Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:14:16 EST
From:         Bob Brandenburg
Subject:      Radio and Antenna Info Request


I'm hoping the forum can provide the following information:

For ITASCA's shortwave receivers:

1).   What was their sensitivity at 3105 KHz and 6210 KHz?

2).  Were the S-meters scaled from S1 to S5, or from S1to some higher S-number?

3).   What was the sensitivity calibration  corresponding to the highest S-number on the scale?

4).  What was the scale factor in dB per S-unit?

For AE's  shortwave transmitter:

1.)  What was the output power (input to the antenna) at 3105 KHz and at 6210 KHz?

2.)  Was the dorsal vee antenna on the Electra intended to excite the entire aircraft structure as a radiating body?  If so, what would be a good approximation for the gain of the composite radiating body?

3).  If the dorsal vee was intended to be the principal radiator, what would be a good approximation for its gain in each of the 000, 090, 180, and 270 degree relative bearings with respect to the aircraft's nose?

The antenna gain (directivity) is significant not only for analyzing the implications of the observed signal strength changes during the approach to the vicinity of Howland Island, but also for estimating the radiated power from Niku under the assumption that AE successfully landed the aircraft intact on the tidal flats, and was transmitting with the aircraft in its normal three-point attitude on the ground.  This would have elevated the front end of the vee antenna at an angle of about 20 degrees from the horizontal.  And the effective  radiated power in the direction of Wailupe in Hawaii could have been significantly different depending on whether AE landed heading Northwest or
Southeast.

Thanks in advance for any insights you can provide.

LTM,
Bob Brandenburg

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

I'm way outside my pay grade on this stuff but it occurs to me to wonder whether ITASCA even had an "S meter" or if it was purely a judgment call by the operator. Let's hear from the gurus.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:32:59 EST
From:         Dave Baker
Subject:      Re: More info on Book--"Record Setting Pilot"

This sounds reasonable. I would like to meet the Longs and discuss their research, as Ric should.  I have always theorized that they went down at sea, the single question is...which direction from Howland?. Ric demands proof of this theory before he will abandon the Nikku version, and that has been his saving grace in this forum. I told Ric that he is wasting time and money re-exploring Nikku, and that I would donate money to an organization that would explore the ocean near of Howland. I also told him that this would cost a lot of money, and weeks..possibly months,  of tedious searching. If Ric is  willing to put off the next Nikku adventure, and donate some of TIGHAR's expertise to help the Longs, that would probably go a long way towards solving the great mystery we all want solved.

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

I'm not often at a loss for words, but this one came close.  Do I give everyone the impression that I just fell off the turnip truck?  We've been working on this thing for ten years.  We started from where Elgen is now.  Do you really think that I have not sat with Elgen and Marie in their home and discussed Earhart theories with them?  Have you somehow gotten the impression that Elgen and I haven't freely shared information?  That I haven't seen his videos and heard him present his case in person at several events?   Elgen is a fine gentlemen and he and Marie have been working on the Earhart case far longer than we have - but his theory is deeply flawed and does not stand up to rational scrutiny.  The notion of a deep water search for NR16020 (besides being not justified by the evidence) is logistically ludicrous given the available technology.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:37:03 EST
From:         Dave Baker
Subject:      Re: On Becoming Over Critical of Opposing Viewpoint

I had to look up "invective" I assume you are using that term in it's proper context. I have been as reasonable in this forum as any TIGHAR member. To express the views I hold would tend to brand me as an iconoclast among the fiercely devoted TIGHAR "litter" but I have not been abusive toward anyone, nor have I used profanity. Your interpretation of my position is that I am against locating AE because I don't believe she crashed at Nikku. That is absolutely incorrect. There are many people like myself who would enjoy the challenge of locating historically significant aircraft. However, the odds of actually finding AE or the White bird are as long as the time it would take in a treacherous environment to locate a hulk that would not resemble an airplane, but much more like another rock on the bottom of the ocean. It is next to impossible to find such wreckage after sixty years of exposure to all the elements beneath the surface. That is why Ric's position is safe, because he has no proof other than a few insignificant traces of human habitation on Nikku, yet,  he challenges anyone else to locate AE's airplane where it can't be found, but in all probability, where it actually is.

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

From Ric

Now I'm really confused.  Aren't you the guy who just suggested that I should help Elgen Long look for NR16020 on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean?
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:42:40 EST
From:         Dave Baker
Subject:      Re: Opposing viewpoints

>From Mike (miker@primenet.com)
>
>I suspect he could count them on whichever finger he doesn't have up
>his...... (Sorry, Ric.)

If that isn't "abusive" I don't know what is!!

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

Yes.  That was abusive.  I shouldn't have posted it.  I'm sorry.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:49:29 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Elgen Long book

Ric says:

>I'm quite sure that at one time or another we've walked every inch
>of shoreline, but that doesn't mean much.  In many, if not most, areas there
>could be a 747 parked 40 feet back in the bush and you wouldn't know it.

Let me elaborate a bit, and give Jon a bit more background.  In '89 we foolishly set out to look at the whole bloody island; I anticipated being able to cut transects across the thing about every five to ten meters and look at it intensively.  Didn't work; the veggies are just too dense and nasty.  But we DID look as closely as we could at the whole place.  In some cases this involved organized transect surveys; in other cases it was just getting through the bush as well as we could and looking as carefully as we could, and in some cases all we did was kind of poke around the edges.  We did walk the entire perimeter, and boated along the lagoon shore, as well as working our way through the interior wherever we could; I have a rather complicated map showing survey coverage.  The area where the wreckage was reported by the folks on Funafuti is, naturally, one of the areas where we didn't look very hard.  We walked the beach, sort of peered back into the (VERY thick) Scaevola, and then a couple of team members came at the area from the inland side, looked over the area inland from the heavy bush, and then hacked their way out to the beach.  There's lots of opportunity for stuff -- Electras, 747s, a Klingon Bird of Prey -- to be down in the bush, and/or buried in the surge ridge that runs back of the beach in many places (and tends to support dense Scaevola).

As for dirt bikes, the problem isn't getting around the beach; the island isn't so big that it can't be accessed, and walking along the shore is pretty much like walking along the shore anyplace else in the world -- pretty nice. It's the vegetation that's a problem, and that can be handled as long as we're looking at a defined area of reasonable size.  What we can't do is look in detail at the whole island -- at least not without Agent Orange or napalm, which wouldn't go over at all well with the natural environment.

Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:57:09 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Capitol statues

Don't forget that Rocky Marciano died in a plane crash!

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

Yes.  Please submit future nominations for Capitol statues of Famous Americans Who Bit The Big One In Airplanes to the United States Congress (trivia@capitol.gov)
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:08:53 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Aircraft Skin (2-2-V-1)

Aluminum is aluminum is aluminum....  But it ain't all the same.  I'm speaking of the element aluminum, not an aluminum alloy.

This may be about as far out as looking for Fred Noonan's fingerprints on that sextant box.  The box we don't have!

But we do have some peices of aluminum that might still tell us something more. Of course, one of particular interest is artifact 2-2-V-1.  Alcoa says the alloy produced in the 1930s is indistinguishable from that produced today although the designation has changed.

I presume they mean that the proportions of aluminum, copper, manganese and magnesium in alloy 2024 is the same as in the 24S produced in 1930s.  A chemical (metallurgical) analysis would not distinguish a piece of a mid-1930s aircraft from a piece of some WWII aircraft.

Maybe a closer look would reveal some differences.  I've not looked into this critically but it seems that aluminum produced from ore (usually bauxite) from different parts of the world may have different proportions of the several isotopes.  Why this should be is apparently not understood. Perhaps the same is true for isotopes of some of the other constituents.

I find indication that prior to about 1938, most aluminum produced by Alcoa was from bauxite from South America.  Around 1938, there began a concerted effort to reduce our dependence on foreign sources for our aluminum.  There are large deposits of bauxite in a number of areas within the US.  Arkansas is a major source of bauxite used by Alcoa begining in the late 1930s.

A mass spectrometer might show differences in the aircraft aluminum available in the mid-1930s and that produced shortly thereafter.  This would by no means be definitive but it might be one more of the many "could be" sort of things that cause us to persist in thinking Amelia and Fred may have been on Niku.

It might be interesting to do comparative mass spectrometry on some of the various pieces of aluminum we have, or know to exist, that might have come from Amelia's Electra.  Of course, there's artifact 2-2-V-1 and somebody has a wood box with inlaid pieces of aluminum said to be from the airplane that was on Niku when the first settlers arrived... and there's that piece of the Electra recovered from the mishap in Hawaii (the paint color sample).  These could, in turn, be compared to more recently produced aluminum.

If we were inclined to engage in this kind of wild-goose chase, we would need someone who could get some mass spectrometer time for free.  I don't know that I could do anything with this aspect of it.  It's been too long. All the people I once knew are long gone, on way or another.

One further thought relative to the box with inlaid aluminum pieces... If the thickness of these pieces has not been altered (if hammered or sanded, it would show), it would be interesting to know how thick they are.  Maybe they're 0.032 inches thick and maybe they were once part of artifact 2-2-V-1.

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

I think we have an adequately large flock of wild geese at the moment so we'll pass on the isotopes in the hope of finding something a bit more conclusive.

The inlaid aluminum from the box is indeed .032 thick, but that's a fairly common thickness for airplane skin and 2-2-V-1 does not have any pieces cut out of it (except the hunks cut out by Alcoa for testing).
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:14:10 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: ITASCA smoke

If someone is going to study the Itasca smoke, I think the interest will be in what was burned to heat the water in the boiler... Uh, pressure vessel, that is! What were they burning?  Oil?  Surely not coal.

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

From Ric

Oh, it's a lot better than that....but I won't steal Bob Brandenburg's thunder.  I'm sure he'll be happy to share his thoughts when he's ready.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:16:46 EST
From:         Dev
Subject:      Ms. Found in a Bottle

"Nippon nom"

"Nipp—n" is Japanese for "Japanese"

"nom" is French for "name"

"Japonais" is French for "Japanese" (singular)

"namaŽ" (sometimes abbreviated to "na") is Japanese for "name"

Deb
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:41:38 EST
From:         Tracy Edson
Subject:      Re: Elgen Long book

In a recent reply concerning the wreck photo, jon 2266 closes with the oft- cited "ltm" for "love to mother".  I know this refers to the Brink book (which has its own wrecked plane photo), but I'm new enough here not to know TIGHAR's conclusion on the note and the plane.  Compared to notes in bottles, or your own photo of unknown origin,  would you give a brief summary of their validity?  You could also point me and other newcomers to any Archives for homework.

Love to matriculate,
Tracy Edson

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

Yes indeed.  It's time once more for the "Love to mother" briefing.  But first - Brink's "wreck photo" can be dealt with very quickly.  In his book "Lost Star" he reproduces a wartime aerial photo of a Japanese airfield on Taroa atoll in the Marshalls.  He enlarges the image of what he says is a twin- tailed airplane with a missing wing and raises the suspicion that it is NR16020 because "The Japanese built no twin-tailed monoplanes either before or during WWII."  It is not apparent from the photo that the airplane is twin-tailed, but even if it is, the truth is that the Japanese built and used several twin-tailed types before and during the war, including many license-built Lockheed Model 14s.

Errors of historical fact are not uncommon in Earhart books, but Brink probably holds the record for outright fiction.  His treatment of the "Morgenthau transcript" is another whopper and has been discussed at length on this forum.  Due to space limitations we have to limit the available forum archives to the past few months.  Currently, January through March of 1999 are available by the following procedure:

First, send an email to:

listserv@home.ease.lsoft.com

with the command:

INDex earhartforum   (that's all you have to put in the body of the message)

You'll get back a list of all the archive files available. It will look like
this:

  EARHARTFORUM  LOG9901
  EARHARTFORUM  LOG9902
  EARHARTFORUM  LOG9903


Choose the one you want and send another email to

listserve@home.ease.lsoft.com with the command:

GET EARHARTFORUM LOG [whichever one you wanted]

so if you wanted the log for February, your message would read:

GET EARHARTFORUM LOG9902

Within a few minutes you'll get back a confirmation message, and a separate file with the log you wanted. It will come as a downloadable text file, too large for most email software. They'll open in any word processor.

And now, about Love to mother:

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. Kuppinger, 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:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:49:26 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Elgen Long book

Tom,
Thanks for the additional insight.  Sounds like a fun place to visit!
ltm
jon
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:58:26 EST
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Re: Radio and Antenna Info Request

Re the receiver S-meter:  What type receiver was it, aboard Itasca?

The only thing I have ever seen to offer a clue, is some video from one of the TV shows over the last couple or three years, which is of a shipboard radio room.  Anybody know the source of this video or film?  Is it actually the Itasca's radio room, or only "stock footage"?

The receivers I saw in that video were of the correct vintage... they looked like RCA Model AR-60.  Someplace, I have a technical review article of that radio, in a 1936 magazine.  I'll look it up to see what clues there are to the S-meter... but let me warn you!  There were no real "standards" for sensitivity vs. S-meter calibrations in those days, and even today this is still an almost arbitrary relationship.  Manufacturers want their receivers to "look" sensitive, so they often "fudge" the S-meter scales to make the meter read somewhat higher on weak signals than it really should.

What this article will tell us, is RCA's CLAIMED specs for the AR-60... and some idea of how the reviewer feels they are/are not valid.

As for the aircraft antenna:  I don't know any way to definitely establish its gain or directivity at either frequency... but this is not an "ideal" antenna.  Aircraft antennas are quite unpredictable, because of the close proximity of the mass of the aircraft structure, which is at GROUND potential.  This airplane did NOT have any means for using the entire aircraft as a radiating element... and even today this is quite uncommon (I think the C-5A uses an arrangement like this in which the wings may be used for an antenna... but that is about the only one I know of).

Any time you get a large mass of metal closer than one-quarter wavelength in distance from an antenna wire, it will REALLY screw up the radiation pattern.  The dorsal Vee was only a few feet away from the fuselage and wings, and there is no way to know the radiation pattern of this device without actually measuring it... a very complicated task, in those days.

Not that it really would matter much anyway.

These characteristics would also vary extremely widely with frequency.

It is just impractical to answer the antenna questions, without developing some kind of complex computer model.

The transmitter was designed to put 50 watts into the antenna.  Whether it actually did that well, can be questioned.  I'd say between 25 and 50 watts out, the power decreasing as the frequency increased.  It would also depend upon how closely the rig was tuned (and the WE 13C series was a BEAR to tune correctly, if the instruction manual procedures are any indication... by the way, an external test set was required to do it -- a technician's tool, which AE and FN did not have, so it would be ludicrous to think they could have just pulled the radio out of the plane after a landing, thrown a wire over a tree limb, and put out any kind of signal!), and the condition of the tubes.

I'll look into the receiver issue.

73
Mike E.
*****************************************************************
From Ric

I've never seen any motion picture or still photo that is known to have been taken aboard ITASCA.  Don't believe anything you see on television (especially interviews with Gillespie).

As an aside, Elgen Long's entire case about where the airplane had to have crashed at sea is based upon a precise constraint of it's distance from ITASCA according the strength of the signals received.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 13:32:36 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: Elgen Long book

To Tom King---Thanks for the explanation........I am getting a good picture of how very dense and thick the pretty green stuff is...

Jim Tierney
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 13:37:02 EST
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      Re: Capitol statues

Ric wrote:

>Yes.  Please submit future nominations for Capitol statues of Famous
>Americans Who Bit The Big One In Airplanes to the United States Congress
>(trivia@capitol.gov)

And don't forget Carol Lombard

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

From Ric

I done it again, haven't I?  This forum is like a rotary engine. Swing the prop once and, if it fires, all semblance of control is gone forever. 
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 13:41:00 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Donations

Sactodave said:

>I told Ric that he is wasting time and money
>re-exploring Nikku, and that I would donate money to an organization
>that would explore the ocean near of Howland

Pssst, Dave.

Ah, my name is, ah . . . Henry Ponzi.  And, ah, I'm putting together a group of, ah, experienced deep-ocean diving and optical research professionals to search for AE and FN somewhere around Howland Island.  The group is called Scientific Camera And Monitoring, Inc. and we need $150,000 to get this project off the ground and would love to take you up on your offer.

Just send the check to S.C.A.M. at 1492 Santa Maria Drive, Ninapinta, CA 01999-1492

Thanks in advance.

LTM, who's made millions this way!
Dennis McGee #0149

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

That's probably abusive too.  I shouldn't have posted it .  Sorry.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 13:50:49 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Itasca Radio Room

Mike asks:

>Anybody know the source of this video or film?  Is it actually
>the Itasca's radio room, or only "stock footage"?

Typically these shows will use "stock shots" that were included in the original 1937 newsreels released immediately following the disappearance, though sometimes they may also use some additional WWII era stuff.  The closest thing I've ever seen is a nice still photo of the radio room on board USCGC "Tahoe" (another of the "Lake" class cutters) taken in 1936.  For what it's worth, I have a copy and will be happy to loan it to you - just drop me a line off-Forum.

  LTM,
  Russ
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 14:36:57 EST
From:         Cam Warren
Subject:      E. Long & Other Comments

Glad to hear you've talked to Elgen; he's got a lot of good information (and some - I suspect - he's been sitting on for some years and not telling anybody).  I've also come to near fisticuffs with him on a couple of occasions, but that's all part of the learning process. Will Rogers (probably quoting Socrates) said it best; "We're all of us ignorant - only about different things" - a very wise observation that should never be ignored.

As you should know, the theory of an Earhart splashdown 40-250 miles NW of Howland is a viable one, and although no hard evidence exists (obviously) is the most popular amongst serious researchers. (A group you heartily detest, although it includes the US Navy, the US Coast Guard, Capt. Safford, Cmdr. Anthony, Kelly Johnson, the Longs, Cam Warren, etc. etc.).  So, don't be too hasty to characterize Elgen's reasoning as "deeply flawed".

And a deep sea search is not logistically - nor technologically - "ludicrous". According to Scripps Institute of Oceanography and Dr. Ballard, who I've heard, has been sniffing around again.

Ludicrous cost-wise perhaps;  Scripps quoted $25,000 per search-day six or seven years ago. Don't forget, an engineering group located and recovered a cargo door that blew off a United Airlines plane somewhere between Honolulu and San Francisco some years back. I'll concede it hadn't been under water for sixty years, however, but very cold water (three miles down) is a pretty good preservative - for metal objects AND human remains.

Cam Warren

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

Let me get this straight.  You're suggesting that the prospect of searching the bottom of the Pacific Ocean at a depth of roughly three miles for a swath (how wide?) 210 miles long (40 to 250 miles NNW of Howland) for an object that is (best case scenario) 55 feet wide by 38 feet long is not ludicrous?

The company that found the cargo door you mention is Oceaneering International, the same outfit we hired to do a sonar sweep around Niku in 1991.  We talked to them about that find and it wasn't quite the way you describe it.  Their search area was quite well constrained by radar returns from the incident.  In other words, they knew where to look.

The only way a deep-sea search for an object as small as NR16020 would make any sense would be if you could precisely define the search area - and you can't.  If Elgen can sell the folks at Scripps on the notion that he can pin down the spot where the airplane supposedly went in the drink, more power to him.

And by the way, your prediction about the preservation of human remains on the ocean floor is just as accurate as the rest of your information.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 16:00:14 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Deep water survival

Cam Warren said:

> ...very cold water (three miles down) is
> a pretty good preservative - for metal objects AND human remains.

Not really.  I've just finished reading "Blind Man's Bluff" a book on the U.S. Navy's spying activities using submarine's.  In the book they talked about the "Glomar Explorer"" effort (financed by the CIA, or course) to raise a 1960-era Soviet sub that sank in the Pacific in about 15,000 feet of water.  As we all know, the Glomar Express did finally get a chunk (about 30 feet) of it up and it had the remains of at least three Soviet sailors  -- nothing but bones.  And they'd been down for only about 10-12 years.

Also, look at the photos from the Titanic wreck site -- there are plenty of shoes and metal but no bodies or even bones.

The deep ocean may be a good place for storing metal but it isn't good for human bodies; there are enough little bugs and parasites down there to eat the remains of any type of life form or life-form products - humans, wood, cloth etc. -- slowly perhaps, but they do disappear.  (Shoes survive because the tanning agents in the leather make them unappetizing to the deep sea critters.)

Could the airplane survive after 35-plus years, yes.  The bodies, no.

LTM, who gets squeamish over this type of talk
Dennis McGee #0149
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 1 Apr 1999 16:25:09 EST
From:         David
Subject:      Re: E. Long & Other Comments

I salute Ric for his patience in dealing with his detractors, and I couldn't resist taking a poke at this one myself...

Cam Warren wrote:

> And a deep sea search is not logistically - nor technologically -
> "ludicrous". According to Scripps Institute of Oceanography and Dr.
> Ballard, who I've heard, has been sniffing around again.

Using Dr. Ballard's famous name in this context promises nothing, since he has become famous for finding objects that are nearly 1,000 feet long, made of tens of thousands of tons of steel, and are known to have gone down around a certain specific lat/long.  Let's not also forget that he had huge amounts of money and the National Geographic Society behind him.  Finding an airplane, much smaller and much more fragile, in such a vast area is really far out!  Until we can scan the entire ocean floor cheaply and in great detail from satellites, whatever is on the bottom in that area (and most other areas) is almost guaranteed to stay there.

> ...very cold water (three miles down) is a pretty good preservative
> - for metal objects AND human remains.

Obviously Mr. Warren has never heard of an obscure little boat called the Titanic!  Despite the intense cold at it's depth of around 13,000 feet, thick hull plating is oozing away in 'rusticles', and the human remains are all long since gone, which includes all bones and teeth, which dissolved in the calcium-starved water.

I can see why Ric likes defending himself against his opponents so much, since people beg to have the errors of their ways pointed out publicly when they make statements that lack even a basic understanding of the subject in question.  Honestly, sometimes I wonder if some of these turkeys (analogy here to a turkey-shoot) are secretly working for Ric just as easy targets in order to make him look better!

Love to Morons,

David  :-)
*****************************************************************
From Ric

"Love to Morons" is abusive.  I shouldn't have posted it.  Sorry.

It has been frequently alleged that I have invented certain contributors to this forum for just the purpose you suggest  Such charges have, on occasion, elicited outraged (and hilarious) assurances from the purported figments of my imagination to the effect that they are indeed sentient beings. I will state now, as I have stated in the past, that I am not nearly creative enough to have invented such wonderful characters.  Truth, my friends, really is stranger than fiction.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 08:44:35 EST
From:         Don Jordan
Subject:      Niku density

If the island is that densely cover in growth, how could anything big work its way past the tree line.  Maybe it would be a good idea to start the search on a section of the island that wasn't covered in 1937.  Is it possible to identify those areas?

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

From Ric

The photos we have from 1937 (Lambrecht's and those taken in October by Bevington) show a typically dense vegetation pattern that is not noticeable different from what we see today.  In general, the foliage waxes and wanes with the rainfall, but a big storm can fling stuff way up into the treeline or rip out whole sections of beachfront undergrowth.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:17:07 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      How deep is the ocean?

>Their theory is that AE and FN went down in the Ocean NW of Howland Island
>and she is 17,000 miles under the water.

17000 miles under the sea?  Surely you mean feet!
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:18:34 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Message in a bottle

I have several examples of FJN's cursive and block writings, should anyone seriously want to do a handwriting analysis.  Most of the material resides at the Purdue Library.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:22:31 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Itasca Radio Room

After examining hundreds of files on radios from the USCG and Navy at the National Archives during the 1930's time period, ALL of the photos were restricted at the time.  I doubt very seriously that anything on video from that time period was really from the ships or radio stations involved.

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

From Ric

Video?  Surely you mean film.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:25:41 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: E. Long & Other Comments

I have worked with Bob Ballard when he was at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution for well over a decade, and we occasionally discuss searching for Earhart on the ocean floor (which is my professional area of expertise).  We both agree that the available technology is not feasible, given the lack of clues of where to search, search rates, ship cost rates, time, and logistics.  Estimates range up to $100M.  I doubt that  anyone could come up with that figure based upon such scanty (non)evidence of a downing at sea.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:35:08 EST
From:         Cam Warren
Subject:      From Ric's Book of Snide Remarks . . .

Ric - you are SO predictable! (Which you can spin into a compliment for your consistancy!)  Mercy, I should have realized I was treading on dangerous ground, mentioning the possibility of a deep sea search for the Electra. (Can't have the loyal Mother Lovers thinking there MIGHT be an alternative choice to downtown Nikumaroro and poor old near-sighted Lambrecht).

"Alas, what ignorant sin have I committed?"  (Othello)

Bowing to your vast and superior knowledge,  I'll recall the "human remains" remark. Again, citing W. Shakespeare as my reliable source: "Full fathom five thy father lies; of his bones  are coral made . . ." (The Tempest - since  I'm sure you'll want to verify this).

Actually, I was thinking of that B-24(?) that wound up in a Sierra lake (altitude 7000 feet above mean sea level) during WWII, and not discovered until the lake (part of the Big Creek hydroeletric project) was rountinely drained some 50 (?) years later.  The crew's bodies were quite well preserved, as I recall, as was the aircraft. (Your good buddy Fred Goerner did a story on it).

Cam Warren
(A member of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (aka The Nasty Boys), ready to discredit TIGHAR no matter the cost).

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

Cameron my friend, as ever, you represent yourself magnificently.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:40:31 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Deepwater search

You folks who are suggesting that a deepwater search will find AE's Electra are obviously not familiar with the amount of time and technology and money that it took to find the Titanic, which was a much MUCH larger target, made almost exclusively of ferrous metals, and lay in a much smaller search area.

Ballard and those before him at least had a set of (admittedly flawed) coordinates to begin with. Where do you start when searching for Amelia? Yes, Elgen Long has a set of coordinates in mind, based on guesses and assumptions.

IF the Electra is in the water, it is under nearly three miles of water! It is a small aluminum airplane. How do you detect it? And how do you prove that a lump of aluminum you may have found down there is actually NR16020? Are you just going to read the number off the wings? I doubt it. 

Ballard at least had the resources of the US Navy behind him. What do the Longs have?

A search of this type will take years, millions of dollars, incredible dedication, and hundreds of people. A great many possible targets may be found, but with no way to verify them.

I suggest that TIGHAR's exploration of Niku is a bargain by comparison.

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:47:26 EST
From:         Kenton Spading
Subject:      Piles of Sand on Niku

Recently on the Forum someone speculated about whether or not Amelia or Fred would have written a note (maybe put it in a container) and placed it somewhere on the island for someone to find at a later date. Someone who was about to die might do this in order to leave some sort of record behind. I believe it was then suggested that we should keep our eyes open for this type of thing.

In response to that Tom King wrote:

>But there's no use hiding something for someone to find, if you don't
>leave something to guide future discoverers to its location.  So one would
>expect a cairn [pile of rocks] or something, and there's no evidence of
>this unless you interpret the Maude/Bevington story of piles of sand or
>heaps of debris to  be such.  Which could be, but if so, our searches
>haven't turned them up.  Which all leads, I guess, to a sort of
>shoulder-shrugging conclusion: "Good idea, but what can we do with it?"

My response to this should in no way be interpreted to imply that I am suggesting a message was left behind. Or for that matter that Amelia or Fred left a marker of some sort behind. However, we did find "piles of sand" during the 1997 Niku trip. The following is a short version of the story.

Maude and Bevington visited Niku on Oct 13-15 1937 (a few months after Amelia disappeared). While walking around, Bevington indicated that he saw signs of "previous habitation" on the island. He later described it as a bivouac site. The Arundel group had been there from 1892-94 (a reasonable source) and, of course, the Norwich survivors were there for a short time in 1929 (less likely source). Amelia and Fred could be another source. A few years ago, Tom King asked Maude (yes, he is still alive) what he thought Bevington meant by the statement. Maude responded something to the effect that he thought it consisted of piles of sand.

While we were working around the Aukaraime South shoe/babies grave/fire pit site on Niku in 1997 I discovered, a short distance away, a pit in the ground with a pile of sand next to it. To say that this had anything to do with Amelia would be pure speculation. It probably was dug by the colonists. All that can be said is the "piles of sand" were found near a bivouac site. However, I agree with Tom K., the pit and piles did not look like a "sign left behind."

LTM
Kenton Spading
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 09:51:18 EST
From:         Pat Robinson
Subject:      Nippon Maru

There actually was a ship called "NIPPON MARU".  She was a tanker built in 1936...She was sunk by a torpedo from the USS SCAMP on January 14, 1944.

Source:  Dictionary of disasters at sea during the age of steam (1824 - 1962)" by Charles Hocking

Patrick N. Robinson
*****************************************************************
From Ric

I wonder if that poor Frenchman was still down in the hold.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:04:33 EST
From:         Suzanne Tamiesie
Subject:      abusive language

For the sake of a scientific and factual exchange of theories and ideas, I think that the emails containing obviously abusive language regardless of what position the writer is supporting be eliminated from the forum. I think the posting of such language i.e. "love to morons," "finger up his..." should stop. Repeated apologies after the fact quickly lose their effectiveness and carry little weight. Such language adds nothing to the search for AE nor to our credibility. If individual forum readers would like to use such insulting language let them write directly to the author of the email to which they object. It is easy to go for the broad stroke put down, much harder to address such comments directly to the person with whom one has a disagreement.

Thanks for listening,
Suzanne T. #2184

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

You're right of course.  But then again, if we limited these discussions to scientific and factual exchanges of theories and ideas it wouldn't be nearly as much fun  Same old problem.  Striking the right balance.

But there's no excuse for bad language.  Correction noted.

Thanks,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:56:48 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: E. Long & Other Comments

Ric:  The use of Moron is okay, it is really code for "More On" The Ball.

Let's hope everyone understands that we are all human, all prone to mistakes, and have our own little idiosyncracies which make us unique human beings, even if sometimes that means we are also a little cranky.  (a little cranky is what you use to start a Model T Ford)  Let us hope we can all keep a sense of humor about ourselves and not take ourselves too seriously.  That is what usually leads to trouble is when we let our huge egos get in the way.  The talk of the Titanic reminds me that it is the largest monument to the foolishness of the human ego. Someone's ego said it was unsinkable.  Someone else's said it can therefore go as fast as possible.  Another's said it didn't need lifeboats or lifeboat drills.  So much for man's great intellect.

Back on track.  If the Electra crashed in the sea, and it had all those ping pong balls, would it have floated?  Since the big radials are so heavy, would it have floated in a tail up position?  I saw a program where they made a scale model of the Titanic and put it in a water tank and re-inacted the sinking, changing factors to test different theories, ie. water tight doors open, water tight doors closed, etc.  Do we know for a certainty how the Electra would have fared in the water.  Of course, that depends on the condition after touchdown.  If they made a good water landing with everything intact versus losing a wing or the tail section, etc.  Yeah, yeah, I know, they didn't go down in the drink, they landed at Niku.  What I'm trying to get at is this:  the theorists that say she ditched assume the plane and its various parts would not float.  However, my
contention is that some or all of the plane would have floated and some "evidence" of a downing would have survived and by now would have washed up on a beach somewhere! Maybe Niku!  The navy never even found an oil slick, so where did the plane go?  How fast would a gas/oil slick have dissipated in the Pacific?  Or rather, how long should it have been expected to last and how far would it have been visible, etc from the air and sea?  I can't believe that nothing has ever been found.  Are there any reports of items being found from other similar losses such as airplane crashes and ship sinkings in the ocean that would give us some reference?

