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were running a scam - This person sounds like they just haven't gone through all the "clues" that have been found, the historical documents that have been researched and the "hypotheses" that have been put forward based on that research.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.... 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! 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, . 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: > < 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: > < 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. <> 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! >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 *************************************************************** From Ric Certainly if we had anything to say about it, whatever may be found should be conserved to prevent further deterioration and exhibited as is. In both the antique auto and antique airplane worlds there is great emphasis placed upon replicating the materials and techniques used at the time the machine was originally in service. Unfortunately, the end product is often represented as therefore being "all original" as if replacing something with a like object magically turns it into the original object. You clearly realize that the best your Swallow can be is a faithful representation of what the 1927 airplane was like, and that is certainly a worthy goal. The question of whether to replace historic material with modern look-alike (or nearly so) material is often a matter of practicality. Once the original linen fabric is gone, it's gone and nothing can bring it back. Recovering with ceconite makes a lot of sense because it looks pretty much the same, is cheaper than linen, and will hold up better. It will also prevent future historians from mistaking the replaced component for the original material. Restoration, as a term used in historic preservation, is the return of an object to a known previous appearance through the minimal introduction of new material. Most of what passes for "restoration" in the aviation world is actually wholesale repair. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 11:53:14 EST From: Ron Dawson Subject: search site As the website gets bigger and more complex, have you thought about adding a site search engine? Pinpoint is a good one and it's free. Smooth Sailing, Ron Dawson 2126 *************************************************************** From Ric Good idea. We'll look into it. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 11:59:13 EST From: Suzanne Subject: Purdue gift and kids >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?) Having some experience with University finance, I bet the Purdue fund likely gave the plane to AE and GP. LTM, Suzanne #2184 Ps did my last email of 12/21 re: section featuring Tighar on the History Channel AE special arrive? If not, just wanted you to know I thought you came across as very credible and the only speaker who offered scientific facts! The kids were fabulous -- with students like they are, we know that if we don't find Amelia, they certainly will continue the search! Anyone who gripes about "kids these days" ought to observe the interest, intellectual spark and joy in learning exhibited by the kids. LTM, Suzanne #2184 *************************************************************** From Ric Amen about the kids. Aren't they great? We're really hoping that the Voyage of Discovery educational program we're developing will bring the magic of the Earhart investigation to thousands like them. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 12:01:41 EST From: Dick Strippel Subject: Army Records There's an Internet Site that will look up addresses. I found it using COMPUSERVE some years ago, but don't know if AOL's browser will find it. Search for "VETERANS AFFAIRS."---------------Dick ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 12:25:29 EST From: Barbara Norris Subject: Re: Purdue gift and kids As the teacher of the kids (a.k.a. "The Airhearts" as they've been christened by Tom King) featured in the History Channel documentary...You've hit the nail on the head about the power of the subject matter. These kids have made a long-lasting discovery about learning through their experiences with TIGHAR and Amelia. With the Voyage of Discovery we can hopefully tap into more of those developing minds and really bring some powerful, meaningful learning into classrooms around the world. The secret to finding success with any child is figuring out what gets them motivated--and believe me--Amelia is a motivator! Thanks for your feedback. I'll share it with The Airhearts and I promise you, they will be thrilled. Blue skies, Barbara Norris #2175 ************************************************************** From Ric It's just a shame that Barb didn't get any airtime. She's a lot prettier than I am. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 13:13:13 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: History Channel show Russ Matthews was kind enough to send me a dub of the History Channel show "The Mysteries of Amelia Earhart." After watching it, my reaction was that it was pretty much a rehash of the usual folklore with the traditional cast saying their traditional lines (Sage & Skeptical Historian Tom Crouch; Earnest & Hopeful Expedition Leader Ric Gillespie; Voice of Reason Elgen Long; etc.) It was interesting that none of the conspiracy crowd spoke for themselves with the exception of Rollin Reineck. Buddy Brennan and Henri Keyzer-Andre are dead, so their ghost-writers had to speak for them. The late Fred Goerner appeared in old film clips as did Joe Klaas (author of the classic Amelia Earhart Lives!) who, as far as I know, is still around (although possibly living in New Jersey under an assumed name). The usually ubiquitous Joe Gervais was, for once, nowhere in sight. The Earhart biographical stuff was fairly accurate (for TV) and certainly far better than the abominable PBS production for The American Experience. I was especially pleased to see that GP's grandaughter Sally Chapman (TIGHAR 1126) was able to contribute her insight and that George Putnam, for once, was not portrayed as a manipulating Svengali. The description of the Lae/Howland flight was the usual mess. TV producers seldom get the facts straight, always have trouble understanding the navigation, and then try to explain it all in sound bites and nifty graphics. The result usually bears no resemblance to what little is known about what really happened, and this show was no exception. I have to confess to some amusement at Elgen Long's going on and on about the Chater Report without happening to mention that it was TIGHAR who brought it to light (but that could just be the editing). Why on earth he thinks that the position reports included in the report support his allegation that Earhart was burning fuel at a higher than anticipated rate is yet another Earhart Mystery. In the end, Barb Norris' kids (The Airhearts) definitely stole the show, which is as it should be. Love to Mother, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:16:26 EST From: Jack J. Subject: Re: Purdue gift and kids In retrospect, You are right. NR16020 is a historic artifact and should be preserved. The thought of the possibility, that Niko's governing sovereignty, could see dollar signs and turn the wreckage into a tourist attraction is chilling. It is surprising that the details of the purchase of the L-10, through Purdue University, has never been published. I think that G.P. Putnam's "connections," and AE's being a "counselor" at Purdue, put into motion the unusual transaction. The "contributors" could not get a tax deduction for "donations" made to AE and/or GPP. They could get a deduction for a donation to Purdue. How the university's governing board allowed the aircraft to be titled in AE's and GPP's names is still a mystery, but by no means indicative of a conspiracy. University boards of trustees do a lot of questionable things, usually for rich and famous or heavy contributing alumnae. Lastly, the kids. They are the future. I teach Civil Air Patrol (CAP) cadets "Aerospace History" form time to time, and the 13 to 17 year old are a treat to work with. I hope they learn as much from me as I do from them. The CAP "Awards" or ribbons are named after famous people in aviation and/or aerospace, e.g., Goddard, Doolittle, and of course AE. The teacher of "The Earharts" can obtain some very worthwhile booklets from the CAP, for free, by contacting the local CAP squadron. They will be glad to tell her where to write to, to obtain the material. There is a very nice booklet about AE in the "Education" materials. If she is unable to get the information, I will get it to her ASAP. I don't have it at hand, or I would have posted it. LTM Jack J. PS - pool found - buoyancy test in progress - may or may not share progress of "research." PPSS The back edge of the heels of my "flying" shoes are worn and rounded from rubbing on the cabin floor, while my feet are on the rudder petals (sic)! Just a thought! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:18:29 EST From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Re: Purdue gift and kids Bravo, Barbara!! The featuring of the "Airhearts" on the History Channel documentary is wonderful news!! Kudos to the kiddos and their outstanding teacher!Ric's "year of the TIGHAR will definitely be off to a great start! Happy holidays from your fellow teacher, Gene Dangelo #2211 :) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:20:49 EST From: Tom Cook Subject: Re: Change of fabric on the HK-1 Dick is exactly right, there was a coating put on the HK1 that altered the appearence of the aircraft, I was told that this is one reason that the fabric was replaced, also some has deterioated in 51 years I have 2 swatchs of the linen facric, one shows mildew, the other shows he coating that was put on. If they had to replace the fabric, I would have prefered that use the original type, although your reasons for using seconite ( or is it ceconite?) are more practicle. It's kind of like the modern engine in the old plane , a kind of "street rod" of the air. If they are going to restore he HK1 to the time of the one and only flight (Nov 2, 1947) they need to replace the engines with the original R4360's, the present set is either the second or perhaps the third. I have been told that Mr hughes concidered the a/c to be underpowered with 3000 hp per engine, and that he had the later model installed, which produced 3500 hp. as used in the B36 bomber. They will also need to replace the spiral steel stairs leading to the flight deck with the original ladder, and remove the airconditioning that Howard Hughes had installed after the flight, and replace the 8 electric throttle control levers with the 4 pnumatic (each one controlled 2 engines) controls used during the flight. All of these modifications were made during Howard Hughes' lifetime in preparation for additional flights which never took place. TC 2127 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:24:58 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Message flood Well, I didn't get anything from any other forum, but I got everything from your forum and my own incoming e-mails in triplicate and quadruplicate or more! LTM Dave Bush #2200 ***************************** From Pat The first--the flood of messages from lists you are not subscribed to--is a known hotmail glitch, there's a good bit of traffic about it on the Listserve tech site right now. If it keeps happening, you need to get with Hotmail to solve the problem. The second--duplications--is usually an ISP problem. Again, you should talk to your provider and see what they say. P ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:26:13 EST From: Daryll Bollinger Subject: Re: Pan Am HF/DF Holiday Greetings to the Forum; I just wanted to pass along ( FYI ) to the Forum a response from Tim Coyle who is doing some research on early air navigation. My question was; Since you are doing some research, I wonder if you could answer a question for me? If and when did Pan Am start using High Frequency Direction Finders on the Pacific routes? Let me thank you in advance for your response. Daryll His reply was; Daryll Pan Am installed HF stations on Midway and Wake when they put in the flying boat bases. Survey flight to Midway June 12-22 1935 Survey flight to Wake August 9-28 1935 Survey flight to Guam October 5-24 1936 All flights by S-42 Pan American Clipper Navigator Noonan used DF bearings also on the first survey flight Oakland/Honolulu April 16-23 1935. Noonan makes reference to 'our' (meaning PAA) DF station at Kaneohe Bay in his report of that flight, so presumably PAA installed that one too. He would also have used a station in the SFO/OAK area, but that might have been a government station. Hope this helps, but if not why not ask Ed Dover (see his e-mail in the PAA messages - he was a 314 operator. regards Tim coyle Daryll ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 12:38:09 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: History Channel show Ric, your inclusion in that segment was more of an indication that interest has not waned in determining the fate of Earhart, rather than recognition of TIGHAR as the most prolific, or successful research group. You were not in, shall we say, the top billing. I regularly discuss alternative explanations to the mystery with other enthusiasts. Their theories are just as valid, or invalid, as yours. Until you locate a sizable piece of that airplane (and MY theory is that you won't locate it on Nikku) you are among the rest of us, and that includes everyone not depicted or interviewed on television. *************************************************************** From Ric I would certainly agree with you that TIGHAR's inclusion in the History Channel show is an indication of continuing and building interest in Amelia. I also agree that TIGHAR's work didn't get top billing. I think Hirohito's horse got more airtime than I did (nice horse though). Does that mean that the Japanese capture theory is the most plausible or that the subject is more entertaining? I disagree, however, with your stement that "you are among the rest of us." There IS an important difference between we TIGHARs and you, your enthusiasts, Elgen Long, Tom Crouch, Rollin Reineck, ad nauseum. We're doing the work, raising the money, finding the forgotten documents, establishing the facts of the case, mounting the expeditions, digitizing the photographs, analysing the artifacts, doing the science - while the rest of you sit back and pontificate about what we haven't found yet. Name me one - ONE (yes, I'm shouting) new piece of legitimate information about the Earhart disappearance that has been brought out in the past ten years by anyone but TIGHAR. Name one - ONE individual or group of individuals who has gone any place you can't simply by an airline ticket to and done anything but collect unsubstantiated stories. Yes, there is great and growing interest in the Earhart mystery. Why do you suppose that is? Do you think it just might be because the mystery has been in the news a lot in recent years? Who do you think is responsible for that? Your theory is that we "won't locate the airplane on Nikku (sic)." Is that the best you can come up with? Sorry for shouting, but I've seen too many good people work too hard for too long to let your meanspirited comments belittling their efforts pass unchallenged. Love to mother, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 12:40:50 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: History Channel program The most obvious highlight of the program was the Tighar film clips demonstrating the kind of "hands-on/on-site" research that is required to develop and ultimately prove any hypothesis concerning the Earhart/Noonan disappearance. Most of the other film clips mainly showed old men sitting behind desks, shuffling through charts & maps, while pontificating on why their particular theory is the only explanation for the Earhart/Noonan disappearance. The nice thing for Barb's kids is that they need only log-on to the Earhart Forum in order to become a part of an on-going investigation into an historical event that happened long before their own parents were born! The biggest complaint I have about the program (& similar programs) is the way they "scatter" the film clips throughout the program, with no consideration for historical chronology or accuracy, often showing such clips completely out of sync with the audio being broadcasted. Well, no one is perfect & at least such programing does try to keep up with the latest (Tighar's) research efforts, keeping new generations (Barb's kids) aware of the fact that the Earhart/Noonan case has yet to be closed! Don Neumann ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 12:52:14 EST From: Bob Seath Subject: Nikamuroro Two questions from a newcomer: 1-Is there an accurate time line of the AE crash history? How can I access it? 2-What makes many folks so sure of the Nikamuroro crash site? BobSeath@ix.netcom.com *************************************************************** From Ric The name of the island is Nikumaroro. A lot of people seem to have trouble with the spelling but it's a lot easier than Cincinnati - uh - Cincinatti - uh - whatever. We haven't presented the known events of the Lae/Howland flight as a time line per se, but the article from TIGHAR Tracks entitled "Log Jam" comes close. I'd urge you to read the material available on the TIGHAR website at www.tighar.org. