Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 08:18:06 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Lae Takeoff Video

ric:

your prop "spins" but the electra never taxis onto the runway or takes off on webtv!

not all that unusual, as very few interactive programs work on webtv.

don neumann
*************************************************************
From Ric

Uh, Don, we're not talking about the Electra on the home page.  All it is supposed to do is sit there and spin its prop.  The Lae Takeoff Video is a separate feature on the site.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:07:05 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      sactodave, fraud, and conspiracies

Well we do have an interesting range of responses to sactodave's accusations.
Here's today's crop:

***********************************************************

From Dennis McGee 0149

I say let sactodave rant on.  So far all he has done is blow smoke and -- as is usual of many conspiracy types -- offers no INDEPENDENT research of his own.  Hell, this guy doesn't even bother to offer his own theory about what happened!

His alluding to TIGHAR defrauding the public is equally porous, offering no proof, of course.

No, sactodave's ranting is that of the ignorant, the lazy, and the hapless.  The raving follows the pattern of  many conspiracy-types that in their own souls feel powerless to effect their own destiny.  To compensate, they create "conspiracies" against themselves to explain their own failings or short comings.  This attitude creeps into their everyday actions and manifests itself in habitual negative thoughts regarding just about everyone and everything.

I say let sactodave rant and we'll all get a good lesson in the psychology of the conspiracy crowd -- plus that you'll save the cost of a subscription to "Psychology Today."
***************************************************************
From Dave Bush 2200

Regarding the person who thought we had little evidence and were running a scam - This person sounds like they just haven't gone through all the "clues" that have been found, the historical documents that have been researched and the "hypotheses" that have been put forward based on that research.  It is easy to look at just what is said on the forum on a daily basis and reach the conclusion that not much evidence is put forth.  In the past you have advised new forum subscibers to look at the postings of evidence before making a judgement about the validity of the work done by TIGHAR.  I would suggest that this person do likewise.  But there is no reason to be adversarial with anyone about anything.  They are welcome to their beliefs.  After all, it is hard to give up a lifelong belief, no matter how uninformed it may be.  We can only ask people to look at all the evidence, ask questions when they aren't clear on a point, and try to make an INFORMED opinion after they have really considered all the information that TIGHAR has amassed.  I was skeptical at first because I believed all the previously published hypotheses that were put forward as "truth".  But being a pilot and using the scientific method, I realized that the most likely scenario was that put forward by TIGHAR.  I want AE/FN found, and I want the truth out there.  Your wealth of research data has gone a long way in convincing me.  The logs from the Itasca, the reports from the Brits, etc., show that TIGHAR has spent a great deal of time in approaching this scientifically, not emotionally, as some have done.  I believe quite strongly that your hypothesis is the correct  one because it is so well documented and fits the evidence (clues) that have existed, but were either overlooked or only recently came to light.

Love to Mother,
Dave Bush

#2200
***************************************************************

From Dean Alexander

I think that all of the comments about fraud etc. are based in ignorance and perhaps jealousy, although a lot stranger things have happened. I think it is wise to remain skeptical of people, organizations and causes, however I feel Ric and Tighar have done a great job so far. You continue to have my support.
****************************************************************
From Bill Leary

Jerry Hamilton wrote:

> While you may have accepted his comments with reasonable calm, I didn't.
> I say tell him to stuff it! And censor him from the forum.

Although I'm cleary not as deeply into the search as some of the rest of you are, I think I can still understand your feeling here.

But, there are (at least) three reasons which come to my mind that illustrate that Ric's approach is the right one.

First, this sort of view WILL happen, and now it's been addressed and the answers are on record. Future instances can be referenced to Deja-News or perhaps Ric could make up a "No, this isn't a fraud" page for the web site with the material already written on the subject.  That could then be referenced when the next instance occurs.

Second, maintaining calm in the face of adversity shows that you are aware of why you're doing what you are doing and are not just going off half cocked or just trying to suck bucks out of people.

Third, posting (and handling) these "negative posts" shows that this isn't just a mutual admiration society (or mail list).  Including the opposition and critical views promotes thinking and illustrates honesty.

    - Bill
***************************************************************

From: Monty Fowler

This discussion on "Fraud on Niku" and "planting evidence" dismays me for several reasons:

1) I have never been to Niku, but based on past postings, it is not a place I would voluntarily go to simply to make someone else 5,000 miles away look silly. I can think of much better ways to make someone look silly that cost a whole lot less;

2) You never lie to the media. They will eventually find out (I know, I used to be in that game), and then you will be publicly drawn and quartered for all the world to see and for all eternity;

3) Other forum readers may disagree, but I find the moderator and major TIGHAR layers to be distressingly level-headed, and not the type who would stoop to that level of lunacy.

Bottom line - if you haven't walked a mile in their Cat's Paw replacement heels, then butt the heck out.
**************************************************************

From Kris Tague

Dear Ric,

While you may find our crier of "fraud" insulting for his accusations, I'm kind of insulted he doesn't think we'd come up with much "better" artifacts than that if we were "faking" it.

Kris
*************************************************************

From Ric

I hope that you don't have to have seen Kris covered from head to toe in dirt and sweat after hours of archaeological grubbing on Niku to appreciate how funny that posting is.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:08:54 EST
From:         Marty
Subject:      Bananas forever

Ref Bananas forever (museum)

Got a nice personal e-mail from a lady on Vashon Is.WA She has been there, done that. Unfortunately I managed to delete her name after I replied, and I don't remember the nice lady's name.

Marty 724C
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:19:03 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Lae Takeoff Video

I've had a similar problem with the download version - I got the player, which works fine, but when I run the downloaded version, it's just a black screen.  I'm running it on a P2, 233mhz w/3d graphics,etc...

****************************************************************
From Ric

Hmmmm...  Is anyone NOT having problems with the download version?  How much of a problem do we have?
***************************************************************

From Tom Robison

>>From Michelle
>I just tried to take a look at the Lae takeoff video on the TIGHAR
>website.

I just saw the takeoff from Lae on TV. (well, I think it was genuine) The local PBS station just showed a half-hour program called *Heroines of the Sky*, about the Linda Finch flight, but most of it was archival footage of Amelia. I didn't tape it, alas, but I assume TIGHAR has a copy of this program?

If not, let me know, I'll call the station and ask them to play it again.

Tom #2179

***************************************************************

From Ric

Heroines of the Sky doesn't ring any bells, but my stomach isn't strong enough to watch Linda Finch.  Most TV shows that use the Lae footage edit it because the unedited version is pretty choppy.  What we have on the website is the whole thing.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:21:34 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Re: Fraud

You guys are doing just fine with the evidence you've collected, and that which will be  collected in the future.  I think yer getting real close to AE and/or her Electra.  Keep  up the good work.

It always makes me grin when folks get mad at success.

Carry on!

Love to mother,
Roger Kelley, #2112
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:50:58 EST
From:         Deb
Subject:      Re: corks

Yes, I thought about the possibility that someone else had already scavenged the site before bringing it to the attention of the officials. After all, two metal canteens, each cut in half, would make four nifty metal dishes! If this was the case, then little wonder the stoppers were left behind. I really don't think coconut crabs would be interested in making metal dishes, unless there's a giant, mutant variety no one knows about ... yet.

Deb
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:58:56 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Game?

there is a web site that has a simulation of the earhart/noonan "around-the-world" flight: www.abacuspub.com/catalog/s337.shtml

don neumann
***************************************************************
From Ric

I took a quick look and they have it set up for Microsoft FlightSimulator which (being a Mac user) I can not use.

Could somebody take a look at this program and give us a review?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 10:09:04 EST
From:         Don Newumann
Subject:      Re: Lae Takeoff Video

i knew that, i'm talking about the section of your web site that accesses the video of the lae take-off, it just won't "roll" on webtv, unfortunately.

don neumann
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 10:13:13 EST
From:         Dan Postellon
Subject:      Re: Bananas forever

Has anyone checked with the International Banana Club yet?
http://www.Banana-Club.com
Dan Postellon

**************************************************************

From Ric

Not that I know of, but I sort of think that with all the new information we have there are some potentially more rewarding avenues of research we can pursue.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 1 Dec 1998 10:16:33 EST
From:         Vickie
Subject:      Re: Lae Takeoff Video

The Lae Takeoff Video downloads and plays in the smaller version just fine on a Power Mac with RealPlayer version 5.0 plug-in.  The longer version I downloaded and got computer speak on the page within my browser (Netscape 3.0), saved the document to my desktop and then opened it up with RealPlayer.  It converted the saved document and ran a larger screen version of the Takeoff Video.

Hope this helps.

Vickie
Indiana
**************************************************************

From Ric

Indeed it does.  Thank you.  That's just the way it's supposed to work.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 09:51:58 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Abacus "Earhart Flight" look-see

Abacus has produced what they call "theme scenery" that can be added to any flight sim program.  I did a real quick look at a review by one Sean "Crash" Reilly of Westwind Virtual Airlines.  Mr. Reilly did a good job of wringing out this bad boy.  He flew the program from California to St. Louis (in Africa) covering about 10 days of the original planned 28-day trip.  Along with his review he published many different virtual views of the trip, including views from the cockpit of the L-10E, from an "overhead camera" watching the Electra take off/landing, of the Electra (well, not really but more on that later) overflying various points and doing things the virtual FAA will eventually ground him for.  One of the interesting stunts he did was buzz Miami just before landing and the program showed him about 100 feet off the Miami causeway and about 50 feet above Miami Bay.  I'm sure the virtual letter from the virtual FAA is in the mail.

Because the Electra was so slow (about 160 kts?) Reilly often switched planes in mid-flight to speed things up.  Therefore some of the scenery shots include 737s, 747s or Electra IIs instead of the L-10E.

The overall quality of the graphics was very good for both interior and exterior shots, especially the panel for the L-10E -- no VORs, GPSes, etc., only ADF.  What fun, hey?

All in all, it looked like a fun program, even though other reviews said that it takes time (lots of time!) to set things up for the Earhart flight.

It sells for $40 and if a TIGHAR member was able to spend the money, time, time, and time setting the program up, it would certainly be a nice feature to donate to the TIGHAR site.  And if they were good -- I mean REALLY good -- they might be able to simulate the final few minutes of flight as it ended at . . .ah, well, let's not rush to a final decision here.

Happy times!

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 11:31:20 EST
From:         John Marks
Subject:      Love to Mother

Would someone be so kind as to explain the context and significance of the "Love to Mother" closing salutation?

Congratulations on a remarkable web site and a most impressive achievement.

TIA,
--
John Marks
**************************************************************

From Ric

For new forum subscribers who may be wondering what this Love to Mother (often abbreviated to LTM) business is all about, here's the story:

A few years ago, a woman named Patricia Morton was doing Earhart research at the National Archives and stumbled upon a telegram dating from 1945 which contained a whole list of messages to friends and relatives from internees at a recently-liberated camp in China. One was addressed to Mr. G.P. Putnam, 10042 Valley Spring Lane, North Hollywood, California  The text reads:

Following message received for you from Weihsien via American embassy, Chungking:

Camp liberated; all well.  Volumes to tell.  Love to mother (*).

The (*) is explained at the bottom of the page as meaning signature omitted. The State Department forwarded the message to Putnam via SpeedLetter (a type of quick-notice letter) on August 28, 1945.  The letter was sent by Eldred D. uppinger, Assistant Chief, Special War Problems Division. The document has no stamp to indicate that it was ever classified, nor does it have a stamp indicating that it was ever declassified.  Anyone who has ever obtained formerly classified documents at the National Archives knows that they are real careful about that. There appears to be no indication that the document was ever classified.   That's hardly surprising given the explanation of what a SpeedLetter is, which appears in the upper right corner of the document; "This form of communication is used in the interest of speed and economy.  If a reply is necessary, address the Department of State, attention of the Division mentioned below."

In Putnam's reply he merely updated his address and asked to be notified if anything else was heard.

Weihsien was not a prisoner of war camp. It was a Civilian Assembly Camp - an internment camp.  According to a 1995 letter by one of the American soldiers who liberated Weihsien on August 17, 1945 there were no Japanese military personnel in charge of the camp.  It was run by a Mr. Izu of the Japanese Consular Service.  All internees were well documented.  Amelia Earhart was not there.

On the 18th a general inspection was made of the camp and twelve internees were hospitalized and selected for early departure due to poor health.  They were evacuated by C-47 on the 28th, the date of the telegram and the SpeedLetter.

Why was such a message sent to Putnam?  Sadly, it was most likely a hoax.  In the years following Amelia's disappearance GP was beset by dozens of false leads and scams.  Some were financially motivated.  Others were apparently just cruel jokes.  Whether the Weihsien message was a joke or a mistake, it's quite clear that it was not from Amelia Earhart.  Nonetheless, the letter is frequently held up by conspiracy theorists as evidence that Earhart was "captured" by the Japanese, held prisoner, and returned to the U.S. after the war.  This telegram and the nonsense which has surrounded it in recent years has prompted those of us most involved in TIGHAR's Earhart research to adopt the "Love to mother" closing as a reminder to keep our objectivity and skepticism intact when evaluating any new evidence.

Love to mother,
Ric

You can order your very own Love to Mother shirt and refrigerator magnet on the TIGHAR website at

http://www.tighar.org
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:09:30 EST
From:         Skeet Gifford
Subject:      Fraud

After exhaustive research, I have discovered that *sactodave* is a pseudonym for Richard Gillespie. The faux-postings were apparently intended to enhance his sagging 11:00 p.m. ratings.

Happy Birthday, Ric. What day is it?

***************

This is Pat... Ric's birthday is December 8. But, as his wife and partner in various crimes, I can guaran-damn-tee you that he is *not* SactoDave..... As Kristin mentioned, if he were going to pull a fraud it would be much better, or at least more artistic, than what we've got now!

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:11:22 EST
From:         Duncan MacKinn
Subject:      Re: Game

From memory this software was reviewed in "Computer Pilot" magazine a couple of issues ago.  (Let me know if you're really interested and I'll dig out my copy.)  It is also covered in Nick Dargahi's "Ultimate Flight Simulator Handbook".  (On a separate note he writes about AE/FN, mentioning your research but gets some of his facts wrong and reports common myths such as FN being an alcoholic.)

The software is an add-on for Microsoft Flight Simulator.  It provides period scenery of the airports AE used, as well as a replica Electra aircraft, including panel and appropriate performance characteristics such as fuel consumption, to recreate the feeling you would have of flying her actual journey.  I understand that one of the major differences is how it treats Howland Island.  I think that it puts a NDB (Non-Directional Beacon) there for ease of navigation, supposedly simulating the CG vessel, but in reality making landfall very easy as long as you head off in the right direction from PNG.

Please let me know if you want more info.

Duncan
Wollongong, Australia
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:10:29 EST
From:         Marty Joy
Subject:      Re: Fraud

Re fraud

Soooooo Wic, you cwever wascal !

Planting all of those artifacts to finance trips to that garden spot of the Pacific, Niku, for you and your band of brigands,eh? Next time find the stuff on Maui, I'll go with you.

I was beginning to miss the "color" that Dick Strippel and Ed Dames added to the Forum, it seems we now have a worthy replacement.

Marty 724C
****************
Hey, I'm holding out for St. Maartens in February, myself.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:15:01 EST
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Re: a technical analysis of the Western Electric

> Subject:      Re: A TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF THE WESTERN ELECTRIC
>
> Did you look at that strange box-like object in the Wreck Photo?  Ring any
> bells?
>
> Ric

Yes, I did... it is very interesting indeed.  At the very first glance, this was my reaction:

I said, quote:  "Damn... that kinda looks like a Command Set." IF this is a radio.... and, IF it is of American origin.... (and we cannot be certain that either question may be answered in the affirmative) THEN... it looks awfully much like the front panel of a Command Set Transmitter... either a Navy ATA, Army SCR-274N or one of the AN/ARC-5 transmitter units.  These are of World War II vintage.

 (Not only the US used these radios.  The Allied air forces did as well.)

I base this opinion on the "round object" in the center, which looks very much like the "frequency" dial on the Command Set transmitter unit; and also on the apparent presence of a small white "fleck" which could be (note: COULD be, not IS) the metal tuning chart which was found in the upper left-hand corner of the front panel of any of these transmitters, on which a technician would pencil in the dial settings for the various controls to operate on a given frequency.

There are other things about the photo, however, which argue against this being what it is.  Something is right below the surface of my brain, which has not yet come to light....

The Command Set transmitter front panel measures 5 inches wide by about 7 inches high.  The transmitter would be mounted in a shock-mounted rack which, depending upon the installation, would hold one, two, or three physically identical units (each operating on a single frequency) side by side.

If this is a Command Set, there is some stuff beside it which I have yet to identify; and which does not seem to belong there.  There is only one transmitter present, if this is what it is.  Most American and Allied military aircraft were fitted with two transmitters.  The receivers would have been in a separate rack, and usually the aircraft carried three: beacon band 190-550 KHz, HF bands 3-6 and 6-9 MHz.  Certain Navy aircraft may have carried more transmitters or receivers, or both; but usually larger planes like PBMs, PB2Ys or PB4Ys.  If the aircraft in the Wreck Photo is a Lockheed 10 of US Military origin, I dare say it would have carried only 2 transmitters and 3 receivers, much as a Beech SNB/C-45/Model 18 did (but that bird has its radio gear in the tail section).

I say this LOOKS like it MIGHT be a Command Set at first glance... if it is a radio, it could be British, Aussie or even Japanese.  I don't know a lot about the vintage avionics from any of the above; but do have access to a wartime TM-E Signal Corps reference which has pictures and data on German and Jap radio gear.  I will go take a look.  Also, recently discovered some more web sites dealing with Aussie gear, but most of it is not aircraft.  I need to look closer, and for others.

Is there any likelihood that this aircraft is an Australian bird? Did the Aussies get any Lockheed 10s or 12s?

I do not think anything in this "box" is Western Electric stuff... at least, not yet.  I don't think it is big enough to have been the cockpit console in which the receiver control head, with the tuning dial, is mounted; but let me blow it up some more and turn it over and over.... hmm.

Were any of the articles I sent helpful in any way? If it will help, I can send you (by mail, don't have a scanner) some copies of pictures of a Command Set transmitter, and complete installation.

Judge for yourself.

73
Mike #2194
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:18:19 EST
From:         Pat Thrasher
Subject:      About the forum and the press

Hi everyone....

As I type Ric is getting on a train in Wilmington to go to New York and be on the morning news shows tomorrow, or at least ABC... the CBS shows he will be on won't be the rush hour show, I'm not sure just what the heck is going on. And he will be on NBC Today on Friday morning. Catch him on Good Morning America at (latest word, may change) 7:09 am.

This last big bit of publicity is quite encouraging. Please check your local papers, we like to have clips. Please include the name of the paper, city, date if you send us something. This is ammo for helping get sponsors, so it's important to show as much stuff as we have.

Let me know what you see.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:19:49 EST
From:         Jim Kelly
Subject:      Mouse pads and plants

Ric:
I got my mousepad [and a darn nice one it is]! AND I believe! If I was to plant evidence I'd probably go to the wrong island...

LTM
Jim Kelly #2085

*************

Well, I'm glad *someone* got a mousepad. No kidding, they really did get sent. I guess I will need to compile a list of who didn't get them and send out more.....

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:15:44 EST
From:         Forest Blair
Subject:      Army records center3

Can any of you provide an address for the US Army records center that may know the addresses of retired Army officers?  Am trying to contact another helicopter pilot who was at Canton when Bruce found the engine.  Hoping the pilot can give us more air crew names and information .  The only info we have on the pilot is his rank/name, Major Harold Martin, and that he was stationed at Fort Rucker (Alabama, I think) before coming to Canton.  Martin is also in one of the slides Bruce is reviewing.

All kinds of thanks for any help.

Forest #2149
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:21:21 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Lae takeoff video

Both work for me, but I cannot find the downloaded version anywhere on my computer under the name amelia_3.m*.  It never asked me where to dump it!

> I've had a similar problem with the download version - I got the player,
> which works fine, but when I run the downloaded version, it's just a
> black screen.  I'm running it on a P2, 233mhz w/3d graphics,etc...

***************

I am going to have our gurus look into all this and see what they say.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:26:05 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: corks

In a message dated 98-11-30 08:15:37 EST, you write:

>I have a hard time attributing all the missing stuff to coconut crabs.  I have
>a pretty good hunch where the two missing shoes went.  I've got 'em right here.

I was thinking (sic).  How far do you think it is from -- what was it Gallagher said, 5 feet from the high springs? -- and the location of the TIGHAR shoes?  Maybe in 1940 a good deal of stuff -- including our shoes -- were scattered back in the bush beyond the radius that Gallagher et al searched.

They say I can expect a good crowd for my schpiel on Thursday night here in Madison.  I'm lunching with Jim Kelly tomorrow.

LTM
TK
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:31:01 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: sactodave, fraud, and conspiracies

Ric, there's a good point in all the posts about Sactodave and alleged fraud, etc.

The few folks I have talked to about TIGHAR and the good work ongoing are very skeptical, for a variety of reasons. Try as I might, it is hard for a layman such as myself to convince others that TIGHAR is (very likely) on the right track. (many folks seems to be unclear on TIGHAR's motives. storical research for it's own sake doesn't seem to be credible enough, urprisingly)

***********************
Yes, we run into this as well. We *must* have some ulterior motive, why would anyone waste their time with this otherwise?
***********************

How about a new page on the web site, addressing some of the concerns of the naysayers, one document that the skeptics can start out with and get a better understanding of TIGHAR's motives. Entitle it "Newbies and Naysayers, Read Me First! or something like that.

************************
This is a good idea. I will mess around with it some and see what I come up with.
************************

And if I were writing it, I might mention Kris Tague's point, that if the extant evidence had somehow been manufactured, wouldn't you have "manufactured" something a little more dramatic?

************************
Well, I'd like to think so.
************************

And for those who question why TIGHAR is continuously begging for money, how about a page showing the itemized costs of the last Niku expedition? And perhaps some comparisons to other scientific expeditions. How much did it cost to dig up King Tut? What did it cost the long-suffering American taxpayer to find the Titanic?

*************************
All good questions. All you researchers out there, help us out! I can surely show where the money goes (we print this occasionally in TIGHAR Tracks, for one thing). But how much *did* it cost to find the Titanic? Bunches, I bet. 

*************************

Love to mother.

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:33:53 EST
From:         Andrew McKenna
Subject:      Re: corks and chains

Ric wrote:

>Did civilian canteens in the 1930s still use
>corks rather than screw-on caps?  How wierd would it be for the chains from
>two canteens to come loose and the canteens themselves disappear leaving only
>the corks and chains at the site?  On the other hand, whatever container(s)
>the corks stoppered somehow went away.

I dont know about the 30's, but during my childhood forays into the deserts of the American West with my father looking for fossils during the 60's , we often carried a canvas water container that, if memory serves, had a cork stopper on a chain.  The canvas sweated just enough to allow the evaporation to keep the rest of the water cool.  The Whole arrangement had a rope handle, and the only other metal parts was a round mouth piece that the cork stoppered, and perhaps some grommets for the rope handle.

A canvas water bag would certainly have rotted away on Niku leaving only the metal parts and possibly the cork.  Since the metal mouth was not attached to the cork or the chain, the cork and chain could easily be found detached.

We may still have one somewhere.  Want me to look?

Andrew McKenna  #1045C

********************

Thanks Andrew, please do.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:32:46 EST
From:         Marty Joy
Subject:      Re: the Lae film

About 12 seconds into the film there is what appears to be, a Caucasion youth about 12 years old, standing next to the port side hatch. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out the identity of this child, and what he or she heard AE and FN talking about prior to take-off?

Marty724C
*****************

???????????????

Someone want to examine the film very closely and report on this?

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:34:59 EST
From:         Kenton Spading
Subject:      Missing artifacts/bones

Ric wrote in response to Tom K wondering why stuff was not found with the bones etc..

>>> I think that it's possible that some souvenirs in addition to the
>>>Benedictine bottle were picked up before Gallagher got involved.  It may also
>>>be that there is still stuff laying around yet to be found.

We know of one other artifact that was picked up....the "inverting eyepiece" for the sextant.     It was allegedly lost by the native who found it.     I have a gut feeling that a "cool" item like that was not lost.    So yes,  natives were grabbing stuff.     Gallagher apparently expresses some mild alarm when he hears the bottle has left the island. He tells his native telegraph operator to send a message asking for the recovery of the bottle.       It is possible that the native telegrapher spreads the word and the other natives decide to shut up about their precious finds......they think  1)   I found some cool stuff  that I do not want to give up and   2)  I do not want to get into trouble.    Obviously we were not supposed to be taking stuff or for that matter burying bones.

I speculate that other artifacts were found and not reported.

Could stuff still be laying around?      yes,  the scatter area/footprint, however,  could cover a lot of ground,    Ric and I speculated during the England trip that a giant crab could drag a bone at least 50 yards from where he found it without too much trouble (back to his hideout),   that leaves a search area 100 yards in diameter or roughly 2 football fields, .....and,  apparently stuff was scattered around,  the natives found the skull but not the bones or the sextant box,  surely they would have grabbed the box had they seen it  (you grab stuff on a resource poor island, no shopping malls),   a wider search was needed to find other stuff, the lack of belt buckles, rings, watches etc. is worrisome,  however, that is the exact stuff (shiny) that is dragged underground by crabs and rats,

I saw a forensics guy on the Discovery channel checking out a site where a skeleton was found,    after doing a ground level search he started digging holes and climbing trees.     You climb trees to find the persons hair in birds nests.    The birds will grab every bit of it.   (he found the persons hair in a nest).      After clearing the ground he started excavating all the rodent holes.    After doing this he found jewelry, a jaw bone (with shiny fillings) and many other smaller bones.   All down in a rodents nest.

As far as the missing skeleton goes, Mr. Bauro says two skeletons were found.    One up by the Norwich City and one on the eastern end of  the island.     Yes, Bauro's story is anecdotal, but so far the anecdotes have held up to scrutiny.    The Kilts story also says that the remains of two people were found.      Two independent anecdotes mention that two sets of remains were found.      It is possible that a skeleton was found in 1938-39 and then later (in 1940) the Gallagher related bones/skull are found   (a liberal interpretation of Kilt's story even suggests this).

This is the story that emerges if you put the Bauro and Kilts stories together.

gotta go...
Love to Mother
Kenton Spading
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:39:22 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Corks and Thermos

For Fred Madio

If you have opportunity, it would be interesting to check out Thermos in Norwich.  You might be able to find out whether they produced a Thermos bottle with a cork secured with a chain in some past time.

If you should discover this to be the case, it would be interesting to know how the chain was attached to the cork and how the other end was attached to the bottle... to some part of the outer shell which was probably steel.

Good Luck!  It might prove an interesting experience in general. =========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:47:35 EST
From:         Kelly Small
Subject:      Re: Lae Takeoff Video

I've been a member of the forum for awhile but have never sent in a post.  I just saw on CNN that bones found on Nikumaroro may be those of Amelia Earhart.  I assume they were talking about TIGHAR's research.  Hey, I can never get Real Player to work on my computer so guess I won't get to see the Lae takeoff video.  :-(

Kelly
Indiana PS (Hey Vickie...what part of the Hoosier state are you from?)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:51:00 EST
From:         Kelly Small
Subject:      Re: Bones and Silence

I never really told you about myself. I have been interested in the AE story for as long as I can remember.  (I'm 32)  I probably have seen the Lae takeoff video, I tape anything on AE that I can from tv.  I have read everything I can get my hands on about AE.  In college I wrote a research paper on her life.  I know the forum is not about her life but her disappearance and solving the mystery.  I enjoy reading the postings from the forum and look forward to them everyday!  I don't really have any skills that could help your research but I'm sure interested in this mystery being solved!  You may have already thought of this but thought I'd mention it. Have you considered doing DNA testing on the bones that were found to compare to DNA from a living Amelia relative?  I think they did this with the bones of Jesse James to prove they were really his bones.  Just wondered.

Thanks!

Kelly
Indiana
**********************

We don't have any bones!!!! Ooooh, gee, I hope not too many people have gotten this impression. All we have is the *report* about the bones.

If/when we find bones, yes, we *will* do DNA testing. The family has indicated a general willingness to participate.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:52:15 EST
From:         
Subject:      CNN article about bones

Take a look at this!

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/02/amelia.earhart.ap/
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:53:13 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      In the News

So.... I'm just casually reading my morning paper and guess what catches my eye? Headlines: Bones Found In 1940 Could Be Earhart's. Even a quote from Ric, "We have probably the most dramatic archival and scientific evidence in 61 years..." Of course, as usual, the press manages to mangle the facts ("Precise dimensions of the bones taken from paperwork, discovered only two weeks ago, ..."). That is unless you guys found some more measurements across the pond on your recent visit. The last paragraph said, "Other Earhart experts...cautioned that Gillespie has claimed other discoveries...only to have their authenticity questioned."  I'll scan the article and forward it for your clipping file. The SF Chronicle picked it up from the LA Times.

blue skies, -jerry

***************

Thanks Jerry

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:54:09 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Game

I picked up the Abacus "Around the World" Earhart recreation, and it's a pretty interesting simulation.  It traces the original trip, uses an accurately performing L-10-E simulation, and (within the limits of the computer) is pretty good.  I must admit that I skipped ahead to the Howland leg, and it was fun to find the Itasca sitting in the water off the end of the runway.  This will be interesting for some, boring for others (it's not a combat simulation!).  What it won't do is solve the mystery, but what it might do for some (like me) is point up how difficult a task it must have been to actually fly the legs of the flight with the primitive (by our standards) navigational resources they had available.  Try flying from Lae to Howland with just the compass (of course the simulation doesn't give you the ability to do celestial navigation, but you can sort of fake it by popping in and out of "slew" mode in the simulator, to check your position in Lat & Long).  For me, it was worth it.

Love to mother,
jon
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 20:02:42 EST
From:         Paul Chattey
Subject:      Research and reporting

Folks, I'm a little slow sometimes but I get there.  Remember Ric's report from Eng-land, as it sounds to my American ears when pronounced by English friends? The one we all waited for with such anticipation?  It more than lived up to my expectations and this is without taking into account jet lag, English food and warm beer, and researcher's overload. Moreover, I have it "on the highest authority" that the report was written somewhere above the north Atlantic--which meant we all got to read it weeks sooner than if I'd been there.

Written.  Written on a laptop, the TIGHAR laptop.  The laptop that is still not paid for.  I don't care how the grammar on that last sentence is supposed to work, we all know what we need to do.  These few short weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas are the most appropriate time to return the favor.

Nail my VISA for $50, it ain't much but it all helps.

Paul

******************

Paul, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

And American Express is getting restless.....

Thank you very much.

Pat (PS, aren't you glad I took your credit card number off your post?)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 20:04:01 EST
From:         Tom Ruprecht
Subject:      ATC

So, can anybody recall if the editor of "Air Classics" has ever been interviewed on All Things Considered?  Good interview, Ric.

Rupe

**************

I don't think so, but I'm no authority.... <G>

Thanks, Rupe, the guy did a nice job and even bought us lunch.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 20:08:46 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: sactodave, fraud, and conspiracies

> Yes, we run into this as well. We *must* have some ulterior motive, why would
> anyone waste their time with this otherwise?

I suppose I'm strange, but this is the one point I've never questioned.  Why do people collect stamps?  Build ship models?  Go to see the battle fields at Concord?  Visit historic ships?  Heck, volunteer to do maintenance on these historic ships?  Because there's something in us that wants to know, that want's to do things because they strike our interest, and cultivating interest is the root of what makes us human.  If it weren't for simple curiosity we'd still be sending messages by banging rocks together... if that.  Some people direct that curiosity into inventing new things, some into exploring old questions.  I see it as just aspects of the same thing that makes us as a species what we are.

    - Bill #2229
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 22:49:42 EST
From:         Ted Whitmore
Subject:      Sand Pile Dave

Sactodave undoubtedly considers himself an instant expert:  one who has put forth an idea that no one can disprove  - - - yet.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 22:51:46 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Army records center

Forest wrote:

>Can any of you provide an address for the US Army records center that may
>know the addresses of retired Army officers?  Am trying to contact another
>helicopter pilot who was at Canton when Bruce found the engine.  Hoping the
>pilot can give us more air crew names and information .  The only info we
>have on the pilot is his rank/name, Major Harold Martin, and that he was
>stationed at Fort Rucker (Alabama, I think) before coming to Canton.  Martin
>is also in one of the slides Bruce is reviewing.

There is a military locator online, but I can't remember the web site now. I think if you go into a search engine such as Alta Vista and search for "military personnel" or somesuch it might pop up.

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 22:56:53 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      News reports

Pat wrote:

>This last big bit of publicity is quite encouraging. Please check your local
>papers, we like to have clips. Please include the name of the paper, city,
>date if you send us something. This is ammo for helping get sponsors, so it's
>important to show as much stuff as we have.

The following was on the CNN web news this morning:

**********
[my comments in brackets]
****************

Report: Bones found on island may belong to Amelia Earhart

 LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Bones found on a Polynesian [it's actually Micronesian, but what the heck...] island may offer some  insight into the mysterious disappearance of aviator Amelia Earhart, a researcher told the Los Angeles Times.

 The bones were found on Nikumaroro Island in the republic of Kiribati in 1940 by British soldiers [not soldiers, of course, but the British Cadet Colonial Officer]. They were sent to British headquarters in Tarawa, where a physician concluded they belonged to a man.

 Richard Gillespie, director of the International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, a nonprofit organization that has searched for evidence of Earhart's fate for 10 years, recently found records of the examination in Tarawa and England.

 Two forensic anthropologists who studied the records said precise dimensions of the bones taken from the paperwork indicate the skeleton was that of a white female of northern European extraction, about 5 feet 7 inches tall.

 "We have probably the most dramatic archival and scientific evidence in 61 years to indicate that we may soon know what happened to Amelia Earhart," Gillespie told the Times in an interview published Wednesday.

 Earhart vanished in 1937 while attempting to become the first woman to fly around the world. Most authorities believe she and her navigator lost their bearings, ran out of fuel and crashed into the Pacific while flying between Asia and Hawaii, but some think the two were captured by the Japanese as spies.

 Some experts were wary of Gillespie's findings, which he plans to present Friday at a meeting of the American Anthropological Association in Philadelphia.

 "I have always been skeptical about claims such as this," said Thomas Crouch of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum in Washington.

 "When people ask me what I am looking for, I say it is fair to look for a smoking gun, something that could only have come from them Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan," he said.

 The new information doesn't qualify unless the bones are found, he said.

 Gillespie has presented other discoveries from Nikumaroro, about 1,700 miles southwest of Hawaii, only to have their authenticity questioned. Experts concluded that a piece of aluminum purportedly from Earhart's Lockheed A-10E Electra and a rubber heel supposedly from her shoe were not linked to the aviator. [Of course, they don't say what experts, or what conclusions they drew.... the "experts" were Elgen Long and some of the Japanese-man-take-lady- flyer-Saipan crew...]

Tom Robison
***************

Oh well, it could be worse.

Cynically yours,

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 23:01:39 EST
From:         Jack Snee
Subject:      Re: a technical analysis of the Western Electric

I sure wish I had a copy of the wreck photo your looking at. I can't see half the things people are seeing and I'm using bi-focals hi hi. I have pictures of what the Command Set looked like in a B-17. Your description is almost correct however the tuning chart on the transmitter is on the top RIGHT side not left. Are you testing us Mike to see if we are paying attention?

73,
Dog six king
Jack, 2157
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 22:59:36 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: The Lae Film

Here's a quick thought: for any film footage of Amelia et al., if there are any good facial shots during conversations, perhaps a teacher of the deaf, who reads lips well, can make out at least some parts of what people are saying during the silent filming. Just an idea! Thanks for your indulgence!

Gene Dangelo 2211

****************

It's a thought.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 22:58:44 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Time Travel?

the latest research bulletin on the web page is dated 12/19/98. I accept the fact that you folks are way ahead of me, but 17 days?

****************

well, it's like this. So I put the wrong date on it. Didn't notice until about two weeks ago. But by then, the new web site was up, my old software wouldn't cope, and I was attempting to get the new software up and running today (what a joke)... I'll fix it tomorrow, ok?

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 23:00:24 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: a technical analysis of the Western Electric

If you think it may be an ARC-5 transmitter of the T-19 variety, let me know, because I OWN one, and can give you EXACT measurements! Where on the wreck photo is this item located? I have it stored in my computer scanner files and can check it out.

Dr. Gene Dangelo, N3XKS
Tighar #2211   :)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 2 Dec 1998 23:03:22 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Re: CNN article about bones

Excerpt from CNN article:

Experts concluded that a piece of aluminum purportedly from Earhart's Lockheed A-10E Electra and a rubber heel supposedly from her shoe were not linked to the aviator.

Who concluded this?

Sounds like rubbish to me.

*************

Me too, Mike.

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 3 Dec 1998 20:47:24 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      TODAY Show not

Late this afternoon, the TODAY Show decided not to have me on the show after all.  No reason officially given but the scuttlebutt is that they felt that they would look second rate if they covered the story after so many other media had already done it.  Such are the ways of television networks.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 3 Dec 1998 23:02:06 EST
From:         C Spear
Subject:      GMA review

Just observed Ric on today's GMA segment about the search for AE.  His reference to the scientific method, absolutely rational approach to the evidence, and openness to review is why I will renew my TIGHAR membership for another year!  And, oh yeah, that trace of humility too.  Excellent presentation and credibility, Ric!

(Oh, I still think AE needed larger shoes for the heavy socks to keep her feet warm at altitude [not unlike my wife]... if there has to be a reason for the larger shoe size)

**************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks.  I try to hold it down to just a trace of humility.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 06:15:21 EST
From:         Ron Dawson
Subject:      Re: The Lae Film

Regarding lipreading on the film. As a speech pathologist working with hard of hearing kids, I can safely say the best lipreader can only get about 60% if you are in the room with the individual and know the Context of the conversation. On a bad film at a distance, with no context, good luck!

Smooth Sailing
Ron Dawson 2126
**************************************************************
From Ric

Just continues to amaze me the expertise we have on this forum.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 06:58:01 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Sextant boxes revisited (long)

Of all the things that have turned up on Nikumaroro, the sextant box found in 1940 is one of the most likely to definitely place Fred Noonan on the island.  That box is unique in that it bears stencilled identifying numbers.  I persist in the belief that those numbers were put on that box by PAA.  There are probably other things around that were once the property of PAA and with similar numbers.  We just haven't come across them.

The question of whether or not PAA would have had a lot of old marine sextants has been discussed here at some length.  I believe it is very possible that they DID have quite a few marine sextants as well as bubble sextants and that both were typically carried on flights during the mid 1930s.  This belief is supported by at least two documents written by Fred Noonan himself.  In a document titled, "Making the Landfall," dated, October 3, 1935 (note 1), Fred wrote, in part:

"Due to the spacious chart room aboard the 'Clipper' the navigation equipment need not be so severely limited as in smaller planes, hence the list of navigational instruments reads like that of a surface craft.  It shows two bubble octants, a MARINER'S SEXTANT, aircraft chronometer... etc., etc."

Clearly a mariner's sextant was standard equipment on the "Clippers" on Pacific flights in 1935.

In a letter to P. V. H. Weems (Note 2), discussing an early PAA "Clipper" flight to Hawaii, Fred wrote, in part:

"Due to the spacious chart room and large chart table aboard the Clipper, the navigation equipment need not be so severely limited as in smaller planes, hence the choice of equipment may be governed entirely by the individual's personal preference or the Company's desires in the matter.  To date the Company has not decided upon any standard equipment, and therefore I chose the equipment used on the subject flight."

  And...

"... several factors influenced the selection.  Preeminent among them was the fact that most of the instruments had been used extensively by the writer and had proven satisfactory. ... and I suspect that plain prejudice, which actuates so many of us, carried some weight."

One of the instruments that Fred had used extensively was the marine sextant.  And this was true of the PAA navigators, in general.  They had been seafaring navigators and they knew and trusted the marine sextant.  The bubble octants were new to them and difficult to use.

  Finally...

"Two sextants were carried -- a Pioneer bubble octant and a MARINER'S SEXTANT.  The former was used for all sights; the latter carried as a 'preventer.'"

Again, whatever is implied by the term "preventer," the mariner's sextant was clearly standard equipment on the Pacific "Clipper" flights.

I'm told that, as used here, "preventer" is a nautical term originating in french.  Prae = pre and venire (verb) = to come. Praevenire = precede, anticipate.  Dictionaries say things like, "One that forestalls or anticipates another."  And, "To satisfy in advance... To be in readiness.

I suspect some of those former marine navigators may have used the sextant for a preliminary sight then, knowing about what the angle should be, used the bubble octant for a final sight.  And, of course, the sextant could be regarded as a backup in the event of real problems with the octants.

Note 1.  "Making the Landfall -- Trans Pacific Air Navigation," October 3, 1935, by F. J. Noonan, Navigator, "Pan American Clipper."  This is from the "Research Library," Pan American Airways, and appears to be a draft copy.  There is a marginal note to omit one paragraph in the early part of the paper.

Note 2.  Letter from Fred Noonan published in "Air Navigation," 2nd edition, 1938, by P. V. H. Weems, McGraw-Hill.  The date of the letter is not stated.  It was probably about 1935.  Much of the wording is identical to that in "Making the Landfall"  It didn't appear in any printing of the 1st ed. of "Air Navigation."

*** I believe a concerted effort to connect the numbers on those two sextant boxes to PAA is justified... If we can figure out how to go about it!  Any ideas?  Comments?  Anyone?

************************************************************

From Ric

The only question I would raise is the notion that PAA had a whole bunch of old nautical navigators running around.  From what I've seen (and Randy, your impressions would be welcome here), Fred was about it.  Only the Clipper flights carried dedicated navigators and Fred was the guy on original survey crew in 1935. Sounds to me like Trippe knew he'd need navigators for the new Pacific Division.  He hired Noonan to develop the techniques and teach them to new hires.  The bit about carrying a nautical sextant was, I think, more likely a personal preference of Fred's which may have been copied by his proteges.

There is a curious line in a TIME magazine article which came out following the failed search.  In it, Noonan is described as being dismayed when he first signed on for the first attempt by Manning's reliance upon an old fashioned nautical sextant.  Fred made arrangements to borrow a modern bubble octant from the Navy.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:03:51 EST
From:         Marty Joy
Subject:      Birthdays

HAPPY BIRTHDAY RIC!

Mine is December the 7th ( this is not a drill)

Marty 724C
*************************************************************
From Ric

Thanks Marty.  But you come first.  Happy Birthday!

I understand that mine (the 8th) is the Feast of the Immaculate Conception but you'll have to ask Mom about that.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:08:21 EST
From:         Suzanne
Subject:      L.A. Times

The same LA Times article to which Jerry refers was also picked up by the San Jose Mercury News on December 2!

LTM
Suzanne #2184

*************************************************************
From Ric

That L.A. Times piece went all over the world.  The biggest error in it (as has been pointed out) is that the reporter somehow got the idea that the bones were found by "soldiers" and that the records are "military."  I've just got to learn to speak more clearly.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:15:25 EST
From:         Ann Hinrichs
Subject:      Press coverage

The Cincinnati Enquirer also carried the Tighar article (12/2/98 edition).I'll send a copy for your files.
LTM Ann #2101

**************************************************************
From Ric

Thanks Ann.

Today at noontime we're doing a press conference in Philadelphia at the annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association.  Kar Burns (our forensic anthroplogist) and I will be offering ourselves up for sacrifice.  I really have no idea what kind of turnout we'll get.  The story has certainly had a lot of "play" over the past few days.  We'll see how it goes. (Film at 11)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:23:05 EST
From:         Leah Ouzinian
Subject:      Re: TODAY Show not

I am surprised that the TODAY Show won't have you on their show.  Every time I turn on the news channel there's second-rate coverage of Clinton (and so on)...

I will be looking forward to ANY coverage I can find about your Earhart findings at the American Anthropological Association.

Sincerely,
Leah Ouzinian
(a newbie to the Earhart Forum)
***************************************************************

From Ric

After the word got out that I wouldn't be on the show, an ugly mob with torches and pitchforks surrounded the NBC studios at Rockefeller Center chanting "TIGHAR, TIGHAR, TIGHAR."  At the mayor's request I went over there and, with the aid of a bull horn. finally got them to disperse.  And then I woke up.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 4 Dec 1998 19:09:21 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: TODAY Show not

They probably did feel that way Ric. But, if you and TIGHAR do find the golden nugget of evidence on your next expedition (I doubt it, but...) you will have the satisfaction of putting them on hold as the flood of network offers for appearances (and my apology) comes your way. Your group needs all the publicity they can get!  Sorry about the disappointment.

**************************************************************
From Ric

This would have been my fifth appearance on the TODAY Show, so it's not exactly a crushing disappointment. We got page one ("above the fold") in the L.A. Times and most major U.S. papers carried the story as did most British papers.  The Associated Press and Reuters have both put out wire stories. We had a really nice in-depth piece on National Public Radio's All Things Considered in a top time slot (5:37 p.m.). I was on ABC's Good Morning America and CBS Up To The Minute.  I did dozens of radio interviews with stations all over the U.S., the BBC,  Canadian Broadcasting, and various other places such as South Africa, Austria and Colombia (Amelia's popularity is really amazing).

Whether the story continues to generate press or not largely depends upon the media's ability to generate some kind of controversy to keep the public interested.  So far they're having trouble.  Forensic anthropologists seem to be generally in agreement with the findings of Burns and Jantz, and no one can dispute the fact that the British files exist.  We haven't made any claims that this new evidence proves anything except that further investigation is warranted.   It's pretty hard to generate controversy around that.

When we first decided to do a press conference at the American Anthropological Association meeting in Philadephia we thought that, if we were lucky, we might get some local TV coverage picked up by a network. I'm astounded by the response we have actually gotten.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 5 Dec 1998 07:56:49 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Army records center3

Ric wrote:

> Can any of you provide an address for the US Army records center that may
> know the addresses of retired Army officers?  Am trying to contact another
> helicopter pilot who was at Canton when Bruce found the engine.  Hoping the
> pilot can give us more air crew names and information .  The only info we
> have on the pilot is his rank/name, Major Harold Martin, and that he was
> stationed at Fort Rucker (Alabama, I think) before coming to Canton.  Martin
> is also in one of the slides Bruce is reviewing.

Historic Wings has a highly experienced research arm in Washington, DC, including permanent presence inside the Pentagon with access to all historical records, though we are primarily focused on Air Force and Air Corps records. Would you like us to look into this for you?

Thomas Van Hare
Historic Wings
****************************************************************
From Ric

That inquiry was actually put up by Forest Blair (TIGHAR #2149), the former CO on Canton.  He and Bruce Yoho (TIGHAR #2036E) -who found the engine in the first place - are chasing the helicopter pilots.  I'm sure that they'll appreciate any help you can provide.  Feel free to contact them directly.
========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 5 Dec 1998 08:09:10 EST
From:         John Rayfield
Subject:      Old Radios

I've got an old BC-696A sitting here on my desk.  I always had the idea that this was the same as what was referred to as an ARC-5.  Is that correct? This BC-696A was made by Western Electric, and covers 3 to 4 Mhz.

   John Rayfield, Jr.
   WB0NZM
   Springfield, Missouri
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 5 Dec 1998 08:32:22 EST
From:         Bruce Yoho
Subject:      TV

You did a fine job on the Good Morning America show. It is amazing what the other person stated. Did not seem to have any evidence to back up his claims.

LTM
Bruce
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 5 Dec 1998 09:57:14 EST
From:         Bill Zorn
Subject:      Re: News reports

Albuquerque journal Dec 3 1998 final edition (print) earhart story w/ byline "Thomas h. maugh II    Los angles times" location, front page, above the fold, below the  banner (a most excellent position) same basic text as I have seen online (CNN version) plus a little more. Contiues on page A2, pictures of AE on both pages.

Checked the journals website, but it wasn't up (yet)?

Will try to find time to scan into my computer at work tomorrow. Have a file format preference, or do you prefer snail mail? Could also scan and try some OCR to turn it into a text file.