Love to mother,
and blue skies to all,
Dave Bush
#2200

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

Everyone please note:  Dave is kidding about the ping pong balls.  There were no ping pong balls.  We're not going to talk about ping pong balls.  Ever, ever again.

How would the Electra float?  Not too hard to figure.  Those engines weighed a thousand pounds each.  Nothing forward of them was watertight.  The buoyant objects (empty fuel tanks) were all aft of the engines. How do YOU think she'd float?

How long would she float?  We've debated that one up one side and down the other.  Bottom line:  Maybe only a few minutes, maybe quite a while (how's that for an answer?).

Once she sank, what would logically remain on the surface?  That would depend largely on how much she broke up in the ditching.  If she remained intact, maybe only some scattered objects and an oil slick. (The airplane left Lae with 80 gallons of oil aboard.  Some would be used during the flight but there surely would have been a whole bunch of oil aboard when she went down.)  If she broke up on impact there could be fuel tanks, oil tanks, pieces of aluminum skin with kapok insulation, life jackets, empty tomato juice cans, etc. all over the place.

And no.  Nobody ever saw anything either on the ocean or washed up on a beach.

How fast does an oil slick dissipate?  I guess it would depend largely upon the weather.  As I recall, the debris from the loss of the Samoan Clipper was easily found the next day, but that airplane blew up.  I expect that we have some forum subscribers who can provide other examples.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:59:20 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Niku density

> a big storm can fling stuff way up into the treeline
> or rip out whole sections of beachfront undergrowth.

Surf action in major storms, ie hurricanes, can do unbelievable damage.  I lived in Galveston county, Texas when hurricane Carla came ashore.  The beach line that had been over 100 yards from the nearest road was now past the road, the road having been completely washed out in places and only a big gaping hole left.  I actually lived on the mainland and drove past a large shrimp boat that was over 1 mile from the nearest water, sitting in the middle of Hwy 3 in La Marque!  My mother stayed on the island since she worked as an operator for the phone company and my dad and I went back on the island before the National Guard even got there.  We drove down Broadway (6 lanes, divided) maneuvering around debris, boats and even caskets that had washed out of the local cemetaries!  So, could the plane be in the vegetation - YES!  Could the plane be at the bottom of the ocean - YES!  If it is at the bottom of the ocean now, could it be on the island in 2000 - YES!  That is how the ocean works, it gives, and it takes away, and it is very capricious in its activities.

Love to mother,
and blue skies to all,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:10:02 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Piles of Sand on Niku

Seems I remember something about a pile of oyster(?) shells in one place that had become cemented together over the years.  In previous places and times, people have left behind cairns made of stone.  No stone on Niku, why not a cairn of shells?  Did anyone take this stack of shells apart to see what was under them?

Love to mussels,
and blue skies to all,
Dave Bush
#2200

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

Clam shells near Kanawa Point.  In all likelihood from somebody eating clams. But who?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:05:35 EST
From:         Mike Rejas
Subject:      abusive language

Dave Baker wrote:

>If that isn't "abusive" I don't know what is!!
>From Ric:
>Yes.  That was abusive.  I shouldn't have posted it.  I'm sorry.

To anyone who thought I was abusive, my apologies (to SactoDave, to Ric, to Ric again if he's actually SactoDave, Mom, etc.) It *is* a common expression, but sorry anyway.

I find it abusive when people malign the credibility of others without basis; when people blast unproven theories of one party while supporting unproven theories of another; when people imply others are idiots, fools, or con artists; and when people ignore volumes of collected evidence to make blanket statements involving another's character. SactoDave, I think you've had your 'abusive' moments too, and Ric has been gracious enough to accept them as 'part of the job'.

Ric has done a fabulous job in collecting and organizing evidence, managing TIGHAR, moderating the forum, and in general keeping things going. He puts up with a lot of things most people wouldn't - that's a good trait for a leader who wants to get something done. He deserves the same respect for his (TIGHAR's) theories and opinions that anyone else does, until somebody somewhere manages to prove one.

Ric, I will henceforth constrain myself to self-abuse only.

LTM.
Mike Rejsa

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

Perhaps others will follow your example.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:18:52 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Niku density

A little more on this topic -- Although the overall density of veggies (at least as perceived from above) is about the same today as it was in '37, the nature of the vegetation is different.  In '37 there were lots of Bukas (Pisonia grandis) and (seemingly) Kanawas (Cordia subcordata, with just a few patches of coco palm.  The large-scale clearing that took place in the '40s and '50s removed much of the indigenous forest and replaced it with coco palm.  Since the island's been left alone (since the early '60s), the cocos have gone ferile and other stuff, notably Scaevola, has grown up.  I suspect (but have no way of proving) that the Scaevola was less dense along the shore in '37 -- maybe a lot less dense.  Plus, as Ric says, a storm event can wreak havoc with the shoreline.  The island's pretty dynamic, especially along the shore.

And actually in both '89 and '97 we did check areas that had been relatively clear in '37, with no particular results.

Good thought, but .....

LTM
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:29:47 EST
From:         Don Jordan
Subject:      Re: abusive language

I agree.  At least when I disagree or post an opposing viewpoint.. . . .I'm polite about it!  Name calling is for little kids!  Even Dick's posting are not abusive, but the last few I read from a couple people are!  Maybe you should return them to the sender for a rewrite before posting.

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

Hey, Dick!  Now do you see why I don't post that stuff?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:09:08 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Piles of Sand on Niku

>Did anyone take this stack of shells apart to see what was under them? 

Nope.  The shells weren't actually stacked; they were scattered (fairly densely) along the surface of a coral ledge on the edge of the lagoon, firmly cemented to the coral.  We looked carefully for associated artifacts of any kind (at the time I thought it was probably a prehistoric site, and it may have been), but found nothing.

Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:25:55 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: E. Long & Other Comments

Dave Bush 2200 wrote:

> The Navy never even found an oil slick, so where did the plane go?
> How fast would a gas/oil slick have dissipated in the Pacific?

When people talk about the oil slick from an airplane crash, it is usually a combination of oil and gasoline on the surface. The gasoline evaporates much faster than the oil, though it still leaves a residue behind. Sea conditions are critical to the length of time it takes to both evaporate and spread the slick out. The larger the waves, the less time the slick is visible (before it becomes too dispersed to see with the naked eye). {So what were the waves at the time of the loss, again?}

If AE/FN crashed into the ocean, you can be nearly sure that they did it with empty fuel tanks. They would have switched tanks and milked everything dry as they flew back and forth (circling?) to try to find Howland. Put yourself in their position, and you know that you'd only ditch it if you simply didn't have any other options. This means no gas on board or you'd keep right on searching and calling on the radio.

So, how much of an oil slick would less than 80 gallons of engine oil make? I cannot imagine much, particularly if it was in the oil tank in a plane that sank in 17,000 feet of water and only bled out a little at a time, slower and slower as the frigid cold of the deep turned the oil into sludge.

Of course, if the plane landed on an island beach, there wouldn't have been any oil slick in the water whatsoever.

Thomas Van Hare
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Sea conditions were just sort of average throughout the period in question.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:35:23 EST
From:         Jim Van Hare
Subject:      Go-Getters and Goat-Getters

Forgive me if I am intruding here, but it appears to me that there are folks out there who enjoy "getting your goat" and who, with a minimum of effort on their part, manage to alter the entire tone of the Forum. Instead of a scientifically-based forum for free exchange of information the Earhart Forum is in danger of degenerating into a series of attack and defense postings.  The result is that Ric Gillespie wastes a lot of his time defending a position that, in the opinion of the majority of Forum subscribers, he really doesn't have to defend at all.

I suggest that you ignore disruptive influences and avoid posting disruptive and argumentative messages.  If someone has an opposing viewpoint to express and does so without implying that you are a charlatan running the Earhart Forum for personal gain, fine.  But anything that denigrates the character of yourself or anyone else has no place here.  If an opposing opinion is posted without supporting evidence, the rest of us will see through it anyway, and there's no need to spend your energies trying to show that the posting is without value.

Cheers!

Jim Van Hare (family physician and former USAF navigator)

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

From Ric

Thank you.  Sounds like just what the doctor ordered.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:45:47 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Opposing views

Cam Warren asks:

>"Alas, what ignorant sin have I committed?"  (Othello)

I'll let him answer his own question.

> Actually, I was thinking of that B-24(?) that wound up in a Sierra
> lake...The crew's bodies were quite well preserved, as I recall, as was the
> aircraft.

Yes, cold FRESH water is an excellent preservative.  However, the Pacific Ocean (where you maintain the Electra went down) is composed of SALT water. There's a BIG difference.  Even a "junk scientist" can tell you that.

If you're planning to "discredit TIGHAR no matter what the cost," you'll have to do a lot better than that.

LTM,
Russ

*****************************************************************
From Dave Porter

I have become convinced that Dave Baker, Cam Warren, and Dick Strippel are the smartest men on the planet, and most able to solve the AE/FN mystery.  I met with these men recently in the 5th dimension, aboard their starship KHAQQ, piloted by Capt. Carrington, USN (ret.)  They showed me a marvelous device called a Howland 281 Interdimensional Space Modulator, which transmits a morse code like pulse at 6210 kilocycles, and is capable of locating an object as small as a dime, on the ocean floor, from space.  Another machine, the Knaggs/Goerner 10E Astral Spectrometer then detects the psychic aura of the most recent carrier of the found object, which can then be compared via remote viewing with the aura of known objects belonging to the subject.

I propose that you immediately shut down TIGHAR and forward all available funds to these men, in the interest of science.  They also told me that if we fail to comply, they will bombard me with cosmic theta rays from their NR16020 Gillespicizer, which in controlled, secret military tests has turned people into bleating sycophants.

LTM,
Dave Porter (waiting for my # and refrigerator magnet)

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

Never fear.  Your # and refrigerator magnet are enroute.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:52:23 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      New Policy

I think Dr. Van Hare hit the nail (or goat) on the head.  This forum is too valuable a research tool to be allowed to be distracted by a handful of people who have already demonstrated that all they really want is attention. Sacto, Cam, Dick - the party is over.  From here on in, no substance, no posting.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:54:27 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Piles of Sand on Niku

Well, while there is some hope that AE/FN left some type of message or sign that they were there, it is my personal opinion that they would not have left any message.  Why, you ask?   Because (just conjecture on my part) they most likely would be expecting a massive search and rescue within a few days.  Being novices at island survival, they would not have realized right away that they might not be able to survive - ie no water, little food.  Also, they probably would not have realized how quickly an injury could become septic, and once infected there physical state would probably deteriorate so quickly as to leave them no time to think, let alone act, to leave a message.  As I said, just conjecture on my part, but using my little bit of rationale, what's left of it anyway, points me in that direction.

Love to meditate,
and blue skies to all,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 09:32:10 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Legends and facts

Let me open by saying that I'm NOT flaming you here Dave.  You're a victim of popular mythology and it gives a chance to show the difference between popular opinion and facts.

Dave Bush wrote:

> The talk of the Titanic reminds me that it is the largest monument to the
> foolishness of the human ego. Someone's ego said it was unsinkable. Someone
> else's said it can therefore go as fast as possible.  Another's said it
> didn't need lifeboats or lifeboat drills.  So much for man's great intellect.

1. The builders and owners never claimed she was unsinkable.  Their claims were pretty specific in that they believed that the worst thing that could happen to a ship was to be struck at the junction of two watertight compartments by the bow of another ship.  Titanic (and her sisters and some other ships) were built to survive this.  Popular opinion, however (perhaps based on a Ship  Builder article calling them "practically unsinkable") was another thing entirely.

2. It was common practice to go full speed until ice was actually sighted.

3. No ships traveling the Atlantic at the time had enough life boats.  It had nothing to do with believing the ships unsinkable, it was just the way they did business.  Among other things, life boats used up valuable deck space.

4. Life boat drills almost never involved passengers at that time.  It was purely for the crew, and a select "life boat drill" crew at that.

The Titanic wasn't really unusual, except that she was really big.  Then history stepped in and made it obvious that the beliefs and practices about building and operating ships were (at best) misguided.

So, point number one, is that you expressed very popular, but incorrect, beliefs about Titanic, which don't stand up to actual research of the facts. This is not unlike many theories we all keep running into about AE & FN.

On the other hand, you were right that it was huge ego (conceit?) on the part of those who built and operated ships of that era to believe that Mother Nature wouldn't find subtle ways to do in their creations.

> I saw a program where they made a scale model of the Titanic and put
> it in a water tank and re-inacted the sinking, changing factors to test
> different theories, ie. water tight doors open, water tight doors closed, etc.

I saw the demonstration you mention and we discussed it at length in the Titanic news group.  It was actually rather badly flawed.  I.e.: no simulation of the mass of the engines, no simulation of the behavior of flooding after fhe forward well deck submerged, no simulation of the change when the inflow of water into the #5 boiler increased room took place, and more.  The discussion in the Titanic forum went into these and other issues with that demonstration.

Again, the point is, that impressive theories and even "proofs" can be built on inaccurate data and can be quite misleading.  The more I read up on the lost world flight, the more convincing I find Gardner as an answer to where it ended up.  Not because TIGHAR has answered ALL the questions to my satisfaction, but because they've answered MORE of them in ways I find convincing and which take into account the situation at that point in history.

    - Bill #2229
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 09:38:20 EST
From:         David Dunsmore
Subject:      Flotation issues

Dave Bush wrote:

> Since the big radials are so heavy, would it have floated in a tail up
> position?

I've seen photos of a British Lancaster bomber that ditched in the North Sea during the War and was floating perfectly level and intact for over 24 hours!  The crew were picked up after a chilly night in their dingy, and the Royal Navy finally had to expend considerable ammo to rupture enough of the empty fuel tanks to get it to go down (before it drifted east into German hands).  The pilot made a great water landing, as it was all in one perfect piece!  The water was lapping across the top of the wings, and all four Merlin engines were just below the surface, but it was sitting perfectly level in the water, however, the upper half of the fuselage, the wingtips, the twin tails, the mid-upper turret and the cockpit were all high and dry.

> Are there any reports of items being found from other similar losses such
> as airplane crashes and ship sinkings in the ocean that would give us some
> reference?

I have a friend who knows several of the folks who were involved in the recovery efforts of Swissair 111 off the Nova Scotia coastline last fall, and it seems that most of the floating debris consisted of plastic interior pieces and smaller things like luggage and stuff that would have trapped a pocket of air in them enough to remain afloat.  Also, the Air India 182 crash off the Irish coast in 1985 left a few personal belongings and some fragments of honeycomb structure, such as part of a nacelle, that were picked up the next morning.  We're probably all familiar as well with the scenes from TWA 800, when more luggage was found, along with that famous chunk of flap (sticking out of the water) that must have been the rear cone of the streamlined cover over one of the flap jacks. All three of these aircraft were very large (an MD-11 and two 747s), and involved the loss of 229, 289, and 230 people respectively, so there was plenty of material left behind by the machines themselves as well as the occupants.  One tiny Electra with only two people would be a whole different story.

I'm not an expert of maritime matters, but I know that literally tons of floating debris was recovered from the Titanic for months afterwards. Some of the crews that were sent out from Halifax, Nova Scotia to recover bodies were able to find stacks of really exotic woods that had been part of the great ship's magnificent interior.  Since these guys were just relatively poor fishermen, and couldn't dream of affording such materials themselves, they eagerly kept the wood for their own use and made it into such things as beautifully inlaid tables and picture frames.  I've actually seen some of these items on display with other things that were recovered in the weeks and months after the disaster.  There is even one first class deck chair and one second class deck chair known to exist, along with numerous cork-filled life belts that failed to save the lives of their owners.  If I'm not mistaken, things were even turning up on the Irish and Scottish coastlines all through the summer of 1912 (keeping in mind that she sank on April 15).  We must not forget though, the Titanic was... well, titanic - and scattered masses of 'evidence' on the surface of the ocean, and for later technology to find, all over the bottom too.  The Electra in question certainly wouldn't have left much behind, and even though the navy had looked, they could still have missed lots of things just because the Pacific is one very big ocean.

Love to Mother,
David Dunsmore  :-)
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 09:40:16 EST
From:         Robert Klaus
Subject:      Navigation Books

I've answered one of my own questions about the state of the art in aerial navigation.

I recently found a copy of "Practical Air Navigation" by Thoburn C. Lyon, U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, published by the CAA, dated September 1940.  It deals with basic private pilot navigation, not going into over water work to any extant.  However it does mention aim-off.

On page 64 it says; "Under some conditions it is good practice to fly a course at some distance to one side of the destination.  Suppose that a pilot is flying through an area where there are very few landmarks, to reach a town located on a railroad at right angles to his route.  If he heads directly for the town, but reaches the railroad at some point other than the town, he may be uncertain whether the town is on his right or on his left.  If, on the other hand, he deliberately heads for a point at some little distance to the right of his destination, when he reaches the railroad he knows to turn left, and reaches his objective with no time lost other than the small amount of time required to fly the added distance."

So apparently the concept of aim-off was common even for sport flyers of the time.

LTM
Robert Klaus
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 09:43:53 EST
From:         Jim Tweedle
Subject:      Re: E. Long & Other Comments

The frigid cold of the deep would have been around 39 degrees Fahrenheit, about the same as cruising at 10,000 feet on a warm summer night.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 09:52:06 EST
From:         Jim Tweedle
Subject:      Re: Piles of Sand on Niku

Has any thought or attention been given to examining the environs of the Norwich City in search of any sign or message relating to Amelia and Fred's stay on Niku.  While I recognize that a rusted out hulk has to be among the most uninviting objects on the planet, it was still the most noticeable man-made artifact on the island, and may have attracted the downed crew for a number of reasons.

LTM,  Jim Tweedle

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

In 1937 Norwich City was a burned out, rusted hulk - but still very much recognizable as a ship.  Today she's a pile of rusted iron, battered down almost flat by over half a century of waves.  The most prominent surviving feature is her massive triple-expansion steam engine that still towers probably 20 feet or more above the edge of the reef.  Any message left aboard Norwich City is long gone.

Incidentally, the family of the captain of the Norwich City is sponsoring a plaque that we'll be bolting (somehow) to the engine in tribute to the eleven men who died in that disaster.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 10:00:51 EST
From:         Craig Fuller
Subject:      Re: New Policy

Not, to tie up the forum with any more clutter, but THANK YOU! I was getting burned out reading all of those postings.

Craig Fuller

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

Both Cam Warren and Sactodave have responded to the announcement of the New Policy in their accustomed fashion, but you won't be reading it here.  Sacto advises that he's letting his WebTV subscription lapse, so he'll be gone anyway.  It is the end of an era.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 10:10:56 EST
From:         Bob Brown
Subject:      Vegetation

Don Jordan asked:

>If the island is that densely cover in growth, how could anything
>big work its way past the tree line.  Maybe it would be a good idea to
>start the search on a section of the island that wasn't covered in
>1937.  Is it possible to identify those areas?

My observation of Scaveola, Beach Naupaka, is that you could drive a truck into it and it would give just enough to absorb the vehicle even losing branches in the process and then quickly recover and grow back to conceal it completely.  It escaped from cultivation here in Florida in 1982 (Wunderlin), was promoted in the early 80's for use in beach stabilization.  It has escaped and become established on many south Florida beach dunes, coastal berms, coastal rock berms, along saline shores, and in coastal hammocks.  It appears to be supplanting native coastal vegetation in some Florida areas (Nellis 1994).  The problem here is that it has begun to displace rare native beach plants, such as inkberry, S. plumieri, and the Florida endangered sea lavender, Tournefortia gnaphalodes (L.).   This information is from "Identification and Biology of Non-Native Plants in Florida's Natural Areas" by Langland, Burks, et. al.

I can see how a dense growth of this plant could easily grow over and conceal a large object such as an airplane that may have gotten washed inland from the beach.  The very action of the plane being washed inland would also break and bend branches as well as distribute seeds and fruit.  The new growth would rapidly fill any path opened in the vegetation by the plane quickly concealing it.

Bob Brown in West Palm Beach,  Florida
****************************************************************

From Ric

Last October a stand of Scaevola escaped from a cultivated area near Boca Raton and robbed two 7/11s and a liquor store store before being apprehended in a bloody late night shoot out with local police.  This stuff is not to be messed with.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 10:12:39 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Itasca Radio Room

Video clips (e.g. newsreels) used a lot of still photos.  The only thing close I ran across that showed a legitimate radio station is the USCG station in Oakland/San Francisco area, where GPP was shown in the picture. In the background one can see some radio equipment.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 10:33:54 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Sinking of Nippon Maru

Website for the USS Scamp I (SS-277) does show that the Scamp did sink a single large tanker on it's sixth patrol, in the area of Truk-Kavieng, between mid-December 1943 & February 1944.(The Scamp was presumed lost with all hands off the Japanese coast in November 1944 due to enemy action.)

If in fact the Nippon Maru was the only Japanese registered ship with the name 'Nippon', one would wonder why such a ship (tanker) would be sailing in the vicinity of the French coast, assuming of course that the "message-in-a-bottle' has any credibiliy!

Don Neumann
sandon@webtv.net

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

I think that this whole line of discussion has been a classic example of how the astounding availability of information via the Internet does not necessarily promote meaningful research.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 18:52:01 EST
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Itasca Radio Room

As someone with experience in commercial broadcast and production, my advice would be never to accept  accompanying stock footage in an historical piece (especially in historical videos about popular subjects like Earhart, the Titanic, the space program, etc) as authentic unless it is specifically referred to and described in the narration (ie, "This is a picture of the radio room of the USS Itasca taken in early July 1937..."); and in that case, be reasonably  skeptical and look for a way to confirm the claim before examining the image for useful information.

Accurate, scholarly research in the production of historical documentaries is enormously time consuming and expensive and there's a real temptation for producers (who are often not fully trained researchers) to skimp, especially if the production is intended for a commercial, ratings driven market on the networks or on cable.

I guess, to drive my point home, that I'm saying not to take video historical documentaries too seriously; I enjoy them but see mistakes in them all the time-- they're not even close to being primary sources.

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

Having had a bit of experience working with documentary producers I can say amen to that.  And don't let anybody kid you that Public Television is not a commercial, ratings driven market.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 19:29:37 EST
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      FW: Legends and facts

Bill Leary is right. I don't want to become off-topic, but having researched the Titanic shipwreck in a previous professional life I want to add a few words in support of Bill before the Forum explodes in another burst of off-topic rethoric.

Neither the builders (Harland & Wolff of Belfast), nor the owners (the White Star Line) ever claimed Titanic to be unsinkable. This became part a myth after the disaster, perpetuated untill this day. She was discribed in the press as state of the art, having watertight bulkheads that normally speaking should make her virtually unsinkable. Saying that a Boeing 747 is a safe airplane does not mean no 747 can ever crash. Yes,

Titanic was the biggest ship of the day, being some three feet longer than her sister ship Olympic which was launched one year earlier. So was the third sister ship, Britannic, which hit a mine in WW I and sank in the Mediterrranean (much faster than Titanic). The reason why the three ships were so big had nothing to do with someone's ego, as it has become popular to believe, but with the flood proportions of emigration to the US at the turn of the century and with shipping companies, such as Cunard and White Star Line, responding to it by introducing bigger ships to carry more people and make more money. Like what the airlines did in the Sixties when introducing Boeings 747.

Titanic did not carry too few life boats because she was unsinkable or because they took up deck space, but because in 1912 the Board of Trade regulations stipulated that any ship of 10,000 tons or more should carry 16 lifeboats (Titanic was a 46,000 ton ship and carried 20).

She was not, as some still believe, going at full speed to break a record. Titanic was not a fast ship. She was sailing at a sedate 21 1/2 knots. She didn't reduce speed because visibility was good and because in 1912 it was normal procedure to maintain speed unless visibility deteriorated. Having no rada they doubled the number of men in the crow's nest.

The reason why Titanic foundered was because of Murphy's Law. When Olympic, Titanic and Britannic were on the drawing board nobody foresaw  the possibility of a ship striking an iceberg a glancing blow that would dent the hull and spring leaks over 250 feet and flood no fewer than five watertight compartments. Murphy was proved right : If anything could have gone wrong, it had done so, at the worst possible moment and at a time it could do the utmost damage.

That brings us back to Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan. They too met Murphy.

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

I think Herman is dead on topic.  Any great disaster - any great historical event for that matter - quickly becomes mythologized.  To really understand what happened you have to get beyond the mythology, and myths die hard.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 3 Apr 1999 19:45:52 EST
From:         Hugh Graham
Subject:      Amelia's radio

Ric wrote:

>Earhart, by commercial radio messages sent prior to
>departing Lae, told the Itasca:
>                  -what radio frequencies she would be using,
>                  -that they should send only voice messages to her,
>                  -what times she would transmit,
>                  -what times she would be listening,
>                  -that she would use Greenwich Mean Time,
>                  -to send signals on 7500Kcs for her to home on,
>                   and specifically asked if that frequency would be OK.

To the best of your knowledge:

Did Amelia ever receive any reply or confirmation to the above msgs?

Did she ever know she should transmit on 500Kcs to realize maximum benefit from Itasca's Radio Direction Finding capability?

Do you think she was promised HF Dir. Finding by someone?, else why the DF setup on Howland?  The logic doesn't add up?

If the Coast Guard knew she was expecting to DF on 7500Kcs, why didn't they warn her?  Or did they warn her?

Thanks in advance.  LTM, HAG 2201.

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

>Did Amelia ever receive any reply or confirmation to the above msgs?

Yes.

>Did she ever know she should transmit on 500Kcs to realize maximum benefit
>from Itasca's Radio Direction Finding capability?

I can't say what she knew.  I do know that her ability to put out signals on 500 kcs was severely limited by her short transmitting antenna.

>Do you think she was promised HF Dir. Finding by someone?, else
>why the DF setup on Howland?  The logic doesn't add up?

I know that Thompson (the captain of the ITASCA) later claimed that it was never intended that the Coast Guard would provide bearings to Earhart.  They were just supposed to provide transmissions upon which she would take bearings.  It is clear, however, that Earhart did not share that opinion.  We have found no evidence that Earhart knew anything about the HF/DF on Howland.  It seems to have been entirely an idea cooked up by Richard Black of the Dept. of the Interior and Air Corps Lt. Dan Cooper as an experiment to supplement the ITASCA's DF capability.

>If the Coast Guard knew she was expecting to DF on 7500Kcs, why didn't
>they warn her?  Or did they warn her?

Good question.  No -  they replied to her message but they didn't say anything about 7500 being a bad frequency for DFing.  Of course, they also ignored her request for voice-only messages and use of Greenwich time for the radio schedule.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 4 Apr 1999 09:20:42 EDT
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Legends and facts

I hesitate to carry this further, and you can biff this message if you want, but Herman glitched a few details himself.

If you DO decide to post this, I'd be pleased to take any further discussion by questioners as direct mail (Bill_Leary@msn.com)  rather than clutter up the Earhart forum with Titanic myths vs. facts.  I have my reference materials handy and can quote sources for my statements.

Herman wrote:

> ((..portions omitted throughout for brevity..))
> Titanic was the biggest ship of the day, being some three feet longer than
> her sister ship Olympic which was launched one year earlier.

There are rumors that Titanic may have been three inches (not feet) longer, but (except, perhaps, for building errors) all three Olympic class ships (Olympic, Titanic and Britannic) were the supposed to be the same dimensions.  Each was successively slightly wider because each enclosed more space.  This "enclosed space" is how size was judged, and it was this additional enclosed space that made each ship successively "larger" than its previous sister.

> Board of Trade regulations stipulated that any ship of 10,000 tons or more 
> should carry 16 lifeboats (Titanic was a 46,000 ton ship and carried 20).

And those extra four were builders/owners "flourish."

What isn't generally known was that the Board of Trade took its advice on regulations from a consulting body which was made up of the shipbuilders themselves.  So, in practice, the shipbuilders were writing their own regulations.  The builders didn't want more lifeboats for a variety of reasons.

> She was not, as some still believe, going at full speed to break a record.

Correct. The Mauretania, for example, had a designed service speed of 25 knots and a maximum of over 30 knots.  The Olympic class ships (including Titanic) were 21 and 24 for the same figures.

It's possible Titanic was trying to beat Olympic's maiden crossing time (as illustrated in the recent movie).  However, researchers opinions are mixed as to how likely it was that Captain E.J. Smith would have tried this, either of his own accord (most think "no") or if encouraged by his boss, who was on board (opinions are mixed here).

This business of trying to read E.J. is a lot like people trying to read AE and FN today.  What would EJ have done if pushed by Ismay to go faster? What would AE have done once it became obvious she'd missed Howland?  What navigational techniques did FN use in trying to find Howland?

> Titanic was not a fast ship. She was sailing at a sedate 21 1/2 knots.

Actually, she WAS going "full" (but not maximum) speed. 21.5 knots may be "sedate" by todays standards, but it was pretty quick for 1912.

> She didn't reduce speed because visibility was good and because in 1912 it
> was normal procedure to maintain speed unless visibility deteriorated.

This is all true.  The real error, to my mind, was that they didn't recognized that, dispite the crystal clear night, the visibility HAD deteriorated because there was no wind and no moon, making icebergs at least as hard to see as under foggy conditions.  All things being equal, if they'd reduced speed as if it were foggy, they'd have avoided this particular collision and perhaps the others that were looming in her course as well.

> Having no radar they doubled the number of men in the crow's nest.

Two lookouts was normal for White Star Line, at least on the Olympic class ships.  They were, however, told to keep a sharp eye out for ice.

> The reason why Titanic foundered was because of Murphy's Law.

Correct.

> That brings us back to Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan. They too met
> Murphy.

I definitely see parallels, and perhaps it's these parallels that draw
people to these two mysteries and, in fact, draws a number of us to both.

Ric wrote:

> I think Herman is dead on topic.  Any great disaster - any great historical
> event for that matter - quickly becomes mythologized.  To really understand
> what happened you have to get beyond the mythology, and myths die hard.

I watched a show on Discovery last night about various disasters.  Several of them, including the Titanic, I knew either a bit or a lot about.  It was amazing to see how much error gets recorded on the tube as fact.  The thing to me, though, was since I could see in these cases how much error was introduced it caused me to have some healthy skepticism about the accuracy of the "facts" presented about the other disasters.

When someone expresses opinions about what happened to AE, FN and the plane I like to take into account their track record.  If their responses to criticism or questions amounts to "because I said so" I have to doubt that they've really done the homework to back up their opinions.  When, for example, they dismiss the recorded fuel capacity, load and usage rates for the Electra in coming to their conclusions I have to wonder what else they've ignored.