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 13:07:08 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: Pan Am HF/DF I was simply astounded to read Tim Coyle's response to Daryll's message. > Tim Coyle wrote: > All flights by S-42 Pan American Clipper Navigator Noonan used DF > bearings also on the first survey flight Oakland/Honolulu April 16-23 > 1935. Noonan makes reference to 'our' (meaning PAA) DF station.... This and the list of PAA DF stations he provides (with dates from 1935) lead me to wonder about the common logic that Amelia Earhart did not have much experience with radios and with taking a DF bearing and that this contributed to the loss of the plane and their lives. The point of Earhart being in control of the radios is indirectly reiterated in the TIGHAR page entitled, "Log Jam": http://www.tighar.org/TTracks/12_2/logjam.html On that page you write: Earhart had been unable to take a bearing on the station at Lae, attributing the problem to the closeness of the station. In fact, at no time during the world flight is Earhart known to have successfully used her direction finder. Clearly, her confidence in the technology, and in her own ability to use it, was not high. It is hardly surprising that she would prefer to simply provide a signal and have someone else tell her what direction to fly. Now, if what I read through this forum is true -- that Noonan was in cockpit next to Earhart in the front of the airplane -- then it would naturally follow that Noonan would have at least observed the attempt to get the DF bearing if not tried to do do one himself. And given that PAA had been using DF gear for trans-Pacific navigation for several years at that point, it is reasonable to assume that Noonan would have known quite well how to use the DF gear (unless the type of equipment was new to him, but even then, the procedure should not have been all that different). In effect, all of this points to problems with the equipment, signal, or signal strength and not with Earhart's ability to tune the radios and limited experience thereupon as I so often hear repeated in the press. In effect, perhaps this passage should be amended to include that neither Earhart nor Noonan had been able to get a DF bearing throughout the previous legs of the flight and that Noonan was quite experienced with DF gear. Thomas Van Hare *************************************************************** From Ric There was a separate Radio Operator aboard the clippers who handled all radio matters. This usually consisted of the plane sending out a signal upon which the ground station took a bearing. The ground station would then send that information to the Radio Operator in morse code and he would pass that information to the Navigator for his consideration. I've seen no evidence that Noonan's experience with Pan Am included his fiddling with loop antennas. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:53:50 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Go get 'em! Ric said (with a pulsating, bulging neck vein): > There IS an important difference between we TIGHARs and > you, your enthusiasts, Elgen Long, Tom Crouch, Rollin Reineck, ad nauseum. > We're doing the work, raising the money, finding the forgotten documents, > establishing the facts of the case, mounting the expeditions, digitizing the > photographs, analysing the artifacts, doing the science - while the rest of > you sit back and pontificate about what we haven't found yet. > > Name me one - ONE (yes, I'm shouting) new piece of legitimate information > about the Earhart disappearance that has been brought out in the past > ten years by anyone but TIGHAR. Name one - ONE individual or group of > individuals who has gone any place you can't simply by an airline ticket > to and done anything but collect unsubstantiated stories." Thank you for an excellent defense -- as if it is needed -- of TIGHAR and its past 10 years of work. In spite of occasional grousing over the past 12 years, I truly enjoy the intellectual (and physical) challenge TIGHAR offers its members. In effect, it is saying, "Here is what we think, here is why we think that way, and here is the evidence to support our beliefs. And if you disagree, let's see your evidence." When people have questioned me about TIGHAR's work on AE/FN, my usual answer has been that TIGHAR is the only organization I know of that is doing original public research that could lead to solving the mystery. I support this research because the ideas, theories, and hypotheses are clear and succinct and, to me, seem logical and possible. The research is expensive, expansive, and difficult, but the pay-off is phenomenal. A good, short answer is "TIGHAR does good science." P.S. OK, Ric, NOW can I have my Lap Dog Merit Badge? LTM Dennis McGee #0149 ************************************************************** From Ric Will you settle for an Oreo? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 16:32:56 EST From: Ty Sundstrom Subject: History It amazes me to read so much about how Tighar puts down the efforts of individuals who cherish history every bit as much as Tighar members. If Charles Lindbergh were alive, I'm sure you would want him publicly flogged for having replaced the spinner on his "Spirit of St. Louis" when it was found cracked when he reached Roosevelt Field. Then you would want him flogged again for allowing the French to replace the fabric that torn by souvenir hunters at Le Bourget, or again when he had night landing flares installed for his flights around the Americas. History is just that, not the moment that a person or persons decided when history was! You are a most arrogant bunch. If Charles Lindbergh were alive and still operating "his" aircraft you can bet he would have the best fabric installed on it that is available. I have restored many aircraft, the restoration process most often starts with a determination of what point in time you are trying to best represent, keeping in mind that you are in the "here and now" not the "then and there." If the model 10 is ever found, it will be in it's historically accurate condition at that moment. Quit TRYING to define history as a point in time and you will see that it is all part of history. By the way, the components of the Hughes HK-1 were recovered using the "Poly-fiber" process, not the Ceconite process. I am positive Howard would approve, as it is the best available today. I'm am sure you will just die when I tell you that the top 18 feet of the rudder to the Hughes HK-1 has been structurally repaired after it was dropped during the disassembly process. This is all part of it's history. So, I ask, when the fabric rots off of the "Spirit of St.Louis", is it Tighar's position that this American treasure be left that way, or should the fabric be replaced so that the multitudes will know just how much we value it? Do you not change your underwear because it is the underwear you were using the night of the senior prom, I think not. Would you not paint your colonial house or would you leave it to rot because that is history? Ty N. Sundstrom **************************************************************** From Ric My goodness we're a cantakerous lot. Must be holiday stress or something. This is the Earhart Forum and I really don't want to get off on a tangent about historic preservation philosophy. That subject probably deserves its own forum and we may get around to that eventually, but I'll at least try to answer a couple of Ty's specific questions. What TIGHAR has tried to do is nothing more or less than bring the accepted, much debated, tried and true standards of historic preservation to the aviation world. You can read all about it in the Preservation section of the TIGHAR website. Ty's outrage is typical of skilled and well-intentioned people who are not really familiar with some basic principles of historic preservation and probably wouldn't be much interested in it if they understood what it is anyway. When we started TIGHAR in 1985 my mindset, having come from an aviation background, was the same as Ty's. In fact, TIGHAR's first motto was "Bring 'em back alive" (old airplanes,that is). It wasn't long, however, before we could see that there was something wrong but it took us a long time to figure out what the problem was. It was a painful process and the truth, we discovered, is not something that many aviation enthusiasts want to hear. To answer Ty's specific questions: The Spirit of St. Louis, as it was when it landed at LeBourget, is gone. The airplane we have is the airplane that went into the Smithsonian collection in 1928 (as I recall) complete with all the changes made to it up to that time. At that moment, in a sense, it stopped being an airplane and became an historic property. The responsibilty of its owner ceased to be to maintain its safety and efficiency as a flying machine, but to safeguard and preserve the physical object for future generations. If the day ever comes when the fabric has to be replaced, it will be because the Smithsonian failed in its duty to conserve it. A recovered Spirit would look prettier but be diminished as an historic property. Likewise, the damage and subsequent need to repair the HK-1 tail dimishes its value as an historic property. Accidents happen. Colonial houses are repainted, not because we don't value original 18th century paint, but because you can't very well keep a house in a museum to protect the paint. Fortunately, airplanes can be protected in museums. They can not, of course, be protected on the flight line. If the decision is made to return an old airplane to service rather than preserve it as an historic property (and that is often a perfectly rational decision to make), the first consideration must be safety. Beyond that, whatever nod to an accurate historical appearance the owner wants to make is up to him or her. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:50:13 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Search engine on site As recently suggested, we have now installed a search engine on the homepage of the TIGHAR website (www.tighar.org). This should make it much easier to find the information you need and want. If you've visited the site recently, be sure to refresh your web browser (i.e. empty your browser cache) so that you can see the new features. Always tryin' Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 19:43:12 EST From: Mark Cameron Subject: Shout all you want I've been reading the forum for a month or two and beleive you and your researchers are definitley on the right track - just ran across the letter from Dave Kelly dated 12-27 and completely agree with your response - no other person, group, organization, etc. has lifted a finger to find any evidence to prove their theories(??) on the end of this most famous flight in the last 30 years. But they are all waiting in the wings for you to fall on your face and then I'm sure we'll hear from them again - hope they never get their chance. About 20 years ago I read Joe Klass' book, to the un-informed he made some convincing arguments, but looking at them now, in the light of your findings and 20 years of maturity, his statements lack any real proof or positive evidence. I have one question that you may have an answer to - he claimed to have found the crash site of a 10E in the Nevada mountains in the 1960's that bore the same reg.