Well, done. The pail is level. Love to mother
william h. zorn
*************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Bill.  No real need to send an actual or electronic clipping.  We have the content of Maugh's piece.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 08:32:24 EST
From:         Tom Cook
Subject:      GMA

Ric :  Happy Birthday in advance, if you're not too old to have another Birthday!  My son called last night and said that the Dr. told our daughter-in-law that if she had not started in labor by Monday that he would start her, so I could get, a grandson on the 7th or 8th if not sooner!

I saw you on GMA yesterday, boy that Crouch guy is really negative! The Evansville Press ran an AP article  datelined Los Angeles   Dec.2, stating that the bones were found on a "Polynesian island"  by" British soldiers "  in 1940 on Niikumaroro island in the republic of Kiribati (no mention of Gardner as it was known then)  Mr Crouch made his usual comment about needing to see a "smoking gun"  "The new information doesn't qualify unless the bones are found, he said" Final paragraph:  "Gillespie has presented other discoveries from Nikumaroro, about 1700 miles southwest of Hawaii, only to have their authenticity questioned,  Experts concluded that a piece of Aluminum purportedly from Earhart's plane and a rubber heel supposedly from her shoe were not linked to the aviator" They sure can screwup the facts and slant their articles,  can't they ! They did mention that two forensic anthropologists have concluded that the bones were of a 5'7''white female, with no explaination of how else such a person's bones would turn up on Gardner island in 1940. "Some experts were wary of Gillespie's findings, which he is to present Friday to the American Anthropological Association in Philadelphia." BTW Mr. Crouch has some  pictures at the Smithsonian that I took of Army Aircraft , I have seen a book (published in England) with my pictures credited "Smithsonian Institute" LOL in Phillie today!!

TC  2127

**************************************************************
From Ric

Thanks Tom.  No. I'm not in denial about birthdays.  I'm turning 51 and I still have the mind of a 12 year-old.  Say hi to your new grandson for me.

Yes, the media get it wrong.  It's one of the few things we can all rely on these days.

My old buddy Tom Crouch negative?  You think so?  I'm sure that he would prefer to be called "cautiously skeptical."  Rumor has it that he did a spot for CNN yesterday that was considerably less negative.  It may just be that he can feel the way the wind is blowing and thinks it might be time to start shifting his sails.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 08:34:28 EST
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Aircraft Radio Corporation

CQ CQ CQ...

Does anyone out there have information on Aircraft Radio Corporation?

The company dated from the 1920s, and was located in Boonton, NJ until it was absorbed by Cessna Aircraft Company in the 1970s.

I am looking for the company's historical records from the early-to-mid 1930s to about 1940 or so.

Anyone out there with Cessna, who could make some inquiries?

Could these records still exist?  Were they donated to some library, school, university, etc.?  Let's hope they were not destroyed....!

73 GM AR
Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 08:45:21 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Sextant boxes revisited

Ric - while it is probably a very long shot, it might be possible to process the sextant box for fingerprints, using modern development techniques, and depending on all the obvious factors (weathering, how many people have handled it, etc) it might be possible to develop fingerprints - particularly from inside.  And IF (big if there) any prints are developed, it might be possible to compare them with Fred Noonan's fingerprints.  If he wasn't fingerprinted formally, it might be possible to develop his prints from known papers, etc.  A positive match would be a pretty strong piece of physical evidence...

ltm
jon
**************************************************************

From Ric

We don't have the sextant box that was found on the island in 1940, so it's pretty hard to check for fingerprints.

The sextant box we have, which seems to be similar to the description of the one found on the island, is in the Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola and we know that it belonged to Fred (so fingerprinting is pretty pointless).
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 09:02:23 EST
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      Army records center

For what it may be worth, if Maj. Martin was a pilot, he may well have been USAF, not Army.  Does Bruce have the name/number of his unit?  The US Air Force Historical Records Center, Maxwell AFBase, AL 36112-6678, phone (205)293-5723, has unit histories (not service records of individuals).

It's possible that the missions/flights flown by the helo unit at Canton in '71 are listed.  -  Maybe Maj. M. is now retired and is a member of the Reserve Officers Ass'n--I don't have its address but your local library probably will.  The Army-Navy Journal may still be in existence.  It is/was a weekly (I think) newspaper that prints all sorts of info on active and retired officers--births, marriages, deaths, retirements, etc.  Don't know where it's located, maybe Wash., DC.  Check your library.  Military service records are archived at National Personnel Records Center, 9700 Page Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63132 but it's unlikely they'll release information on anyone who's still living.  I don't know if any of these sources have Web sites. Oh, one other 'long shot':  Some of the 'net search engines will give free access to US white pages, 'phone directories.  For a name like Harold Martin, this is liable to produce a huge list.

Happy hunting!
LTM
Bill Moffet #2156
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 09:21:49 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Reuter's report 12/4/98

Researchers To Present New Amelia Earhart Claim

December 4, 1998 9:28 AM EST

By David Morgan

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Anthropologists were to hear new evidence Friday suggesting that legendary American aviator Amelia Earhart died on Nikumaroro Island after her plane disappeared over the Pacific Ocean on July 2, 1937.

Earhart, in 1928 the first woman to cross the Atlantic by plane, was trying to become the first woman to fly around the world when she and her navigator, Fred Noonan, disappeared -- starting a mystery that has lasted more than 60 years.

Researcher Richard Gillespie said the new evidence mainly consists of a 57-year-old medical report on a dozen bones and a skull that were found on the island in the Polynesian Republic of Kiribati by British soldiers in 1940 and later lost to investigators.

The doctor who first examined the bones said they belonged to a man. But Gillespie and his colleagues, who used modern techniques to reexamined the original findings, suggest the bones actually come from a woman of North European extraction who stood five feet seven inches tall.

And that, the researchers say, supports the theory which claims Earhart landed her Lockheed A-10E Electra on Nikumaroro, once known as Gardner Island, and died there.

The new findings were to be presented at the annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association in Philadelphia.

"These are probably the best clues we've had in 61 years," Gillespie, director of the nonprofit organization known as The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR), told Reuters.

"The case is not solved, certainly, but we have higher hopes than we've ever had. Everything about it seems to be consistent with Earhart."

But Gillespie's claims only seem to have stirred skepticism among other Earhart experts.

During four trips to the uninhabited island, Gillespie has collected a piece of aluminum said to be from Earhart's plane and a rubber heel alleged to be from her shoes. Neither has provided a convincing link to the long-lost aviator, however.

"If they can find these little things, where are the big things? Where re the engines? They weighed 800 pounds (362 kg)apiece. The propellers weighed 200 pounds (90 kg) apiece," said retired U.S. Air Force Col. Rollin Reineck of Kailua, Hawaii, a member of the Amelia Earhart Society.

"Why can't they find them? Because they were never there, that's why," he added.

Earhart and navigator Noonan were on their way from New Guinea to Hawaii when they failed to locate tiny Howland Island for a planned fueling stop. The last radio report said they were almost out of fuel.

Most experts believe the plane crashed into the Pacific after running out of fuel. But theories abound. One says Earhart was captured by the Japanese, another that she ditched her plane in a deliberate attempt to escape her public life and become an ocean-bound recluse. A third maintains she assumed a new identity and lived happily ever after, in New Jersey.

Critics of Gillespie's theory believe the bones most likely belong to one of several European castaways who died on Nikumaroro about a decade before Earhart's flight.

"There's no reason to believe these bones were Amelia's. This is not a smoking gun," said Thomas Crouch, a senior curator at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum in Washington.

"And after all these years, after all these blind leads -- the Japanese, etc, -- it's fair for people to expect a smoking gun, something directly connected to Amelia Earhart."

Gillespie says the next challenge will be to find actual bones onNikumaroro that can be submitted to DNA analysis.

"This is an important new clue that we hope, frankly, will shake loose the money to help us get back out there. Everything we do has to be raised from charitable contributions and the general public," he said.
***************************************************************

From Ric

It's always a bit disappointing to see how consistently the media can screw up the facts, but what is most interesting about this piece is what is not there. In trying to find the "balance" that journalists are always looking for, do you suppose that Reuters did not think to contact leading forensic anthropologists in an attempt to find dissenters?  I know for a fact that Good Morning America did, and they couldn't find anybody who disagreed with Burns and Jantz (the scientists who re-evaluated the bone measurements for us).  If I were a senior official at the Smithsonian I'd start to get a little nervous if the only person the media could find to support my opinion was Rolly Reineck.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 09:32:51 EST
From:         Jerry Ellis
Subject:      Re: Old Radios

I think I have an old BC-453, the Canadian version if I remember correctly.  Have someone contact me if it is important.

You should have recieved my 50 bucks by now, there are so many opportunities to donate, I was confused and didn't know what to ask for; a mouse pad, membership dues, matching funds, the laptop contribution, special membership deal,....  Oh well, I trust you'll make good use of the dough.

***************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Jerry.  The old radios are Mike Everette's department.  He'll be in touch if he needs info.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 09:35:00 EST
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Re: Old Radios

John Rayfield wrote:

> I've got an old BC-696A sitting here on my desk.  I always had the idea that
> this was the same as what was referred to as an ARC-5.  Is that correct?
> This BC-696A was made by Western Electric, and covers 3 to 4 Mhz.

Yes, you are basically correct.  The BC-696A is part of the SCR-274N Radio Set.  This equipment is the Signal Corps version of the Navy ATA/ARA equipment... the "N" in SCR-274N stands for "Navy."

The AN/ARC-5 is a later, improved version of the ATA/ARA.  The earlier sets, and the 274Ns, used screen-grid modulation on AM phone.  The ARC-5s were plate-modulated, and there are some minor circuit changes in the transmitters themselves.  The ATAs and 274Ns use series plate-voltage feed, and the ARC-5s use parallel feed.  The ARA and 274N receivers have no AVC circuit; the ARC-5s do.  There are some minor mechanical differences as well, but it it basically the same radio.

73
Mike E. #2194
(aka WA4DLF)
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 10:03:24 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Re: Sextant boxes revisited

Re: the source material referenced by Vern regarding Noonan sextant use.

Both of the quotes which Vern references and which came from separate sources which he had, I believe, were derived from the same original source. On May 11, 1935, Fred Noonan wrote a letter to Weems which contained both quotes exactly. This letter looks like it predates both the sources quoted. He wrote it after having just returned from a Clipper trial run to Honolulu. This was the first flight to Hawaii after they brought the Clipper to San Francisco (based in Alameda actually) from Florida the previous March. The Hawaii flight was followed by increasingly longer flights to Midway in June and then another to Wake in August as they tested the route to Manila. The May letter was published in Popular Aviation three years later in May of 1938.

Re the bubble octant for the flight, Butler (East To The Dawn) quotes a cable AE sent to Washington, "Amelia Earhart urgently requests air station loan Navy octant for projected trans Atlantic flight and shipment air express to Oakland immediately." Butler says clearance was granted March 16 by the secretary of the navy. The reference given for this info is Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College. The clearance was just three days after Noonan was unexpectedly announced as a flight participant.

blue skies, -jerry

*************************************************************

From Ric

And here's an excerpt from a TIME magazine article published July 19, 1937 (the search was called off on the 18th).

"Several facts made it clear that much more than simple bad luck was involved. Before the hop-off, when capable Navigator Noonan inspected what he supposed was an ultra-modern "flying laboratory," he was dismayed to find that there was nothing with which to take celestial bearings except an ordinary ship sextant.  He remedied that by borrowing a modern bubble octant designed especially for airplane navigation....."

The bubble octant was actually borrowed in Harry Manning's name because he was an officer in the Navy reserve. On March 20, 1937, after the wreck in Hawaii, Fred gave Harry a handwritten receipt for "Pioneer Bubble octant #12-36 to be returned to U.S. Navy, North Island, San Diego, upon completion of Amelia Earhart flight."  The original note is in Manning's papers at the Merchant Marine Museum in King's Point, N.Y.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 10:24:42 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Fingerprints

Of course, if we don't have any of Fred's prints on record, maybe we need to check the box in Pensacola  for prints first, to see if we pick up anything that might match anything else later! (Remember type I & type II errors!) I understand that there is the outside possibility that, say, the same assembler made both boxes and deposited prints on them, but nothing ventured, nothing gained, eh?

Have a good week, and Happy Birthday to Ric!
Gene Dangelo  2211   :)

****************************************************************
From Ric

Thanks Gene.

I'm not a forensics expert so I don't know how tough it would be to lift Fred's 60-some year old fingerprints from a box that has been handled by at least dozens of people since then - especially since we don't know what Fred's prints were in the first place.  My layman's guess is that we're talking the impossible.

Any fingerprint experts out there?
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 11:36:28 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Special Newbie Welcome

From
Ric Gillespie
Executive Director
TIGHAR

This latest media feeding frenzy has, to date, brought roughly seventy new subscribers to the Earhart Search Forum.  That's an increase of roughly 17% within a few days.

I'd like to extend a personal welcome to all of our new friends.  Not all of you will stick around.  Some will find the sheer volume of traffic to be too much.  Others will find many of our discussions too technical for their taste. Still others may simply disagree with us.  That's okay.  You won't hurt our feelings. If you have trouble signing off using the instructions in the standard welcome message, just let me know and I can usually sign you off from here.

Of course, we hope that you'll become an avid reader and active participant in our research.  Please don't be shy about contributing your thoughts, ideas and opinions.  That's what this forum is all about.  But please do take the time to familiarize yourself with the facts of the case as presented on the TIGHAR website (www.tighar.org).

As you know, you're tuning in to a "program already in progress" and at first you're going to feel pretty lost, but you'll soon come up to speed.  Here are a couple of helpful notes:

- You'll notice that many people who post messages to the forum have a number after their name.  This is, in most cases, not an indication that they are serving time in a penal institution.  It is a TIGHAR member number.  These are the people who have put their money where their mouth is.  We consider them to be the most highly-evolved life forms on the planet and we cordially invite you to join them.

- You'll also notice the frequent use of the closing phrase "Love to Mother" (often abbreviated to LTM).  This is a reference to some ridiculous speculation that made the rounds a few years ago about how a telegram delivered to Earhart's husband George Putnam in 1945 form a Chinese internment camp was proof that Earhart had been "captured by the Japanese."  The unsigned, unclassified wire said merely, "Camp liberated. Volumes to tell. Love to mother."  We use the closing to remind ourselves to always try to remain objective in our evaluation of evidence.  We even have Love to Mother t-shirts and refrigerator magnets.

Yes, we're a little strange, but we have a lot of fun and we do good work.

Welcome to the forum!

Love to Mother,
Ric
Ric Gillespie
TIGHAR
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 6 Dec 1998 11:36:34 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      TIGHAR Tracks ready

The new issue of TIGHAR Tracks is just in from the printer and will be mailed out to all TIGHAR members on Wednesday/Thursday of this week.  Our cover this issue features none other than Gerald "Irish" Gallagher, the British colonial official who just may turn out to be the man who found Amelia.

The magazine includes the full paper prepared by Dr. Karen Burns, Dr. Richard Jantz, Dr. Tom King, and yours truly, entitled "Amelia Earhart's Bones and Shoes? - Current Anthroplogical Perspectives on an Historical Mystery." You'll also find an article on "The Crash At Sydney Island" and a review of the National Park Service's new "Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic aviation Properties" and much more.  There's also a really cool pull-out with a detailed and annotated three-view of NR16020 (complete with correctly-orange leading edges).  Stick it up on the 'fridge with your "Love To Mother - Check Your E-Mail" magnet.

Of course, if you're not yet a TIGHAR member you'll miss out on all that so you might want to hurry up and join.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:06:42 EST
From:         Suzanne
Subject:      Re: GMA

Just had the chance to watch your GMA appearance which I taped. Splendid job. Your answers were precise, well thought out and you used the limited time allowed to it's fullest, as each word you used conveyed a clear message.  Have you thought about media consulting? On second thought, we'd hate to loose you.

Congratulations,
Suzanne #2184

***************************************************************
From Ric

(blush)  I am but the servant of the project.  Media consulting?  That's easy. here are only three rules:

-  Tell the truth as briefly and clearly as possible.
-  Never confuse marketing with science.
-  Remember that all television is entertainment.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:11:03 EST
From:         K L Wallis
Subject:      Re: Fingerprints

I have a lot of experience over the years working with latent prints.  The chance of lifting 60-year old latent prints is extremely remote.  I'd strongly recommend that you enlist the services of a professional laboratory with some of the new laser equipment.  It won't alter the box as powders, chemicals, or cyanoacrylate will, and will show what's there.  Of course, the best lab to look at this would be the FBI lab, if you can get them to process it for you.  They might be interested because of the potential historic significance.
***********************************************************
From Ric

I still don't understand how anyone could tell which fingerprints were Fred's.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:14:30 EST
From:         Bruce Yoho
Subject:      Re: Sextant boxes revisited

Is it possible to think we have two(2) sextants borrowed for the flight. Could it be the Box numbers are Navy inventory numbers? Would there be a way to locate the  Navy paper work on these loans to civilians. I know today you have to sign everything including your mother away to get even a bolt out of the military.
LTM
Bruce
****************************************************************
From Ric

Good thought, but Navy sextants had little brass plaques on the boxes which had the model number, serial number, etc.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:16:29 EST
From:         Bruce Yoho
Subject:      Re: Special Newbie Welcome

Yes, we are different, just ask Dr. Tom King what he calls a shovel.
LTM
Bruce
***************************************************************
From Ric

(Oh good Lord.  Here we go again.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:21:14 EST
From:         JB9700
Subject:      Re: TIGHAR Tracks ready

I'm not familiar with the membership and/or subscription fee(s).  Please respond with that info.  Also, would I be able to purchase just the latest issue of TIGHAR TRACKS?  Sounds extremely interesting and would add to my girl scout's troop's exposure to Ms. Earhart's incredible life and speculation of what may have happened on that fateful last flight.

I read, on occasion,  the riveting notes and mail you send to each other. Facinating.  Sounds like a group of thoughtful and talented technicians in these discussions.  Refreshing!   Sometimes I do not have a clue what is being said, but it is still very interesting.  I am not a technical person in any capacity with this subject  but I do have a curiosity about Ms. Earhart and  I pass this curiosity (or rather TRY to)  onto my troop.

Looking forward to your response.
***************************************************************
From Ric

Non-members can purchase current and back issues of TIGHAR Tracks for $10. Just send a check payable to TIGHAR to:
TIGHAR
2812 Fawkes Drive
Wilmington, DE  19808
Include a note telling us which issue you want.  The current issue is Vol. 14, No. 2.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:23:37 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: TIGHAR Tracks ready

HOORAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jim Tierney
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:32:27 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Your Comments Requested

One point that need to be cleared up in my mind at least is the lack of comments or reference to AIRCRAFT WRECKAGE in Gallagher's messages to his superiors.  If Gallagher speculated that the bones that were found might be those of AE it would seem like he would also make some reference in his messages to the old aircraft wreck.

Could it be that the aircraft wreckage was not discovered until after 1940 when the bones were located?  I would appreciate your comments on this. Perhaps I just missed the time line in my reading of TIGHAR TRACKS and the web pages.

Dick Pingrey 908C
*************************************************************
From Ric

Let's be very clear that the bones (while once anecdotal) are now fact, whereas the aircraft wreck on the island is still anecdotal.  Had Gallagher known about an airplane wreck it certainly seems like he would have mentioned it.

It may be significant that we did not hear anything about the wreck ourselves until we started to talking to people who had lived there in the 50s and early 60s.  The old-timers, who knew about the bone story, did not know about the airplane wreck story.  It does, therefore, seem that the discovery of airplane wreckage (if it really happened) came sometime after the death of Gallagher and the outbreak of the Pacific war and the island's subsequent isolation.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:02:38 EST
From:         Bob Sherman
Subject:      Re: Aircraft Radio Corporation

I believe ARC had an affiliation with Bell Labs for radio products, i.e. they may have built (or sold) the lab's designs (usually done by Western Elec.)  but some of their stuff was not handled by W.E.  If so, a letter to Lucent ... (I no longer have their addresss) should get you some details....     73's   RC
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:12:39 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Re: Fingerprints

As a matter of fact, we do have Fred's left thumb print. It's in his maritime records from the National Archives. Ric, you should have a copy. Now if we could only get his bones and find a female relative for Dna testing....

blue skies, -jerry

***************************************************************

From Ric

You're right!  I had forgotten about that.

There is another possible solution to the Noonan DNA problem.  Dig up his mother. Of course, we wouldn't do that unless we had bones that we had reason to suspect were Fred's, and we'd have to know where she's buried, but maybe we should go ahead and at least locate the grave.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:17:17 EST
From:         Monty Bar
Subject:      Ever closer

You all do good work, Looks like step by step you are getting closer. I'm anxious to see if any of the material you brought back from England might give a clue to what happened to the bones and other items found by Gallagher.

Good luck
LTM
Monty #2224

***************************************************************

From Ric

The correction I would make to your posting is the pronoun.  Anyone with a TIGHAR member number after their name is certainly entitled to say that it looks like WE are getting closer.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:35:30 EST
From:         Mike Rejsa
Subject:      Conspiracies & castaways

Ric, you're doing a great job. It's starting to look like the conspiracy is on the other side...

> "Why can't they find them? Because they were never there, that's why,"
> he added.

Why isn't the press disputing this statement, or asking for his proof?

>  Critics of Gillespie's theory believe the bones most likely belong to one
> of several European castaways who died on Nikumaroro about a decade before
> Earhart's flight.

Which female European castaways?

On to more productive stuff:

> "Several facts made it clear that much more than simple bad luck was involved.
> Before the hop-off, when capable Navigator Noonan inspected what he supposed
> was an ultra-modern "flying laboratory," he was dismayed to find that there
> was nothing with which to take celestial bearings except an ordinary ship
> sextant.  He remedied that by borrowing a modern bubble octant designed
> especially for airplane navigation....."

Doesn't this indicate that the sextant and octant were *not* Noonans, and therefore we wouldn't expect a connection to the existing Noonan box or any Noonan-generated serial numbers?

Hang in there...
Mike Rejsa
***************************************************************
From Ric

It certainly does imply that the bubble octant used on the first attempt (and, at least at first, retained for ther second attempt) was borrowed from the Navy.  I don't think that it necessarily gives us any information about what "preventer" Fred may have carried with him on the second attempt.

And no.  Of course there were no female European castaways.  There were no known European castaways of either sex.  The S. S. Norwich City went aground in 1929 with 35 men aboard.  Twenty-four made it ashore and were rescued five days later.  Three bodies washed up and were buried.  That leaves 8 bodies unaccounted for, but for any of them to become a "castaway" would mean somehow getting ashore alive but not hooking up with the others and not getting rescued.  Seems extremely unlikely.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:52:44 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      donation

1.  Sorry I couldn't join you Saturday in Philly as I had planned but several things (including a nap and some milk and cookies) came up that needed to be done.  I'm looking forward to whatever report comes from the event.

2.  Happy Birthday (51?? Hell, I thought they put people to sleep after 45.)

3.  I checked my bank account and found an extra $50 that was just collecting interest and wanted to know to which account I should sent it -- the laptop paydown or the Niku IIII adventure?  (By the way I told my girl friend the $50 is coming out of her Christmas-present fund, so the trip to McDonalds and the Wednesday afternoon bowling is out.  I have just enough left to buy her a bottle of bleach and a box of Brillo pads.)

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149
**************************************************************
From Ric

1.  It went well in Philly (at the meeting of the American Anthropological Association where we presented the forensic anthropological paper at a press
conference).  Good turn out.  Good questions.  Lots of interest.  The paper is
on the TIGHAR website.

2.  So far no calls from Jack Kevorkian.

3.  Thank you.  We choose the laptop paydown.  I'm not sure I want to know what you mean about the bottle of bleach and the box of Brillo pads.  Reminds me of something another veteran of our early adventures in the Maine woods used to say, "Everything was going fine until the bag broke,the sheep died, and we couldn't find the rubber hose."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 13:31:10 EST
From:         Steph Thomas
Subject:      Re: Lae takeoff video

As a tech doing support for IBM Aptiva computers, I may have some helpful suggestions here.

>From Randy Jacobson
>
>Both work for me, but I cannot find the downloaded version anywhere on my
>computer under the name amelia_3.m*.  It never asked me where to dump it!

Randy, try searching for something less specific.  Click on Start, Find, Files and Folders.  In the named field, type ame*.*, then make sure the drive selected is the c: drive (or the drive letter of the hd where you dl'd it to) and make sure "Include subfolders" is checked.

> From Jon Watson
>
> I've had a similar problem with the download version - I got the player,
> which works fine, but when I run the downloaded version, it's just a
> black screen.  I'm running it on a P2, 233mhz w/3d graphics,etc...

For Windows95 or 98 Systems:

For everyone who is having probs playing the video, I would say check your computer mfg's web site for updates to your video drivers.  To find out the existing version, RIGHT click on My computer, choose properties. Up at the top of the System Properties windows, click on Device Mgr. Click on the plus sign next to the category that says "Display Adapter". Write down the info there.  Check the mfg's web site.  Most computer mfg updates (you may want to give them a call to verify if this is the case with your comp mfg) will not apply an upgrade if you already have the latest version.  Also, you may want to check with the mfg of the particular video card or chipset that comes with your computer.  Aptivas usually have an ATI chipset, and I know that users can dl the very latest updates from ATI's website way before the renovations are made to IBM's website to include the latests versions.

Sorry, I do not have any info for Mac users. Just a few suggestions.

Steph Thomas
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 13:34:57 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Finger prints and sextant boxes.

The suggestion of Gene Dangelo, # 2211, to check for finger prints on the sextant box being held  the museum in Pensacola is a good one.

I checked with the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department , Scientific Services Bureau, Latent Print Identification section, and received the following response from their experts.

"The lifting of prints from a 60 year old wooden box is possible.  However, several factors will determine success.    First, the box must have been sheltered from the elements and not exposed to drastic temperature and humidity changes.   Second, the condition of the surface on which the prints might have been left is critical, (rough grain wood is not good, smooth like glass is best)."

If prints should be lifted, we would immediately be confronted with the problem of identifying the person who left them. We must have high quality prints from all 10 fingers and 2 good palm prints of good 'ol Fred before any eliminations might be attempted.

With out Fred's prints to compare, and considering the fact that possibly hundreds of people have handled the sextant box, and that the box might have been cleaned periodically, it's not likely Fred's prints could be identified on the sextant box in the museum at Pensacola.

I suggest that we put this one on the back burner.  Sorry.

Love to Mother,
Roger Kelley, # 2112
***************************************************************

From Ric

I agree entirely.  We have one thumb print in Fred's maritime records, but the main point is that I have no idea what good it would do us if we could find Fred's prints on the Pensacola box.  We already know that it was his box.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 13:49:20 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Fingerprints

Ric, since you pointed out that we don't have the box in question, trying to get Fred's comparison prints is a moot point, but just for the record, they have chemically raised fingerprints from articles found inside the pyramids...
ltm
jon
***************************************************************
From Bob Sherman

It isn't often that I can contribute anything useful, so try this on for size.  I tossed the fingerprint possibility to an expert of my aquaintence.  He offered the following:  A good finger, thumb, or palm print could remain on a good, protected surface for more years that we are concerned with.  New laser procedures, with limitations, can do wonders.  If we can come up with a possible print(s), he will do the rest.

RC  #941
**********************************************************
From Simon Ellwood

Ric wrote:-

> I still don't understand how anyone could tell which fingerprints were
> Fred's.

If it IS possible to lift prints from 60 year old samples - then surely we must have some article which we know Fred touched to lift comparison prints from. Admittedly, many other people may (will) have touched it since Fred, but if we can match two sets of prints then Fred's got to be the strongest contender - and the case could be strengthened further by looking for more of the matching prints on other items known to have been Fred's.

Needs a lot of lab time though.

LTM
Simon #2120
**************************************************************
From Ric

I can see how having Fred and Amelia's fingerprints documented could be useful if we find artifacts which could be tested, but I think that we're getting all wrapped up in specualtion about how to do something that we don't need to do yet.  Am I missing something?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 13:52:51 EST
From:         Craig Fuller
Subject:      Re: Press Coverage

You can chalk up another small town (well actually county) newspaper running the article. The Press Democrat, Santa Rosa CA. But more interesting is that one of its columnist, Gaye LeBaron, who has a column on local area history also picked up on the story. She tied it into local news being that "former Petaluma resident Dr. Thomas King will present findings from an examination of archival material about a skeleton found on Nikumaroro Island in the Central Pacific three years after Earhart's plane disappeared."

Craig Fuller
TIGHAR 1589C
***************************************************************

From Ric

Well, well... We always wondered where he came from.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 14:26:43 EST
From:         anonymous
Subject:      Attack

It is something we are all waiting for I suppose, but I wouldn't get too cocky Ric.  The bones, if found, should be checked, and this should be done with the full cooperation of Earhart's living relatives.  After this has been done, and re-testing by different private factions is allowed, to include one or more chartered idependently by the Earhart Society of Researchers, I hope you eventually regret the lack of respect you have consistently shown to the World War Two historians and heroes that have spent so much more time over the years, and more of their own money, to learn more about this subject than you ever will.  But this is yout tighar folly and you gotta keep those bucks commin in somehow, even if you're chasin Earhart in the wrong direction, with the knowledge that you are the only one Uncle Sam will never challenge because of your politically correct stance.  If you are so sure that Rollin Reineck is the only one out there ready to face you with a challenge, (by the way, Reineck is a distinguished veteran who served our country as well... more why it puzzles me that you don't show these great Americans to whom we owe so much more respect than you do) you're a less formidable opponent than I thought.  There are legions of great Americans that would welcome the opportunity to be there when you finally learn how the trivial information you came upon was originally categorized in England all those years ago.  Unfortunately this will be something that chagrins you greatly, but for now we'll have to let the thing play out.

How silly of you to be so naive... but then you've always been a little naive about Earhart anyway, so that  comes as no surprise.  You know, Gillespie happens to be a family name linked closely with the father of our country, George Washington.  Remember Ric, he couldn't tell a lie...

Another thing, your "love to mother" cynical comments at the end of your myopic driveling statements and on those silly buttons you proposed is not going over to well in a few halls in DC. You didn't need to carry that over from the National Geographic forum from earlier this year.  That shows a reckless lack of maturity on your part. I'd be careful there if I were you. Does your wife agree with those types of reactive commentaries of yours? I know she agrees with your ninety grand a year checks Tighar pays you, to chase Earhart in the wrong direction, and always will as long as you can keep em fooled.

Oh well, gotta go.  Good jabbin with you.  How was England by the way?  Oh, less fruitful than you hoped huh?  Oh well, hang in there.  You're great entertainment for us all.  By the way, several of your ex members continued to e-mail me with tid bits and anecdotes about your operatives.  Most said non-supportive things about you.  How strange.  What do you make of that?

By the way, you write too much stuff that says nothing. Economize Ric.  Most of of it is so boring and kooky anyway, we don't need to hear it all.  See ya.
*************************************************************

From Ric

In case anyone was wondering about the oft-quoted but seldom-named critics of TIGHAR's work, here is a classic example of what we're up against.  His cowardly anonymous comments merit no response from me except to say that my annual salary at TIGHAR is less than $55,000 and this year the organization has only been able to pay me a fraction that.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 14:31:12 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Special Newbie Welcome

No, no, Bruce, it's where you PUT the shovel that counts.

LTM
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 14:33:07 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: GMA

Ric, don't forget the most important thing to remember about TV - it's primary reason for existence is to sell advertising... ltm jon
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 9 Dec 1998 14:47:46 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Sextant boxes revisited

> Could it be the Box numbers are Navy inventory numbers? Would
> there be a way to locate the  Navy paper work on these loans
> to civilians. I know today you have to sign everything including
> your mother away to get even a bolt out of the military.

What's the number on the box you are trying to look up? Also, please provide other information. This is something that we may be able to do on your behalf, though I'll have to check with the researchers -- if we can't we'll be able to find where the records are, how to access them, etc. More commonly, we get requests on serial numbers of military wristwatches, for which records were kept as well. Just give the word and we'll look into it.

Another note, if may turn out that the box is registered to a Navy officer who is MIA, and its discovery will be very important news for someone's family out there. Either way, we need to follow up on this. If you hadn't realized it, one of the roles we play at Historic Wings is as a clearing house of wartime-related information for veterans, veterans' families, and friends -- we've put together many old friends, provided information to families who lost loved ones, and much more through our research arm and in the forums -- an example:
   http://www.historicwings.com/forums/b17/

By the way, we are still interested in doing an AE feature story (very positive toward TIGHAR, of course). Please drop me a note letting us know how we move forward from here....

Thomas Van Hare
***************************************************************

From Ric

I'm happy to help with a story.   No need to make it positive toward TIGHAR. Just report the facts.  Let me know what questions you have.

The numbers reported to have been on the sextant box were 3500 (stenciled) and 1542 (apparently not stenciled).  No mention of a plaque.  The corners of the wooden box were dovetailed.  That's really all we know.

Our initial investigations revealed no similarity to U.S. Navy numbers but we're happy for any help we can get.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 07:56:00 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Newsweek

Just received the latest copy of Newsweek (12/14/98) in the mail and we're on page 8.  Looks like it's just the LA Times piece rewritten again (many of the same errors repeat themselves, though in a somewhat more smarmy way).

MYSTERY
Maybe It's Miss Amelia

Sixty one years after Amelia Earhart vanished over the Pacific Ocean, her most dogged pursuer believes he has the finest evidence yet about where she drew her last breath.  According to Richard Gillespie, founder of the nonprofit International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, a handful of bones discovered in 1940 by British soldiers on the tiny South Pacific island of Nikumaroro may belong to Earhart.  There's just one problem: no one knows where the bones are.  Gillespie's conclusions are based on two anthropologists' rereading of a British doctor's examination of the bones after they were initially found.  The doctor thought they belonged to a man; the scientists say he was wrong.  Without the specimens though, it's impossible to know for sure.  That didn't stop Gillespie, a pilot whose hotly disputed claims include finding Earhart's shoe and a piece of her plane, from touting the news at a major anthropology conference last week.  In addition to Earhart's mortal remains, he's hunting some bucks - about 500,000 of them - to finance a trip to the region so he can search some more.

The text is reprinted on the Newseek website at
www.newsweek.com/nw-srv/printed/us/dept/ps/ps_4.html

  LTM
  Russ
**************************************************************

From Ric

We should also have a piece in the next U.S. News & World Report and possibly another article in the New York Times.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 07:58:42 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re Army Records

Ric - could the Major (helicopter pilot) have been a Marine?  Sorry if this muddies the waters...
ltm, jon

**************************************************************

From Ric

Not very likely from what I understand about the SAMTEC operation, but I'll let Forest and Bruce be the judge.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 08:10:59 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

Ric says, of the Norwich City as a source of castaways:

> That leaves 8 bodies unaccounted for, but for any of them to become a
> "castaway" would mean somehow getting ashore alive but not hooking up with the
> others and not getting rescued.  Seems extremely unlikely. 

Well, yeah, but not impossible.  Somebody falls off the ship, is washed through Tatiman Passage into the lagoon and down to Aukaraime or Kanawa Point, crawls ashore, maybe injured, unable to get back up the shore and isn't sure where s/he is anyway, survives a time and then dies.  OK, it's unlikely, and made more unlikely by the apparent sex of the castaway, and the multisex shoes, but it's not completely beyond possibility.
***************************************************************

From Ric

Granted.  This kind of dilemma comes up repeatedly.  Few events are completely beyond possibility and complex sequences of unlikely events occur all the time, and yet, the correct answer is usually the most obvious answer.

You can't find your car keys.  They're not on the hook by the door where you always leave them.  It's not beyond the realm of possibility that somebody stole them, but it's probably a good idea to check your jacket pocket before calling the police.

LTM
TomKing
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 08:27:36 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Fred's DNA

Ric, ref Fred's dna, are we sure there were no siblings - maybe even cousins?  There was recently a recap of the Romanov story on Biography (I think), and they were able to eliminate the woman from Berlin as Anastasia, due to dna comparison with Prince Phillip, who was a distant cousin of the Romanov's.  Don't recall if anyone has ever indicated that Fred had any other family... ltm jon

**************************************************************

From Ric

No, we're not sure that Fred had no siblings, only that his mother died shortly after his birth.
****************************************************************
From Jerry Hamilton

RE: "There is another possible solution to the Noonan DNA problem.  Dig up his mother. Of course, we wouldn't do that unless we had bones that we had reason to suspect were Fred's, and we'd have to know where she's buried, but maybe we should go ahead and at least locate the grave."

We already know where she is buried. It's a cemetery on the South Side of Chicago. I have been in contact with the people there while searching for information on Noonan's various relations.

blue skies, -jerry
***************************************************************
From Ric

Okay.  We're all set.  All we need now are some bones we suspect might be Fred's; official permission to exhume; and a shovel. (We have the shovel.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:45:51 EST
From:         Dean Alexander
Subject:      Re: Attack

Ric,
This guy's definitely got some hang-ups and not small ones at that !

*************************************************************
From George Kastner

Absolutely amazing what passes for ''thought'' these days.  Sorry that you must put up with this, Ric.  I could not do it. Thank you, and Good Holidays/G. Kastner 0862C
*************************************************************

From Jim Tierney 0821 (JimErnieT@AOL.COM)
12/9/98  15:52

Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who is this guy???????????
Where does he come from??????????????
Why does he take off and dump all over you at this time??????????????
What is his agenda?????????????
What are his reasons??????????????
Anybody know who he is?????????????

I have to print his diatribe and read it at my leisure

Any other comments from anybody......
Let me state my unwavering support for Mr/Mrs Gillespie and what they are
doing and how they are doing it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jim Tierney--Simi Valley, CA

PS- Ric-Thanks for publishing his comments...   Shows guts...
JT
***************************************************************

From Ric

No guts required.  We have nothing to hide and the facts speak for themselves. His refusal to reveal his name is typical of the conspiracy crowd.  That's okay.  Once these guys are exposed to some sunlight they either shrivel up or slink back into their hole.
***************************************************************

From Tom Robison

>It is something we are all waiting for I suppose, but I wouldn't get too
> cocky Ric.  The bones, if found, should be checked, and this should be
>done with the full cooperation of Earhart's living relatives.

This fella obviously hasn't been on the Forum for a while, nor has he visited the website. I think Ric has made it clear that DNA testing will have to be done in order to prove the lineage of the bones, and that the Earhart family is cautiously cooperative.

>Researchers, I hope you eventually regret the lack of respect you have
>consistently shown to the World War Two historians and heroes that have spent
>so much more time over the years, and more of their own money, to learn more
>about this subject than you ever will.

Ric, what does he mean by this? Now I've only been a Tighar member for about half a year, but I have been following TIGHAR's exploits for many more than that. I've never detected any lack of respect toward any other historical group, except perhaps the "crashed and sank" club. I, for one, am a [admittedly amateur] WWII historian myself, and I think you have done much to further WWII research in the Pacific. What is the writer's basis for his comments?

>But this is yout tighar folly and you
> gotta keep those bucks commin in somehow, even if you're chasin Earhart
>in the wrong direction, with the knowledge that you are the only one Uncle
> Sam will never challenge because of your politically correct stance.

Ric, does he mean you are [gasp] a liberal? Dear me, that thought never occurred to me. Oh, well, I'll forgive you this one peccadillo.

>Another thing, your "love to mother" cynical comments at the end of your
>myopic driveling statements and on those silly buttons you proposed
>is not going over to well in a few halls in DC.

Love to Mother, cynical? Who is this whacko? Why would anyone in DC care about a  sentimental tag line?

Ric, please, if you can offer any enlightenment as to what planet this guy is from, fill us in.

Tom #2179
**************************************************************

From Ric

The planet this guy is from is called Conspiritar.  It's a cold, bleak world in the Paranoid system and it's part of an alternative, parallel universe where all things have hidden meanings, where absence of evidence is proof of a cover-up and where reality is whatever you say it is.  I've done battle with these creatures many times before and I've learned a few things about them.

1.  They prefer to hurl their little missiles anonymously.
2.  They never have their facts straight (as you note about the DNA issue).
3.  They delight in distortion. I am not disrespectful of World War II heroes (my own father IS one).  I am, however, disrespectful of anyone who claims to be a historian but eschews the accepted standards for establishing historical fact.  Virtually all of the Earhart conspiracy authors and buffs fall into that category and, yes, I am decidedly disrespectful toward them.
4.  They will never be convinced by any document or artifact or DNA match because their beliefs are not based upon facts but upon their view of the world.

My political opinions are of no consequence, but since you ask, I am registered as an independent.  I think that if the government which governs least, governs best, then we must have the best of all possible governments because these days it seems to be governing not at all.

And if our critical friend believes for one second that we're intimidated by his vague threats about our "love to mother" tag line "not going over to well in a few halls in DC", he has sadly misjudged an organization which goes by the acronym TIGHAR.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:45:57 EST
From:         Patrick Robinson
Subject:      Waste of time

My check is in the mail for membership in TIGHAR...I'm disappointed though that you continue to allow such dribble as the latest attack from sk82son...

Most of us are professionals with little enough time on our hands for the IMPORTANT stuff...

Let's cut out the garbage and get on with the business at hand...

Patrick N. Robinson
***************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks.  I share your sentiments about characters like sk82son but, at the same time, I don't want anyone to think that we're censoring criticism or stifling opposing viewpoints.  It's always hard to strike a balance.

This same anonymous critic has offered another posting which purports to defend the "love to mother" telegram but, of course, presents no documentation to support his claims.  I've rejected the posting and told that I'll only put it up on the forum if he can show that it is anything but unsubstantiated anecdote.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 12:10:12 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Fingerprint logic

My premise as to what good it would be is this: Even if we only have one thumbprint on file, people usually only pick up rectangular objects, like sextant boxes, in certain ways with opposing thumb hands, as we have. (Being a piano major, I'm attuned somewhat to hand anatomy!) Given that situation, it may be possible to reconstruct the rest of Fred's prints from that box which we know was his. THEN----take THOSE prints to compare with any on the other box(the island box), which remains to be found. If you get a match there, WOW!  Then you know that Fred did indeed handle the island box!!! Hurrah! THAT'S the value of it all. Thanks for your consideration.---Gene Dangelo,   #2211  :)
***************************************************************

From Ric

Okay, I see your point.  We know where the Pensacola box is (Pensacola) and if we get something from the island that might have Fred's prints we could pursue this line of investigation.  Howzat?
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 12:50:17 EST
From:         Forest Blair
Subject:      Re: Army records center3

To: Tom Van Hare

Thanks for your offer to help find retirees.  All we know (we think) is that the chap we're trying to locate has the following ID (which is not much to work from):
            Harold Martin, Major USA (Ret)
            Helicopter pilot
            Stationed at/near Fort Rucker before 1970
            Had a Vietnam tour (most likely)
            Retired no later than mid 1970

All help will be greatly appreciated.  One bit of info that may be helpful to Historic Wings is that one of the three CH-3's we had at Canton in 1970 was a "movie star".  It had the same "tail" number as one used in the old space movie "Marooned".  Don't remember the number but did confirm it at the time I saw the movie way back.  If Historic Wings tracks by aircraft missions, however, this might be a help.

Not much info to go on, I know.  That's sort of the name of the game with the TIGHAR gang.  Always great, however, when we do find something.

Forest Blair
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 13:07:07 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Press Coverage

(referring to disclosure in the media that the venerable Dr. King was born in Petaluma, CA)

Just me and the chickens (Petaluma used to be called the Egg Basket of the World).  Gaye is an old buddy of my sister (a retired local newspaper owner), and I pass on stuff to her.

Which reminds me, can I order a couple of gift memberships for Christmas presents and get something to send the recipients?

LTM
TK
**************************************************************

From Ric

Gift memberships in TIGHAR as unique holiday presents?  Say Tom, that sounds like a swell idea!  What a great way to please that brainy, already-has-everything history enthusiast on your list, while also helping to find Amelia.

Just let us know the name and address of the lucky recipients and we'll send them an attractive greeting along with their membership card, sticker and TIGHAR Tracks (and whatever other TIGHAR goodies you may wish to order) in time for Christmas (or to you if you prefer).

And now, back to our program...
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 13:10:26 EST
From:         Forest Blair
Subject:      Re: Army Records

For Jon Watson,

Yes, the helicopter pilots could have been from any of the DOD agencies, as well as the Coast Guard and civilian agencies.  The pilots  worked for a civilian contractor (Global Air) which in turn contracted services to the Air Force (SAMTEC).  The pilots I remember, however, were ex-DOD types, and were retired from the military.  None of the aircrews were on active duty with the military when working at Canton.

Major Martin used to talk about performing exercises with Army troops. That's my only clue to his being ex-Army.

Bruce may have some better info.

Forest #2149

***************************************************************

From Ric

Hmmm.  Performing exercises with Army troops...  I've done that.  We called them push-ups.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 13:17:52 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Anonymous postings

Whilst understanding and agreeing with your sentiments regarding not censoring critical postings, surely it seems reasonable that people posting contributions at least identify themselves.  Many news group moderators refuse to accept anonymous contributions - so I think you're well within your  rights to withhold contributions bearing only cryptic e-mail addresses.

LTM
Simon #2120

***************************************************************

From Ric

Yeah, you're probably right.  We let ol' "sactodave" (David Baker) get away with it for awhile, and I just felt kind of sorry for this poor little guy. The world must be a very scary place for a dedicated conspiracy buff.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 13:30:43 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Back into his hole

As reported earlier, sk82son submitted a posting which purported to explain the "love to mother" incident.  I replied:

>I have not posted your message to the forum because you provide no evidence to
> support your allegations.  I'll be happy to post it if you can show that it is
> anything but unsubstantiated anecdote.

To which sk82son has now replied:

"Okay.  Good luck to you."

'nuff said.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 13:33:17 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Noonan siblings

RE: question of whether we are sure there are no Noonan siblings.

Ric's response was correct. We are not "entirely" sure whether there were brothers and sisters or not. However, nothing has turned up after a reasonably exhaustive search so far. No census info, no birth records, no church records, and no references from any other written material we have. His mother died four years after his birth. But we haven't been able to establish his parents marriage date yet. We are still searching via church records (the state has nothing). While the search for siblings goes on, we are running out of avenues to explore. Personally, I am doubtful that we will find any siblings at this point. We are also trying to determine whether his mother had sisters. Female descendants of his aunts, if any, could be used for dna testing. To that end, we might need a volunteer to go to the regional National Archives in Chicago (7358 South Pulaski Road) to look up some immigration information. Please contact me if you are interested and can help with this.

blue skies, -jerry
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 17:20:22 EST
From:         George Mershon
Subject:      RealPlayer suprise

I downloaded my new version of RealPlayer Plus G2 via the net and found "A.E.'s Last Flight" preloaded in the software ( with about four other choices ).  Man, you are getting the world "booted up"! EeeeHaaaaa!

George Mershon 2181
***************************************************************

From Ric

Holy Guacamole!  We had no idea.  Hits on the TIGHAR website have been going through the roof.  I wonder if we're reaching some kind of critical mass.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 10 Dec 1998 17:21:54 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Fingerprint logic

Zat's poifect!

Have a great weekend!
Gene Dangelo #2211
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:18:50 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Crabs & bones

Just to open another can of worms (or crabs), Tom King recently got this input from a fellow archaeologist on Saipan:

"Thinking back on WWII remains that we have found, there was one instance where we found a well preserved skeleton that must originally have been laid out on the ground surface (in an area where there should have been many coconut crabs).  It was essentially intact, suggesting that crabs do not scatter bones".

Which prompts me to wonder if we should ask ourselves:

Who says that Gallagher's supposition that the bones were scattered by coconut crabs was correct?  Was he an expert on the depredations of Birgus latro (the coconut or robber crab) any more than we are?  In 1989 we saw an intact but very dead cat in the island's co-op store.  Why didn't the crabs scatter its remains?  Do we have any evidence at all that coconut crabs scatter remains?

And if they don't (spooky music) how did the remains of the castaway get scattered?

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:55:19 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

>Granted.  This kind of dilemma comes up repeatedly.  Few events are
>completely beyond possibility and complex sequences of unlikely events occur
>all the time, and yet, the correct answer is usually the most obvious
>answer.

Usually.

Then again, "the most obvious answer" is that the Electra crashed in the ocean.

No, don't y'all jump on me.  I believe in the possibilities, I joined, I paid my dues.