One of the most gratifying aspects of TIGHAR research been the handling of the evidence.  When it turned out the navigators book case wasn't the confirming find that would have been desired, TIGHAR was public with the facts right away.  This is one of the reasons I send in my dues, and one of the reasons I support the search.

- Bill

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

I posted this, in part, because I think it says something about the type of person who joins and supports TIGHAR.  Journalists are often astounded to learn that only about 25 percent of our membership are pilots, but TIGHAR is not about flying.  It's about history.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 4 Apr 1999 09:48:12 EDT
From:         William Webster Garman
Subject:      Re: Itasca Radio Room

Yes, while the pressure to "economize on fact" is higher on purely commercial outlets, it is certainly true that PBS is in its own way a big commercial enterprise and provides its own unique pressures on producers (and ultimately on the producer selection process), which can and does sometimes skew the objectivity of the content. And sometimes the facts presented are well-established, while others are simply ignored (for a variety of possible reasons), which can really change the overall impression or impact of a documentary.

Also, PBS documentaries that run during "pledge week" are often chosen for their pure ratings and image building appeal, where the "mythology" factor may be stronger.

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

Having dealt with major network, cable, and public television as a subject of their gentle attentions, I have noticed some surprisingly consistent characteristics in each category:

1.  Network people have big budgets, beat up equipment, cluttered and frantic offices, and they work like dogs.

2.  Cable people have miniscule budgets, no equipment (because they rarely shoot their own footage), you never see their offices, and they work like dogs.

3. Public television people have humongous budgets, equipment that should be on the Space Shuttle, tidy offices with art in the hallways and lots of people standing around with coffee cups in hand, and who work very hard at making sure that everyone understands how much more money they could be making if they weren't so noble.

It has been quite an education.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 09:34:45 EDT
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: Radio and Antenna Info Request

meter:  What type receiver was it, aboard Itasca?I've never been able to determine this, altho one excelldent researcher postulated it was an RME product. That co. furnished the USCG with lotsa sets just prior to WWII, when National became the major supplier to the "sea services".

Re:The Antennas, I read somewhere they were Windoms, as teh ship's photos show (i.e. off-center-fed half waves)

btw-Regardless of what some radio "experts" will tell you , the Smeter scale on any receiver or CB set (especially CB sets) is arbitrarily marked off.  At one time Halicrafters claimed its meters were calibrated so that a 50 micrivolt signal was S9++(probably 20 db over). Read up on the definitions of "R" or"S"signal strengths in contemporary military manuals.  Perhaps the best is "Ship-board Electronic Equipments" a Navy manual available from the USGPO.
            Sorry, gang                  --Dick
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 10:06:19 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Al isotopes

Jerry Ellis checked out my idea to try dating some of the aluminum found on Niku by looking at the proportions of the isotopes of aluminum present. There is reason to believe Alcoa's sources of ore may have changed in about 1938.

Another good idea shot down!!  There's only ONE isotope of aluminum to be found in nature.  I thein there IS a conspiracy!!  I've quoted part of Jerry's message below.  Maybe someone has some thoughts about the possibility that engineering materials properties might enable dating a sample of alloy sheet stock.

From Jerry...

>I looked in my Chemistry and Physics Handbook and to be sure Al has isotopes 
>with masses of 24 through 30.  The catch is that the 27 isotope is 100% 
>abundant meaning that, if these data are correct, it is the only isotope found 
>in nature, the rest are man-made.  In that case, there wouldn't be any 
>difference in Al from different parts of the world.  Do you know of evidence to 
>the contrary?

No, I do not have such evidence.  There would, in fact, be no difference.

>But isn't there some other difference one could find between the
>Al of the 30's and that of more recent production that would allow such a
>distinction to be made.  I'm thinking of some materials science type
>measurements that engineers do.  I don't know much about that area.

>Jerry W. Ellis                      Carbohydrates, polymers and
>Professor of Chemistry              Chemical Education
>Department of Chemistry
>Eastern Illinois University         (And bluegrass)
>Charleston, IL  61920
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 10:13:53 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Clancy/Gallagher Search

Do you have any idea why the "Clancy Search" should have just been front-page news in the local Malvern newspaper?  My contact in Malvern reports that it has been in the local paper twice in as many days.  Due to technical problems, I've not yet seen the articles so I don't know just what it's all about.

I've not yet made waves around Malvern of a magnitude to attract the attention of the media.  Is TIGHAR up to something there that I don't know about?

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

Nope.  But I've learned never to underestimate the power of Amelia.  Back in December when we announced that we'd be giving a press conference about the bones at the American Anthropological Association meeting in Philadelphia I figured that we might get some decent local coverage.  We got page one of the L.A. Times and from there it absolutely hit the fan.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 10:17:20 EDT
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Aircraft Floating Position After Ditching

I tend to agree with David Dunsmore's posting on how most aircraft float after ditching.  It an airplane is intact I would expect it to float relatively flat in the water rather than with the engine pointing down and the tail up.  The center of gravity for nearly all airplanes is about 1/3rd of the wing chord measuring back from the wing leading edge.  It would certainly depend on what areas did and didn't fill with water but if the wing fuel tanks remained empty I would expect the Electra to float level. Once again, the effective weight of the submerged engines is lightened by the volume of water they displace.

There are quite a few items from almost any airplane that will float. The fact that none were found floating by the Navy tends to go against a water landing although the Pacific is a very big chunk of water.

I do think it was time to cut off those that simply wanted to use the Forum to discredit TIGHAR.  There are a lot of topics to research so I agree, enough space has been given to those that have nothing positive to add to the search effort.

Dick Pingrey 908C
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 11:07:48 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Modeling

Someone has earlier suggested creating a model of AE's Electra and see how long it takes to sink.

The modeling may be a good idea, but it is impossible to accomplish.

As a kid I used to routinely build and sink model ships (hey, I was just curious, OK?).  I sank the USS New Jersey about a dozen times by drilling ever larger holes in her hull and timing her demise.  The problem, of course, is that the "experiment" did not account for the many internal compartments and the mass and weight of the ship. Consequently that ragged old battleship would go under real quick.  (Her final journey was an reenactment of the sinking of H.M.S Hood (of Bismarck fame) when I put a firecracker in her superstructure and let her go.  Sure, enough she disintegrated and disappeared just like H.M.S. Hood!)

The same modeling problem exists for "real scientists."  It is impossible to scale down the mass and weight.  As an example the Electra 10E TIGHAR is offering for sale is a 1/48th scale model, meaning that one inch of model equals 48 inches of the real airplane. Proportionally, this model 10E with a real empty weight of 7,000 pounds (??) should then weigh about 145 pounds.  Even made of sold depleted uranium this 14' (wingspan) model would come in at about . . .  what, 8-10 pounds?

Trying to "model" the 10E beyond her physical dimensions is an exercise in futility.

(Remind me to tell you what we did with our model flying aircraft . . . Ka-BOOM!)

LTM, who is no model herself
Dennis McGee #0149

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

From Ric

I guess we'll just have to buy Finch's airplane, ditch it, and see how fast it sinks.  Finding a pilot could be tricky.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 11:14:08 EDT
From:         Don Jordan
Subject:      Photo

Has anyone been able to find that computer program that can make a computer model of the wreck photo and overlay it on a like picture of the Electra.  Surely someone has heard of it.

Also, has there been any progress in finding the crew on the chopper that Bruce was on when he found the engine?  Has Bruce found any photos yet?  Maybe you could give us a run down on anything new to do with the engine.

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

I'm not aware of the software you're talking about and I'm frankly pretty dubious that anything this side of a Cray would have the computing power to accurately manipulate imagery to correct for angles and distances.

So far, Forest Blair has found one operations guy and one pilot from the timne that Bruce was on Canton.  It is their opinion that the helicopters never went to Gardner during that time period.  We're trying to track down another pilot and think we're getting close.  Stay tuned for further developments.  Film at 11.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 11:32:07 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Nippon Maru

Ric said regarding the Nippon Maru story:

>I think that this whole line of discussion has been a classic example
>of how the astounding availability of information via the Internet does not
>necessarily promote meaningful research."

I disagree.  I had never heard the Nippon Maru story until it was brought up on the forum.  And I'm sure it is probably one of many more AE/FN-related myths out there that most of us have never heard before.

The benefit of the Nippon Maru episode on the forum was that I am now able to better deflect critics who complain that TIGHAR is purposely avoiding certain areas in its investigation.  If anyone mentions the Nippon Maru story I now have the facts to explain why we believe that story is a fabrication and why we haven't pursued it.

While defending TIGHAR is above my paygrade, it is good to have as much background as possible.

Thanks for the exercise.

LTM, who avoids things French
Dennis McGee #0149

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

While I see Dennis' point, what struck me about the whole episode is that the logic of the whole thing was so flawed.  Somehow we got from a phrase in the letter which supposedly said "Nippon Nom" (the meaning of which is impossible to fathom with any degree of certainty but which probably meant nothing more than "some kind of Japanese name") to "Nippon Maru" as the name of the vessel.  Then it turns out, not surprisingly, that there was a ship named the Nippon Maru and that it was sunk during the war by an American submarine. The mind boggles.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 13:34:08 EDT
From:         Tom Ruprecht
Subject:      Re. Finch's 10E

>I guess we'll just have to buy Finch's airplane, ditch it, and see how fast
>it sinks. Finding a pilot could be tricky.

Aren't you a multi-rated pilot, Ric?

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

And your point is.....?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 14:47:47 EDT
From:         Dave Porter
Subject:      Scaevola

Having read the descriptions on the forum, and checked out the picture on the website, scaevola would seem to be a first class adversary to TIGHAR's efforts on Niku.  How does it compare with Normandy hedgerows, circa 1944? (I bet you know where this is headed)  It may be that you are entirely satisfied with the brush clearing capabilities of NIKU4. It may also be that logistics or budget won't allow it, or that such a thing doesn't even exist, but what about some sort of vehicle mounted "hedgehog" similar to the ones mounted on allied tanks shortly after D-Day which allowed penetration of the notoriously thick Normandy hedgerows?

I only ask because adding such a thing to NIKU4, while expensive, would surely be cheaper than mounting NIKU5 should 4 (horrors!) fail to find conclusive proof.  Also, it seems a bit safer than a bunch of guys attacking the treeline with chainsaws.

A couple other thoughts:

re Norwich City:  Bolting a plaque to the remains of the Norwich City should be fairly easy.  At my day job, we use a "powder actuated fastening tool" which uses .27 caliber blank cartridges, color coded for charge strength, to, in extreme cases, drive a threaded stud through a steel beam, allowing whatever is necessary to then be simply bolted to the beam.  Movie fans will note that the bad guys in the original Die Hard used a similar tool to bolt their rocket launcher to the concrete floor of the skyscraper.  Any local building trade supplier should be able to help you get what you need in this regard.

re Kiribati:  Is the drought still in progress there?  Don't our heroic leaders in D.C. supply things like water desalinization plants to friendly seaside developing nations at fairly low cost?  Could a good TIGHAR P.R. opportunity be lurking hereabouts?  I'm willing to write my congressman...

re the Forum:  As I mentioned to Ric privately, I would've joined TIGHAR on the strength of the magazine article and website alone.  The forum is "icing on the cake" to an amateur like me.  The members who contribute regularly, as well, I'm sure, as those who don't, are an extraordinary bunch of intelligent, well spoken folk.  So, to the Van Hares, Mike E, Dave Bush, Kenton Spading, Tom King, Bill Leary, Craig Fuller, Herman, Pat, Ric, and all the rest of you who've probably already forgotten more about airplanes, radios, history, and archaelogy than I could ever hope to learn, I proudly throw my lot in with yours, and promise to try mightily to keep my questions intelligent and my comments useful.

LTM,
Dave Porter (# en route)

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

Scaevola:

Unfortunately, our dedication to sound archaeological methodology pretty much precludes our use of hedgehogs, naplam and Agent Orange.  Our objective is not simply to remove the pernicious stuff from the face of the Earth; we need to look carefully at what might be hidden in amongst it.  That means hand work - chain saws and bush knives.  It's physically demanding and dangerous as hell in a place where we have no way of dealing with a massive blood-loss injury.  So we're REAL careful.

Norwich City:

Hmmm.  We'll have to look into that.

Kiribati:

We assume that the drought is still on but it's very hard to get information out of Kiribati.  As far as we know they're getting no help from the U.S. and there's very little international awareness that they even have a problem. They have no U.S. embassy and no representation at the U.N.  I suspect that it would be hard to get the State Department's attention right now given the other humanitarian catastrophe on the Balkans.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 14:54:09 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Clancy/Gallagher Search

The passage below is from a local press site covering the English Midlands which includes news supplied by the Malvern Gazette, the weekly paper for that part of Worcestershire.

The site is at

http://www.thisisworcestershire.co.uk/worcs/malvern/index.html

Another line of approach might be through the local branch of a family history society. (Hope I won't patronize too many people by pointing out that UK census returns are published only once 100 years has elapsed, so that route can't be used to track a family as recently as the 1940s).

These societies are mostly organized on a county basis, i.e. Malvern would fall under Worcestershire FHS. I am a member of the Herefordshire FHS, one county further south. Links at their site indicate that Worcestershire doesn't have a stand-alone FHS but is covered by the Birmingham and Midland Society for Genealogy and Heraldry (http://www.bmsgh.org/). This in turn has a Worcestershire branch with its own sub-branches. Malvern doesn't have its own but would logically fall under the Worcester sub-branch, for which the BMGHS site gives no email address but a contact point as Miss C.A. Stormont, 18 Osprey Close, Lower Wick, Worcester, WR2 4BX (Tel: 01 905 748 075)

Another link at the BMSGH site is to family history mailing lists. These include:

ENG-WORCESTER. A mailing list for the discussion and sharing of information regarding family, local, and social history for the county of Worcestershire, England. Mailing address for postings is eng-worcester-l@rootsweb.com. To subscribe send the word "subscribe" (without the quotes) as the only text in the body of a message to eng-worcester-l-request@rootsweb.com (mail mode) or eng-worcester-d-request@rootsweb.com (digest mode).
----------------------------------------------------

The resting place of the pioneering female aviator Amelia Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, remains unknown despite repeated attempts to locate the crash site. The pair were trying to circumnavigate the globe when their plane disappeared as they tried to reach Howland Island, a small island in the middle of the South Pacific on July 2, 1937.

Now it is hoped an answer can be turned up by looking again at some bones found on the nearby Gardner Island by native settlers in 1940. The trail has been traced to Malvern and the relatives of the man who first examined the bones, Gerald Gallagher, Officer in Charge of the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme.

He died on Gardner Island in September, 1941, aged 29, and is buried there, his effects, including a photo album and a sextant found with the bones, were returned to his aunt, a Miss Clancy, of Clanmere, Graham Road, Malvern.

The search is the work of Florida-based internet aircraft publication HistoricWings.com and The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR).

HistoricWings.com editor Thomas Van Hare said Gallagher examined the bones with Earhart's fate in mind.

He had them closely examined by a doctor who measured the bones, logged his findings, and then declared that they were of a Polynesian native man, he said. With that, the mystery was considered solved as not being the bones of Amelia Earhart. The sextant box was left unexplained though it remained in the possession of Mr. Gallagher.

Supporters of the theory that the doctor was mistaken in his conclusions are urgently trying to trace members of Mr Gallagher1s family for any paperwork they may have.

Forensic experts have recently revisited archive material held in Britain and say they cannot discount the possibility they are Earhart's, although too few measurements are available to be conclusive, hence the hunt for any of Gallagher1s papers which may have made it to Malvern.

Ultimately, it may be that someone in Malvern may have the key to solving the mystery of the disappearance of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan almost 61 years ago, said Mr Van Hare.

Some resident in Malvern may have the photo album or even the sextant box in their hands or information that would lead us to Miss Clancy's descendants.

Anyone with information about the Clancy family can ring the Malvern Gazette newsdesk on 01684 892200 or write to us at Broads Bank, Malvern, WR14 2HP.

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

There's your answer Vern.  Looks like Tom Van Hare has been helping out.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 14:57:47 EDT
From:         Tom Roberts
Subject:      Re: Modeling

Dennis McGee wrote:

> As an example the Electra
> 10E TIGHAR is offering for sale is a 1/48th scale model, meaning that
> one inch of model equals 48 inches of the real airplane.
> Proportionally, this model 10E with a real empty weight of 7,000 pounds
> (??) should then weigh about 145 pounds.  Even made of sold depleted
> uranium this 14' (wingspan) model would come in at about . . .  what,
> 8-10 pounds?

In fact, mass/weight scales according to distance (length) cubed.  A 1/48 scale model of a 7000 pound aircraft would weigh approximately one ounce. Of course this assumes all materials are the same (density is preserved) and all dimensions (including skin thicknesses) are scaled proportionally (very difficult).  Also I assume Dennis meant 14 inch wingspan.

LTM

Tom Roberts, # 1956

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

Our models will not be to scale weightwise.  They'll weigh maybe a pound and a half.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 16:25:42 EDT
From:         Colette Stoneking
Subject:      Re: Photo

That is called 3-D rendering with AUTOCAD Releases 12 or 13 or 14 it works with 12 and 13 the best!

Colette Crowder Stoneking Daughter of USMC Captain H.B. Crowder III.

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

Wonder if there's a MacIntosh version.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 5 Apr 1999 16:32:47 EDT
From:         Bob Brandenburg
Subject:      ITASCA Smoke

Vern recently raised a question about what kind of fuel was being burned in ITASCA's boilers.

Here is a summary of what we know about ITASCA and her smoke generation on the fateful morning.

ITASCA was 250 feet long, painted white, and was steam-powered by two Babcock and Wilcox boilers that burned fuel oil.  More about the properties of that fuel.

According to her deck log, ITASCA was "drifting to westward of Howland Island"  just a few hundred yards offshore,  began "laying down heavy smoke" at 06:14 local when Earhart was estimating  that she was 200 miles out, and the smoke was observed to "stretch out for ten miles and not thinning out greatly." There is no log entry indicating cessation of the smoke.

0614 local time was about an hour and a half before Earhart was expected to arrive at Howland.

During the next two hours, ITASCA's weather log reports wind direction as East, with speed varying between 7 and 11 knots.

It is worth noting that ITASCA's estimate of the length and density of the smoke is not credible.  Consider that since the ship was drifting, the ship's view of the smoke was along the axis of the smoke plume, which was drifting downwind. Consequently, it would not have been possible to estimate the length of the plume, or its downstream density.

The boiler fuel oil most commonly used in those days was know as "bunker oil", which essentially was crude oil right out of the ground - - - very heavy with a high soot content, and hard to burn- - - required extensive preheating just to get it to atomize properly in the boiler feed nozzles.  It was somewhat like burning liquid tar.  The smoke therefore was "heavy" and tended to sink rapidly to the surface.  During and after WW2, the Navy switched to Navy Special Fuel Oil (NSFO) which was processed so that it was easier to preheat and burned more efficiently, producing a somewhat lighter smoke.  It is unlikely that ITASCA was burning NSFO.

But having laid down many NSFO smoke screens in my day, including a fair number in combat with North Vietnamese coastal batteries, I can tell you that that even NSFO smoke screens are not very durable.  In anything more than a light breeze, say 5 knots or so, the smoke is pushed rapidly down onto  the surface where it flattens and  thins out within three to five miles.  This results in rapid vertical thinning of the smoke, thus drastically reducing its visual contrast with respect to the sea surface.

So, within about five miles from the ITASCA, the smoke plume would have been virtually invisible from the air.   Smoke is really only useful as a visual detection aid when the wind speed is less than about 5 knots, when there is a significant vertical plume, which is readily visible in contrast to the sky luminance.

AE's problem was further complicated by the fact that at the reported wind speed, there would have been white capping, a condition in which the wind-driven waves break like surf on a beach.  The fact that ITASCA was painted white and was relatively small would make her tend to blend in with the whitecaps, and make her nearly invisible from the air beyond a few miles.

If ITASCA had been steaming at 10 knots or so, her Kelvin wake (the vee-shaped wave pattern caused by the ship's movement throught the water) would have been quite visible from the air, looking like an arrow pointing right to the ship.  But the drifting white ITASCA would have been nearly invisible unless AE was within a very few miles.

Furthermore,  it is unlikely that ITASCA made dense black smoke for an hour and a half, which would have been necessary for AE to have a chance to reach and see the smoke plume.

In a steam powered ship such as ITASCA,  under normal steaming procedures, the boiler watch crew would take particular care to ensure that the fuel-air mixture being sprayed into the boiler fire box was as close as possible to ideal, so that combustion would be nearly complete, thus minimizing soot buildup on the tubes within which water was boiled into steam within the boiler firebox.  The combustion exhaust observed at the smoke stack under ideal conditions was described as a "light brown haze", and was not visible from more than a mile or so.  In order to minimize soot buildup on the boiler tubes, the ship would "blow tubes" once each four-hour watch.  This was accomplished by activating a valve system which literally sprayed live steam onto the boiler tubes in the firebox, thereby dislodging loose soot from the tubes.  The dislodged soot was carried up and out the ship's smokestack by the exhaust gas plume.

But there always was an accumulating residue that could not be removed by blowing tubes, and eventually, about every 600 steaming hours or so, it was necessary to shut down each boiler and (after it had cooled!!!) send sailors into the fire box  to remove the residual soot  by hand, with wire brushes, etc.

Since ITASCA had only two boilers, the Captain would NEVER have taken a boiler off line for tube maintenance while at sea, even though one boiler would suffice for the ship's needs while on station, because if the on-line steaming boiler were to sustain a major casualty requiring it to be taken off line, the ship would be dead in the water with no power.  So, cleaning fire box tubes (known as cleaning firesides) was done in port, not at sea.

A smoke screen was created by reducing the amount of air in the fuel-air mixture being pumped into the boiler fire box.  This made a lovely black smoke, but rapidly increased the rate of deposition of soot on the boiler tubes, thus hastening the time when it was necessary to shut down the boiler for hand cleaning.

And making heavy black smoke for a protracted period - - - more than 30 minutes or so - - - was inviting trouble in the form of a tube rupture (caused by uneven heating of the tube surface due to rapid and uneven soot accumulation)  which resulted in water and steam spewing into the fire box, dousing the fire and, worse, causing the firebrick lining the inside of the fire box to crack from chill shock and crumble into a pile of rubble in the middle of the firebox.   Such an event would require major and expensive shipyard repairs, and avoidance of such a failure was uppermost in the mind of any ship Captain.

To have laid black smoke until AE's scheduled arrival at Howland would have been courting disaster, and there is nothing on the record to indicate that ITASCA was under orders to incur such a risk.

So there you have it .  ITASCA almost certainly was not making black smoke when AE needed it, but even if the smoke was being laid right up to AE's estimated time of arrival, AE wouldn't have seen it until she was just a few miles away.

LTM,
Bob Brandenburg,  #2286
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:44:18 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Kiribati drought

> re Kiribati:  Is the drought still in progress there?  Don't our heroic
> leaders in D.C. supply things like water desalinization plants to
> friendly seaside developing nations at fairly low cost?  Could a good
> TIGHAR P.R. opportunity be lurking hereabouts?  I'm willing to write my
< congressman...

My inquiry about this to the American Red Cross got me sent to the British Red Cross, which has not had a thing to say.  Actually, a few letters to Congresspeople expressing concern about the situation in Kiribati and asking what's being done about it might be interesting.  All members can be reached via www.senate.gov or www.house.gov.  Thanks for the idea, Dave.

Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:53:44 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Al isotopes

It is not the isotopes of Al that can be measured, but the impurities always found with Al in its manufacturer.  You could probably determine different batches of Al used during the same year.  Then the issue becomes what is original to compare the Niku samples to.  I contacted some geologists who do ion mass spectrometry, and they said it would be easy to calculate parts per trillion or less for any sample of aluminum, but it does cost money.  This was well before the time that TIGHAR took their pieces to Alcoa for overall analysis.  It still might be worth doing, if someone can come up with the bucks (approx. 50-100k for thorough analysis of a variety of samples).

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

Lockheed did not build each Model 10 from a discreet batch of aluminum.  The best you could come up with would be something like,  "This aluminum found on Niku seems to be from the same batch of aluminum that was used to build Earhart's plane.  Of course, we don't know how many other planes of what types may have been built from that same batch or whether aluminum from that batch hung around for years and may have been later used for wartime repairs, etc." I can think of better ways to spend $100,000.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:55:35 EDT
From:         William Webster Garman
Subject:      Re: Modeling

Yes, as I calculate it here, using an empty weight of 7000 pounds, a true 1/48 size & weight scale model of the Electra would weigh in the vicinity of an ounce.

For amusement only, it's important to recognize that at 1/48 scale, if the model were built to scale in weight too, the physics of elastic tension on water surfaces alone are a much larger factor at that scale and would tend to skew the results of any flotation experiment <big grin>. Not to mention that if the skin thicknesses and compartments were generally accurate, the model would be exquisitely fragile.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:19:53 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: ITASCA Smoke

Bob Brandenburg wrote:

> The fact that ITASCA was painted white and was relatively
> small would make her tend to blend in with the whitecaps, and
> make her nearly invisible from the air beyond a few miles.

As a former search and rescue pilot (just about 750 hours of low altitude actual SAR time in the logbook), I can tell you that a 250 foot vessel would so far supersede whitecaps that they would not matter much in terms of visibility. If the ocean is dead calm (I recall seeing it that way twice), then visibility for a ship this size is something like 8 or 10 miles, but in the usual waves, with or without whitecaps, visibility is still four miles or greater.

The USCG ships we worked with were almost all 110 footers (such as the USCGC Padre), and painted white with an orange stripe. From four miles away, they were quite easy to make out in most wave conditions, but you would not generally discern the orange stripe until about one or two miles out. The ocean appears quite dark greenish blackish in deep water and the white of the vessel is the best contrasting color for maximum visibility. Conversely, the whitecaps are not generally individually visible beyond three miles or so.

As another piece of interesting information, if the vessel is underway (plowing through waves, etc.), it will create a wake that is oftimes more visible than the ship itself from greater distances. The implication here is that since Itasca wished to be seen, they really should have been underway, cutting tracks off the shore of the island, as opposed to right next to it and drifting.

Instead, they were drifting fairly close in.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:25:03 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Kiribati drought

Dave Porter wrote:

> re Kiribati:  Is the drought still in progress there?  Don't
> our heroic leaders in D.C. supply things like water desalinization
> plants to friendly seaside developing nations at fairly low cost?

Dave --

First I'd like to amplify what Ric said about the lack of international interest -- and I will go into greater detail for those who have the time to read another one of my lengthy missives (see what follows this next paragraph).

More importantly, you should understand that purification is much easier than desalination. There are numerous low-cost purification machines available that are about the size of a pick-up truck bed, but desalination (particularly on a grand scale to address drought conditions) would be a major installation -- think millions upon millions of dollars and a huge construction project and a one to two year timeframe.

And, to return to the first point, there are few authorities at State or Defense to do this sort of thing. I'll run down the authorities and actors involved:

Under AID/W policy, this small country is not a target for major development assistance programming. Other places like Ethiopia, Bangladesh, etc., have a much higher priority, and much of the funding that is there is actually programmed for political purposes, hence the large share going to Egypt, etc., despite lesser need there than in much of east and west Africa and central Asia.

Defense humanitarian assistance is limited to work in Excess Property and H/CA, which must be approved through State/Pol-Mil on an individual basis. H/CA activities typically involve training programs (doctors doing jungle operations in Honduras, engineers building a road in El Salvador, etc.). Excess Property distribution which is handled and distributed locally with management through the USAID in-country or, barring that, a State officer. Property shipments are typically MREs, military clothing, and other non-lethal supplies that have been declared excess through age or the drawdown that has been going on for the past nearly decade.

Conversely, OFDA (Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance) has the authority but is far more interested in larger scale catastrophes, such as those generated by the ongoing problems in Kosovo and massive natural disasters like the impact of the hurricane in Honduras and Nicaragua this last summer. A drought in Kiribati is an ongoing issue of water management rather than emergency assistance.

Kiribati is far off the agenda of the Federal agencies involved. There is neither the authority, nor the general public interest, nor the budget, nor the politico-military importance in undertaking these sorts of programs in such a small country in the middle of the Pacific. As it is, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief budgets have seen an even greater cut than the military since the "peace dividend" was first the focus of budget cutting across the Congress.

> The members who contribute regularly, as well, I'm sure, as
> those who don't, are an extraordinary bunch of intelligent,
> well spoken folk.  So, to the Van Hares, Mike E, Dave Bush,
> Kenton Spading, Tom King, Bill Leary, Craig Fuller, Herman,
> Pat, Ric....

Dave, thank you for your kind words. The only problem I see here is the old line about not wanting to be in any club that would have the likes of me as a member....

Thanks again,

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:28:19 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Modeling

Ric wrote:

> I guess we'll just have to buy Finch's airplane, ditch it, and see
> how fast it sinks.  Finding a pilot could be tricky.

Ric, I recall that there actually was a series of tests on aircraft ditching done in a Cessna 152(?) off the beach at Melbourne, Florida, some years ago. As I recall, they managed to ditch the same plane four times before it was unflyable upon being pulled out of the water. All four flights were the same pilot. I recall that three out of four times, the plane flipped over onto its back when it hit (the landing gear catching the water).

Anyway, there are test pilots who are willing to undertake this sort of thing -- but the rationale has to be real and not just for idle purposes (where there is funding, there is a way).

There was also the fellow who flew into tornados on purpose to measure wind and pressure....

Thomas Van Hare
******************************************************************
From Ric

Maybe we could get Finch to do it as part of a plea bargain.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:35:32 EDT
From:         William Webster Garman
Subject:      Re: Modeling - correction

Well, I just realized that I made a careless mistake. I was taking square roots when I should have been dividing by cubes (4). A 7000 pound object reduced to 1/48 original scale, made of the same materials and having the same average density, would weigh around 2 1/4 pounds (roughly twice as heavy as what Ric says the TIGHAR models will weigh). My earlier confirmation that it would weigh around an ounce was quite wrong-- sorry.

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

I'll have to weigh one when they're finished.  It would be cool if the weight was more or less to scale.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 10:43:49 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: Clancy/Gallagher Search

Since we now have several people trying to track down the Clancys (and the Gallaghers), I think we need each to be aware of what the others are doing, and what has been learned by any of them.

Tom Van Hare appears to have been instrumental in getting the Malvern Gazette to run a couple of articles about the search for Clancy family members who may have some knowledge Gerald Gallaghers personal effects that were returned to a Miss. Clancy residing at "Clanmere" on Graham Road in Malvern at the end of WWII.  This may get us in contact with someone who knows something of the Clancy family, if there are/were Clancys in the Malvern vicinity.  The Miss. Clancy of Clanmere may prove to be a dead end. (Not to start the "dead" thing again!!)