# as AE's plane, and made some statement about exhaust manifold serial #s being 1930 issue - do you know what became of that plane or know of any explanation for what he claims to be the original AE Electra? I'm sure there is a proper answer to that mystery - please let me know if you can provide one. Back on the subject - I have been involved in reverse-engineering many times in my career. Looking at the known facts - shoe heels, airplane scraps, plexiglas, etc. all obviously American made, pre-WWII, deposited on an island so far out that only a specially equipped aircraft, complicated logistics, and an experienced pilot/navigator could reach it - what other explanation could there be for this?? Was there another (possibly secret) across the Pacific flight that ended there at the same time as AE?? Did Wrong Way Corrigan again lose his way only to crash land out there?? THESE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS THAT DEMAND SERIOUS ANSWERS!!! (now !'M shouting). Of COURSE you're on the right track. There is no other (and none has been offered) plausible explanation for what you've found. That's a big ocean out there (as you've probably noticed) and in my personal and professional opinion the chance of anyone else being that far out in a commercial airplane and getting lost without anyone noticing is ZERO. (not the Jap type, that's another rev-engineering story) Even if the Electra is never found, I'm sure further expiditions will uncover more artifacts that will help to tell us the story of the last hours/days(?) of AE and FN. And your scientific approach and passion for preservation will insure that when the final sentence in this saga is written, there will be no more questions, no more critics, only the truth. Finally. LTM and AE Mark J Cameron *************************************************************** From Ric Aye lad, ye talk like a true TIGHAR. Will ye no join us? The printable membership form is at http://www.tighar.org/membernew.html The story about the wrecked Electra with Earhart's registration number is a classic. Years after the disappearance, Amelia's former technical adviser Paul Mantz bought himself a Lockheed Model 12A "Baby Electra" ( a smaller version of the Model 10 Electra and a totally different airplane). In June of 1957, possibly in honor of the 20th anniversary of his friend's demise, he requested that the airplane's FAA registration number N60775 be changed to N16020 (Earhart's had been NR16020). The change was approved. Paul later sold the airplane, the number being retained by the new owners who, on 16 December 1961, managed to fly it into a side of one of the Tiefort Mountains near Bicycle Dry Lake, California (not Nevada) reducing the airplane to kit format and killing themselves in the process. Well, the timing was perfect. In 1960 the Great Amelia Conspiracy Festival had been launched by Paul Briand's book Daughter Of The Sky and radio reporter Fred Goerner's investigation of tales from Saipan. To supersleuth Joe Gervais (a former USAF buddy of Briand's), the fact that a Lockheed Electra (sort of) just like Earhart's (not) and bearing her plane's registration number (or very nearly so) had mysteriously crashed (well, crashed anyway) 24 years after Earhart was supposedly lost was damning evidence indeed. Joe's friend Joe Klaas was all too willing to include the incident in his 1970 book Amelia Earhart Lives! And the rest is history (sort of). Love to mother, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 19:49:33 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Search engine on site Does this mean we can now search for AE's engines on your web site? You've been holding out on us all of these years and months: You and Bruce Yoho found the engine after all, digitized it, and put it on the web! You rascal, you! At least it should save you money to go back to Niku, unless you want to find its mate/partner. Your humble tongue-in-cheek colleague. Give my love to your horse, and those that ride it! **************************************************************** From Ric I knew that somebody would pick up on that and I should have guessed that it would be my esteemed tongue-in-cheek colleague from the Office of Navel Research - and leave my horse out of this. Happy New Year Randy! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 19:57:51 EST From: Jim Kelly Subject: Prettier than who? Ric: Re: Barb and airtime- isn't everyone? Prettier than you I mean. Happy New Year Jim Kelly 2085 *************************************************************** From Ric Almost, but I am prettier than Tom Crouch. Not as smart perhaps, but definitely prettier. That's why I always insist that they put him on the same show with me. Secrets of show biz. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 20:02:10 EST From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Re: History Having read Ty Sundstrom's commentary, I feel compelled to mention a few thoughts of mine on "history," as it were. "History" can mean different things to different people at different times. Oftentimes, a prevailing philosophy is so strong regarding the sanctity of the past and its artifacts that they can be either preserved, salvaged, or destroyed. For example, the death camps of the holocaust are preserved, not as a tribute to the atrocities that took place there, but as a memorial to those that died there, and as a reminder to humanity that such atrocities ought not be repeated. On the other hand, sites of other atrocities, such as the Oklahoma City Federal building, and a McDonald's Restaurant where people were killed mercilessly, were razed almost immediately because the memories are far too painful (The Federal Building was also structurally dangerous). Historic shipwrecks are sometimes raised from the depths because they represent a time capsule of times hitherto relatively unknown; other wrecks are subject of debate as to whether or not to disturb them, as they are the graves of many, and many of the deceased have relatives living today. The Titanic is a good example of the latter. What "history" presents us with, then, is an ethical dilemma, whether to adopt a purist viewpoint about what is societally sacred and refrain from disturbing certain artifacts, or to investigate and salvage and/or restore artifacts from our past. Oftentimes politcal, religious, and /or ethnic barriers are imposed by certain groups of people to prevent such investigations, because of the sanctity of their traditions. Consider such relics as the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail, the Shroud of Turin. Each has been the subject of considerable archaeological controversy. Yet, almost every major city has some type of a museum, which houses something of historical importance. When Ford's Theater collapsed in 1893 (ironically as Edwin Booth's funeral procession passed by), it was subsequently restored in light of its historical significance. When the great cathedrals of France were ruined by artillery fire and bombs during World War II, they were restored as well. It is of importance to here note that arguments on BOTH sides of "to restore or not to restore" (and for "restore," one may substitute "recover," "salvage," "exhibit," or any of those verbs, the processes of which are often encountered by historical artifacts) are equally impassioned. But amidst all of the passion, we must all rationally consider what course for ANY artifact which is found ever, will be most productive for society-at-large, both now and in the future! It does no good for persons of opposing philosophies to sling mud, rather, to do so tends to weakens one case, no matter how impassioned. I joined TIGHAR only recently, not to obtain a love of history, but because I already had one. It did not change in nature because I joined, except for possibly becoming more intense. I don't consider myself to be arrogant, and certainly don't want to become that way. I don't believe that to be on this forum one has to "buy a company line" of philosophy, so to speak; quite the contrary: the best avenue to diverse thinking about any topic is to entertain a diversity of opinions about it! I believe that this forum and the TIGHAR organization both do that quite well. Of paramount importance, however, no matter which side of any debate one happens to be on is that we can all communicate rationally, even when we have have strong feelings.It's not an "us versus them" scenario on any forum; it's an opportunity for mutual growth. We don't have to agree with each other; just respect each other as rational persons. I'm sure that we can all agree on one thing, which is that "every reasoned opinion is of worth!" Thank you for this opportunity, Dr. Eugene M. Dangelo #2211 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 20:04:15 EST From: Bob Subject: Re: Pan Am HF/DF You are correct. The HF/DF used by Pan Am in the 30s was one way DFing. The Adcock DF System at the PAA Ground Radio Stations could get very accurate bearings on HF transmissions from the aircraft, but the aircraft could not take bearings on a ground HF Radio Station transmission. LTM Bob ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 21:31:42 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: History Channel show I do applaud TIGHAR's ambitious use of funds to research information on AE. However, you did not assimilate that data from mid-air. Someone already knew that information, or researched it long ago. Furthermore, that someone was using his own money, or had the proper credentials to perform research on AE, and received grants to explore all aspects of the flight. Yes, TIGHAR does much to rejuvinate the zeal to locate the crash site, but only after lot's of money has been spent, and you haven't found anything to prove your theories. One more thing, the people you disparagingly refer to as sitting on their laurels and spouting theories without proof, possess much more knowledge than you on the subject of AE, and have done considerable research on their own, or among groups with similar interests. They have gone out to the islands in search of AE, and they've done it with their own money! *************************************************************** From Ric >you did not assimilate that data from mid-air. Someone >already knew that information, or researched it long ago. Not true Dave. The Chater Report, for example, was found by a mining company executive who came upon an old file labled Amelia Earhart. It was my phone number he dialed when he saw that it might be important because he had read about TIGHAR's investigation. When Peter McQuarrie came upon Gallagher's correspondence about the bones, he emailed me because he's a TIGHAR member and he knew that I'd be interested. The files Kenton Spading found in England which open a whole new and previously unknown chapter in the Earhart mystery were TIGHAR discovery. None of this information was previously known to Earhart researchers. In fact, much of what we've done for the past ten years is correct the errors and dispel the myths created by these people who you say know so much more than we do. You know Dave, I don't think that you "applaud TIGHAR's ambitious use of funds to research information on AE." I think it drives you nuts. You sound every bit as jealous and resentful as the others who whine about TIGHAR's use of what they call Other People's Money. I have, as a consequence of these attacks, come to accept the rather incredible fact that there are a number of otherwise well-educated folks out there who haven't the foggiest notion of how the tax-exempt, charitable foundation system works in this country. Here's a primer. Pass it around. This great nation, as we all know, is built upon a capitalistic system where everyone is pretty much free to make a buck and spend a buck anyway they choose, provided they give some of those bucks to Uncle Sam. Sam then uses those bucks to provide services we all need but would prefer not be handled as profit making businesses, such as running the government and providing national security. (The Mafia is an example of a security service that is run like a business). To supplement this system of commercial enterprise and taxation, the federal government also recognizes that there are some things that need doing which are better done outside the realm of for-profit business or government funded services. A few examples are: The Arts (museums, symphonies. ballet, etc.), humanitarian services (the Red Cross, United Way, etc.), medical research (American Cancer Society, etc.), historical research and education (virtually every local, regional and national historical society, Civil War re-enactment groups, the Confederate Air Force, and, yes, TIGHAR). The government thinks (whether you do or not) that it's a lot better for individual citizens or companies who believe in a particular cause to support that cause voluntarily rather than have it come out of everyone's taxes. So the deal is, if you form an organization for an approved purpose and promise not to pass out ("distribute" is the term) any profit you make, but plow it all back into the organization, then you don't have to pay taxes on the money you bring in and the people who give you money get a deduction for supporting your "exempt purpose." It's a great system. It gives people the power to help causes they believe in and actually get rewarded for it by the government. It makes it possible to do all kinds of things that couldn't be done otherwise without an astronomical increase in taxes (just ask our friends in Europe). In 1985 the United States government recognized TIGHAR as a tax-exempt nonprofit foundation under section 501 (c)(3) of the IRS Code. We are further recognized as a Public Charity because we can show that our funding comes from a broad base of popular support rather than a few fat cats. As our members know, we send a receipt for every contribution and it specifies what amount is for merchandise purchased and what amount is pure donation. We follow the rules meticulously because the American nonprofit organization system is basically fair and it works. People who conduct Earhart research with their own money are simply exercising their right to spend their money as they wish. They don't have to convince anyone that their efforts are worthwhile and they don't have to answer to anyone for their conclusions. They are also, of course, constrained by the limits of their own fortune and the knowledge and skills of the few friends they can get to help them. Those of us who conduct a professional investigation must meet a far higher standard but are able to benefit from the immense resources of an interested and supportive public. But then again, maybe you already knew all this and just don't think that it's a good system. Well, it's a free country. Love to mother, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 21:36:45 EST From: Tom Cook Subject: Re: HK1 My apology to Mr. Sundstrum, for refering to the new covering on the control surfaces of the HK1 as "ceconite" I was told that by one of the volenteers at the temporary museum on Sunday Nov. 29,1998. I Emailed Gary Thompson some of the same questions, with regard to the engines of the HK1, but have not recieved an answr yet. I certainly have no desire to create ill will between the two organizations as I am a member of both. TC 2127 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:13:51 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: History Channel show Thank you so much for the civics lesson. Geez, I must have been absent that day when all this tax-exempt stuff was discussed (listening to Jim Bakker, and the "International Children's Fund" commercials, probably.) I will reiterate, you and TIGHAR have not found AE after ten years of donations, three expeditions, and lots of peripheral research that has seen more dead ends then a New York construction site. Yet, you cast aspersions on those who do not ascribe to your theories, and who are not full time employees of a "tax exempt" entity. Why aren't they out there in the Pacific trying to prove what they say? Because to prove what they theorize involves resurrecting several dead Japanese soldiers, or scouring thousands of square miles of deep Pacific Ocean with expensive equipment and manpower. *************************************************************** From Ric There's a lesson here. Never embrace a hypothesis which may actually be provable. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:22:29 EST From: Jim Tierney Subject: Re: History Channel show Ref--- Comments from Dave Kelly--- Did I miss something? Who and what organization or group-went where? To what island? When? Where was the press coverage either before or after the trip? I dont miss much but I guess I missed that------- Jim Tierney *************************************************************** From Ric Let's see ....back in the 60s Fred Goerner initiated what became a major tourist industry for the island of Saipan, which spread to the Marshalls with the help of Vince Loomis and Buddy Brennan. The most recent visit I know of which got any press coverage was by the inimitable Randall Brink who alleged that Earhart's plane could be seen in a wartime aerial photo of the Japanese airfield on Taroa in the Marshalls. CBS flew him out there for a segment on Connie Chung's "Eye to Eye." Oh - they didn't find the Electra but they did interview some guys who were quite sure that Amelia had been there. Love to mother, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:29:46 EST From: Jeff Norris Subject: Other People's Money In response to Dave's posting: Over the past few months many comments have been made regarding the use of "Other People's Money" in order for TIGHAR to conduct research. After reading Ric's explanation with regard to nonprofit organizations, I'd like to pose this question to you: Isn't ALL money used for everything in this country Other People's Money? It's not my impression that we go to a money store and get it for free. We all have the choice to direct our funds as we see fit. The federal government, in its ability to tax, gives us the option to at least make a few choices as to where some of our tax dollars go. There are many worthwhile, nonprofit organizations that deserve the support they get from their benefactors. TIGHAR is just the choice of most of the people on this forum. In my mind, at least I know how this money is being spent. When it comes to the balance of my tax dollars, well--that remains a question. LTM, Jeff Norris 2178 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:33:24 EST From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Hypoxia? Just a quick thought about the potential for Hypoxia during AE's flight to Howland. Having just been through the USAF training in the high altitude chamber in Colo Springs, It occurs to me that hypoxia may have been a contributing factor in AE's ability to DF and communicate with the radio equipment she was working with. It is well known today that flying above 10,000' is the danger zone for Hypoxia, but what about 1937? I know that the USAAF did hypoxia training for bomber crews during 1944 for example, but before WWII I suspect that not much was known about this subject. In addition, hypoxia can be experienced at much lower altitudes if the duration of the flight is extended, over 4 hours above 5000' for example, can result in a hypoxic condition. Given the 20 hour duration of the last flight, it occurs to me that there may have been a significant chance that Hypoxia may have played a role. Granted, AE was an experienced long distance / high altitude (for the day) flyer, but after 20 hours who knows what her condition would have been. What do we know about the altitudes chosen for the flight from Lae, and whether or not AE decended from her highest altitude upon approaching Howland. Just thinking out loud LTM Andrew McKenna 1045C *************************************************************** From Ric Kelly Johnson's recommended fuel management profile called for a climb to 8,000 feet where the airplane would stay for nine hours. Then he called for a climb to 10,000 for the remainder of the trip (another 10 hours or so). The Chater Report describes three position reports from Earhart which were received at Lae. At 2:18 (4 hours 18 minutes after take off) she says she's at 7,000 feet and making 140 knots. She should be at 8,000 and making 130 knots. Sounds like she might have found more favorable winds a bit lower. At 3:19 (5 hours 19 minutes into the flight) she says she is at 10,000 feet and mentions "cumulus clouds." No mention of speed. Sounds like she had to climb over some weather. (This may be where Elgen Long gets his "proof" that she was burning fuel at a higher than normal rate, but Amelia ended that transmission with the words "everything okay" and, to coin a phrase, we believe Amelia.) At 5:18 (7 hours 18 minutes) she says she is at "8,000 over cumulus clouds, wind 23 knots." Sounds like she is sticking to Johnson's plan as much as possible. Without a direction, her report of the wind speed is meaningless. For what it's worth, the forecast for the winds for that portion of the trip was 25 knots from the ESE which would give her a quartering headwind. Was hypoxia a factor? It would be hard to say that it didn't have some effect. Was it a material cause of the loss? I don't how we'll ever know. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:36:12 EST From: Stephanie Subject: Book links At least this book admits to being fiction! http://www.mysterynet.com/books/hitlist/ Found this on a mystery web site, thought you might be interested. Cause I'm sure there are going to be a whole new round of conspiracy theorists who will claim this book is the gospel! I know you get a lot of requests about books about AE, so I thought I'd pass along a link to Amazon.com's web site, which has a pretty extensive list of them, plus reviews. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/Subject=Earhart%2C%20Amelia%2C/002-7799971-5630240 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:39:57 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: History Channel show I know of no one that has received grant funding for researching AE's disappearance...do you? ************************************************************ From Ric Nope, including TIGHAR. How 'bout it Dave? Who are these Earhart scholars who have received grants.? And while you're at it, just what laurels are they resting on? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:42:54 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: History Channel show Bravo, Ric, for your response to SactoDave. And Dave, pray who do you think these "someones" are who "already knew that information, or researched it long ago?" Can you point to some examples, or do you just like to throw unfounded accusations around? Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 13:55:37 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: History Channel show Having been in a number of discussions that develop around non-profit law, I will post the following information and commentary in an attempt to head off the most common misconceptions and confusion that airs about these issues: With the exception of the examples used, Ric's explanation of 501(c)(3) {the core non-profit law} and 509(a)(2) {which seperates public charities from private foundations} is quite accurate. For the category humanitarian services, it would be far better to list groups like the International Medical Corps (IMC), Save the Children, and CARE, rather than the Red Cross, which has something of a special congressional status -- it is recognized by an Act of Congress and granted certain rights and restrictions that are unique -- or the United Way, which is more of a funding organization which redistributes donated money to member groups, all of which are non-profit organizations. Similarly, many medical research organizations (though not all) are actually defined as not-for-profit, which is quite a bit different than non-profit, public charities, though few people understand this. A not-for-profit business essentially balances out at $0 at each year end, but for all intents and purposes runs and operates like a business entity. A non-profit, public charity, conversely, may end the year with positive or negative profit, but is engaged in "charitable" operations, a term which is explicitely defined in the 501(c)(3) letter granting such status (if I had one at my elbow, I would quote from the content of the definition itself -- Ric, you may do so, please). Notably, many religious organizations and churches fall under 501(c)(3), and it is through these groups that many of the nation's charitable functions are carried out -- everything from soup kitchens to rehab centers. Educational groups are also covered 501(c)(3), likely the category that TIGHAR was approved under, though Ric could fill in these details. > the deal is, if you form an organization for an approved > purpose and promise not to pass out ("distribute" is the > term) any profit you make, but plow it all back into the > organization.... This is also a point of confusion among the public. "Plowing" it back into the organization does not necessarily mean that nobody in the non-profit group receives a salary. In many of the larger non-profit groups, extensive staff are maintained to support the purposes of the non-profit. Organizations like World Vision, Catholic Relief Services, Project HOPE, and CARE have hundreds of paid staff, tens of thousands of volunteers. However, the scale of operations precludes a strictly voluntary structure. For instance, as a case example, World Vision maintains operations in almost 100 countries, moves millions of dollars worth of food, medical supplies, and development-related cargo around the globe, and is involved in small cash grant and micro-business support programs where literally millions of dollars of funds are moved from account to account. Without paid staff, there would be no accountability, no continuity of operations and management, and no formal structure. Without these three things, particularly in that most of their operations are in the Third World and in locations where corruption and theft are rampant, paid staff for a large non-profit group like World Vision is of paramount importance. Most groups, particularly in the mid-size range like TIGHAR, maintain few if any paid staff. When they do, they often publish the salary levels and justify each dollar spent to their support base -- people like you and me who sacrifice and make donations to help others in need, to educate, and to preserve. Thomas Van Hare Historic Wings **************************************************************** From Ric Actually, the form letter you get says only that you're approved for what you asked for and doesn't define your exempt purpose but refers to the applicable sections of the code - in our case - 509 (a)(1) and 170 (b) (1) (A) (vi). Not having a copy of the IRS code kicking around the office I've never looked it up. We've probably been approved as a Recognized Cult. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 14:08:17 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Kiribati contributions Over the past few days there has been a lot of chat on the forum regarding who actually owns AE's Electra, if it is ever found. While the reality is that the government of Kiribati "owns" it today because it is (we hope) on their soil, wouldn't the Kiribati government's case be stronger if they contributed significantly to its discovery? In short, what direct aid has the government of Kiribati provided to TIGHAR in its quest? While they have allowed TIGHAR to do the search and sent along an inspector(?)/interpreter, have they provided any direct aid, i.e. funds, personnel, equipment etc.? Just curious. LTM and other non-conspirators Dennis McGee #0149 *************************************************************** From Ric One short anecdote should answer your question. Our 1991 expedition (Niku II) departed from Hawaii. When our Kiribati Customs official arrived by air from Tarawa to join up with us he had a severely abscessed molar that was causing him excruciating pain. Why would he embark on a month-long sea voyage in that condition? Because there was no dentist in Tarawa, the nation's capital. We tried to get local help for him in Honolulu but nobody would touch him because there would be no opportunity for post-operative care (because he was leaving with us). In the end, our team physician just kept him stoked up on pain killers for the duration. Kiribati is not a Third World country. They're not there yet. Kiribati is what the UN terms a "least developed nation." They have no legation to the U.S. or the U.N. because they can't afford one. Open wide, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 14:10:57 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: History Channel show Dave Kelly wrote: > I will reiterate, you and TIGHAR have not found AE after ten > years of donations, three expeditions, and lots of peripheral > research that has seen more dead ends then a New York > construction site. The other lesson here is that if the donors are willing to support the effort, then the search for Earhart and Noonan will go on -- whether or not the Dave Kellys of the world would like it to. For me, I strongly feel that if there is even a one in a hundred chance that TIGHAR is right and the evidence will be found on Nikumaroro, then it is worth supporting. Furthermore, from the evidence I've seen to date, the chances that TIGHAR is right are far higher than one in a hundred (perhaps 20 in a 100.... maybe more). In light of this, I had no qualms about sending in my donation for a multi-year membership. What would bother me more would be if nobody took the steps to find out for sure and the case was never solved. Right now, we have every bit of chance of either finding Earhart and Noonan or, in the case of finding some other wreckage, probably solving an MIA case from 60+ years ago (and let me tell you, someone's family out there would finally find peace and that would also be more than worth it all). Thomas Van Hare Historic Wings ************************************************************** From Ric Thank you Tom. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:03:33 EST From: Kari Donaldson Subject: Book Review?? Can you give me your take on the book "The Earhart Disappearance-the British Connection" by Donahue?? Thank Kari *************************************************************** From Ric Disorganized, rambling, maddening, frustrating, and hilarious. The whole world flight was one big spy mission and everyone associated with it was a spook of some sort. The "British connection" of the title was a rather pathetic character named John William Jones who worked for Burns Philp South Seas Company as an overseer on Hull Island (next island over from Niku) at the time of the disappearance. Donahue has him as some kind of James Bond figure. The captain on Gilligan's Island is closer. The really frustrating thing about Donahue's book is that he did a great deal of research and came up with a lot of good information, but he also invented a ton of garbage. He then mixed it all up together and provided no references so you can't tell which is which. For example, he presents a fuzzy aerial photo of Gardner Island which he blithely captions: "Amateur aerial photograph taken with Kodak 616 Camera of Gardner Island, Phoenix Group, from Earhart Electra on 2 July 1937" and he credits the photo "USN Office of Naval Intelligence Report." Pretty compelling huh? But we have copy of the same photo from an archive in New Zealand and a photocopy of the reverse of the original which is stamped July 9, 1937 - the date of the USS Colorado's aerial search of Gardner. The intelligence report Donahue refers to is publicly available at the National Archives and is a 1942 catalog of photos of various Pacific Islands. The subject photo is one of several of Gardner. The book can only be read as fiction. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:15:01 EST From: Dick Pingrey Subject: Repair, Restoration or Preserve as is? I think Gene Dangelo has hit the nail on the head when it comes to the repair, restoration or leave it as is approach to old aircraft. We, you and I, don't agree on which policy is correct although our differences are narrow and respectful. Certainly Ty Sundstrom doesn't agree with either of us and there are probably as many positions as there are airplanes that need consideration of how they can best be preserved. History does mean different things to different people when it comes to these airplanes. None the less, there is a need to have some guidelines and a lot of what is and has been done to historic aircraft is sad and it is due, in part, to no clear public policy. Personally, I think any airplane that has significant historic value, such as the Spirit of St. Louis, should be preserved in the state it was received by the museum rather than be made to look like it just rolled off the assembly line. On the other hand for a museum to display a Swallow airplane that has no connection to any important historic person or event with strips of worn out fabric hanging on a rusting steel tube frame does little to show the public what a Swallow airplane was like when it was an actual airworthy aircraft. The Seattle Museum of Flight has a 1926 Swallow on display that has many modern modifications such as a WW-II engine, modern fabric covering, a tail wheel rather than a skid, a pitot static system and modern instruments, etc. Nothing informs the viewing public that these modifications are not part of the original aircraft. All this may be off topic but it is important for the consideration of what is to be done with AE's airplane if and when it is found. Dick Pingrey 0908C *************************************************************** From Ric If and when we're presented with the question of what to do with whatever remains of NR16020, we'll follow established historic preservation ethics and procedures. There's no mystery about what those are. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:18:33 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: whatever Sactodave said: > ... you and TIGHAR have not found AE after ten years of > donations, three expeditions, and lots of peripheral research that has > seen more dead ends then a New York construction site. I really am curious why Sactodave is so upset over how I (and other TIGHAR members) spend our money and time. He makes it sound as if here is only a finite amount of funding out there and TIGHAR is hogging it all to itself. For cryin' out loud Sacto, start your own damned group and forum, create your own theories and hypotheses, go round up the bucks and do the legwork -- and give me call in 10 years to let me know how you're doing. Sheesh! Get a life. ((You can tell things are REAL slow here . . I'm spending wa-a-a-ay too much time on this stuff!)) LTM Dennis McGee #0149 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:21:51 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: Hypoxia? Andrew McKenna wrote: > Just a quick thought about the potential for Hopoxia during > AE's flight to Howland. As I recall, in the last segment of her flight, during which she is actively searching for the island, she was down at 1,000 feet. Perhaps someone else will recall for certain, but I remember it that way. At that altitudes, hypoxia would not be a factor. Thomas Van Hare ************************************************************** From Ric That's right. When she was looking for Howland she said she was flying at 1,000 feet (probably to get below the typical scattered cloud deck which forms at around 2,000). ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:24:36 EST From: Bill Leary Subject: Re: History Channel show From Dave Kelly: > I will reiterate, you and TIGHAR have not found AE after ten > years of donations, three expeditions, and lots of peripheral > research that has seen more dead ends then a New York > construction site. My apologies for dragging Titanic in here again, but I see a parallel, and I've been "into" Titanic a lot longer. Ballard started work on finding the Titanic in 1973 (fund raising, technology development and research at first). The location of Titanics demise was far better known than that of the AE/FN and the Electra. During the time from '73 to '85 when the ship was found, there were three expeditions that I know of (I've seen comments about others) to find the ship. The early attempts (Jack Grimm and others) failed. For that matter, Ballard and Michel failed during the first half of their search as well. All during this time bits and pieces of information kept coming to light on this supposedly "fully researched" topic (and, indeed, still do today). It was the work of actually going out and digging up information, then going to the place and looking based on that information, that finally led to the discovery. Twelve years (and that's just him, others looked longer) for a much larger object with a much better defined final resting place. There was an airplane found in a Scottish Loch a few years back. People KNEW where that puppy went down, the Loch wasn't all that big, and they looked for it twice before that. Eventually, rereading witness reports and scouting the countryside, they picked another locations, went out on another "waste of time and money" search, and found it. Keep up the good work. Personally, I'm not convinced about Nikumaroro, but it's the best case I've read the evidence for and the research is alive, not rehashed. Even if it's not there, the research will pay off. Either well get a better slant on AE and FN and their trip, or we'll find somewhere else to look, or maybe we'll find the plane and/or the crew there, or that they WERE there. No matter what, this will pay off. - Bill ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 21:41:09 EST From: Dean Andrea Subject: Re: History Channel show As far as using other people's money I gave/ will give(to TIGHAR) because I believe in what TIGHAR is doing. This is voluntary on my part. No one, including Ric, has coerced me or any other TIGHAR member I have talked to. If TIGHAR's theories are garbage as some think so be it. I made a decision and will stick by it. If I had a cause, ANY cause I believed was just, I would use any legitimate way to finance it--- this is simply common sense!! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 21:50:04 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: whatever Thank you, I already have a life. As far as "Team Building" I would advise TIGHAR members to expand their research horizons beyond the oft visited Nikku. If I were to form a group of researchers, it would include those with varying opinions, not a camp following that dogmatically adheres to one theory. ************************************************************** From Ric Uh, Dave. I wouldn't say stuff like that to this group. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 22:36:47 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: History Channel show The "Dave Kellys" of his world don't flog (or fund) a dead research horse. *************************************************************** From Ric Let me tell you something else the Dave Kellys of this world don't do. They don't get away with trying to turn an intelligent, productive forum into the World Wrestling Federation. You've been asked to support some of the allegations you've made with facts. You apparently can't do that so you've chosen instead to dispense another dose of pointless invective. Well, the party's over. Starting now I'll post only those messages you submit which contain on-topic information (in the event you should ever come across any). Love to mother, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 22:47:21 EST From: Roger Kelley Subject: Re: History Channel show For Dave Kelly I have read your posting of 12-28-98 several times and for the benefit of all who participate in this forum, I request that you answer a few questions. For clarity, I have quoted your statement first and voiced my question immediately below your statement. 1. "Someone already knew that information, or researched it long ago." What information are you speaking of and who conducted the research? 2. "Furthermore, that someone was using his own money," How much money did this "someone," spend? 3. "or had the proper credentials to perform research on AE," Who had the proper credentials and who certified those credentials? 4. "received grants to explore all aspects of the flight." Who received the grants, who issued the grants and how much money was involved? 5. "Yes, TIGHAR does much to rejuvenate the zeal to locate the crash site, but only after lot's of money has been spent, and you haven't found anything to prove your theories." Yes Dave, you're right about rejuvenating interest in AE and her fate. After all, it's my understanding that major news organizations from all over the world have been contacting TIGHAR for information, interviews and requests to participate. Please forgive me for making a statement. My question is...do you have any evidence which will disprove TIGHAR's theories? 6. "One more thing, the people you disparagingly refer to as sitting on their laurels and spouting theories without proof, possess much more knowledge than you on the subject of AE," Will you please direct me to those who have more knowledge than TIGHAR on the subject of AE? 7. " and have done considerable research on their own," Who conducted the research and what were the results of their research? 8. "or among groups with similar interests." What other groups have similar interests? Have the other groups published their findings? 9. "They have gone out to the islands in search of AE, and they've done it with their own money!" Who went to what islands, when did they go, how much money did they spend on their expeditions and did they publish their findings? Dave, I for one eagerly await your response and thank you in advance for your response to my questions. Love to mother, Roger Kelley, # 2112 **************************************************************** From Ric I will, of course, be happy to post Dave's answers. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 22:49:15 EST From: Barb Norris Subject: Re: whatever (Give it up already) Poor Dear Dave, I regret to inform you that your postings are no longer intellectually stimulating or mildly entertaining. They are simply annoying. Why not find a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen in your area that could benefit from your energies? And here's a little tip: You'll catch more flies with honey then with vinegar... Sigh, Barbara Norris #2175 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 22:55:00 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Daves' opinions Dave Kelly wrote: > Thank you, I already have a life. As far as "Team Building" I would > advise TIGHAR members to expand their research horizons beyond the oft > visited Nikku. If I were to form a group of researchers, it would > include those with varying opinions, not a camp following that > dogmatically adheres to one theory. > > ************************************************************** > > From Ric > > Uh, Dave. I wouldn't say stuff like that to this group. Ric: Please, please, don't let this get into a name calling debate. Suffice it to say that Dave Kelly, et al, have their opinions. We have ours. We know how ours were formed. Deliberate study of the true facts as researched by many people both within and without the TIGHAR organization (mostly within) is how we came to our hypothesis. If, after reading them, Dave Kelly and others still want to hold to their opinions, so be it. There are still adherents to the "Flat Earth Society" and many other similar organizations despite all the proofs to the contrary. We don't need to debate these people. They haven't come up with a shred of hard evidence to back up their contentions and they haven't any way to debunk ours. One note: if the Japanese did destroy Earharts plane on Saipan - where are the engines. They would be too big to burn or destroy except by more violent means than have been put forth so far. If the plane was merely burned, the engines would still be there, somewhere. So, why didn't the expeditions to Saipan find them? Are they still there? If they were dumped in the sea, then get those ROV's that were used on Titanic and go around Saipan in an ever increasing circle. Otherwise, please, keep your opinions to yourself. If you don't like what TIGHAR is doing, stay tuned, 'cause you'll probably like what happens next year even less! LTM Dave Bush #2200 ************************************************************** From Ric Never fear. I will not let this devolve into name calling whether by Sactodave or dogmatic camp followers like you. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 22:58:41 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: whatever Dave Kelly wrote: > If I were to form a group of researchers, it would include > those with varying opinions, not a camp following that > dogmatically adheres to one theory. If Fred Noonan's pencil washed up on the shore of California, I have little doubt that TIGHAR would look into it. Hey, the plane could be at the bottom of the ocean. Hey, the plane could be crashed on the west side of Howland Island. Hey, Earhart could have been hotdogging and cartwheeled the plane into the waves. Hey, the plane could have crash landed on Nikumaroro.... All of these are possible, though it is beginning to look more and more likely that the latter one is the truth. The reason the group is going back to Niku is because EVERY time they go, new evidence and data emerges that seem to indicate that this is the right trail. If, after Niku IIII, it turns out that the whole effort was a bust -- then it will be back to the drawing board. If in the middle of all this, a native from the Solomons remembers that during a long canoe trip years ago, he saw Earhart's plane crash in the ocean, you can believe that the group would immediately follow look into that as well. The problem with all of the conspiracy theories is that they have been studied to death and nothing ever seems to come of it. No evidence emerges -- if not a smoking gun, where is the bloody sword. What became of the bodies? Where are the records? So, Dave, why not pursue those lines of thinking yourself? Think about it. This is real -- you could do this. You could create your own non-profit, you could get all of the other conspiracy types together, and, hell, you'd probably outnumber TIGHAR 40 to 1 -- and have a bigger budget. And in the end, if you are proven right and you find the unmarked gravesite at Rabaul, you'll be famous and have the last laugh too. But in the end, I can't but imagine that everyone in this group would simply take their hat off and salute you for solving one aviation's greatest mysteries. In the meantime, we'll continue investigating this line of thinking -- and if we don't, someone else will. As for that "camp following" business. We're ALL involved here. That is what all of this discussion list is about, that is why so many people offer their help in so many ways, that is why things get done. Ric doesn't sit on a mountain top and preach the party line and gospel of truth -- if anything, he sits in the firing line, every day. Thomas Van Hare ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 23:10:27 EST From: Pamela Subject: Re: History Channel show You guys are a lot of fun!!! I really enjoy your chat. Makes these cold winter nites bareable. *********************************************************** From Ric Ohhhhkay. Who wants to follow up on this one? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 23:15:36 EST From: Art Hyland Subject: Re: TIGHAR Tracks ready I haven't been checking my email for most of this month; new job, Xmas, sick kids, etc., and boy have I missed out on a lot. Nice to hear of the exposure from the various media and programming. Speaking as a professional fundraiser, nothing does a non-profit more good than exposure, good or bad. The inquisitive pop up and next thing you know, you've got a few more supporters. Listen, I never got my December issue of Tighar Tracks. Could you please send me another copy. I believe my membership is still current. Let me know if I'm delinquent and I'll make amends. Gotta go, my 6mo old daughter is about to fall off the bed! LTM Art Hyland *************************************************************** From Ric Catch that kid Art! Your membership is cool. Don't know what happened. Either the USPS lost your TIGHAR Tracks or it was captured and taken to Saipan. We'll send out a replacement tomorrow. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 11:44:13 EST From: Stephanie Subject: Re: whatever Dave Kelly wrote: >Thank you, I already have a life. As far as "Team Building" I would >advise TIGHAR members to expand their research horizons beyond the oft >visited Nikku. If I were to form a group of researchers, it would >include those with varying opinions, not a camp following that >dogmatically adheres to one theory. ************************************************************** > >From Ric >Uh, Dave. I wouldn't say stuff like that to this group. Having been a forum subscriber for several months now, and knowing just how untrue this statement is,I just had to reply to this one. The thing I have most admired about this forum and, indeed, about Ric, is the fact that the posts that I receive do not always (or even mostly) represent ONLY Tighar's views. Thomas Van Hare, Randy Jacobson, even you, sactodave, et al, are all people who routinely post opinions and intrepretations that do not agree with Tirhar's hypothesis about AE & FN. These msgs are posted not because Ric has to, but because he is genuinely interested in facts and truth. People who back up their msgs with proof and/or logical reasons for their intrepretations of the known facts, can and do continue to post msgs that do not "dogmatically adhere to one theory". People like you, Mr. Baker, who refuse to back anything up with facts (because they only have unfounded accusations), are cut off. As they should be. Bravo Ric! In other words, Dave, back up what is coming out of your 'mouth' with facts, or bow out gracefully from this forum where frivilous and unfounded posts are not long tolerated, but facts, truth, and learned opinions (even dissenting ones) are embraced. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 11:56:32 EST From: Jon Subject: Saipan-1957--1960 While serving with the navy seabees as a second class builder on saipan I was fortunute to be involved in a number of great adventures Let me assure you I was no hero, just a lucky 17 yr. old in a place,where so many historic events took place. #1 We were a cover for covert operation at NTTU (goerners book) #2 where were the compnents for the 3rd bomb, and when bullt, where was it going. #3 was the plutonium left in the m.i. before it left for guam or did it go down with the uss indianapolis?? #4 the best for last Amelia Earhart I like my supiorior officer in guam in 1960 Chester Nimitz stated a/e most likly died at sea, but if she didn't than there is little doubt that she was taken by boat or seaplane to the island of saipan where there her fate is unknown. Before we were discouraged from investigating any further, although finding many carcusses of all types of planes, both japanese. and american.(my fellow seabees and myself, included didn't give a hoot about any of those planes,) alt of them we just pushed over the cliffts, also tanks, all types of equipment. Now, not only did goerner write a bad book, but he ruined a great way of life for a bunch of seabees in paradise. Ike had to close down NTTU and we the cover,had to go to. In conclution, my interest is the over all adventure and not just a/e. question; what islands in the pacific had runways on them, who built them, for what purpose, clippers, spy planes haha, etc,also when were they built. Also how many flights did Fred Noonan make while he was flying the clippers, or PAA, and what was the time span. About coconut crabs, you hunt at night with flashlite, step on there back, tie back pinchers shoot pformaldihide in them and mount them on a plack. eat mangoes, coconuts, snails, Ric; do you think that the shipping lanes, something that f/n new might be there best shot at getting picked up, if they had to ditch. maybe 99 is the time to find a/e Happy new year jon luck tx. there are many places on saipan to hide 2 engines. and barge with airplane with a broken wing.(if you know where to look) *************************************************************** From Ric Sorry Jon but I can't take time to catalog for you all the flights Noonan flew for Pan Am and all the islands of the Pacific that have airfields. If you can show me why this information would materially advance the search I'll be happy to try. As for shipping lanes: To fly to them to ditch, Noonan would have to know exactly where he was, and if he knew that he wouldn't need to ditch. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:16:37 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: Purdue gift and kids Jack J wrote: >It is surprising that the details of the purchase of the L-10, through Purdue >University, has never been published. I think that G.P. Putnam's >"connections," and AE's being a "counselor" at Purdue, put into motion the >unusual transaction. The "contributors" could not get a tax deduction for >"donations" made to AE and/or GPP. They could get a deduction for a donation >to Purdue. How the university's governing board allowed the aircraft to be >titled in AE's and GPP's names is still a mystery, but by no means indicative >of a conspiracy. University boards of trustees do a lot of questionable >things, usually for rich and famous or heavy contributing alumnae. In case some of you are not aware, Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, has one of the finest aeronautical engineering curriculums in the country. Such luminaries as Gus Grissom are counted among the distinguished alumni. Purdue has its own airport, and has taught many a Chuck Yeager "wannabe" to fly. (indeed, Purdue's airport doubles as Lafayette's "municipal" airport). I don't know all the details, but I suspect that Purdue's purchase of AE's Electra was intended as a "research grant" if you will, and I'll bet that Purdue fully expected to get the aircraft back when AE was finished with it. (yes, of course, they expected to get a little publicity out of it. Why hire AE as a consultant, except for the publicity? There were much better aeronautical minds out there, if they only wanted a "consultant") And that brings up the insurance question someone raised earlier... Didn't Purdue have the aircraft insured? Seems to me, if it was insured, the wreckage, if found, belongs to the insurance company. And if it was not insured, then it seems to me it still belongs to Purdue. (I don't imagine, though, that Purdue will take Kiribati to court over it, if the wreckage is found) Just my $0.02, and now I'm broke again. Tom #2179 *************************************************************** From Ric No need to speculate about this. Mary Lovell in her book "The Sound of Wings" (1989, St. Martin's Press) gives an excellent (and duly footnoted) account of how the acquisition of the airplane came about (pages 229-232). The money ($80,000) was donated through a specially-created "Amelia Earhart Fund for Aeronautical Research." Purdue did not expect to get the airplane back. I have never seen any mention of insurance on the airplane and, as a former (and reformed) aviation insurance underwriter, I can assure you that even today insuring that airplane for its intended purpose could have been accomplished only in the London market and at an astronomical premium. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:18:37 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: History Channel show Tom Van Hare wrote >What would bother me more would be if nobody took >the steps to find out for sure and the case was never solved. Right now, >we have every bit of chance of either finding Earhart and Noonan or, in >the case of finding some other wreckage, probably solving an MIA case >from 60+ years ago (and let me tell you, someone's family out there >would finally find peace and that would also be more than worth it all). Indeed. The name of the organization is The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery... not the Earhart Recovery Group. Whatever wreckage is found on Niku, or any other island, or in Maine, by TIGHAR, will likely clear up someone's mystery. Earhart is the emphasis right now, but eventually we will go on to other quests and other mysteries (if Ric isn't driven mad by all the ankle-biters out there). Hang in there, Ric. Oh, by the way... mouse pad was received yesterday. Thanks, I love it. Tom #2179 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:24:15 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: Repair, Restoration or Preserve as is? I'm still a little "up-in-the-air" about this issue of preservation. On the one hand, I like to see historic things that are exactly as they were at a certain period in time (i.e., no restoration). On the other hand, I would prefer to see the original Wright Flyer represented as Orv and Will flew it, not as it was originally received by the Smithsonian (in tattered pieces in a box, as I recall...) The Sopwith Spad on display at the Air Force Museum is another case in point. It was built from original drawings by the technicians at AFM (not sure if they built the engine, or if it was vintage). Still, I'd rather see that airplane, as they built it, on display rather than a photograph of same because an original couldn't be found. Some things just shouldn't be displayed in original form, such as the Ford coupe that Bonnie and Clyde were killed in... if you've not seen photos of this vehicle as it is now displayed, it will make you sick. On the other hand, a beautifully restored Ford coupe of the same vintage is a joy to behold. If the wreckage of NR16020 is found, and if it is determined that AE and Fred did not die in the wreckage, then perhaps displaying it "as is" is appropriate. However, if evidence suggests that they died in the aircraft, then I'd just as soon not see it. However, I would like to see an Electra 10E on display, restored to represent NR16020. That to me has educational value as well as historical merit. The Ford Museum in Dearborn has a replica of Lindberg's Ryan. Yes, I would like to see the original, but for educational purposes, isn't the replica a reasonable substitute? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder... Tom #2179 ************************************************************** From Ric The temptation is great to launch into a discussion about historic preservation. Many, many people struggle with the same back-and-forthings as Tom does about what to do with old stuff. We really need to do an on-line Aviation Historic Preservation Course. Just a matter of time and funding. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:26:07 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: whatever Dave Kelly wrote: >Thank you, I already have a life. As far as "Team Building" I would >advise TIGHAR members to expand their research horizons beyond the oft >visited Nikku. If I were to form a group of researchers, it would >include those with varying opinions, not a camp following that >dogmatically adheres to one theory. Dave, if you have a life, why are you wasting it by associating with us camp-followers on the TIGHAR forum? Why not go find a list that agrees with your point of view, and leave us to our delusions? Tom #2179 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:31:03 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: History Channel show For MY benefit, is TIGHAR claiming that they are the sole agency that researched information about AE?!? You just can't make up facts out of thin air. Where TIGHAR gets there data is where everyone gets there data, from historic records. For the benefit of you and the rest of the camp, I don't believe she was captured by the Japanese. *************************************************************** From Ric For your benefit, TIGHAR claims only that we have uncovered historical records previously unknown to those who are interested in what became of Earhart. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:46:11 EST From: Dave Kelly Subject: Re: History Channel show Sorry, I didn't scroll down far enough. If there are other organizations that provide funds from "members" to explore the theories of the few top recipients in the search for AE, and only those recipients are allowed to participate in the field work, then you tell me which ones they are? I'm waiting...tick tick tick. TIGHAR members are treated to the adventures of Indiana...sorry, Ric Gillespie Jones, traveling around the globe on a nice consulting fee, gathering up junk from remote islands, and claiming it as "significant" To London, gathering records and opinions, next stop...? He provides the absolutely comical reissue of a physician's examination of bones found on Nikku as being of a "European, female" which is opposite of the physician's, without the bones! That is just...plain...STUPID!! Mr. Reineck has gone to several islands in research of his theory, and I do not agree with his theory. The world record "Pole to Pole" pilot interviewed during the television documentary, who's name escapes me, also has visited several islands to research his theory. I personally overheard the conversation of a professor from a major midwest university discussing his research, on the island of Yap. I wish I could have talked to him, but he was with the flight crew in the back of the C-130 with the Gas Turbine Compressor whining. What little conversation was overheard was his position that AE went down at sea. Would you like me to ask Mr. Reineck how much money he spent? Why? He is not soliciting other people to pay his expenses while he explores his own theory, and that's my point. Credentials? Who among TIGHAR explorers is a professional international pilot, navigator, or Earhart Scholar? Who has flown the route from Lae to Howland? Who was present on the Itasca and communicating with AE? Who was among the search pilots who flew over Gardner? These are the people who will provide the information you need, not Ric Gillespie. ************************************************************* From Ric I really didn't know what to do with this posting. I had said that I wouldn't post anything from Dave that didn't contain some facts. Well, the tirade above does contain his explanation of what he meant about other researchers who have gone to islands. He is his own best spokesman. I hope we all now understand how Mr. Baker feels and anyone who shares his views is, of course, free to commiserate with him via private email. I'd like to ask that no one respond to the above comments unless you agree with him or have questions for me based upon his charges. I think that I've done all I can to allow him to air his views and express his opinions of me and TIGHAR and all of us on this forum. Let's let it end here and go on to more productive discussions. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:49:42 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: New Year's resolutions Here is my New Year's resolution for 1999: 1. I will not gleefully and purposely antagonize or goad conspiracy theorists to the point where they become more irrational ... just shy of that point is another matter. Are there any other TIGHAR-related New Year's resolutions out there? LTM and HNY (Happy New Year) Dennis McGee #0149 *************************************************************** From Ric I've got one. I resolve to get the Eighth Edition done by January 31st (of 1999 that is). ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:54:32 EST From: Dick Strippel Subject: Re: Book Review?? (referring to Jim Donahue, author of The British Connection) PRETTY BAD. USUAL SPY FECES. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO THIS CLOWN CALLED ME ALMOST EVERY SATURDAY MORNING. ALMOST AS BAD AS BOBBY MYERS!!!!!!! **************************************************************** From Ric Ahh Dick, you're like a breath of fresh air after Sactodave. Who is Bobby Myers? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 12:59:20 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Re: History Channel show Pamela wrote: >You guys are a lot of fun!!! I really enjoy your chat. Makes these cold winter >nites bareable. >***********************************************************> >From Ric > >Ohhhhkay. Who wants to follow up on this one?>> Hey, I'm single . . I'll take a shot at it. Pam, you don't know the meaning of fun . . . yet. Those cold winter nights are God's way of saying men and women should be together. Let us not deny the will of our creator. Some of my fondest memories are of Ohio, especially that 7-11 at 48th and Chester in Columbus ... but I want you to know I was never convicted for that . . .etc. etc. LTM Dennis McGee #0149 *************************************************************** From Ric Don't make us watch this. Any reply should be directly to Dennis. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:01:28 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: History Channel rebroadcast I caught an ad on the History channel last night just before jammyland, and the AE special is being repeated tonight (Wed/12-30) at 8PM Eastern, for those (like me) who missed it the first time. ltm jon ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:06:44 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Sextants, Reprise We are still looking for sextant records in the USN system. At this point, unlike others, I am more than ever convinced that the numbers on the box referenced in the Gallagher documents are US Navy numbers and not from Pan American Airways. Part of the reason for this is that you have to know and understand the USN system. Essentially, our emerging view -- still largely educated opinion -- is that one number refers to the sextant and the other to the eyepiece, which would have been logged separately in the US Navy system since it is, by definition, a "fine optical instrument". In the box, there would have been other items as well, but these would have been considered disposable and not worthy of tracking in the system. I'll let you know when we find the location of the USN records -- hopefully these tracking lists were not destroyed, just as wristwatch numbers were tracked and entered into logbooks as a way of helping to identify remains. Thomas Van Hare ************************************************************** From Ric Hmmm. The stencilling would make sense in a naval context, but I would have expected a plaque on the box or at least a "USN" someplace. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:12:51 EST From: Kris Tague Subject: team dynamics You might point out to members of the forum that many of our team meetings are actually open meetings, attended by TIGHAR members not a regular part of the team. This may happen informally or more formally as when the Earhart Symposium at The Hiller Aviation Museum participants joined in with the Team Meeting. People who wonder about team dynamics and indeed TIGHAR dynamics can see for themselves. White slavish follower robes are the sole responsibility of attendees. Kris *************************************************************** From Ric Oh no. Don't tell them about the robes. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:51:39 EST From: Russ Matthews Subject: Questions and Answers I know how one becomes a professional pilot or navigator, but how does one go about becoming a "professional Earhart Scholar?" Is there a course of study at a "major midwest university" (taught in noisy cargo planes) or perhaps even a doctoral program? If just one of us could become a Doctor of Earhart, our arguments might carry more weight with the likes of Sactodave. Unfortunately, I wasted my time on a History degree. I do know that the name of that "Pole to Pole" pilot is Elgen Long - will that get me into the advanced course? Actually, I think time is the key. Sacto has nothing but contempt for TIGHAR, yet he has high regard for men whose names he can't even remember. Maybe that's because his heroes have each spent over thirty years not finding Amelia, while TIGHAR has only spent ten. OK, I'm crossing into WWF territory here, but I feel I have to jump into the ring... TIGHAR is not just one man. It is a living, growing collection of bright, passionate outspoken people. Ric does not dictate their energies, but harnesses and focuses them. Unlike, the various conspiracy theorists who wear their "lone gunman" status like a badge of honor, TIGHAR finds strength in numbers. Our members have and will continue to produce solid, meaningful work because they give so freely of their time, expertise, money, and opinions. The level of co-operation, humor, determination, and sheer courage I have seen in these individuals - whether in the field or on this Forum - makes me very proud to be associated with them, with TIGHAR. Of course, I'm speaking for myself here...Ric for damn sure doesn't speak for me and I wouldn't dare put words into my fellow TIGHARs mouths. LOVE TO MOTHER Russ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:54:31 EST From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Re: History Channel show This is one of the things I love about this forum: its humanness! And, just for the record, I'm single too! Happy New Year! Gene Dangelo :) ************************************************************** From Ric Maybe we're missing a fund-raising opportunity here. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:58:05 EST From: George Kastner Subject: Re: History Channel show Ric and Pat-- If the TIGHAR moderated forum has any major flaw at all, it is that its moderators let too much of their valuable time and energy be diverted into dealing with those who have no grasp whatsoever of historical investigation or research principles. Pat and Ric, you are too indulgent to them by a factor of about 10. Let them start their own forum. Let them start their own "research" groups. Let them put up their own money--any money at all--for their own trips to quite literally the middle of nowhere. Put please drop them from this fine forum much, much sooner. Respectfully, G. Kastner #0862C ************************************************************** From Ric I have to take the blame for this one. If it was up to Pat ol' Sacto would have been twisting slowly in the wind long ago. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 21:02:55 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: Sextants, Reprise Ric wrote: > Hmmm. The stencilling would make sense in a naval context, but > I would have expected a plaque on the box or at least a "USN" > someplace. Not necessarily true since the box itself wasn't the item of value. Also, in most cases military equipment is acquired from civilian contractors, and some of it is "dual use", meaning both military and civilian issue. Additionally, some items are inter-service -- a sextant, for instance may have been produced for civilian, Coast Guard, and Navy use. Thus, the device itself may or may not be marked. The packaging, case, box, etc., also may or may not be marked. All of this depends on the item and the policies of the controlling logitics agency. Today, for instance, camera gear issued is not marked with a USN label -- either on the camera or on the camera case -- the serial number, however, is carefully tracked and logged when it is issued to the sailor. There is often no clearly definitive reason why some things are marked and others are not. And it is not strictly with regard to value; the camera, for instance is unmarked, but the sailor's shirt has a label that reads something on the order of "Property of US Navy". Thomas Van Hare *************************************************************** From Ric I guess the key will be whether the 3500 and 1542 fit into the system. If they do, it will be a pretty good indicator that the sextant box found on Niku with the bones in 1940 was once U.S. Navy property. What, I wonder, will that tell us? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 21:14:23 EST From: Tom King Subject: Saipan Motors Re. Dave Bush's question: "if the Japanese did destroy Earharts plane on Saipan - where are the engines. They would be too big to burn or destroy except by more violent means than have been put forth so far. If the plane was merely burned, the engines would still be there, somewhere. So, why didn't the expeditions to Saipan find them?' Dave, I lived on Saipan for the better part of two years (1977-78), and for what it's worth, it would be real easy to lose an airplane engine there. The island was fiercely bombarded before the 1944 invasion, and then the Seabees did a really good job of flattening the rubble, building huge fuel tank farms (for the bombers that were based there to hit the Japanese homeland), jetties, runways and the like. A lot of stuff got buried and pushed into the ocean -- there's a breakwater that's allegedly made up mostly of Japanese tanks. I don't think the Electra was on Saipan any more than most other TIGHARites do, but not because the engines would have been found if it had been. You could lose the engines of the Starship Enterprize amid the WWII junk on and around Saipan. Love to Motors Tom King *************************************************************** From Ric If you're looking for a reason that Tom Devine could not have seen the Marines drag Earhart's airplane out of a hangar on Aslito airfield and burn it, try the fact that all the hangars at Aslito were destroyed in the capture of the airfield, and it was the Army that did it. The Marines weren't there. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 21:56:59 EST From: Cameron Warren Subject: NOONAN'S SEAT In the message headed "Re: Industrial Espionage" dated 23 Dec 1998, you make one of those gratuitous, undocumented statements you are so quick to chastise we lower primates about. You say Noonan "rode up front most of the time, contrary to legend." In my many years of researching Earhart, I've NEVER seen any factual documentation as to where Fred customarily sat, (back or front). Oh yes, there are photos showing him emerging from the cockpit hatch, etc., but that could well be a "photo op" situation. Everything I've ever read would indicate he dutifully manned his navigator's post back in the cabin, somewhat illogically perhaps, when he could have been looking for Howland from the right-hand seat, but AE was running the show. However, I'd be happy to accept your premise if you can back it up. And as to the optical glass window - you have (I understand) a good collection of photos, what do they show? Heavens, don't tell me Joe Klaas is right about a plethora of Electras, all numbered NR16020! Cam Warren ************************************************************** From Ric Okay Cam, let's dismiss all the photos which show Noonan climbing in through the cockpit hatch (including the Lae departure film) as staged photo ops cleverly designed to make us all think that Noonan rode up front. This conspiracy is reinforced by the total absence (as far as I know) of any photo or film of Noonan entering the airplane by the cabin door. The purpose of this subterfuge, however, escapes me. Let's also discount as anecdotal the statement made to me a few years ago by the late Bo McKneely (Earhart's mechanic) that, "That Noonan fellow thought all that fancy navigation station stuff back in the tail was unnecessary. He rode up front where there was a comfortable seat and he could see something." Let's instead, take Amelia's word for it. In her handwritten notes from the earlier portions of the world flight, now in the Purdue Special Collection, she makes repeated references to things Noonan is doing which sound very much like he is beside her rather than out of sight back in the tail. For example: "Sea hazy. Sun blazing on left. Few fuzzy clouds. Freddie looking for lighthouses." (Note: in the heavily edited "Last Flight" Freddie becomes Fred.) "6:35 We sight a reef. Freddie said we'd pass one at 6:40. Pretty good." "Freddie points out a submerged (partly) wreck off shore." "I could not cut so straight without a navigator. We are looking for little rocks which just poke their heads above the water." "Freddie goes back to catch a bug." (Note: reference to taking an air sample by opening the cabin door and sticking a small bottle out into the slipstream. This was an attempt to determine what microscopic organisms - bugs - might be in the upper atmosphere.) And in Last Flight there is a passage on page 81 (of my edition) in which Amelia refers to some peanuts she bought in a West African market: "Subsequently, as we munched them, Fred and I might have been in the bleachers of a ball-game back home, instead of in the cockpit of a plane spanning remote deserts." Clearly, he did spend at least some time back in the tail. In an air-to-air photo taken over Java, only AE can be seen in the cockpit. But the available evidence supports the notion that he rode up front most of the time - which, as you point out, makes more sense. And as to the optical glass windowAnd as to the optical glass window - as I said - it goes away in Miami, never to return. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 12:56:18 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Why we search. This came in through the website from someone who - as far as I know - is not on the forum. He didn't intend it as a forum posting so I'll not include his name, but I think he raises a good question which I enjoyed answering and I want to share it with all of you. *************************************************************** > Friends of mine ask me why am I so interested in AE and subscribe to TIGHAR. > They know little, but know enough to point out that, like many icons of the > 20th century, the heroine images we see of AE standing valiantly next to her > Electra, are to a large extent public relations photo-ops orchestrated by > Putnam. Are we searching for AE because her trip is of historical interest, > because we admire her so much, because she was so fascinating and gifted, or > because of the images that Putnam helped create of her, or some combination? Are we searching for Amelia because her trip is of historical interest? Yes and no. Her trip, even had she completed it, was of no particular historical significance. It was a stunt and a fairly meaningless one at that. What makes it historically interesting is the fact of the disappearance and the public's reaction to it. Are we searching for Amelia because we admire her so much? I think that many people care about finding out what really happened to her because they have come to admire the icon she has become. Was the real Amelia Earhart an admirable person? I honestly don't know. Are we searching for Amelia because she was so fascinating and gifted? Are we talking about the myth or the person? I think you accurately perceive the situation. We're trying to find Amelia because enough people want her found to make it possible (maybe) to find her. Whether or not the public adulation is warranted is immaterial. TIGHAR is searching for Amelia because the mystery presents an opportunity to exercise the kind of critical thinking, scientific methodology and rational thought that is so badly needed in our daily lives and in the education of our children. Amelia is a package in which to wrap the greatest gift a teacher can give a student or we can give ourselves - the gift of how to think. Ric Gillespie TIGHAR ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 13:08:37 EST From: Roger Kelley Subject: Re: I'll try....... Pamela wrote: > You guys are a lot of fun!!! I really enjoy your chat. Makes these cold > winter nites bareable. If the weather is that cold, might I suggest that you come on out to the land where AE's Electra was built and repaired. The Newhall, my home sweet home in Valencia, is a 30 min drive from Burbank. Can't say much more other than I have attached our local weather report. Love to mother, Roger Kelley, #2112 (is this off topic or what?? Happy New Year! *********************************************************** From Ric If I charge a finder's fee can I be brought up on charges of "procuring?" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 13:12:14 EST From: Bob Cole Subject: Re: Saipan Motors For what it's worth, my father was on Saipan from 1944 through the end of the war, in the Army. Ric is correct, the Marines were not there. I recall on several occasions when we would see or hear stories of an Electra sighted on Saipan near the end of WWII, later burned, he would tell me those stories were pure BS. As a staff sergeant and company clerk, his duties took him all over that island, he would repeatedly tell me he knew EXACTLY what hanger they were talking about, and there never was any airplane even approximating a Lockheed Electra, Beech 18, or any other small twin on Saipan while he was there (before you conspiracy guys say we don't know one airplane from another, I am a commercial pilot, and he held a BBA in Aviation Management from University of Georgia). No great pronouncements here, just a casual observation. My father passed away in 1991, I wish he were still alive to ask more questions about this. Bob Cole *************************************************************** From Ric But apparently there was a hangar standing, or was it a hangar erected by the Army? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 13:37:56 EST From: Cameron Warren Subject: Re: NOONAN'S SEAT Fair enough - I haven't seen the Purdue notes as yet. But the case would be stronger if there was a confirming source. And this stirs up the old question; why wasn't Fred ever talking on the radio? I'm sure he knew a lot more about DF/radio operation than AE ever did. Final point - not intended as argument - but I never had a lot of faith in remarks made by McKneely, Buzz Furman et al. As YOU have pointed out, anecdotal evidence (of that sort) is suspect. Which is why Goerner would ask questions over and over again of an interviewee (over a substantial time span), and would wrap up a series of (letter) exchanges with a questionaire. (Such as "you stated they only used morse code" and then requested confirmation, denial and/or an expanded response. Very professional indeed). ************************************************************** From Ric I don't know what makes you think that Noonan "knew a lot more about DF/radio operation than AE ever did." The Pan Am clippers carried a dedicated radio operator. Radio communication and DFing were not part of his job. Chater's report from Lae says that Fred's morse code skills were no better than AE's. I do have to agree with you about the unreliability of statements by McKneely. Like Al Bresnik (Earhart's "official photographer") and Harry Balfour (the Lae radio operator), Bo later claimed that Amelia considered taking him along on the flight and if she had, maybe she wouldn't have been lost. (Come to think of it, I seem to recall Amelia asking me to come along. I had to turn her down. I remember exactly what I said. "Gosh AE, I'm awfully sorry, but I won't be born for another ten years.") Francis "Fuzz" (not Buzz) Furman was apparently one of the few who weren't invited. Fuzz struck me as a pretty sharp guy when I interviewed him in 1987. Interviewing witnesses is an art unto itself. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 13:41:26 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: New Year's resolutions I hereby resolve to renew my membership to TIGHAR when it comes due (not now, Ric, too many Christmas bills to pay) and also to promote the TIGHAR "dogma" whenever possible. If this results in Ric and Pat enjoying a decent living by the salary they earn from TIGHAR, so be it. They deserve it. Warmest wishes to all for a happy and prosperous New Year. Tom #2179 *************************************************************** From Ric Here, here! I'll drink to that! (I say, Jeeves, be a good fellow and bring me a whiskey.) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 13:43:46 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: Book Review?? Dick Strippel wrote: >(referring to Jim Donahue, author of The British Connection) > > PRETTY BAD. USUAL SPY FECES. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO THIS CLOWN CALLED ME >ALMOST EVERY SATURDAY MORNING. ALMOST AS BAD AS BOBBY MYERS!!!!!!! > >**************************************************************** >From Ric > >Ahh Dick, you're like a breath of fresh air after Sactodave. Even usual spy feces is a breath of fresh air after sactodave. Tom #2179 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 14:44:16 EST From: Cameron Warren Subject: Re: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS, etc. Skimming through the pile of TIGHARMAIL accumulated over the holidays, I noticed a certain amount of fairly reasonable potshots taken at The Royal Churl himself (Ric, for those of you who are more loyal than perceptive). And a lot of heart-warming support reminiscent of the Beany Baby crowd. (Impressive! They didn't teach Charisma 101 when I went to school - I think it was a '60s thing, like bombing the university physics lab in the interests of World Peace). Not to be ungrateful - Ric DOES share information willingly when asked politely, although ACCEPTING anything not conforming to his Earhart scenario is a different matter - but sactodave has a point or two. The Gospel According to TIGHAR1 emphatically states that nobody but TIGHAR has ever come up with any new information, and implies nobody has gone to any trouble visting islands, spending any time or money on serious research, etc. etc. Not true, of course, and at least a couple of TIGHARettes know this. Some of your favorite targets have been unjustly maligned, even considering that they may espouse some rather far out ideas. Jim Donahue is an example, and yes, he should have done a better job of segregating the wise from the weird. Fred Goerner spent 25 or so years after he wrote THE SEARCH FOR . . . diligently burrowing into newly opened government files, doing voice interviews, corresponding with AE's contemporaries, writing articles and pursuing every likely lead. And mostly using his own money. (Note that he completely reversed himself re the Saipan scenario). Rollin Reineck has been mentioned, deservedly. Joe Gervais is still collecting every scrap of info about Earhart. Your nemesis Bill Prymak doesn't quit either, nor does Dick Strippel. All these, and many more, have contributed in varying degrees - they just don't beat their chests as loudly as the leader of the T-Gang. And maybe, given the (apparent) public mood now existing in this country, that's a mistake. But I digress. And how about Cam Warren? I thought he (and an accomplice) accomplished something by investing three weeks and a lot of money having a first hand look at Winslow Reef (which might qualify as an "island" for the sake of this discussion.) And I feel I've made two or three other significant discoveries while digging through the long-cold ashes of the Earhart saga. (Such as why AE's receiver apparently didn't work, and some solid information re the whole DF situation). I was also old enough to read the newspapers when AE disappeared - and thought the attack on the Panay was a bigger story. So poke amongst the bones as you will, and I'd be delighted if you could announce (truthfully this time) "The Mystery Is Solved!". Meanwhile, cut us poor, under-financed and un-loved grubbers a little slack. (Brink, Klaas and other successful authors will have to defend themselves.) 30 (as we used to say in the olden days). Cam Warren *************************************************************** From Ric Well Cam, I hope you got that out of your system because it's the last time I'm going to let you embarrass yourself in front of these good people. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 14:51:04 EST From: Suzanne Tamiesie Subject: Re: Editing I heartily endorse G. Kastner's suggestion and Pat's inclination to more vigorously edit the forum to eliminate those postings which have no scientific basis. Best regards, Suzanne Tamiesie #2184 ************************************************************** From Ric Yes Ma'am. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 19:19:55 EST From: Mike Subject: Historic preservation > The Ford Museum in Dearborn has a replica of Lindberg's Ryan. Yes, I would > like to see the original, but for educational purposes, isn't the replica a > reasonable substitute? They also have the chair Lincoln was shot in, complete with crusted blood. That would seem to be a lot closer to the Bonnie and Clyde car. My feeling is that a real wreck isn't that interesting to look at anyway. Museums often display parts of things, e.g. "Instrument panel from Earhart's Electra" rather than a big ball of scrap. If the plane is found fairly complete that's another story. ************************************************************** From Ric You have a common misconception about the Lincoln chair. That's not dried blood. It's the grease men used to put on their hair. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 19:23:53 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: ID Marks on Military Equipment For what it may be worth, in the matter of identification marks or stencils on military equipment, these thoughts: I tend to agree with Ric that the Navy more than likely would have specified a little brass plaque on the box. This plaque would have had the numbers stamped into it. Probably it would be around an inch by an inch in size and would say something like, "Navy Department, Bureau of Ships" and then have the equipment type ("Sextant") and a military model number or specification number. Example from the radio arena: The tag reads as follows: (and again, I know this isn't a sextant box but it does serve as an example) NAVY DEPARTMENT -- BUREAU OF SHIPS RADIO TRANSMITTER TYPE CBY-52232 A UNIT OF MODEL ATA RADIO EQUIPMENT CONTRACT No. CONTRACT DATE: AIRCRAFT RADIO CORPORATION BOONTON, NJ The box itself would probably not have had such a nomenclature; the tag would refer to the instrument it contained (although that might not always be true). The tag would be held to the box by small rivets or brads in each of its corners. It would have a raised-edge border, and the lettering would likewise be raised, with the "background" painted in either blue, black or red enamel. This is the sort of tag which was used to identify all types of Navy radio equipment, and I have seen its like used on many other items such as range finders, etc., on board ships. Visit a preserved naval vessel, such as the battleship USS North Carolina (at Wilmington) and see what I mean, if you don't have the opportunity to board a Navy ship in service. (Actually the USS NC and her sisters are a better choice because the style of ID marking plaques and placards date from closer to the era we are concerned with.) However, a sextant box might not have been markedwith a placard. Numbers might, indeed, have been painted or stenciled. Nevertheless, I too would expect some kind of marking to identify the item as Navy property. Some things to look for might be: A small "USN" or "U.S. Navy;" or An anchor symbol of some sort. Again, referring to radios: Almost every WW2 (and pre-war too) Navy radio I have ever seen has, somewhere on its outer cover or cabinet or on the outside of the chassis, a stenciled anchor, usually in yellow paint, about 1/4 to 1/2 inch tall. Here I am somewhat guessing; but I would be willing to bet that this mark was applied when the item of equipment was initially delivered to and accepted by the Navy from the manufacturer, and/or checked out for the first time before being issued. I don't see any reason why such a mark might not have been applied to a sextant box. As for equipment being "interservice:" No way. Not in the 1930s. The Army and Navy were extremely territorial, and both the Navy Dept. and the War Dept. had their separate purchasing and procurement systems. Joint service procurement and contract-issuance did not come about until WW2 forced it on the military. 73 GM AR Mike E. #2194 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 19:28:55 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: Noonan and the radio Maybe a dumb question, but why, since it appears that Noonan spent so much time in the co-pilot's seat, wasn't Fred the one operating the radio during the Lae to Howland leg of the trip? Seems to me that he could have been at least as proficient an operator as A.E., yet in my recollection it seems that A.E.'s was always the voice heard speaking, throughout the entire trip. Was there some protocal that required only the pilot being the voice radio operator? Seems to me, given the obvious problems A.E. had in trying to home-in on any signals from Itaska, it would have been more practical to have Noonan handling the dials, or was he?? Don Neumann sandon@webtv *************************************************************** From Ric It's all a matter of speculation but it doesn't seem at all strange to me that AE was the one on the radio while Fred devoted his energies to trying to figure out where the hell they were and what they should do next. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 19:42:02 EST From: Tim Heck Subject: Re: whatever (Give it up already) Would everybody calm down!!! I think cabin fever is hitting the group. Knock it off. Tim Heck Member #2208S ************************************************************** From Ric There's something priceless about an admonition to calm down followed by three exclamation points. We're okay Tim. Really. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 19:53:17 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS, etc. I couldn't help myself, I conferred with Mr. Webster to discover that the #1 definition of "churl" is a freeman of the lowest rank. I guess my interpretation of that would be churl = independent. "Lowest rank" I would interpret to be just one of us. All things considered, I guess I for one like the idea that this inquiry is being moderated by an independent. Assimilate facts and adjust the theories when justified in doing so, share information, maintain your standards, and Happy new year to mother jon ps - hope to get my number soon. *************************************************************** From Ric Well, if a churl is an independent freeman who is "just one of us" then, as Carol Channing used to sing, "I enjoy being a churl."