I'm pointing out that we must often look past "the most obvious answer" to find the truth and must not dismiss something because it's unlikely.  Even if it's something we'd rather not find out is the truth.

    - Bill   #2229

****************************************************************
From Ric

Which brings us back to our old friend William of Occam (1285-1329) who said,"Non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem" meaning "entities are not be multiplied beyond necessity" or "the simplest explanation which accounts for all of the facts is most probably correct." (This basic principle of investigation is known as Occam's Razor.)

The problem with the "crashed at sea" hypothesis is that it fails to account for all of the facts.  If the Electra simply landed in the ocean (bloop!) and sank (gurgle, gurgle, gurgle), then all of the things that we know happened which suggest a different scenario are, in fact, random unrelated occurrences. To name a few:

- bearings on post-loss radio signals on July 3rd and 4th which cross near Gardner;

- Lambrecht's sighting of "signs of recent habitation" on Gardner on July 9th;

- Bevington's notice of "signs of previous habitation" on Gardner on October 14, 1937;

- Gallagher's discovery of a what now appear to have been a woman's bones on Gardner in September 1940;

- TIGHAR's recovery of artifacts from Gardner in 1989, 1991, 1996, and 1997 which appear to be associated with Earhart

Occam's Razor suggests that the complex array of coincidences required to create the illusion of Earhart's presence on Gardner is less likley than the very simple explanation which accounts for all these unusual discoveries. It is the magnitude of the significance of that explanation, rather than the explanation itself, which demands of us such a high standard of verification.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:00:21 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Anonymous postings

Just think of all the amusement we'd miss if you chopped these guys.  Besides, he probably adheres to the old adage that 'just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you'...
ltm
jon
***************************************************************

From Dave Kelly

I'll have you know that none of my postings were anonymous. All of them were honest, straightforward inquiries to determine if TIGHAR was considering an alternate course for their research, rather than concentrating on the small, inconclusive evidence from Nikku. The mere fact that they do not consider alternative views is proof to me that they are tailoring their evidence to prove their own theories.

****************************************************************
From Ric

The mind boggles...
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:15:33 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Noonan siblings

Just for info, there's a huge amount of archival immigrant information, which is available for review, at Ironworld, in upstate Minnesota. (Virginia, I think, but don't hold me to it).
ltm, jon
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:13:53 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Waste of time

Ric:  Personally, I love the drivel from these conspiracy types.  I don't take the time to read the tabloids at the checkout lane, but the headlines are a riot.  Reading and listening to these people is like watching Jerry Lewis. Doesn't make any sense, but its a hoot to watch.  I agree, though, that we ought to ditch the "Love to Mother" - I think we should have something more appropriate for TIGHAR - like - "EAT 'EM UP, EAT 'EM UP, RAH RAH RAH" - referring to AE/FN and their bouts with the sand crabs (meaning no disrespect to AE/FN, the sand crabs, veterans or any group foreign or domestic).  Your political leanings as you mentioned in an earlier piece also reminds me of an old cartoon. Two couples are sitting in a living room and one of the men is sitting behind a machine gun mounted on the coffee table and his wife is saying:  "Herman takes his politics very seriously."  That's like these conspiracy types.  They are going to stick by their guns to the bitter end.  The funny thing to all of us with any common sense is the fact that their "guns" are loaded with blanks.

Love to Mother,
Dave Bush
#2200
(ps - thanks for giving me such an easy number to remember)

***************************************************************

From Ric

I do think that it's important that we keep the door open to those with dissenting opinions and viewpoints.  If they can offer evidence of another explanation for the Earhart disappearance which meets the same standard we have set for ourselves, we'll be happy to follow that line of inquiry and, as we do almost daily, reconsider our hypothesis.  However, if they can't meet the standard of evidence we can't allow them to distract us or derail our pursuit of the truth.

So, I'll let anyone step into the arena and draw their sword, but they had better have a sharp blade.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:28:30 EST
From:         Mike
Subject:      Critical mass?

Lets rather say, "UNcritical" mass, you have had enough of the critics! So have the rest of us supporters.

Mike
***************************************************************

From Ric

"People who think they know everything are particularly annoying to those of us who do." - anon.

When things are going well there is a great temptation to get smug and cocky, especially when you've been through what we've been through.  Let's try to remember that, despite our discoveries, we know perhaps one-tenth of one percent about what happened on that island.  Any hypotheses we construct based upon such skimpy information are almost guaranteed to be wrong.  They're nothing more than a starting place, but at least they're a place to start.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:46:13 EST
From:         Tom Cook
Subject:      Major Martin

I checked 1958 Ft.Rucker Yearbook, like a highschool yearbook, no luck. No officer named Martin, any rank at Ft. Rucker,Alabama at beginning of '58.  This is the only book of this type during my time there: 1 /58 thru 6/60.

We've certainly seen our share of critics lately, Stripple, Sactodave, Anonomous poster,  the psycic major, whats his name?  and Mr. Crouch. They all say that we are all wrong, but I see no evidence that they have a better theory.  Where are their research results?

Tom Cook 2127
PS The grandson has not arrived yet despite the Dr.'s best effort, I guess HE just likes it where HE is!!

***************************************************************

From Ric

Critics?  Heck, this is nothin'.  You should have seen the firestorm in 1992 when we first announced the shoe parts and airplane skin.  Of course, I didn't help matters much by announcing to a packed press conference in Washington that "the mystery is now solved."  Well, live and learn.

By the way, our sources tell us that the Anonymous Poster is a gentleman by the name of Tod Evan, for what it's worth.  As for Tom Crouch at the Smithsonian- Tom and I are old friends.  He's a fine scholar and his biography of the Wright brothers, The Bishop's Boys, is one of the best on the subject. His role as learned skeptic of TIGHAR's work has gotten him a lot of air time, and that's actually very good for us.  When the day comes that Tom is finally convinced it will be the symbolic long-withheld blessing that is needed to "change history."

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:48:58 EST
From:         Chuck
Subject:      Re: RealPlayer suprise

George:

Sorry to bear the bad news, but you will also notice that the 4 other "preloaded" programs were also previously loaded on your old version of RealPlayer.  Anything that was in your old site list is carried forward when a new version is initialized.

Chuck

***************************************************************

From Ric

Whoops.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:03:47 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Off-Topic inquiry

This is far off topic, but if possible, I'd like to query the Forum on behalf of my friend Scott Russell, Deputy Historic Preservation Officer for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, who sent the following post. I'm not suggesting any of this for Forum discussion, since (Fred Goerner notwithstanding) it has nothing to do with Earhart, but if any of our experts on strange and exotic matters historical has information to share with him directly, his address is cnmihpo@itecnmi.com.

Thanks to anybody who can help him.

Tom King

--------------------------
We are planning a project to collect oral histories relating to operations of the NTTU on Saipan.  NTTU, as you probably recall, was the CIA front for covert operations against China.

Most of the project will be directed at collecting oral histories from local residents that either worked for NTTU or were in a position to observe its operations.  I will also be doing archival research - particularly in the old TT archives - to see if there is any documentation that may shed light on less secret operations of NTTU.

We will also go through the motions of doing a FOI Act request to get more petinent documents.  Can you offer any suggestions on how best to phrase our request?  Is the government obliged to release records that relate to NTTU but are not related by national security concerns?  How exactly does the process work with respect to the release of Cold War documents?  Any advice you might give will be appreciated.

Regards,

scott

*************************************************************

From Ric

I'd like to suggest that anyone who has information which might be of interest to Scott contact him directly.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:05:35 EST
From:         Suzanne
Subject:      Re: anonymous postings

I see no reason to publish anonymous email whatever the topic. If one is not willing to sign his or her name, I, for one, don't think he or she deserves to be published or read.

Best regards,
Suzanne T.
#2184
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:08:37 EST
From:         Collette Stoneking
Subject:      Re: RealPlayer suprise

Say it like a real cowboy from Texas or a real Texan it is Yeeeeeeeeee, haaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Ayaaaaaaaaaa, ehhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Colette Crowder Stoneking

**************************************************************

From Ric

Now THAT'S what I call off-topic.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:21:14 EST
From:         John Marks
Subject:      Ockham's Razor, with all due respect

Ric wrote:

> Which brings us back to our old friend William of Occam (1285-1329) who
> said,"Non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem" meaning "entities
> are not be multiplied beyond necessity" or "the simplest explanation which
> accounts for all of the facts is most probably correct." (This basic
> principle of investigation is known as Occam's Razor.)

With all due respect, although Ric __translates__ The statement that Medieval Scholastics called "the Razor" correctly, his repeating of the common __paraphrase__ of it is both ahistorical and unjustified.  The faulty paraphrase unfortunately is much better known that the context is, which has lead to all kinds of errors that Ockham would have found baffling.

The context was Scholastic theology, the attempt to reconcile Scriptural revelation with rational knowledge such as Aristotle's discoveries. What Ockham proposed was a methodology, not an all-purpose reality test.  This is really important, guys!  Ockham proposed a methodology that posited a rational agenda for investigation, not a substitute for it.

The misunderstood core of the Razor is that what Ockham really proposed was: if there is a universe of possible causes or explanations, as a matter of efficient methodology, it made sense to investigate __by other means__ the most simple first, NOT because it was more likely to be true, but because it would be easier to disprove!

Let me repeat that. Ockham NEVER posited that a simple explanation was more likely to be correct.  He posited that it would be easier to analyze.  Really.

AND, when you realize that the kinds of things that were actively under discussion, such as the nature of the Real Presence in the consecrated Eucharist, were usually otherworldly in the extreme, the paraphrase of the Razor is doubly a canard.

Because the context is so far off, I will not make any effort to try to apply the real core of Ockham's Razor to the situation at hand, that is, where Earhart ended up, because I sincerely believe that it is not an appropriate methodological tool.

And when I joined this list I assumed I would have nothing to
contribute.

Anyone want to learn about John Duns Scotus' articulation of the notion of prevenient grace, write me privately!
--
John Marks
***************************************************************

From Ric

Boy!  Do I stand corrected!  Wonderful stuff.  Is this a great forum or what?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:44:25 EST
From:         Joe Horodyski
Subject:      A Project Book?

I'm a new subscriber to the Earhart forum (this is my first posting, so excuse any goofs), and I've spent the last week or two reading all the previous postings, as well as all the articles TIGHAR has available on different aspects of the Earhart search, the physical evidence, the anecdotal native stories, and so forth, and I've found them extremely fascinating.  Many of these make references to past people, incidents and locations that I'm sure veteran Earhart buffs are familiar with,  scattered about the various articles.  What occurred to me is this:

Has anyone at TIGHAR ever considered putting all this information into a book, that can outline everything in a chronological, easy to follow order for the average reader?  I'm surprised there isn't one already. There's so much information out there that  I think it would be a great way to present the latest discoveries to the general public.  As an example, the first part of the book could outline Earhart's demise the way TIGHAR's evidence suggests it may have happened, and why the searches failed to turn up anything. The middle third of the book could then outline how TIGHAR came to be, and follow their various expeditions to the island, what they did on each, what it was like for the people involved, personal reminiscences, that sort of thing.  The last part of the book could look at the physical evidence turned up, and what the latest thinking is as to their authenticity and meaning.  In other words, take all the information and theories currently available on TIGHAR's web site, telling TIGHAR's story as well as Earhart's in the process, and put it all in one neat little package between the covers of a book.

The benefits are obvious.  First,  besides reaching a greater number of people, the book would generate some income for TIGHAR.  A certain percentage of the proceeds could be set aside to help fund any further expeditions or pay for any other historical research that needs to be done, but is held up for lack of money.   And it would stay in the public's eye longer than a TV documentary that is seen maybe once and then forgotten, by having further updated editions come up anytime anything new is discovered.  Audio books are common these days, and it could even have a longer shelf life by being reissued in the inevitable paperback version a year or two later.  I know I would certainly buy such a book, and it would make  a handy reference guide too, to check the facts when some other researcher or writer starts making absurd claims.  It could certainly help supplement TIGHAR's reliance on fund-raising and contributions for a few years.  The facts are already there in TIGHAR's archives,  all somebody would need to do is organize them with a general narrative tying it all together.  How about it, are there any professional writers out there willing to take on the challenge?

Joe Horodyski

***************************************************************

From Ric

Yeah, me.  In 1989 we put out the first edition of "The Earhart Project - An Historical Investigation"  (usually known to TIGHAR members as The Project Book).  The Seventh Edition was published in May of 1993.  These were soft-cover, spiral-bound books produced in-house.

Last spring I had the bright idea that it was high time to produce an Eighth Edition as a commercially produced, bound, soft-cover book with photos and maps and graphics galore.  We said it would be ready by July and started taking orders at $49.95 - then the Hoodless report turned up, which set us on the trail that led to the recent trip to England and the re-evaluation of the bone measurements, etc., etc.  In short,  the project was suddenly moving forward so fast that there was no time to stop and publish a book that would be obsolete before it was printed.

Now if everybody will just stop making dramatic new discoveries for a few minutes, I'm hoping that I'll be able to find time over the holidays to put this thing together.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 12:12:57 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Mr. Gatty?

One interesting tidbit of information which has emerged out of the files we found in England is that in August of 1941, the High Commissioner of the British Western Pacific High Commission (Sir Harry Luke), personally showed the sextant box found on Gardner Island to a "Mr. Gatty" who supposedly had "expert knowledge in such matters" and felt that the type of sextant the box once held was not the type that would be used in "modern trans-Pacific aviation."

I have a sneaking suspicion that "Mr. Gatty" is Harold Gatty who flew around the world with Wiley Post in 1931.  If memory serves, I think that Gatty later worked for Pan American.  If this is the same Mr. Gatty, it raises the question of how much Sir Harry told him about the box's origin.  This is the only instance we know about when the discoveries on Gardner Island may have been revealed to somone who might have had enough knowledge to connect the dots.

But was Harold Gatty in Suva, Fiji in August of 1941 and, if so, why?  It's research time gang.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 13:06:08 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Comments from the Sunshine State

I didn't check my mail for a few days around Thanksgiving, and when I did, WHAMO, 26 of them from TIGHAR1 !!! I'll be afraid to check my mail after 2 1/2 weeks down in New Zealand for the Christmas Holidays!!! Take it easy on me you guys!!

I've enjoyed reading the lunatic fiction lately and I don't think that it should be censored. Bring it on, you never know!! You've even posted some of my ramblings, but they were always sent with the best of intentions. By posting these critical comments, no one can accuse Ric of running a closed-minded program. That is important from an integrity standpoint.

Concerning the Noonan background, how about contacting one of those groups that figures out your family tree? When you need help, you might as well go to the experts! I'm sure that they have access to information that our tiny minds would never think of.

What's this "Ric is a pilot" talk? Could you give us a legally accurate answer to that? If affirmative, what is your piloting background?

 Ric, what are the most up to date plans for 1999 as far as expeditions go? What is the game plan for exploring Niku? Areas of concentrated exploration, etc? How about digging up the engine on Canton? The philosophy is the same as looking for stuff on Niku, "There just may be some artifacts from AE over there if you're willing to work for it". I know that the Canton dig is big, but who knows, you might get the serial number plate in the first shovel of dirt! If this mystery was easy to figure out, it would have been done by now!

LTM
Gary Moline       Orlando, Fl.
***************************************************************

From Ric

If you're going to be away for 2 1/2 weeks you'd better send a message to 

listserv@home.ease.lsoft.com
with the command
SET EARHARTFORUM NO MAIL
then when you get back send
SET EARHARTFORUM MAIL

Otherwise, as Nikita once said, "We will bury you."

As for my piloting qualifications and experience:

I hold a Commercial certificate with Instrument, Single and Multi-Engine Land ratings.  I have something over 4,000 hours pilot-in-command in a variety of types from J-3 Cubs and Stearmans, through the usual stable of Cessna, Piper and Beech singles and light twins, up to a couple hundred hours of right-seat time in DC-3s.  Never flown a turbo-prop or jet.  Lots of stick time in rotor-craft but no rating.  I've owned a Cessna 172, a Beech Debonair, and a Cessna 182 RG (all back when I was doing risk management and accident investigation for the aviation insurance industry).  These days I don't have the need, the time, or the money to fly.  I miss it sometimes.  Seems like I spend a lot of time on boats.  I'm not sure how that happened.  I don't much like boats.  I much prefer airplanes.

Speaking of boats... you ask about Niku IIII.  We're scheduled for April 29 through June 8 of 2000.  That's an unintentionally Biblical forty days which should give us 30 days on Niku.  We will, of course, be doing a thorough examination of the areas where former residents told us there was (is?) airplane wreckage, and we'll be doing a meticulous search of the area(s) where we think the bones were found to see if we can come up with more bones or artifacts.

We're still trying to figure out a way to excavate the Canton engine.  We may be able to incorporate that into Niku IIII.

At present we're preparing a fairly detailed schedule and budget for the project up through and including the expedition.  When it's ready we'll mount it on the website.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:36:34 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

Ric wrote:

> Do we have any evidence at all that coconut crabs scatter remains?
> And if they don't (spooky music) how did the remains of the castaway get
> scattered?

My apologies in advance for this, but perhaps a little lighter-hearted mood with regard to the conspiracy folks is in order.... So, with that said, regarding the above question, the answer to this one is either very simple or very complex, depending on how rational you are in approaching the equation:

Rational Answer:

We don't know. We also don't know if these remains were in any way truly related to or actually were Earhart's and Noonan's. No bones, no DNA, no proof, just stories and message traffic (very well could be all smoke).

And now, the Conspiracy Answer (obviously, this following is a joke):

After killing them off as spies, the Japanese Navy scattered the bones on the island to cover up their dastardly plot to invade Pearl Harbor.

Thomas Van Hare
***************************************************************

From Ric

Actually, for the purposes of our speculation about the scattering, it doesn't much matter whether the bones were Earhart's or not.  Somebody died on the island and a partial skeleton was later found.  The partial skeleton found in the shade of a small tree.   There were the remains of a fire, dead birds and a turtle nearby.  There were also parts of the soles of a man's shoe and a woman's shoe - possibly indicating the presence of both a man and a woman. There was the sextant box, a Benedictine bottle, and at least two "corks with brass chains."  That's it.  No hair.  No clothing.  No jewelry or watches.  No belt buckles.  No coins. No tools.  No sextant (but supposedly a piece of the sextant had been found and thrown away by the finder who was presumably a Gilbertese laborer).

It is important to remember that Gallagher is not the original discoverer of this site.  He hears about the finding and burial of a skull (which seems to have occurred in April of 1940) when he first arrives on Gardner in early September of 1940.  He asks to be taken to the spot and initiates a search which then turns up the other bones and artifacts.  We therefore have a considerable amount of time - April to September - between the initial discovery of the skull and Gallagher's description of the site.  Lots of things could have happened during that time.

Gallagher attributes the absence of the missing parts of the skeleton to coconut crabs, but he also admits that at least one object (the part of the sextant) was found and lost, apparently during activities that were not under his supervision.  Gallagher's attitude toward the Gilbertese under his charge was quite paternal and it is not difficult to imagine him "covering" for "his people."  I think we have to recognize the possibility that there may have been some souvenir collecting (and even perhaps some more bone-burying) before Gallagher arrived on the scene.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:40:36 EST
From:         Monty Bar
Subject:      crashed at sea theory

I used to think that they went down in the ocean looking  for Holland island also. But besides the artifacts found on Nikumaroro, being lost over the ocean, especially back then, the last thing you would want to do , and the biggest fear they would have, would be to run out of gas and be forced to come down in the sea with no land or ship in sight. Because of this alone, I'm sure they would have attempted to find another island before they ran out of fuel.

Monty #2224
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:52:00 EST
From:         Daryll Bollinger
Subject:      Your words;

Ric you wrote:

>I do think that it's important that we keep the door open to those with
>dissenting opinions and viewpoints. If they can offer evidence of
>another explanation for the Earhart disappearance which meets the same
>standard we have set for ourselves, we'll be happy to follow that line
>of inquiry and, as we do almost daily, reconsider our hypothesis.
>However, if they can't meet the standard of evidence we can't allow them
>to distract us or derail our pursuit of the truth.
>
>So, I'll let anyone step into the arena and draw their sword, but they
>had better have a sharp blade.

Ric, can you explain to me why I should waste time typing out an Forum post in which I document  my sources just to have you censor it. I wonder if you will post this?

Daryll
****************************************************************

From Ric

I have NEVER "censored" or failed to post an on-topic posting with documented primary sources.  Why would I do that?

As I recall,  you once a submitted a long posting about something to do with secret codes during WWII with quoted a bunch of secondary sources, none of which had any but the most fanciful connection to the Earhart disappearance. I didn't post it.  However, if you still have it, or wish to re-write it, I'll
post it if it will make you feel better.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 19:39:51 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Harold Gatty

Ric- regarding the bones being shown to Mr. Gatty---

Harold Gatty- the Tasmanian Navigator of -8 Days Post/Gatty fame- was affiliated with Pan Am. Juan Trippe used his services to fact find and negotiate certain agreements with the Australian/ Nae Zealand authorities on passage and landing rights...He did spend some time in the "Islands" on various tours....

Bender and Altschuls-'The Chosen Instrument-Juan Trippe and Pan Am'--references to a three month trip by a yacht named Kinkajou around Jarvis. Baker and Howland and others surveying for guano,etc. It made regular reports back to Pan Am filing coded messages to PanAM Honolulu... This was in late 1936..

Harold Gatty was a member of the crew... He might be the same Gatty that the Commissioner refers to... They may have met in the course of these trips,etc..... I dont have a Gatty biography to check.. Hope this helps a little.. Jim Tierney-
observer and recorder of the arcane and trivial....

***************************************************************

From Ric

So Harold Gatty is associated with Trippe as early as '36.  It's the sextant box, not the bones, that is shown to Mr. Gatty.

Checking Sir Harry Luke's service record, he was in New Caledonia and the New Hebrides from July 5 to July 22, 1941, then he's back in Suva until 27 August when he goes off to Tonga and returns on the 31st.  Given the distances and times involved, he must have had an airplane (a Catalina maybe?) at his disposal.

We know from the entries in the file that the meeting with Mr. Gatty had to have occurred between June 7, 1941 and August 8, 1941 so it's possible that Sir Harry met up with Gatty during his trip to New Caledonia/New Hebrides but it seems more likley that Gatty was in Suva for some reason.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 20:17:44 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

It is safe to assume that approximately one minute after stepping ashore on Niku that you all will begin digging furiously at the site of the finding of the bones? How deep do you dig when you all find a "hot" spot? How far out from the spot do you dig? It sounds like a good spot to begin your next search.   LTM     Gary Moline

***************************************************************

From Ric

Nothing archaeological happens furiously.  The first days at the island are always occupied with logistical tasks.  Then we'll probably tackle the airplane wreckage search before we begin the bone search.  The bone search, when it happens, will not involve digging - at least at first.  It will involve carefully clearing the jungle floor of coconuts, leaves, sticks and stuff and then doing a meticulous, inch by inch, eyeball search for anything that might be a bone.  Imagine about a dozen people on elbows and knees, butts in the air, moving along like a line of snails.  Pretty romantic huh?  Eat your heart out Harrison Ford.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 20:38:36 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

> Which brings us back to our old friend William of Occam (1285-1329) who said,
> ((..omitted..))
> investigation is known as Occam's Razor.)

I'm very fond of the Occam's Razor principal.  I use it all the time.

> The problem with the "crashed at sea" hypothesis is that it fails to account
> for all of the facts.

I happen to agree with you.

Which doesn't alter the fact that you (and I mean you specifically, Ric... you're the "face" of this project) need to be very careful about using phrases like "the correct answer is usually the most obvious answer" because your detractors will eat you alive with them.  Quite possibly in a forum (like a live TV broadcast) where you won't be able to clarify why you believe this doesn't apply to the evidence you've accumulated.

The most obvious answer is still that the evidence you've quoted (and more like it) has been misinterpreted or misunderstood and that the Electra is in the Pacific somewhere.

When the evidence requires careful analysis to be understood, the simplest answer is always to ignore it or rationalize it away and go with the obvious.

- Bill #2229
***************************************************************

From Ric

You're right of course.  It doesn't take much dealing with the media to realize that they are utterly incapable of grasping, let alone communicating, complex information.  It's all soundbites, simplify it, and dumb it down.

My experiences with the press have led me to the conclusion that one of the biggest problems we (as in "We the People") have is that most of the individuals who decide what information gets disseminated to the public have poor educations, don't realize that they have poor educations, and honestly believe that they are better educated than the public they're trying to inform.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 20:41:32 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Ockham's Razor, with all due respect

John Marks wrote:

> Let me repeat that. Ockham NEVER posited that a simple explanation was
> more likely to be correct.  He posited that it would be easier to
> analyze.  Really.

YIPE!

I should have caught that.  As soon as I read "William of Occam (1285-1329)" I must have skipped the rest of the paragraph.

>And when I joined this list I assumed I would have nothing to contribute.

There's a saying that "Everyone is an idiot about most things."  Which is true.

But I've always been more fond of the inversion one of my bosses used which was "Everyone is an expert on SOMEthing."

Thanks for pulling your "expert" out of the drawer for us.

> From Ric
>
> Boy!  Do I stand corrected!  Wonderful stuff.  Is this a great forum or what?

I'm amazed by the quality of people who hang around these parts and am endlessly pleased that bits of it rub off on me.  The ultimate benefit of research is not just to solve the problem at hand, but to have a fall out of other bits of knowledge and learning.  I've picked up all kinds of interesting stuff on this forum.

    - Bill #2229
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 20:46:59 EST
From:         Colette Stoneking
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

Weather changes and storms can and will do a number on the natural graves sites. Typhoons and Huricanes and other water gushings do a lot of damages encluding floods, eh?

Sincerely Yours,

Colette Crowder Stoneking

*************************************************************

From Ric

Gallagher states specifically that this site is about 100 feet above the high water line of the highest normal tides.  He was apparently under the impression that the scatter was not due to the action of water.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1998 20:52:49 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

Point of clarification: William of Occam died in 1349, not 1329 as a result of the Black Plague.

***************************************************************

From Ric

You'll have to fight that one out with the Encyclopedia Britannica which give places his death in "1329?"  Maybe the question mark is because he wasn't quite dead yet.  Few people realize that this discrepancy is the historical basis for the famous scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. ("But I don't want to go on the cart!")
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:34:22 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

It probably sounds morbid, but if you are going to have time on the island, conduct your own experiment - slaughter a small pig or a chicken or some such animal, put it out, and make your own observations.  That way you will have accurate information on crab activity for the island. If there's someone there you can trust to set the experiment up ahead of time, maybe they can get it started for you.
ltm
jon

***************************************************************
From Ric

We actually attempted just such an experiment during Niku III in 1997.  We put out a leg of lamb and carefully documented its deterioration for two days until the weather got so bad that the area flooded and we lost the experiment. At that point our primary concern was that we not become an experiment ourselves. More recently we've been in touch with friends in other parts of the Pacific about setting up a coconut crab experiment.

***************************************************************
From Bruce Yoho

I have been researching Kiribati on the Internet and had read an article written by a Peace corp Volunteer who had stated the crabs do like to take shiny items into their holes. She also stated that as she took a bath one night she watched a crab reach up to a shelf take her watch and dive into its hole.

How did the skeletons get scattered? Is it possible that the victims had on jewelry watches, rings and shiny writing instruments that the crabs were trying to carry to their holes and just drug the bones along with them. Would the crabs know how to take a watch off of a bone a ring off a finger, hardly?

Ric, I don't remember the long words but this would be classified as a second hand statement, and a little brainstorming. Just something to think about.

LTM
Bruce
***************************************************************

From Ric

The long word is "anecdotal", but it's interesting.  Sounds like after we thoroughly inspect the surface we'll need to do some digging.
***************************************************************

From Jon Watson

Ric, your comment "... no hair ..." strikes a chord.  What we frequently find when we investigate a body dump site is that the hair is salvaged by birds, and later discovered in nests.  On Niku, this could be the case (I don't have a clue what kinds of birds might nest there, but there could well be some).  At any rate, such nests are generally reasonably close to the death (or body dump) site.  Since hair would probably last a long time, even though the nests would have deteriorated/fallen to the ground/etc, such hair might very well be found, and with it (potentially) hair roots, with - hey, you guessed it - DNA.  Talk about looking for a hair in a haystack...
ltm, jon
**************************************************************
From Ric

Lots of birds.  Frigates, Boobies, Red-tailed Tropics, Fairy Terns, Sooty Terns, etc.  But I 'spect that after 60 some odd years finding hair is going to be pretty tough.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:41:12 EST
From:         John Thompson
Subject:      Gallagher's Field

Ric wrote:

> I think we have to recognize the possibility that there may have
> been some souvenir collecting (and even perhaps some more bone-burying)
> before Gallagher arrived on the scene.<<

As a newbie to the forum I cannot resist commenting on the double Irony here.

In 1932 when AE landed in *Gallaghers* field(Cornshell), after her solo transatlantic crossing, souvenir hunting was also a distinct possibility!!!.

A possibility so strong that AE requested that Mr Gallagher drive her back to his field ASAP after making her phone call.

Less than 500 yards way from the site, I uncovered in 1987 a grave(bones & burial urn intact) dated to 1700-2500bc.

Not sure about conspiracy theories, but what are the chances of the Gallagher who met AE in 1932, being related to the Gallagher who "uncovered" AE.

John Thompson
Curator
Amelia Earhart Centre
Derry
Ireland
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/AmeliaEarhart/

PS a VERY embryonic website!!!
**************************************************************
From Ric

Welcome aboard John!  The psychic types call this sort of thing "synchronicity."  I call it a really cool coincidence.  It's good to have you on the forum.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:49:23 EST
From:         dr914
Subject:      fair play

Ric, I applaud your objectivity and sense of fair play to allow all viewpoints to be expressed on the forum, no matter how "far out" or discourteous they may be.  I would be curious to read his defense of the "love to mother" note.

It is great that we can consider all viewpoints in this search for Amelia.  Have you considered taking the people who say they used to play on the aircraft wreck back to the island to show you where the saw the plane?  Can someone currently on Canton be hired to excavate the dump and look for the engine?
**************************************************************
From Ric

As for airing opposing viewpoints, it seems to me to be basic to the scientific method.  If we're serious about getting to the truth we have to consider all possibilities.  At the same time, we can't let ourselves get bogged down chasing every alleged "eyewitness account."  That way lies madness.

The woman who told us about playing on the wreckage described the place quite specifically in relation to known landmarks.  We know where to look.   We've considered hiring some folks on Canton to dig for the engine but it would be essential that they be supervised by an archaeologist.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1998 08:24:41 EST
From:         Janet Powell
Subject:      Norwich City - Missing Crew

Daniel Hamer, Master of the NC was my Great Uncle and among the survivors.  As a family historian, (albeit amateur), I consider myself well placed  to accurately relate family recollections of events. In practising a serious approach to my research, I have studied official documents and anecdotal evidence from other sources.

Whilst accepting that 'anything is possible', consideration of all the available evidence leads me to express some personal views regarding the theory that an unaccounted-for member of the NC crew may have reached Niku, alive, and not been among the recorded survivors.

These men spent 3 days on Niku in dire need of sustinence and shelter. Survival was paramount.  They spent their time in search of food and water.  They achieved some shelter, using available resources, and waited........and hoped.......

This was no passive process.  Fresh water was in extremely short supply - by the 4th day they had none.  They would surely not have restricted their search to their immediate surroundings.  In a total of 5 days, it seems likely that they would have explored a large part of that island.

Their other immediate concern - what of rescue?  They did not know for sure how long it would be before help came, and if or when it did, whether they would ever get off alive.  They believed that radio messages sent from the NC had got through but the static was bad and details of any rescue plan were unclear.  The environment was hostile. They scoured the horizon for passing ships.  It seems logical that they would have done this in all directions, from parts of the island other than the site of the wreck.

They buried their fellow crew members on the beach.  They were living the experience of having done so.  The NC stuck on the reef was the only ship that they could be sure of seeing.  Their thoughts were of their situation and the fact that 8 were still missing.  One might suggest that the survivors were highly motivated to actively search for their shipmates.  Had they been found, dead or alive, their fate would surely have been recorded.

What of the 2 rescue ships?  They were searching the coast with the purpose of finding the crew and executing the rescue.  The wreck was the only reason that they were in the area.  They record seeing only the 24 survivors.  They would surely have undertaken a thorough search in an effort to learn the fate of the missing.

Following completion of a difficult rescue on the 5th day, is it really conceivable that any of the missing 8 reached the shore, alive?  (.... a genuine question....)

Given the available evidence, my personal conclusion is that if bones found on Niku belonged to those of the NC crew, they were either remains washed ashore or belonged to those fortunate enough to have been given a decent burial.

Love To Mother,
Janet Powell
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1998 08:34:00 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Harold Gatty of Air Pacific

Regarding Mr. Harold Gatty.   A quick net search using Yahoo and the key words "Harold Gatty" produced 31 hits, one of which is under the title of "Air Pacific."

I quote,  "Air Pacific (airline) has a colorful history, first registered two years after the second World War as Katafaga Estates Limited.   It was the brainchild of famous Australian aviator Harold Gatty who settled in Fiji after the WWII."

Questions:

Was the Harold Gatty who flew with Wiley Post an Australian?

What was the span of Sir Harry's service in the Pacific?

Could Sir Harry have met Mr. Gatty in 1941 and assisted him after WW II?

Was there a close relationship between Sir Harry and Mr. Gatty prior to or during 1941?

Was Sir Harry's headquarters in Suva?

Would the term, as used by Mr. Gatty, "modern trans-Pacific aviation" refer to the most recent device on the market?

Would Mr. Gatty declare a sextant or sextant box manufactured prior to 1937 as, "obsolete?"

Is he still alive and if not, can we contact his survivors for info?

Might someone with lots of juice from TIGHAR contact Air Pacific management in Suva for assistance?

If we could find the sextant box in question, the other articfacts found on Niku in 1940 might be also found.  Other artifacts might still be inside the box...??? Long shot, but who knows!

That sextant box could still be in the Pacific being used to support ash trays in some breaucrat's office or may be in the possession of Mr. Gatty's survivors.

The Air Pacific web site can be located at:
http://www.bulafiji.com/airlines/airpac.htm.  Click on "The Air Pacific Story"
and go
to: http://www.bulafiji.com/airlines/airpac/apstory.htm.

Me thinks we might needs ta get busy again.

LTM,
Roger Kelley, # 2112

***************************************************************

From Ric

Sure sounds like a "Fiji connection" to me.  Good questions Roger.  I'm on the road right now but I can get answers to some of them later today.  More later. Film at 11.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1998 08:43:20 EST
From:         Leah Ouzinian
Subject:      Romance & adventure

Some of us would find it more than romantic.  It would be the ultimate adventure!  :)

Sincerely,
Leah Ouzinian

**************************************************************

From Ric

We have an old saying at TIGHAR.  " Adventure is what happens when things go wrong.  It's what you get instead of results."  That sounds awfully cynical, but it really is important that we focus on the work to be done rather than the experience to be had.

You can get really philosophical about all this and it's always tempting to expound on how we have created a world that is so safe and secure that we now manufacture adversity.  But that's off topic.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:16:03 EST
From:         Dean Alexander
Subject:      Re: crabs & bones

Do we know for certain that the turtle, dead birds and fire were found near where the bones were found.I thought this point was not really established (ie. possibly more than one camp site). Also, does anyone know if the inhabitants of Gardner may have taken jewelry off of a skeleton? Were they possibly too superstitious to do so? If we can be fairly certain that no one would have removed personal effects off of the "bodies" than they probably are still somewhere in the vicinity of where the bones were found.

***************************************************************

From Ric

It is clear from Gallagher's descriptions that he considers everything he found to be part of a single scene.  He says specifically (in a telegram to the Resident Commissioner on 6th october, 1940) that "There are indications that person was alive when cast ashore - fire, birds killed, etc."

It seems to me unlikely that the Gilbertese would take any items from the body.  We are told by Gallagher that, prior to his arrival, they found only the skull and buried that.  The bottle may also have been found at that same time.  If so, it does show a willingness to collect objects.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:21:28 EST
From:         Kirk
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

"I think I'll go for a walk ..... I feel happy .... I feel happy!"  -- Old Man from The Grail

kirk
***************************************************************

From Ric
(A working knowledge of Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a basic requirement for Earhart Project research.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:29:59 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

> You're right of course.  It doesn't take much dealing with the media to
> realize that they are utterly incapable of grasping, let alone communicating,
> complex information.  It's all soundbites, simplify it, and dumb it down.

Amen and more.

I've had the experience of being ON THE SPOT when a couple of news worthy events occurred.  The stories I read in the paper later were, well, creative.  Mostly the geography is correct (i.e.: Hopkinton Center, near the soldier (he's actually a doughboy)) and the times and major event (i.e.: just before the start of the Boston Marathon) but much of the remainder bore only a distant relationship to the facts as I observed them.

I always keep a bucket of salt handy (for all those "pinches of...") when I read the paper or watch the news on TV.  And the net can get things wrong at speeds the other media can only dream of.

I've never had the experience of being quoted (or misquoted) yet... but I'm not dead yet.

    - Bill  #2229
**************************************************************
From Ric

(Another quote from the same Monty Python scene!)

Back in 1992 we had terrible arguments with NBC News Productions about the way they wanted to make their documentary.  At one point the producer accused us of being "biased toward the facts."
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:35:29 EST
From:         Tim Smith
Subject:      'Tis the Season

My wife recently asked what I would like for Christmas.  I couldn't think of any material thing (except a new car, which would not have been the right answer), so I said "Make a donation to TIGHAR for me."  She thought that was a good idea and the check will be in the mail in time for Christmas!

You are most welcome to use this idea for a little fund-raising.  Other good reasons for gift donations:  1) beats shopping at the mall this time of year, 2) beats getting socks, ugly ties, or that 14th bottle of after-shave, 3) its tax deductible, and 4) its a good cause.

Love to Mrs. Clause,
Tim Smith #1142C

***************************************************************
From Ric

This is the kind of thing that makes those of us in the forefront of the research get a little choked up and then go all steely-eyed about the job we have to finish.  Thanks Tim.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:53:28 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

Ric wrote:

>My experiences with the press have led me to the conclusion that one of the
>biggest problems we (as in "We the People") have is that most of the
>individuals who decide what information gets disseminated to the public have
>poor educations, don't realize that they have poor educations, and honestly
>believe that they are better educated than the public they're trying to
>inform.

Yes, we have been made painfully aware of that this week...

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:56:50 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

Ric wrote:

>Imagine about a dozen people on elbows and knees, butts
>in the air, moving along like a line of snails.  Pretty romantic huh?  Eat
>your heart out Harrison Ford.

Ric, If you find a provenance and go running naked into the surf crying "Eureka, I have found it", please destroy the photos. Leave something to our imaginations.  ;)

Thanks,
Tom #2179

**************************************************************

From Ric

Trust me.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:58:25 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Ockham's Razor, with all due respect

Bill #2229 wrote:

>I'm amazed by the quality of people who hang around these parts and am
>endlessly pleased that bits of it rub off on me.  The ultimate benefit of
>research is not just to solve the problem at hand, but to have a fall out of
>other bits of knowledge and learning.  I've picked up all kinds of
>interesting stuff on this forum.

I'll second that!

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:45:50 EST
From:         Daryll Bolinger
Subject:      Secondary Sources

Refering to your reply;

>I have NEVER "censored" or failed to post an on-topic posting with
>documented primary sources. Why would I do that?

I wondered that myself. You are in a unique position on the Forum, to be able to determine what everyone reads and in some cases believe.

>As I recall, you once a submitted a long posting about something to do
>with secret codes during WWII with quoted a bunch of secondary
>sources,

Are records (sources) obtained from National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Primary or Secondary Sources ,gee, I have trouble keeping that straight ?

>none of which had any but the most fanciful connection to the Earhart
>disappearance. I didn't post it. However, if you still have it, or wish
>to re-write it, I'll post it if it will make you feel better. 

Did that first part mean that I might have an imagination? I can see that it sure didn't make anykind of an impression on you. I don't submit a posting to the Forum to make myself feel better. I do it to contribute. and you always seemed to have a sly comment about it. Could you define for me and the Forum what your definition of a conspirator from the planet conspiratar is, and how it pertains to Amelia Earheart?????

Daryll
**************************************************************

From Ric

As Moderator of the forum I am, indeed, in a unique position to determine what everybody reads but I certainly hope that I do not control what anyone believes.  I take the job of Moderator to be just what the word implies - I try to moderate the content of the forum so that it stays informative, productive and entertaining without becoming nasty, irrelevant or excessively silly.

What archive a source comes from does not determine whether it is a primary or secondary.  A contemporaneous written account (for example, Senior Aviator John Lambrecht's report of his search of Gardner Island or Dr. Hoodless's report on the bones) is a primary source.  And not all primary sources are equally credible.  A newspaper account of Earhart's departure from New Guinea is probably not as reliable as the report written by the general manager of Guinea Airways.  A post-loss radio message reported by a ham operator in Wyoming is probably not as reliable as one reported by the U.S. Navy in Hawaii.

Secondary sources (books, articles, etc.) are useful only to the degree that they accurately cite the primary sources from which they draw information.

Of course, a researcher can have tons of primary source information and attempt to relate it to events for which there is no documented connection. That's what generally happens with the Earhart conspiracy fans.  Yes, elements of the U.S. government had pre-war concerns about Japanese activity in the Pacific.  Yes, elements of the U.S. government were involved in Earhart's world flight attempt.  No, there is no evidence that there was any connection between the two.  This is where imagination comes in.  It is perfectly legitimate to ask the question and look for indications that there was something going on that was not publicized.  Gather information, formulate a hypothesis, and test it.  I saw nothing in your posting to suggest a likely onnection between code-breaking activity and the Earhart flight.  If I missed it, please correct me.

My "sly" comments about conspirators from the planet Conspiritar are intended to discourage those who persist in adhering to hypotheses which have been shown to be indefensible.  There are, of course, those who would put me in that category.  My only suggestion to them is that they go moderate their own darn forum.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:06:39 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

My sources for William of Occam's death comes from Barbara Tuchman's "A Distant Mirror", pg. 99, and George Holmes "The Later Middle Ages 1272-1485".  There are no question marks beside his death year.

**************************************************************
From Ric

Although hardly of cosmic consequence, this is a classic case of which secondary sources are most credible.  If we wanted to get TIGHARical (adjective defined as "being really anal about documenting historical events") we'd want to see the death certificate or the loading manifest for the cart ("Bring out your dead!").
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:13:52 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      A Momentous Statement

Dear Forum Members,

Most of you are aware that I have researched AE and FN for nearly 8 years, working with Ric and fellow TIGHARs.  What many of you do not know is that I have steadfastly refused to throw my weight behind the theory that AE landed on Niku.  In fact, my working hypothesis, if there was one, was to try and disprove this theory, using contemporaneous documentation and all available geophysical/oceanographic/environmental information.  Until recently, given the evidence of a few aircraft parts, shoe fragments, and anecdotes, I believed that while it was possible for AE to land at Niku, there was insufficient evidence to support this idea.  We know that aircraft parts derived from other islands (e.g. the navigator's bookcase). Shoe fragments still could have come from either New Zealand or American surveyors in 1938-1939.  One could still come up with simple hypotheses to explain the existing data without resorting to invoking AE and FN.  The most disturbing part of TIGHAR's hypothesis was the lack of evidence of the plane wreckage on Niku.

With the advent of the bone and sextant stories and the careful documentation of forensic analysis, my thoughts and feelings have changed. The most convincing and simplest hypothesis that fits the existing data IS that AE and FN did land on Niku.  While the available data is not sufficient for scientific proof of their landing on Niku, I must state for the record at this time that TIGHAR's working hypothesis is the most reasonable available.  The lack of aircraft wreckage is still puzzling.

It has taken eight years for TIGHAR and Ric to convince me of this reasonableness.  Ric knows that I do not make these kinds of statements lightly.  Perhaps now that I have made this statement, Tom Crouch's conversion may be forthcoming as well.

Randy Jacobson
***************************************************************

From Ric

Wow!  Now I'm REALLY worried.  Pat is always telling me, "Ric, dammit, just because somebody agrees with you doesn't mean they're wrong!"

By the way,  I have taken the liberty of forwarding this posting directly to Tom Crouch.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:25:25 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Re: Your words;

>So, I'll let anyone step into the arena and draw their sword, but they
>had better have a sharp blade.

Yeah, the No Land Club* found this out the hard way. (The reason Lambrecht didn't see the plane is because it wasn't there)

Love to Lambrecht (and Happy Holidays to all),

The No land Club*
***************************************************************

From Ric

And Happy Holidays to the No Land Club*
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:31:27 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

Bill said:

>Then again, "the most obvious answer" is that the Electra crashed in the
>ocean.

The No Land Club* would say "the Electra wound up in the ocean (off Western Reef of Niku), with bits pieces redeposited over time on Niku."

Ric said:

> Lambrecht's sighting of "signs of recent habitation" on Gardner on July
> 9th;

That was the flag pole or the 1800's plantation.

We can talk about razors and philosophers, but:

The Lambrecht/Colorado air search crews didn't see a plane.  Because it wasn't there.

If the Lambrecht crews could clearly see natives "underwear" (loins I believe was the term used) over Hull Island, they ain't gonna miss an Electra.

And the NLC* says it was a pretty thorough search with 3 planes, 6 sharp eyed young bucks (who probably had binoculars), who wanted nothing more than to be the ones to find Miss Amelia and Mr. Fred.

Love to Lambrecht,

NLC*
***************************************************************
From Ric

You know, we're probably never going to be able to resolve this.  If we find a big chunk of wreckage in the bushes I don't know how we're going to tell whether it washed up there on July 8th or July 10th.  I'll be content as long as it's there.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:05:20 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Scattering bones

Ric writes:

> Gallagher attributes the absence of the missing parts of the skeleton to
> coconut crabs, but he also admits that at least one object (the part of the
> sextant) was found and lost, apparently during activities that were not under
> his supervision.  Gallagher's attitude toward the Gilbertese under his charge
> was quite paternal and it is not difficult to imagine him "covering" for "his
> people."  I think we have to recognize the possibility that there may have
> been some souvenir collecting (and even perhaps some more bone-burying)
> before Gallagher arrived on the scene. 

Comment:  I think this could well account for missing artifacts -- like a canteen to which the corks were attached, as has been discussed -- but I have trouble imagining how it would explain missing bones.  Certainly people might take things that they thought would be useful; I once had a distinguished Chuukese elder ask me for a grindstone we'd found in a grave dating from the 1930s.  But bones are pretty scary things, and they're not good for anything. Of course, they might have buried them, but if so, why be selective?  And why dig up the skull but not other parts?

On balance, I'd still bet that the crabbies are the culprits, along with birds and rats, and that there's something different about the war dead that Scott Russell mentions that kept them from being distributed in the same way.  But -- a fruitful area for research.

Tom King

****************************************************************
From Ric

I agree that it seems highly unlikely that the Gilbertese laborers were responsible for the scattering of the bones.  They found the skull but didn't find the rest of the stuff because the bones had already been scattered and the skull was in a different place.

I've been thinkin' about this (uh oh, here he goes again) and I think we have more information than we have realized.  Let's think for a moment about just what bones were found where and what that might tell us about what happened.  Let's assume that the unhappy individual expired with all body parts parts intact and that the bones found at the "campsite" were the ones that were moved least.  (This seems more reasonable than assuming that the person died somewhere else and that various bones just happened to be transported back to the campsite.)

So the bones that are missing are the bones that got carried off.  Duh.  So what's missing?

- The whole right arm and hand, EXCEPT for the radius (the big forearm bone). Now how does that happen unless the flesh is already gone?

- The entire left arm from the elbow down.

- Both feet (although it seems reasonable to think that some foot bones may have been there but escaped notice).

- The left leg from the knee down.

- The entire torso (both collar bones, one shoulder blade, the whole backbone except for one neck vertebra, all of the ribs except part of one, and half of the pelvis).  If a crab went off with that chunk, I never want to meet that crab.