Simon Wiseman, of Malvern, has visited Graham Road and located "Clanmere." The building now houses several offices of one kind and another.  The structure has certainly seen better days.  Simon believes the building was probably a lodging house during WWII.  If this is correct, and Miss. Clancy simply had lodging there, that may be about all there is in the way of a Malvern connection to the Clancy family.  I think this is very possibly the case although it does not jibe with the idea that Miss. Clancy's Malvern address was more permanent than Gallagher's mother's London address.

During WWII, the Royal Signals and Radar Establishment (RSRE) was relocated to Malvern.  Some will remember that Malvern is the birthplace of radar. The basic development was carried out on the playing fields of Malvern College.  It is very possible that Miss. Clancy was employed at RSRE and roomed at Clanmere.  This may be the extent of any Clancy-Malvern connection.  Incidently, RSRE has now become the Defense Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA).  I wonder if there would be employee records from WWII time?

Simon Ellwood (yes, two Simons), working from Leeds and from Cambridge, has identified three Clancy women in addition to Gerald Gallagher's mother, Edith Annie Clancy Gallagher.  At the moment I can not cite the sources of this information, but it appears that Edith Clancy had two sisters, Elizabeth Rachel Clancy and Mary A. Clancy.  There is also a Lousia Clancy who was a witness at the marriage of Edith Clancy and Gerald Gallagher.  It seems that Lousia Clancy was not a sister of Edith Clancy, nor was she Edith's mother.  The relationship is unknown at this time.

Any one of these three Clancy women could have been the Miss. Clancy of Malvern.

Simon Ellwood, having little time to devote to the search, and feeling that he lacked expertise in genealogical research, engaged the services of a professional researcher.  I presume that it is she who turned up the names of the Clancy women and the relationships, known and unknown.  No doubt she will provide information relative to the sources she found.

I've told Simon that I feel the cost of the services of the genealogical researcher amounts to a contribution to TIGHAR.  However, I doubt that he will be able to take it as a tax deduction!

It will be most interesting to know where the marriage of Edith and Gerald Gallagher took place. That might provide some idea of where the Clancys, and the Gallaghers, came from.

John Thompson, curator of the Earhart Centre in Derry, Ireland says the name Gallagher is unique to that particular part of Ireland.  It was "Gallagher's Field" where Amelia Earhart landed on May 21, 1932, having just become the first woman to fly solo across the Atlantic Ocean.  That's quite a long way from where Gerald Gallagher, jr. was born in Romford. Essex, England.  I think that's sort of the "East End" of London where the shipyards were and are.  Not generally a high-class neighborhood.

The article in the Malvern Gazette mentions a photo album and a sextant being among Gallagher's effects that were returned to Miss. Clancy.  I think that, if there was a sextant, it was Gallagher's own sextant, not the sextant box (sans sextant) that was found on Niku in 1940.  The article also says the sextant box "remained in the possession of Mr. Gallagher." Gallagher sent the box to Fiji along with all the other things found on Niku.

To the best of my knowledge, that pretty well summarizes what we know about the Clancys -- and the Gallaghers -- at this point.  Perhaps the articles in the Malvern Gazette will bring forth someone who can help to get us on the trail of whatever may still exist that might help us pin down the location on Niku where the bones, box, bottle, and the campfire remains were found in 1940.

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

Tom mentioned to me that "Clanmere" was an "old persons' home".  That's quite different from a "lodging house."  Which is it?  The Miss Clancy who lived there was definitely Edith's sister.

Gerald's sextant was not sent home.  As I recall, it was sold or given to the master of the "Viti."  At any rate, it had nothing to do with the sextant box found on the island.

Whether or not Gerald was born in a high class neighborhood, he was rather a high class guy who got a high class education at very expensive schools, learned to fly, navigate, and had friends who fox hunted.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:02:17 EDT
From:         Mark Kreitz
Subject:      Re: Kiribati drought

Isn't it possible to limit these postings which barely qualify as peripherally relevant. I understand the importance of an open forum, but I'd really rather not read a review of the United States's foreign policy with respect to desalinization in third world countries.

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

The crisis in Kiribati is actually very relevant to our efforts to conclusively solve the Earhart riddle.  They own Nikumaroro and whatever is on the island. We can do nothing there without their approval.  For ten years they have been gracious and cooperative toward us. Now they have serious health problems as a result of the prolonged drought.  The prevalence of airborne infectious diseases in Tarawa has become so acute that we have abandoned our plans to send a team there this year to discuss the disposition of artifacts with the government.  Instead, we'll try to catch up with the appropriate officials when they're somewhere else.

We'd like very much to find some help for them and Tom Van Hare's explanation of why the U.S. is not likely to help at least helps us understand the problem.  We're Americans, but we try not to be ugly ones.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:05:23 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      modeling

William said:

>A 7000 pound object reduced to 1/48 original
>scale, made of the same materials and having the same average density,
>would weigh around 2 1/4 pounds (roughly twice as heavy as what Ric says
>the TIGHAR models will weigh). My earlier confirmation that it would
>weigh around an ounce was quite wrong-- sorry.

Ric replied:

>I'll have to weigh one when they're finished.  It
>would be cool if the weight was more or less to scale.

Whew, William's new estimate of  2.25 pounds for the 10E model sounds a little more realistic that the earlier estimate of one ounce. Of course my estimate of 145 pounds  . . . well, I'm better at words than at numbers.

Back when I was  modeler, if the model was too light, I just packed it full of nuts and bolts held in place with some type of body putty.  If it was too heavy, punt.


LTM, who is trying to regain her dignity
Dennis McGee #0149

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

That's probably all we need to say about modeling.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:12:23 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Clancy/Gallagher Search

>Since we now have several people trying to track down the Clancys

Sorry, I should have pointed out that although I posted the message with the excerpt from the Malvern press site and other links which might be useful, I have done no research beyond this so am not, I hope, treading on anyone's toes.

LTM
Phil Tanner, 2276
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:25:13 EDT
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Miss Clancy

Ref. the enigmatic Miss Clancy, -  you're sure that she's definitely his mother's sister (i.e. an aunt) ??

If so, that narrows the search down to two candidates, neither of which was really old enough to be resident in an old people's home, so maybe we'll get lucky and find which of the two aunts it was - enquires are continuing.

LTM
Simon #2120

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

From Vern Klein

For:  Ric

> The Miss Clancy who lived there was definitely Edith's sister.

I thought we only assumed that the Miss. Clancy of Clanmere in Malvern was probably an unmarried sister of Gallagher's mother.  Do we have hard evidence that she was a sister?

If Miss. Clancy is, for sure, Edith's sister, then she's either Elizabeth or Mary.  I'm assuming both Francis and Hugh to be brothers.

We seem to also have a Louisa Clancy who may be an aunt.  Present indication is that she is NOT Edith's sister NOR is she her mother.  Her mother's name seems to have been Alice.

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

From Ric

In a letter to Sir Harry Luke, High Commissioner of the Western Pacific, dated December 20, 1941  Edith Gallagher gives the Clanmere address and specifically says that it is "My sister's home."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 11:13:18 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      By their bootstraps

Ric said:

>Whether or not Gerald was born in a high class neighborhood, he was rather a
>high class guy who got a high class education at very expensive schools,
>learned to fly, navigate, and had friends who fox hunted.

Whatever the neighborhood, his father was a medical doctor.  Someone once said, "I never saw a poor doctor."  so, I guess my inclination to compare Gerald Gallagher to Fred Noonan is really not valid.  Fred seems to have started out in life with little going for him but he sure made it... up until he got involved with that Earhart woman, that is! <grin>

So Gerald had friends who fox hunted.  I'm reminded of one of my favorite paintings, artist unknown.  It's a scene of the fox hunt just starting, the english gentlemen and ladies galloping off and the pack of dogs bounding ahead. It's called, "The unspeakable in pursuit of the unedible"

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

The quote is usually attributed to Oscar Wilde, sometimes rendered as "The unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable."  My Bartlett's doesn't include it, but based upon his other wonderful quotes I have no trouble believing that Oscar said it.  And because I live in one of the few places in this country where fox hunting in the English tradition is still practiced, I can tell you that he was absolutely correct. (And before anyone makes any assumptions about my politics concerning animal rights, my complaint with fox hunters has more to do with their generally poor horsemanship rather than any compassion I may feel for their quarry.  But I digress.)

We have one personal letter to Gerald which seems to have arrived several months after he was already dead and so was relegated to the official file. The handwriting is a bit difficult, but it seems to be from a female friend back in England and, as such, is a real clue to what his former life was like.  Pat is going to scan it in and decipher it as best we can and I'll put the text on the forum. (It's just a friendly, newsy letter.  Nothing intimate.)

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 11:21:09 EDT
From:         Suzanne Tamiesie
Subject:      Big Digest?

Most of the April 5-6 Digest came through in about 16 pt. type. Were you making sure we were awake?

Love to mother,
Suzanne T. #2184

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

That's really wierd.  Nothing we did on this end.  Anybody else have that problem?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 16:02:46 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Clancy/Gallagher Search

Vern Klein wrote:

> The article in the Malvern Gazette mentions a photo album and
> a sextant being among Gallagher's effects that were returned to
> Miss Clancy.  I think that, if there was a sextant, it was
> Gallagher's own sextant, not the sextant box (sans sextant) that
> was found on Niku in 1940.  The article also says the sextant box
> "remained in the possession of Mr. Gallagher." Gallagher sent the
> box to Fiji along with all the other things found on Niku.

Just to clarify the record before we start a major new discussion about what sextant was sent home to Miss Clancy, please recognize that this was more the result of the usual misquoting in the relationship one has with the Press rather than any new information. As Ric can heartily attest: you say one thing, the Press writes another. Virtually all of the information in the Malvern Gazette articles was sourced from TIGHAR research and there should be nothing new.

What discrepancies there are come from the Press itself -- don't blame them -- I will note that it sounds a bit more exciting the way they wrote it, the photo album plus Amelia's sextant in Malvern or all places! In that regard, it does serve to gin up more interest and that, in and of itself, is good. Let's see if anyone comes forward.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 17:08:39 EDT
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Miss Clancy

Several possibilities come to mind here.  This town being used for radar research, may have been limited on space for additional personnel, so "spare" rooms were let wherever available.  Also, she could have both worked and lived there if she was a nurse or nursing aid or held some other position there.  She could also have been an invalid and stayed in the "old folks home" even if relative young, which is sometimes the case in our own country, though I don't know anything about their arrangements for this sort of thing.  That's the limit that I can come up with, others may have different suggestions.

Love to mother,
Blue Skies,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 7 Apr 1999 17:25:51 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      The letter to Gerald

We have deciphered the only known personal letter to Gerald Gallagher and it's a potential treasure-trove of information which may lead us to someone who knows what happened to the personal effects that were sent back to England following his death.

The letter was written by a female friend whose first name was Ruby.  Her surname, unfortunately, is the only word in the entire letter we couldn't be sure we had transcribed correctly.  It may be Mayells or Maxells - something like that, but we just can't be sure.

Tomorrow we're going to mount the handwritten letter and our transcription of it on the TIGHAR website as the Document of the Week.  I'd particularly like our English forum members to give us an idea of what can be learned about Gerald Gallagher from the tone and content of this letter to him.

Opinions about what Ruby's surname might be are, of course, also welcome. The letter should be up on the website (www.tighar.org) by noon EDT.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 8 Apr 1999 11:19:13 EDT
From:         Robert Klaus
Subject:      Models and plans

The current discussion on models is very good.  The appreciation of the difficulty in applying the results of small scale tests to reality is very important.  Even the newest super computer driven wind tunnel simulations have to be verified by real world tests.  In the case of NR16020 even the best computer or real test would have a large degree of indeterminacy due to questions concerning the exact configuration, weight, and condition after contact with the water of the aircraft in question.

I've read about a 10E ditched off the New England coast, I believe in the '70s.  The accident report, and testimony of witnesses should still be available.  How did it float? 

On other L10 models; I've seen no mention on the forum of Williams Brothers new model kit of the L10.  Anybody have a review of this, or know why it was made in 1/53 scale rather than 1/48?  I note it has markings for NR16020, is it an accurate representation?  And, does anybody out there know what ever became of the second most famous L10, the "Air France" Electra in which Victor Laslo and Ilsa Lund escaped from Casablanca?  This was a large (possibly 7/8 scale) model used on the sound stage.  It was matched to footage of a real airplane for the engine start sequence close ups. The fog (for which Casablanca is not noted) was to hide the lack of background detail.

Lastly; the camera installation plans I mentioned in a previous E-mail.  I saw this plan while working on a pair of Lockheed 18s for an air museum.  One of the aircraft had been built as a C-60, and subsequently modified.  It had Pratt Whitney engines installed in place of the Wrights (bringing it to approximate C-56 configuration), and an airline interior.  In the process of removing the airline interior we found the remains of a camera installation in the aft fuselage.  We wanted to discover and document when this was installed, as a military camera installation would be of great significance to the aircraft's history, and to how it would be restored and displayed.

To try to identify the installation we got in touch with Lockheed.  They sent us a fat envelope of  photocopies of general arrangement drawings for camera installations for all the twins they built during the period, along with a note that they held part drawings for some of the installations.  We couldn't match up the installation in our aircraft to any of the drawings.  We concluded that it was probably a mapping camera installed during a period when the aircraft was working for an oil company in South America.

The model 10 installation drawing was one of those supplied.  I thought at the time that the conspiracy buffs would love to get hold of it, then went back to work.  I note that there were at least eight, and possibly eleven L10s built new for military customers, and about sixty impressed aircraft.  In addition there was the Model 10D military variant.  The D was not built, but may well have included a camera installation.  The drawing could have been prepared for one of these military variants, or for a civilian photo mapping installation.  They should still have the original.

LTM (little tiny model)

Robert Klaus

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

From Ric

Lockheed 10E N233PB of Provincetown-Boston Airways was ditched in calm water about 20 feet deep about 200 yards off a beach 20 miles south of Boston on August 27, 1967.  All 14 people aboard the airplane escaped without injury. According to an article in a New London, CT newspaper the airplane floated for "about eight minutes."  No mention was made of what attitude the airplane was in but "some swam and others clung to the wing until boats arrived."

The pilot was Elwood Hallowell of Naples FL who was 38 at that time.  Curtis Schermerhorn, 46, police chief of Port Dickinson, NY witnessed the ditching and rescue.  John Munro, 49, of Mountain Lakes, NY was the only passenger who required hospital treatment.  A psychiatrist, Dr. Calvin F Settlage, 36, of Ardmore, PA was also aboard the airplane.

That was 32 years ago.  Some if not most of the above named should still be alive if anyone wanted to inquire further.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 8 Apr 1999 11:34:13 EDT
From:         Marilyn Pollock
Subject:      Re: Big Digest?

Yes, the April 5-6 digest came through to me also in large print.

Marilyn #1238

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

From Ric

If this is an on-going problem we'll need to talk to the List-Serv people.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 8 Apr 1999 12:48:46 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Gallagher letter up

The letter to Gallagher is now up as Document of the Week on the TIGHAR website (www.tighar.org)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 08:58:37 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Clanmere on Graham Road

Perhaps there's a momentary interest/curiosity regarding Clanmere in the offices of the Malvern Gazette.  Maybe someone could be nudged into doing a little research on Clanmere.  Newspaper people should know how to go about such a thing.  It might make an interesting local history piece.  What is Clanmere now? What was it during WWII?  What was it before WWII and before time and changing circumstances took their toll on the old structure?  What was it originally?  Many old buildings have an interesting past.

If this were to be done, it might answer a lot of our questions... If they could get it right.  I've seen no evidence of an e-mail address, so it would take a phone call or a letter.  Does the forum, in its wisdom, think this would be worth a try?  I'll also see what light Simon Wiseman may be able to shed on the matter.  I suspect there is some kind of confusion about what building is what along that part of Graham Road.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:08:36 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Gallagher letter

Just a few of random thoughts on the Gallagher letter . . .

1.  The letter is obviously from a very close friend; mentions others' names as if Gallagher would have no problem in knowing who's who.  She has obviously kept up to date on who is doing what.  Could be Ruby, Gerald, Harry, Jim, Jack, Ted, Mary and Molly Hill are all school chums from Malvern schools or college.  Do these first names correspond to any first names of kids in Gerald's class at the local schools. Yearbooks?  Local Malvern public school rosters?  Class pictures?

2.  References to return to ( "Just pray we can go back to Malvern . . .") and familiarity with Malvern ("Mary has a bungalow on Malvern Common near the golfhouse . . .") may suggest Ruby, and perhaps the others, could be from Malvern.

3.  One woman is named Molly Hill and works with the Woman's Air Force in Worcester.  ("Molly is busy with Women's Air Force and goes to Worcester daily -- Mary goes also.  I forget if you know that Mary's father died just before last Xmas -- and Mr. Hill about Easter, so both these girls are on their own.").  WAF records available on a Molly Hill? From Malvern?

4.  Was there a riding school or fox hunting club in Malvern? Ruby apparently loves horses and she mentions them several times, then at the end of the letter laments the loss of ?business/fun?, stating, "Hunting was going to so good this season -- plenty of new horses. Some new customers.  It does seem too bad."

Lots of small clues here for our members in England.  I'd check out Gerald's classmates in Malvern, if possible, and then see if a Molly Hill was in the WAF and assigned to the Worcester area.  We need to know more of the WAF, was it a bone fide military organization or just volunteers, like an auxiliary etc. that ran the U.S.O., handed out coffee and doughnuts etc.

The first draft of history is never easy, is it?

LTM, who is appalled to think others may read her mail
Dennis McGee #0149

*****************************************************************
From Jon Watson

After reading the letter to Gallagher, I started surfing around on the 'net and found that Malvern has a pretty nice website, including links to both colleges.  Although the men's college site is under construction, the women's college has a complete website.  I sent the attached letter to Mrs. J. Hardy, webmaster at the women's college. Hopefully she might be able to point us in the right direction.
ltm
jon  2266

> Dear Mrs. Hardy,
>
> I obtained your name and e-mail address from the College website.
>
> I am hoping you may be able to assist in the search for Amelia
> Earhart.  I am writing on behalf of The International Group for
> Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR).  You may access the materials to
> which I refer directly by visiting their website at
> www.tighar.org/Projects/Documents/Gallagher_Letter.html
>
> We are seeking information about the background or personal history of
> Mr. Gerald Gallagher, who was Officer-In-Charge, Phoenix Islands
> Settlement Scheme, on Gardner Island.  Prior to his death, Mr.
> Gallagher discovered bones which we believe may have been those of
> Amelia Earhart.  Some time after his death (in September 1941), Mr.
> Gallagher received a letter (referenced above), from a friend who was
> apparently affiliated with either the Malvern College, or the Girls'
> College.  The last name in the signature on the letter is unclear, but
> the first name is "Ruby".  She was apparently displaced to Somerset
> when the government took over the school early in the war.
>
> I would appreciate any assistance you may be able to provide in
> helping us to identify "Ruby", and perhaps even to locate her.  Thank
> you in advance.
>
> Jon Watson
>
> cc: TIGHAR
******************************************************************
From Phil Tanner

The surname looks to me like it might be "Morpeth" and I think the address is not "Harrington House" but "Horsington House" - I have found a reference to Horsington in a list of tourist accommodation in Templecombe.

During the war the government took over some large schools for essential projects - I work for a branch of the BBC which was installed in a mansion between London and Oxford vacated by a boys' public school on just this basis. Ruby is connected, maybe as a teacher, to Malvern Girls' College, a leading English public boarding (i.e. private, live-in) school. Very much an establishment for the elite then and now. Her role there is important enough for her to be evacuated along with the pupils, but back in Malvern she has her own bungalow, which suggests she wasn't a matron. I wonder if the college keeps a staff list going back that far?

I think the piece in the margin reads "the boys' college IS at Blenheim Palace PER tem", i.e. for the time being. Malvern College, the boys' equivalent of the girls' establishment (I don't know if they are independent of each other), was indeed relocated to Blenheim Palace. The following is from a web site outlining the the history of the Royal Radar Establishment http://www.dra.hmg.gb/html/who_are/history/ajenhis1.htm

"On 27th February 1942, following some keen intelligence work, a Commando raid had been made ... near Le Havre in France with the object of seizing the critical parts of a newly identified German radar... Fear of reprisals was taken very seriously and the order went out from high places that the Establishment be moved. Malvern College, located in premises at Great Malvern in Worcestershire, had been evacuated early in the War in anticipation of its occupation by Admiralty staff from London, but in the absence of attacks on London, this requirement had lapsed and the boys had returned to Malvern from Blenheim Palace near Oxford..."

Her friends Mary and Molly have their own homes, Molly's is grand enough to have its own name.  (Well, it might not be grand, but it's not 997 Coal Street). These two have lost parents recently and she makes no mention of her own at this logical place to do so, which suggests she may already be in middle age.

The numerous references to horses and hunting place her very much in the social elite. I'm sure there were plenty of horses in rural Somerset, so when she says she misses "the horses" the suggestion is she means her own.

And I wonder who the "we" who know Gallagher who may be with her in Somerset are? Plainly people who know him via a link to Malvern. This suggests that he has met Ruby through his aunt to whom his effects were sent, and maybe links her to the school as well - someone he is close enough to report an attack of tropical boils knows Ruby well enough to pass this news on to her.

LTM
Phil Tanner 2276
****************************************************************
From Patrick Robinson

I just read with interest the Document of the Week...

While I cannot make out the name at the bottom I would offer a suggestion...

The name is not a last name judging by the character of the letter...Why start out the letter with My Dear Gerald then sign it first name, last name...

The content and familiarity of the person writing the letter would also suggest it is a middle name or nickname rather than a last name...

Everyone has a opinion...Looks like "Marybeth" or something similar...

Patrick N. Robinson 2239
****************************************************************

From Ric

Lots of good info and observations in all of the above.  I tend to agree with Patrick about the name but Ruby is an unusual enough first name and Malvern is small enough, and the horse connection is specific enough that we should be able to find out who she is.  I'd say there's a better than even chance that Ruby is still with us, or Mary, or Molly, or Jack, or Ted.  If we can find these people we'll know a lot more about our man Gerald and we may be able to track down his things.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:14:32 EDT
From:         Jim Kelly
Subject:      Re: Big Digest

Also had the large type program. Thought maybe Dick Stripple had joined the staff...

LTM
Jim Kelly
*****************************************************************
From Dick Pingrey

The postings on the 5th and 6th were the same as all the other on my computer.

Dick Pingrey 908C

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

Okay.  I'll assume that the weird large type in the digest for April 5/6 was anomalous, selective and attributable to space aliens.  Let me know if they strike again.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:42:08 EDT
From:         Monty Fowler
Subject:      Bits and pieces

Two "for what they're worth" submissions:

For more information than you ever wanted to know about the water situation in Tarawa in particular and Kiribati in general, the UN was trying to deal with that very problem several years ago. Go to:
http://www.unesco.org/csi/tarawa.htm

You Earhart conspiracy buffs will love the following, but I for one am not sure where these guys are coming from. Just goes to show that ANYONE can put up a web page: http://www.crimsonskies.com/aaw/news/amelia.html
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:56:26 EDT
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Dogs & Bodies

I hesitate somewhat in sending this and only do so because it relates directly to previous discussions about the behavior of dogs around corpses. In the April 5 issue of the Orange County Register in southern California there was a very short article regarding the bodies of a man and woman found dead in their apartment.

"Anaheim - A man and a woman were discovered dead and decomposing in their apartment Easter evening, their feet chewed off by two surviving pet dogs, police said. They've been dead for a week plus - they were in an advanced state of decay,..."

The article said one body was in a sitting position on a couch, the other was in a lying position. No details regarding the dogs. I transmit this only for whatever scientific value it may have. And I continue to strongly favor cats as pets.

blue skies, -jerry

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

I wonder if they were wearing shoes.  If so, why not go for the bits that weren't covered up (hands, face)?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 14:58:19 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Clanmere on Graham Road

I wonder what the British historic preservation establishment (National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Dept of the Environment [I think; they may have reorganized], local groups) know about Clanmere.  Might be worth cruising some web sites, or making local inquiries.

Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:32:53 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Gallagher letter

More thoughts from England in response to others' comments:

[The letter is obviously from a very close friend]

At very least someone who takes an interest in our Gerald, but maybe not a very close friend. A friend of the whole family or a former teacher who has kept in touch? She is writing in November, but reporting at least one piece of news from before the previous Christmas without knowing if he is aware of it, and one from Easter. So she hasn't written for at least seven months, and admits she hasn't "for some time". And she's not a lover - there's absolutely no "remember when we..." slant.

[Was there a riding school or fox hunting club in Malvern?]

My guess is that riding schools would have been very much less common 60 years ago than they are today, because the landed classes would have learned to ride at home as soon as they could walk and only a tiny proportion of the population would have had the necessary income and leisure time to indulge, compared with 1999 (writes a bitter man whose wife and daughter spend every waking hour with their horse.)

A hunt would be based outside the town and would be an institution with a strong social pecking order and a tradition of family membership, rather than a club you subscribe to like a golf club. For fox hunting to be central to a young woman's life, she would need to fit in socially and the stronger her roots in the area, the quicker she would achieve that status - you wouldn't just fetch up in town and sign up. All the more so 60 years ago.

[The name is not a last name judging by the character of the letter...Why start out the letter with My Dear Gerald then sign it first name, last name...]

I think "My Dear Gerald" and a signature with first and surnames would be quite plausible for a letter from an English middle-class woman to an English middle-class male friend almost 60 years ago.

[Ruby is an unusual enough first name]

Very rare today, but maybe not in that generation - e.g. my grandmother-in-law, born 1910. I think it was probably quite common in that era.

Re-reading the letter, I think the crucial bit is "we talk and think of you so often" and the fact that Ruby sees no need to explain who the "we" are. This implies she knows that the other person/s is/are in the habit of writing to GG more often than she does, so they are closer friends of his, or relatives. My guess is it could be his aunt from the house "Clanmere". And as "talk" is in the present tense, this places the other/s thinking about Gallagher with her in Somerset - i.e. evacuated with the girls' school - because phone conversations even across 100 miles or so would have needed manual connection by operator at that time, and using the phone socially would certainly have been heavily frowned on in wartime.

LTM
Phil 2276

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

Phil's description of hunting fits with what still happens here in Southeastern Pennsylvania/Delaware.  A hunt is very much a social institution and, for the devotee, a way of life.  What really struck me about Ruby's letter is her attitude toward the war "we are indulging in."  This is England in November of 1941, for crying out loud, and the war sounds like more of an annoyance than a catastrophe.

I'm no expert on class (Lord knows), but this to me does not sound like correspondence between middle-class people.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 10 Apr 1999 09:35:08 EDT
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      Re: Gallagher letter

For what it may be worth, the missing word in the heading after "Palace" looks like "pro" as in pro tem (for the time being).  Guess it's obvious that Edith and her 2 sisters have probably all passed on.  Posting 1/1/99 mentions looking into Dr. G.H. Gallager's records, if any, in West African Medical Svce.  Any progress?  I wonder when G.H. Gallagher & E.A. Clancy moved to England & whether they were married in Ireland or England--probably doesn't make much difference except may shed some light on their ages, place of origin and possibly descendants still living.  Note that Lousia (Louisa?) Clancy was witness to the marriage (from Vern K. 4/6/99). Wonder if there's more detail in that record?   Also -- is anyone  looking at "Irish's" connection to Mr. G. Butler, Maiden Hall, Bennets Bridge, Co. Kilkenny, Ire.?  If not, I have some Internet refs from the Irish Genealogical Society, HQ, St.Paul, MN, I can check.  I note Butler is an old Norman name, still extant in Co. Kilkenny.  Map shows Bennetsbridge on River Nore abt 5 miles SE of town of Kilkenny.

LTM who was Irish?
Bill Moffet #2156

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

As far as I know, no one has yet dug into the Butler connection in Co. Kilkenny.

I would be surprised if Gerald's mother and father were not married in England.  These Gallaghers are clearly of Irish extraction, and we know that our Gerald was a Roman Catholic, and yet they moved in the upper echelons of English society.  Gerald's nickname "Irish" in the Colonial Service is a joke, not a description.  Harry Maude described him as "English down to his fingertips."  For us to really understand who this man was requires that we get a grasp of that complex love/hate relationship between Ireland and England.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 10 Apr 1999 09:39:45 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Clanmere on Graham Road

Tom King wondered:

>...what the British historic preservation establishment (National Trust for 
>Historic Preservation, the Dept of the Environment [I think; they may have 
>reorganized], local groups) know about Clanmere.

The National Trust would get involved only if a building is of substantial interest, either in itself or through a connection with a famous individual. However, there may well be a local civic society documenting the bricks-and-mortar side of local history in the way a family history society does the people. And any building will have a set of deeds recording changes in ownership down the years - a fantastic resource for family historians, when you can get at them. These will belong to the current owners, which could be the institution holding any mortgage.

Another route could be local planning records - if Clanmere is now used as offices but was formerly a private residence, the change of use would have required formal planning permission, applied for in writing to the local council. And has anyone contacted local radio or TV covering the Malvern area? Sometimes local broadcasters at this level really have to scrape the barrel for interesting content, and something linking a town on their patch to a great mystery like Earhart, even tangentially, should be right up their street.

I'll do a few web searches and will gladly write some letters, but would need a fuller grasp on what is known for absolute certain about the Gallagher-Clancy Malvern link.(I forgot to mention in an earlier posting that the FHS covering Malvern will in all probability publish its own journal based on members' contributions, maybe quarterly. I'd be quite happy to join it and make some queries on TIGHAR's behalf.) Perhaps Vern Klein could contact me off-list?

LTM
Phil 2276
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 10 Apr 1999 10:29:47 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Gallagher letter

>What really struck me about Ruby's
>letter is her attitude toward the war "we are indulging in."

This is "classic" British understatement/irony and not to be taken too seriously: Mentioning the war at all in a personal letter like that indicates that the war is serious. The letter, from a British perspective, clearly describes that the war has had a powerful impact on the entire village.

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

How say our resident Brits on this subject?
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 10 Apr 1999 13:24:08 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Gallagher letter

>This is "classic" British understatement/irony and not to be taken too
>seriously: Mentioning the war at all in a personal letter like that
>indicates that the war is serious. The letter, from a British perspective,
>clearly describes that the war has had a powerful impact on the entire
>village.
>******************************************************************
>How say our resident Brits on this subject?

Strongly agree. Conveying any sort of alarm or despondency would have been seen as inappropriate, if not indeed an illegal act. Even mentioning in passing that the government has acquired an identifiable set of buildings and then not used them looks like an indiscretion in this context. This reads to me like the classic "stiff upper lip" fully deployed.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 11 Apr 1999 10:42:38 EDT
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      The Gallagher Project

>.......I wonder when G.H. Gallagher & E.A. Clancy
>moved to England & whether they were married in Ireland or England--probably
>doesn't make much difference except may shed some light on their ages, place
>of origin and possibly descendants still living.