And here's the clincher for me -  It's clear (at least to me) from Gallagher's description, that the lower jaw was with the bones at the campsite (found in September), not with the skull that was found and buried earlier (ca April). That may  mean that the skull was moved AFTER deterioration had reached a point where the jaw had separated from the skull.  All of this does not sound to me like a bunch of crabs pulling at a rotting corpse.  It sounds like dogs. Dogs?  Yup, dogs.

We know that Gilbertese people kept dogs as pets. We know there were dogs on the island when the Coast Guard was there during WWII.  We don't know when the first dogs arrived, but if the families of the first work party who arrived in April of '39 brought dogs with them, or if the next batch of settlers who arrived in June of '39 had dogs with them, then we have dogs on the island well before the skull was found in April of '40.  A couple of dogs could go off with smelly old clothes and groups of bones that were still stuck together (rib cage and backbone), and all sorts of things.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:08:42 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

I want to add a bit to Ric's response to Gary's comment that...

> It is safe to assume that approximately one minute after stepping ashore
> on Niku that you all will begin digging furiously at the site of the finding
> of the bones? How deep do you dig when you all find a "hot" spot? How far out
> from the spot do you dig? It sounds like a good spot to begin your next
> search.

Our first problem here is to figure out where the "site of the finding of the bones" IS.  We have two good candidate locations, and there may be more that become logical as we work through the textual data.  Neither location is a discrete "spot;" each is easily several hundred feet on a side, with ill-defined boundaries.  We'll probably have to work on both sites, or more, and/or a larger area that embraces all the candidate sites.

Working, as Ric says, doesn't involve furious digging.  In archeology, CONTEXT is terribly important.  The fact that Gallagher gives us some information about the spatial relationship of the skeleton (sic) to the campfire to the turtle bones to the sextant box gives us clues that we'd not have if he just reported finding all the stuff somewhere.  So when we do archeology, we do it slow and careful, plotting everything we find on maps, so we can reconstruct spacial relationships.  In the case of bones scattered over the landscape precise locations may not be as important as they would be in a pristine site, and that's one of the factors we'll take into account in designing field methods, but the bottom line is, certainly no furious digging and as Ric says, probably lots of crawling.  And mapping.  One of the things that makes archeologists go wild is when somebody picks up an artifact and trots over to ask what it is.  You don't pick the stuff up till you've plotted it in.

We may have to dig, though.  Soil develops and buries stuff, shorelines shift, and crabs dig burrows into which they drag stuff.  The crab burrows we sectioned at Aukaraime last time were about 50 cm. deep -- 18" or so.  It's very unlikely that any contemporary burrow was occupied in Earhart's time; everything has probably been turned over repeatedly, but in any event, I'd guesstimate that 50 cm. is as deep as we'd have to go.  But going to this depth, over a large area, searching for scattered bone fragments and teeth, is a humongous undertaking, and something that to the best of my knowledge nobody's ever done before.  There's got to be a better way, and suggestions are really welcome.

Tom King (Project Archeologist)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:15:44 EST
From:         Steve Miller
Subject:      Metal detectors

I assume you have already considered taking a metal detector to check out the possible 'burial' site, something else useful for excavation without too much damage to items is a backpack leaf blower. Try one out on a bare patch of ground and see what happens.

Steve Miller
**************************************************************

From Ric
The good folks at White's Electronics in Sweet Home, OR have long equipped TIGHAR expeditions with the latest in metal detection technology.  Many of our best finds have been made with White's equipment and we have lots of warm, fuzzy feelings about the company's sponsorship of our work.

I think Dr. King will agree with me, however, that we'll pass on the leaf blower.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:17:57 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      For a Balanced Forum

I agree with you that printing at least some of the e-mail of those that think TIGHAR is wrong.  It is important that we all understand that there are those who think the research work by TIGHAR members is all wrong.  It makes us take each step very carefully and to make certain we can fully justify what we say and do.  As long as we maintain the primary focus of the Forum printing these messages does not harm the Form and they have a positive outcome in helping us walk a strict line in doing our research. We must also remind ourselves that those messages are directed toward all TIGHAR members, not just Ric.

Dick Pingrey 980C
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:19:49 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Harold Gatty

Ah, yes, Harold Gatty!

I wondered why his name rang a bell to me! In 1965, when I was 10 years old, I was an avid builder of airplane models. I remember that in that year, I built a model of an airplane from the early 1930's, called "The Winnie Mae Of Oklahoma," and one of its decals named its crew as Wiley Post (pilot) and Harold Gatty (who I assumed to be the navigator). This plane made a historical flight of some significance as to distance, as I recall. Of course, Wiley Post met an untimely end in the 1935 Point Barrow, Alaska crash, which also claimed his friend, the humorist Will Rogers.

You opened up a whole avenue of my childhood which I'd forgotten, by your postings. Thank you for that!

Gene Dangelo  #2211   :)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:28:14 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      PAA and sextants

Re: Source material referenced regarding Noonan sextant use...

Jerry has indicated that he believes the sources I referenced were derived from the same original source.  It's of no great importance, but I think these are separate documents, both written by Noonan.

The Letter to Weems (Jerry says it was dated May 11, 1935) is clearly just that -- a personal letter.  It opens:

"I hope you will pardon this long delay in acknowledging your congratulatory and greatly appreciated letter of April 1st..."

The other appears to be a draft copy of a paper, perhaps for internal use by PAA.  The cover page has the title, "Making the Landfall."  And a sub-title, "Trans-Pacific Air Navigation."  On the lower part of the cover page it is dated:  October 3, 1935, F. J. Noonan, Navigator. "Pan American Clipper."

This document opens with:  "Any discussion of the navigational procedure during the several transoceanic flights of the 'Pan American Clipper' would be incomplete without a brief description of the carefully planned and faithfully executed training program to which the success of those flights is directly attributable..."

It's very true that much of the content is the same.  Some of the wording is identical.  So... Fred said it, not once but at least twice, marine sextants were carried on the Clippers! <grin>

After reading some of Weems' book, "Air Navigation," and noting the problems associated with use of bubble octants, I can understand why Fred would have wanted a "preventer" on board -- a marine sextant.

Only the paper, "Making the Landfall," contains the statement, "...the list of navigation instruments reads like that of a surface craft.  It shows two bubble octants, a mariners sextant...etc."

Speaking of "The more recent flights over the Pacific," the paper also makes reference to "The navigational procedure followed during the several crossings..."

But that's probably only one airplane and one set of navigational equipment.  So, I really don't have much support for the idea that PAA had a "lot" of old marine sextants.  It appears that a marine sextant would have been on Fred's flights but that's about all that can be said.  It seems reasonable that some marine sextants would have been used for training purposes.  One of those ended up in the museum in Pensacola -- loaned to a trainee by Fred Noonan and never returned by the trainee.  Maybe another ended up on Nikumaroro in 1937.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:39:52 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      New sextant box info

As part of our show and tell at the recent meeting of the American Anthropological Association meeting in Philadelphia, we were fortunate enough to have on loan from the National Museum of Naval Aviation, the famous Fred Noonan Sextant Box.  With more leisure to examine the box we a couple of interesting new observations.

1.  It is a well-made box, but it is not what you'd call fine cabinetry.  The wood is probably mahogany.  The sextant that was in the box when it was donated to the museum, on the other hand, is a Ludolph - one of the very finest German instruments made.

2.  The inside back cover of the box has a crudely cut-out notch.  The folks at the museum confirm that the notch is not necessary to accomodate the Ludolph.  They also say that there is no component that came with the Ludolph which fits in a holder in the box which is clearly designed to secure a cylindrical object.

It would appear, therefore, that this particular box was not always used to store this particular sextant.  For whatever that's worth....

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:47:35 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Boxes and numbers

We know of two, and only two, sextant boxes with the tantalizingly similar numbers: 3500 and 3547 stencilled or hand-writen on them. The first was found on Nikumaroro in 1940.  The second resides in a museum in Pensacola and is known to have been in the possession of Fred Noonan shortly before 1937.

TIGHAR has examined over 500 sextants, most in boxes, in various collections in the U.S., Great Britain and Europe without finding numbers of any kind on the boxes.

Whomever it was that put the numbers on those two sextant boxes probably put similar numbers on other things.  One might expect to find such numbers on boxes containing other navigational instruments. There were probably other navigational instruments in those collections examined by TIGHAR representatives.

Would we have noted numbers, perhaps similar to 3500 and 3547, on other items in the collections?  I can imagine a box open to display a set of parallel rulers, dividers, or a chronometer... with the number on the lid of the box not visible.  Would the investigators have been looking for numbers on other items they may have seen?

***************************************************************

From Ric

Aaaargh!   Probably not.   In most cases we were looking specifically at collections of sextants.  Tom Crouch recently mentioned to me that the Smithsonian has the Weems Collection of navigational instruments and tools. He'll help us obtain access to check them.  Certainly worth doing.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:38:22 EST
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      FN's sextant

Maybe I'm nitpickin, but re-reading the Tarawa File, note Gallagher's telegram of 23 Sept 40 to the Resident Commissioner:  "...a search has produced...and a sextant box with two numbers on it...- sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel."

I think this is where the confusion began about finding the sextant.  But why would "Irish" describe a sextant he didn't have?  Maybe he based it on the "inverting eyepiece", but I gather, perhaps incorrectly, that a native had that and "lost" it.  Maybe some black enamel paint chips remained in the sextant box.  Ric, I wonder what became of 'Irish's' possessions?  Your England Prelim. Report (long) of 11/23 says they included a sextant. Hmmmmmmmm.

LTM
Bill Moffet #2156

**************************************************************
From Ric

The confusion about a sextant being found resulted from an error the Resident Commissioner made when he passed the word about Gallagher's discovery on to Fiji. Remember that Irish notified his immediate superior, the RC, who was on Ocean Island.  The RC then notified the brass in Fiji who never saw Gallagher's original telegram.

I don't think that Gallagher's sextant is suspect because he also had a set of astronomical tables.  he had his own sextant and knew how to use it.  As for what made him think that the sextant which had been in the box was painted in black enamel, your speculation is as good as mine.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:54:11 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: Harold Gatty of Air Pacific

>>Was the Harold Gatty who flew with Wiley Post an Australian?

Harold Gatty was born in Campbell Town, Tasmania (which qualifies him as Australian). Apparently, there is a memorial to him there. See these URLs:

http://www.tased.edu.au/tot/central/campbelltown-text.html
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~wilmap/TAS31.HTML

A picture of this attractive memorial, which might be described as "deco-moderne" in style, can be seen at:

http://www.metva.com.au/~tomcat/building.htm

According to the official government website of Fiji, Gatty restarted Fiji Airways (now Air Pacific) in 1951 (the airline had an earlier incarnation beginning in 1933 but later went bankrupt). See
http://fiji.gov.fj/about/milestones.html

The 1951 date is probably when the airline first began regular services under the name "Fiji Airways". Evidently, Gatty had been running less regular passenger (or possibly charter) operations out of Fiji since at least 1947 under the name "Katafaga Estates Limited". This at least implies the possibility of some significant experience on Fiji prior to 1947.

Gatty was the author of a relatively famous practical survival-techniques book called "The Raft Book" (1943). It was also issued that year in a "waterproof" edition.

Interestingly, he may also have written a book called "Nature Is Your Guide" (no date-originally published in Australia), possibly still available under the title "Finding Your Way On Land Or Sea Reading Nature's Maps", about natural (as opposed to instrument based) navigation techniques. This book includes a section on Polynesian celestial navigation techniques. See 
http://www.uao.org/tach/survival/bklist.txt for a secondhand description of this book.

***************************************************************

From Ric

All good information, but it would be nice to confirm that he was in Fiji in the summer of '41.  And of course, there is no way of telling how much Sir Harry may have told him about the circumstances surrounding the sextant box.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:05:24 EST
From:         Tom Ruprecht
Subject:      Posting Management

Do you have a "mission statement" for the Forum?  If so, acceptance or rejection of postings should be on the basis of whether they meet its constraints.  You could make your decision as always, and use a macro to send a copy of the statement to rejected posters with a quick check box style form letter attached as to why it is being rejected, with an invitation to repost when the *poster* edits the post adequately.  This way would save a bunch of your precious time, and allay concerns of closing the Forum to dissenters.

If anyone insists, maybe the rejects could be saved in a downloadable file for those who want to spend the time going through them.

As I've said before in private email, I approve of strong leadership in this project, and prefer that such posts be published on these peoples' own forums or newsgroups.

Rupe

***************************************************************

From Ric

Everyone who signs up for the forum receives a Welcome Message which says, in part:

This is a moderated forum.

All postings come to me first so that I have an opportunity to head-off advertising and inappropriate material.  On those rare occasions when I reject a posting I'll usually email the person who submitted the rejected message and tell him or her why I have not posted their message.

Our purpose here is to promote an intelligent and productive discussion of the Earhart disappearance.  Specifically, we want to further our investigation of TIGHAR's hypothesis that Earhart and Noonan, and probably the airplane, ended up on Gardner Island (now known as Nikumaroro) in the Phoenix Group.  We will not discuss conspiracy theories on this forum, nor will we debate whether the airplane crashed at sea near Howland.  We feel that we have already established a strong probability that the flight arrived in the vicinity of Howland Island pretty much on schedule and, as of the last officially received radio transmission, had adequate remaining fuel to reach Gardner Island.  The question is, did it?

Likewise, we will not discuss Earhart's personality, previous record-setting flights, love life, place in history, etc. unless it directly pertains to the discovery, verification, or disqualification of evidence relating to her disappearance.

Prior to posting messages to the forum, subscribers are urged to familiarize themselves with the evidence described on the TIGHAR website at http://www.tighar.org

We recognize that this forum is not for every Earhart enthusiast.  Some may find us unsuitably irreverent or excessively scientific in our approach.  But if you're interested in hard answers instead of idle speculation, we think you'll enjoy what happens here.
**************************************************************

As you can see, I've not been terribly strict in enforcing these guidelines.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:18:18 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: Harold Gatty of Air Pacific

Ric- The only one of Roger Kelleys questions that I can answer is that Harold Gatty was born in Tasmania/Australia... I dont have the date and attended the Australian Naval College...Some time after that he met Wiley Post and in 1931 flew around the world in eight days...

Jim Tierney

***************************************************************

From Ric

I have a few other answers:

>What was the span of Sir Harry's service in the Pacific?

20 August 1938 to 20 July 1942

>Could Sir Harry have met Mr. Gatty in 1941 and assisted him after WW II?

I don't know but I doubt if they had any post-war relationship.

> Was there a close relationship between Sir Harry and Mr. Gatty prior to or
> during 1941?

Again, I don't know, but I don't get that feel from the tone of Sir Harry's file entry.

>Was Sir Harry's headquarters in Suva?

Yes.

> Would the term, as used by Mr. Gatty, "modern trans-Pacific aviation" refer
> to the most recent device on the market?

I would think so, yes.

> Would Mr. Gatty declare a sextant or sextant box manufactured prior to 1937
> as, "obsolete?"

That's not the issue.  An aeronautical bubble octant is an entirely different shape from a nautical sextant.  The size of the box and the interior fittings would tell him that it held a nautical sextant.

>Is he still alive and if not, can we contact his survivors for info?

Dunno.

> Might someone with lots of juice from TIGHAR contact Air Pacific management
> in Suva for assistance?

I don't know about the juice part, but we can certainly make inquiries at Air Pacific.  They helped sponsor the 1997 expedition.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:31:11 EST
From:         Peter McQuarrie
Subject:      Re: Harold Gatty

I think you will find that there was only one well known Harold Gatty. Fiji is indeed a good place to look for information. He was one of the founders of what is now known as Air Pacific (Fiji's national carrier) and at one time owned Katafaga Island in Fiji's Lau Group. His survival guide for aviators "The Raft Book" was well received when it was published 40 or 50 years ago. There is probably a published biography on him. He has been dead for some years but his son owns and operates "Spices of Fiji" not far from Suva, you will find his contact in the Fiji Telephone Directory. Some of your Fiji contacts who are more mature in years will be able to provide information on Harold Gatty.

Rgds

Peter McQuarrie

***************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Peter.  We'll do that.  Wonder if his son is keeping his cumin in an old sextant box.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:54:36 EST
From:         Dave Leuter
Subject:      Crabs

As a Professional Lurker here on the forum I usually remain silent. But I have a question.  Do you know how deep the average Coconut Crab hole is?  (African or European swallow question comes to mind here)  I assume you guys are bringing multiple metal detectors specially calibrated for 1930's aluminum alloys and jewelry, <grin>.

Just wondering.

Dave (Ace wheel reinventor) Leuter

**************************************************************

From Ric

I'll have to ask for Tom King's help here.  I recall that Tom excavated a number of burrows and came up with an average depth for a hole dug by an unladen coconut crab.  Incidentally, they do not seem to drag coconuts into their holes but eat them in the open.  They grip it by the husk.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:58:22 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

From time to time I do research that requires going through microfilm copies of newspapers from the early twentieth century. Journalists haven't changed much. One must be wary about reading contemporary news accounts. The most general facts (ie, geography, government actions, etc) are usually somewhat accurate, but the details are often quite wrong and the underlying reality is typically either ignored or completely misunderstood.

Even when they get it right, it tends to happen for the wrong reasons.

***************************************************************

From ric

We've often wondered how many of the known inaccuracies in the Floyd Kilts newspaper story (which was our first hint that bones had been found on Niku) are attributable to the reporter rather than to Floyd.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:03:17 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Secondary Sources

>> I have NEVER "censored" or failed to post an on-topic posting with
>> documented primary sources. Why would I do that?
>
> I wondered that myself. You are in a unique position on the Forum, to be
> able to determine what everyone reads and in some cases believe.

I have seen this as well. You do post all of the messages that are related to AE, but you also add a comment on at the end (in effect, always getting the last word if it is an argument or debate). Sometimes, your final comment is also editorial in nature, putting a spin on the original posting that changes its meaning. Don't get me wrong -- I am a big supporter of your efforts; I believe you've got it right, but in some ways you may be your own worst enemy.

Thomas.
***************************************************************

From Ric

No comment.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:06:05 EST
From:         John Marks
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

The 1917 edition of The Catholic Encyclopaedia states W of O's death as "about 1349" and "probably near Munich."  I'd be surprised if it could be nailed down much closer.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:09:00 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Ockham's Razor, with all due respect

(refering to comments about what neat people hanfg out on this forum)

ric:

i'll "third" that!
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:21:09 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Conspiracies & castaways

The problem here is documentation.  Death certificates were probagbly not available for this era, even if such things were documented, the documents are either filed so deep they'll never be found or they have been lost or destroyed in the interim.  I know that trying to search for documentation fro only 100 years ago is nearly impossible, let alone several hundred years ago when the documentation was almost nil and such things as paper were very, very scarce and expensive.  Also, clerical errors abound.  My own birth certificate shows the correct birthdate, but the filing date shown on the paperwork is a year earlier?!?  The next person looking at the paperwork would have a difficult time being sure which date is correct.  The birthdate as shown, or the filing date.  Which do you trust?  And this is recent, relatively speaking.  I know (?) which date is correct, because of anecdotal evidence from my parents.  I was there, but didn't know how to read a calendar yet, so cannot testify to the exact date (ha, ha).

Love to mother,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:18:50 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: A Momentous Statement

One of the problems most people seem to have is with the wreckage not being visible to searchers or readily visible now.  As a mission pilot for the Civil Air Patrol, I have had numerous experiences in searching for wreckage of lost aircraft.  Even on practice missions with the ELT going off and flying directly over the wreckage at 1000 feet, it was sometimes nearly impossible to recognize from the air.  Compound that with not even being sure if there is any wreckage, then add heavy underbrush, high airspeed (our searches are usually conducted at 90-100 knots - how fast did the search planes that the nvy sent out fly?).  What was the pilot's state of mind?  Did they feel that they were just flying over an island with little or no chance of AE/FN having made it.  Were they expecting to see their airplane in pristine condition sitting on the beach front with AE/FN waving the American flag?  Did they have any concept of the tidal action on this type of island?  Most of those are questions we can't readily answer, and maybe the answer is yes to all of them.

They hoped to find AE/FN, but not being trained and experienced in search missions or not trained for these types of terrain might have missed the wreckage.  We know that the Norwich City survivors were out of water in 4 days, and AE/FN were probably in no better fix by the time the island was searched, so they may not have even been in a condition to signal an airplane.  If they tried to signal an airplane, they quite possibly were not equipped (i.e. flares, mirror, etc) and as stated in a previous posting, most pilots wear flight gear that tends to blend with the terrain, making them nearly impossible to spot from the air, or even on the ground.  The wreckage can be in "plain" site to ground observers while not being in "plane" site from the air.

Love to Mother,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:33:53 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Sextant box search

Ric said:

> Aaaargh! Probably not. In most cases we were looking specifically at
> collections of sextants.  Tom Crouch recently mentioned to me that the
> Smithsonian has the Weems Collection of navigational instruments and tools.
> He'll help us obtain access to check them.  Certainly worth doing.

If that collection is in D.C. and if you need some help looking, give me a call.  I live just down the road,  have plenty of annual leave to use, and would look forward to helping TIGHAR again.

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149
***************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Den.  We'll keep that in mind.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:31:37 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

Tom King/Ric,

Obviously, my sense of humor in writing about"digging furiously the minute you step ashore" was misunderstood as being a serious question. What I wanted to know was, "Will you excavate for the possibility of bones and artifacts first?" Then, "how will the excavation actually take place?" I think that your recent response to my question and Ric's earlier explanation of the procedure has answered my questions. I appreciate both of the responses. I'll be careful with any future questions, as getting caught in the electronic meat grinder is somewhat humiliating!

LTM
Gary Moline
Orlando, Fl.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:44:04 EST
From:         Daryll Bollinger
Subject:      Sources;

( ".........but I'm getting better." ) as the old man was thrown into the cart.

It is my position that we were given a jig-saw puzzle and that someone has kept out most of the pieces with the straight edges. It makes the puzzle difficult, not impossible.  When I used the Raiders of the Lost Ark metaphor back in July, I was trying to describe the task. The name of warehouse in Washington D.C. is : INDEX OF NSA/CSS CRYTOLOGIC DOCUMENTS   Released to   THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION (NARA) as of 31 December 1987. The address of the warehouse is Military Archives Division    Modern Military Headquarters Branch    Record Group 457.

How big is this warehouse? As of 1987 it had 969,796 pages in it. For someone to read every page in this warehouse @ 1000 pages per week, it would take 18.5 years to do it. How many people other than the authors and the typist of these pages have read them? When I ordered some of these documents, they had a declassification date of ( 5 March '86 ), about the time I requested it. How does that work, I don't know ?  Most of these records were generated by organizations whose job it was, was to keep SECRETS! How can you find the truth in this environment? You have to use circumstantial evidence, the same catagory of evidence that has sent thousands of people to jail. The same catagory of evidence that TIGHAR has from the South Seas.  In your last reply to me.

>Of course, a researcher can have tons of primary source information
>and attempt to relate it to events for which there is no documented
>connection. That's what generally happens with the Earhart conspiracy
>fans. Yes, elements of the U.S. government had pre-war concerns about
>Japanese activity in the Pacific. Yes, elements of the U.S. government
>were involved in Earhart's world flight attempt. No, there is no
>evidence that there was any connection between the two.

While you were in England I posted to the forum, requesting info on the HF/DF on Howland island. Randy responded. With your permission Randy I will repost it:

From Randy Jacobson

Where to start? Most of the information is anecdotal, third hand, etc. Yes, there was an experimental HF/DF on Howland. It was run by Radioman  3rd Class Cipriani, detached from the Itasca for the purposes of DF'ing her signals. It was run by batteries extracted from the Itasca, but the radioman started the radio early during the night, and by the time he really needed to use it, the batteries had basically ran down. Where did the radio come from? Stafford, who was in the Navy Communications and ONI departments then and during the war, did some research after his retirement when he was working at the Library of Congress. He claims that the radio was essentially the same rig as what AE had in her plane, only set up for use on land and on ship. It came from the Fleet Air Base, Pearl Harbor, where it was an experimental unit, probably under examination for future utilization by the Navy. Radioman 1st class Leo Bellarts of the Itasca claims it was a breadboard (read very experimental) unit, that when came back aboard ship, was wrapped completely around the turning axis several times so that the wires were broken, and thus was unusable. I guess they did not know about slip rings back then. What was its capability under the best of circumstances? Unknown. Who was the manufacturer? Unknown. Did AE know about it? Only if Putnam was knowledgable enough about it to pass it on to AE during phone calls. AE was expecting a radio rig (but not DF) on her first try to Howland (from Honolulu). In all of my correspondence on file, there is very little mention of the HF D/F during 1937, with the exception of Capt. Thompson's report to the Coast Guard. The rest of the stuff above comes from 1960's interviews and manuscripts. I do know that the radio was not calibrated in direction. It was set up away from the Howland living facilities, and was never calibrated against the Itasca prior to the flight. Itasca never made a run around the island, which was the standard practice for calibration (actually, aboard ship, the ship turns, D/Fing against a fixed location). There was some calibrations made a couple of days later against the Itasca, which most people assume was a reading against AE (NNW/SSE), unless they read the radio logs in excrutiating detail.  Hope all of this helps.

Let me thank you again Randy for your response.

The following is from SRH-305 ( SRH  Special Research Histories )  THE UNDECLARED WAR   "HISTORY OF R.I."  15 NOVEMBER 1943   by L.F. SAFFORD CAPT. U.S. NAVY.    In 1943 this was classified SECRET.

R.I. refers to Radio Intelligence (Codes,Direction Finding,Traffic Analysts etc.) I might add that the Supreme Court before WWII found this activity illegal. This is from the same warehouse I mentioned earlier.Some of the Forum members will remember that Safford was commander of OP-20-G from 1936 - 1942.

" The significance of these Japanese D/F installations lies in the fact that in 1933 some of the U.S. Navy's radio engineers were claiming that the high-frequency direction finder was technically impossible, and that Naval Operations was wasting time and money by its insistence on the development of high-frequency D/F apparatus...."

Safford had stated earlier on this same page.

" These early bearings were not particularly accurate, ( Japanese D/F, my words), but neither were ours when we got high-frequency direction finders installed at Guam and Cavite, four years later..................."

I figured that date to be around July, 1937  As far as the frequencies for R.I. HF/DF, Safford claims the Japanese in 1933 took bearings on the U.S.S. Houston on 12,820 kc, and on the U.S.S. Monocacy on 335 kc.

The key words to focus on here is HF/DF high frequency / direction finding and that the time frame is also correct. This is only one example I have found that shows a connection.   That is why I'm bothered by your statement.

>My "sly" comments about conspirators from the planet Conspiritar are
>intended to discourage those who persist in adhering to hypotheses which
>have been shown to be indefensible.

Is this the mindset of a researcher? A seeker of truth. Yes, the Sun orbits the Earth, the Earth is flat!

Daryll

****************************************************************
From Ric

I'm a bit confused about what I'm supposed to do now.  I've posted your message.  If I respond to you here I'm being sly and putting spin on your message which apparently controls people's thoughts.   Wouldn't want to do that so I guess I'll just shut up and see if anybody wants to comment on what you've said.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:57:47 EST
From:         Rollin Reineck
Subject:      Re: Posting Management

I think that your followers would be interested to know that there is a new Earhart documentary that will be aired on the History Channel on Saturday 19 December 1998.  It is a two hour program and titled MYSTERIES OF AMELIA EARHART.  Aloha .   Reneck

**************************************************************

From Ric

That's right.  Unfortunately, our cable provider here doesn't carry the History Channel but TIGHAR did provide videotape, stills and interviews.  HC even taped interviews with some of Barb Norris's 4th graders (now 5th graders), the famous "Airhearts."  I'll be eager to hear about the show. =========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 09:54:57 EST
From:         Mike Kelly
Subject:      Harold Gatty

Here is some information I received from Tasmania about Harold Gatty.  I sent it to Mr. Kelley of this forum but thought it might be useful to the group.

Mike Kelly
--

Your request for information about the Gatty Memorial in Campbell Town has been passed to me by  Warwick Lee of Service Tasmania.

The memorial is in the form of a boom supporting a large metal globe of the  earth with a miniature aeroplane (the "Winnie Mae") on the top. I understand that at least part of the memorial was constructed at the Hobart Technical College. It was erected in memory of the late Harold Gatty in March 1961.

Gatty is best known for his round the world flight with Wiley Post in 1931. He was born in Campbell Town, Tasmania in 1903 and died in Fiji in 1957.

The memorial was unveiled by the Deputy Premier of Tasmania in the presence of Mr Gatty's brother and sister. It is situated in a small park in the main street of Campbell Town. In 1981 a commemorative plaque was placed in the same park commemorating the 50th anniversary of Post and Gatty's flight.

Recently (1997) a book titled 'Gatty. Prince of Navigators' by Bruce Brown was published in Tasmania. It tells the story of Gatty's eventful life. The publisher is Libra Books, 39 Manning Ave., Sandy Bay, Tas, 7005.

The Launceston Library has a small collection of news clippings relating to Gatty, the memorial, and his Tasmanian connections.

Please advise if more information is required.

Peter Richardson
Senior Librarian
Launceston Library
ph 6336 2630
fax 6336 2624

***************************************************************
From Ric

We need to get a copy of that book.  It would be nice if a TIGHAR member would take on this line of investigation - that is,  get hold of the book; see if Gatty was in Suva at the right time; and see if there is, by any chance, any reference to Sir Harry showing him the mysterious sextant box.  It would also be interesting to know if Gatty knew Noonan or Earhart.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:09:38 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Death of Ockham

The 1944 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia Dictionary agrees, listing "William of Ockham, (c.1280-1349), scholastic philosopher and controversial writer, b. Ockham, Surrey, England; d. Munich, Germany." It also states,"Entering the Order of St. Francis, he became a teacher at the University of Paris, 1320...his effort to simplify Scholasticism was undoubtedly well-intentioned."

The 1967 edition doesn't mention him. He is, however apparently listed in Turner's 1903 treatise, entitled, "History of Philosophy," for anyone so inclined!

Philosophically,
Dr. Gene Dangelo  #2211   :)

***************************************************************

From Ric

Yeah, but the other day I saw a guy working in a Burger King who looked EXACTLY  like William of Occam.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:52:02 EST
From:         Peter McQuarrie
Subject:      Coconut Crabs

I think perhaps we are focusing on the wrong species of crab. Coconut crabs are vegetarians and not interested in bone scattering. They are also very secretive and live in holes under large rocks or in amongst tree roots. In addition they are no way near as plentiful in the Central Pacific as the large land crabs (known as "manai" in I-Kiribati).

It is the common land crabs which move about more and are found in more open locations which are more likely to be the bone scatterers. These are found in the millions on Christmas Island and I guess on Nikumaroro too? They are an important food resource for I-Kiribati people who will know much about their habits.

***************************************************************

From Ric

We're talking about Birgus latro - the Coconut or Robber crab known as "te ai" to the I-Kiribati.  If he is a vegetarian, no one has thought to mention that fact to the ones who live on Nikumaroro.

In March of 1997 we were taking our lunch break near the archaeological site on Aukaraime (where the shoes were found).  Somebody glanced up into the trees overhead and noticed that we weren't the only ones having lunch.  A medium-sized coconut crab (perhaps a ten-pounder) was perched comfortably on a forked branch with a dead rat laid out on its back in front of him.  The belly was neatly opened up and he was eating it just like a baked potato.  When he finished the good parts he pushed aside the gutted carcass which fell (plop) at our feet.

The other land crabs on the island (which I suspect are the ones you describe) are also scavengers.  In fact, I have personally seen evidence that they are predators.  In 1989, Pat and I were standing in the coconut jungle near the village talking quietly when a big land crab scuttled by with a rat in its claws.  The rat was torn nearly in two and was a gruesomely fresh kill.  I remember that we commented at the time that we were glad they don't get any bigger than they do.

At least on Niku, there's little doubt that both species of crab would find a dead body a gourmet delight.  Whether they would scatter the remains is another question.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:06:29 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      The aerial search

perhaps my recollection of the lambrecht survey of the island & his subsequent report is not entirely accurate ( the copies i'd stored in my "favorites" files has electronically "vanished"), but i seem to recall that his report documented circling the island more than once & noting seeing "signs of recent habitation" (which seems to mean that the altitude at which he flew was fairly low), he also suggested that the entire time of the search flights there was clear weather with excellent visability.

so it would seem to me that we can all agree that if the plane was still sitting on the reef or any shallow water or open beach area, it would have surely been seen by lambrecht.therefore, unless some severe weather system struck the island so hard that the intact (or demolished) aircraft was swept into the island's  dense interior or, it could have been washed off the reef, into what i understand is an extremely deep drop-off which surrounds the island, (such a severe weather system would necessarily have occurred during the week preceding the lambrecht overflight) subsequently, over the succeeding years, portions of the ship might have surfaced & carried ashore & also washed into the interior of the island by wave wash & tidal action.

i can't recall whether we were ever able to obtain any evidence of tidal or storm generated activity for the month of july, 1937, which would provide some support for the proposition that the electra could have made a safe, wheels down landing, on the reef flat surrounding the island at lo-tide on the 2nd of july & then was washed off the the reef into the "abyss" of pacific ocean before the lambrecht overflight 7 days later.

naturally, if such a scenario is accurate, then the stories of islanders seeing a wrecked airplane on the island & the recovery of an airplane engine from the island would be very improbable.

i can understand how a search aircraft could easily miss seeing individuals on he island or not being able to spot wreckage in a large, dense area of undergrowth, i can't understand how they could miss seeing an intact  electra if it was still sitting on the reef, shallow water or an open beach area.

**************************************************************

From Ric

I can only reiterate my cautions about statements of what "surely would have" happened.  None of us have ever (yet) been up overhead the island, so judgements about what could or could not be seen from various altitudes at various tidal states are wildly speculative.

My personal experience at the island tells me that you don't need a hairy great storm to get some vicious surf running across the reef-flat.  The one photograph we have that was taken during the July 9th overflight by Lambrecht and company was taken from (ballpark) 1,200 feet and shows that the tide was highish with a strong surf running.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:09:49 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      The aerial search

> If they tried to signal an airplane, they quite possibly were
> not equipped (i.e. flares, mirror, etc) and as stated in a
> previous posting, most pilots wear flight gear that tends
> to blend with the terrain, making them nearly impossible to
> spot from the air, or even on the ground.

Here are some basic numbers to illustrate this point (taken from my memory but originally based on USCG tests and training programs/keep in mind I did SAR for two straight years, three flights a week):

Single Observer, 50 percent probability of spotting a target, aircraft flying at btw 80 and 120 mph, 500-1000 feet altitude daytime, dedicated observer (averages):
--------------------------------------------------------------
Head Bobbing Above Water:                  .25 miles
Single Man Raft in Water:                  .50 miles
Large Raft/Boat in Water:                 1.00 miles
Flare:                                    1.25 miles
Mirror Flash:                             6.00 miles

  (#1 Lesson Learned: Bring a mirror when you fly.)

Thus, AE and FN would have had a tough time if they were in the water in a raft (and, by the way, life expectancy for them would have been about four days in that condition, no supplies, no training) and even worse floating in the water (life expectancy between 12 and 24 hours). If they made an island, who knows -- if Niku, perhaps one to two weeks, hard to say? In the end, it is pretty clear that they didn't beat the odds.

Thomas.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:31:21 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Crabs & bones

(re: Gary Moline getting ground up in the forum meat grinder)

No problem, Gary; we all get ground up all the time, and that's nothing to what happened to that poor devil on Niku.

LTM
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:34:12 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Scattering bones

Dogs, huh?  Well, maybe so, but I don't think we know enough yet about crabs as agents of bone transport to jump to another hypothetical agent.  What do you think, Kar?  (forensic anthropologist Dr. Karen Burns)

LTM
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:19:25 EST
From:         Kenton Spading
Subject:      High Water Ordinary Springs

Ric wrote:

>Gallagher states specifically that this site is about 100 feet above the high
>water line of the highest normal tides.

Let look at this a little closer

The RC on Ocean Island asks Gallagher...."How far from Shore"  [was the skeleton found]..  (see TIGHAR Tracks, Sept 30, 1997, P. 21)

Gallagher replies:   "100 feet from high water ordinary springs"    (see TIGHAR Tracks, Sept 30, 1997, P. 22)

But what does this mean?     I work with water for a living and based on my experience  I know that "High Water" does not always mean what it implies.

So,  approx.  one year ago, I queried a friend of mine who lives in the Pacific and works for a company that deals with sailors a lot.    His name is Peter Cooper (met him on Funafuti after Niku III)

Pete wrote in response to my question of what does..... high water ordinary springs mean?

"High Water Ordinary Spring"

This was a new expression to me but I called a friend who says it is quite a well known method of describing a tide line. It actually means " The mean high water line" or the average high water line taken over a year. Taking into account the regular spring tides (higher than average) and neep tides (lower than average) It is the tide line used on ships charts. It will be of British origin as they were the original race to prepare nautical charts.

Peter

So, Gallagher is apparently referring to an average tide line.     The highest tide line could be a number of feet higher.

If crabs do not drag bones around, surely rats do?   Rats love shiny stuff.

LTM
Kenton Spading
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:12:40 EST
From:         Bruce Yoho
Subject:      Ric's spin on things

I actually need your spin or comments related to posting on the forum. Most of us do not work in the Archeology field, and we do not have the previous information cataloged and at hand such as you do. Quite frankly, I for one do not have the memory for all the issues as you do either.

So as the information is posted by an author to be the best thought he has. We need the added knowledge of knowing why and where our information, does fit or does not fit, and if it is just a restatement of things that have been gone over and solved before.

Yes, this is just my spin on what I think is helpful to most members of the forum.

LTM
Bruce
***************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Bruce.  Most messages to the forum come in as direct questions or comments to me and it has been my practice to answer them as notes at the end of the posting (just as I'm doing here).  As has often been said, the success of this forum has been largely attributable to the fact that we do stay more or less "on-topic."

If anyone needs an example of what happens when an Earhart forum is allowed to run wild, just remember what happened to the National Geographic Earhart forum which followed the magazine's publication of an article about Amelia last January.  Their unmoderated forum was soon dominated by the conspiracy crowd and the level of idiocy in the postings reached truly epic proportions. Before long, nobody with a brain would go anywhere near the place.

It is never my intention to put "spin" on a posting.  If I disagree with a point of view I say so and I say why.  It's up to the individual reader to decide whether my comments have merit.  If (no, when) I say something stupid, the meat grinder goes to work on me with the same relish as it does anyone (perhaps more).

If forum subscribers find my answers and commentary unfair or obtrusive I trust them - trust you - to take me to task.  That's what I'm here for.  It's part of my job.  The guy on the horse at the head of the charge is also the best target.  I understand that and accept it.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:16:04 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Crab holes

The crab holes I sectioned at Aukaraime were about 50 cm. (say 18") deep, but this depth coincided with a change in soil texture that appeared to coincide with a distinct change in moisture.  I tend to think that it was this change in texture that controlled the depth of burrow, and that could be different from place to place.

LTM
Tom King

**************************************************************

From Ric

The good ol' encyclopedia Britannica says that Birgus latro lives in burrows up to 2 feet deep.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:44:22 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Early DF Accuracy

By the early 40s, DF equipment, even when properly calibrated and used by knowledgeable operators, could still be very dodgy, often with very wide nulls and lots of swing.

I cite comments from a navigator of that era, Dick Peacock who posted the following on the Pan Am historical website November 23, 1998:

"1941 Boeing 314 Flying Boats, as Radio Operator we did lots of manual DF work, using BC stations near the US coast, VRT (BDA) and CTH Horta on 333 and 1638 kc on approaches. On BDA to Azores leg, there were some HF (3285 and 5165 kc) Adcock bearings passed to us from Nova Scotia and Newfoundland stations, but they were not very accurate. We also took bearings on the USCG weather ships at mid-Atlantic stations. We also did some transmitting for the BDA and Horta stations to take bearing on us. Seems we always ended the long legs quite a bit off the track and made a long curving approach as the DF results improved. Way out from the station, the audible null could be very wide, like 50 degrees, and also swinging a lot. Wow, what a difference from later facilities, and GPS!"

The post is at http://www.panam.com/wwwboard/messages/612.htm
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:49:46 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: FN's sextant

> (c) Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542 -
> sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel.

As we know, these are Gallagher's own words from his telegram. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I have always interpreted this sentence as having a punctuation problem or word omission (which is common in old telegrams, which usually contained uneven levels of word economy: since they had to be manually keyed in code by an operator at one end and read by someone at the other, each word was expensive, one way or another).

I read it as saying that the sextant box appeared to have held an "old fashioned" sextant (because it looked like an old box-- or an "old fashioned" sextant box), and that the box itself appeared to have been painted over with black enamel.

That is, "Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542 - sextant being old fashioned and [BOX] probably painted over with black enamel."
*************************************************************
From Ric

But if he had the box in front of him (which he did) why would he say that it was PROBABLY painted over in black enamel?  It either was or it wasn't.  Many sextants are painted with black enamel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:52:00 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: FN's sextant

Addendum to my previous note:

To avoid any possible misinterpretation, obviously I read Gallagher's words as saying that the box was empty (no sextant).
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:57:55 EST
From:         Pat Robinson
Subject:      Book by G. Carrington

I'm reading the book, "Amelia Earhart What really happened at Howland" by G. Carrington...

Two questions about the book...

Is the equipment list in Appendix II and the Lockheed Serial Number and List of Owners in Appendix correct ???

On page 106 is a picture of AE and GP showing kites she is going to carry as distress signals should she be forced down...The picture was taken on March 6, 1937...

Is there any evidence she actually took these kites with her and/or is there any evidence she took any other emergency equipment on her trip ???

Thanks...PNR
***************************************************************

From Ric

Without a documented source Carrington's equipment list is useless.

As for the kites, they are not included in the inventory of the airplane taken following the March 20 wreck at Luke Field so we it would appear that they weren't even taken along on the first attempt, let alone the second.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 13:02:16 EST
From:         Cliff Argue
Subject:      New York Times

Congratulations on getting the extensive coverage in today's New York Times. That will certainly make your efforts well known.

Cliff Argue
Mercer Island, WA
***************************************************************

From Ric

Wow!  Didn't know about that.  I talked to a NYT reporter last week but I didn't know that he had gone ahead with a story. I'll have to check it out. Thanks.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1998 16:34:49 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Ric's spin on things

Ric wrote:

> It is never my intention to put "spin" on a posting.  If I
> disagree with a point of view I say so and I say why.  It's
> up to the individual reader to decide....

Reading my message about "spin", I can see how it can be interpreted two ways (this is illustrative of the exact forum-listserv problem I was addressing):

WHAT I MEANT:
The conspiracy crowd interprets your postings as getting the last word on their messages. Thus, unintentionally, you feed their paranoia and open yourself up to unjustified attack. I wasn't saying that you should stop posting your thoughts at the end of the messages -- just that you've got to be very clear and very careful when you do so.

Thomas Van Hare
****************************************************************

From Ric

Okey doke.  I agree completely.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 13:54:55 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Ockham

Ric wrote:

>Yeah, but the other day I saw a guy working in a Burger King who looked
>EXACTLY like William of Occam.

Gee Ric, I didn't know you were old enough to know EXACTLY what he looked like.....   :-)

From Simon #2120
P.S. I'll try & get hold of the Gatty biography 'Gatty. Prince of Navigators'.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 13:58:27 EST
From:         Ken Feder
Subject:      Ockham

>From Ric
>
>Yeah, but the other day I saw a guy working in a Burger King who looked
>EXACTLY like William of Occam.

And the *simplest* explanation for that would be....???

Ken Feder

***************************************************************

From Ric

.....that he simply got lost, ran out of fuel, and ditched at a Burger King.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:02:59 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Regarding viewing the aircraft if it was in the water during the overflight. Strong surf/tidal action, sunlight glinting off the waves.  I don't think you could guarantee to be able to see anything well enough to identify it in those conditions.  Also, I don't know how bumpy the ride would be over an island like this.  The bumpiness of the ride can affect the ability to scan effectively and sometimes make binoculars completely useless.  The speed of the aircraft is important, too.  Wreckage on land can be highly visible or highly invisible depending on the circumstances.  I don't know if there is seaweed there, but if you've ever seen a coastline with seaweed or other debris, it can completely obliterate other items on the beach and camouflage them extremely well.

I realize that this is a sticky part of this.  Some people who have performed searches on land think it would be easy to spot the wreckage.  But when a plane crashes into the side of a mountain, the debris field is sometimes easy to spot for years and years.  However, remember the WWII disappearance of band leader Tommy Dorsey (?).  Only about ten years ago did they find his aircraft.  It was assumed that he went down in the channel, but actually his aircraft had impacted a ridge only a few miles from the base he had left.  Nobody found it for nearly forty years.

Love to Mother
Dave Bush
#2200
***************************************************************
From Ric

You wouldn't by any chance be thinking of Glen Miller would you?  His fate is still unknown, but there is a pretty good circumstantial case for thinking that he went down in the Channel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:11:26 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: FN's sextant

Maybe he meant black enamel, as opposed to black lacquer! Syntax is the key! (Doesn't syntax sound like it should be a duty levied upon illicit acts?) Ah, but I digress....

Thanks for your patience!
Gene Dangelo   #2211   :)

*************************************************************

From Ric

He said black enamel and i 'spect he meant black enamel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:06:38 EST
From:         Dean Alexander
Subject:      Pythonic issues

> From Ric
> (A working knowledge of Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a basic
> requirement for Earhart Project research.)>>

When you guys are out cutting brush and trees can one hear you sing the Lumberjack Song also ? If so that would mean taking a lot of extra clothes. (Not from the movie but from the show )

***************************************************************

From Ric

"We cut down trees, we skip and jump, we like to pick wild flowers. We put on women's clothing and hang around in bars."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:18:29 EST
From:         Anna
Subject:      newspaper articles

Hi... I am brand new to this forum, and couldn't be happier to have found it. I have also recently been struck with fascination about all aspects of this mystery. What I would like to know is if there is a way that anyone might suggest to find copies of the articles printed in the various American newspapers regarding the disappearance at the time of the disappearance. Any ideas? thanks, and I look forward to learning as much as I can from this forum.
Anna
ak315@aol.com
****************************************************************

From Ric

We don't make a habit of putting newspaper articles up on the forum (we like the info here to be accurate) but it so happens that Roberta Woods 2218 was kind enough to send the URL for the recent New York Times article:

http://search.nytimes.com/search/daily/bin/fastweb?getdoc+site+iib-site+36+0+wAAA+TIGHAR

It's not too bad, but it's not really accurate either.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:51:47 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: New York Time

It's actually not a very good story -- very drifty, and sort of sidles over to the Crashed and Sank school, then drifts off into the White Bird and St. Exupery.

TKing
***************************************************************

From Ric

Yeah but it contains some important new information.  For example,  I hadn't realized that "Most experts still believe that Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, simply crashed into the Pacific about midway between Australia and Hawaii."  ( I hate it when that happens.)

I was also fascinated to learn that Tom Crouch has apparently done some calculations.  "The odds are 100 to 1 that Amelia and Fred came to rest on the ocean floor."   It would be interesting to see the math.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:59:14 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Harold Gatty

Ric, we also need to look at Sir Harry's several books, most if not all of which are doubtless out of print but available from rare book dealers or perhaps in special collections in appropriate libraries.

LTM
TKing

**************************************************************

From Ric

Yes, absolutely.  Reviewing my notes from England, there is a three volume autobiography entitled "Cities and Men" published by Geoffrey Bles, London, 1953.

There is also "A South Seas Diary  1938- 1942" published by Nichols & Watson, London ( I don't have a publication date.)

I think there were a couple of others also.  Kenton?  Do you have any notes on this?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:03:27 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      The aerial search

On 12/12/98 Mike Ruiz wrote:

> And the NLC* says it was a pretty thorough search with 3 planes, 6 sharp
> eyed young bucks (who probably had binoculars), who wanted nothing more than
> to be the ones to find Miss Amelia and Mr. Fred. 

  As founder of the NLC*, thought you'd be interested in what Lt. William B. Short, one of Lambrecht's sharp-eyed young heroes,  had to say on the subject in a letter to his father dated July 5, 1937 (reprinted in TIGHAR's "Earhart Project Companion, 3rd Edition").

"This whole business is certainly a royal pain in the neck."

He then goes on to grouse sarcastically about Earhart's foolhardy flight and to speculate about what caused her undoing (I think he'd have fit in quite well on the Forum).

In fact, the (admittedly few) Earhart search veterans I've spoken to have tended to characterize the affair much the same way.  In 1937, they were mostly teenagers and twenty-somethings who missed out on shore-leave in Paradise to go look for some dame who got herself lost and "took a damn good man with her" (the quote is from Frank K. Stewart, Chief Quatermaster of the USCGC Itasca, in an interview with me in 1992).

That's not to say they didn't all do their duty to the best of their ability - they just weren't very happy about it.

  Love to Short,
  Russ
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:31:41 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: Sources

On 12/14/98 Ric wrote:

>I'm a bit confused about what I'm supposed to do now...so I guess I'll just
>shut up and see if anybody wants to comment on what you've said.

Actually, I don't think anyone could be more clear than Ric's earlier response to Daryll, when he wrote, "A researcher can have tons of primary source information and attempt to relate it to events for which there is no connection...Yes, elements of the U.S. governement had pre-war concerns about the Japanese activity in the Pacific.  Yes, elements of the U.S. government were involved in Earhart's world flight attempt.  No, there is no evidence that there was any connection between the two."  Yeah, that seems pretty clear to me, but here goes...

Correct me if I'm wrong (or even if I'm not), but after wading through Daryll's lengthy posting I believe he has established that:

[A] An experimental high frequency direction finder was on Howland Island in July, 1937.

[B] Four years after 1933 (July? 1937) the U.S. Navy installed high frequency direction finders at Guam and Cavite.

From which he concudes that:

[D] The HF/DF on Howland was not meant to aid the Earhart flight, but rather part of a secret U.S. Navy cryptology effort to break the Japanese naval code in preparation for the coming World War.

Or, put even more simply:

[A] There was a HF/DF on Howland.
[B] Some HF/DFs were used to spy on the Japanese.

Therefore:

[D] The HF/DF on Howlad was used to spy on the Japanese.

Notice that step [C] is missing - the part which actually connects the unit on Howland to espionage of any description.

While Daryll is to be commended for citing source material, his application is flawed.  By filling his post with an over-abundance of dates, quotes, catalog numbers, and even warehouse addresses, he hopes that the sheer volume of important-sounding information will lend weight to his argument.  In legal circles, this tactic is known as "burying them in paperwork."  Yet, it doesn't matter what warehouse the government uses to store that paperwork, if none of it supports the conclusions he's reached.

I'm willing to bet that somewhere in that secret storehouse there are documents pertaining to another use for high frequency direction finders...as an aid to aerial navigation.  Of course, we don't really need to go looking, because we already know of a document that links such a use DIRECTLY [yes, I'm shouting] to the unit on Howland - Cmdr Thompson's 1937 Report (as cited by Randy and Daryll).

Thus in the spirit of Ockham, I would like to suggest a slightly different scenario...

[A] There was an HF/DF on Howland.
[B] Some HF/DFs were used as aids in aerial navigation.

Therefore:

[C] The HF/DF on Howland was used as an aid to aerial navigation (just like the Thompson report says it was).

LTM,
Russ

"You're not fooling anyone, you know."

from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"
Written by Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin, Handmade Films, Ltd. (1974)

**************************************************************

From Ric

Gee, I should shut up more often.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:40:07 EST
From:         Mike Rejsa
Subject:      What he meant was...

> But if he had the box in front of him (which he did) why would he say that it
> was PROBABLY painted over in black enamel?  It either was or it wasn't. Many
> sextants are painted with black enamel.

He may have meant that the box was black enamel and may or may not ("probably") have been painted black over its original factory color. If it looked like an amateur paint job, you know?

This is basic miscommunication. Aren't any of you guys married? ;)

Mike Rejsa

***************************************************************

From Ric

So when she says "Not tonight" you assume that she means "Knots tonight", this being a clear request for a playful bondage session to which her subsequent protestations merely reinforce your conviction that you correctly interpreted her meaning.

If we start assuming that passages in the correspondence are errors (without some other reason for suspicion) we'll go nuts.  Where do you stop?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:46:58 EST
From:         Albert Ackers
Subject:      Re: FN's sextant

I'm new at this but this is my take on the wording of Gallagher's telegram:

(The) Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542 - (Judging by the details inside the box, the) sextant (was probably) old fashioned and (judging by [markings or particles] inside the box, the sextant was) probably painted over with black enamel.

Albert Ackers
**************************************************************

From Ric

Me too.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:43:35 EST
From:         Hugh Graham
Subject:      Re: Sources(long)

Daryll wrote:(******edited by HAG while retaining original meaning)

>  The name of the
>   warehouse in Washington D.C. is : INDEX OF NSA/CSS CRYTOLOGIC
>  DOCUMENTS   Released to   THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
>  ADMINISTRATION (NARA) as of 31 December 1987. The address of the
>  warehouse is Military Archives Division    Modern Military Headquarters
>  Branch    Record Group 457.

******HAG: The above information source is in reply to Ric's request for it.

> When I ordered some of
>  these documents, they had a declassification date of ( 5 March '86 ),
>  about the time I requested it.  How does that work, I don't know?   Most
>  of these records were generated by organizations whose job it was
>  to keep SECRETS!  How can you find the truth in this environment?  You
>  have to use circumstantial evidence, the same category of evidence that
>  has sent thousands of people to jail. The same category of evidence that
>  TIGHAR has from the South Seas.
>        In Ric's last reply to me:
>   <<Of course, a researcher can have tons of primary source information
>  and attempt to relate it to events for which there is no documented
>  connection. That's what generally happens with the Earhart conspiracy
>  fans. Yes, elements of the U.S. government had pre-war concerns about
>  Japanese activity in the Pacific. Yes, elements of the U.S. government
>  were involved in Earhart's world flight attempt. No, there is no
>  evidence that there was any connection between the two.>>

******HAG: Ric nailed that one on the head.  Also, the US selects agents who know Morse code and how to tune a radio.

>   While Ric was in England I posted to the forum, requesting info on the
>  HF/DF(high freq direction finding) on Howland island.  Randy responded.
>  With your permission Randy, I will repost it:
>
> From Randy Jacobson  "Where to
>  start?  Most of the information is anecdotal, third hand, etc. Yes, there
>  was an experimental HF/DF on Howland.  It was run by Radioman  3rd Class
>  Cipriani, detached from the Itasca for the purposes of DF'ing her
>  signals.  It was run by batteries extracted from the Itasca, but the
>  radioman started the radio early during the night, and by the time he
>  really needed to use it, the batteries had basically run down.  Where did
>  the radio come from?  Stafford, who was in the Navy Communications and
>  ONI departments then and during the war, did some research after his
>  retirement when he was working at the Library of Congress. He claims
>  that the radio was essentially the same rig as what AE had in her plane,
>  only set up for use on land and on ship. It came from the Fleet Air
>  Base, Pearl Harbor, where it was an experimental unit, probably under
>  examination for future utilization by the Navy. Radioman 1st class Leo
>  Bellarts of the Itasca claims it was a breadboard (read very
>  experimental) unit."
>          " Who was the manufacturer? Unknown. Did AE know
>  about it? Only if Putnam was knowledgable enough about it to pass it on
>  to AE during phone calls.  AE was expecting a radio rig (but not DF) on
>  her first try to Howland (from Honolulu).  In all of my correspondence on
>  file, there is very little mention of the HF D/F during 1937, with the
>  exception of Capt. Thompson's report to the Coast Guard.  The rest of the
>  stuff above comes from 1960's interviews and manuscripts.  I do know that
>  the radio was not calibrated in direction. It was set up away from the
>  Howland living facilities, and was never calibrated against the Itasca
>  prior to the flight. Itasca never made a run around the island, which
>  was the standard practice for calibration (actually, aboard ship, the
>  ship turns, D/Fing against a fixed location). There were some
>  calibrations made a couple of days later against the Itasca, which most
>  people assume was a reading against AE (NNW/SSE), unless they read the
>  radio logs in excrutiating detail.  Hope all of this helps."
>
>    Let me thank you again Randy for your response.

******HAG: Amelia was expecting low frequency direction finding at Howland, but left the L10E's trailing wire antenna(used for LF) in Miami to save weight(about 5 lbs. or 2/3 gal of gasoline).

>  The following is from SRH-305 ( SRH =3D Special Research Histories )  THE
>  UNDECLARED WAR   "HISTORY OF R.I."  15 NOVEMBER 1943   by L.F.
>  SAFFORD
>  CAPT. U.S. NAVY.    In 1943 this was classified SECRET.
>    R.I. refers to Radio Intelligence (Codes, Direction Finding, Traffic
>  Analysis etc.).   I might add that the Supreme Court before WWII found this
>  activity illegal. This is from the same warehouse I mentioned
>  earlier.  Some of the Forum members will remember that Safford was
>  commander of OP-20-G from 1936 - 1942.
>
>  " The significance of these Japanese D/F installations lies in the fact
>  that in 1933 some of the U.S. Navy's radio engineers were claiming that
>  the high-frequency direction finder was technically impossible, and that
>  Naval Operations was wasting time and money by its insistence on the
>  development of high-frequency D/F apparatus...."
>
>   Safford had stated earlier on this same page.
>  " These early bearings were not particularly accurate, ( Japanese D/F,
>  my words), but neither were ours when we got high-frequency direction
>  finders installed at Guam and Cavite, four years
>  later..................."
>
>  I figured that date to be around July, 1937  As far as the frequencies
>  for R.I. HF/DF, Safford claims the Japanese in 1933 took bearings on the
>  U.S.S. Houston on 12,820 kc, and on the U.S.S. Monocacy on 335 kc.
>
>  This is only one example I have found that shows a connection.   That is

******HAG: What connection?  So the Japanese were ahead of the US in HF/DF.  So what.  They make better TV's too.  And 335kc is only low frequency.

>  why I'm bothered by your statement:
>  <<My "sly" comments about conspirators from the planet Conspiritar are
>  intended to discourage those who persist in adhering to hypotheses which
>  have been shown to be indefensible. >>
>
>   Is this the mindset of a researcher? A seeker of truth?

******HAG: You have a point, Daryll, but nobody is perfect, and many of us are sick of the illogical conspiracy theories.

>  Daryl
>
>  ****************************************************************
>  From Ric:
>  I'm a bit confused about what I'm supposed to do now.  I've posted your
>  message.  I guess I'll just shut up and see if anybody wants to comment on
>  what you've said.

From HAG: I found Daryll's posting to be very interesting, although I reject its premise that AE was involved in any covert activity, other than possibly being a decoy.   regards, HAGraham 2201.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:01:07 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Concerning Tom Van Hare's comments on a ditching at sea, that whole scenario would be even more complicated based on the fact that we would have no idea about how they ended up in the ocean. Did AE pull off a perfect (ie: no significant damage to the aircraft) water landing? How long did the plane float? Were they able to get lots of useful equipment, food and water off of the airplane before it sank? Did they actually have a raft and/or life jackets aboard? Did she mess up the landing and then they got out by the skin of their teeth? Only one survivor of the landing? Etc, etc, etc.

Although they had at least some survival training, there were many instances of long periods of survival at sea by people during WW2. Eddie Rickenbacker spent 22 days in a tiny raft with two other men. (Ironically, his crew was on their way to Canton Island!!) They were not able to get any supplies off of the B-17 except for four oranges. The vast majority of the survivors of the USS Indianapolis made it for five days and they had neither rafts or life jackets. Another air crew survived for 31 days in a raft.

Of course, in order to believe that AE/FN ditched and then made their way to Niku, we would all have to disregard any and all possible evidence of aircraft parts on the island and also the reported radio transmissions after the flight. The possibility of a ditching at sea is another "mind boggler"!
LTM,   Gary Moline

**************************************************************

From Ric

For what it's worth:

According to a New London Connecticut newspaper article dated 8/28/67, Lockheed 10E N233PB belonging to Provincetown-Boston Airlines was landed in about 20 feet of calm water 200 yards off a beach 20 miles south of Boston. The plane stayed afloat for eight minutes permitting all 14 persons aboard to escape with minimal injuries (one person was briefly hospitalized).  Five nonswimming passengers were even rescued from the wing before the plane sank.

Of course, this aircraft did not have the fuel tanks featured on Earhart's Electra.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:07:54 EST
From:         Marty Joy
Subject:      unrelated thoughts

These are just some unrelated thoughts, I'll leave the decision to post them up to you.

1. Lambrecht's report on his search mission sounded to me like he was not very motivated and his attitude somewhat cavalier. He made reference to the AE flight, I believe in a letter to his father, that he considered the flight no more that a "publicity stunt" maybe this general disdain caused his search to be haphazard.

2. Ref. Harold Gatty. I will ask Lillian Crosson if she  knew of HG. She said she knew Wiley Post quite well.

3. I mistakenly deleted the Forum that touched on this so can't check on it. You mentioned something about a "notch" being cut into the lid of the sextant box in the museum? Could it have been cut to provide clearance for a non-standard accessory like maybe an "inverting eyepiece"?

Regards
Marty724C

***************************************************************
From Ric

1.  The letter to his father was from another pilot on the same mission, but the tone of Lambrecht's report (which was actually an article for the USN Bureau of Aeronautics Weekly Newsletter) was criticized by his superiors as being too casual.

2.  Okay

3.  An inverting eyepiece is not at all unusual or nonstandard for a nautical sextant.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:20:11 EST
From:         James Thompson
Subject:      Crabs, bones and GIS

>Neither location is a discrete "spot;" each is
>easily several hundred feet on a side, with ill-
>defined boundaries.

>... the spatial relationship of the skeleton
>(sic) to the campfire to the turtle bones to the
>sextant box gives us clues...

>...we do it slow and careful, plotting
>everything we find on maps, so we can reconstruct
>spatial relationships.

The next Niku cries out for creation of a Geographical Information System (GIS)! I've read (GIS World?) about TIGHAR using GPS during a previous expedition. Has TIGHAR had the time yet to use the GPS data files together with any associated attribute files (artifact, vegetation, flora, fauna, image) to create a GIS? The analytical capabilities of such a system might make it just that much easier to find answers to all our spatial questions.

If a GIS exists and you need "gofer" help please let me know.

james thompson

P.S. <<One of the things that makes archeologists go wild is when somebody picks up an artifact and trots over to ask what it is.  You don't pick the stuff up till you've plotted it in.>>

Absolutely!
****************************************************************

From Ric

One of the things that makes me go wild is when we spend immense amounts of time and energy to deploy donated technology that looks great on camera and is of no practical use to the expedition.  In 1997 we collected gobs of GPS data and have never been able to get it plotted out despite several volunteer efforts.

I'm happy to use any bells and whistles that will actually make life easier rather than more complicated and frustrating.  Some technology has worked well for us (metal detectors, pulse-laser range finders) while some has not (GPS, electromagnetic remote sensing).  Four trips to Niku have taught us to stay as lo-tech as possible.  In that environment, whatever can break, will.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:28:00 EST
From:         Matt Mondro
Subject:      Using Common sense

As a first time poster ive got an uneducated comment on the crash. I have read all the documentation on the website though a few times, great stuff. First, using the same thought that Dr Robert Ballard used on the titanic, he felt the boilers were probably very close to the sinking spot due to the fact that they would fall straight down. Using that thought it seems that the engine that guy found might be very close to the spot of the original wreck or at least the first impact, I don't think its unreasonable to think the plane water skipped 100, 200 maybe 300 yards after that, maybe even ashore. Due to the engines weight I cant think of anything moving it, maybe the tide a little but not much. This all assuming thats her motor and all.

--
Matt Mondro
sitting at work thinking too much
***************************************************************
From Ric

I agree that the engine would not go far once it left the airplane.  If the engine Bruce found about 50 feet from shore was Earhart's and on the reef at Niku, I suspect that that is where it separated from the rest of the airframe. an R1340 doesn't float worth a darn and the shape and weight might tend to make the water flow around it rather than move it.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:38:59 EST
From:         Jerry Ellis
Subject:      AE books

I would like to read a good book on Amelia Earhart but I don't like to read fiction.  I have enough trouble keeping straight what is thought to be fact, let alone a bunch of non-facts.  Would you, or some other informed forum subscriber, be willing to recommend the one or two best AE books?  Jerry Ellis

***************************************************************

From Ric

There are a couple of decent biographies of AE but there is, sadly, nothing out there that accurately presents the facts surrounding the disappearance. As long as you stop reading when the book gets to about 1936 my favorite is "The Sound of Wings - the Life of Amelia Earhart" by Mary Lovell ( St. Martins Press, New York, 1989)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:31:23 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Dave Bush 2200 wrote:

> Strong surf/tidal action, sunlight glinting off the waves.
> I don't think you could guarantee to be able to see anything
> well enough to identify it in those conditions.

For what it is worth, I have flown innumerable circuits around the Cay Sal Bank in the Bahamas doing SAR (the island of Cay Sal, by the way, is a very close copy of Niku in shape, complete with lagoon at center -- if you want, I'll send you a photo). I can confirm that if the aircraft wreckage is underwater, even in the shallows, so long as nothing is sticking up above the wave surface, you will be hard-pressed to see it, except from almost straight above. The sun angle is quite critical -- an object sticking out of the water appears as a black dot when looking into the sun's reflection off the waves, while down sun, the white caps and such around the object are far more visible.

Wreckage on land is easier but only because when the plane crash lands the pilot usually tries to find a clear space rather than putting it into the trees. There are quite a few plane wrecks in the Bahamas, and they are always fun to pick out as practice. On Anguilla Cay (SW Cay Sal Bank), there is even a former drug running C-172, largely stripped, right on the top of the island. You can spot that one from a half mile away because it is in the clear. I don't know anything about the vegetation on Niku, but I am surmissing from other posts that it is a bit thick. Therefore, a plane in distress would probably select the beach rather than the inland trees (which also raises the question as to what pilot would select a partially submerged reef to land on?).

> Also, I don't know how bumpy the ride would be over an island
> like this.  The bumpiness of the ride can affect the ability
> to scan effectively and sometimes make binoculars completely
> useless.

Binoculars don't work for an island search anyway -- the Mark I Eyeball remains the world's best instrument. The way pilots naturally tend to search an island (I've trained about 25 others and saw this again and again) is that they descend to between 200-400 feet, fly around the beach/rocky edge while over the water, usually counterclockwise (pilot's side view). You don't need binoculars to spot a person on the beach or wreckage. If they are inland, they will be hard to spot, period, end of story -- at any altitude/speed. Usually, this low down and over the water, there is little turbulence except on the downwind side where there are significant topographical features (you get a localized "wave" and "burble").

> The speed of the aircraft is important, too.

Best search speed is between 80 and 120 mph. When you do an island, the search speed is typically on the higher side. You have got to watch out for birds (they seem to like flying in front of the airplane, all the time!, many crews had the copilot fly and keep half an eye on the birds while the pilot scanned intently).

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:40:37 EST
From:         Thomas
Subject:      Re: Sources

Russ Matthews 0509CE wrote:

> In legal circles, this tactic is known as "burying them
> in paperwork."

I always liked the term, "walking on smoke," which is also used in legal circles to describe the same thing.

Thomas.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1998 12:06:59 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Ockham

Of course, we've failed to mention that this Burger King was on a flat coral reef, and served Campfire Grilled burgers! They used to have canned bananas as a side order too, but not anymore. They once ran a sextant box promotion deal with the happy meal as well, but I guess it just didn't catch on....something about kids being able to swallow the inverted eyepieces in the boxes. Another strange thing----the grills at that place are made of aluminum and have lots of rivet holes.....Oh well, it's just me, I guess!

My prop spinneth over,
Gene Dangelo  #2211
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:18:58 EST
From:         Bob Sherman
Subject:      AE & HF RDF

On 12/16 Hugh Graham had a long posting mostly of quotes with a couple of his comments.  One of which was appended to his quote of Randy Jacobson's about the DF station set up on Howland.

>******HAG: Amelia was expecting low frequency direction finding at
>Howland,....

I don't think that anyone knows what she was expecting, but these are excerpts of the next to the last messages the Itasca heard from her.

Times local am on July 2, 1937:

07:58  ".....we are circling but cannot hear you.  Go ahead on 7500* with a long count...."

08:00  "We received your signals but unable to get a minimum.  Please take a bearing on us (on 3105) and answer 3105 with voice..." (earlier AE had also requested a bearing on her 3105 xmssns)

*The signal AE heard was the Itasca on 7500 Kcs (now khz) ...to dispel the thought that she may have meant 7500 meters (400kc)

From the foregoing at least, it appears that AE expected to have the Itasca take bearings on her hf signal, and she asked for a xmsn. on 7500kc (hf) then said,  in effect, we hear you but can't get a null.

RC  #941
**************************************************************

From Ric

Not that it's particulary appropos to the HF RDF question, but one of the interesting discoveries we've made ("we", in this case, being me and Randy Jacobson) is that Amelia almost certainly never said that she was "circling." In the original Itasca radio log, that word was clearly typed over an earlier entry which had been partially erased.  The original word was "drifting."  We speculate that the operator at first thought she had said "We are drifting but can not hear you."  But that didn't make any sense, so he erased "drifting" and typed in "circling" (without realigning the platen precisely).  Our best guess is that she actually said, "We are listening but can not hear you."
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:26:22 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: New York Times

Ric wrote:

> I was also fascinated to learn that Tom Crouch has apparently done some
> calculations.  "The odds are 100 to 1 that Amelia and Fred came to rest on
> the ocean floor."   It would be interesting to see the math.

I'd be far more interested in the data used for the calculation, the numbers assigned to those data points, and how those numbers were determined.

 - Bill

**************************************************************

From Ric

Forgive my feeble attempt at sarcasm.  I'm quite familiar with Tom Crouch's level of familiarity with the details of the Earhart disappearance and I feel comfortable in assurring you that there were no data, no assigned numbers, and no calculations.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:28:54 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Pythonic issues

I just KNEW I was hanging out with the right bunch! High level thinkers, to be sure! Anyone who reveres the sacred Monty Python is definitely in the right ballpark!

And now for something completely different...

**************************************************************
From Ric

Loonies, you mean.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:41:55 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Supposing for a moment that the airplane really did >land< in the water, and providing it wasn't hugely damaged in such landing, wouldn't each of those fuel tanks (by now mostly empty) act like a flotation device? Tending to keep the plane up that much longer.  S'pose?

Another question that crossed my mind.  In a prior discussion, it was mentioned that among the bones was a half pelvis.  Not being an anatomy major I don't know, but isn't the pelvis essentially a single structure unless, say, broken in an airplane crash?
ltm
jon
***************************************************************

From Ric

The ability of the fuel tanks in the cabin to provide effective flotation would depend upon their remaining intact.  The tanks were of very lightweight construction and were secured to the cabin floor by means of light metal straps.  In a flotation situation, the airplane would be largely suspended from those straps - a service they were never intended to perform.  If the tanks broke loose they would probably tend to pile up in the aft end of the cabin (as the airplane tried to sink nose first).  Whether they would retain their buoyancy thoughout such a violent occurrence is problematical.  To be blunt, I suspect that NR16020 would float like a wrench.

As for the pelvis, it is made up of two separate bones, the left and right innominates.  The absence of one of them does not require a fracture caused by a crash.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:45:16 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Glen Miller

Yes, it was Glen Miller - that's why I put the question mark behind Tommy Dorsey, I just couldn't think of Miller's name at the time.  No, I read a report about two years ago where they had dug up the wreckage of his aircraft on the ridge near the airbase.  It was positively identified.

LTM
Dave Bush
#2200

***************************************************************

From Ric

No kidding?  How'd I miss that?  Anybody else see this?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:30:43 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Ric wrote:

>You wouldn't by any chance be thinking of Glen Miller would you?  His fate is
>still unknown, but there is a pretty good circumstantial case for thinking
>that he went down in the Channel.

Ric, has TIGHAR ever considered looking for Glenn Miller? In our spare time, of course.

Tom

Tom Robison
****************************

There really isn't a mystery about Miller any more. Back a few years ago (Jim Tierney, you probably remember just when it came out?) there were several articles written that indicated that the Miller aircraft was taken out inadvertently by a bomb release from an Allied bomber. His aircraft had strayed into the area over the English Channel where bombers jettisoned their unused loads, and suffered a direct hit. We aren't really dead keen on attempting to sort one small aircraft out of the detritus at the bottom of the Channel....

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:35:57 EST
From:         Dustoff
Subject:      Re: the Aerial search

About the Floating Electra, Ric wrote:

>Of course, this aircraft did not have the fuel tanks featured on Earhart's
>Electra.

Nor the Ping Pong Balls. (grin)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:37:43 EST
From:         Suzanne
Subject:      Re: Harold Gatty

I did a search at www.bibliofind.com, Yahoo's best web site of 1997 which searched hundreds of used books stores for books by Harold Gatty. Found multiple copies of the following: "The Raft Book, the Lore of the Sea and Sky, 1943; "Nature Is Your Guide: How To Find Your Way on Land and Sea by Observing Nature", 1958; "Around the World In Eight Days. The Flight of the Winnie Mae" 1931, written with Wiley Post.

As an aside, this site is a superb one for bibliophiles and researchers.

LTM,
Suzanne #2184
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:45:54 EST
From:         Daryll Bollinger
Subject:      HF/DF

Safford wrote in SHR-305;

"(4) Our inability to track the Japanese Fleet demonstrated the necessity of establishing a strategic D/F network as part of the R.I. Organization ( in distinction from the navigational D/F setup in the United States ), the urgency of obtaining some sort of high-frequency direction finders ( regardless of how crude ), and the desirability of prosecuting the development of both H.F. and I.F. D/F apparatus. "

This is only one thing the U.S. Navy learned following The Orange Grand Maneuvers of 1930 by the Japanese Navy.

Safford makes a distinction between navigational D/F and Radio Intelligence D/F. It appears that important radio communication between ships, aircraft, and the shore take place on the H.F. high-frequency band. The Navy could pick up the radio transmissions but could not tell the direction. That would also seem to imply that navigational D/F in the United States took place on the L.F. low-frequency band.

Safford claims that in 1933 some U.S. Navy radio engineers felt that HF/DF was technically impossible. Guam and Cavite recieved HF/DF equipment around July 1937. Was that equipment considered experimental?

One author has given Safford credit for the establishment of the Mid Pacific Strategic Directon Finder Net in 1937. For that net to fulfill it's purpose it would have to have HF/DF radio equipment.

When I first learned of the HF/DF radio on Howland Island I thought navigational DF, nothing unusual here.

I have since reconsidered.

It would seem that the experimental HF/DF radio on Howland was supposed to use it's antenna to find or tune to a transmitter, hopefully AE. The bearing obtained, could also have easily come from a transmitter on a ship. I think this is just the reverse of navigational D/F used in the U.S. at that time. The aircraft had the loop and tuned to a ground station. I guess it can work both ways. I was just remembering the photo of AE where she used the loop antenna to frame her face in a picture.

How big a part was this HF/DF radio supposed to play in AE's flight? From what is known, not much. Knowing about the experimental HF/DF radio causes me to have some questions.

1. If it was intended to aid AE in the flight,why wasn't it calibrated? It would seem this experimental HF/DF radio was along just for the ride.

2. Did the radio operator run the batteries down during the night trying to learn how to use it or trying to pick up AE at maxium range to test it's capabilities?

3. Who took credit for bringing it from Pearl Harbor?

4. I think it was Randy's post that said Safford stated that it was the same rig AE had in her plane. Did AE have an experimental HF/DF radio in her plane? Log jam on the Tighar website would suggest she did. I think she wanted to take a bearing with her loop antenna on 7500kc (I think).

5. Referring to Log jam on the Tighar website again. It would seem that AE knew about the HF/DF radio. At 06:14 she wanted the Itasca to take a bearing on 3105 kc ( I think that is in the HF high-frequency band ) and again at 06:45. The Itasca didn't have the equipment for that high of frequency. What about the HF/DF on Howland, did they forget about it?

I know when I tie HF/DF radios to Radio Intelligence it might  cause some people to grimace, and cry conspirator. There is nothing sinister about what went on back then, unless you were Japanese. The men and women who worked in R.I. were talented patriots and victims of their own secrecy.

The following is from SRMN-015 ( Discrete Records of Historical Cryptologic Import: U.S. Navy ). Memorandum For VICE ADMIRAL F.J. HORNE dated JUN 20 1942
From OP-20-G (GA/jac)

" 3. In 1937 the existing radio intelligence organization was carefully surveyed and a thorough analysis was made of war requirements in the Pacific. As a result of this study it was decided to maintain the following units: "

Why did the author economize on words and just say who did the survey? 1937 was a busy year.

Daryll
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:48:25 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Ockham

Gene wrote:

>.....Oh well, it's just me, I guess!
>My prop spinneth over,

Your prop overspeedeth, methinks!
;>)

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:57:33 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Glen Miller

Yes, it's true, but it was more than two years ago, I believe; more like five or so. Glenn Miller's plane had been lost in a fog in 1944, and everyone thought at the time that he'd gone down, I believe, in the English Channel, but no one was sure. Then again, there WAS a war in progress, too. When he was lost, a sax player from his band, named Tex Beneke took over the band's leadership.

By the way, speaking of people who crashed, I'd referred to Wiley Post (in connection to Harold Gatty) pertaining to the Winnie Mae of Oklahoma. I'm pretty sure also that when I'd built that plane's model, the right wing decal read: NR105W, I believe. Was that, in fact, the plane's number, or is my memory failing after 33 years?

Your musician-in-residence,
Gene Dangelo  #2211   :)

***********************

Jim Tierney, where are you now that we need you, O Great Guru in charge of digging out the details on stuff like this.....

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:58:49 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: New York Times

> Forgive my feeble attempt at sarcasm.  I'm quite familiar with Tom Crouch's
> level of familiarity with the details of the Earhart disappearance and I feel
> comfortable in assurring you that there were no data, no assigned numbers, and
> no calculations.

That's kinda what I was driving at.

    - Bill
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 10:00:06 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: Glen Miller

It is Glenn Miller-- I must have missed it too... As far as I know he and the pilot are still at the bottom of the English Channel.....

Never heard of any other find...

What are the details,dates, where,etc......
Jim Tierney
Simi Valley, CA

*****************

A Rescue, A Rescue!.... We'll get this figgered out.

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 10:00:55 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Numbers on boxes

The earlier quest for sextant boxes with numbers on them did not necessarily check other items that might have had such numbers on them.  It would be a potentially worthwhile endeavour to check again to whatever extent it is possible.  Anyone who is in a position to check out any kind of collection of nautical and/or aeronautical navigational instruments, or whatever, just might find the clue that would definitely place Fred Noonan on Nikumaroro.

Numbers similar to those on the two sextant boxes we do know of and that might be found on any item at all might provide some kind of clue as who was numbering things by such a system... And, just possibly, establish a Noonan connection.  Of course, the most intriguing numbers are:  3500 and 3542. Personally, I think these are Pan American Airways numbers.  I'd sure like to see that proven or disproven. Other numbers of interest are:  1542 (Niku box) and 116 and 173 (Pensacola box)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 10:04:01 EST
From:         Craig Fuller
Subject:      Re: Glen Miller

I have been asked about Glenn Miller a number of times. Ann Hinrichs (TIGHAR #2101) has come across an article where a Royal Air Force bomber pilot claimed the following:

(from the March 1995 issue of FLYING,a brief article titled:The Glenn Miller Mystery:Solved at Last?)

...a former Royal Air Force bomber pilot was extensively quoted in the British press on his eyewitness account,which seems to settle the half-century-old mystery of what happened to the bandleader. In poor weather Miller had departed from Twinwood Farm,Bedfordshire,as a passenger aboard a USAAF Noorduyn UC-64 Norseman single-engine utility transport,bound for Paris....On that same 1944 day, Victor Gregory was commanding a Lancaster bomber that took off from Methwold,Suffolk,for a raid on Germany. Because of the weather the bomber formation's fighter escort was unable to get airborne and the mission was aborted.Gregory's aircraft was ordered to fly to an area of the English Channel reserved for jettisoning bombs and there to dump his load of one 4,000 pound Blockbuster and a dozen 500 pound incendiaries.Gregory says that his bomb-aimer released the Lanc's load and the navigator drew his attention to a Norseman that was passing directly below the bomber,at a height of about 1,500 feet above the surface of the sea. The Lancaster's rear gunner then reported over the intercom that the blast from one of the bombs had caught the smaller plane....it was flipped over and crashed into the sea."

I checked with a number of my contacts with the British Aviation Archaeology Council about this story, and they were well aware of the claim. They told me that this person had been discredited as researching RAF records the pilot and plane either did not fly that day or flew at the wrong time. I don't recall which. I would have suspected if Glen Miller's plane had been found they would have mentioned that too. I will write (snail mail) them to follow up on this new story.

Craig Fuller
TIGHAR 1589C

Aviation Archaeological Investigation & Research
**********************

This is the story we have heard, but had not heard that the fellow was discredited. We need details....

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 10:05:17 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Ric writes:

> As for the pelvis, it is made up of two separate bones, the left and right
> innominates.  The absence of one of them does not require a fracture caused by
> a crash. 

Actually there are three bones -- the two innominates and the sacrum, which
goes down the middle from the vertebral collumn, and includes the "tailbone."
And the various bones are themselves made up of bones that are separate in
infants and gradually fuse together with age, so depending on age the pelvis
may be made up of three bones or more.

TKing
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 10:07:47 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: AE & HF RDF

While I'm certainly not even a novice, I do seem to recall from my high school field trip in a small southeast Asian country, that while using shortwave to communicate from Saigon to a field office up country, our signal (which was impossible in the daytime) would "drift" sometimes, causing it to not be possible to get a clear transmission.  For what it's worth...
LTM
jon

> From Ric
>
> Not that it's particulary appropos to the HF RDF question, but one of the
> interesting discoveries we've made ("we", in this case, being me and Randy
> Jacobson) is that Amelia almost certainly never said that she was "circling."
> In the original Itasca radio log, that word was clearly typed over an earlier
> entry which had been partially erased.  The original word was "drifting." We
> speculate that the operator at first thought she had said "We are drifting but
> can not hear you."  But that didn't make any sense, so he erased "drifting"
> and typed in "circling" (without realigning the platen precisely). Our best
> guess is that she actually said, "We are listening but can not hear you."
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 12:04:43 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Missing Mouse Pads

We're trying to get this sorted out -

Would anyone who ordered a TIGHAR/Earhart Project mouse pad, but has not received it please send an email to Pat at TIGHAR@AOL.com and say so.

We're not sure what happened but we were using some temporary help to fill orders and we suspect that some (ping pong?) balls got dropped.  Please let us know if we owe you a mouse pad(s) and we'll bounce 'em right out to you.

Thanks,

Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:00:26 EST
From:         Pat Robinson
Subject:      Why that time of day?

In the latest posting HAG wrote:

>I found Daryll's posting to be very interesting, although I
>reject its premise that AE was involved in any covert activity, other
>than possibly being a decoy.   regards, HAGraham 2201

To me this is also very interesting...And it raises questions about the latter leg of AE's flight...

Why leave Lae for Howland at the time she did ???...Of course storms played a part in her decision...But why put yourself near Howland in the early morning ???

If they were off course and FN had to take sun shots, how accurate are sun shots at dawn ???...And wouldn't his accuracy increase after the sun has risen higher off the horizon ???

Why schedule such a long (20 + hour flight) overwater flight ???...Up to their landing in Lae they had been flying 4 + hour legs after departing Africa...

Pat
**************************************************************

From Ric

Good questions, to which there are good answers.

Earhart's departure from Lae was not delayed by storms.  It was delayed by radio reception difficulties in Lae which prevented Fred Noonan from receiving the necessary time signals needed to establish the accuracy of his chronometer.  (The whole thing is very well documented in the report later submitted by Guinea airways Gen'l Manager Eric Chater.)  It was 9 p.m. on the night of July 1st (Lae time) when good time signals were finally received from Sydney, Australia and Fred got confirmation at 8 a.m. the next morning with signals from Saigon.  The take off was made 2 hours later at 10 a.m. Lae time, which also happened to be 00:00 Greenwich time (thus simplifying the calculation of time aloft).  The flight was expected to take between 18 and 20 hours.  A morning takeoff in Lae would give them daylight for the first eight hours or so when they would be flying in areas where landmarks should be visible (New Britain and a few island groups).  During the night they would be over open ocean where there was nothing to see anyway, and Noonan would be able to take star sights to keep them on course.  Daybreak would come a few hundred miles out from Howland giving Fred one last Line of Position (LoP) which he could then advance by DR (Dead Reckoning) through the destination. He would be looking for the island in daylight without worrying about approaching nightfall.  The sun might be in his eyes, but the other advantages of a morning departure from Lae far-outweighed that one annoyance.

Incidentally, that LoP was pre-calculable.  Technically, he wouldn't even necessarily have to "shoot" the rising sun.  By noting the precise moment when the sun broke the horizon he could put a line on the map (he could know ahead of time that it would be a line that went 337 degrees one way and 157 degrees the other way) and know that he was somewhere on that line.  From there is was just a matter of calculating his groundspeed and noting the time it would take to reach the advanced LoP.  When the time was up he'd know that Howland (if not immediately visible) was either off to his left at 337 degrees or off to his right at 157 degrees.  The only question was which way to turn.  That's what Radio Direction Finding was supposed to tell them, and that's the part of the plan that didn't work.  But to get back to the original question, the decision to leave when they did was, in part, governed by necessity but was a good choice nonetheless.

As for the accuracy of sun shots after dawn -  as mentioned above, the Line of Position they would get was no great secret.  It was going to be 90 degrees to the rising sun, which was going to rise at 67 degrees sure as shootin' (thereby giving a 337/157 LoP).  The only question was at just what moment would it rise?

And why schedule such a long flight?  Because they had no choice.  Howland was the closest (only) airfield between New Guinea and Hawaii.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:17:25 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      English 101

> (Mike)
> He may have meant that the box was black enamel and may or may not
> ("probably") have been painted black over its original factory color. If
> it looked like an amateur paint job, you know?
>
> (Ric)
> If we start assuming that passages in the correspondence are errors (without
> some other reason for suspicion) we'll go nuts.  Where do you stop?

Ric, that was a serious suggestion! I don't think he made an error, simply that human language is often vague and open to misinterpretation. Both this and several other ideas as to what he may have meant are all reasonable.

I guess what I'm suggesting is that we accept that the box was black enamel and that's as much as we can really deduce from his statement. If he never mentions having the sextant itself I don't think we should try to twist his statement to make it refer to the sextant. There are plenty of reasonable English usages where he could be referring to the box in his hands.

Could be worse... he could have said "Ni!" (for Niku?)

***************************************************************

From Ric

I'm not trying to be difficult but, at least to me, there is nothing at all ambiguous about Gallagher's statement that:

"Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 (stencilled) and 1542 - sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel."

This is not a matter of interpretation.  The sentence is very clear.  The subject of the second clause of the sentence is "sextant" and it is clearly the sextant which he thinks is old fashioned and probaly painted over with black enamel.  Heck, even I know that, and I only have a B.A. from the State University of New York. Gallagher had an M.A. from Cambridge.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:22:51 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Floating Electras

Ric wrote -

>Of course, this aircraft did not have the fuel tanks featured
>on Earhart's Electra.

And if it had, it would still be floating today!

Empty fuel tanks make great flotation devices if they are not damaged.  Considering the volume of air AE and FN would have had in their empty tanks, they could have probably paddled that damned Electra to Howland if they'd put down in the ocean.

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149

**************************************************************
From Ric

Back in 1991, Oceaneering International calculated the theoretical buoyancy of NR16020 (assuming empty intact tanks) at 1,100 pounds positive.  As expressed in my earlier posting on this subject, I have grave (watery grave) doubts that the tanks would retain their integrity if the aircraft was actually afloat.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:39:27 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      AE's shoes

In the latest edition of TIGHAR Tracks (which, as usual, is excellent) you mentioned the replacement Cat's Paw heel found on Niku (The Nikumaroro Shoe, page 5).

The photo accompanying the article shows AE's foot on the aircraft wing and judging from the photo the heel of her shoe shows little if any wear on the heel.  That apparent lack of wear and tear and the color variations of the heel led you to state that "The lighter shade of the lower heel suggests that it may be a replacement heel."

I don't dispute your statement, but I would like to point out that the toe and the front sole of the shoe in the same photo are also a "lighter shade," which I would suggest is consistent with "normal" scuff marks acquired from everyday use and not because they may be replacements.  My point is that the lighter shade alone is not indicative of being a replacement, when in fact the lighter shade of the lower heel may be from the glare of the sun on the aluminum skin -- or scuffing.

I know this is a very small nit to pick, but to silence your many critics I believe it is important for TIGHAR to explain how TIGHAR arrives at its conclusions.  In this instance, I assume that the thickness of the "lighter shade" may have also contributed to your conclusion.

Two questions:

1.  How thick is the "lighter shade" in the photo and how thick is the Niku heel?

2.  How worn is the heel you found on Niku?

***************************************************************
From Ric

Certainly valid questions.  As you might guess, there are lots and lots of photos of AE wearing what appear to be these same shoes.  The lighter shade of the bottom (replacable) portion of the heels is consistently apparent right back until about January of 1937.  Before that time the entire heel appears uniformly black.  The explanation that comes to mind si that she had the heels of her favorite flying shoes replaced just before the first world flight attempt.

The thickness of the lighter shaded part of the heel appears to be about 1/4 inch thick, which is entirely consistent with the replaceable part of a shoe heel even today (Hey kids!  You can try this at home!).

The thickness of the heel found on Niku was originally 1/4 inch, as evidenced by the unworn portion at the center of the forward edge.  It is, however, quite badly worn down along the rear edges (particularly the outside rear edge).  It would appear that whoever wore this shoe spent some considerable time walking on the island's very abrasive coral rubble.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:53:41 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: The aerial search

Ric is correct in a fashion, but he obviously lacks an understanding of physics. Apparently, so do certain Hollywood special effects people. In the movie "Airport 77",  (or the Airport sequel that featured the "underwater"  Boeing 747), the attempt to raise the airplane was carried out by the use of balloons strategically placed with straps under the fuselage and wings. As the balloons were inflated, the dramatic rise of the behemoth aircraft commenced. As the hapless passengers watched in horror, the straps began to fail on the balloons as they hefted the lurching airliner ever upward!! The strain must have been tremendous!!!! Nothing could be further from the truth. Whatever "strain" occurred was purely the result of air bouyancy, which is hardly sufficient to cause the tension failure of those straps, or the bending of metal depicted in certain scenes. It's the same with the tank retaining straps in the Lockheed. Whatever bouyancy is provided by the tanks will sustain flotation of the plane, or allow it to sink slowly, but certainly would not be sufficient to cause tension failure of the metal retaining straps.

***************************************************************
From Ric

I wasn't involved in the making of Airport 77 but I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong about the straps.  I need some more help though.

Let's simplify the problem.  Say we have an anchor (representing the Electra) and we're going to lower it over the side of a boat (representing the empty fuel tanks) and let it dangle there without touching the bottom.  You seem to be saying that strength of the rope required to do this would be less than would be required to lift the anchor off the deck.  Or am I missing something?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:13:55 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Re: L10 Floatation

Ric wrote:-

>The ability of the fuel tanks in the cabin to provide effective
>flotation would depend upon their remaining intact. The tanks were of very
>lightweight construction and were secured to the cabin floor by means of
>light metal straps. In a flotation situation, the airplane would be largely
>suspended from those straps - a service they were never intended to perform.
>If the tanks broke loose they would probably tend to pile up in the aft end
>of the cabin (as the airplane tried to sink nose first). Whether they would
>retain their buoyancy throughout such a violent occurrence is problematical.
>To be blunt, I suspect that NR16020 would float like a wrench.

I think you'll find that the tank straps were a little stronger than you give them credit for. Admittedly the density of fuel is a little less then that of water - but when the tanks were full of fuel, the weight of the full tank would be of the same order as the buoyancy you're now asking them to support.  I'm not sure what regulations regarding structural integrity were in force in the US in 1937, but surely the straps would be stressed to a point where they could sustain a -1g gust without breaking ?

Just to answer Jon's question fully, a while back we did some calcs which showed that if all tanks were virtually empty and undamaged, the plane would float, with some reserve buoyancy.

LTM
Simon #2120

**************************************************************
From Ric

Of course, we're not talking about one tank.  There were a total of 6 tanks in the cabin (2 each @ 118 gallons,  3 each @ 149 gallons, and 1 each @ 70 gallons).  The three 149s and one 70 appear to have been held down by three cables (steel?) and the two 118s were held in place by what look like 2 aluminum bands perhaps an inch and a half wide.  In addition, there were 6 more tanks in the wings (three tanks of 102 gallons, 81 gallons and 16 gallons in each wing) for a total gallonage of 1151.  Against the buoyancy provided by those tanks was the airplane's ballpark 7,000 pound empty weight. Complicating the issue further would be the kapok insulation in the cabin and the effect of however much oil remained of the airplane's 80 gallon capacity.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:17:17 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Anatomy 101

Hmmm.  So if the bones gradually fuse with age, then wouldn't FN's & AE's pelvic bones have been pretty much a single unit?  Unless broken somehow?  Years ago I had an acquaintance whose horse fell on him, and it fractured his pelvis in the center of the front.  Pretty excruciating as I recall.
LTM
jon
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:30:02 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Glenn Miller

Ric:  I hope that all this about Miller isn't too off topic for the forum, although, since we are into Historic Aircraft Recovery, it isn't off topic for TIGHAR.  I only remember reading the story, it was roughly 2+ years ago and I just remember them saying that some parts of the aircraft had been identified but beyond the info about the ridge and the proximity to the base and the info about the poor weather that he flew in, I don't remember any more.  I can't even remember what kind of magazine I read it in, but I think it was an aviation magazine.  But I read about anything I can pick up (except trash), and it could have been anything from National Geo to Popular Mechanics.  Hope I haven't opened a can of worms on this.

LTM
Dave Bush
#2200
***************************************************************
From Ric

It is off topic, but it's a phenomenon I have seen repeatedly but have never heard addressed.

At least three times before, in other investigations, we have had people report significant information that they read some time ago in a magazine, but can't remember exactly when or what magazine.  They are, however, absolutely positive about the information.

I'm embarrassed to tell you how many hundreds, if not thousands, of man-hours (sorry, person-hours) were spent trying to find the respective magazines.  I have literally sat in the Library of Congress digging through back issues of Argosy and its ilk trying in find an article somebody was sure they had once seen.

I'm not saying that your recollection is faulty.  You may be absolutely correct.  I'm just saying that I'm getting (as Yogi Berra probably never really said) "Deja Vu all over again."

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:31:49 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Ric:  Regarding AE and experimental equipment:  it wasn't all that unusual during this time period for the government to work with aviators on experimental equipment.  Wiley Post did a lot of work with ADF equipment.  He also worked with BF Goodrich in testing high altitude flight suits (ie space suits) and even took the Winnie Mae (using JATO units) into what was classified as "space" at the time.  This made him the first "Astronaut". However; NASA (or somebody) reclassified the altitude where "outer space" began, thus making NASA the first people to put a man in "space".  But whenever anyone asks me who the first astronaut was, I always reply: "Wiley Post"!

As usual, I have a lot of off beat, and off topic info.

LTM
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:34:55 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: Glenn Miller

OK OK OK---I just got here......

Yes the book -"Around the world in eight days"- a copy of which is always near at hand. Shows pictures of the "Winnie Mae" with the registration number NR 105W during the flight. some time later it was changed slightly to NC 105W because of a change in the use of the aircraft from restricted to commercial.

Turning to Glenn Miller- yes I remember the story about the bombs dropping on Miller's aircraft. It has to be five years ago....It was pretty much disproved by experts based upon timing, routes and locations, etc.

Anything else?

Jim Tierney

***************************************************************

From Ric

As I recall, British aviation historian Roy Nesbit wrote up that theory in Aeroplane Monthly.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:41:27 EST
From:         James Thompson
Subject:      Gobs of GIS

Youch! Sounds like GPS doesn't like TIGHARs. So you too have experienced some of the unexpected "joys" of GPS! I bet you all were really pushing it: roving PLUS real-time base...on-location, thousands of miles from everywhere. I can definitely sympathize.