Gerald Hugh Gallagher and Edith Annie Clancy were married in Chelsea on August 8, 1911.  Edith was born in 1879 in Kentish Town, London, England. The marriage record shows her age 25 in 1911.  This does not agree with her birth record which is not all that surprising.  Maybe she's 25, and holding...!

Gerald Hugh Gallagher was in Dublin, Ireland as of the 1906 Medical Register. The Registers for 1912, 1915 and 1919 show him in the West African Medical Service.  It would seem that he came to England sometime between 1906 and 1911.

*****************************************************************
From Simon Ellwood

I've actually managed to obtain a copy of Gallagher's parent's wedding certificate, and also Gallagher's birth certificate. His parents were married on 8th August 1911 at a church on Cheque Row, Chelsea, London - England. Gallagher's father - Gerald Hugh Gallagher is recorded as 29 years old, and his mother as 25 years old.

Interestingly, the latter age actually conflicts with census information which puts her birth date at around 1879 making her about 32 years old - a difference of seven years ! Since she appears on the 1881 census as a child of two years old, and again on the 1891 census as twelve years old, I think it's obvious that she was actually older than 25 and was less than truthful at the marriage. Perhaps even Gerald Hugh wasn't aware that his bride was a couple of years older than himself. Social attitudes of the time may have persuaded Edith into this course of action.

Another interesting detail is that they are recorded as living at the same address in Chelsea at the time of marriage.

One other piece of information recorded is that the fathers of both were deceased at the time of the wedding.

Regarding the witness to the wedding - Louisa Clancy,  Ric has already confirmed that our Miss Clancy was in fact one of Edith's sisters so I think we can rule out Louisa.  The wedding certificate shows three witnesses:-

    Bernard J. Clancy
    Harold Sinclair Coghice (?? - but  definitely not Clancy)
    Louisa Clancy

I've found no record of Bernard J. Clancy - he's not one of Edith's brothers but may I guess be an uncle or a cousin.  I speculate that Louisa may in fact be his wife and thus not be a "Miss" at all.   I think we can forget her.

As to where Gallagher's parents were born, his mother Edith A. was definitely born in England, in Kentish Town, London.  I'm not sure about his father but it was probably Ireland.  The earliest reference we have to him is in the 1906 Medical register, his address being 3 Grantham Street, Dublin. He'd be about 24 at the time.

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

Good work gentlemen.   I'd like to suggest that we coordinate research on The Gallagher Project through Vern just so we don't reinvent too many wheels.

Couple of observations:

If Dr. Gallagher and Miss Edith Annie were sharing an address prior to their marriage in August 1911, they were at least being careful.  Gerald wasn't born until July 6, 1912.

Whoever Bernard J. Clancy is, it is probably not a coincidence that Baby Gerald's middle name was Bernard.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 11 Apr 1999 10:44:03 EDT
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Re: Gallagher letter

William Webster-Garman wrote:

>This is "classic" British understatement/irony and not to be taken too
>seriously: Mentioning the war at all in a personal letter like that
>indicates that the war is serious. The letter, from a British perspective,
>clearly describes that the war has had a powerful impact on the entire
>village.

Ric replied:-

>How say our resident Brits on this subject?

Yes, I also agree.
Don't read too much into this rather offhand reference to the war.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 11 Apr 1999 10:57:36 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Another TV show

For those who get the "E Channel" on cable, I've been notified that they'll be airing an Amelia Earhart edition of their "Mysteries and Scandals" series on Monday, April 12 at 7:30 p.m. (as usual, be sure to check your local listings for the correct time in your neck of the woods).  It's a half-hour show for which TIGHAR provided some imagery and I did some talking-head stuff. I have no idea what they'll do with it.

We don't get the "E Channel" but they've promised to send me a tape.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 11 Apr 1999 11:15:13 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Coming Soon

For the next Document of the Week to be mounted on the TIGHAR website we'll be putting up the report submitted to the Western Pacific High Commission by Dr. Duncan "Jock" Macpherson in November 1941 (the same month Ruby's letter was written) entitled "Death of Mr. G.B. Gallagher, M.A.".   The report describes the voyage of the ship "Viti" in August/September of 1941 which ended in the death of Gallagher on Gardner Island following an operation by Macpherson in a desperate attempt to save his life.  Powerful stuff.

I'll put out a notice when it's up (probably by next Saturday).

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:51:21 EDT
From:         Bill Zorn
Subject:      various subjects

Noticed in the local paper recently an article about the auction of a diary of a WW2 RAF Lancaster crewmember which reports an incident over the English channel which may give some information with respect to the disappearance of Glenn Miller. Wasn't there a discussion a while ago on the forum with regards to this?  Could someone refresh my memory?

The latest issue of AIRWAYS has an article about a Electra 10A owned by Air Canada (Tango-Charlie-Charlie). might this be a data source for information about the 10E NR16020?

Some mention was made about the use of AUTOCAD (ACAD) software for use in analyzing the photo. ACAD V12 or V13 were the last versions to be made with Apple application in mind. ACAD V15, (ACAD 2000) is the version now being pushed by the manufacturer (AUTODESK). I don't think they will be making an Apple version. AUTODESK are rather proud  of all their products (read expensive). Additional, the learning curve is a bit steep, but AUTODESK and it's dealers do supply a lot of support on and off line.

Also with regards to the photo, in the book WARPRIZES by Phil Butler copyright 1994 by Midlands Counties Publications there are three photographs of Ki-54's in  various states of distress or disassembly which might be informative.

I did receive one posting last week that had part of the message in larger bold type, but just figured someone was getting creative.

william h zorn
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Yes, there was an off-topic discussion of the theory that the light aircraft in which Miller was traveling was blown out of the sky when it strayed into a bomb-dump area over the channel and a Lanc returning from a weather-aborted mission jettisoned a "cookie" with a proximity fuse that detonated nearby.  The log supposedly documents that the tail gunner saw such an incident.

We're familiar with the Air Canada Lockheed 10A.

I don't think TIGHAR has sufficient need for AUTOCAD even if they made a current version for Macs.

More photos of the Ki-54 would be most useful if they showed internal inboard wing structure.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:00:05 EDT
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: Another TV show

>I have no idea what they'll do with it. 

Allow me to venture a little "remote viewing" of what's in store for those of us lucky enough to receive the "E!" channel. E! stands for "Entertainment."  That's entertainment, mind you, not "education."  Another clue is that the show is called "Mysteries and Scandals" and not "Mysteries and Scholarly Debate."  Prepare to hear every AE rumor and myth you've ever known repeated in the most sensational light possible...a half hour of eccentricity, pregnancy, espionage, alcoholism, and pure manipulation.

  LTM,
  Russ

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

From Ric

Yeah, I probably didn't help matters when I told them that we found the barely discernable initials G.E.P. carved on the headstone of the baby grave.

(justkiddingjustkiddingjustkidding)

LTM,
ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:04:49 EDT
From:         Joel Dunlap
Subject:      Ruby's Last Name

Being a genealogist I come across this situation many times.  I believe Ruby's last name is Maryetts.  In several instances she runs her "r" and "y" together.  See "Harry was called up..." and "Mary's father died...".  She puts on a delayed cross on some of her "t's" as in her signature which most people write faster than regular words.  Look at "Batsford" and also look at that "s" in "Batsford".  Does" in the last few lines also shows a good "s" that can be compared to the last letter in her last name.  Therefore, looks like Maryetts to me.  But of course after looking at all these postings on the forum for so long, I'm blind in one eye and can't see out the other!

LTM,
Joel #2183

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

From Ric

Well,  I can't say that I've ever heard of anyone named Maryetts but that doesn't mean you're wrong.  Somebody want to check the phonebook for Malvern?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:51:18 EDT
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Ki-54 photos

Bill Zorn wrote:

>Also with regards to the photo, in the book WARPRIZES by Phil Butler
>copyright 1994 by Midlands Counties Publications there are three photographs
>of Ki-54's in  various states of distress or disassembly which might be
>informative.

Yes - I also have this excellent book. Several of the photos on my web page comparing the L10E and Ki-54 come from this book including probably the best shot we have - the quarter frontal of a Ki-54 post war undergoing maintenance with engine cowls removed.  'Fraid there's no wing spar shots though.


LTM
Simon #2120
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 13 Apr 1999 13:26:08 EDT
From:         Amanda Dunham
Subject:      Re: Another TV show

Russ wrote:

>Prepare to hear every AE rumor and myth you've ever
>known repeated in the most sensational light possible...a half hour of
>eccentricity, pregnancy, espionage, alcoholicm, and pure manipulation.

What, no lesbianism? no heroin of the skies??

At least tell me Joan Rivers will comment on AE's flying togs...

Amanda

****************************************************************
From Russ Matthews

I guess I owe the folks at E! something of an apology.  While there were numerous factual errors in their Earhart presentation, the overall tone was much more sober than I predicted.  In fact, if it weren't for those two scandal-mongers Gillespie and Jacobson, there would hardly have been any mention of the "juicy" stuff!  Guess I'll have to limit myself to "remote control viewing."

  LTM,
  Russ

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

Gosh Randy.  I wonder what we said?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 13 Apr 1999 13:32:33 EDT
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      Glen Miller (again)

The theory about the Glenn Miller airplane having been hit by bombs jettisoned by an Allied bomber over the Channel while returning from a raid to Germany is one of the theories around the disappearance of Glenn Miller. Ever since the bomber offensive against Germany began in 1943, bombers have occasionally been hit by bombs falling from aircraft flying above them. There are even pictures of such accidents. One finds them in books on the history of the 8th Air Force.

Yet this is not the only theory on Glenn Miller's disappearance. There is also the story (confirmed by the Royal Navy) according to which the single engine Noorduyn C-64 Norseman in which Glenn Miller was flying to Paris was shot down by mistake by one of their trigger-happy Royal warships. I believe it was a frigate. As far as I'm aware of this is the only version that was said to be official.

                                                        Herman

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

The story I heard is that the Norseman was brought down by a bottle thrown from a Japanese ship by a French galley slave.

Let's let Elgen Long find Glen Miller while we concentrate on Amelia.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:03:26 EDT
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      New Model

This is not a spam. I have no vested interest in Squadron Mail Order, just passing along info to whomever might be interested.

The latest sale flyer from Squadron Mail Order lists a Lockheed Electra, by "Special Hobby" of the Czech Republic. It is in 1/72 scale, with "resin cockpit and engines". The artwork shows what appears to be a Lockheed Model 10 painted in some type of camouflage with national markings that I don't recognize. It also shows five cabin windows on the starboard side aft of the cockpit. I suppose the experienced modeler might be able to make a replica of NR16020 from this kit, but can't advise for sure. The item number is 4-SO72015, and the price is $15.96 plus shipping. You can order from their web page at http://www.squadron.com/ .

Did Czechoslovakia or other European countries operate Lockheed 10s?

Tom #2179

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

The Model 10 was actually quite popular in Europe.  Unfortunately, the delivery records include some airlines that are long defunct and I'm not sure of their nationality.

Deliveries included:
LOT (Poland) - ten  Model 10As
LAV  (?)  - eight Model 10As
LARES (?) - seven Model 10As
Aeroput (?) - eight Model 10As
British Airways - six Model 10As


LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:52:43 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      E! Channel Program

I thought the program was not remotely similar to that predicted by the prognosticators on the Forum. Instead, while it was all  well-known stuff, it was seriously presented, and the film clips were as good as I've seen anywhere.  The only problem was that not much substantive info could be presented in a half hour including commercials. As usual, Ric did a yeoman job in handling his interview.

LTM,

Bob
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:57:33 EDT
From:         Chuck Jackson
Subject:      NEW?MAGNETOMETER

May '99 Popular Science tells of an NMR imaging magnetometer as much as 2000 X as sensitive as magnetometers normally used to locate objects on the ocean floor, in use by  Franek Goddio,French archaeologist, to puruse Cleopatra's Palace.  Says he  has exclusive archaeological rights to this technology developed for U. S. Navy.    Now THAT'S  technology!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Let's locate the mfgr.  for a start, I have an email inquiry in to the article author. Does our resident archaeologist know Goddio???

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

From Ric

I going to pass on that one.  An aluminum airplane is a lousy magnetic target.  If I was going to look for better technology to use in our search I'd be looking for foliage-penetrating radar or something that could detect and image aluminum from a considerable distance.  But I'm not looking for better technology right now.  We have excellent historical data which suggest several places on the island where we might concentrate our search.  We now need to get some "ground truth" about those areas so that we can better define what kind of technology might be most useful, or whether we already have adequate technology to conduct a thorough search.  Experience (often of the  bitter variety), has taught us to keep our operations at Niku as lo-tech as possible and still get the job done.  It's an environment that eats electronics, and it's a long way to Radio Shack.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 14 Apr 1999 14:07:12 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Ruby's Last Name

The name could, perhaps, be Ruby Morfetts.

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

So we have Morfetts, Morpeth, Maryetts......

For those who missed the first verse of this song, we're trying to decipher the signature on the letter to Gallagher which you can see if you go to:

 http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Documents/Gallagher_Letter.html
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:32:33 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Skeletonization

I'd like to bring the forum in on a discussion Tom King and I have been having about skeletonization of human bodies.
*******************************************************
Due to the graphic nature of this posting, reader discretion is advised.
*******************************************************

When you think about it, it does seem like we have something unusual going on at Niku.  Let's back up for a moment and ask ourselves, "What is the NORMAL progression of events (assuming there is such a thing) if a body is left out to rot in a tropical environment."  My perception is:

1.  The flesh rots and the clothing breaks down somewhat from the UVs and the whole mess gets pretty stuck together and gross.

2.  Whatever critters are indigenous to the area feed on the carcass - bugs, birds, crabs, etc.   In the process, clothing already weakened by deterioration gets further broken down.

3.  At some point, there is nothing left to eat and all that remains are the bones, still joined together by cartilage. Eventually, the cartilage breaks down and the bones disarticulate.  What's left is a bleached white skeleton surrounded by whatever bits of clothing are the most durable - belts, shoes, jewelry, watches, coins, etc.

4.  Over time, the bones may be further reduced by rodents which chew on them for the minerals.

Whether or not scattering occurs depends entirely upon the presence of creatures which:

A.  Eat carrion.
B.  Tend to want to carry food off and eat it elsewhere.
C.  Have sufficient body mass and strength to disarticulate and carry off portions of the body.

In the case of the remains found on Niku, it seems clear that significant scattering occurred and it would seem to make sense that the most likely time for the intervention of scavengers would be during Phase 2 (above). Available information suggests that in a tropical environment that phase lasts no more than a few months at best.  In other words, we can reasonably speculate that within a few months of the death of the Castaway of Gardner Island (who was most likely a woman of northern European descent who stood around 5 ft 7 in. tall) the corpse was beset by animals of sufficient size to disarticulate and carry off the body parts that were not found at the site in 1940.  These include:

The head, minus the jaw. (found some distance away)
The entire torso with the exception of one cervical vertebra (neck bone),
part of one uppermost rib, and half of the pelvis.
The left arm and hand from the elbow down.
The entire right arm and hand except for the large bone of the forearm.
The left leg and foot from the knee down.
The right foot.

That the missing pieces are not random but constitute specific body portions reinforces the notion that they were carried off during Phase 2 (above).  The fact that the pelvis came apart suggests that it was perhaps toward the latter part of Phase 2.

By far, the biggest scavenger indigenous to Niku is Birgus latro, the robber or coconut crab.  So far we have not been able to document that he carries off food, rather than eating it wherever he finds it, but assuming that he does remove food to a remote location, is he capable of going off with these missing body parts?  How much weight can a big coconut crab drag?  I'm guessing, but I'd say 30 pounds is being generous.  How much do our missing body parts weigh?  Well let's see (guessing again). A 5'7" woman might weigh ballpark 120 pounds.  That might break down something like:

Head (1 ea.)  - 10 lbs.
Arm (2 ea.) - 10 lbs.
Leg (2 ea.) - 25 lbs
Torso (1 ea.) - 40 lbs.

Reduce those weights by at least a third due to dehydration and selective dining and it seems like it is at least theoretically possible that the scattering was the work of coconut crabs (as Gallagher thought) IF that is something that coconut crabs do.

However, if Birgus latro is not the scatterer our only other candidate is Man's Best Friend.  The earliest reasonable arrival date for dogs on the island is April of 1939 when the families of the first work party arrive. That means that, if dogs did the deed, the Castaway of Gardner Island probably didn't die until sometime the previous fall.  If that hapless individual was Ms. Earhart, it means that she survived for well over a year  after her arrival and was alive and well and living on Gardner when Maude andBevington visited the island in October 1937.  That might explain why they saw "signs of previous habitation "  ... "like someone had bivouacked for the night" but saw no bones.

And this is why we're interested in the dining habits of coconut crabs.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:32:55 EDT
From:         Tim Smith
Subject:      E! TV show

I just watched the E! network Mysteries and Scandals show on AE.  It was 30 minutes (actually about 20 minus commercials) long.  I had very low expectations for it but was pleasantly surprised.  The first 3/4 is a brief biography of AE covering her childhood, young adulthood, and flying career.  It presents her in a very positive light.

Finally, the world flight is introduced as being "doomed to failure" followed by some shots of the wrecked Electra and how it took 3 months to repair.  The Oakland to Lae part of the world flight is completely glossed over and then focuses briefly on the search.

It is made clear that the theory of AE being captured as a spy by the Japanese is a Hollywood invention.  The other theories presented are the "went down at sea" school (represented by Tom Crouch) and the Nikumaroro theory as presented by some guy named Gillespie.

Overall, the show was very superficial and presents nothing that Forum readers don't already know.  It was however pleasant to see vintage stills and footage of AE (which sometimes corresponded to the script). Best of all, there was no time spent on the array of crackpot theories that we expected.  Actually, TIGHAR's ideas were given quite a bit of credibility.  Its a bit of fluff, but TIGHAR came off looking like about the best game in town (and I'm NOT biased, of course).

Tim Smith 1142C
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:10:29 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Ruby's Last Name

Our best take on it, and please be aware that we have an Englishman on staff here as well (less than four months in the States actually), is that the name could possibly be "Marpeth", "Margeth", or most probably Ruby Margaret, though it looks least like that of all. The question here that he raised is  to whether Ruby would have signed the letter with or without her last name, given that she is on such close terms with Gallagher. His take on it is that it could have gone either way -- with or without the last name would have been socially acceptable.

Would it be sensible to simply call the school at this juncture? Or has someone else already taken this on?

Thomas Van Hare

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

I see the logic in the name not being a surname but a middle name.  If I had to guess, I'd say that she's probably Gerald's cousin.

Vern Klein has been coordinating research on this aspect of the research and Phil Tanner has been handling local inquiries. Whaddya say guys?

*****************************************************************
From Jon Watson

I checked the on-line white pages for Malvern for the MOR* and MAR* listings and find no "Ruby", or anything close to the name as popularly deciphered (ie: morf morp morq marf marp marq- pretty much anything with MO and a descender).

By the way, I haven't heard anything back from the girls' college yet.

LTM
jon

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

Let's be sure we coordinate these approaches.  Vern, can you give us quick review on who is doing what?
*****************************************************************
From William Webster-Garman

My first reaction was "Morfeth", but pronouncing it aloud isn't very encouraging <grin>.

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

Perhapth ith's a phonetic thpelling.

***************************************************************
From Antonio Gomez

As trying to decipher the last name, I thought of a name that would sound more like a name. Martell.
thank you

****************************************************************
From Phil Tanner

To update Forum members - research in the local phone book for Malvern turned up no references to precisely versions suggested for Ruby's surname, but 12 to one quite close, "Margetts". I have now written to two of these people and to two contacts at the hunt most local to Malvern, as well as to the secretary of the local family history society seeking help on Ruby and Miss Clancy of Clanmere. (Incidentally, I wonder if it is just a coincidence that the syllable  "Clan" appears in both, given the ghastly tradition of making up names of houses from elements of personal names.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:12:24 EDT
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Off-topic: Africa Shackleton

Can any of you out there tell me more about the story of a Shackleton bomber that went down in the desert during a ferry flight from South Africa to England a few years back?  If so, please respond to me directly at the address above.  Thanks.

  -Russ
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:22:42 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Canton 1996

I just subscribed to the Forum,  but I can't seem to be able to find out how to participate....

I spent 3 weeks on Kanton in late '96, and would like to make a posting about it.

I just discovered the Tighar site, and am not sure about the details about that engine buried in the dump...  But if its exact location is not known, there is many ACRES  of dump covered with tons of coral rock!!!  I don't see it doable without a bulldozer!

Etc...

Sincerely

Christian

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

Just hit "reply" and type away.

We do have a very specific location but that only tells us what dump to dig in.  And yes, a bulldozer would come in handy.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:24:32 EDT
From:         Chuck
Subject:      MAGNETOMETER

GOLLY RIC----associated with that airplane is a hellava hunk of steel in the form of crankshaft,cams, connecting rods, landing gear etc.----nothing compared with the Titanic, but substantial.  Anyway, was'nt thinking of it to search foliage,  but for a better look in the lagoon and/or off the reef.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:05:51 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Shoe size

A critic who would apparently prefer to remain off the Forum has raised a question in correspondence with me, that I thought I'd pass on for Forum consideration.

The critic (hereinafter "Critic") says that the shoe heel found at Aukaraime on Niku cannot match the heel shown in the photograph of Earhart's shoe on the Electra wing.  Critic says that the rows of rivets on the wing are 2.5 inches apart.  The photo, as depicted in TIGHAR TRACKS, shows the heel to be about the size of, or slightly smaller than, the space between the rivets -- ergo 2.5 inches long or less.  The Aukaraime heel, however, again as shown in TRACKS, is about 3 inches long.

Critic also says that he discussed the matter with a shoemaker who has repaired shoes for almost 40 years, who said that the a woman's Blucher oxford would have been heeled with a smaller, thinner replacement heel than the Aukaraime heel.

Responses?

Tom King

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

From Ric

I'll admit that this one had me worried for a minute.  We had never measured the heel alone in the photo, just the sole as a whole.  Lay a set of dividers on the two rows of rivets and compare the spread to the length of the heel and - yes - all same same.  The heel appears to be 2.5 inches long, but The Phantom Critic fails to account for perspective.  The rows of rivets do not pass under the shoe but end several inches short of the shoe and are, thus, not in the same plane (no pun intended).  Draw a line along each row of rivets extending through the plane of the shoe (like railroad tracks converging in the distance) and then measure the spread in the plane of the heel and voila! - the heel in the photo is 3 inches long. (Whew!)

> ...a woman's Blucher oxford would have been heeled with a smaller,
> thinner replacement heel than the Aukaraime heel.

Well, Biltrite told us that there was no way to tell whether the heel we showed them had come from a man's shoe or a woman's shoe.  Their opinion that the shoe was a woman's was based upon the tightness of the stitching pattern still visible in edges of the sole.  We know that the sole goes with the heel because they were found together and the nail holes match up perfectly. Supporting evidence is found  in the tiny size of the brass shoelace eyelet found in the same location.  We know the heel dates from the mid-1930s (because Biltrite matched it to the original mold) and Biltrite says that men's laces in the '30s were too fat to go through such a small eyelet.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 14:47:45 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      Magnetometer

Just to accentuate the idea on NMR in case "higher tech" is ever desired, NMR has nothing to do with ferro- (e.g., iron) magnetic materials. Its utility would be in areas where iron is NOT present, eg. organic substances (vegetation, etc).  Common magnetometers (metal detectors) can be, and were in fact, used on Niku in earlier searches, I understand.

LTM,

Bob

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

Now I'm really confused.  If NMR doesn't detect iron, what does it detect?

On previous expeditions we've used magnetometers (which detect ferrous metals), "metal detectors" (which detect all metals), and "ground conductivity meters" (which detect not only metals but also disturbed earth).  We've also used side scan sonar (which uses sound to image objects in the water).
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:24:56 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Niku bones

Am I in the ballpark when I interpret Ric's remarks in his "Skeletonization" posting of April 15 when I say:

Using Gallagher's description of when and where he found "the skeleton" we should consider that the castaway died shortly before april 1939 when dogs were first introduced to Niku.  The dogs found the castaway's corpse shortly (8-10 weeks?) after death, "disarticulated" portions of the corpse and dragged off several large (up to 40 pounds) chunks?  The bones were then found by Gallagher in 1940.

Well, gang, yes and no.

So far I have been under the impression that Gallagher found the skeleton relatively intact.  By that, I mean the bones were in general relationship to each other regarding where they fit on the body, most (70 percent-plus?) of the bones were present, and the bones were spread over a small (10-foot diameter?) area.  In short, clearly recognizable as human remains but not simply a bunch of unidentified bones scattered about.

I think it is important to go back to Gallagher's exact words. Did he report a "skeleton," or did he report "human remains," or "bones of a human being" etc.  Each of those phrases, to me, conjures up a different picture because they mean different things.

Second, it has been my experience when one or more dogs find carrion they often take what pieces they can far from the others simply to enjoy it in peace.  (This would be especially true if there were a large number of dogs, i.e. competition for what little meat there was available.)  If one or more dogs repeatedly visited the death site, which would be necessary to devour a 80-100 pound carcass, the bones would have been scattered.  The scattering would result from the initial meal and subsequent meals as each canine would with each visit investigate the site for fresh carrion (is that an oxymoron?) and then chew on what ever scraps were available.  With competition (how many dogs were there?) and less meat available, the dogs would tend to transport their scraps farther and farther from the original death site so as to gnaw away in peace and quiet.

For now, I vote "No" on Ric's theory.

LTM, who is about to blow chow
Dennis McGee #0149

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

Allow me to clarify:

IF, that is IF, coconut crabs do not habitually carry off pieces of discovered carrion to eat it elsewhere, then we have to find some other source for the removal of significant portions of the corpse.  Having noted the scarcity of bears on the island, the only alternative source I can think of is dogs.  The late (ca April '39) arrival of dogs suggests to me that the demise of the castaway was recent enough at that time that the corpse was still ripe enough to be of interest to pooches.

Your impression that Gallagher found the skeleton relatively intact is not necessarily borne out by what he says.

On Sept. 23, 1940 in a telegram to the Resident Commissioner, Gallagher says:

"Some months ago working party on Gardner discovered human skull - this was buried and I only recently heard about it.  Thorough search has now produced more bones ( including lower jaw ) part of a shoe a bottle and a sextant box.  It would appear that

(a)     Skeleton is possibly that of a woman, ...."

On October 17, 1940 in a telegram to the Secretary of the WPHC Gallagher elaborates:

"Complete skeleton not found only skull, lower jaw, one thoracic vertebra, half pelvis, part scapula, humerus, radius, two femurs, tibia and fibula. Skull discovered by working party six months ago - report reached me early September.  Working party buried skull but made no further search.

Bones were found on South East corner of island about 100 feet above ordinary high water springs. Body had obviously been lying under a "ren" tree and remains of fire, turtle and dead birds appear to indicate life.  All small bones have been removed by giant coconut crabs which have also damaged larger ones."

Gallagher found a total of 13 bones, roughly ten percent of the total number in a human skeleton.  We really have no specific information about how large an area was searched to find the bones that he did find.  Something caused him to conclude that the "body" had been lying under a tree, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the bones were all found there.

The absence of most of the skeleton, the poor condition of the bones that were found, the absence of the leather uppers of the shoes, and the absence of other items that one would normally expect to be present at a castaway's campsite (clothing, belts, tools, shelter of some sort, etc.) create, for me, the impression of a site that has been greatly altered since the death of the resident.  Gallagher attributes the removal of the small bones to "giant coconut crabs", but there are more than small bones missing.  The moved bones include the largest bones in the body (skull, femur, half pelvis, etc.). Something has played absolute havoc with this site and I have a hard time laying it all to Birgus latro.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:29:56 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Re: Ruby's Last Name

Hey, how about taking the easy ones first.  Has anyone looked for a Molly Hill?  You know, the girl Ruby talks about whose dad died around Easter?

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149

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

Well, it is the one complete name we have.  Trouble is, there are likely to be lots and lots of Hills.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:39:38 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      NMR

NMR refers to nuclear magnetic resonance. The preferred term for the instrument is  nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometer (not magnetometer). Certain nuclei in atoms in molecules possess spin and so will interact with an applied magnetic field in unique, measurable ways. Typically, protons (hydrogen nuclei), and other atomic nuclei such as O17, C13, F19 and P31-containing molecules can be measured,  and much meaningful info about the structure of the substances can be determined.  Everyone has heard of MRI  (magnetic resonance imaging) by now, which reveals certain structural features of organisms.  Iron is not the component determined. Organic substances (visualize vegetation) can be  characterized. Whether or not these devices can be useful in Niku searches is conjectural, but it's an interesting idea. It might be useful, for example, in distinguishing one kind of organic substance (living or dead) from another.  Metal detectors would locate metal airplane parts. NMR would look at non-metallic parts and aid in characterizing them. It can be a powerful tool.

LTM,
Bob
****************************************************************

From Ric

I don't see an immediate and obvious application but it's good to know what it is and what it does. Thanks.

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

From Bob Sherman

I'll let some physicist explain NMR, But I believe it what was 'invented' by one of the Varian Bros. (pilots who 'died by the sword') and an(east) Indian while they were at Stanford.  The story I heard was that Varian was explaining the precession of a gyro when a force was applied.  Between them they got the idea of applying a magnetic force to an element, then noting the displacement of the electrons in their orbit.  Each element had a different signature, thus NMR & the machines Varian later made and sold were for qualitative analysis of unk. compounds.  Magnetism, as we think of it applied to ferrous metals , is not involved.

If for any one of a thousand reasons there are flaws in the above, will you at least agree that it is a good story??    Varian, Pilots, Stanford, the Indian, and some sort of a 'NMR' device, (based on the precession of a gyro) and what became Varian Bros. mfg. co. or scientific instruments , are true.  RC 
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Truly, it is a good story.

*****************************************************************
From Randy Jacobson

NMR is Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, used in the same way as CAT scans.  It is based upon the principle that hydrogen atoms vibrate at a particular frequency, and the density of these atoms are mapped out using NMR, giving a very detailed cross-section of human anatomy.  It is not relevant to finding metal in the environment.

**************************************************************
From Hugh Graham

> From Ric
>  Now I'm really confused.  If NMR doesn't detect iron, what does it detect?

Any element.

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, AS I UNDERSTAND IT was discovered in the 1940's and is the precursor to modern Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

A strong constant magnetic field is applied to the target material which lines up all the atoms in north to south fashion.(all atoms with orbital electrons have a magnetic field).  Then an oscillating electro-magnetic field(radio wave) of a frequency exclusive to a given element is applied at right angles and focused such that it excites the orbital electrons out one energy level of orbit(the "resonant frequency" of the element)  This radio frequency is then turned off and an antenna and amplifier picks up the orbital electrons collapsing into their normal orbit.  Thus a given element can be detected.

MRI uses the hydrogen atom exclusively and since water is pervasive in all matter, a picture(still and moving) can be taken of most matter. Through focusing, bone can be made invisible to MRI.  Greatest thing since sliced bread.

How this could assist a magnetometer is a mystery to me too.