>we collected gobs of GPS data and have never
>been able to get it plotted out despite several
>volunteer efforts

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE send me a gob or two. No guarantee that I will have better success, but I'd like to try. You have my mail address as part of my membership info. Please send a sample and let me have a go.

>Four trips to Niku have taught us to stay as
>lo-tech as possible.  In that environment,
>whatever can break, will.

A friend once told me that you can always tell a pro by the amount of stuff s/he doesn't carry around! Screwdrivers work best!

Jim Thompson

P.S. >One of the things that makes me go wild
>is when we spend immense amounts of time and
>energy to deploy donated technology that looks
>great on camera and is of no practical use to
>the expedition.

Come to think of it that article in GIS World did have a picture of Dr. King using a GPS unit.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:46:33 EST
From:         Daryll Bolinger
Subject:      Log Jam
Mime-Version: 1.0

Itasca Primary Radio Log entry for 07:58 a.m. July 2, 1937

KHAQQ CLNG ITASCA WE ARE CIRCLING BUT CANNOT HR U GA ON 7500 WID A LNG COUNT EITHER NOW OR ON THE SKD TIME ON 1/2 HOUR (KHAQQ S5 A3) 0758

Aboard Itasca: Apparently Earhart's transmissions are coming in so loud that the speakers are distorting her words. At first the operator thinks he hears "WE ARE DRIFTING BUT CANNOT HEAR YOU"

Could the operator have heard?

"WE ARE DFing BUT CANNOT HEAR YOU"

Does that fit ?

Daryll
**************************************************************

From Ric

What she really said is anybody's guess but it's quite clear that the operator thought she said "drifting."  Once you remove the world "circling" (ain't scanners and computers great?) you can clearly see the partially-erased word "drifting."
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:38:59 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Crabs and collectables

Ric...  Crab burrows may be as much as two feet deep.  How deep can the state-of -art metal detectors find things?  I suspect that two feet is a real challenge for small metallic objects.  I can believe that, under ideal conditions, the whole sextant might be just detectable at a two foot depth. I doubt that small objects such as coins or keys could be detected.  How good are the best metal detectors these days?

**************************************************************

From Ric

A whole sextant at two feet would be a piece of cake.  A dime would be marginal at best.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 19 Dec 1998 11:50:30 EST
From:         Dustoff
Subject:      Taxes and such

Year end tax planning is here.  Presumably you don't want to add tax advisor for all your TIGHAR cubs to your many duties.  However, can you give us an idea of what TIGHAR expenditures MAY be deductible.  For example, membership dues, CD-ROMs, cash contributions, T-shirts, magnets, etc?  We can then take it upon ourselves to check out and firm up individual situations.  Thanks.
Dustoff1.

***********************

This is Pat. Every time you send money to TIGHAR, you get (or should get) a receipt. It is usually blue. On that receipt is printed your name, your address, your member number, the amount you sent, what it was for, *and* how much of that contribution was deductible from TIGHAR's point of view.

TIGHAR can't (and won't) advise you on your individual tax status, nor tell you how much you can deduct. But if you take a look at those receipts, you'll find out what we *can* tell you.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 19 Dec 1998 16:14:50 EST
From:         Dave Leuter
Subject:      black boxes

Ok lets assume that Gallagher is holding this box in his hand and describing it.  Now if the box had been painted in black enamel and this finish had eroded to the point where he would have to guess what type of finish it was, do we really believe that "stenciled" numbers or markings would have fared better?  Gallagher makes no mention of these markings being difficult to discern, therefore, I must agree with Ric in his assertion that the "enamel" finish referred to was on the instrument that HAD been in the box.

Just my .02 worth
Dave Leuter
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 19 Dec 1998 16:17:30 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: AE's shoes

Ric wrote:

> It would appear that whoever wore this shoe spent some considerable
> time walking on the island's very abrasive coral rubble.

Actually, I thought it was worn because the wearer had spent three years in the opium dens of Singapore, walking up and down the alleyways.... The point here is that it might be a bit of a stretch to say why the shoe was worn -- was it the coral or something else? How can you tell?

Thomas Van Hare
***************************************************************
From Ric

You're right.  No way to tell what caused the wear.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 19 Dec 1998 16:19:57 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Floating Electras

> Empty fuel tanks make great flotation devices if they are not
> damaged.  Considering the volume of air AE and FN would have had in
> their empty tanks....

It is quite impossible to say if the plane would have survived a ditching, flipped, caught a wing and cartwheeled, etc. If it landed smoothly on the waves, then it probably would have floated for some time (perhaps even an hour or more). If it hit and broke up, then it probably sank in seconds. Anything between is also possible.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 10:25:37 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Flotation issues

Fuel tanks as buoyancy devices have even been an issue in maritime considerations. I recall reading that in April, 1956, when the motor liner Andrea Doria collided with the Stockholm(which had an icebreaker bow, and was thus an effective plate piercer) the main element in the Doria's instability and ultimate capsizing was the fact that the empty fuel tanks which should have been customarily flooded with seawater for ballast, were not. The resultant air in them, acting as a buoy on the starboard side of the ship, rolled her over more readily. Of course, they were insufficiently buoyant to prevent her from sinking, but she lies on her less buoyant side on the ocean floor!

Have a good weekend, everyone!
Ol' speedyprop(So I'm told),
Gene Dangelo #2211  :)
****************************************************************

From Cameron Warren

Bill Prymak, of the Amelia Earhart Society, recently did a very thorough engineering analysis of the flotation capabilities of  NR16020. Maybe if you called him at 303-469-1153 he'd send you a copy.

Cam Warren

***************************************************************

From Ric

Experience has shown very little cause to have any faith at all in the accuracy of anything put out by Mr. Prymak and company.
**************************************************************
From Vern Klein

Holy Ping-Pong balls!  These guys have something in common!! It appears that neither of them understands flotation! <Grin>

>From Dave Kelly
>
>...... Whatever bouyancy is provided by the tanks will sustain
>flotation of the plane, or allow it to sink slowly, but certainly would
>not be sufficient to cause tension failure of the metal retaining
>straps.
>***************************************************************
>From Ric
>
>..... and let it dangle there without touching the bottom.  You seem to
>be saying that strength of the rope required to do this would be less than
>would be required to lift the anchor off the deck.  Or am I missing
>something?

Yes, that's what he's saying.  And that is correct.  The strength required is less by exactly the weight of water displaced by the anchor.  "A pint's a pound the world around." (Assumes fresh water.  Sea water weighs more.)
****************************************************************
From Dave Kelly

(Referring to Ric's example of an anchor dangling from a boat.)

Your example does not compare with the physical properties of flotation devices. A fairer assessment would be to loosely don a flotation vest, turn in the water until the vest is on top (This should occur naturally) then try to sink. The "strain" on the vest straps results from the flotation properties of the vest. If it holds you above the water, then the size is correct, if not, it will sink with you, but the straps will not break from YOUR weight, because they are not holding your weight. If the tanks in the airplane are empty, then the ability they have to sustain the airplane afloat is a matter of bouyancy, not the tensil strength of the straps.
**************************************************************
From Ric

Your point, I think, is that the tension between the thing that is trying to sink (me) and the thing that is trying to float (the vest) can not exceed the
force of buoyancy exerted by the thing that is trying to float.  If the thing that is trying to sink (me) is too heavy (I could only find a child's vest), then the whole enchilada is going to sink. The vest will still be pulling upward, trying to float, but as long as the straps holding it to me are sufficient to withstand the upward tug, the vest will stay with me and Davey Jones.

Let's reduce it to the absurd.  (As if we haven't already)

Let's say I have found a nice big, more than adequate, flotation vest but the ship's rats have chewed on the straps until it is held on by mere threads. I'm too tired to tread water anymore and I give up and go limp. My body is trying to sink but the vest is saying no.  Pop! go the threads and down goes ol' Ric (no cheering please).

The estimated empty weight of NR16020 was about 7,000 pounds.  In order for the airplane to float, various watertight (tanks) or naturally floating (kapok) components of the machine would have to, together, exert a buoyant force of 7,000 pounds minus the weight of the volume of seawater displaced by the plane (thank you Vern).  The total tension between the thing that is trying to sink and the things that are trying to float must be equal to that figure - yes?  The real question, it seems to me, is whether the strap strength of the various individual ad hoc flotation devices is adequate for the flotation force exerted by that device.  Any failure will, of course, reduce the available flotation force.  If it falls below the magic number, down she goes.

As Tom Van Hare has already pointed out, this equation is so impossibly complex that there is no way to know what would, could or did happen.

LTM,
Ric
************************************************************

From Kary Barnett

In response to Dave Kelly.

I don't see how he could possibly calculate what the lifting capacity of a strap could be by looking at it on T.V. He also states that what ever strain was on them was from air buoyancy which is hardly sufficient. It would be interesting to here from him what buoyancy is grater than air and what buoyancy is sufficient.  Only a perfect vacuum would be slightly greater. Every ship including the very largest and heaviest is buoyant only because of the air inside of them.

Ric:

In response to your statement about the anchor over the side of the boat.  It is true the anchor would wight less.  Their for you could lift it with a smaller rope when it is submerged. I don't think you missed anything. I think you were seeing if we were asleep.

(Archimedes Principle ) The buoyant force on a submerged object is equal to the weight of fluid displaced by the object. Even though the anchor will not float it still displaces the water and has some buoyancy witch would make it weight slightly less. The small straps you described over the top of the fuel tanks on floor of the Electra would have to hold 1,100 lb. If it were submerged in the water right side up.

Merry Christmas
Kary
***************************************************************
From Vern Klein

I'd been able to pretty much stay out of this kind of discussion but I think I've been "suckered" into it!  Somewhat relative to "Airport 77" which I've not seen....

Didn't some people try that sort of thing, maybe a couple of years ago? Was it a piece of the "Titanic" they were trying to lift off the bottom?

Anyway, they used "balloons" and, I think, straps passed under the thing they wanted to lift.  Diesel fuel, or some such, was pumped into the "balloons." Not as bouyant as air but bouyant enough.  And the liquid was not compressable as air would have been.  An important point when you're starting from very deep water... lots of pressure.  Air filled "balloons" would have burst when they got into lower pressure nearer the surface.

They lifted it alright.  I believe the "balloons" were on the surface when the straps, or whatever, began to fail.  "The strain was tremendous!"  They tried to tow it to more shallow water before loosing it completely but I don't think they made it.  I think the piece is back at great depth and not far from where it started.

***************************************************************
From Ric

Sadly, there have been a number of attempted deep water recoveries, several involving rare airplanes, which have ended as you describe.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 10:29:25 EST
From:         Perry Ellington
Subject:      Flotation again

Ric wrote

> You seem to be saying that strength of the rope required to do this would be
> less than would be required to lift the anchor off the deck.  Or am I missing
> something?

sure it would be, ever picked your women up in a pool, or held a young kid afloat while teaching them to swim, unless im mistaken, what you are referring to is a basic principal of bouyancy...

I believe Dave knows what he is talking about on this one.... In the movie, the strain would equal the lifting power of the balloons....and yes things do weigh less in water.

Perry Ellington

***************************************************************

From Ric

We're going to need to establish the legal definition of "picking up women in a pool" before I answer that question.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 10:48:17 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

If the Navy was so interested in setting up a radio HF/DF network, one node on Howland, why did they provide the gear to the Coast Guard with no instructions as to use, or a qualified radioman to operate it?  Why was there no radio message traffic to Itasca to coordinate radio interceptions using this HF/DF?  It is rather obvious...it was not intended for that purpose on this trip.

Parenthetically, joint classified Navy/CG meetings on emergency use of HF/DF for search and rescue pointedly state that PAA's equipment was far superior to their own. As food for thought for the conspirators, perhaps PAA was part of the network!

***************************************************************

From Ric

Good point Randy.  It's clear from Cmdr. Thompson's (captain of the Itasca) report that he didn't want the thing on board.  The HF/DF seems to have been foisted on him by Richard Black (Dept. of the Interior) and Lt. Daniel Cooper (Army Air Corps).  Quoting Thompson's report:

"Mr. Black and Lieutenant Cooper of the Army had the Navy send a high frequency direction finder on board.  The Coast Guard did not request the equipment and did not receipt for it."

Thompson had to get a radioman 2nd class (Cipriani) transferred from the cutter Taney to operate the HF/DF.  Black didn't know how to work it.  Cooper didn't know how to work it.  Cipriani did the best he could, but it became apparent that he didn't know what the heck he was doing either.

This all sounds very familiar to me.  You have a big, high-profile project. Somebody gives you a hi-tech piece of equipment to use.  You don't really know how to use it but, what the heck, you figure you'll figure it out.  In the end, it's just a big waste of time and energy.  Been there.  Done that.

Ltm,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 10:57:01 EST
From:         Cameron Warren
Subject:      HOWLAND DF

The "mystery" HF/DF on Howland came from the USN intercept station at Heiea, Hawaii, and according to Chief Radio Electrician H. M. Anthony, was a suitcase model.   The ITASCA received it aboard from Fleet Air Base, Pearl Harbor, on June 16, 1937, as can be confirmed by the deck log for that date. (They also loaded storage batteries for the Dept. of Interior about the same time, probably to power the ham radios used on the island).  According to Adm. August Detzer (who was OP-20-GX in 1937), the set was probably an experimental XAB/HRO, developed by the Naval Research Labs (later referred to as a "model DT").  In the early 1970's,  he told Fred Goerner that AE "certainly did know that a HF/DF was going to be available to her at Howland Island.  We were using every opportunity to run comparison tests against other direction finders."

As I suggested in a recent article (pending publication in AIR CLASSICS), AE jettisoned her 500kc DF system in favor of  "hush-hush" HF/DF gear, most likely the Bendix RA-1 (or a prototype) tuned ONLY to 7500kc (although actually a multi-band receiver). Her regular WE receiver didn't work (that's another story!), but she did hear the ITASCA on 7500, as we know. Putnam, probably Vince Bendix, and SOMEBODY in Navy Intel was in on the program, everybody else, including Capt. Safford and Commander Thompson, was left in the dark. The Howland gear was supposed to be a backup to the airborne equipment, but that part of the job got badly fumbled.

Anthony incidentally, although turning into something of a curmudgeon in later years, was fiercely loyal to the Coast Guard and brooked no accusations as to careless operations during the Earhart saga. He manned a 24 hour radio monitoring station in the Aloha Tower in Honolulu during the search, and was adamant that NO legitimate messages were ever received that could be attributed  to AE after the final ("line-of-position") one. Further, he said, no "post-splash" messages were picked up by any of the ships in the area at the time. (So much for the ACHILLES report).

He pretty well convinced me, although previously I had been encouraged by Frederick Hooven, an acknowedged DF expert and engineering genius, who thought the Pan-Am intercepts were valid.  Also by the excellent computer analysis of all the radio messages by Charles Hill, who assembled a complete listing of every signal (using GCT) in chronological order. If, as Anthony avowed, none of those messages purported to come from a beached (or floating) Electra were legitimate, it strongly supports the "splashed down and went to the bottom" theory, which Goerner eventually embraced.

In haste,
Cam Warren
**************************************************************

From Ric

This is how AE has stayed lost for 61 years. You make bald statements of fact which are, in reality, nothing more than anecdotal recollections which may or may not be true. The ONLY piece of documented information you offer is the date the set came aboard the Itasca.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 11:02:37 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Anatomy 101

Jon asks:

>So if the bones gradually fuse with age, then wouldn't FN's &
>AE's pelvic bones have been pretty much a single unit?

No, except in really rare cases the two inominates and the sacrum remain separate even in old adults.  Check out your own (no, no, put down that knife!).  If your whole pelvic girdle were one bone, you wouldn't be able to bend over, or straighten up.

A broken pelvis is no laughing matter -- I'm sure it hurts like the devil, and imobilizing it till it mends is a real problem.  But the pelvis doesn't have to be broken to produce an isolated inominate; the other inominate and the sacrum simply have to wander off somewhere after the cartilage decays.

LTM
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 11:07:17 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Glenn Miller

>No kidding?  How'd I miss that?  Anybody else see this?

I missed it too. It seems like I heard sometime recently that he was still listed as MIA. Seems like if he had been found, wouldn't he have been brought home and buried with military honors? Don't remember anything about that.

Tom #2179
(who is still sans mousepad... hint, hint.)
***************************************************************

From Ric

Missing mice to be mailed Monday.

Trivia:  It was several days before the famous band leader was reported missing because he was listed on the aircraft manifest as Maj. Alton G. Miller (his real name).
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 11:37:40 EST
From:         Tom Cook
Subject:      PING PONG BALLS

Ric, a while back we had an extensive discussion of ping pong balls as flotation devises, which reached the point of being a joke, now Dustoff brings the subject up again.  It so happens that I have been reading "Howard Hughes and his FLYING BOAT by Capt. Charles Barton USN (Ret.)  Charalbert@aol.com.

It seems that Howard Hughes made an around the world flight of his own beginning July 10, 1938 he flew from New York to Paris to Moskow to Omsk to Yatusk (last 3 cities USSR) to Fairbanks to Minneapolis back to New York in 91 hrs.  This far northern route was much shorter than the route that AE took  near the equator.  The A/C  was a "Lockheed Lodestar", what model # would that be?  How does that compare with AE's Model 10E?  He had a copilot, navagator, flight engineer, and radio operator along.

To quote from page 147 & 148  regarding the HK1 Flying boat "Below the cargo deck the hull was divided into 18 watertight compartments.  If 12 of these were flooded the ship would still float.

As additional protection in case of flooding, Hughes at first had beach balls placed in the hull.  LIKE THE PING PONG BALLS USED IN HIS ROUND -THE - WORLD  LOCKHEED LODESTAR, (emphesis added)  they were to provide buoyancy in case of an accident on the water.  Interior photographs of the hull taken during this period clearly show the balls, but the captions sometimes erred as to their purpose: they were not to protect people who fell from the catwalk, as one caption explained.  A net placed over the balls ensured that buoyancy would be applied to the lowest points at which the net was fastened to the hull.  After the test flight, however, the beach balls were replaced by styrofoam meticulously ontoured to the ship and placed alongside the catwalk.  ("We never used the beach balls," says Ben Jiminez.  "We gave those to the kids. Everyboy got a few."  "

I was personaly shown what was said to be one of the beach balls, when I phographed the Hk1 in Mc Minnville, OR, where it is presently located, last Sept.

TC 2127

PS I finaly got that grandson, but not on your birthday, but on my 60 yr. 11 mo. birthday.  Andrew Thomas Cook arrived 12/14/98 weighing 8 lb. 14 1/2 oz.

PSS The book mentioned as well as a tape of the only flight of the HK1 are availble from the museum gift shop at www.sprucegoose.org

PSSS What campus of SU of NY did you attend?  I attended U of Buffalo, before it became a campus of SU of NY.
***************************************************************

From Ric

Congratulations on your new grandson.  He was a bit late but it sounds like he was hefty and healthy.

I graduated from SUNY Oswego.  You and I could probably debate endlessly as to who got more snow and wind.

Hughes' Lockheed was a Model 14 (same basic airframe as the wartime Hudson), a much larger airplane than the Modle 10.  I've never heard that he had ping pong balls aboard and I suspect that somebody is confusing him with Dick Merrill's flight that did use ping pong balls.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 11:40:15 EST
From:         Mike
Subject:      black enamel

> I'm not trying to be difficult but, at least to me, there is nothing at all
> ambiguous about Gallagher's statement that:
> "Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 (stencilled) and 1542 - sextant being
> old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel."

Ric, I was misremembering what he said - you are right, I apologize profusely. Basil! (*whap*)

*************************************************************
From Ric

No big deal.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 11:51:43 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      TIGHAR Tracks

Paul Chattey, TIGHAR member 1120C, sent the following as a private email but I don't think he'll mind if I share it with the forum.  Besides being the sort of note that makes us feel better than you can imagine, it is also perhaps one answer to a question many forum subscribers may ask themselves - "Why should I join TIGHAR?"

****************************************************************
Dear Ric and Pat,

I pawed though the day's mail while Leanne did some business at the bank last night and found my copy of TRACKS.  "OK," I thought, "what's in this issue that I don't already know about?"  You may not get to hear this enough, but I need to tell you that this issue, like all issues, brings up  considerable delight.  I like the way it is laid out with clean graphics and good spacing, I like the clarity of reasoning that pervades the writing, the light and irreverent tone, I even like the inserts!  And, by the way, the map was very, very welcome.  In fact, I was so engrossed in enjoying the magazine that I came to the end and found myself starting to read about the NRHP before it hit me that I'd helped write the article.  I did sit there, quietly stunned like the Norwegian Blue, before getting a good laugh.  You guys made my evening.

Published doesn't equate to famous, but I'd rather have an article in TRACKS than put up with an interview by some microphone jockey.  Thanks again!

Paul
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 11:59:27 EST
From:         Paul Chattery
Subject:      Re: AE's shoes

OK, I'll ask.  Do the inner (straight) edges of the heel show any signs of wear, nicks, gouges, or rounding that might indicate coral, loose sand, Etc?

Paul
****************************************************************

From Ric

No nicks or gouges.  Lots of rounding.  There were also originally two "traction plugs" (usually lighter colored discs set into the heel) on the outside rear of the heel which are missing.  This is a very worn heel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:10:19 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: English 101

"Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 (stenciled) and 1542 - sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel."

I'm still not really sure how clear the sentence is (given its source as a telegram, subject to economy in words and manual recopying during transmission, etc, and especially the awkward syntax of the phrase after the dash mark). Obviously, someone else had yet another interpretation of that same phrase at the time, since for weeks after reading it, the authority at Suva was still expecting to receive a non-existent sextant as a part of the group of artifacts found on Gardner.

My own reading of the phrase was done in the knowledge that no sextant was found, so I quickly (probably rashly) resolved the lack of clarity by thinking that perhaps Gallagher was referring to the box.

But I'm also not at all familiar with sextants-- although I know that Gallagher was. As I read the opinions of people who are much more familiar with sextants and sextant boxes than I am, I'm beginning to agree that Gallagher probably was, after all, referring to the missing sextant in that last phrase

However, there must have been some evidence in the empty box-- its fittings perhaps-- that made him believe that the instrument was "old fashioned" and painted over.

Or, if he actually saw that fragment of an inverting eyepiece (the one that was later thrown away by the finder), or heard a good description of it (including a remark that it seemed like it was painted over), Gallagher might have reasonably inferred that the sextant it presumably belonged to was painted over too.

Question:

Was it common (or even reasonable) during the 1930s for sailors and aviators to run across "old fashioned" sextants that had been painted over in enamel of any colour?

Sorry for focusing in on this. It reminds me of that line from "The English Patient"-- to paraphrase-- it comes from always trying to read so much into so little.

By the way, it does seem likely that our friend Gatty was indeed floating around Fiji while this was all happening, and was shown the box by a curious official at some point. I wonder if Gatty ever mentioned this in any of his published materials or private letters-? Perhaps there's still an archive of his papers on Fiji somewhere? Problem is, one could go to a lot of trouble simply to find a passing mention of his that he saw the box but was for some reason (right or wrong) so unimpressed with it that he recorded no additional meaningful detail or opinion about it.

****************************************************************

From Ric

Allow me to correct a misconception.  The officials in Suva never saw this telelgram.  It was sent by Gallagher to his immediate superior, the Resident Commissioner, who resided at Ocean Island which was the headquarters of the Gilbert & Ellice Islands Colony.  The Resident Commissioner then reported Gallagher's news to his own superiors, the High Commisioner and Secretary of the Western Pacific High Commission who were in Suva, Fiji.  The RC's telegram to Suva erroneously reported that a sextant had been found, thus creating the confusion.

Black enamel paint is common on nautical sextants.  Your speculation about why Gallagher thought the sextant had been painted sounds reasonable to me.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:16:14 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      More flotation

I think Ric's intuitive understanding of physics isn't so bad. And as much as those old "Airport" movies make me grimace, trying to raise a submerged aluminum skinned, loaded 747 with big balloons strapped to the fuselage could very easily cause some sort of catastrophic failure.

Here's why. First, imagine trying to hold an ordinary inflated beach ball completely under the surface of the water sometime and then tell me that air buoyancy in water isn't violent.

To be more precise, the Archimedes' principle states that a submerged body is subject to a buoyancy force that is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by that body. Water is heavy stuff, and air is extremely light relative to water, and the weight of the amount of water displaced by a good-sized air-inflated beach ball can easily be 100 kilos, which would translate directly into an upward force almost equal to the weight of the water displaced (in this case ~100 kilos) if you try to hold it under water (for example, against your own weight).

Translate this to a 118 or 149 gallon tank, almost empty, and you've got something pretty much equivalent to a marine rocket seeking the surface. The forces are easy to calculate and are rather impressive when water is displaced by air-filled containers. As an analogy for these sorts of volumes, imagine the rapidly accelerating force of a falling grand piano (in this case falling "up" to the surface).

Taken to an extreme, the viscosity (resistance) of the water would soon balance the forces out into a steady rate of ascent, which creates the visual illusion that the substantial acceleration forces involved are "gentle".

I could roughly estimate that in absence of any deliberate design to the contrary, the tank(s) would either rupture from the complicated stresses, or the retaining straps would fail, or both, almost immediately as the Electra became submerged.
**************************************************************

From Ric

Isn't there some kind of experiment we could do involving women and swimming pools?
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:21:12 EST
From:         Alan Caldwell
Subject:      Re: Glenn Miller

I have not heard of Glenn Miller's aircraft being found and found this comment on the internet from July.

10:05 AM 7/17/1997

NEWSMAKERS

Air Force downs rumor

For those who weren't sure, the U.S. Air Force has issued a terse press release insisting that band leader Glenn Miller died in a plane crash in the English Channel.

"A German newspaper, Bild, claims it knows the 'true' cause of death," the statement says, referring to the tabloid-like paper's story that Miller died of a heart attack in the arms of a French prostitute in 1944. "The report is incorrect," the Air Force said. "All known facts indicate that Maj. Miller died on Dec. 15, 1944, when his plane crashed into the English Channel, as originally reported."

Alan
**************************************************************

From Ric

But if Miller was in the arms of the French prostitute INSIDE the airplane when it went down in the Channel, would their buoyancy be sufficient to ....

Sort of brings us back to that swimming pool experiment.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:23:57 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Painted sextants

I got curious the other day, and surfed a bunch of nautical antique shops.  Found one (don't remember which one now, but I think I bookmarked it at home if it's important) which had an old nautical sextant in a wooden box.  There were what appeared to be three eyepieces displayed with it (along with a certificate of some kind - possibly a calibration certificate - from an observatory in England).  The sextant is clearly black (black enamel ?) and the box is clearly wooden.  I nipped a copy of the picture and I would be glad to forward it to you next week if you are interested.  Alas the outside of the box is not shown (thinking of the numbers), but there is a number on the certificate, which could be a serial number for the instrument.  I guess my feeling is, like you, Gallagher is saying the sextant was painted. Could be that it was repainted at some time in it's life, to protect the brass from corrosion, which could be what caused him to make the comment.

Love to mother, and merry Christmas to all
jon - ps: happy belated birthday!

**************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Jon.  I would indeed like to see that picture, if it's not too much trouble.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:28:23 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Arriving at Holland in the early morning

Pat Robinson asked

>But why put yourself near Holland in the early
>Morning.

In addition to the reasons you listed, all very good, I would add that early morning was the ideal time to arrive in order to make a visual sighting of Holland.  In the Central Pacific the least amount of cloud cover unusually occurs in the morning hours.  Shadows cast by clouds on the open ocean are often very difficult to distinguish from island unless you are quite close.  Additionally, as the sun heats the surface small clouds normally form first over the islands making a marker for the islands when there are just a few clouds.  By afternoon many clouds form obscuring the view of the surface and thus hiding any land forcing the pilot to descend below the base of the clouds.  In many cases this means descending to 1 to 2 thousand feet where horizontal visibility is very limited.  I say this from experience of flying into many Pacific Islands during my years with Pan Am.

Dick Pingrey 908C

***************************************************************

From Ric

Earhart did, in fact, say that she was flying at 1,000 feet when searching for the island.

Holland, however, is relatively easy to spot.  The windmills are visible for miles.  (I know. I know.  Nobody loves a smart ass.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:48:24 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Flotation/Titanic

>I think the piece [of Titanic's hull] is back at great depth and not far
>from where it started.

Off topic, I know, but since the subject came up...

About four months ago another expedition relocated and (successfully) recovered "The Big Piece."   Discovery Channel carried the whole thing as a special entitled "Return to the Titanic Live!"

LTM
Russ
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:54:06 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: More flotation issues

Ric wrote:

>Isn't there some kind of experiment we could do involving women and
>swimming pools?

The only drawback would be that the buoyancy characteristics of women can be very complex to accurately calculate.

***************************************************************
From Ric

It would hard to imagine a line of investigation that could get us into more trouble than this one.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:27:24 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: Glenn Miller

Added Trivia about Alton Glenn Miller--

His name is listed along with 5000 others on the -'Wall of Missing Men' in the US Cemetery at Maddingley outside Cambridge-along with young Joseph Kennedy and all the others. A dramatic, sobering, inspiring, reflective site along with the 8000 others in their graves under the perfectly symmetrical rows of crosses and Stars of David. If you go to Cambridge/Duxford-you should see Maddingley.

Jim Tierney
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:29:18 EST
From:         William Garman
Subject:      Re: More flotation issues

Ric said:

>It would hard to imagine a line of investigation that could get us into more
>trouble than this one.

I had this brief mental image of a swimming pool, Amelia and a beach ball, but quickly thought, "No..."
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:40:24 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Tank Strap Stress, Floating Aircraft

If my basic physics serves me correctly, the stress on the straps that held the fuel tanks secured to the floor of the cabin is equal to the weight of the volume of water the submerged portion that the empty tanks displaced.  Assuming there was little or no damage to the airplane structure during landing (on the coral shelf or in the open water) this force should not be enough to cause the straps to fail.  The airplane could very well float for quite a long time even though it might be in a nose down position.  It could easily float out to the reef in rising tidal action or be carried onto the shore by strong storm wave action.

When Pan Am ditched a 4 engine piston aircraft half way between Hawaii and San Francisco many years ago the airplane eventually had to be sunk by gun fire because it was considered to be a hazard to navigation.  That was, I believe, several days after the ditching.

Dick Pingrey 908C
***************************************************************

From Ric

Interesting.  Sounds like there is at least a possibility that ol' NR16020 would have made a pretty durable boat.

I see a possibility here for new conspiracy theory.  A Japanese destroyer sank Earhart's floating Electra because it was a hazard to navigation.

Better yet - National Enquirer headline - Caribbean cruise ship damaged in collision with Amelia's floating Electra.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:49:29 EST
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Comments:  HF/DF

Cameron Warren's recent posting mentioned an "experimental XAB/HRO" d/f equipment, which was "later referred to as a 'model DT'."

For what it may be worth, and for those who may have a technical interest, this almost undoubtedly means that the equipment utilized some sort of direction-finding antenna and converter/coupler unit, feeding into a National Radio Co. Model HRO receiver, which was a commercial model equipment used by a great many government agencies including the FCC, the CAA, and the military services... as well as the airlines, and by amateur radio operators who could afford one.

The HRO tuned 100 KHz through 30 MHz, using a number of plug-in coil drawers (one for each frequency band).  It was a table-mounted or rack-mounted unit, and operated on 115v AC 60 Hz power... although it did have a provision for operation from external batteries (dry cells -- "lots of 'em"!) or a DC-to-DC converter.  The "external batteries" would have included 6 volts for the tube heaters (probably a storage battery) and 180 to 270 volts DC for the high-voltage power.  This might have come from a bank of 45-volt, 67-1/2 volt or 90-volt dry "B" batteries in series-parallel.

Considering the current appetite of the many tubes in the HRO, these "B" batteries would have not lasted more than a few hours at best... depending upon how many batteries were available.  They were one-shot batteries and could not be recharged.

If the set were being operated from a DC-to-DC converter, this meant running from storage batteries.  These too would have only lasted a few hours before being drained.  I suspect that charging batteries is no easy matter on an island with no convenient power source to "plug in" a charger; it would have to be done using some kind of gasoline-engine-driven generator.

The HRO was considered to be "The Standard" by which receivers were judged -- extremely rugged,  with excellent frequency stability and signal-selectivity, and a highly-accurate dial which meant extreme accuracy of tuning and frequency-resetability.  Today the HRO is a prized antique. Many are still used on-the-air by ham operators.

I am not all that familiar with the details of the Model DT direction finder, except to say that this was intended for use at land bases or aboard ships.

To call any equipment of this vintage "portable" would be a stretch. Usually this term meant, "it's got a handle on it so a couple of strong guys can lift it."  Probably a minimum crew of two or three would be required to set it up and calibrate it.

(Today, such gear is popularly termed, in the antique radio/ham radio world, "Boat Anchors."  The term stems from the carrying handles, which make ideal anchor-line attachment points; and the weight of the equipment.)

I will be interested in seeing the upcoming Air Classics article, and what kind of sources are cited therein.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:56:34 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Gees...can't you get anything right?  Cipriani was a 3rd,not 2nd,  class radioman, picked up from the Taney at the last moment...he wasn't part of the permanent Itasca crew.

***************************************************************

From Ric

Thompson, "Radio Transcripts Earhart Flight", 19 July 1937, page 5:

"The TANEY transferred a radioman second class to the ITASCA."

Lemme guess.  You've got a better source that says he was only a 3rd class.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:07:14 EST
From:         Monty Fowler
Subject:      Fame at last

TIGHAR has finally hit the big time. In the Dec. 22, 1998, issue of the "National Examiner," on page 13 (naturally), a bold headline states "Amelia Earhart FOUND!" Of course, it is under the story "Joan Rivers' Advice to Newlywed Daughter: Forget Furniture, Buy Sexy Undies!" and next to "Maria (Carey) Battles Disfiguring Skin Disease." The story repeats the errors about who found the bones, etc., but it has a nice picture of Amelia and Fred holding a map in front of the Lockheed's tail.

And no, I'm not going to explain how I happened to stumble on this little journalistic gem.
***************************************************************
From Ric

Every time I go through the supermarket checkout line I half expect to see my picture on the cover of a tabloid with the headline "RIC GILLESPIE - THE TRAGIC LAST DAYS."
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:09:44 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Flotation issues

The effort to raise "the big piece" of plating from the Titanic did initially end as described in the preceding posting, but the group tracked the descent of the fragment, and returned this past summer and retrieved the piece entirely, and it is now being examined. They have, in fact, identified the exact spot of the ship from which it came, via the traditional rivet-hole vs. blueprints method. It also has a couple of portholes on it. I think that the Discovery Channel carried the special on it in Summer, 1998.

Best regards,
Gene Dangelo #2211  :)

***************************************************************

From Ric

I'm baffled by why anyone would want to do that.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:21:21 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: More flotation

I like Ric's experimental proposition. You are correct that the force is considerable. The airplane could conceivably remain afloat based on the volume of air in the tanks, if not, it would sink slowly. The retaining straps would be subjected only to the limit of bouyancy in those tanks, not the weight of the aircraft, as Ric implies. If the straps were not of sufficient strength to sustain that force of bouyancy then indeed, they would fail. I am not familiar with the type and strength of the straps used to hold the tanks down, but I would definitely NOT want those tanks to move in any flight regime that could possibly be encountered. I would want them to be very strong. Wasn't Archemeties the one who said "Give me twelve billion, and I can leverage IBM?"

***************************************************************
From Tom Cook

Archamedes (sp?) Principle says something to the effect that an object in water (or any other liquid) will displace a volume of the liquid to equal the weight of the object, unless the object is more dence than the liquid (weighs more than its volume of the liquid) Example:  The steel plates needed to build a ship would sink in water, but weld these plates together to make a ship and it floats because it displaces more than its weight of water, the exces being the carrying capacity of the ship, however if you damage the the ship so that it floods it sinks just like the stack of steel plate ( as did the Titanic ) because it no longer displaces more than its weight in water.

BTW  The story about the ping pong balls in the Howard Hughes round-the-world flight and the beach balls in the HK1 for flotation purposes was credited to Ben Jiminez April 24, 1979 and to Clarence Selberg (Hughes Aircraft Inspector ), April 7, 1979 by the author,Charles Barton.

TC 2127

***************************************************************

From Ric

For the record, the guy spelled his name Archimedes (but he used the Greek alphabet to do it).
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:38:06 EST
From:         Jack
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Re. your reply to Randy Johnson on the operation of the HF/DF.

> You said Thompson had to get radioman 2nd class
> (Cipriani) transferred from the cutter Taney to
> operate the HF/DF. Black didn't know how to work it.
> Cooper didn't know how to work it. Cipriani did the
> best he could, but it became apparent he didn't know
> what the heck he was doing either.

How do you know Cipriani didn't know what the heck he was doing? Do you have any supporting evidence to substantiate your claim about Ciprianie's capabilities? Are you clairvoyant or was this a slip of the tongue?

Ed Dames may be watching.

Dog six king
Jack #2157

***************************************************************

From Ric

Well, I'm judging Frank Cipriani's abilities by the results he got - which were zilch.  According to his own log, he does not receive as many transmissions from Earhart as Itasca and the ones he does hear are weaker than Itasca reports.  He has seriously miscalculated or mis-anticipated the battery drain so that he has to use the set "sparingly" just when Earhart seems to be closest and needs his help the most.

What do you think Randy?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:48:23 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Flotation issues

First, Ric wrote:

"...and let it dangle there without touching the bottom."

Then he wrote:

"...and down goes ol' Ric."

And then:

"If it falls below the magic number, down she goes."

And Perry said:

"ever picked your women up in a pool..."

Then Ric wrote:

"...experiment... involving women and swimming pools?"

And Alan wrote:

"...died of a heart attack in the arms of a French prostitute..."

And Ric wrote:

"Nobody loves a smart ass."

Sure glad there is not a special prosecutor investigating us. Ric might get impeached!

Tom #2179

***************************************************************

From Ric

I demand Ken Starr!  I won't settle for anyone else unless, by some chance, Heinrich Himmler is still alive.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:50:19 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: PING PONG BALLS

Tom Cook wrote, regarding the HK1 Flying boat:

>Below the
>cargo deck the hull was divided into 18 watertight compartments.  If 12
>of these were flooded the ship would still float.

Yeah, and Harland and Wolff claimed "if any five of Titanic's 16 watertight compartments were flooded, the ship would still float".

Ah, the best-laid plans of mice and men...

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:55:46 EST
From:         Deb
Subject:      Re: Sextant boxes

The way I've understood this is:

The box was padded or built up in the interior in such a way to indicate that the sextant was an older one. You don't want a delicate instrument rattling around! Does the sextant box in Florida have these paddings and/or build ups inside?

As for the black enamel, perhaps small flakes of the enamel had come off or were adhering to the padding/build ups inside the box. The black enamel may have rubbed off or flaked off at some contact/rubbing points inside the box.

Deb

**************************************************************
From Ric

The Pensacola box has numerous wooden structures inside to hold the instrument and its accessories in place.  Padding doesn't amount to much - just some thin felt in a few places.  I agree with your speculation about the enamel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:58:42 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Still more flotation

Just to drag the floatation issue out a little further - don't forget that the fuselage tanks are mounted higher than the wing tanks. Thus in a floating situation what would happen is that the wing tanks would be totally submerged providing the bulk of the buoyancy and the fuselage tanks partly submerged (the exact amount depending on the reserve buoyancy - I forget how much from the calcs. that were done).  Thus the stresses on the fuselage tank straps would be less than the total tank bouyancy.

Another question:-  How "sealed" would the tanks be (assuming they are undamaged in the ditching) ?   If AE ditched, then it's reasonable to assume that she had the presence of mind to ditch whilst still under some power (i.e. with a little fuel remaining) and not "dead stick". In this scenario, we could expect the fuel cocks to have been left open and thus perhaps flooding of the tanks would have occurred back though the engine carbs etc which would certainly have been submerged. Also the tanks would probably have breathers of some sort (when fuel is used, air from somewhere has to come in and take its place).   My point here is that even though the L10 had a reserve bouyancy,  I don't think the prospect of the L10 floating for any length of time (hours - certainly days) is reasonable.  If the L10 was ditched - then whatever the outcome, it was at the bottom long before help arrived.

From Simon #2120
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:01:02 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Flotation issues

Vern Klein wrote:

> Didn't some people try that sort of thing, maybe a couple
> of years ago? Was it a piece of the "Titanic" they were
> trying to lift off the bottom?

Yes, the piece was lifted to subsurface (bouyant balloons filled with diesel fuel at the top) but was lost in the rough surf while trying to haul it on board. During autumn of this year, they went back again and recovered the piece, known as the "Big Piece", and it will soon be on display in Boston, as I recall.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:03:02 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: More flotation

William Garman wrote:

> Here's why. First, imagine trying to hold an ordinary inflated
> beach ball completely under the surface of the water sometime
> and then tell me that air buoyancy in water isn't violent.

I think that the best way to look at this is not in terms of the rising force of air, but rather the pressure of water/downward force of gravity, which causes the object full of air to be "squeezed up and out" of the water by the sheer immensity of the weight of fluid.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 13:55:54 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Agrosy and its ilk

As long as we've gone off-topic  . . .

Ric said:

>I have literally sat in the Library of Congress digging through back issues
>of Argosy and its ilk trying in find an article somebody was sure they had once
>seen.

Argosy?  Weren't "Saga'" and "Stag" also of that ilk?.  Great pulp 'zines from the 50s!!  Bodice busters for the testosterone set! The type cover I liked best were the one with the Grizzly Bear terrorizing a buxom nymphet clad  (the nymphet, not the bear!) only in vaporous trains of amorphous silk.  What ever happened to that great literature and its fans??  Think any of them might be TIGHAR members?

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149

**************************************************************
From Ric

I'm probably already in deep doo-doo with our esteemed female TIGHARs about the swimming pool thing.  I only read those mags at the Library of Congress for research purposes - honest.  I'm sure that the last time any of our members read them was at the barber shop when they were 15 years old.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 13:57:48 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Still floating

We've all missed a crucial point in the Floating Electra debate.

The fuselage tanks were INSIDE the aircraft, so even if the restraining straps failed, it is entirely (well, kind of) possible the undamaged (for the sake of argument) tanks would keep the aircraft up. The restraining straps did not have to bear the weight of the tanks and fuel, the fuselage did.  Right?  Inflate a balloon inside milk carton and punch holds in the carton and see what happens.  It should float in proportion to the air in the balloon.

Damn, with all this floating and sinking, I'm gettin' seasick!

LTM and Mae West
Dennis McGee #0149
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:25:30 EST
From:         Jack
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Ref. Randy's 12201623 & Ric's 12210938

Per NRS 246C RG 26 Records of U.S. Coast Guard, Earhart Search, Jul 37

Cipriani was a 2nd Class Radioman.

Cipriani received a commendation from L.C. Lovell, Asst. Commandant for his efforts that day. The numerous unknows would preclude a judgement such as what you made Ric.

What type of antenna installation did he have? Was the equipment functioning properly? For example, if all Cipriani had was the loop for receive, capture area of a loop vs a long wire on the Itasca would give you a vast signal difference in favor of the Itasca. His logs would be accurate then. Your comments lack corrobration. If its YOUR opinion, then state same as such. Otherwise its "anecdotal evidence."

73,
Dog six king
Jack #2157

**************************************************************

From Ric

You sound a bit testy there Jack.  Take it easy.  I'm not out to get Frank Cipriani.  He got handed a piece of equipment he may never have seen before. If he had some problems getting it to work right (which is fairly evident from the logs), it's hardly surprising.  He did have what he referred to as a "long vertical antenna" which he used "for reception of signals only."

My point in all this was not to impugn Cipriani or the United States Coast Guard, but to reinforce Randy's point that the deployment and employment of the HF/DF as part of the Earhart mission appears to have been a last-minute, what-the-heck  experiment rather than any part of a secret national security program.

If my opinions about what the logs imply differ from yours that does not make the logs or my opinions "anecdotal evidence."   The logs are a primary source and constitute contemporaneous written evidence of the events they describe. My interpretation of them is not "evidence" of any kind.  Anecdotal evidence is what you get when somebody tells you about an event they remember.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:34:29 EST
From:         Mmondro
Subject:      Locating the engine

Does technology exist to "x-ray" the dump for that engine? Seems that a big metal object such as that would show up on some kind of software. Or is that place littered with stuff much bigger than a P@W 1340?
****************************************************************

From Ric

Yup.  Axels, transmissions, truck engines, you name it.  And we have no idea how broken down the engine might now be.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:41:54 EST
From:         Vince Welsh
Subject:      Glenn Miller

Regarding Glenn Miller:

I came in on this conversation in the middle, and I apologize if this has already been considered, but I caught a CNN broadcast about a year ago based on a German newspaper article that claimed Glenn Miller actually died of a heart attack in a European brothel in the company of a prostitute. The missing plane story was circulated by the U.S. military out of respect for Miller's family and his contribution to the Allied war effort.

Vince Welsh

Orlando, FL
*************************************************************
From Ric

The story about the French prostitute has been around for years and resurfaces every now and then.  Although nobody (as far as I know) can say for sure what did happen to him, I think that if has been reliably established that he got aboard a C-64 Noordyun Norseman in England that was supposed to take him across the Channel to France but never arrived.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:08:45 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Special Welcome

I'd like to extend a special holiday welcome to our many new Earhart Forum subscribers.  The flood of publicity which followed our recent discoveries about the bones and the airing of the History Channel documentary has, of course, resulted in a considerable increase in visits to the TIGHAR website and a 20 percent increase in sign-ups to this forum.  As of today 533 people receive the messages posted here.

Not all of you will stick around.  Some will find the volume of traffic too high and others will find our tone too irreverent or our standards of evidence excessively rigid.  Virtually all of you new subscribers will, at first, feel like you have tuned in to a program already in progress - which, of course, is exactly what you have done.  I can only suggest that you be patient, read the material on the website, and don't be afraid to ask questions. We were all new here once ourselves.

I'll mention a couple of points that will help de-mystify the postings:

- a number after a person's name does not (in most cases) indicate that they are serving time in a penal institution.  It's a TIGHAR member number.  These are the people who have put their money where their mouth is.  We like them a lot and hope that you too will want to join our fine organization.  You'll find a printable membership on the TIGHAR website (www.tighar.org).

- on many of the postings you'll see Love to Mother, often abbreviated to LTM, used as a closing.  This is a reference to an unsigned telegram received by Earhart's husband in 1945 which was sent from a Chinese internment camp and said only, "Camp liberated.  Alls well. Volumes to tell.  Love to Mother." Many conspiracy theorists have taken this to be proof that Earhart was captured by the Japanese.  We have adopted the Love to Mother closing as a reminder to always guard our objectivity and not jump to unwarranted conclusions. We take the work seriously, not ourselves.

I hope you enjoy what happens here.  Please don't hesitate to email me directly at TIGHAR1@aol.com if you have any problem or private comment or question.

Love to Mother,
Ric Gillespie
Executive Director
TIGHAR
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:14:30 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Oops!  He was 2nd class.  My humble apologies.

********************************************************

From Ric

Whew!  That was a close one.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:16:42 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

If Cipriani was trained on the HF/DF, he probably (here we go again, supposing and speculating!) would have calibrated the directionality against the Itasca, asking the ship to circle the island, standard procedure (actually in reverse: the ship turns in a circle relative to a stationary transmission point) for calibration.  That never happened.

Other calibrations, even for a single direction was never conducted, at least we have no documentation for it.  We do know that the Itasca never circled Howland.  The Itasca and other Navy ships did this as routine upon leaving Hawaii.  In fact, the only device he had at his disposal for directions was a pocket compass!  How's that for quality control for a Navy unit?  Cipriani, in the radio tasking manifest, was clearly given the worst job for AE.  He was left alone to his own devices without much support from the ship.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:20:18 EST
From:         Stephanie
Subject:      Re: The Deep

Ric wrote:

>I'm probably already in deep doo-doo with our esteemed female TIGHARs
>about the swimming pool thing

Speaking for myself only, Ric, I must say that you completely redeemed yourself with the comment that you made, (I've deleted it now) something to the effect of "It would be difficult to imagine a topic that could get me in more trouble than this one."  I got a real kick out of that.  It showed that you respected it might be a tricky subject w/some of the females on the forum.  I didn't take offense to the subject, but still that remark was very amusing! :-)

Steph
*************************************************************

From Ric

Redemption is sweet.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:36:20 EST
From:         Jack
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

The point I'm testy (as you say) about is you said it was apparent Cipriani didn't know what the heck he was doing. I want to know how YOU know that. Can you back that statement up with some hard evicence? If not, it's just your opinion. Thats MY point.

Dog six king
Jack, 2157
***************************************************************

From Ric

This is an interesting point which speaks to our entire investigation. The hard evidence I have to offer is the content of Cipriani's own radio log, the other radio logs kept aboard the Itasca and the ship's deck log.  From that hard evidence I have drawn what seems to me to be a reasonable conclusion that Cipriani didn't know what the heck he was doing.  You might read that same evidence and draw a different conclusion.

A whole lot of opinions get expressed on this forum and we are always asking each other to back them up with hard evidence.  Your challenge of my statement is perfectly justified.  In previous postings I have presented my evidence to back up my opinion.  It is up to each forum member to decide for him/herself whether that opinion is warranted by the evidence.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 16:25:23 EST
From:         Jack J.
Subject:      Re: Army Records

I've been away awhile and am slowly getting caught up on the forum E-mail. The comment about doing exercises with helicopters and Army guys struck a nerve. I did that 30 years ago, only we called the "exercises" LRRPs (pronounced lirps).

No matter, what I jumped in here to add is the following; 

1) If I remember correctly both AE and FN were commissioned officers in the Navy Reserves. I don't know about the 1930s, but in the late 1960s every member of the US military was fingerprinted. Maybe their prints are on file with the Navy, or in one of the record centers for such old military records. I was once able to get a picture of a specific F-86 Saber Jet from one of the military record centers.

2) You Stated in one of your responses or announcements that the latest TIGHAR has a "centerfold" of NR16020 in which the "3-view' of the aircraft is depicted with it's leading edge painted (printed) in the correct color FS 12197 orange. Is this another level bucket comment? Was not NR16020's leading edge black, followed by  FS12197 orange?

3) For those who may be interested, Testors Model Co. produces FS12197 orange in it's Model Master Paint series. The color is referred to as "International orange." This is the same reference used by Paul Mantz in his letter to GP Putnum regarding the color the aircraft ought to be trimmed in. I don't thing this a coincidence

4) Lastly, congrats on your trip to the fatherland (England) I'm kidding folks!  Seriously, while you were gone Pat handled things beautifully. You really should let her take the left seat more often. She is far more subtle, can cut as deep, if not deeper and quicker, but leaves the unsuspecting victim smiling. Seriously, she does a great job, and is most enjoyable to read.

Jack J.

PS a belated happy birthday (we are of the same vintage - keep in mind it beats hell out of the alternative - and then there is always Viagra!) LTM
**************************************************************
From Ric

I should probably let Pat reply to this, but:

1.  No, neither AE nor Fred was a commissioned officer in any military service.

2.  Yes, the TIGHAR Tracks pull-out is correct. The leading edges of NR16020 were orange, not black.

Viagra?  Isn't that a place near Buffalo with a waterfall?

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:00:11 EST
From:         Mike Cundiff
Subject:      ROV deployment of Earhart search

This is my first post to the forum.  I am an avid History enthusiast and having nearly 31 years entrusted to Titanic.  I have followed with great interest the legacy of Amelia Earhart, and am very intrigued with the research and expeditions that have been mounted to learn of her fate.

The discovery of the remains of the Titanic were intially discovered on 1 Sept. 1985  by way of underwater towed camera sled apportioned to the site courtesy of the US NAVY.

The wreck lies in 12,500' of North Atlantic waters.  Now I understand there are those among the Earhart researches, that beleive that the Lockheed Electra, having consumed all fuel may have ditched just short of Howland Island.  I also understand the depth of that area surrounding the island/s is somewheres around 17,000'.  Has an ROV ( remote operated vehicle) ever been considered deployed to the area for search of Earhart's aircraft? Dr. Ballard who discovered Titanic also found the remains of the German battleship Bismarck (@ 15,000')  by way of an ROV.

Any help or furtur information will be appreciated.

I am anticipating many hours of learning and enjoyment with the those feelow enthusiasts of Amelia Earhart and her dissaperance.

Sincerely,

Mike Cundiff
Carson City, NV
**************************************************************

From Ric

Welcome Mike.  I'm sure that I don't need to point out to you that the problems inherent in the Earhart search are infinitley greater than they were for either Titanic or Bismarck.  In both of those cases everyone knew where the ships were (at the bottom of the ocean).  It was just a matter of figuring out exactly where.

In the case of Earhart, not only is the target truly tiny when compared to a ship, but there is no general agreement about where to look.   Some say that the airplane was destroyed by the Japanese or by the American military.  Many believe it is somewhere on the ocean floor.  In our opinion, based upon the research we have done, we think that it is most most probably on the island of Nikumaroro (or at least a significant body of wreckage is there). Consequently, we're not much inclined to consider ROVs to search where we think the airplane probably ain't.

Love to Mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:21:44 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Flotation issues

Ric wrote:

>I'm baffled by why anyone would want to do that. (raise a chunk of the
>Titanic)

Ric, if you found a piece of Amelia's Electra on the ocean floor, would you let it lie there?

Tom #2179

***************************************************************

From Ric

Believe it or not - probably.  I think that the most important objective of the Earhart Project is to answer the question of what became of AE and Fred. The Electra itself is no more historically significant as an artifact than is the Titanic.  It's recovery and exhibition - just like the recovery and exhibition of a chunk of the Titanic - is nothing more than morbid fascination.  I think that the wreckage of Titanic should be left the (expletive deleted) alone.  If the wreckage of NR16020 was found in an equally inaccessible place I would want to leave it there.

However, I think that a significant portion of the wreckage is on land and accessible.  It is protected from exploitation only by the fact that nobody knows for sure where it is.  Unfortunately, we're confronted by a paradox.  In order to solve the mystery we have to find the airplane.  Once we find the airplane it will no longer be protected and we will have to recover it to insure that it is not exploited.

This gets to the heart of some very basic historic preservation issues.  I'd be very interested to hear some opinions on this from some of our trained preservationists on the forum.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:24:16 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Argosy and its ilk

Ric wrote:

>I'm probably already in deep doo-doo with our esteemed female TIGHARs about
>the swimming pool thing.  I only read those mags at the Library of Congress
>for research purposes - honest.

Yeah, right, and I only buy Playboy for the articles....

;>)

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:29:09 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Industrial Espionage

Just saw the History channel's special "Mysteries of Amelia". Whew! Now I know why the Zero was such an excellent fighter. Apparently key design elements were directly taken from AE's Electra. Of course that was after two Japanese navy operatives lured Amelia and Fred to an island near Howland with fake radio signals, dispatched them, and then crated the plane and shipped it back to Japan where its secrets were revealed. Just imagine how good the Zeke would have been if they'd hung two motors on it instead of one. The mind boggles. I think its time to put sake and sushi on the hallucinogen list.

zany skies, -jerry

***************************************************************

From Ric

What's especially baffling is why they would go to all that trouble when the Imperial Japanese Navy had already bought a Lockheed Model 10 Electra on the open market in 1936 and had a paid-for licensing agreement to build Model 14s in 1938.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:49:33 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: PING PONG BALLS

> Yeah, and Harland and Wolff claimed "if any five of Titanic's 16 watertight
> compartments were flooded, the ship would still float".

Actually they claimed she could float with any two flooded or as many as the first four - the iceberg pierced the first six.

Love to Andrews
Russ

**************************************************************

From Ric

Hmmm.  While we're on the topic,  I wonder what really happened to Amelia Eahart?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:52:27 EST
From:         Chuck Jackson
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

While scanning a book on WW2, hoping to run onto something on AE, I stumbled onto a reference to HF/DF---referred to as HUFF-DUFF re: locating jap subs.  ran, don't walk, to the web----altavista found me 67 hits!!!  Several in german

(no matter as the latest altavista offers to translate!!!!!).only took time to look at 6.(if

10 people each took 6............). below's the link to the best so far:

http://uboat.net/allies/technical/hfdf.htm

another link:www.uscg.mil/hq/g-cp/history/h_AtlWar.html says uscg had been involved with radio direction finding since 1919. must be a lot more out there somewhere on cg HF/DF!

****************************************************************

From Ric

But there's no evidence that the Coast Guard was the least bit interested in HF/DF with regard to the Earhart flight.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:56:39 EST
From:         Kary Barnett
Subject:      Flotation Experiment

You were looking for a good experiment on buoyancy. Maybe this would help. We could get a Cruse ship with a swimming pool on it and a row boat. Scribe a line on the side of the Ship at the water line. Put Archimedes in the Row Boat to monitor the water line. Get all of the women on the ship to get in the pool. Check the water line . All the girls out check the water line. All the girls drink a lot and get back in. Check the water line. Get all the drunk girls to splash water out. Check the water line. Get in the pool with all the drunk women drink and splash out water with them. Forget about the water line and Archimedes. We have found  what we have been searching for. The smoking gun right there in our wife's hand.

My wife said that she did not know what to get me for Christmas I told her I wanted a membership to TIGHAR. She said ok. So I get to become a member Cool.

Merry Christmas

Kary
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:30:10 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      The Steel Plate Example

Lets take your example of the steel plates that make up a boat a bit further.  If each steel plate occupies one cubic foot in volume and they are below the surface of the ocean they displace one cubic foot of water each.  Thus their effective under water weight is the weight of a cubic foot of steel minus the weight of a cubic foot of water.  If the plates are shaped into the form of a boat hull then the combines volume of the steel and air inside the hull that are below the water line are equal to the volume of water displaced.  This weight of displaced water is equal to the weight of the entire boat both above and below the water line and, in fact, the point of equal weight is what determines how high or low the boat floats in the water.

Dick Pingrey 908C
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:31:41 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Re; Floating Hk-1 Flying Boat

Remember that the HK-1 was constructed out of wood.  Get rid of the engines (which are actually a small part of the total volume) and probably 90% of the remaining structure is lighter than water and would float even if there were no water tight compartments.

Dick Pingrey 908C
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:44:26 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Bury Me!!

I just can't bring myself to delete the Forum for the 16 days that I will be in New Zealand! I guess that I'm an example of a person that is hopelessly hooked! All this talk of ping-pong balls, orchestra leaders and French prostitutes, floating airplanes, man-eating crabs, women, pools and flotation experiments and don't let me forget that Earhart lady, makes me realize what a well rounded and spirited Forum you have created! I couldn't bear to miss a word!! I'll keep an eye peeled over the Pacific!

LTM          Gary Moline      Orlando, Fl.

**************************************************************

From Ric

Yes folks, THIS is what can happen if you let your forum use get out of hand. Fortunately, we have a 12 step program guaranteed to help you shake the Earhart Forum habit.  It's available from TIGHAR for just $836.95 - or - you can become a member of TIGHAR for just $45.  Don't be a victim!  Be part of the problem!  You'll find a printable membership form on the TIGHAR website at www.tighar.org
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:08:09 EST
From:         Bette
Subject:      Re: The Deep

What do you think Amelia would have said?
ltm
Bette
**************************************************************

From Ric

I assume you mean - What do I think Amelia would have said in response to our joking speculation about flotation experiments using women in swimming pools?

I suspect that she had a good enough sense of humor to join in the fun but I also think that if we caught her at a bad moment she could rip us apart with language that would blow your monitor.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:16:24 EST
From:         Linda Jones
Subject:      Books?

I'm a newly subscribed member to this list but have long, long been fascinated by Amelia's mystery every since I saw a Saturday morning special on her probably...25 years ago???   Anyway, my question is...are there any books available on AE that someone could recommend as worthy of reading???  I think too my interest is heightened by my archeological experiences of the last 7 years...  Fascinating past time indeed!!

LTM,

Linda
*************************************************************

From Ric

You'll find a rather extensive (but by no means complete) list of Earhart books and films along with brief and irreverent reviews at http://www.tighar.org/TTracks/12_2/film.html
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:50:53 EST
From:         Jack J.
Subject:      Re: Army Records

At our age trusting the memory is a dangerous thing. Before I go on I want to post the following disclaimer; "I am not now nor have I ever been a conspiracy proponent."

In Randall Brink's book "Lost Star The Search for Amelia Earhart" there is a picture following page 160 wherein AE is shown opposite an Army officer and both AE and the officer have their right hand raised in what appears to be a swearing in ceremony the photo is credited with having been discovered at Hickham Field, Hawaii. In the photo is also Major General Oscar Westover, one of the commanding officers of the USAAF in 1937. I don't know what this means, or what relevance it has, but it is curious. Does anybody out there have an explanation for this photo. It may have been a "photo op" for the USAAF. This was a time in military aviation when most of the funding went to the NAVY, and the Army still had cavalry with real horses.

Secondly, in looking over the various photos of NR16020, AND NX16020, some of the photos look as though the leading edge is darker than the orange FS 12197. However, in other photos the wings appear to have only one color trim, that is FS 12197. We do know the aircraft went through some changes before it's "final" flight configuration. Again I beseech TIGHAR (that would be you Ric) to produce a special edition of TIGHAR Tracks dedicated to the details of NR16020, in your spare time (someday maybe). Relax Ric, I know you are busy. Beside I waited 10 years for the correct FS color, I can wait 10 more for a few other details.

I will forward a copy of the article that appeared in the local paper re the "bones." The local TV station carried the story, but referred to TIGHAR as "an organization interested in determining what happened to AE." Don't you just love "The Third Estate"?

Lastly, I continue to be in absolute awe of the spectrum of knowledge shared by these forum members. The learning factor they provide far outweighs the pucker factor brought on by TIGHAR's detractors.

LTM Jack J.

PS I rechecked my Atlas and Viagra is indeed that honeymoon/tourist trap in the Northeast part of New York State. In the 1930s people went there to gamble on whether their honeymoon would result in progeny, now people go there to gamble in the casinos! (Sorry, I could not resist!)
**************************************************************

From Ric

I love it when people ask me questions I can actually answer.

The photo of AE being "sworn in" was the subject of a newspaper article in the San Jose Mercury News on July 5, 1995 following the publications of Brink's incredibly bad book.  It seems that one Bill Palmer of Novato, CA has a photo almost identical to the one in the book (apparently taken at the same event) which shows his father, Captain Burdette Palmer, U.S. Army Air Corps, pinning wings on AE at Crissy Field at the Presidio in San Francisco in 1928.  AE had just made headlines for her first transatlantic flight (as a passenger) and was receiving honors from many quarters.  At that time it was not at all uncommon for military units to make celebrities honorary members and, indeed, the roster of the 381st Service Squadron (of which Palmer was the commanding officer) lists Amelia earhart as an "honorary major."

As for the leading edges of the wings of c/n 1055 - as far as I can see from the many photos taken of the airplane fromthe time of its delivery in July 1936 until its disappearance in July of 1937, the wings were unpainted until January or February of '37 when the orange (edged in black lines) was applied. Some later Lockheed 10s were fitted with de-icer boots, but not this one.  The leading edges of the horizontal stabilizer and vertical fins, however, featured what appear to be black rubber anti-abrasion boots.

Back in 1995 we ran a two-part piece in TIGHAR Tracks which traced the evolution of the Earhart Electra.  We should probably put it up on the website.

Regarding the Third Estate - thank you for an excuse to look this up (actually Pat looked it up).  Just prior to the French Revolution, the realm was said to be comprised of four "estates":

The First Estate was the clergy
The Second Estate was the nobility
The Third Estate was the popular majority - the people.
The Fourth Estate was the press.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:53:59 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: ROV deployment of Earhart search

It might be pointed out that the exact coordinates of both the Titanic and Bismarck were well known, the only area to be searched was the distance from that point on the surface to the furthest point that the wreckage would have "glided" on its descent to the bottom.  The problem with the Electra, if it went down at sea is WHERE?  If the Navy and Coast Guard had the info they could have steamed to that site immediately and not had to search 100's of 1000's of miles of ocean for the plane.  THAT is a vast difference and IF AE/FN went down SOMEWHERE in the ocean, it would take about a 1000 ROV's a few 100 years to search the area thoroughly.  And IF AE/FN DIDN'T make it to Niku, there is ZERO chance of ever finding the final resting place of the Electra.  I am not shouting, just EMPHASIZING.  But really, if you put the numbers on paper, it is a sure bet that the likelihood of finding one lone plane whose final contact with the surface world isn't known within a 1000 miles, is astronomical.

LTM,
Dave Bush
#2200

****************************************************************

From Ric

I can't argue with that.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:11:12 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Historic Preservation

> This gets to the heart of some very basic historic preservation issues.  I'd
> be very interested to hear some opinions on this from some of our trained
> preservationists on the forum.

I am not a trained preservationist, but would like to offer my "opinion", if I may.  Actually I am torn between two choices, and hope some of the preservationists can offer a better alternative.  On the one hand, I would like to see a "Museum" dedicated to TIGHAR and its mission of locating historic aircraft.  In that museum, it would be nice to have on display a working model Electra 10-E that could be flown around the world on tours with artifacts and/or displays describing the scientific methods employed and the results (ie the catspaw heel, the sectant box - if recovered- etc.).  On the other hand, two people perished and it seems almost irreverent to display any of the items - sort of like grave robbing.  But we have been putting such things on display for years - mummies, tomb articles, etc. What is the "correct" thing to do?  That varies with every person.  The furor surrounding artifacts taken from different countries is tremendous.  Yet, we surrounded by artifacts from dead people and dead cultures.  Airplanes exist because of the efforts of the Wright brothers, and thus are modern "artifacts", yet we don't have a problem with them.  So many things that we take for granted are so.  Great paintings abound in both private and public collections - most are the legacy of people long dead.  What about the great music of Bach, Beethoven, et al?  We are listening to the innermost being of these great composers.  Poems, original manuscripts, letters, etc.  Do we have a "right" of access to these?  Would our knowledge and understanding be diminished if we didn't have access to them?  What if we didn't have access to the writings of the great philosophers - Plato, Socrates, Charlie Brown?  You have said many times that if we don't know the past we are doomed to be children all of our lives.  These artifacts are part of the past and provide us with a link to those people and times and show us insights to their actions and thus insights to guide our future actions.  Should we go through the wreckage of airplanes? YES!  For only then can we determine ways to prevent such tragedies in the future.  But, when does it become voyeurism and when is it a monument to the human spirit of adventure and sacrifice?  Yes, I think the items should be displayed in a manner that builds up the human spirit and edifies the sacrifice that Amelia and Fred made in trying to expand the boundaries of our world.  Some of what they did may have been for selfish purposes, as is most of human endeavor.  But also, much of their efforts were for selfless purposes and the human spirit of adventure and learning.  Why else would the TIGHAR members spend so much time and money and energy to go to a small island that is probably the arm pit of the south Pacific, if not the world. Not much glory, unless you find Earhart, and then not much chance of any great monetary reward.  Why go at all?  To expand our boundaries of knowledge and to connect to the past while showing future generations the connections to a different era.  And more than I can express through mere words.

Love to Mother,
Dave Bush
#2200
**************************************************************

From Ric

I think you hit the nail on the head when you speak of the feeling of connection with the past.  That is the almost magical function of historic properties.  That, I think, is why people want to bring up chunks of the Titanic.  It somehow makes them feel closer to the tragic events of that long ago night.  It's an emotional thing.

Certainly, no one would argue that we should not exhibit, study  and enjoy the works of great artists and thinkers.  Preservation questions arise there when we consider whether to "restore" something like the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

As for airplane wreckage - it is hard to argue that studying the wreckage of a 60-some year old accident could contribute anything to modern air safety. Like the Titanic stuff, it is primarily a catalyst for an emotional connection with the past.  Whether or not to disturb a wreck is usually decided by economic rather than ethical factors.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:13:45 EST
From:         Colette
Subject:      Re: Argosy and its ilk

There are a lot of great articles in some of those mags too,eh? Like the articles on the Titanic and Antique Aircraft in the Aircraft Musiums about the Naval Ships like the USS Lextington AVT/CVT  16 as well as the USS Lexington  2,  and last but not least everyones favorite sports columns too, like the Base Ball, Basket Ball, Foot Ball ,  Soccer, and Rugby too.

Colette
*************************************************************

From Ric

But pretty much off topic.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:17:36 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: flotation experiment

>We have found  what we have been searching for. The smoking
>gun right there in our wife's hand.

Personally I don't want to be anywhere in the state if my wife has a  gun in her hand, smoking or not!  And too much booze ruins the experience anyway.

Love to Mother of Invention,
Dave Bush
#2200

***************************************************************

From Ric

I know, I started this but could we, like, get back on topic?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:26:53 EST
From:         Mike Cundiff
Subject:      Historic preservation

Ric writes:

>I'm baffled by why anyone would want to do that. (raise a chunk of the
>Titanic)

The stern hull section that were raised by the "salvor in possesion", is without a doubt a permanent reminding focal point of that tragedy . All that can testify to man's arrogance and absolute defiance of GOD by proclaiming a ship "unsinkable" or even "pratically unsinkable", is this 20 x 30 section of 7/8" steel plating that wore torn to bit's like shards of paper.

If indeed the remains of Earhart's Lockheed Electra are waiting to be found in 17,000' of Pacific Ocean then many answers to long enduring controversies/theories will finally be at last concluded . IMHO, a more fitting place for any remains of the Earhart aircraft should be right alongside Lindberg's "Spirt", because like Lindy,  Earhart was of the same divine, only her fate was to be of a different nature.

I personally feel a Gov't cover-up are the answers we are seeking, but it is my hope that Mr. Gillespie will prove different.

Mike Cundiff
Carson City, NV

***************************************************************

From Ric

Gosh, and all along I thought it was an iceberg that sank the Titanic.  I'll have to review Earhart's writings to see if she might have said something that accounts for her demise.  And come to think of it, I'm probably already dead meat.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:59:12 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Industrial Espionage

There was a claim by the late Howrd Hughes (testimony before a Senate committee in 1947, investigating his wartime defense contracts) that the Japanese top aeronautical engineer, Jiro Horikoshi, had "copied" the design for the "Zero" from Hughes' high speed, experimental "H-1".

After setting a transcontinental speed record (332mph) on 1/19/37 with this plane, Hughes had suggested the U.S. Army adapt the H-1 for use as a fighter plane, however his proposal was rejected & Hughes subsequently "mothballed" the plane in California.

Horikoshi's "Zero" did bear a similar resemblance to the H-1 & many of the post-war conspiracy buffs have created stories to support such contentions, even suggesting that the Japanese somehow tried to make a "deal" with Hughes after Earhart's disappearance, in which he supposedly supplied them with plans & specifications for the plane in order to "buy" her freedom! (Talk about ultimate conspiracy theories!!!)

By the way, i saw the same program & noticed something I'd not seen in past viewings.  In all the film clips up to & during the "world flight", the starboard side of the Electra clearly shows "two" windows amidship, however I believe on one of the last clips (possibly the one at Lae) I noticed that one of these windows was either missing or had been covered-up.  Are my "aging" eyes deceiving me or did someone else notice the same thing?

Don Neumann
**************************************************************

From Ric

Nothing wrong with your eyes Don.  Early in 1937, as part of the preparations for the first world flight attempt, a non-standard window was added to the starboard side of NR16020.  The glass appears to have been flat and this was probably intended as a place where Manning (Earhart's first choice as navigator) would take celestial sightings.  The window was retained after the repairs which followed the Luke Field accident but, for some reason, was skinned over prior to the airplane's departure from Miami on June 1st.  We don't know why.

Many have alleged that this was a removable hatch, but it is clear from the photos that the window is not there prior to Jan/Feb 1937, is there up until the departure from Miami, and is visible only as a a gradually darkening patch throughout the world flight.

My speculation is that Noonan didn't feel he needed it (he rode up front most of the time, contrary to legend) and on the flight across the country to Miami decided for some reason that it was a liability.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:03:57 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: PING PONG BALLS

>Hmmm.  While we're on the topic,  I wonder what really happened to Amelia
>Eahart?

You didn't let me finish.  I meant to add, "Pray, what else floats in water?"

Love to Monty
Russ
**************************************************************

From Ric

Churches, apples and very small rocks.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:06:42 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Industrial Espionage

Jerry Hamilton wrote:

>Just saw the History channel's special "Mysteries of Amelia". Whew! Now I
>know why the Zero was such an excellent fighter.

Hush! I don't get the History Channel! My bro-in-law taped the program for me, but I haven't seen it yet! Don't give away the ending!

(Aw, go ahead, tell me... do they disappear again?)

For the newbies on the list, Ric, how about repeating the message of a couple months ago, werein someone surmises that Fred and Amelia are on an island waiting for us, and Amelia says "Fred, get your shoes on, they're here!" or something like that.

Regarding viagra, Ric, it's that stuff that only makes some people taller...

Tom #2179
**************************************************************

From Ric

I'm supposed to tell a joke to which you have already given the punch line?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:15:09 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: ROV deployment of Earhart search

> Consequently, we're not much inclined to consider ROVs to search where we
> think the airplane probably ain't.

Of course, Mike (Ruiz) and the NLC* contingent might argue that there is a need to search the deep water immediately surrounding Niku.  In any case, deploying ROVs to find the Electra would still be a very tricky (and expensive) proposition at best.

For comparison, just imagine that someone MAY have dropped a mobile home somewhere in Yosemite National Park.  You have to search for it by flying at 15,000  feet above a solid cloud deck towing a TV camera at the end of a long line...and, by the way, it's NIGHT.

Dr. Ballard's job was made easier (read "possible") because in his case it was more like looking for the Empire State Building that someone had first smashed into a million pieces and then dropped them from two miles up.

If Elgen Long (or anyone else) wants to try using the technology that found the Titanic and Bismark to locate Earhart's Electra, I wish him luck - but, I sure ain't gonna pay for it.

LTM,
Russ

P.S.  This past summer, Dr. Ballard spent a month or more criss-crossing the site of the Battle of Midway.  His expedition team found the wreckage of the carrier U.S.S. Yorktown...but NOT the destroyer that sank right along side it, nor any of the four Japanese carriers, nor any of the scores of aircraft also lost in the area.

"Stuff is hard to find."
  -old TIGHAR saying
***************************************************************

From Ric

And as Dr. Ballard has repeatedly demonstrated, it's hard to find stuff that isn't even lost in the first place.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:19:38 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Exploited Electra

Ric wrote:

>Once we find the
>airplane it will no longer be protected and we will have to recover it to
>insure that it is not exploited.

The plane should be recovered.  Unless you find their skeletons sitting in it, then that gets tricky.

Hopefully, some financial benefit can be gained by the Electra (or whats left of it) being visited at museums or wherever.

Hopefully, some of the proceeds will be directed to the good people of Kiribati to improve their lot in life.

Love to Lambrecht,
NLC*
**************************************************************

From Ric

As we have pointed out many times, if the airplane is on (or near) Niku it belongs to the Republic of Kiribati and its disposition is up to them.  I agree with Mike that its recovery, conservation and exhibition should benefit the people of Kiribati.

But first we gotta find the sucker.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:33:11 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Off-topic but what the h...

I thought the TIGHARs may enjoy this.  I got it from one of the guys in the Civil Air Patrol.

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149

By Phyllis Moses

> Twas the night before Christmas, and out on the ramp,
> Not an airplane was stirring, not even a Champ.
> The aircraft were fastened to tie downs with care
> in hopes that come morning, they all would be there.
>
> The fuel trucks were nestled, all snug in their spots,
> while peak gusts from two-zero reached 39 knots.
> And I at the fuel desk, now finally caught up,
> had just settled comfortable down on my butt.
>
> When over the radio, there arose such a clatter,
> I turned up the scanner to see what was the matter.
> A voice clearly heard over static and snow,
> asked for clearance to land at the airport below.
>
> He barked out his transmission so lively and quick,
> I could have sworn that the call sign he used was "St.Nick".
> Away to the window I flew like a flash,
> Sure that it was only Horizon's late Dash.
>
> Then he called his position, and there could be no denial,
> "This is St Nicholas One and I'm turning on final."
> When what to my wondering eyes should appear,
> A Rutan sleigh, and eight Rotax reindeer.
>
> He flew the approach on glideslopes he came,
> As he passed all fixes, he called them by name:
> "Now Ringo! Now Tolga! Now Trini and Bacun!
> On Comet! On Cupid! "What pills was he takin'?
>
> Those last couple of fixes left controllers confused,
> they called down to the office to give me the news,
> The message they left was both urgent and Dour:
> "When Santa lands, could he please call the tower?"
>
> He landed like silk, with the sled runners sparking,
> Then I heard "Exit at Charlie," and "Taxi to parking."
> So up to the offices the coursers they flew,
> with loud airplane noise, and St. Nicholas, too.
>
> He stepped out of the sleigh, but before he could talk,
> I had run out to him with my best set of chocks.
> He was dressed all in fur, which was covered with frost
> and his beard was all blackened from reindeer exhaust.
>
> His breath smelled like peppermint, gone slightly stale
> and he smoked on a pipe, but he didn't inhale.
> He had a broad face and his airpits were smelly,
> and his boots were as black as a cropdusters belly.
>
> He was chubby and plump, a right jolly old fool,
> and he kindly informed me that he needed some fuel.
> A wink of his eye and a twist of his toes,
> led me to know he was desperate to powder his nose.
>
> I spoke not a word, but went straight to my work,
> and I filled up the sleigh, but I spilled like a jerk.
> He came out of the restroom with a sigh of relief,
> and then picked up a phone for a flight service brief.
>
> And I thought, as he silently scribed in his log,
> That with Rudolph, he could land in eighth-mile fog.
> Next, he completed his preflight, from the front to the rear,
> then he put on his headset, and I heard him yell "Clear!"
>
> And laying a finger on his push-talk,
> He called up the tower for his clearance and squawk.
> "Straight out on two-zero," the tower called forth,
> "and watch for a Cessna straight in from the North."
>
> But I heard him exclaim, 'ere he climbed in the night,
> Happy Christmas to all, I have traffic in sight."

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:48:36 EST
From:         Bob Marden
Subject:      Re: Special Welcome

Ric, Thank you and the others who labor so tirelessly to solve the mystery of Amelia Earhart.  I have always been fascinated by her disappearance, but I don't have any expertise to contribute.  Anyone who knows about scientific research knows that you all are following the scientific method.  Findings don't come overnite.  Stay in there even though it might be a long time.  Best wishes to all for a happy Christmas, a merry New Year.  Sincerely, Bob Marden

**************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Bob.  Believe it or not, it'a lot easier to find the expertise we need than it is to find the funding we need.  No one needs to feel that they don't have anything of value to contribute to this effort.  Simply becoming a member of TIGHAR is an important step toward helping us find the answers we're all seeking. Numbers mean strength for any organization.  We don't want to be small and elite.  We want to be BIG and elite.

The forum has proven to be a powerful research tool and a great source of new TIGHAR members.  A while back someone on the forum put it best.  "The people will find Amelia."

Love to Mother and a Merry Christmas,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:52:08 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      TIGHAR museum

Hey, I liked Dave Bush's idea of a TIGHAR museum, but this being the 90s we will have to do it in excess.  Therefore, instead of a museum we'll have a theme park, kind of like Gettysburg. Except at the TIGHAR's Den we'll have rides, at least one of which MUST involve water.

Ride one will be The Crash Landing where the parkgoers are strapped into a replica of an Electra cockpit and then run over a harrow two miles roller coaster before slamming (actually gliding, if the software works as designed!!) into a pool of warm salty water.  Talk about realistic . . . -m-m-m-m!

The second ride would be to put the participants in the replica Lockheed and then leave them there for 20 hours, not allowing them to move about or go to the bathroom, make them eat bad food and drink stale water and smell everyone's b.o., and mix in ample gas and oil fumes and constant noise and vibration that would make a saint cry.  NOW we're having funs, kids!

This is only the start.  I'm sure the possibilities are endless... how about one where the parkgoers are "captured" by a menacing foreign military force, or ... well, you get the idea.

I know, its Christmas and I shouldn't be so-o-o- cynical, but then ...

LTM
Dennis McGee $0149

**************************************************************

From Ric

We can always count on Dennis .....
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 19:36:02 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Four Estates

> Just prior to the French Revolution, the realm was said to
> be comprised of four "estates":
> The First Estate was the clergy
> The Second Estate was the nobility
> The Third Estate was the popular majority - the people.
> The Fourth Estate was the press.

And then there is the fifth column.... Even though this is quite off-topic, I don't know if you mind me asking, but what were the other four columns and were they related in any way to the four estates view of the world?

Thomas Van Hare
***************************************************************

From Ric

What is this?  Trivial Pursuit?

During the Spanish Civil War, facist revolutionary General Gonzalo Queipo de Llano y Sierro had four military columns advancing through Madrid and described his supporters within the civilian population as his "fifth column." No relationship to the Four Estates.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 19:37:54 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

From Dave Bush  2200:

> On the other hand, two people perished and it seems almost
> irreverent to display any of the items - sort of like grave
> robbing.

This has been discussed at great length among the Titanic artifact recovery folks who are putting together (and in fact already have) a fixed and a travelling exhibit of Titanic-related items -- the trumpet, dishes, eyeglasses, the "Big Piece", etc. It may be valuable to go over  their discussions, arguments, and conclusions, as I rather expect that the AE/FN discussion would follow almost exactly along the lines that those developed over the years.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 19:47:59 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Flotation issues

Richard E. Gillespie wrote:

> Believe it or not - probably.  I think that the most important
> objective of the Earhart Project is to answer the question of
> what became of AE and Fred. The Electra itself is no more
> historically significant as an artifact than is the Titanic.
> It's recovery and exhibition - just like the recovery and
> exhibition of a chunk of the Titanic - is nothing more than
> morbid fascination.

Although I am not a trained preservasionist, I am a skilled marketing and advertising consultant as well as an aviation historian. As such, I can only point out the obvious historic value of the wreck (for educational purposes in a museum setting) and, more importantly, the financial aspects involved.

Looking at strictly bottomline issues here, the Electra wreck would draw visitors, increasing support for TIGHAR and its ventures. If you don't take it home, someone else will, and they will do so for straight financial reasons -- they can profit from it. Either way, once discovered, you can be certain that the wreck will be recovered unless it is financial unfeasible to do so -- and even then, it still might be. As such, would you want to leave it there, if it was accessible, or bring it back? It becomes a question of control -- who would be better suited to have the wreck, a group like TIGHAR or some ill-begotten business venture exploiting it for its raw cash value. Of course, it may be recovered by a benevolent business or government group instead, but all bets are off if you don't bring it home yourself.

Just some food for thought.

Thomas Van Hare
***************************************************************

From Ric

I agree entirely.  It's important to recognize that the airplane, if it's on or near Niku, belongs to the Republic of Kiribati.  Having said that, I do not pretend to think for one moment that treasure hunters would hesitate to steal the wreckage once its location was known.  If and when we find the airplane, or whatever is left of it, it will be necessary to recover it as soon as a responsible conservation plan can be developed and approved by the government of Kiribati.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:12:13 EST
From:         Jack
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Ric,

This will be my last comment on the matter. It amazes me that you have the capability to determine a persons technical capabilities from radio logs. That would be like me saying that after reading the results of THREE Niku expeditions the expedition leader doesn't know what the heck he's doing. Sorry Ric, I can't buy into your explanation. Anyway, you and Pat have a nice holiday season

Dog six king,
Jack, #2157

**************************************************************

From Ric

>after reading the results of THREE Niku expeditions the expedition
>leader doesn't know what the heck he's doing.

I think that most of the team would agree with you.

Happy Holidays
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:21:37 EST
From:         Mike Cundiff
Subject:      Re: ROV deployment of Earhart search

> It might be pointed out that the exact coordinates of both the Titanic
>and Bismarck were well known, the only
>area to be searched was the distance from that point on the surface to the
>furthest point that the wreckage would have
>"glided" on its descent to the bottom

Not neccessarily so, in fact Texas oilman Jack Grimm (AKA: "Cadillac Jack") spent millions of dollars on three separate expeditions to try to locate Titanic's final resting place, only to come up empty handed.  After exhausting their resources the French IFREMER team abandoned their part of the joint effort, and with less than a week remaining Dr. Ballard with the company of Jean Louis Michael discovered the wreck of Titanic.  Ballard also spent a great amount of time in locating the "Yorktown" who's remains are also at an enormous depth in the vast Pacific.

I feel that if a serious "deepwater" search were undertaken of a general area when AE/FN picked up the clear messsages from "ITASCA" yet......."can not see you", which I think had them in the general area, then perhaps a substantial amount of debris or large portion of Electra could be found.

As an aside, Jack Grimm came within one-half mile of locating Titanic.

Mike Cundiff
Carson City, NV
****************************************************************
From Ric

When last heard from at 08:43 local time AE and FN (according to our calculations) had roughly four hours of fuel left.  At 130 knots that gives you a circle (with an unknown center point) with a radius of roughly 510 nautical miles.  I'm not sure how long it would take to search that much ocean bottom, but I'd suggest that you pack a lunch.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:24:03 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Re: ROV deployment

Sorry to extend a clearly off topic subject but I had to correct Dave Bush's comments about the Titanic and Bismarck:

The precise sinking position of neither the Titanic or the Bismarck was known before Dr. Ballard found the wrecks:-

In the case of the Titanic, it was found the the navigator who calculated the position of the ship when sending out the SOS whilst the ship was sinking in fact got the position wrong by over 10 nautical miles due to the fact he hadn't used a time correctly adjusted for the ships passage westward (i.e. retarded).  When Dr. Ballard found the Titanic, it was at the extreme north-east end of an already extended search area.

In the sinking of the Bismarck, Dr. Ballard had the three different positions recorded for the sinking from the four British ships on the scene of the sinking. The distance between these three reported positions was as much as 6 miles. The Bismarck, when eventually found, wasn't at (or near) any of these three positions.

LTM
Simon #2120
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:30:15 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Electra recovery

Ric, not being a trained preservationist, but more of an interested (read fascinated) bystander, let me jump in.  I cannot help but think that had Ballard "recovered" the Titanic, he would have "preserved" it. I believe that if TIGHAR "recovers" the Electra, it WILL be "preserved". Your point is well taken, because, as we all know, the Titanic is being scavenged (alas), and I am firmly convinced that if you find the Electra and announce it WITHOUT recovering it, there will be those who will swarm to the area to get it.  It seems to me that the trick may be to utilize the "exploitation" aspect to support/fund the "preservation" aspect.  The Spruce Goose is exploited (I saw it when it was in California) and preserved at the same time.  Since so much of our history has been junked in the name of "progress", I think we have to do whatever we reasonably can to preserve everything we have left in the way of these machines.  After all, the machines are the tangible link to the people (men and women) who are now mostly gone forever. Find it and grab it!
ltm, jon

***************************************************************

From Ric

As I've said before, we can't and won't do anything without the permission of the owner - the Republic of Kiribati.  Also, assuming that we're fortunate enough to find a substantial amount of wreckage, there are huge logistical problems associated with recovery and conservation.  This is an issue which will require careful planning with the cooperation of the appropriate authorities.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:48:19 EST
From:         Amanda Dunham
Subject:      Language, Flotation, etc

Ric, I've got a couple of questions.  First, regarding your message:

>I suspect that she had a good enough sense of humor to join in the fun but I
>also think that if we caught her at a bad moment she could rip us apart with
>language that would blow your monitor.

I've heard others imply that AE had a mouth on her, but that quality hasn't been mentioned in the biographies I've read (and I don't count the bad ones, like Doris Rich's).  Are there documented instances of AE having a blue hissy fit in front of witnesses, or is this lady-like-legend backlash? Or are people just confusing Amelia with Pancho Barnes???

The other question regards NR16020.  I figure it's probably on/around Niku, but I'm curious.  Assuming they ditched and assuming no damage (!?!), just how watertight might the Electra have been?  I'm guessing door, hatch, and window seals might leak, but beyond that I don't know what parts of the cockpit and cabin would admit water.  Were there vents of some kind?  And I'm probably not the only non-tech on the forum who's wondering.  Could you maybe explain some of the possibilities?

So if she weighs the same as a duck, then she's made of wood...
Happy Holidays
Amanda Dunham

And the conspiracists would be from The Society for Putting One Theory on Top of Another

****************************************************************

From Ric

As far as Amelia's linguistic skills are concerned, we're really in the realm of anecdote and folklore.  Without a diary that records a specific incident, I don't know how you'd document something like that.  We know that Nixon could turn the air blue because tapes exist, but in the case of AE almost everything we know about her as an individual comes through the filter of her promoter/husband.  As with most famous people, she had her enemies and detractors.  What was she really like?  I never met the lady.  Anything I say is a guess.

Was the Electra more or less watertight?  Aside from the actual tanks, I think it would leak like a sieve.  There were air vents, inspection plates and fuel drains all over the wings and fuselage.  Unpressurized airplanes are often not very good at keeping even the rain out.  I've sat in many a cockpit in a rainstorm and gotten soaked.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:55:13 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Conspiracy Theory 201

It just dawned on me!  Boy, do I feel stupid.  There really is a government conspiracy to cover up the Earhart case.  By enlisting people to put forth all types of covert operation conspiracies, the government has pulled attention away from their true purpose - covering up their mistakes in the disappearance and search for Earhart!  All those people putting forth the other conspiracy theories are just puppets of the government.  Probably paid big bucks by big brother to divert our attention from the truth.  Even the "lost at sea" types are really a part of a much bigger cover up.  Because the government doesn't want Earhart "found" they have hired these people to fabric stories to help them with the real cover up.  If everyone believes that she went down at sea, no need to search elsewhere.  If you don't search anywhere else, you find Amelia or the truth - that the government didn't give her the right type of equipment or trained personnel and then botched the search for her after the fact.  WOW! Talk about conspiracies - this one takes the cake.

LTM,
Dave Bush
#2200
***************************************************************
From Ric

There was, in fact, a conscious effort on the part of the Coast Guard to promote the idea that Earhart had gone down at sea shortly after her last radio transmission.  If there was never a chance to save her the failed search could not be faulted.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 21:01:11 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

The Earhart/Noonan legacy (thus far) has been engulfed in controversy from the moment  the last radio message from the Electra was received. Motion pictures, TV dramatizations & innumerable books have been published (most containing little in the way of demonstrable evidence to support the many theories as to what actually happened to the Electra & it's crew) to try & obtain what we today refer to as "closure", for a tragic event that is over 60 years old.

What has attracted me to this forum has been the dedication of the TIGHAR organization & it's many supporters,  to a search for the true facts surrounding the Earhart/Noonan flight & the stubborn unwillingness to settle for anything less!

The accumulation of artifacts is immaterial when viewed in light of finally determining the true facts surrounding the final hours of the Earhart/Noonan flight & the subsequent demise of the Electra's crew.

Since A.E. once declared (her pre-nuptial letter to her husband) she had no desire to be "caged", even in the most attractive of cages, I don't believe she would have looked with any favor upon having her memorabilia or artifacts from her final flight on display in any museum; rather I suspect she would have opted to have such remnants remain where they fell at the end of her journey & let the rest of the world think instead upon the courage, faith & determination it took for two human beings to undertake such a mission & that even the seeming failure of such mission was merely opening yet another door to the future of aviation, in which she had long expressed great confidence.

In many respects, A.E. has remained, over these many years a very mysterious personage, at times taking on almost mystical proportions, so it would not surprise me (in spite of all our best efforts) that the final piece of Ric's "puzzle" (or Tom Couch's "smoking-gun") might forever remain free of our grasp, perpetuating forever the final mystery of Amelia Earhart. (I know this is pure heresy for any aircraft accident investigators worth their salt!)

Don Neumann
*************************************************************

From Ric

Amelia-worship aside, Don brings up an interesting point.  Say you disappeared on your way home from work and your fate became a great mystery.  Then one day, many years later, your smashed car was found in the bushes at the bottom of an embankment.  Would you want the wreck displayed as a tribute to your memory?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 21:03:35 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Industrial Espionage

Thanks for the assurance that my old eyes are still 'ok'.

Have you ever considered the possibility that the window "patch" could be the piece of airplane "skin" that you recovered on Niku , since it didn't seem to fit any of the other areas of comparable Electra 10(s)?

Don Neumann
***************************************************************

From Ric

Don't I wish?  But no such luck.  Rivet pattern is all wrong.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 21:06:05 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Historic preservation

There is one significant point which occurs to me as the result of the sinking of the Titanic, namely perceptual inaccuracies which abound in anecdotal accounts.  A prime example of this is the fact that the Titanic broke in two while sinking as the result of stresses near an expansion joint in the hull superstructure. Yet only one survivor's account (that of Jack Thayer, Jr.) indicated that this took place. Amazingly, despite hundreds of survivors' accounts, this fact is seemingly lost in most of them. The Titanic has been one of MY pet projects since 1966, when I read Arthur Lord's "A Night To Remember." Even film accounts of the Titanic's sinking prior to Dr. Robert Ballard's discovery of the wreck in two sections omit the breaking of the ship in two. In 1986, I wrote to Dr. Ballard and sent him photocopies of Jack Thayer, Jr.'s account of the ship breaking in two, which Thayer even illustrated(The same illustrations appeared in Dr. Ballard's subsequent book on the subject.). Dr. Ballard wrote back, thanking me for the information and for my interest, which was far more than I expected from such a busy scientist at such a hectic time. In any event, the moral of the story is that anecdotal information is often replete with inaccuracies, especially as more time passes, yet what may seem to be the most miniscule or outnumbered account of an event may possess within itself some grain of truth which may subsequently be corroborated. Therefore, be archaeological packrats, as it were! Don't discard anything until it can be proven to be useless, and maybe even not then, due to implied research! (Impracticality does not equal uselessness, either.) I guess I'm just a purist at heart, especially where eclecticism is concerned (how's THAT for an oxymoron?).

Happy Holidays To All!
Dr. Gene Dangelo   #2211
:)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1998 21:12:57 EST
From:         John Marks
Subject:      Re: Exploited Electra

> As we have pointed out many times, if the airplane is on (or near) Niku it
> belongs to the Republic of Kiribati and its disposition is up to them.  I
> agree with Mike that its recovery, conservation and exhibition should benefit
> the people of Kiribati.
>
> But first we gotta find the sucker.

With all due respect:

Really?

My experience with aviation law is limited to defending lost-luggage claims by adroit use of the Warsaw Convention, but that was during a previous reincarnation.

However, my first-thing-in-the-morning guesstimate would have been that the aircraft would be the property of the insurance carrier that paid the claim on the loss.  Which response of course assumes that there was insurance on the aircraft.

In the absence of insurance, I would assume that the aircraft was still owned by its owner at the time of its loss.

Law-school-style hypothetical:  Jacob von Marx and his mistress are traveling incognito and cross-crountry in a Rolls-Royce Phantom II.  As they are going down a dirt road in a United States Park, a landslide buries them and the car.  (Somebody has read too much Clive Cussler.) Mrs. von Marx assumes that her husband has returned to Germany, searches for them there, and gives up.  Sixty years later, geologists looking for the perfect rock to carve into the Gingrich Monument discover the buried Rolls-Royce and trace its ownership through motor vehicle registration information.  They then do genealogical research and end up on my doorstep.  I think that there is litle question that I am entitled to claim great-grandad's corpse for burial.  Why don't I get the Rolls too?  I'd be rather put out if I didn't, even if it was a Springfield-Mass. built KND kitcar.

Now, if ignorance is bliss, I verge on extasy, but are you telling me that Bill Clinton gets the Rolls?  Like he gets the girls?  Cause it was found on gummint property?

Mutatis mutandis, I would appreciate enlightenment, especially on the insurance issues.
--
John Marks

***************************************************************

From Ric

First of all, there was no insurance on the airplane.

Second, we're talking about a loss on land owned by a sovereign foreign power.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:06:02 EST
From:         Mike Cundiff
Subject:      Postscript to ROV search

I just wanted to add a remark Dr. Ballard made preceeding his accomplishment of finding Titanic.  Ballard shared "It's like trying to find (Titanic) a needle in a haystack".

One thing that varies from the abyss of the North Atlantic and the South Pacific are the calirity at those depths.  I recall reading that Ballard could see nearly across the entire flight deck of "Yorktown", while at the Titanc site and up-close to the parted stern section he reported the propellors were buried.  However in 1987 the IFREMER team proved different.