All corrections and omissions will be cheerfully entertained.  LTM, HAG.

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

Doesn't sound like these things will coming free in a box of Cheerios right away either.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:48:19 EDT
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      Gallagher in Ireland

Recall that 'Irish' in Sept. 1935 began "studying agriculture on farm with Mr. G. Butler, Maiden Hall, Bennets Bridge, Co. Kilkenny, Ireland".  Map shows Bennetsbridge (1 word) 4 miles SE of Kilkenny City on the River Nore. Visit www.rtc-carlow.ie/Kilkenny/kilcas.html and learn that Kilkenny Castle is at the SE end of the City and "from the 14th Century was the main seat of the BUTLER's (my caps), the Earls and Dukes of Ormonde".  Visit www.kst.dit.ie/nat-arch, the National Archives of Ireland, then click Uasal, then Irish Nobility, then Non-Gaelic Irish Families, then Butler of Ormonde (Pedigree) and Wow!, a 16-page text from Burke's Peerage, Baronetage & Knightage, 103rd Ed., 1962 which begins with descent from the Domesday Book (1086 AD) and ends with the 6th Marquesse of Ormonde, (James)Arthur Norman Butler.  But of more interest to TIGHAR is the 5th Marquesse and 29th Hereditary Chief Butler of Ireland, James GEORGE Anson BUTLER (1890-1948). I wonder if this man was Gallagher's host in 1935-6?  Could he have sponsored an agricultural school?   Or did 'Irish' study with G. (as in Gomer) Butler, who had a 5-acre plot of potatoes in Co. Kilkenny?  I wonder if he was looking into Colonial Service and learned that some knowledge of agriculture would be a necessity.  Perhaps the W.P.H.C. foresaw the need for people to oversee clearing land and planting "crops"?

How to proceed?  The Butlers may well have a family historian, but how to reach him/her?  And then how to explain we're trying to locate a living relative of Gallagher?  Would that be important enough?  The Butlers have a seat in Kilkenny but resided in  England--and perhaps elsewhere.  Perhaps a better tack would be the Local Studies Dept., Kilkenny Co. Library, where a librarian could probably advise who inhabited "Maiden Hall" in 1935-6 and what was going on there then.  If it was a school, perhaps there are student records.

How about running this by the Simon Ellwood , Phil Tanner and John Thompson for their ideas?  This may well be a wild-goose chase in any event and unnecessary if the Malvern search proves fruitful.

LTM who loved the auld sod
Bill Moffet  #2156

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

Verrry interesting.  Whether or not we find relatives in Malvern, I'm curious to know the nature of Gerald's sojourn in Ireland.  I think the approach of finding out just what was going on at Maiden Hall in 1935-6 is good one.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:19:54 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Re: Skeletonization

Concerning #1 and #2,  I think one should not overlook the hermit crabs!  In late 1996 I also spent 3 weeks on Palmyra, which has a similar climate to Niku -only a bit wetter still.

Fishing there was great, and it was common to find HUNDRESDS of these small hermit crabs covering fish skeletons and food scraps. They would even be scrambling  all over the outdoor kitchen counters and cooking utensils -after the kitchen had been cleaned!

Unless someone knows of a reason why these small crabs wouldn't touch a human corpse, I feel that within a very few weeks of death, only a clean skeleton would be left.

As for the coconut crabs, as Niku had no population for years before 1937, these crabs (which are very good food) would have been plentiful!  My understanding is that they live on the flesh of coconuts: their claws are extremely powerful.  I have no idea whether they'd be interested in bones or if they like to bring trophies to their nest like magpies.

Skill is needed to deal with these BIG crabs, and once they retreat deep into their holes (under fallen dead trees, etc) I think it is impossible to get them out.  These holes are not that easy to locate.  I also have no idea if nests used 60 years ago would still be used today???  Even if one would crawl in there today, 60years old trophies would be buried under decaying vegetal matter?

As for dogs, is it known if any were brought to Niku by the settlers? Gilbertese do not seem too fond of dogs -as seen on Tarawa, and few dogs and cats can be seen nowadays on Kanton and Xmas.  Could the British Administration have forbidden the import of dogs and cats to the Phoenix in the 30's?  I don't know...

Hope this helps.

Christian

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

I've seen the same kind of assaults by hermit crabs on Niku.  No doubt about it.  The litle buggers are voracious, but they're not going to go off with bones.  Their small size also let's them get into small places, like for example the interior of bones to get at the marrow.  The more I think about it the more I think that the scattering of the bones occurred while the corpse was till a rotting body rather than a picked-over skeleton.

We have quite a bit of data on coconut crabs and the surprising thing is how little is really known about them.  Tradition holds that they climb coconut trees, snip down the nuts, climb back down, husk the nut and open it with their claws, and eat the meat.  That they climb trees is not in doubt.  We've watched them do it.  That they eat coconut meat is also a given.  But apparently there is no documented observation of a crab harvesting a nut from a tree or ripping one open with it's claws.  We do know, however, that they eat meat.  In 1997 we watched one devour a rat high in the branches of a tree.  (Pretty weird to watch a crab act just like a leopard.) Land crabs (different critter altogether) do drag stuff down into their burrows.  Never leave your socks out to dry on a low bush on Niku.  But again, there don't seem to be documented instances of this behavior among coconut crabs.

We know that there were dogs on the island in 1944 because we have a photo of two dogs that were kept as pets by the guys who manned the Coast Guard Loran station.  I know of no British prohibition against dogs.  In fact, I can't imagine a British prohibition against dogs.  It's my impression that every subject of Her Majesty is issued at least two dogs at birth.  We saw dogs, but not a lot of dogs, on Kanton last year.  Let's have some input from others who were out there - Dick Evans was a member of the Coast Guard unit on Niku during the war.  Dick, talk to us about dogs on the island.  Chuck Boyle was on Atafu, which is in the Tokelaus and is a slightly different ethnic group from the Gilbertese on Niku, but did they have dogs?

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:41:46 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Re: Canton  Engine Dump

Concerning the engine buried on Kanton: if the dump location is known,  what did it look like when you guys visited?  How long, how wide, how deep?  How many cubic yards are we talking about?  Does it look like it contains huge heavy metal or concrete structures which would be hard to move out of the way by hand?

I'm not clear also, whether it is rubbish pushed DOWN  into a hole, or if it is a pile above ground?  That makes a huge difference in digging it  without a Cat (bulldozer)! If at least ONE  side was open to level ground at the base...

By the way, I remember that while snooping around the place in '96, I noticed a bulldozer sort of parked, just S of the old "downtown".  I only looked at it for a few seconds: no idea whether it was a wreck or not.  But it was NOT in a dump, more like on a parking lot. Didn't seem like it had run since 1976!?!?  I never thought of asking the local officials about its condition....  I suppose its hydraulic hoses could be cooked by now?

Another idea: anybody at Tighar is a "yachtie"???  For the price of a plane charter to just spend a few hours on Kanton, one should be able to get a sailboat for MANY WEEKS!  At any rate about 1/2 dozen yachts a year go from HI to Kanton.

Also the US automatic Met station on the island is visited once a year by a US Coast Guard vessel.  They don't stay long, a mere few days, I think...  It mostly brings hundreds of Helium bottles which were used by the Kiribati Met man to launch the US weather balloons.

Cheers

Christian

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

It looked like somebody had dug a trench with a bulldozer maybe 20 yards long by 10 yards wide and Lord knows how deep, then pushed the contents of the dump into it along with a whole bunch of coral rubble.  Lots of big chunks of metal all through it - axles, rear ends of trucks, some airplane aluminum, etc. etc. - an awful mess.  Excavating it would take either a beefy backhoe or a whole lot of people who didn't mind working real hard for a long time.

There are plenty of ways to get a few people to Kanton for a few days, if that's your idea of a good time.  But to get the assets there to excavate that dump is a very different problem.  (I know the dozer you're talking about.  It ain't goin' nowhere.)

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:02:01 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Re: Niku bones

Just a small remark: turtles are not that easy to catch for inexperienced castaways without equipment.

Birds are quite tame down there that you can catch them by hand with a little patience.  But turtles in the water are quite shy and swift moving. Could the turtle have been caught at the time by the settlers?

Something that I think should get more attention: clothing should not have disappeared so QUICKLY,  it seems to me!  Could clothing have been destroyed by animal life???  Torn to shreds by birds as nest material???

And this makes me think of something else: if a few settlers had found a skull only after a few months of being on the island, why would they have missed a whole plane, if above sea level in all the years they were there in force???

Christian

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

From Ric

I agree with you about the turtle.  They're hard to catch unless you catch a female on the beach laying eggs, but this site is on the lagoon side, far from the ocean beach.  Dragging a dead turtle all that way would be a nightmare and also unnecessary.  Just butcher it out on the beach and carry the meat to camp.

The turtle was not caught by the colonists but was clearly part of the "scene" at the Castaway Camp.  It's another thing that makes me suspect that whoever the castaway(s) were, they were there for a considerable period of time.

The absence of clothing bothers me too.  I have to think that we're looking at something more than degradation by the elements.  But then, the scattering of the bones tells us that.  Again, I think that the clothing went off with the big chunks of the carcass.

>...why would they have missed a whole plane, if above sea level in all the
>years they were there in force?

I don't think they did.  We have several anecdotal accounts to indicate that at least some of the people who lived on the island knew all about the plane.  They didn't know where it came from, and people after of the war naturally assumed that it was something from the war - just a piece of junk.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:12:58 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Niku bones

While not an expert, and have not visited the Great Island of Niku, I do know that there are numerous birds there.  Are any large enough or are carrion-loving fowl that might be involved in skeletonization? 

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

Some of the birds are pretty big.  A frigate bird can have a six foot wingspan, but I don't get the impression that they do any scavenging on the ground.  Their favorite trick is an air-to-air assault on Boobies returning from fishing trips and scaring them into disgorging their catch which the frigate then grabs in mid air.  It's a living. Good question though, and I know just the guy who can give us an authoritative answer.  I'll ask Roger Clapp, an ornithologist who has been to Niku several times studying the birds for the Smithsonian.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:10:30 EDT
From:         Ron Dawson
Subject:      Interesting item on eBay

Somewhat strange item on ebay. probable scam.

Ron Dawson

Title of item:  1937 AMELIA EARHART COVER U.S.S. COLORADO
Seller: nineballdave@erols.com
Starts: 04/10/99 19:49:26 PDT
Ends:   04/17/99 19:49:26 PDT
Price:  Currently $43.00
To bid on the item, go to:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=89555288


Item Description:

Here is a very strange cover &( decoded  missing) message got this
about 30years ago one of the first cotents ever purchased the old women said
her husband was captain of that ship that serched for Amelia Earhart. i never
took much importance in this except had a interesting cover i found in her
husbands desk while rumaging threw some papers about the search i found a
very very tiny like a stock ticker tape with Dots & dashes and unidenified
marks about 4 inches long after the marks in pencil it said   written in
script. MADE CONTACT: PLACED WELL TO LISTEN: WATER BY AIR:   CAPT
----------Coundnt read his name   anyway after 10 moves and 30 years later i
thought i had lost the cover but found it and CAN NOT FIND THAT LITTlE STOCK
TICKER TAPE But thought this cover could be worth a few bucks so placing it
up would like to get 5.00 bucks, if any bodys interested, Always wondered why
the capt of a ship would be sending something like that to the AMERICAN
EXSPRESS CO. NEW YORK CITY. Always sat a little strange with me, but what
ever . Letter dated JULLY 7 1937
On 04/11/99 at 06:33:31 PDT, seller added the following information:
Several people have email me asking if im sure of, the written script on
stock ticker, as i found the cover, i remember inside under flap i wrote in
pencil when i was trying to deciever ,and had the ticker in hand,  what the
hand written script said, on stock ticker ticket, i wrote the possablitys,
that the captain wrote, in after dots and dashes. and under flap i wrote it
looked liked he said.  MADE CONTACT( is definate)  : Shes : Placed well to
listen OR  Placed well to listen :   ( the last part definately said )
Water BY AIR :  : N:

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

From Ric

That's a strange one all right.  Just for comparison's sake, we have a note that we know was sent from the Colorado that is postmarked the next day, July 8, 1937.

The stamped postmark on the two envelopes looks to be the same.  Our envelope does not have the stamped Colorado logo but instead has a two-color stamped map showing the ship's route from Hawaii and the legend : "U.S.S. COLORADO - Enroute Howland Island and the Equator, searching for Miss Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan, who were forced down."

Over the 6 cent U.S. postage stamp is stamped "LAT. 00-00, LONG 174 - 20". The sender was William Biggerstaff. The addressee was Robert Anderson, who donated the envelope and note to TIGHAR.

The enclosed handwritten note says:

Wed. the 7th

Dear Andy;

I will probably see you before you get this; but it may be of some value to you. (the envelope etc.) I am having a fair time.  All we do is stand watches and listen to lectures.  We had a good time in Hilo.  Had swell plans for Honolulu, but left after 36 hours in, to look for Amelia (the dirty *).  We are getting plenty of hazing because we crossed the Equator today.  Fri. we have a real initiation.  It is really tough.  We get degrees etc. Well, take it easy and I'll see you later.

Bill

* the original word written in this location has been blacked out in pencil and the word "censored" handwritten in red ink above it.  The blacked out word is "bag."

It is apparent that Mr. Biggerstaff was one of the ROTC students aboard the Colorado.  His attitude toward the search is very similar to that expressed by pilot Bill Short in a letter to his father (and previously discussed at length on the forum).

Bottom line:  I suspect that the cover offered for sale on ebay is authentic. The missing tape with the cryptic message is, of course, meaningless unless it reappears and can somehow be authenticated.

LTM,.
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:21:54 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Gallagher in Ireland

Ric wrote:

> Verrry interesting.  Whether or not we find relatives in Malvern...

Just as an aside, we did find relatives in Malvern. But not quite the right ones....

You see, as the Van Hare name is quite rare in this world, you can imagine my surprise when a previously unknown family member turned up in this tiny little backwater town in Malvern. He wrote me a note something like this, "...so are you then related to the George Van Hare who married Kitty and ran the circus..." (they were particularly colorful characters, as you can imagine and, yes, those were my great grandparents, the P.T. Barnum of England); so, well, we've now discovered another branch of the family, still in the UK.

Now what are the odds of that! Anyway, life never ceases to amaze me.

Thomas Van Hare
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Gosh, I wonder if I'm related?  We're all still in the circus business.

By the way, any luck on the Buttonwood logs?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:29:25 EDT
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Skeletonization

It dawns on me that we have discussed at length how the horrific pounding of surf / storm / waves would have potentially destroyed /moved / dismantled the airplane - why could not the same surf action have scattered the bones after the body was skeletonized?

Seems at least as plausible as dogs and crabs...
Love to mother
jon  2266

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

From Ric

No way.  The bones were found on the lagoon side where there is no surf action and, according to Gallagher, 100 feet above the line of the highest tides.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:45:08 EDT
From:         Tony Gomez
Subject:      AIRPLANE REMNANTS

If the wreck photo fits more and more each day the puzzle of AE's plane whereabouts, then why do we also have such high hopes on those aluminum parts seen from aerial pictures of the Niku area that hasn't been visited with detail?

Which plane is which?, or could there be half a plane on each
part? I do hope so.

As always, Thank you Ric and all the magnificent people at TIGHAR.


Faithfully yours
Antonio (Tony) Gomez A.
*************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Tony (although I'm not sure that magnificence is one of our strong points).

I do suspect that the Wreck Photo could be a picture of the wreckage of the Earhart aircraft on Nikumaroro as it appeared circa 1947.  The tall coconut palms in the background of the photo may be a particular stand of trees that we know were present on the shore of the island prior to 1949.  The possible debris field of aluminum visible on the reef flat in the 1953 aerial photos is just offshore this same area and could be parts of the airplane torn off by the surf (such as the "piece of a wing" described to us by the woman on Funafuti).  All of the available evidence - anecdotal and photographic - is quite consistent in suggesting the presence of wreckage on a rather specific part of the island.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:46:52 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      NMR

One more word before we get off the subject. Bob Sherman's story is basically true. We  bought one of Varian's first NMR instruments at Humble Oil (now Exxon) in 1953,  and my group assisted in the development of  the first large data base of NMR of organic compounds. This chemical data base provided the launch pad for the widespread use of NMR in chemical analysis today.  The tool is conceivably  of greater use down the line looking at artifacts behind the scenes,  not out in the field.

LTM,
Bob    #2021
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:51:26 EDT
From:         Chuck Boyle
Subject:      Re: Skeletonization

Yes, we did have dogs on Atafu.  Three dogs, Rosie, Diesel and Hill.  The last two were named after the generators used to furnish power to operate the Station.  I checked with others stationed on Atafu and they tell me the natives were not interested in eating dog meat.  I was not sure.  I know the dogs were there when I left and were there when they closed the station.

Keep up the good work.

Chuck Boyle

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

I'm assuming that the dogs were there when you got there (i.e. you didn't bring them with you) and that the local residents had other dogs of their own.  Yes?

How big were the dogs?  Most similar to what breed that we might recognize? What did they eat?  Did they wander free around the island or were they restrained in some way?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:55:02 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Gallagher/Clancy Research

>Would it be sensible to simply call the school at this juncture? Or has
>someone else already taken this on?
>
>Thomas Van Hare

That does seem sensible.  We would welcome any help in this respect! In all, there are eight schools listed in the Malvern Directory at: http://www.u-net.com/fidelis/limal.htm   Each shows a phone number. The ones of interest to us are probably: Malvern College - 01684-892333   (Boarding & Day, 3 to 18 years of age) Malvern Girls College - 01684=892288  (Ruby and the other girls)
*********************************************************************
Jon Watson wrote:

>By the way, I haven't heard anything back from the girls' college yet.

NOTE that Jon has tried written contact with the Malvern Girls College.
*********************************************************************
Ric wrote:

>Let's be sure we coordinate these approaches.  Vern, can you give us quick
>review on who is doing what?

Simon Ellwood is working with a professional genealogical researcher who knows her way around with records.  They are taking this approach attempting to identify people and creating a Gallagher/Clancy family tree.

Phil Tanner is contacting various family history societies and other organizations in the Malvern area with requests for any information available relating to Clancys and Gallaghers.

Aside from Jon's effort referenced above, we have not yet made a direct attempt to get information from the various Malvern schools.

I'm working on a rather long forum posting reporting what we know at this point along with a little speculation about young Gerald Gallagher's early life.  I hope to get that in tonight (Friday).
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 16 Apr 1999 14:47:10 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Gallagher in Ireland

Ireland was independent by 1935, but if the Butlers are Catholic aristocracy might there be a connection with GG's Catholic (Jesuit?) public school, Stoneyhurst? What subject was his Cambridge degree in? Did he join the Colonial Service immediately before he went to the Pacific in 1937, or did they take him on as the right sort of chap and then train him in useful subjects? This is a bit tenuous, but one of the people with a plausible surname I have written to in trying to track down Ruby in the Malvern area is on a farm.

LTM, Phil 2276

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

Gerald was at Cambridge twice.  He was at Downing College from October 1930 to June 1934.  He received his first M.B in December 1932 and  his second M.B, Part 1, in June 1933.  He received a B.A. (3rd Class) Ordinary Degree in June 1933.

From January to June 1935 he attended St. Bartholomew's Medical School so I presume that he was in pre-med at Cambridge.  Up to this point it looked like the kid was on the fast track to become a physician just like dear old dad, but at the end of the summer of 1935 he suddenly goes to study agriculture on a farm in Ireland.

It's a year later, in September 1936, that he receives notice of his "probationary appointment in the Colonial Administrative Service as a Cadet in the Fiji and Western Pacific service." He is told that his first posting will be to the Gilbert & Ellice Islands Colony but that he will first have to "attend a course of instruction at Cambridge University commencing in October (1936) and extending over three University terms."  He received his "final appointment" as a Cadet on 5 July 1937 and took ship for the Pacific on 17 July of that year.

The official file implies that he has been on the farm in Ireland right up until his probationary appointment in the Colonial Service.  Here's the way I read this:

Gerald (23 in 1935), the oldest son and namesake of the great doctor Gallagher of the West African Medical Service (who is 53 years old in 1935) is under tremendous pressure to follow in his father's footsteps, but after one term at St. Bart's he cracks.  Probably his health breaks down, his nerves are shot, he feels like an utter failure.  He has let his family down.  What to do?  Arrangements are made for him to go to Ireland for a time. Friend of the family.  Country estate. The green fields and fresh air will do him good.  After a few months he is much better and ready to get on with his life.  He has accepted that he is just not cut out to be a doctor, but the tradition of foreign service is strong in his family and he decides to apply for a position with the Colonial Administrative Service.  His educational background is impressive and he tells them that he has been "studying agriculture" in Irleand.  To his delight he is accepted.

I am led to suspect this scenario by what I know of Gerald's service in the Pacific.  The man was driven.  All of his contemporaries marveled at his dedication, spirit of self-sacrifice, and almost total disregard for his own safety and well-being. His fellow Cadet, Eric Bevington, described him as "the most Christ-like man I have ever known" and he seems to have quite literally martyred himself for the sake of Phoenix Island Settlement Scheme. Once you read Dr. Macpherson's description of his final voyage and death you'll see what I mean.  It should be up as Document of the Week on the TIGHAR website tomorrow (Saturday).

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 17 Apr 1999 09:25:03 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Niku bones

>We have several anecdotal accounts to indicate that at least some of the
>people who lived on the island knew all about the plane. They didn't know
>where it came from, and people after of the war naturally assumed that it was
>something from the war - just a piece of junk.

This is a reasonable possibility. The wreckage could have been in plain view for years-- Gallagher may have died before seeing it himself.

I'm looking forward to reading the Macpherson narrative.

william
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 17 Apr 1999 10:23:58 EDT
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      Niku bones

Thoughts on your postings April 15:

1.  If your 'time line' is reasonably accurate, isn't it ironic - to say the least - that Maude's party which spent 3 days on Gardner in Oct. 1937 didn't find the castaway(s), or vice versa.

**********************
From Ric
Ironic, but not hard to believe if you've spent much time on Niku.
**************************

2.  I think it's quite clear the 1940 working party found not a corpse, but a skeleton or parts of one.

*****************************
From Ric
Agreed.  The question is how and when did it get that way?
*******************************

3.  Aside from considering turtles as a meal, how about the reverse?  I note that most turtles are omnivorous, eating both plant and animal matter, living or dead.  Also aquatic turtles are scavengers in lakes, but don't know if they also patrol sea shores.  Green sea turtles only come onto land to lay eggs and my Groliers is silent on whether they look for food while there.

************************************************************* 
From Ric
I'm not a turtologist but I kinda doubt it.
*************************************************************

4.  Do any marine mammals stop off at Niku for R&R or whatever?

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

Like seals, sea lions, walruses, sea otters, and surfer girls?  No.
*******************************************************
5.  Maybe more to the point, Gallagher's telegram of Sept. 23, 1940 said, "Some months ago working party discovered human skull - this was buried and I only recently heard about it..."  I don't know much about the customs, behavior of Gilbertese men.  Think I recall a story about a man who kept, dug up or ?? his father's skull and talked to it upon occasion.  I believe he thought the spirit/soul resided in the skull.  Apparently the proper thing to do when you find a strange human skeleton is to bury the head and disregard the other bones.  Might the natives have scattered them?  Would they keep any for some purpose like a ceremonial object, tool or artifact?

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

From Ric

Absolutely not.  Your assumption about burying only the head is not correct. When you envision the Gilbertese work party on Gardner, don't think of guys who look and act like the island folk in King Kong.  These were poor, largely uneducated people whose beliefs were an amalgam of the old Tungaru traditions of their grandfathers with a heavy overlay of Christianity.  Being from the Southern Gilberts, they had been raised under the strict - some would say oppressive - hand of the Protestant London Missionary Society. (For a better understanding of this context I suggest "Tungaru Traditions - Writings on the Atoll Culture of the Gilbert Islands" by Arthur Francis Grimble, edited by H.E. Maude.  U. of Hawaii Press, 1989.)

Just how this mix of influences manifested itself in these laborers is hard to say, but both the Tungaru and Christian traditions call for the burial of human remains and the concept of "ans" (ghosts of the dead and other unseen spirits) remained prevalent in Gilbertese culture.  The unburied bones of people who died without the benefit of certain rituals were seen as especially dangerous.  I think we can be quite sure that the workers buried only the skull because that's all they found at the time, and it's not a big leap to suggest that they didn't find more bones because they beat feet away from that spot.  Gallagher probably had more than a little difficulty convincing them to go back and search that haunted area for more bones and there is some indication that he didn't dig up the skull until he was ready to ship the bones off to Fiji.  There seems to be little doubt that the discovery of these bones on the island was of great concern to the settlers. Any doubts that the bones were bad news were almost certainly put to rest by the tragic death of Gallagher soon afterward.

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

6.  It's been suggested that birds, rats and ?? like shiny objects, but it occurs to me that watches, belt buckles, pocket knives, jewelry, etc., may have gone the way of the sextant's inverting eyepiece.

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

From Ric
A case can be made that objects were not seen to carry the same stigma as bones.  We know that the island's Native Magistrate, Teng Koata, carried a Benedictine bottle that had been found with the skull with him to Tarawa.  As you mention, the putative inverting eyepiece was supposedly thrown away or lost by the finder (but may have been kept as a souvenir).  According to our informant on Funafuti, the children who played on the airplane wreck and brought pieces home to the village were admonished to stay away from the plane, not because the wreckage itself carried bad spirits, but because "There are ghosts there. When our people first came to the island the skeletons of a man and woman were found and we think they were the people from the plane."

***************************************
Hope I'm not reinventing the wheel.

LTM
Bill Moffet  #2156
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 17 Apr 1999 10:49:24 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: NMR

Suppose that rather than looking for aluminum in the bushes, we're looking for little pieces of bone amid the coral rubble.  Does NMR do us any good in this case?

LTM (who glows)

Tom King

***************************************************************
From Ric (smacking his forehead)

YES.  If this thing could look at the ground and show us bits of bone against of background of coral it could be the magic wand we've been looking for. How say you Dr. Perry?
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:04:10 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Skeletonization

If I correctly recall the voluminous literature on Birgus latro you collected and shared last year, Ric, the coco crab goes through a hermit phase, so the hermits and cocos are in fact the same critter.  When we talk about coco crabs eating bodies, we're really talking about the whole crab population -- adult cocos, hermits, and land crabs (a different species altogether).  Land crabs and hermits wouldn't be able to make off with a femur or a tibia, but they could take a rib, tarsal, or carpal if they were so inclined.

I had an interesting visit on Thursday to the Army's Central Identification Lab, and discussed feet in shoes with Dr. Peter Miller, a physical anthropologist there who works on MIA remain recovery.  Pete says there have been many cases of WWII remains in tropical conditions in which boots have been quite well preserved, with foot remains inside.  He didn't know of any such cases in environments containing substantial dog or crab populations, however; his personal experience in the matter involves pigs.

LTM (who says keep your shoes on)

Tom King

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

Baby Birgus does go through a "hermit" stage in which he borrows a succession of larger and larger shells until he finally has to wing it on his own. These are the bright red guys in roughly baseball-sized shells we find individually and often in groups  on low-lying tree branches.  True hermit crabs are something different and look, well, just like they do in the pet store.  They're not very big (the shells tend to be about the size of an olive) and we've seen them swarming over something tasty.

I agree that a land crab could go off with a small bone such as a carpal and take it to his tunnel.  This activity is well known as ....(I can't bring myself to say it.)

Dr. Miller's experience with feet in well-preserved boots yet again reinforces my feeling that we've got something unusual and rather violent afoot on Niku.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:07:39 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Niku bones

Re. the lack of clothing: I wouldn't expect a castaway on Niku to be wearing very much, if they'd been there awhile.  It's mighty hot, and once you're past the point of worrying about sunburn, the less you have on the happier you are.  Particularly if you're in the bush where direct sun isn't a problem but intense, humid, heat is.

LTM (the nudist)
Tom King

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

Good point, but I think we just lost the PG rating for the film.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:17:32 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Macpherson up

Okay troops.  Macpherson's report on the death of Gallagher is up on the TIGHAR website as Document of the Week.  Go to:
http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Documents/Documents_index.html

Read it and weep.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 09:56:39 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      NMR, MRI

Don't glow too soon, guys. Wish it were so, but MRI (magnetic resonance imaging, which is based nuclear magnetic resonance)  is useful for distinguishing  substances that have largely water, or hydrogen, or certain carbon-, phosphorous- and fluorine-containing molecules in them.  Also, scanning devices are still cumbersome for that kind of operation.  Granted, bone scan would give rise to some signals,  but differentiation from background would be tough.  I think we have to find the other artifacts by "ordinary" methods of the type the team has been using. Once we find them, depending on their general type (metallic vs. other), we can choose among many methods to gain more info about their nature, composition, probable origin, etc.

A long-winded way of saying No.

Bob

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

Oh well.  As we've always said, this is essentially a 19th century type of endeavor.  Cold steel and the Mark 1 Eyeball.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 09:59:59 EDT
From:         Tet Walston
Subject:      Letter to Gallagher

This letter, from Ruby? could possibly lead to finding who wrote it. In the War years, UK citizens were issued with Identity Cards and Food Ration Books. The probability that the School locations would be registered with the Food Office in Templecombe is very strong. This would be the nearest town of any size.

IF the records of those days still exist, then these would provide a clue.

Are there any TIGHAR Members or correspondants in that area, who could carry out a document search. Even the name of a 1941 student could, perhaps help find the name of the Ruby who wrote the letter.

The surname could be MARYATT -- perhaps a local "Huntsman" would know.

Tet
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 10:48:28 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Macpherson Letter

1)
Macpherson's tragic narrative underscores the remarkable remoteness and difficulties of Gardner Island.

I believe that his description of the young OIC only adds credibility to Gallagher's general character. When we remember that Gallagher initially suspected that he might have found Earhart, we can take his impression a little more seriously now, I think.

2)
Regarding any shoes associated with skeletal remains, there is no apparent reason to believe that they were actually being worn at the moment the owner(s) died, especially if the unfortunate castaway had already settled into a prone position.

3)
Mid twentieth century Pacific Islanders, with their cultural mix of missionary Christianity layered over ancient spiritual beliefs, were often what we might call "superstitious" and wary of "ghosts" or "spirits".

From the anecdotal accounts, it appears to me that the first settlers saw skeletons that were clearly recognizable as those of a "white man and woman", that the site was generally avoided, and that over time the remains were gradually scattered by natural forces (and possibly, before and after their first discovery by the Gilbertese,  by wandering dogs from the settlement). Even so, by the time he saw (part of) them over 2 years later, Gallagher for some reason believed he had found the remains of a western woman, possibly those of Earhart.