If a sincere deep-sea effort area surrounding the islands (Marsh., Nik., How., etc.) were to be mounted, then just perhaps the secrets that the Pacific Ocean guards, will too be unveiled.

May the Christmas Spirit be with us all.............

Mike Cundiff
Carson City, NV
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:02 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Electra recovery

I'd like to make a quick correction of a name in my last posting: the author of "A Night To Remember" and its sequel, "The Night Lives On," was, of course Walter Lord, not Arthur Lord. For some reason, I was thinking of the name of Captain Arthur Rostron of the Carpathia (which picked up Titanic's survivors) when I was typing Lord's name, and somehow intermingled the two! I'm ready for a holiday! Sorry about that little mixup!

Gene Dangelo  #2211
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:09 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Electra recovery

I agree with Ric that the Electra should be left in it's current state, less the human remains, if any.  The problem being that once the location is known, scavengers will scurry to collect what historical artifacts they can remove from the crash site. These would indeed fetch a price from collectors, and the race would be on to gather the entire airframe and it's contents. My suggestion would be to photograph the crash site thoroughly, anchor some type of memorial plaque in the location, then recover the wreckage. It could be displayed tastefully as a monument to the flight, Amelia, Fred, and George, at the Oakland airport.  I'm sure that it would draw many people. In addition, the display could include information about the flight, and the principles involved.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:15 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Language, flotation, etc.

I knew Pancho, and nobody could be compared with her.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:38 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

Ric wrote:

>As for airplane wreckage - it is hard to argue that studying the wreckage of a
>60-some year old accident could contribute anything to modern air safety.
>Like the Titanic stuff, it is primarily a catalyst for an emotional connection
>with the past.  Whether or not to disturb a wreck is usually decided by
>economic rather than ethical factors.

The way I see it, Ric, if you find the wreckage and the bodies are not in it, then it is relatively safe to assume that they did not die in the crash. Therefore, why not display the wreckage? I really don't see any problem with putting a major portion of the wreckage in a museum somewhere. As you said, once the wreckage is found, you'll have to salvage it in order to protect it. What are you going to do, lock it in your garage?

The only other option, if you find the wreckage, is to NOT tell the world you found it.

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:23 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Conspiracy Theory 201

You're going pretty far afield here. The government has one problem covering up mistakes, and that's lawyers suing them for their mistakes. Very public trials would take place if the government and plaintiffs squared off in something so universally known as, say, the Earhart accident. Yes, the plethora of crash scenarios is bewildering, but believe me, if the government was 2% negligent in any matter pertaining to AE, they would have been hit with a big lawsuit.

***************************

From Pat--

I am trying to dredge up my dim and distant memories of Civil Procedure from law school..... but if I remember correctly, the federal government is by definition immune from such suits. I do not believe that it is possible to sue, for instance, the Coast Guard, for failing to rescue. (Congressional hearings are a different matter). It is also worth noting that in 1937 people really weren't as suit-happy as they are now.

LTM
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:43 EST
From:         Mike Cundiff
Subject:      Nikumaroro, the abyss, and Rick G.

Ric writes in part.....

> In our opinion, based upon the
>research we have done, we think that it is most most probably on the island of
>Nikumaroro (or at least a significant body of wreckage is there).
>Consequently, we're not much inclined to consider ROVs to search where we
>think the airplane probably ain't.

Thanks for your reply, and just today while X-Mas shopping I passed by a shoe store, and to my surprise in the window shown an ad for "Bilt-Right"  shoes. First thing that comes to mind is your segment of the A & E documentary where you are displaying a "Bilt-Right" sole dating from the 30's........:-)  :-) Also after first learning of Rick's findings on Nick., my interest in A. Earhart was moved up a level, and eventually lead to my entering "TIGHAR" about my search engines.  Thank You.

Anyhow what are the dimiensions of Nikumaroro island?  What presents the biggest problem during searches?  ( I presume overgrowth of vegitation).  Are your (TIGAHAR) searches the most extensive to date?  And why does, beside the thus far recovered items (aluminum, shoe, cable, plexi-glass, etc.) TIGHAR feel so confident that the plane crashed upon Nikumaroro?   Are their compelling facts that lead away from a theory/s that AE/FN may have consumed all fuel, and ditched the aircraft?

********************************

From Pat

I don't really want to type out a precis of 10 years of research here. If you will peruse our web site in depth you'll find the answers to most, if not all, of your questions.

********************************

I would like to add that, of all the searches mounted since the dissapearance of AE/FN, and my subsequential understanding of the efforts to solve the mystery, I strongly support the findings of Rick. G and "TIGHAR".  I only wish the best of luck and success to Rick. G and "TIGHAR" with their endeavors to conclude one of the greatest mysteries of the 20th century.

Sometime after Christmas I will join membership to "TIGHAR".

Mike Cundiff
Carson City, NV
(BTW, I do not want to overstay my welcome, are there post limits to the forum?)

*********************************

No, we haven't had to put a line limit on posters. Have fun.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:49 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      TIGHAR's Den

When planning your visit to the TIGHARs' DEN, please allow six to ten days for travel to and from the park.  Act now and get the off-season rate of only $8,000 per day.

We are proud to announce that with the arrival of winter comes the Grand Opening of our newest theme area "Newfound-land" featuring the thrilling "Tent-A-Whirl."  Riders are seated inside a tent, then run through an industrial car wash while subjected to the blast of an authentic jet engine. Hang on for excitement!

Come mealtime, be sure and visit the "Crab Shack" or stop by "Lai's Fijian Galley" for some of his special tuna-and-baked bean sandwhiches with just a pinch of   sand 'n ants - or maybe some balogna w/barbeque sauce and his world-famous spaghetti pie?  You can wash it all down with a piping hot canteen of "Ric's Own" Clorox Water.  And How 'bout some crushed Oreos for desert - Woodsman/ NASCAR legend Dennis McGee says, "they're my favorite vegetable."

One "Juicy" orange soda will be available at the end of the day on a first come-first served basis.  Coca-cola can be purchased at the park entrance for $9.00 a glass.  Want something stronger - come down to "Noonan's Tavern" for your choice of Fiji Bitter or Fiji Bitter.  The truly adventurous can sample some of "Dr. Tommy's Killer Punch" or sneak on down to "Smuggler's Cove" for a round of illicit cheeseburgers and Margaritas.

Souvenir scraps of aircraft debris and footwear will be available only on the last day of your visit.  We regret that bones, benedictine bottles, and sextant boxes (regular and black enamel) are temorarily out-of-stock.  When the supplier is located, we will let you know.

TIGHARs-DEN accepts VISA, AMEX, and OPM (Other People's Money).

Ask about our coming attractions like the "prop spin,"  "Veryl's Krazy Kites," "Flotation Day" at the pool, and "Sing with King" week.

TIGHARs-DEN is the official theme park of the PPPPA (United States Professional Ping-Pong Players Association.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:31 EST
From:         John Rayfield
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Jack wrote:

>It amazes me that you have the capability to determine
>a persons technical capabilities from radio logs.

Actually, it's often VERY easy to determine how little a person really knows about radio communications from what they say (and they often don't have to say much at all, to determine this).  I can easily see how a person's technical 'expertise' could be determined, from the radio logs that that person kept.

   John Rayfield, Jr.
   Amateur Call: WB0NZM
   President
   Rayfield Communications, Inc.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:42:58 EST
From:         Bob Cole
Subject:      Re: Historic preservation

The last point is a good one, especially the car wreck example.  In 1977, a young woman in her early 20's was going home from a restaurant late at night in Marietta, GA.  Her fiance was following in his car about 1/2 mile behind.  He got to her house ahead of her, she had disappeared.  The next day the boyfriend and a police detective walked the entire 5 mile route from the restaurant to the house, and there was no trace of her car having broken down, the girl had just vanished.  A year later a fisherman in the Chattahoochie river saw the rear wheel of a car sticking out of the water at a time when the river level was unusually low, it turns out the girl had lost control of the car on a curve, it rode up the guard rail, over the embankment and into the river, the girl was still in the car.  The detective and fiance never saw the scrapes on the guard rail because the kudzu (anyone who lives in the south knows what I'm talking about)had re-grown over the rail in less than 24 hours.  This was a huge real-life mystery in Atlanta at the time, the moral is in this case, as the case of Amelia Earhart, a private tragedy does not make for a public museum piece.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:43:06 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      AE & Titanic, a little off-topic

It seems that there are many here, myself included, who are or have been Titanic aficionados. I have gradually lost interest in the Titanic over the past few years, and I guess that's because most everything to know about that ol' barge is known. Very little of the mysterious elements of that tragedy remain to be learned (and because the whole thing has taken on a commercial taint).

Have others here turned to the AE mystery simply because we are interested in mystery, or because we are intrigued by seemingly unsolvable mysteries? Once a mystery is solved, do you cast about for another one to latch onto?

Just curious. Answer back channel if you wish.

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:43:13 EST
From:         Jim Tweedle
Subject:      Re: Glen Miller

I saw a news article several years ago in which a crewmember of a returning bomber saw a small aircraft below spinning out of control immediatly after bombs were jettisonned over the channel.  I also saw a TV documentary in which a search was being conducted on land.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:48:13 EST
From:         Tom Cook
Subject:      Re: Floatin, HK-1 Flying Boat

Remember that the operable word here is BOAT, the HK1 has no landing gear at all, so it was designed to float under all conditions, even if it were broken up.  As Dick Pingrey pointed out the 8 R4360's are the major items that would not float on their own.

The linen fabric that covered the control surfaces on the HK1 has recently been replaced with Seconite (sp?), I find that hard to justify, as they do not plan to fly it, and they are building a $20 million museum to keep it out of the weather.  Ric, what do you think?

Happy Holidays to one and all!!!

TC 2127
PS My first newyears resolution, I promise to stay on topic  (well most of the time anyway!) 
*************************

Well, the fact of re-covering it destroys the historic integrity of the property, so as far as that goes it probably doesn't matter too much what they used to replace the linen.....

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:52:31 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Exploited Electra

Ric, you would probably know better than I: do aircraft fall under Admiralty salvage laws?  If so, the finder (salvager) gets to keep it, once insurance is paid off (likely at the time of the loss).  I believe AE's plane was insured, due to international regulations and permissions, but I never have run across the payoff by the insurance company.

****************************

Well, the acquaintance we have with this body of law is based on old military aircraft, primarily; Admiralty applies pretty specifically to open seas and contemporary properties.. If we are right, there is no question of Admiralty law applying; the aircraft is on land, which is owned by someone, and is an historic artifact, which brings it directly under the purview of that nation's historic preservation rules.

The bottom line is that Kiribati thinks it owns the artifacts, so it does.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:54:47 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: Industrial Espionage

Although I have no expertise in the manufacture of 1930 era aircraft or the "patching/repair" of aluminum aircraft "skin", would it not be possible that the "rivet" configuration on the window "patch" could have been somewhat different from the rest of the aircraft skin,  if such repair patching was done outside the normal manufacturing process?

**************************

Not without changing the stringers and structural members too. The rivet patterns are detemined by the underlying structures.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:42:50 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Merry Christmas

Please accept my heart felt wishes to you and yours for a most Merry Christmas and a Peaceful and Happy New Year, my friend!!

Your musical friend,
Gene Dangelo :)
***************************************************************

From Ric

And Pat and I would like to wish the same to you and all of our Forum Friends. Let's make 1999 the Year of the TIGHAR.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:44:18 EST
From:         Deb
Subject:      Re: THS and TIGHAR

Hello. Seems like a  lot of Earhart-philes are also Titanic-philes. I don't post much on this group because I really can't add all that technical stuff. I tend to post more on the Titanic newsgroups. I've been a Titanic-phile since age four, and an Earhart one probably in my teens. My first Titanic related book was ANTR by Lord, then Maiden Voyage by G. Marcus. Can you believe the Marcus book now sells for $500?

I've been a THS member since 1985, and have the 1/350 model that I built, and I am building the 1/53 Williams Bros.' model of the Electra and hope to be a TIGHAR member as soon as I return to work at the beginning of this year. (The model will 'fly' above the Titanic model, so they can keep an eye on each other.) And, yes, I realize that *both* models are inaccurate.

Just for the record, do you have any suggestions for the best Earhart book(s) to purchase? I've read several of them, and now the Saipan and Crashed-And-Sank School ones look rather skewed.

LTM and Happy Holidays,
Deb
***************************************************************
From Ric

You'll find an extensive (although admittedly incomplete) bibliography of Earhart book and films on the TIGHAR website at
http://www.tighar.org/TTracks/12_2/film.html

I can't say that I recommend any of them but, in my opinion, the best of the lot is Mary Lovell's The Sound of Wings as long as you stop reading when she starts talking about the disappearance.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:44:43 EST
From:         Mike Cundiff
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

Don Neumann wrote:

>In many respects, A.E. has remained, over these many years a very
>mysterious personage, at times taking on almost mystical proportions, so
>it would not surprise me (in spite of all our best efforts) that the
>final piece of Ric's "puzzle" (or Tom Couch's "smoking-gun") might
>forever remain free of our grasp, perpetuating forever the final mystery
>of Amelia Earhart. (I know this is pure heresy for any aircraft accident
>investigators worth their salt!)

Here is where opionions are of a matter.  I for one don't agree with that by not finding the answers to Earhart's dissapearance the mystery will endure. For example, what if  AE/FN were captured by the Japanese?  And just say maybe an altered course was agreed upon by the US  Miliatry/CIA to inadvertenly have a "look and see" of the going on's about the Marschall Islands,  I hate to even imagine that an individual of such spirit and courage suffered such a horrible death as execution, what of the compelling evidence (The blindfold, telegram, eye-witness) that points that way?  It is my hope that her course was deviated/lost due to poor navigation, which would have resulted in increased consumption and even exhausted the supply of fuel, perhaps as "Ric" noted the plane leaked like a sieve, not allowing time for escape, or even maybe a "hard ditch" knocked the two unconsious leaving them no choice but to descend with the craft.  I would rather *known  that AE doing what she loved, not a death from being unbeknowst to what she was getting into.  Please excuse my blatent reference to Titanic, but many felt similar feelings towards Titanic, by not knowing the mystery the legacy endures, albeit, as a result of the discovery, the legacy has done nothing but excelled.  Those 1502 souls are more than names in a book, their memories are alive and flourishing in our hearts and minds stronger than ever before.

Ric wrote:

>Amelia-worship aside, Don brings up an interesting point.  Say you disappeared
>on you way home from work and your fate became a great mystery.  Then one day,
>many years later, your smashed car was found in the bushes at the bottom of an
>embankment.  Would you want the wreck displayed as a tribute to your memory?

Wanting to be noterized or taking part in History, IMHO defaults your normal or ordinary personal stature.  Chas. Lindberg tried to renege his social stature, however to no avail. And to deprive us whom have such a driving sincere interest of needing to "know" and wanting to "see" because we care and can relate to loss is, an selfish act.  My older Sister (aged 28)  was killed by a drunk driver, I know how and why she died.  The passengers of the ill fated TWA 800 and Nova Scotia flights died horrible deaths, and their familes are still needing to know,  how?

Why should such tangible reminders such as those of......  "Holocaust", "World War 1 &11", "Titanic artifacts", "Spirit of St. Louis", "Christie Mathewson's checkerboard", "Ruth's 60th HR ball,  the "Vietnam Wall", "The American flag that bears blood stains of Abraham Lincoln", be available for the human race to see and touch, so we will always be reminded and lest we never forget these happy and sad reminders of our past.

God Bless,

Mike Cundiff
Carson City, NV
***************************************************************
From Ric

If English is not your first language, allow me to complement you on your progress.  If it is, I'm sure there are some excellent remedial programs available.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 11:18:08 EST
From:         John Marks
Subject:      Re: Exploited Electra

Ric wrote:


> First of all, there was no insurance on the airplane.
>
> Second, we're talking about a loss on land owned by a sovereign foreign power.

With all due respect, I don't see that that makes any difference.  My previous hypothetical was designed to be simple, but the US nexus apparently caused some confusion.

Sweden is both sovereign and foreign.  If my father is flying his private airplane over international waters, and then is blown off course and crashes in Sweden, it would appear to me that short-term, there can be little argument that his heirs or the insurer owns the salvage righs in the aircraft and its contents.

Now, it is possible that the aircraft salvage right extinguishes with time.  I do not know which aspects of admiralty common law both apply to travel by air and were not extinguished by the Warsaw Convention of, I think, 1933.  Kiribati did not exist as a sovereignty at the time, but I believe the UK was an original signatory.  I do not know whether Kiribati is now a signatory, and if so, whether their signing is deemed "tacking" on the UK's, or was required to "relate back" to old claims and cases.

Nonetheless, I do not view it as an open and shut case.  This is in partial ignorance, of course, but not total ignorance.  I graduated law school in 1979 and the cases I later handled included not only a lot of lost-luggage and delay claims, for both US aviation insurance cartels, but also two cases involving serious personal injuries, one from a US "hard landing" aborted takeoff and another in a foreign jurisdiction.

To put the issue in another context: if the "White Bird" were to be found in Maine, and the Republic of France, the heirs of the aviators, and the insurer (this is a hypothetical, remember) all asked the State Department to hand over the wreckage, what would happen?

Stalin rhetorically asked "How many divisions has the Pope?"  There is an aspect of realpolitik to this situation.  Without doubt, the Republic of Kiribati does have the right under international law to forbid entry into its territory and also to condition entry as it sees fit.  It can say "You can come in and look only if you agree that the wreck is ours."  Fair enough.  However, interested third parties, such as the heirs of the owner of the aircraft, may have rights that TIGHAR's acts or acquiescence cannot extinguish.

Whether the passage of time or the force of international treaties has extinguished those rights is I question I must leave to a lawyer with more experience in the international law of salvage as it pertains to aircraft.  I am not prolonging this discussion to be difficult or show off.  I am curious as to whether anyone has taken a hard look at this issue, as it might become a real and pressing one at some time.

Best regards,
--
John Marks

***************************************************************

From Ric

The issue really starts and stops with what you correctly term as realpolitik.

Back in 1986 we were all set to begin the recovery of a B-17 from a swamp in Papua New Guinea when the Ministry of Tourism declared all WWII wrecks to be war memorials and tourist attractions.  There was a great deal of sputtering about who owned the airplane but in cases like this possession is 100 percent of the law.  That, of course, has not stopped aircraft salvage pirates from stealing airplanes all over the world.  Some major aviation periodicals who should know better even think it's cute.  The damage this kind of behavior has caused is incalculable. (Don't get me started.)

Any attempt to dispute with Kiribati the ownership of anything on Nikumaroro would only result in shutting down the project.  TIGHAR has always enjoyed the full cooperation and support of the Republic of Kiribati and, as in the past, anything we do on the island, or take from the island,  will be done only with their approval.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 11:22:26 EST
From:         Hugh Graham
Subject:      Glenn Miller anecdotal info.

Ric wrote:

>  I think that it has been reliably established that he got
>  aboard a C-64 Noordyun Norseman in England that was supposed to take him
>  across the Channel to France but never arrived.

Yup, a Canadian-built Noorduyn UC-64A Norseman, with a Col. Norman Baesell and a crack bad weather pilot F.O.John Morgan who were going to France to fill up some bottles with champagne, and gave Glenn a lift because he had missed his B-24H flown by Lt-Col. Robert G. Baker earlier that day, Fri. Dec 15, 1944.

Unfortunately, this Norseman had no de-icing equipment and the temp. at Twinwood Farm airfield was 34 degrees F. when they took off into the fog.  The temperature over the Eng. Channel was about 8 degrees colder, so icing could have been a factor.

An English skin-diver, Clive Ward, claimed to have found a Norseman frame in 1985 off the French coast.  No human remains were found but some papers were, and when the papers were restored they appeared to be musical arrangements by Glenn Miller.  The co-ordinates of this site were inside the WW2 bomb jettisoning zone, and an operation in support of advancing troops was aborted Dec 15/44 due to bad weather so RAF Lancasters flying at ~5000 ft jettisoned their 4,000 lb "cookies" and smaller bombs in this zone on their way back.

A bombardier from one of these Lancasters went directly to the English newpapers with his story in ~1986 claiming that a jettisoned bomb struck a low flying(~1500') small aircraft, and that he had reported this in his debriefing in 1944 but that the RAF had never made this fact public, and that he suspected censorship.  The Paris brothel story is rubbish because Col. Robt. Baker claims he was drinking with G.M. the evening of Thurs. Dec 14/44, and I have a friend who talked to the mechanic who D.I.'ed the Norseman that G.M. used.  So ice or a bomb, or both.  Makes sense to me.  HAGraham 2201
****************************************************************

From Ric

That pretty much tracks with what I remember reading in an article by British aviation historian Roy Nesbit in Aeroplane Monthly a few years ago.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 11:24:03 EST
From:         Ken Knapp
Subject:      Re: Conspiracy Theory 201

Dave Kelly wrote:

>Yes, the plethora of crash scenarios is bewildering, but
>believe me, if the government was 2% negligent in any matter pertaining
>to AE, they would have been hit with a big lawsuit.

Perhaps today the government would have been hit with a big lawsuit, but in AE's time I don't believe the world was quite as "lawsuit happy".

Ken Knapp
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 11:27:23 EST
From:         Stephanie
Subject:      Message Flood

I've been on the Earhart Forum for months now, this just happened last night - 100+ msgs.  Put a question out on your forum, see if it happened to anyone else.
***************************************************************

From Ric

Yeeowch!  Are they duplicates or what?  Anybody else get hit like this?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 11:33:24 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Electra recovery

Whatever happens, if and when the Electra is found, you should  start talking NOW with the Kiribati gov't about what to do.  The worst thing that could happen is that you find it, and both TIGHAR and Kiribati are unprepared for the onslaught on tourists, scavengers, hucksters, etc. Better you should get your act together now and formulate a plan, just in case.
***************************************************************

From Ric

The correspondence has already been initiated and we're planning a trip to Tarawa next year specifically for that purpose.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:49:31 EST
From:         Dean Alexander
Subject:      Re: Conspiracy Theory 201

> It is also worth noting that in 1937 people
> really weren't as suit-happy as they are now.

I totally agree. In 1937 lawsuits were no where near as common or frivolous as they are now. I would suspect people wouldn't have even thought of such a suit.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:49:40 EST
From:         Bob Williams
Subject:      Seasons Greetings

To All:

Happy Holidays and the best in '99!

LTM
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:49:48 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: ROV deployment of Earhart search

Dave Bush wrote:

> It might be pointed out that the exact coordinates of both the Titanic
> and Bismarck were well known, the only area to be searched was the
> distance from that point on the surface to the furthest point that the 
> wreckage would have "glided" on its descent to the bottom.

Actually, no.  I'm not sure about the Bismarck, but the position of the Titanic when she sank was always in question.  She was actually found about 23K east and 3K south of her reported position.

It's generally (but not universally) accepted that the bow section planed away somewhat after the breakup at or near the surface.  However, the stern section almost surely fell pretty much straight down.  Thus where they found the stern is darn close to where she sank.  Thus, her REPORTED position was something like 20 kilometers off.

> The problem with the Electra, if it went down at sea is WHERE?  If the Navy 
> and Coast Guard had the info they could have steamed to that site immediately
> and not had to search 100's of 1000's of miles of ocean for the plane.  THAT
> is a vast difference and IF AE/FN went down SOMEWHERE in the ocean,

Absolutely.  Compared to the data on where the Electra went down (if it did) the Titanic was pinpointed.  They "only" had to search about 800 square kilometers of ocean floor before they found her.  And that's dealing with an object over 800 feet long. that left debris over an area over a mile long, and they ran across the debris (boilers) first.

Bill
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:49:56 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

> This gets to the heart of some very basic historic preservation issues. I'd
> be very interested to hear some opinions on this from some of our trained
> preservationists on the forum.

It seems like nothing more than degrees to me.  You guys brought back bits of shoes which you hope to find were AE's.  I see it as only a degree if you found and returned the whole plane... or any part or series of parts in between.

Somewhere along the curve from "bits of shoe" to "whole plane" people get a glitch that they see as the difference between research and preservation and grave violation.

You see the same thing in Titanic circles.  At one end a large number of people would object to raising, say, the bow section, preserving it, and putting it on display.  A lot fewer people objected to recovery of shoes and suitcases.  An even smaller number objected to recover and sale of coal.

The age of the artifact has impact on people too.  Few object to the raising of an entire ship that sank with many of it's crew in the 1600's.  But people get considerably more worked up about raising a submarine sunk, also with crew, during WWII.

Ballard didn't recover anything from the Titanic, but someone else sure has.

If you do find the Electra broken up on Niku, if you don't recover the parts, someone will.  I'd kind of prefer it to be someone who'll respect it's history and preserve and display things correctly.

    - Bill
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:50:21 EST
From:         David Baker
Subject:      Re: Conspiracy Theory 201

Care for a few examples? View the movie "Afterburn",  that is a true story.

**************************************

From Pat:  Having been around the entertainment industry a good bit in the last 10 years, I know better than to rely on any information found in a film as accurate and truthful.... even had I ever heard of the film.

***************************************

 "Farewell to Manzanar" was propaganda for the Japanese  interned by the U.S. during WWII. Led by U.S. Congressman Bob Matsui, the surviving internment camp prisoners and subsequent generations sued the U.S. Government, and were awarded $24,000,000.00.

**************************************

From Pat:  This was a civil rights suit, not a liability suit. Different thing altogether, both in law and in procedure. Also, it was a suit in the 1990s, not 1930s.... which makes it very different indeed. The Civil Pro laws have changed a good bit since then, and Civil Rights legislation provides specific remedies, even against the federal government.

******************************************

Or how about the woman who sued NOAA because an unused sectional chart, found in the wreckage of her husband's plane, depicted the position of the electrical transmssion tower that the aircraft collided with was 1/8 of an inch "off"? She won $10,000,000.00!! The minor factor of the aircraft being in a zero visibility snow squall was overlooked, along with the little problem of the Sectional chart effective date being two weeks AFTER the accident.

*****************************************

From Pat:  I would have to see documentation on this. Case name and log number in the Federal Cases compilation. It's real easy for these urban legend "cases" to be bandied about by people who "know" without any verification whatsoever. This one sounds pretty unlikely--the government, and government agencies, are generally immune from product liability complaints.

******************************************

 People sue the government all the time, Pat.

*****************************************

From Pat:  Dave, people sue governments under specific statutes which provide remedies for specific complaints. Civil rights legislation allows many suits to go forward now that could not have gone forward prior to 1963. However, a failed search which was run by the military, or a failed flight which was recruited by same, does't fall into this category, so I can't see what all this has to do with Amelia, even if she was a spy. This topic is now declared to be formally off-topic. No more postings will be made under this heading, unless they are really funny.

LTM
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:50:02 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: TIGHAR's Den

Before we wander too far into the wonderful if hypothetical world of the TIGHAR Theme Park, I'd like not to forget the original "TIGHAR Museum" idea, which was to actually interpret the twists and turns of the Earhart research project.  While I don't think this is quite enough for a whole museum, we could right now mount a pretty nifty exhibit on the subject, which could both educate folks about the application of scientific methods to this kind of question AND be a powerful and lucrative draw for institutions that housed it (and, of course, for TIGHAR).  I wonder if there are sponsors out there who'd be interested in mounting such an exhibit.

Now, that said -- Russ, could we add a McKean Island bird-poop dodge to the Den's attactions?

Love to Mother, and may '99 live up to its Earhartian associations.
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:50:08 EST
From:         Stephanie Thomas
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

>the moral is in this case,
>as the case of Amelia Earhart, a private tragedy does not make for a
>public museum piece.

The difference being, in the case of Amelia Earhart, it is not just a private tragedy.  Yes, we all understand that hers and Fred's family had the most at stake, but the entire world was watching and waiting for AE and FN to complete their goal of a world flight.  Everyone involved at the time, and indeed, everyone who has shown an interest since, has grieved for them.  It is not such a "private" tragedy.  The fact that AE & FN were involved in an effort to expand humanity's horizons makes it something everyone had (and still do have)a stake in.  Again, I believe that the plane should be salvaged (if possible, w/the permission of the Kirbiti officials)and displayed in a museum where everyone can learn of their story and their courage. Any remains or personal effects found should, of course, be turned over to the families.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:50:26 EST
From:         Gene Bialek
Subject:      Calibration of HFDF - Howland

In the matter dealing with the calibration (or lack of calibration) of the HFDF on Howland by the IITASKA,  I would like to point out that the recently aquired papers of Rear Admiral Richard Black by the Naval Historical Center (Wash. DC) states that a calibration was done.

Black, in an exchange of letters with the folowing people, stated that the HFDF was set up on the Island by Ciprianni and the ITASKA steamed around the Island and calibrated the radio:

*A 1971 letter to Frank Uhlig, Jr., Senior Editor, United States Naval Institute, Annapolis, MD

*A 1982 letter to Warren Norville, author of "Celestial Navigation Step by Step",    International Marine Publishing Co. (Norville was a Marine Consultant)

*A 1984 letter to Don Wade, a writer and AE history buff.  Wade sent Black a photograph of what he claimed was the HFDF as set up on the Island.

Gene Bialek
Wash. DC
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1998 12:50:31 EST
From:         Gene Bialek
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

I don't think we want to blame the CIA for that theory.  CIA was set up after WWII. Its predecessor, OSS, was not even around until 1940. Naval Intelligence, maybe?

Gene Bialek
Wash. DC
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 09:49:01 EST
From:         John Marks
Subject:      Re: Exploited Electra

Ric wrote:

> TIGHAR has always enjoyed the
> full cooperation and support of the Republic of Kiribati and, as in the past,
> anything we do on the island, or take from the island,  will be done only with
> their approval.

Ah, now we are getting warm!

Not needlessly to multiply entities, or count chickens:

Where I have been heading is to suggest the possibility of ownership disputes once artifacts are brought to the US.  Kiribati can build a fort around a wreck, fine.  However, the decree of its government respecting ownership of artifacts may or may not have legal effect in the US once artifacts are brought here.

Another hypothetical: assume that the newly independent Islamic Holy Republic of Nogoodnistan declares that all Western works of art are contraband and forfeit.  They seize everything Western and artistic in sight, from nationals and foreigners alike.  They then send the art to New York to be auctioned, to raise funds for terrorism.  My grandfather happens to have a Matisse in the trunk of his Mercedes; the canvas is duly seized by the Holy Republican Boy Scouts, and in due course is ready to be auctioned off in New York.

Court jurisdiction takes two forms: over people (in personam) and over things (in rem).  I would posit that a Federal Court in New York would entertain an application for a restraining order against the auction so the rights in the painting can be ajudicated before there are more people claiming rights in it.   Nogoodnistan may claim that its acts are "acts of state" over which US courts have no jurisdiction, see you in the World Court.  But I doubt it working.  There have been recent cases about art the Nazis stole.

Not to draw any ethical comparisons between the Nazis and the good people of Kiribati.

My point, and I do have one, is that moving artifacts to the US might open up litigation from "heirs" claiming that they own by inheritance personal effects or parts of the plane.

Ground-level questions: who held the title in the plane?  Were Earhart's and Noonan's estates probated or administered?

Merry Christmas to all!
--
John Marks

****************************************************************
From Ric

Hmmm.  I can see the potential for a can of worms.

As I understand it (meaning that I'm taking the word of secondary sources), although donations to a special Purdue fund paid for the plane, AE and GP held title and were the sole owners. (I wonder how they pulled that off?)  Noonan doesn't enter into the picture with regard to the airplane.

I'm not sure whether AE's will was probated or administered, nor do I know the difference,  but (again, as I understand it) she left everything to her husband and, if he should die before her mother Amy , everything would then pass to Amy.  Well, who would have thunk it?, but GP did die before Amy, thus leaving her mother with whatever there was of AE's estate - which wasn't much. Several years ago, AE's sister Muriel (presumably Amy's heir) laid claim to the rights to the use of AE's name through a "and anything else of value" clause in the will.  Today those rights are overseen by an outfit in Indianapolis called Curtis Management Group (CMG) which also polices the rights to names like James Dean and Marilyn Monroe.  Several trademarks have supposedly been registered and royalties and fees paid on a number of products which use Amelia Earhart's name.  Check out http://www.cmgww.com/historic/earhart/merchand.html
Muriel died this past March.  Her daughter Amy Kleppner (AE's niece) seems now to be the principal beneficiary.  How solid the legal ground is for all this is outside my pay grade.

However,  it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility that Ms. Kleppner could  allege an ownership interest in the airplane.  Seems like it might be a good idea to get that chicken counted before it's hatched, or certainly before it leaves the coop.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 09:50:37 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

Of course this is not totally true.  Here at the Golden Police Department we have a wrecked car on a trailer, in which two young men died as a result of the driver having been drinking at the time of the crash.  The car was donated by the insurance company, and the families of the young men know, and have supported our use of the vehicle in educational display.  Private tragedy, certainly.  But under the right circumstances...  (Not necessarily a museum display in the strictest sense, but I think close enough!)
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 09:53:04 EST
From:         Stephanie
Subject:      Re: Message Flood

>From Ric
>Yeeowch!  Are they duplicates or what?  Anybody else get hit like this?
********************************
A few were dups, but most weren't.  It looked like I was getting msgs from other forums that were hosted by Lsoft.  Stuff like dog clubs, transplant patients, people throwing parties, that kind of stuff.

**************************************************************

From Ric

Gotta be a computer glitch.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 09:56:58 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

Since I practice historic preservation for a living, I've stayed out of the discourse on the subject here, but I can't help applauding Bill Leary's point of view.  It really is, I think, all a matter of degree.  And as lots of people have pointed out, it's also a matter of practicality -- if we find something salvageable, do we salvage it and treat it right, or leave it for somebody else to do the wrong thing with.  And as Ric and Pat have repeatedly noted, it's really for the Government of Kiribati to decide.

As far as the "ethics" of historic preservation go, we obviously do not routinely treat every old building, archeological site, or wreck as a shrine, whatever the number or notoriety of the people who lived and died there.  Yes, the loss of Amelia and Fred was a trajedy, as was the loss of the Titanic, the sinking of the Hunley, the burning of the Alexandria Library, and the Holocaust, but that certainly doesn't mean to most of us that we should avert our eyes from the artifacts that represent those events.  In historic preservation we routinely try to learn from them, interpret them for the public, and in many cases (as with most old buildings) reuse them for modern purposes.

I just don't see an ethical issue here.  If we find the Electra, or the bones, or the sextant box, or whatever, we ought to study them, recover them, learn from them, and make them available for others to learn from, to the extent and in the manner permitted by the government of Kiribati and the realities of finances and logistics.

LTM
Tom King
**************************************************************

From Ric

Thus sayeth the Project Archaeologist, and I agree.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:05:14 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Re: Glenn Miller anecdotal info.

The next project for TIGHAR...find the Norseman. Roger Kelley, 2112

*************************************************************

From Ric

Oh swell.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:11:13 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Calibration of HFDF - Howland

I would like to see that letter, as there is no evidence of the Itasca sailing around the island, according to its bridge logs.  If there was a date/time, or some other indication, it would prove quite helpful in determining if the HF/DF did indeed get calibrated.  I still doubt it, as the direction device was a pocket compass. Note that the correspondence cited below is not contemporaneous.

> From Gene Bialek
>
> In the matter dealing with the calibration (or lack of calibration) of
> the HFDF on Howland by the ITASKA,  I would like to point out that the
> recently aquired papers of Rear Admiral Richard Black by the Naval Historical
> Center (Wash. DC) states that a calibration was done..
>
> Black, in an exchange of letters with the folowing people, stated that
> the HFDF was set up on the Island by Ciprianni and the ITASKA steamed around
> the Island and calibrated the radio:
>
> *A 1971 letter to Frank Uhlig, Jr., Senior Editor, United States Naval
> Institute, Annapolis, MD.
>
> *A 1982 letter to Warren Norville, author of "Celestial Navigation Step
> by Step",    International Marine Publishing Co. (Norville was a Marine
> Consultant)
>
> *A 1984 letter to Don Wade, a writer and AE history buff.  Wade sent
> Black a photograph of what he claimed was the HFDF as set up on the Island.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:15:53 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Re: Exploited Electra

Ric wrote:

>TIGHAR has always enjoyed the full cooperation and support of the Republic of >Kiribati and, as in the past, anything we do on the island, or take from the >island,  will be done only with their approval.

Amen.

TIGHAR is a first class, world class, organization.

Happy Holidays,

Regards,

Mike Ruiz
#2088NLC*
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:20:46 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Christmas Forum

What a nice surprise under the cyber-tree,  Earhart Forum on Christmas - now that's dedication.  Thanks, Ric and Pat.

LTM,
Russ
***************************************************************

From Ric

You're more than welcome.

As Victor Frankenstein used to say, " Creating a monster carries some responsibilities."
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:39:50 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: Calibration of HFDF - Howland

None of the Richard Black letters cited were written less than 34 years (1971, '82, and '84) after the events in question.  Show us an account recorded contemporaneously and we might have cause to debate the question. "The best human memory is not a sharp as the dullest pencil" (or words to that effect - I can't really remember).

LTM,
Russ
**************************************************************

From Ric

This comes up time and time again in the Earhart case:

- Lae radio operator Harry Balfour later claimed that he had been in two way communication with Earhart for the first seven hours after she left New Guinea.  Comtemporaneous sources contradict that assertion.

- Page Smith, who was flying the PBY sent south from Pearl Harbor to help in the search but was forced to turn back due to bad weather, told me in 1989 that the aircraft's radio operator clearly recieved dashes in direct response to his radioed request for Earhart to send dashes.  There is no mention of such contact in any of the official reports.

-  Mr. Russel Creider told me in 1991 that he had been Lt. John Lambrecht's observer during the Navy's search for Earhart.  USS Colorado's records show that Seaman J.L. Marks was Lambrecht's observer. (Creider later acknowledged that he had been confused.  He had flown with Lambrecht two months earlier off the Lexington.)

People just flat remember stuff wrong.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:50:07 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      TIGHAR's Den/museum

Tom King wrote:

> We could right now mount a pretty nifty exhibit on the subject, which could
> both educate folks about the application of scientific methods to this kind of
> question AND be a powerful and lucrative draw for institutions that housed it
> (and, of course, for TIGHAR).

Theme Parks and inside jokes aside, I think Tom is on to something here. I've given lectures on TIGHAR's work at various venues and seen how many lightbulbs go on over the collective heads of the audience once they see this material presented to them in a clear, logical, and visual manner.

Maybe before viewing the artifacts, visitors could walk past a series of large displays outlining the background and thinking behind the project - with lots of large format photographs and easy to follow diagrams (like the LOP). Security would be a concern, but most museums are set up to deal with it anyway.

I think there are many people out there who would like to learn more about TIGHAR and Earhart, but don't know where to go or have the time to look.  If they can't come to us - maybe we should go to them.

LTM,
Russ

P.S.  Tom, think we should still consider offering the "Sing with King" symposium as an added incentive?
***************************************************************

From Ric

We've talked a little about this.  I think there is real potential for a traveling exhibit which would not try to "sell" TIGHAR's or anyone elses's theory but would simply present the documented evidence and give everyone a chance to see the artifacts they've heard so much about.

I know that there are companies that design and market traveling museum displays.  We need to connect with someone who understands that very specialized field and, of course, we'd need a sponsor.  The right corporation could put it's name in front of the public (tastefully, of course) in what would surely a major draw for the hosting museums.

Anybody got a brother-in-law in the business?

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:03:31 EST
From:         Jack J.
Subject:      Re: Back Issues of TIGHAR Tracks

If it would be possible to obtain copies of the 1995 issues detailing the evolution of NR16020, how do I go about it?

You are correct, the "press" is the 4th estate. I relied upon my memory from a history class taken many, many years ago. Open mouth and insert foot! Thanks for the info regarding the photo. I went back and looked at it again, and it does look like a much younger AE. I think I'll go find a swimming pool, a research assistant, and try your recommended experiment in an effort to clear my head. "It's OK honey," "I'm doing scientific research for TIGHAR!" I'll try harder not to get behind the power curve from now on.

Thanks again.
LTM Jack J.

***************************************************************

From Ric

Back issues of TIGHAR Tracks are available to members for the whopping charge of $2 per copy (while they last).  You want Volume 11, Nos. 2 & 3.   We're getting really low on No. 3.  Include a buck for postage (that's a total of $5) and we'll send them right out.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:15:31 EST
From:         Flatlander
Subject:      Wreck Photo

I'm new to EARHARTFORUM so I need to ask a question about the wreck photo. It was stated (if true) to be taken late 46 early 47 so the time of year is somewhat set. Using only the image off the net, it appears to be about mid day.  Using Dec. and Jan. between 11am and 1pm, is it possible to determine by the angle of the shadows, what line around the earth would be produced by the angle of the sun for that period.  The more you could pin down the month and time of day the narrower the line would be.  Then superimpose that line on a globe and see what islands would be covered.  The possible flaw with this is that I have no idea how wide the line would be and how many of the islands would fall under that line.  If the line is too wide and all islands are included it is of no help.  My Question is, can the line be made small enough to confirm or deny any of the islands in question if the exact date and time of photo was known?

***********************************************************
From Ric

Whew!   Interesting suggestion but, because we have no real confidence in the allegation about what time of year, or even what year, the photo was taken I'm afraid that we wouldn't end up with information that was very useful.

Our best clues to where in the world the photo was taken are the vegetation. According to botanists at the Smithsonian's Museum of Natural History who have first-hand experience in the Phoenix Group, the grasses, bushes and trees visible in the photo are entirely consistent with the islands of the Central Pacific.  Are they also consistent with, say, the equatorial coast of Africa? I don't know.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:35:36 EST
From:         Jack J.
Subject:      Re: Historic Preservation

My gut reaction to the historic preservation question is that if (strike that - sorry Ric,) WHEN the Electra is found, it and any artifacts must be recovered and preserved. If the location of the aircraft is found and made public it will not be long before every vulture, huckster, con artist, etc., will be attempting to exploit the remains. Any human remains, when identified, should be buried with honors.

The aircraft remains should be preserved, but only to the extent necessary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the identity of the aircraft. The rest should be  destroyed, so that it can never be exploited. Permission to do this would depend upon the sovereignty in whose jurisdiction the remains are found, of course.

I suppose many out there will disagree with me, especially on the destruction of the aircraft remains. Folks, you don't have to put your fingers in the wounds, or touch the skin of the aircraft, in order to have closure. Do you really want a wrecked airplane as a monument to an accomplished pilot who STILL holds more than 10 "firsts" in aviation history.

Lastly, what right do we have to stalk AE and FN? Who decided that they were "public figures"? What gives us the "right" to know every aspect of their lives? Why do we become indignant when some little old lady refuses to share her personal letters with us? Because WE want to KNOW? Finding the answer to the question, what happened to AE and FN, is a legitimate endeavor. If we want to know because we adore, revere, respect, admire, etc. AE, then a monument to her, and FN, is a befitting tribute. We want to be sure that her bones don't end up on display in some circus sideshow. Are we historians, or scavangers? LTM and Happy Holidays to the "Third Estate",
Jack J.
***************************************************************

From Ric

As you predict, I'm sure that there will be a few dissenting points of view on this.  I can assure you that there is no way in hell that I am going to be party to the intentional destruction of historic properties in order to "save" them.  I distinctly recall rejecting that approach to dealing with certain Southeast Asian villages back when I wore a green suit with bars on my shoulders.

To answer your question as to who decided that AE and FN were public figures, I'd say. "They did."  One thing you learn, often to your own dismay, when you decide to step out of the crowd and intentionally put yourself in the public spotlight, is that you sacrifice certain rights and privileges.  As a (very small) "public figure" I don't have the same avenues of redress available to me for inaccurate or even libelous statements that may appear in the press (not that that would ever happen) as you do.  It comes with the territory and you just have to accept it.  Amelia and Fred knew that.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:37:51 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Exploited Electra

(Referring to CMG which polices the rights to Earhart's name.)

I followed the link back, then one step further to the "official" home page.  Imagine how disappointed I was when I saw that they didn't even spell "Lockheed" correctly...

ltm,
jon
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:40:09 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Calibration of HFDF - Howland

It is also astounding how much information, thought to be meaningless trivia at the time, is omitted by people from their reports (I have to fight that dragon on a daily basis).  Some of it is laziness, some is apathy, some is just overlooked (and you're right, people just flat remember stuff wrong!).  We humans are a fallible lot!
ltm
jon
*************************************************************

From Ric

That's what my horse keeps telling me.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 13:06:38 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Wreck Photo

A critical assumption in the analysis of shadows is that one needs a definitive measurement (height, length, etc.) of a particular object. There is no such item in the photo that one can definitively measure. Yes, Ric, I know about your propeller measurments, but they all have the basic assumption of having the same length of the Lockheed 10E, then you used that to infer what other measurements does that imply about the wreck. Further, given the poor assumption of mid-day, and late in the year, I am afraid that there would just be too much leeway in the shadow analysis to be of much help.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 13:09:15 EST
From:         Jack J.
Subject:      Re: HF/DF

Ric wrote:

>> after reading the results of THREE Niku expeditions the expedition
>> leader doesn't know what the heck he's doing.
>
> I think that most of the team would agree with you.

Ha ha ha, thats what I like...a sense of humor.

Dog six king,
Jack, #2157
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 13:13:19 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      B-17 in New Guinea

Ric wrote:

>Back in 1986 we were all set to begin the recovery of a B-17 from a swamp in
>Papua New Guinea when the Ministry of Tourism declared all WWII wrecks to be
>war memorials and tourist attractions.

Ric, can you tell us more about the B-17 and adventures surrounding it? Possibly refer us to news articals or books?

Happy New Year every one!  One year to go.....01-01-00 = crash

Thanks,
Roger Kelley, 2112
***************************************************************

From Ric

The whole frustrating tale can be traced in the the TIGHAR Tracks Retrospective - The First Five Years.  It's available via the website.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1998 13:27:25 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      The Electra and Kiribati.

As the discovery and possible recovery of Amelia's Electra draws near, I suggest that TIGHAR continue to pursue proper and equitable arrangements with the government of the sovereign nation of  Kiribati for the disposition of the aircraft.  These negotiations should include all other artifacts which have been found , or are yet to be discovered.

Any thought of secret removal of the aircraft or other artifacts from Nikumaroro Island would only provoke a lack of cooperation from the Kiribati government, most likely invite their wrath, and without doubt, bring discredit upon our organization.

Roger Kelley # 2112
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 27 Dec 1998 11:48:26 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Change of fabric on the HK-1

While I don't have any first hand knowledge of why the linen fabric on the HK-1 was replaced by dacron (seconite) I suspect there were two major reasons.  First, cotton and linen aircraft fabric that was used in covering old aircraft are quite difficult to find since dacron fabric came into common use after World War II.  Second, there aren't very many cotton and linen fabric experts around any more.

Obviously the HK-1 is historically different with dacron rather than linen fabric but it probably looks the same to 90% of the public viewing the aircraft on display.  If I am correct the HK-1 was coated with a preservative when it was in Long Beach and looked quite different close up from the original linen and dope finish.  Of greater importance than the change from linen to dacron is the need to preserve historic aircraft in their true and original state.  Changing the fabric is just one step in altering the authentic nature of the airplane.  If that is all that is changed then it probably isn't that big a deal.  at least the aircraft is preserved rather than cut up.  What is alarming is a visit to a museum of so called historic aircraft where you find airplanes with modern engines and other extensive alterations.  These are no longer historic aircraft in any real sense o the word.

We are presently repairing a 1927 Swallow airplane that will probably go to a museum.  To the extent possible we are making all repairs conform to the way the airplane was originally built by the Swallow Airplane Company including the use of cotton fabric and no synthetic paint.  Hardware, bolts, nuts, screws, etc are all from the 1920-30 time period and construction methods are those used in 1927.  this is not a historic airplane but it will be a true example of what the airplane was in 1927.

I would assume that if AE's aircraft is found it will be in very poor condition.  In my view it should be displayed (along with other non human artifacts) in their, AS FOUND, condition.  They simply serve as the end proof to a very long mystery and I think AE would like the world to know what happened to her.

Dick Pingrey 908C

*******************************************************