Leaving aside for the moment the reports that some of the Gilbertese believed that the bones were somehow connected with airplane wreckage on the island, I wonder how many western women were castaways in the vicinity of Gardner in the late 30s? 1? 5? 100? Forgive me, but I suspect that the number is less than 5, and probably closer to 1, which again leads to a real possibility, obviously begging continued  investigation, that the first Settlement Scheme workers ran across the remains of Amelia Earhart shortly after their arrival on Gardner in late 1938, and because of their own cultural isolation simply didn't know anything about her vanished flight a year earlier.

william
****************************************************************
From Ric

The records of the Western Pacific High Commission include all instances in which inquiries were made of British authorities concerning persons presumed to be missing in the vast area of the central Pacific under British administration.  In reviewing the records for the pre-war years, we found the following:

In March 1938 word was received of a canoe containing two male islanders from Wallis Island (a French possession about 450 nm northwest of Fiji) which was missing enroute southeastward to Futuna Island (another French possession about 350 nm northwest of Fiji). Nikumaroro is 1,000 nm northwest of Fiji. The District Officer in the British Ellice Islands (600 nm north of Fiji) was advised to keep an eye out, but nothing further was reported.

In February 1939, two canoes with a total of 18 Wallis Islanders were reported missing.  It was believed that the canoes were headed southeastward or south southeastward towards Niafouu Island or Tonga.  Again, the D.O. in the Ellice Group was advised, but nothing further was reported. (Incidentally, the British prohibited inter-island canoe travel within their possessions.)

In April 1938 the WPHC received an inquiry from a French woman who said that her husband, Albert Culas, had been reported missing from the French ship S.S. EIDER in 1934.  It is not at all clear where the EIDER was when Culas disappeared or whether he is thought to have fallen overboard or perhaps just jumped ship at some port of call.  Mrs. Culas had read that during the U.S. Navy's search for Amelia Earhart in 1937, white people had been seen on Hull Island in the Phoenix Group and she wondered if one of them could be her missing Albert.  She was advised that there had been, in one fact, only one white person on Hull and he was John W. Jones, the manager of a coconut planting operation. (On July 9, 1937 Johnny Lambrecht landed his Corsair in the lagoon at Hull and Jonesy came out in a canoe.  They chatted briefly, then Lambrecht took off again.)

These are the ONLY instances we could find of people missing in the central Pacific region for the years in question, except of course for the American man and woman whose airplane went missing in July 1937.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 10:54:56 EDT
From:         Tim Smith
Subject:      Re: Macpherson up

I just read the MacPherson report.  It is truly moving and sad, but I urge all the Forum members to read it.

Your Document of the Week feature is greatly appreciated.  I think that it is important for readers to get an idea of what "primary documents' (as historians call them) are like.  Keep this feature going if at all possible!

I've been trying to read Ruby's letter all week.  So far, all my guesses at the last (or middle?) name don't appear in any US phone books, so I guess I'll keep trying.  We have a number of English in-laws with whom we correspond, and they all have bloody awful handwriting.  After 20 years, I've gotten to where I can read about 70% of any one letter, but Ruby's got me stumped.

Tim Smith 1142C

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

Yes.  Documents like Macpherson's report and Ruby's letter are the stuff of history.  Most people get exposed to history second-hand through the work of someone else who has gone to the primary sources and then written a book or made a film.  But this is the front line where the real action is.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 10:59:26 EDT
From:         Ron Dawson
Subject:      Juarez divorces

(Note from Ric:  Ron has been trying to track the details of Fred Noonan's Mexican divorce which was in process at the time of the first world flight attempt.)

Ric: No news yet from Juarez.

Article from EP  Herald-Post, March 10, 1937 gives some insight into the divorce process in Juarez.

"James Hilton, author of "Goodbye, Mrs. Chips', has filed suit in the Juarez Civil Court for divorce from Alice Hele Brown Hilton, of London, England, the Herald-Post learned today. Attorneys had tried to keep the proceedings secret. Hilton, a British subject, came to El Paso two weeks ago, ostensibly to obtain a permanent immigration  visa from the Juarez American consulate. He got the visa, and also conferred with attorneys regarding his divorce suit, which was filed Feb.8. The author charges incompatibility. His petition states that he and Mrs. Brown were married in Sussex, Oct. 19, 1935 and have been separated since July, 1936. They have no children. Judge Ricardo Duran of the Juarez Civil Court said that since papers have to be served on Mrs. Hilton in England, no decision will be made on the case for at least a month. Mr. Hilton recently established residence in Juarez, but has been living in El Paso. Recently he has been writing scenarios for Hollywood. His recent books include 'Lost Horizon' and 'We Are Not Alone'. "

Hmmm. Wonder if Fred and Hilton ran into each other since they were both in El Paso at about the same time for the same purpose. So Josie had to be served. Does service imply consent? Or did she have a timeline to contest? If Fred was in Oakland March 13th to be named navig. by AE, did he make a flying trip back to El Paso to sign the final papers?  If the divorce were final March 17th, how could he sign and get back to Oakland to depart the same day? Attorney proxy? Hope to be able to find out more.

Smooth Sailing,
Ron Dawson 2126
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:47:15 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Gallagher's Life, quite long.

A day late and a dollar short, here it is.  Critical review is invited!

Gerald Bernard Gallagher -- What is known (April 1999), and a hypothesis

His father and mother

Gerald Hugh Gallagher was born in Ireland about 1882.  His father was a solicitor in Ireland.  By 1906 he was practicing medicine in Dublin.  Six years later (1912) the medical register shows him in the West African Medical service.

Edith Annie Clancy was born in Kentish Town, London, England in 1879.  She was the oldest of five children born to Cornelius Bernard Clancy and his wife Alice. After 1895 Edith's father was Lieutenant Quartermaster in the King's Own Royal Lancaster Regiment.  Her sisters were Elizabeth Rachel, born 1881; and Mary A., born 1886.  Her brothers were Francis, born 1888; and Hugh, born 1890.  Elizabeth was born at St. Pancras, Middlesex, England. Edith and all the others were born in Kentish Town, London, England.

Also identified, is a Louisa Clancy who appears not to be Edith Clancy's sister. Her relationship has not yet been discovered.

Gerald Hugh Gallagher and Edith Annie Clancy were married on the 8th of August 1911, in Chelsea.  She gave her age as 25 which does not agree with her birth record.  They had two sons, Gerald Bernard, born 6 July 1912, and Terrance Hugh, born at some later date.

QUESTION:  In view of the above, would the Gallaghers have been able to send their children to the better schools in the 1920s?  The kind of schools that would later gain acceptance at Stonyhurst, Cambridge and in the British Colonial Service for young Gerald?

HYPOTHESIS:  At this point, nothing is known of young Gerald Gallagher's life prior to 1924.  However it seems very possible that he was enrolled at Malvern College, Malvern, Worcester, England at about the age of six, or even younger.  (See The Malvern Connection following)  Gerald would have been 6 years old in the summer of 1917. That would allow for 7 years of primary schooling prior to his enrollment at Stonyhurst College.

Today, Malvern College is Co-educational Boarding and Day school taking children from 3 to 18 years of age.  Hillstone, the Junior School, is a separate unit for those 3-13 on an adjoining site, sharing many of the Senior Schools facilities. There are 385 boys and 188 girls in the senior school.  Hillstone has 111 boys and 69 girls.

Gerald attended Stonyhurst College from July 1924 (12 years old) to July 1930.  From there he went to Cambridge University (Downing College) from October 1930 to June 1934. Gerald then went to St. Bartholomew's Hospital Medical School from January to June 1935.  He apparently dropped out abruptly.

Stonyhurst College is a Roman Catholic Boarding and Day School.  It is located in Clitheroe, Lancashire, England.  Founded in 1593, Stonyhurst is one of the oldest Jesuit Colleges in the world and is a leading Catholic school offering boarding and day education for boys from 13 to 18 and for girls in the sixth form.  Boarding and day pupils from 7 to 13 attend an adjacent Preparatory School, St. Mary's Hall, which is presently co-educational.

In September 1935, after the very brief time at the medical school, Gerald began studying agriculture on a farm with Mr. G. Butler, Malden Hall, Bennet's Bridge, Co. Kilkenny, Ireland.

The following summer Gerald was accepted by the Colonial Service and went back to Cambridge for three semesters of special training for posting to the Western Pacific High Commission.  He sailed for the Pacific on June of 1937.

In the fall of 1940, Gerald had recently been made Officer-in-Charge of the new Pheonix Island Settlement Scheme to move some people from the overcrowded and impoverished Gilbert Islands to some of the uninhabited islands in the Phoenix group.  A village had been established on Gardner
Island (now Nikumaroro) and Gerald had a house there

During clearing for planting coconut groves, a partial human skeleton, an
empty sextant box, a "benedictine" bottle, some shoe parts and the remains
of a campfire were found.  Gerald immediately suspected the bones might be
those of Amelia Earhart who had gone missing in that part of the Pacific
three years before.  Medical doctors who were by no means forensic experts
concluded that this was not the case and the matter was pretty much forgotten.

Gerald Gallagher died, in September 1941, of peritonitis from a burst
appendix. He was buried on the island beneath a cement monument which can be
seen today.  A few personal effects were returned to England shortly after
the end of WWII.  These included a photo album and possibly some letters.

Gerald's mother asked that his personal effects be returned to a Miss.
Clancy who was her sister and lived at Clanmere, Graham Road, Malvern,
Worcester, England.  No first name was stated so we don't know which
sister this was.  Edith Gallagher had been engaged in war work in London and
apparently considered the Malvern address to be more permanent than her own.
Thus begins the puzzle of Gallagher/Clancy family in Malvern.

THE MALVERN CONNECTION:  The Gallagher/Clancy presence in Malvern bacame
more evident with the discovery of a personal letter in Gerald Gallagher's
official file in England.  The letter had been written in November of 1940
but had not arrived in the Pacific until after Garald had died in September
1941.

The letter is from a young woman named Ruby.  As of this writing, we have
not determined what the surname is, or if it may be a middle name.  Ruby is
in some way associated with the Malvern Girls College.  The letter makes it
evident that Gerald Gallagher is well acquainted with a number of people in
Malvern.  Ruby speaks of them by first name only being sure that Gerald will
know exactly who they are.  None of the names can be associated with people
we have identified at this point -- members of the Gallagher and Clancy families.

Something about the tone of the letter makes me feel that Ruby is not just a friend.  I think she's Gerald Gallagher's cousin, the daughter of one of Edith Clancy-Gallagher's sisters.  As of the end of WWII, the sister living at Clanmere in Malvern was "Miss." Clancy.  If Ruby is a cousin, on the Clancy side, then she's the daughter of one of the other sisters.  At this point, we can't tell one from another!

In any case, it's clear that there is much more to the Gallagher/Clancy/Malvern connection than the presence of Miss. Clancy at Clanmere.  Gerald Gallagher is well acquainted with the place and may have attended Malvern College during his early years.
***************************************************************

From Ric

An excellent summation and some reasonable speculation, but there are a couple of corrections needed.

>He sailed for the Pacific in June of 1937.

Gerald's ship sailed on July 17, 1937.  It's an important point because it means that he was still in England and exposed to the news media when Earhart disappeared on July 2nd.  Being a pilot himself and about to take ship for that part of the world, it seems reasonable to think that the story might have been of special interest to him.

>Gerald Gallagher died, in September 1941, of peritonitis from a burst
>appendix. 

Nope.  That's the simplified version that became widely accepted, but it's not true.  Gerald had had his appendix removed years before. Dr. Macpherson's report clearly states the Gerald died from complications of a tropical disease known a "sprue."

>The letter had been written in November of 1940
>but had not arrived in the Pacific until after Gerald had died in September
>1941.

No year appears on the letter, but I'm reasonably certain that it was not written until November 1941.  It's chronological position in the official file suggests that it was received sometime between April 1942 and June 1942.  An earlier letter from Gerald's mother to Sir Harry Luke was dated December 20, 1941 was received in Fiji on April 8, 1942 - suggesting a roughly four month transit time.

This does, however, bring up an interesting point.  Edith, in London, is informed of Gerald's death by cable sometime in early October 1941 (the exact date is not clear).  Ruby, in Somerset, doesn't yet know about it when she writes her letter on November 15th.  Whoever Ruby is, she is not close enough to the family to be immediately notified by Edith.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:52:52 EDT
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Skeletonization

Ric wrote

>Dr. Miller's experience with feet in well-preserved boots yet again
>reinforces my feeling that we've got something unusual and rather violent
>afoot on Niku.

Careful Ric... If this supposition gets out, we'll all be reading about the "Beast That Ate Nikumaroro" at the supermarket checkout. I can see it all now...

"Amelia Earhart was eaten by man-eating crabs. These crabs mutated into giants due to the atomic testing that took place in the Pacific in the 1950s. According to Dr. Richard Gillespie of TIGHAR, "...we've got something unusual and rather violent afoot on Niku."

Tom #2179

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

From Ric

Oooh, oooh, do you think they would?  Love it.  They could even use a production still from the old sci-fi film "Mysterious Island" that featured just such gigantic crabs.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:55:46 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Amelia Earhart Centre

Are we hearing nothing relative to the Amelia Earhart Centre in Derry?

Checked the web site:  http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/AmeliaEarhart/ and see it has been reworked.  There are more pictures, etc.  But that same notice about the closing of the centre is still there.

A wind turbine has been installed at the Centre.  "Power from the Wind" Photo caption: "Mayor & City Councillors initiate the AE Centre Wind Turbine" I wonder what the implication of all that may be?

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

Dunno.  I don't even know what a wind turbine is.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 12:00:08 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: NMR, MRI

>Oh well.  As we've always said, this is essentially a 19th century type of
>endeavor.  Cold steel and the Mark 1 Eyeball.

Yeah, I had the feeling that a bone detector was too good to be true.  I had an interpreting discussion with my old friend Pete Miller, phys anth at the Central ID Lab, about looking for fragmented bone on the surface in a tropical environment, and he says he's gotten to where he can pick pieces out against the background, just from experience.  It reminded me of how, when I first moved from Northern to Southern California (there's no prehistoric pottery in the north, quite a bit in the south), it took me about a month before I could even see potsherds against the desert sand, and then one day it was like my eyeballs became calibrated and I could spot them easily.

LTM
TK
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 18 Apr 1999 12:23:28 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      Macpherson's report

Whew! Gallagher should be recommended for sainthood! For sheer heroics, in some ways his story overshadows the AE/FN story. Gallagher was quite a contrast with lots of folks today...but that's another subject...

LTM,
Bob

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

I just feel really fortunate that, without meaning to, we've uncovered such a wonderful story.  I'm also convinced that there are chapters yet to be opened on that island.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:47:22 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Macpherson's report

Those familiar with another great "if only" affair might spot similarities with Edward Wilson, Captain Scott's right-hand man - medical family, public school, Cambridge, revered by colleagues who survived him. Could Gallagher paint?

More seriously, I know we know Gallagher's brother died with the RAF during the war and is buried in Malta, but has anyone yet tried to find out what details of next of kin he left? They must have been recorded somewhere - even now there are occasional media reports related to WWII remains newly discovered. In one case well covered by UK media last year a public appeal tracked down the son of a (pilot?) killed in Holland the day before his father's military funeral, after attempts to track down the family through next of kin records had failed.

The thing that strikes me about Macpherson's report is impression it conveys of the absolute power of the high commissioner. Clearly, if he decided the bones weren't Earhart's his underlings would have dropped the notion PDQ, and if he said kep it secret, that would be how it stayed.

LTM, Phil 2276

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

There's no indication in Edith's letters to Sir Harry  (the High Commissioner) that Terrence was married.  In his will, Gerald had made his younger brother executor of his estate.  This caused a considerable mess when Gerald died because Terrence was off to the war and couldn't be reached, and then got most inconveniently killed.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:08:48 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Gilbertese translating.

hew! LOTS of stuff to dig around on this Web site!

I remember "somewhere"  reading something about translating some local language into English...  Can't  remember if it was about what was actually said by the Gilbertese now living in the Salomon Is?  On the videotaped interview of what they might know of what used to be known by the first settlers on Niku in 1938 about "2 skeletons with remnants of European clothing..."

It should not be difficult to find someone to translate that videotape -assuming this group of Gilbertese people in the Salomons STILL speak their original language.

I can think for example of Father Bermond, now living on Christmas Is.  He has been in Kiribati for very many years and speaks fluent Gilbertese.  Like most of the French Catholic priests who have spent their lives in the Gilberts. I think they even printed the first dictionaries...

I'll bet Fr. Bermond could be talked into looking at Tighar's videos!

Hope this might be useful.

Christian
****************************************************************
From Ric

You're thinking of an interview videotaped in the Solomons in December 1995. An old woman who previously lived on Niku told her version of a ghost story. We'd like to get a check on the translation that was provided by the interpreter who was present at the time.  Tom King has a number of scholarly acquaintances who have fluent Gilbertese.  It's just a matter of coordinating busy schedules.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:15:18 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      Macpherson's report

Ric wrote:

>I just feel really fortunate that, without meaning to, we've uncovered such
>a wonderful story.  I'm also convinced that there are chapters yet to be
>opened on that island.

Roger that!

LTM,

Bob
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:43:33 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Macpherson Letter

Re. missing persons: There ARE the people lost from the Norwich City, on Niku itself, in 1929.  It is remotely, conceivably, possible that one of these was a woman, survived the wreck, got to shore a good long way from the wreck site (that is, where the bones were found), was not found by the Norwich City castaways or by those who came looking for them, and subsequently expired on the island, but it's a long bow to draw.  About the only thing going for the idea is that Gallagher thought the bones had been there more than a few years.

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

Gallagher also thought that the castaway was not from the Norwich City.

Eleven men were lost in the wreck of the Norwich City.  We have the names of the five British seamen, two of whom  (J. I. Jones and J. Leslie) washed ashore and were buried by their shipmates.  Six Arab "firemen" were also lost, one of whom washed ashore and was buried.  So the "missing persons" from the wreck of the Norwich City are:

J.W. Horne, third engineer
T.E. Scott- fourth engineer
F. Somner - seaman
and five Arabs whose names are not given in the available records.

To say that one of these individuals was female, came ashore unnoticed by her shipmates, and remained undiscovered during the five days it took to rescue the other survivors is indeed a long bow to draw.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:58:41 EDT
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Ruby's Last Name

Ruby's hand writing remind me a lot of the old English documents written during the 1600s that are on microfilm at the Mormon Genealogy Library.  They have some experts in reading these old documents at the Library and they might possibly tell you Ruby's last name (surname).  They would look at all the letter styles in the complete document and determine the letters in her name from these other letters.  I am quite certain a contact could be made at the Library to get this done. 

Dick Pingrey 0908C

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

If you or someone else has a contact in Salt Lake it would be interesting to have an opinion from there.  The letter is right up there on the website.

We were able to decipher the body of the letter by just the technique you describe.  First we digitized the letter so that we could manipulate it in Adobe Photoshop 5.0.  We could then cut and paste known letters and place them beside unknown letters for comparison.  It takes patience, imagination, and a good feel for the English language - but anybody can do it.  The trouble with surnames is that the possibilities are so vast and the word is usually only written once, and if it's the writer's own name it is more than just a word, it's a signature.  For example, the letters in my signature are far more slurred and stylized than the same letters when they appear in other handwritten words I write.

It would be interesting to see what someone who deals with this sort of problem all the time has to say.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:01:56 EDT
From:         Dave Porter
Subject:      carnivore crabs

So, if I understand the situation correctly, Niku is home to flesh eating crabs that are large/strong enough to kill a rat, then drag the carcass up a tree to eat it?  Are you SURE you don't want me and a rifle on NIKU 4?

LTM (who thinks guns are evil)
Dave Porter (2288)

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

Quite sure.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:05:02 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Amelia Earhart Centre

>Dunno.  I don't even know what a wind turbine is.

A wind-powered generator, I believe.  At the AE Centre they'll doubtless use conspiracy theorists to generate the breeze.

TKing
****************************************************************
From Ric

Thank you.  I was hoping someone would do the honors.  (I get in trouble when I say stuff like that.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:25:07 EDT
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Plane Wreckage

>The wreckage could have been in plain view for years-- Gallagher may have
>died before seeing it himself.

What still puzzles me is why this same wreckage was not seen, a week after the plane landed, by the Colorado pilot (Lambrecht), if it remained "in plain view" for years thereafter, especially since those who claim to have seen it recognized it as the remains of airplane wreckage?

Don Neumann

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

There's a big difference between a few people knowing about a piece of junk buried deep in the underbrush and it being visible from the air.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:23:53 EDT
From:         Bob Brandenburg, Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Electra Generator & Battery

>What do you know about the generator and battery on AE's Electra?

Not enough to get you the kind of information you need.  Ideally, we need an Electra that is set up with the same engines, generator and battery as Earhart's and then run some tests.  Trouble is, the only 10E in captivity is the one Linda Finch flew around the world in 1997 sponsored by Pratt & Whitney.  It's billed as an exact replica of Earhart's.  It ain't, but it's fairly close.  It's also for sale but I don't know where it is and who has custody of it.

>I know that the current theory is that the word  "circling" was a
>radio operator's mistake, and that the word really should be "whistling".
>But I don't think we should completely discount "circling".

All I can tell you is that it is very clear that the word "circling" was added to the log after the word "drifting" had been erased.  I'm pretty sure that the original word was "listening" (not "whistling").  I'm also not at all sure that it would have made sense for Earhart to circle.  Circling is the only way an airplane can more or less stay in one place while the crew waits for something.  (A "holding pattern" is nothing more than organized circling.)  In Earhart's situation, circling would mean that they needed to wait until they figured out what they should do next.  I think Noonan was a lot sharper than that.

>He convinces himself, and AE, that they must be Northwest
>of the island, and AE sets out on the course which they thought
>would take them to Howland, but which instead took them to Niku.

Here's another scenario:

He gets to the advanced Line of Position and, to his disappointment but not surprise, no island or ship is in sight.  He knows that Howland is either off to the left (337 degrees) or off to the right (157 degrees), but which way to choose? He knew this problem could come up and he already has a plan.  He knows he is not hundreds and hundreds of miles off.  He also knows that at the time Earhart says "We must be on you but cannot see you." he has roughly 5 hours of fuel left. Happily, there are four islands on or very near his LoP - Howland, Baker, McKean, and Gardner.  Howland, however is on the left (NW) end of that string which means that all of his other options are to the SE. He can afford to search northwestward along the line only a short time because if he is already NW of Howland there's nothing out there but water. But as long as he turns and starts heading southeastward along the line when he still has about four hours of fuel left he is virtually guaranteed finding land.  If he's off to the NW he'll find Howland.  If he's off just a little to the SE he'll soon find Baker and should have enough fuel to backtrack the 40 miles to Howland.  If he's further off to the SE he reach either McKean or Gardner and least not have to put the airplane in the drink.  It's a failsafe contingency plan provided that 1). He really is on the LoP he thinks he is on; and 2). He heads SE when he still has 4 hours of fuel.

I suspect that this is what AE was trying to say in her final message received by Itasca at 08:43 when they should have had just about 4 hours of gas remaining.  Itasca logged the transmission as "We are running north and south." but that doesn't make much sense and it's clear from the log that the transmission caught the operator by surprise when he was doing something else and he's not entirely sure what she said.  The actual message may have been something like, "Were running northwest, now southeast."

>So, by considering the bounding variables, we can estimate how
>much fuel she had remaining on landing at Niku.

But it's going to be a rough estimate.

>That suggests that her optimal strategy was to start the engine,
>make her radio transmissions while the engine was running, wait
>until the battery was fully charged, and then shut down the
>engine.  So we should be able to estimate her fuel consumption
>for each such start-talk-charge cycle, which then bounds how many
>transmissions she could have made.

As noted above, I think that this is going to be difficult data to come by.

>With that information, or even just max/min estimates, we can
>estimate when AE would have reached the end of her transmitting
>capability.  That would help winnow out possible hoax
>transmissions (an issue that I still plan to pursue through HF
>propagation analysis), and also would help explain why AE's
>transmissions ceased when they did.

I may be that the termination of attempted transmissions was dictated not by battery or fuel, but by sea conditions.  The "281" message makes reference to "won't hold with us much longer", "above water" and "shut off."  These could be references to rising water interfering with the prop or they could refer to rising surf forcing an abandonment of the aircraft.

Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:35:44 EDT
From:         John Bayer
Subject:      Casablanca Electra

Great info from Bob Klaus, but I beleive the aircraft in Casablanca is a Lockheed Lodestar, which is larger than an Electra.

John Bayer
First Across

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

From Ric

Nope.  It's a Lockheed 12, Electra Junior.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:43:19 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Electra Generator & Battery

The long posting I just sent out on this subject should have gone to Bob
Brandenburg as a private response.  It contains some characterizations that
are rather more frank than I would express publicly.  Oooops.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 13:00:28 EDT
From:         Skeet Gifford
Subject:      Comment

 (Off topic, but to the parenthetical annotation that "...guns are evil," I would add the following partial list:

Rope (may be used for lynching)
Duct tape (may be used to restrain someone)
Automobile (may be used to deliberately run over a policeman)
Airplane (may be used to crash into White House)
Barbed wire (may be used to construct a Concentration Camp)

IMHO, some people are evil to the core. Inanimate objects are just that. Inanimate.

Skeet Gifford

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

Of course.  And gun-control is certainly off-topic except to note that TIGHAR's gun-control policy is quite simple.  We never, ever permit firearms of any kind on any TIGHAR expedition.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:49:02 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Plane Wreckage

Don Neumann wrote:

> What still puzzles me is why this same wreckage was not seen, a week
> after the plane landed, by the Colorado pilot (Lambrecht), if it
> remained "in plain view" for years thereafter, especially since those
> who claim to have seen it recognized it as the remains of airplane
> wreckage?

It is at moments like these that I am thankful for my background in search and rescue.... So, from that background, I would like to discuss the photograph of the island taken by the USS Colorado pilot during the search (if indeed it is a valid image).

Here is what we know and what we can surmise, based on that single image:

1. The photograph was taken from an altitude of greater than 1,000 feet and probably close to 1,500. This is assuming a standard lens (non-telephoto). If the pilot had used a telephoto lens, very unlikely due to weight and space limitations, the altitude would have been even higher. There is no chance the crew used a "fisheye" lens -- there are no noted distortions and it simply would not have been there based on need in aerial recon.

2. The USS Colorado pilot either a) circled the island at that altitude (fairly likely); or b) climbed to altitude to take the photograph so that he could get the entire island, or most of it in any case, in his viewfinder.

3. The USS Colorado pilot, nor any of the other flight crews, were trained SAR experts -- they were instead trained in procedures to spot enemy ships and aircraft. They're best altitudes for these missions would have been above 1,000 and probably in the 5,000 to 10,000 foot altitude. This leads me to believe that they "did the island" (as we would have said in the plane) at around 1,000 to 2,000 feet.

4. You cannot see anybody or much of anything from an altitude of even 1,000 feet when searching an island. When we used to patrol the Cay Sal Bank in the Straits of Florida, our altitudes were between 200 and 300 feet, the lower the better.

5. Thus, unless the pilot climbed up to take that photograph, which I think is unlikely -- the evidence is right there. They missed rescuing Earhart and Noonan, assumption being that they were still alive and on the island, simply because they didn't know how to look. They flew overhead too high and passed them right by.

I cannot imagine what it would have felt like to see the plane fly overhead on a circuit of the island and then watch it fly away. Heartbreaking....

Thomas Van Hare
****************************************************************
From Ric

On the morning of 9 July the three Corsairs were catapulted from the Colorado at 07:00.  According to Lambrecht's report (the complete text of which we will mount on the TIGHAR website as the next Document of the Week) they flew first to McKean Island.  Lambrecht says, "As in the case of the subsequent search of the rest of the Phoenix Islands one circle at fifty feet around McKean roused the birds to such an extent that further inspection had to be made from an altitude of at least 400 feet."

Just what altitude was used at Gardner is not mentioned.  Randy Jacobson is of the opinion that the photo of Gardner was taken not during the search but as the flight was returning to the Colorado after having taken a look at Carondelet Reef.

I think there are some other clues to what happened during the search of Gardner contained in Lambrecht's report but I'll let the forum form its own opinions.  The new Document of the Week will go up next weekend.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:23:09 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Gilbertese translating.

>Tom King has a number of scholarly
>acquaintances who have fluent Gilbertese.  It's just a matter of coordinating
>busy schedules.

Actually, there's only one -- my wife's dissertation advisor, Ward Goodenough, now retired from the U. of Penn.  Coincidentally enough, Ward's major Kiribati informant was none other than Koata, of the Benedictine bottle.  Anyhow, I sent Ward a copy of the tape that Ric sent me, but he's been very tied up (his wife is very ill).  If anybody else has a fluent contact, I'd say have at it.  It would be very interesting to get a firm fix on what was said.

LTM
Tom King

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

If we were to use Christian's contact on Christmas Island (Kiritimati) he would need to be able to play a VHS/NTSC video tape.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:28:54 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: Amelia Earhart Centre

>A wind turbine has been installed at the Centre.  "Power from the Wind"
>Photo caption: "Mayor & City Councillors initiate the AE Centre Wind Turbine"
>I wonder what the implication of all that may be?
>
>****************************************************************
>>From Ric
>
>Dunno.  I don't even know what a wind turbine is.

It's just a windmill, in this case, turning an electric generator of some sort. It's a 3-blade propeller sort of thing right near the Center building, It looks to be perhaps 25 feet up on a guyed tower.  Maybe it supplies some power to the centre.  These things usually charge batteries at relatively low voltage.  You can use an "inverter" to produce AC power at whatever voltage they use there.

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

From Ric

Oh I get it.  Amelia Earhart.  Propeller.  Natural connection.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:32:18 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: Gallagher's Life, posted 4/18/99

Ric wrote:

>An excellent summation and some reasonable speculation, but there are a
>couple of corrections needed.

The corrections are noted and the file saved for possible re-posting when we know more.

Quoting Ric, Re: The letter from Ruby.

>No year appears on the letter, but I'm reasonably certain that it was not
>written until November 1941.  It's chronological position in the official
>file suggests that it was received sometime between April 1942 and June 1942.
> An earlier letter from Gerald's mother to Sir Harry Luke was dated December
>20, 1941 was was received in Fiji on April 8, 1942 - suggesting a roughly
>four month transit time.
>
>This does, however, bring up an interesting point.  Edith, in London, is
>informed of Gerald's death by cable sometime in early October 1941 (the exact
>date is not clear).  Ruby, in Somerset, doesn't yet know about it when she
>writes her letter on November 15th.  Whoever Ruby is, she is not close enough
>to the family to be immediately notified by Edith.

No way to be sure.  It's hard to believe a letter, even low-priority civilian mail, would take a year to get from England to the South Pacific, but I remember some awfully slow mail of our own during WWII.  So, I assumed it was written in November of 1940 and Gallagher was not yet dead.

"For the sake of sanity, date!"  Korzybski

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

Who was Korzybski and are you sure he was not talking about girls?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:33:45 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Letters to Pacific

> An earlier letter from Gerald's mother to Sir Harry Luke was dated December
>20, 1941 was received in Fiji on April 8, 1942 - suggesting a roughly
>four month transit time.

I presume this was a letter asking that Gerald's stuff be sent to Miss. Clancy in Malvern.

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

Yup.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 20 Apr 1999 16:03:10 EDT
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

>There's a big difference between a few people knowing about a piece of
>junk buried deep in the underbrush and it being visible from the air.

During her interview on Funafuti, Ms. Tapania Taiki stated that: "Oh yes, I could see airplane pieces on the reef & I could see the ship wreck from there, the ship seemed far away........"

Granted, her observations were made in the late 1950's, early 1960's, so we have no way of knowing exactly how long the "airplane pieces" had been exposed on the reef or for that matter exactly how they got there.

Since there seem to be no other such observations, contemporaneous with Mr. Gallagher's sojourn on the island, perhaps such wreckage was not on the reef in the 1940's or for that matter when Lt. Lambrecht overflew the island 9 days after the landing; however if there were no unusually high tides or severe weather conditions that would have struck the island in the interim between a landing on the exposed reef flat by A.E. & Lambrecht's overflight, it still would seem strange that he could see "signs of recent habitation" but miss seeing the Electra, if in fact it was still sitting out on the reef flat.

Thanks for putting Lambrecht's report next up on your Document of the Week feature on the Website!

Don Neumann
*****************************************************************
From Ric

The scenario that makes the most sense to me is:

1.  Airplane is landed safely on reef-fat and radio signals are sent, off and on, for 2 to 3 days.
2.  High seas and violent surf destroy the airplane, leaving only scattered wreckage on the reef-flat when the Navy flies over a week later.  Surf obscures the wreckage from observation, but "signs of recent habitation" (footprints, a campfire, etc.) are visible on the beach.
3.  Subsequent storm action deposits the main body of wreckage in the beachfront vegetation but leaves some debris on the reef-flat.

Portions of the reef flat close to the Nutiran shore (where Tapania said she saw part of the wing of a plane) remain submerged in a couple feet of water even at low tide.  If you're not wading around out there (like a kid) you'd never know what was there.  
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 20 Apr 1999 16:14:42 EDT
From:         Dave Porter
Subject:      oops, sorry (sigh)

It appears that I may have inadvertently opened a big can of worms, and I'm very, very sorry.  Feel free to post this or not, as you feel appropriate.  Since, I suspect, there are at least 2,287 TIGHAR members more qualified than myself to go on expeditions, my comment about going to Niku with a gun to fight off the crabs was in jest, just like the previous comments about "the giant crabs that ate Nikumaroro", and I'm reasonably certain that's how you received it. Unfortunately, many of my fellow gun owners just don't have much of a sense of humor, and I don't think Skeet understood the LTM comment. I'll contact him directly to explain, and ask him to lighten up a bit.  I also suspect that TIGHAR's firearms policy is something incredibly practical, like "if it's that dangerous, we don't go", with which I wholeheartedly agree.  To show my contrition for starting this mess, if you want, forward the Firearms Policy to me, then direct all angry gun owner letters my way, and I'll handle them for you.

LTM (which, of course means "love to mother")
Dave Porter (2288)

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

No big deal Dave.  Don't worry about it.  Your assumption about the reason for TIGHAR's firearms policy is essentially correct.  If carrying guns makes a place safer rather than more dangerous, we don't belong there.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 08:37:23 EDT
From:         Jerry Ellis
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

> The scenario that makes the most sense to me is:
> 1.  Airplane is landed safely on reef-fat and radio signals are sent, off and
> on, for 2 to 3 days.
> 2.  High seas and violent surf destroy the airplane, leaving only scattered
> wreckage on the reef-flat when the Navy flies over a week later.  Surf
> obscures the wreckage from observation, but "signs of recent habitation"
> (footprints, a campfire, etc.) are visible on the beach.
> 3.  Subsequent storm action deposits the main body of wreckage in the
> beachfront vegetation but leaves some debris on the reef-flat.
>
> Portions of the reef flat close to the Nutiran shore (where Tapania said she
> saw part of the wing of a plane) remain submerged in a couple feet of water
> even at low tide.  If you're not wading around out there (like a kid) you'd
> never know what was there.

Do you believe this scenario is consistent with the wreck photo being AE's Electra?

--
Jerry W. Ellis  # 2113
*****************************************************************

From Ric

Do you mean, would I care to climb out on this limb until I can hear it crack?  Yes.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:02:09 EDT
From:         Robert Klaus
Subject:      Where'd the airplane go?

The current theory about what happened to the airplane between the time it landed in fairly good condition (good enough to run the right engine and operate the radio) and the search flight nine days later seams to hinge on the presence of wave action sufficient to break the airplane up, and wash the pieces up among the trees.  Even a cursory search would presumably have found an airplane sitting out on the tidal flat, particularly since that is what the searchers were looking for.  (or should that be "... that for which the searchers were looking.", or even "...that for which the lookers were searching."?)

At any rate, they found "signs of recent habitation", but not the Lockheed.  So we have to presume wave action which can destroy and move an airplane, but leave camp fires, tracks and lean-tos (or whatever signs they saw) undisturbed.

I think a more likely theory can be constructed from the available information.  The natural (unspoken) assumption when reconstructing the incident is that the fuel tanks were empty.  After all, she landed because she had run out of fuel.

First, since the right engine was apparently run for some period, there must have been some fuel.

Second, even if there was no fuel available for the engines, there was fuel on the aircraft.  There is a difference, sometimes a large difference, between total fuel in a tank, and total useable fuel.  Because of the design and construction of fuel tanks some fuel can not be picked up by the pumps.  In many cases this is deliberate as water, crud and contaminants which are heavier than fuel will settle to the bottom.  You don't want those being fed to the engines.  Good filters will protect the engine, but they will clog and not allow any more fuel to pass, resulting in that very loud silence which all flyers hate.

I assume that NR16020 was set up with engine main tanks in the nacelle or inboard wing area that each fed their respective engine.  These would probably have both electric booster pumps, and direct suction pickups from the engine driven pumps (so the engines would stay running in the event of an electrical failure).  The other fuel tanks (including the long range tanks added inside the fuselage) would have electrical transfer pumps.  There would possibly also be a manual pump (a so called "wobble pump") and a set of valves and piping to manually transfer fuel from the long range tanks to the mains.  Either the manual, or the electrical pumps would be used to transfer fuel to the main tanks, where it would subsequently be fed to the engines.  The long range tanks probably were set up to feed from a normal flight attitude (floor level) with fuel pickup points in the center.  The mains should have had dual pickup points, so they would feed from a normal flight attitude, or while sitting tail down during ground ops.

The point of all this is, there was probably a considerable amount of fuel in the tanks, pumps, piping, valves and filters which was not useable while sitting on the tidal flat.  AE and FN may have wanted to get this fuel out for a variety of reasons.  They may have wanted to manually transfer it to the right main tank by draining it into a container, and then pouring it back in through the over wing filler caps (been there, done that).  They may have wanted it for cooking, or to fuel a water still, or for a signal fire.  AVGas, engine oil and green foliage makes a dandy smoky fire.

For the fuselage tanks, they may have disassembled the fuel transfer manifolds (draining them, there pumps and filters) and/or cut a hole in the back bottom corner of the tanks to drain residual fuel.  Either way fuel will be spilled.  They have the fuel out and close the airplane back up for the night.  The tide rises, floats the spilled fuel, and whatever is left in the now open tanks.  The tide reaches the backup battery, shorts it out, ignites the trapped fuel vapor, and presto, you have a disassembled airplane.  An explosion of even a small amount of AVGas trapped in a closed space should be sufficient to shred the fuselage structure.  (Is this consistent with the damage pattern of the big skin piece?)  The normal wave action now has much smaller pieces to hide.

If the design of the fuel system is known a pretty close estimate could be made of how much unusable fuel there was in the plane.  Lockheed test reports or CAA documents might specify.

LTM
Robert Klaus

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

The damage to the big skin piece (Artifact 2-2-V-1) appears to have been caused by  an abrupt and very powerful fluid force applied from the inside of the airplane outward.  That force could have been a fuel/air explosion as you suggest. It could also be simply a big wave hitting an already-busted-up airplane.

You make a good point about wave action strong enough to throw an Electra center section up into the bushes also obliterating "signs of recent habitation" on the beach.  I can think of a couple of possibilities:

1.  The surf action was sufficient to break up the airplane but it remained on the reef flat obscured by the surf itself. (Take a look at the Lambrecht photo on the website and ask yourself whether you'd be able to see airplane wreckage on that reef.)  The big storm that ultimately flung wreckage up into the tree line might not have happened until much later.

2. Or alternatively: The more credible post-loss radio signals ceased abruptly around midnight on July 4th.  Let's say that the wreckage was deposited in the bush at that time. The Navy overflight didn't happen until July 9th.  Five days is plenty of time to leave signs of recent habitation.

The scenario you describe is possible, but it also relies upon a fairly complex sequence of events.  I don't want to get into the whole Occam's (Ockam's, whatever) Razor thing again, but in general I think that the simpler we can keep our hypotheses, the better.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:23:17 EDT
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Lambrecht & Co.

Don wrote:

>What still puzzles me is why this same wreckage was not seen, a week
>after the plane landed, by the Colorado pilot (Lambrecht), if it
>remained "in plain view" for years thereafter, especially since those
>who claim to have seen it recognized it as the remains of airplane
>wreckage?

Tom wrote:

>They flew overhead too high and passed them right by.

Ric wrote:

>There's a big difference between a few people knowing about a piece of junk
>buried deep in the underbrush and it being visible from the air.

Lambrecht and 5 other aviators did not see a plane on Gardner because there was no plane there.

And there is no plane on Niku now.

Some wreckage may be there somewhere, but if it is, it was washed up out of the ocean.

Most evidence collected to date supports this scenario.

Lambrecht and his bunch could see easily see Gilbertese loins flapping in the breeze from the air on Hull.

I can accept missing Noonan's Loin hidden under a Buka tree.

I do not accept Lambrecht +5 missing an intact electra on Niku.

The location of Bruce's engine supports this also.  If Bruces engine is where he said it was, Lambrecht did not see an Electra because it washed off the western end of the island.

If they were low enough to muse about the depth of the lagoon, they were low (and slow) enough to see if there was an electra there.

It is highly unlikely an intact Electra sits on Niku based on the evidence collected so far.

And, another point.

Our highly educated aviator Gallagher immediately suspected AE when he heard about the bones.

What is the first thing an aviator would do?

Look for a plane.

Love to Lambrecht,

the No  Land Club*
(Yeah, we're still here)

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

We have found aircraft debris in the village which we suspect is from the Electra.

We have anecdotal reports of plane wreckage on the island.

We have photographic corroboration of something that might be airplane wreckage just where the anecdotal accounts say there was airplane wreckage.

In 1991 we ran experiments on the reef flat with semi-buoyant objects to see if surf action pulled them out and over the edge of the reef.  Nope.  In all cases, the object traveled shoreward.

How this amounts to "Most evidence collected to date supports this scenario." (no airplane on Niku) escapes me.

I can't prove that there is no airplane on the island any more than I can prove that there is no elephant in my office.  But I'm going to try my darnedest to prove that there is an airplane on Niku.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:25:03 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

It's also easy enough to imagine the whole plane, intact or wrecked, being up in the veggies along the shore when Lambrecht flew over, and that it was subsequently broken up by storm action and distributed along the reef flat. And the signs of recent habitation may or may not have had anything to do with AE and FN; it's possible that they were remains of the residences of Arundel's coconut planters, Gilbertese turtle hunters, etc. etc.  If they didn't have anything to do with AE and FN, or even if they did but were at some distance from the plane (assuming the plane was there), their inspection might have diverted the pilots' attention from wherever the plane was. Anyhow, speculation, all speculation.

Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:34:08 EDT
From:         John Thompson
Subject:      Re: Amelia Earhart Centre

> It's just a windmill, in this case, turning an electric generator of
> some sort.

Hi Ric, Vern and other friends.

My sincere apologies for seeming to disappear, but I have been up to my eyes attempting to resolve AE matters, whilst at the same time making reluctant, yet realistic, attempts to find alternative employment for a worst case scenario.

A brief Update on the AE Centre, *AND* the windmill. :-)

Windmill first.

Erected last year the Windmill supplies power for lights only(at this stage) to the Centre. It is as much an attraction for the local community at least as the AE story.

The Windmill and other new photographs can be viewed at:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/AmeliaEarhart/

And now the BAD news.

I was keeping a discreet media silence on the basis of not wishing to shoot any possible financial rabbit emerging from any Derry City Council hat.

We are now in a state of limbo.

I am posting an extract of a letter yesterday sent to Derry City Council.

BTW, ACE(Action for Community Employment) is a government financed scheme intended to provide temporary employment for the long term unemployed; the scheme, under which we managed, among other facilities, the AE centre is due to terminate in July 1999.... when I also will professionally terminate!!!

"Having lost all administrative ACE employees, I find myself now solely charged  with all ACE administration within our project . As a result I am increasingly having to deny access to individuals and groups wishing to visit the AE facility.

>As things stand the Centre is only accessible to the general, when and if, I am not engaged in administration of our ACE scheme; and then on the assumption that I am not attending meetings elsewhere.

"As a consequence, the Centre, while still officially open, is effectively closed to the general public.

"In response to recent  concern at the possible closure of the Centre I have been approached by a number of individuals and organisations  in Ireland and overseas anxious to lend what support they can. Indeed Foyle Tourism Organisation has suggested a public meeting at their expense.

"Given that you have clearly indicated that there is no possibility of council finance to solve our current difficulties I am now requesting your approval to initiate approaches and discussions intended to secure alternative resourcing of the AE Centre.

"John Thompson"

In simple terms I am saying: If you(DCC) cannot fund the Centre, then allow me  to reinvent the Centre with funding/assistance from those who are prepared to put their money/help where their mouth is.

It appears to be  an eminently logical, common sense, if not inescapable, solution to THEIR problem and that of the AE Centre in Derry.

Equally frustrating and personally embarrassing for ME is the official lack of response from DCC to offers such as those of Herman De Wulf to organize an fly in. Offers officially submitted via sympathetic City Councillor to DCC.

Today in response to a request from BBC TV I broke my self imposed silence and went public on my proposal.

Also being interviewed, soon, simply on the basis of the unprecedented number of  emails received from AE Forum Members and friends is BBC Radio Ulster "Talk Back"  presenter David Dunseith.

The feature will be screened possibly this or next week.

Members wish to remind DCC of their undiminished concern and/or further convince an already impressed Mr Dunseith. E-mail: talk.back@bbc.co.uk  To hear the programme Go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/nca-talkback.shtml

Programmes can be heard either live just after 12:00(noon) (GMT) Monday to Friday, or streamed on demand for the following 24 hours.

John Thompson
AE Centre
Ireland

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

So if I understand this correctly, you've just asked permission and publicly stated your desire to try to make the AE Centre self-sufficient by doing your own fund raising.  Way to go John.  We'll make a Yank of you yet.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:41:58 EDT
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Liberty Bell 7

I saw the following piece in today's LA Times and thought I would pass it along to the Forum.  While not directly Earhart-related, it does fit in with our discussions about the state of marine search technology.  It will be interesting for us to see how they fare in trying to locate a small object in the deep ocean.

LTM,
Russ

HUNT FOR GRISSOM'S SPACE CAPSULE BEGINS

A salvage team set off from Cape Canaveral, Fla., in search of Mercury astronaut Gus Grissom's space capsule, entombed in the Atlantic for 38 years.

A 180-foot ship, the Needham Tide, headed for the 3-mile deep waters 300 miles southeast of the Florida coast.  Curt Newport, the expedition leader, estimated that it would take at least one day to reach the area where he believes Grissom's Liberty Bell 7 lies on the ocean floor.  The capsule splashed down July 21, 1961, after Grissom's 15-minute suborbital flight, which made him only the second American in space.  The hatch blew open too soon, and water in the capsule made it too heavy for a helicopter to lift. The capsule was allowed to sink.  Grissom, who nearly drowned, insisted until his death in the 1967 Apollo launch pad fire that he did nothing wrong.

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

From Ric

Curt came to TIGHAR with this project about 12 years ago.  We looked at it and decided that the chances of success didn't justify the expense.  Not that we thought that the capsule had actually been captured by the Japanese, but that the size of the target, versus the size of the search area, versus the per-day cost of the search, versus the public's interest (or lack thereof) in the project made it impractical.

I'll guess we'll see if we were wrong.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:04:31 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

>Do you mean, would I care to climb out on this limb until I can hear it
>crack?  Yes.

This is a relatively strong limb right now (swaying a bit but otherwise I don't hear it cracking yet). <grin>
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:06:35 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Where'd the airplane go?

>2. Or alternatively; The more credible post-loss radio signals ceased
>abruptly around midnight on July 4th.  Let's say that the wreckage was
>deposited in the bush at that time. The Navy overflight didn't happen until
>July 9th.  Five days is plenty of time to leave signs of recent habitation.

Another alternative is that the signs of recent habitation weren't on the beach.  They could have been anywhere, not even necessarily close to the (putative) airplane.

LTM
Tom King

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

Yeah, that too.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:31:44 EDT
From:         Chuck Boyle
Subject:      Dogs on Atafu

(Note:  Atafu was the southernmost station in the same Loran chain with Gardner.  The residents of Atafu are Tokelaus, a different ethnic group than the Gilbertese on Gardner.)

Yes, we did have dogs on Atafu.  Three dogs, Rosie, Diesel and Hill.  The last two were named after the generators used to furnish power to operate the Station.  I checked with others stationed on Atafu and they tell me the natives were not interested in eating dog meat.  I was not sure.  I know the dogs were there when I left and were there when they closed the station.

Keep up the good work.

Chuck Boyle

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

I'm assuming that the dogs were there when you got there (i.e. you didn't bring them with you) and that the local residents had other dogs of their own.  Yes?

How big were the dogs?  Most similar to what breed that we might recognize? What did they eat?  Did they wander free around the island or were they restrained in some way?
******************************************************
Ric,

It took me several emails and phone calls and a few days to find out that dogs on Atafu were not on Atafu when the Loran Construction Group arrive in l944 to build the Atafu Cost Guard Station.  The dogs may have come with the Construction Group or later with the manning crew.  The natives did not have dogs on the Island before the Coast Guard arrived.  The dogs were terrier size, short hair and were white and black. They were fed left overs from our galley.  They stayed at the Coast Guard Station and did not wander to the village.  They were left to wander around the station.  When the station was closed, the dogs were left with the natives.  The only other animal on the Island were pigs.  We had two pig roasts with the natives (it took several pigs to feed the 500 or so) which was an all day picnic.  Played baseball and other games while the food was being prepared.  They also had chickens.  The pigs and chickens were fed mostly pieces of the dried coconut meat.  I have pictures of two of the dogs.

Chuck Boyle.

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

From Ric

My Dog Theory might be in trouble.  Your description of the Hounds of Atafu sounds exactly like the photo I have (via Dick Evans) of the two Coastie dogs on Gardner.  Clearly there was an ample supply of terrier-sized, shorthaired, black and white dogs that were adopted as pets by Coast Guard Loran stations.  But where did they come from? It's hard to believe that they came all the way from the States.  Canton maybe?  If so, how did they get to Canton?  Is this a typical type of dog in Micronesia? (AKC registered Carrion Terriers?) And the question remains, did the Gilbertese settlers on Gardner bring dogs with them?

And then there's the pigs.  We know there were pigs brought to Gardner but we're not sure that happened before 1940.  Did the pigs roam free?   I can tell you that they do on Funafuti.  Do pigs go off with bones the way dogs do?  Not that I know of, but I've never been that intimate with pigs.  (Don't start.)

Something scattered those bones, gnawed on the ends, and tore apart the shoes - and I still have trouble accepting that it was only the crabs.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:51:57 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Liberty Bell 7

I heard a rumour that a new age channeler found a message in a bottle off the coast of France, written by Gus and tossed off a Japanese slave ship traveling through a time warp, admitting that he "screwed the pooch" and blew the hatch while chasing down loose dimes that had scattered around the capsule. <grin>

On a more serious note, Betty Grissom recently objected to the search for the capsule. Apparently her main concern is that they'll "go too far" in "restoring" the spacecraft in hopes of making it a tourist draw at a space museum in Kansas.

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

Apparently Mrs. Grissom is not at all the shallow dingbat portrayed in The Right Stuff.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:58:57 EDT
From:         Mike Everetete
Subject:      Possibly Stupid Question

I don't want to stir up any "stuff" on the forum with this, unless you think it may somehow be relevant; but, in discussing the matters of bones, etc. with a friend, she brought up a point about why they may have been incomplete and scattered.

I dismissed this as more than likely impossible, but will ask the question in light of your recent response to a posting, "we may have something unusual and violent on Niku."

Is it even conceivable that the island may have been visited by a band of cannibals from some place else, who might be responsible for this?  Or, is this too "Blue Lagoon" or "Robinson Crusoe," as I told my friend (who watches a lot of movies, and insisted that Yes It Could Be!).

If you consult with any anthropologists who may know an answer, it might be that they will ask if anything was found on Niku which resembles native religious-ritual artifacts.

This is something totally out of my areas of expertise, but maybe the question was worth asking.  Don't post it unless you think it would be productive.

73
Mike E.
*****************************************************************
From Ric

It's not a stupid question and if you thought of it, chances are that others have thought of it.  Few of us have had the opportunity to have first hand exposure to Pacific island cultures and we only know what we've read in popular books and seen in movies.

I'm not an anthropologist but I know that we have some excellent ones on the forum so I'll leave it to them to sink their teeth into this one.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:42:43 EDT
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Liberty Bell 7

>I'll guess we'll see if we were wrong.

"Right" and "wrong" almost always need to be put in context.  Twelve years ago the technology and the expertise were nothing like what they are today. There's also the matter of who is doing the work.  I'm a computer programmer, but there are areas I'm good at and areas I'm not.  If you want celestial navigation software, I'm not the guy for the job.  If you want a new compiler written, I'm ready.  Likewise, then, and perhaps even now, TIGHAR might not be the right group to do this sort of search and recovery. Even if they find it, that doesn't make TIGHAR's decision twelve years ago wrong.

    - Bill

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

You're right of course.  For TIGHAR, the decision whether or not to embark on
a project rests upon three questions:

1.  Is it worthwhile historically (i.e is there anything useful to be learned)?
2.  Does it seem doable?
3.  Can the money be raised?

In the case of the Liberty Bell 7, the answers seem to be:

1. Yes
2.  mmmmmmmm
3. Apparently yes.

Sounds a bit like the Earhart Project doesn't it?

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:45:20 EDT
From:         Tony Gomez
Subject:      Liberty Bell 7

Reading the mailings about the recovery of Mr. Grissom's spaceship gets my  entire attention ... again.

For years I've been interested in space, and from the space ;universe; Mr.  Grissom's life and professional experience are a very special topic for me.

And then came Amelia.

Well, here I have one place I will never ever stop being part of. Ric, this definitely feels and sounds like Amelia, like you say. Once the hatch matter gets cleared, fairness will be finally given to Mr. Grissom.
Let's do it.

Faithfully yours

Antonio (Tony) Gomez A.
****************************************************************
From Ric

Well, we're giving Amelia our best shot but Gus is up to somebody else.

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

From Don

I have been following the news coverage of this search, my personal feelings towards it is that Gus Grisson was a pioneer/hero in the advancement of space exploration and the only result of this search would be recovering the capsule and further damaging his name in their findings.  This is one piece of wreckage I am not really interested in seeing.

***************************************************************
From Bill Leary

Ric wrote:

> 3.  Can the money be raised?
>
> 3. Apparently yes.

Maybe we need to find out who's ready to toss this kind of money at a project this difficult.  They're obviously not penny pinchers.  Perhaps they can be convinced to let loose a million more for the Earhart search?

    - Bill

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

I would be interested in knowing where Curt finally got his funding, and how much.  I'd also be interested to know whether this is being done as a nonprofit operation in the interest of history or whether it's a commercial salvage venture.  I wonder who owns Liberty Bell 7, wherever it is.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:50:57 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Korzybski

>"For the sake of sanity, date!"  Korzybski
>
>****************************************************************
>>From Ric
>
>Who was Korzybski and are you sure he was not talking about girls?

If he was talking about girls, Some would say there's inherent inconsistency. I wouldn't say that.  Some would say that, but I wouldn't say that! Alfred Habdank Skarbek Korzybski (1879 - 1950)
Polish born American scientist and writer.  He was much into semantics, founding the Institute of General Semantics in Chicago (later moved to Lakeville, Conn.) The quotation is from one of his books; "Science and Sanity - an Introduction to Nonaristotelian Systems and General Semantics."
(2nd ed. 1941)

Well, you just had to ask, didn't you?

A polish intellectual?  Some would say that. I wouldn't say...  (See above!)

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

For TIGHAR's next fund-raising enterprise I'm going to sell this forum to the Comedy Channel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:53:42 EDT
From:         Patrick Robinson
Subject:      GRISSOM'S SPACE CAPSULE

I thought that the Space Capsule had already been found in a trawler net years ago...

Patrick N. Robinson (2239)

***************************************************************
From Ric
Shhhhh....don't tell Curt.

Seriously, I hadn't heard that.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:30:53 EDT
From:         Amanda Dunham
Subject:      Re: Dogs on Atafu

If you want to feel better about the dog theory, compare it to my theory:

If the Norwich City was carrying any kind of food, then it wouldn't surprise me at all if the crew made use of those excellent rat control devices known as cats.

Say the kitties managed to make it topside during the accident and someone managed to rescue them.  (Were there any lifeboats or did people have to jump and swim for it?)  When they hit the beach they immediately ran for it and wound up feral on Gardner until they died out.

You'd think that with all this stretching I'd be a lot more limber, wouldn't you?

Here's a question which all that crazy talk of searching for the Electra in the vast Pacific put into my head.  The pressure on the Titanic at 2 & half miles down is three tons psi, and parts of the Pacific are deeper still. Ships of steel plates seem to  hold up pretty well, but what would that pressure do to a "delicate" aluminum airplane???

Love to Mother
Amanda

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

From Ric

The pressure wouldn't make any difference as long as it was equal on all sides.  Any sealed object (fuel tank, thermos bottle, etc.) would be crushed.

Neither of the Norwich City's two lifeboats was successfully deployed but both ended up washed up onto the beach.  To what extent they were damaged is unknown.

That there were once feral cats, or at least one feral cat, on Niku is beyond doubt. In 1989 we found the skeletal body of a cat in the Co-Op store. Interestingly enough, the bones were not scattered at all even though there are lots of coconut crabs in that neighborhood.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:37:01 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Cannibals?

OK, I'll bite.  Fijians and some other Pacific islanders used to practice cannibalism, but it's been a long, long time since they did.  While there's always the possibility of a Melanesian Charlie Manson doing kinky things with bodies (I know, CM didn't eat 'em; I just can't think of a better example), the chances are a whole lot smaller than that some carnivore that's less selective than humans did the deed.

LTM (who has a great recipe)
Tom King

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

From Ric

Yeah, but remember that big pot Van and I dug up in the village?
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:58:02 EDT
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

Ric wrote earlier that an experiment on Niku showed that things on the reef flat were pushed up, not off the reef.

Therefore, the damaged engine would not have subsequently been washed back to sea, would it?  Of course, a very strong typhoon coming from the opposite direction could have washed the plane back off shore, but wouldn't something that strong have blown away most of the trees?

LTM,
and Blue Skies,
Dave Bush
#2200

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

As I understand it, that just doesn't happen.  Normally the weather comes in from the east or southeast.  Any big storm comes in from the west or, more usually, northwest.  In other words, big storms don't hit the island from this way, then that way, pushing things back and forth.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:06:03 EDT
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Where'd the airplane go?

I was doing some thinking based upon Ric's response, and came up with a few questions that may plug in to the coral-landing scenario, as follows:

1. Given that some fuel must have been yet present (since the statistical odds of AE just spotting the island as her engines sputtered out are fairly remote) for her to run the engine containing the magneto which charged the batteries, she would have been able to run the engine at its lowest possible speed and still charge said batteries while conserving available fuel, wouldn't she?

(From Ric
I don't see how that follows.  Given that she landed with some fuel still aboard and wanted to recharge her batteries, she would run the engine at whatever RPM it took to do that.)

2. If a fuel/air explosion took place inside the fuselage, distorting the big skin piece as indicated, would such a detonation have had sufficient explosive force to render gross structural damage to the plane similar to that sustained by the plane in the "wreck photo," minus, of course, any subsequent scavenging/deterioration?

(From Ric
Seems possible.)

3. Could such an explosion also have been a source of injury (flashburns,etc, even fatal ones, over a day's time) to AE  and/or FN? It would seem that attempting to operate ANY kind of electrical equipment in the presence of confined fuel vapors from damaged lines or pumping would be a major danger. I do know that one gallon of vaporized gasoline alone has the explosive force of 33 sticks of dynamite. I have no guess as to what such forces are with aircraft fuel. It might even be enough to blow an engine off, huh?

(From Ric
Any blast strong enough to do the kind of damage we see in the Wreck Photo would, I would think, be fatal to anyone aboard the airplane at the time.  I do not, however, see it separating one engine and leaving the other intact.)

Food for thought!

I'm also glad to be back, having been away doing lots of spring musical performances. Contrary to any speculation, I was not lost on an island or anything.

Dr. Gene Dangelo, N3XKS,    #2211
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:22:00 EDT
From:         Steve Farkaly
Subject:      new forum attendee initial pos

I just came back from USAF museum in Dayton, OH  Pilot, aircraft owner, amateur radio op (low band cw), development engineer for major aerospace concern, 20 yr Indy 500 veteran mech, engine builder,etc, machinist and AE buff.  First round:

1.) Way to be Ric, a genuine hypothesis followed by determined research. Obviously, the search must exist on land at this point in history, only practical venue.

2.) Results bring funding and generate interest, good so far, great work.

3.) Canton engine, worth finding at all cost, best clue you have, invest all

4.) Wreck photo, we all can see this exists, whether or not it's Lock 10, immense credibility if it can be found, no matter what it turns out to be.

5.) Sextant box.  Numbers are probably written by a calibrator, rebuilder of precision optics.  find out who repaired sextants for PAA, airlines just send this stuff out for rework, hence unknown numbering system.

6. ) Are you absolutely positive that only Rt engine had a generator?  TCDS list generators as options.  If you were Mantz or anyone involved, would you not install gens on both engines since you could. ( see wreck photo )  If not, a desperate attempt would be made to remove the blanking plate and remount the existing gen on the operable engine.  If opp rot, brush plate can be rotated 90 deg for rev rot. Fields will work either rot.  Plenty of wire available. Simple enuf if no other option.  Expains post wreck messages ( maybe )  Gen could be rigged to turn by hand to charge batts laboriously if no engines op.

7.) M. Ev option (5) attempt to couple DF ant to 7500 kc not implausible, obviosly didn't work (no null) but could have been attempted hence (nonsense) message.

8.) I claim to be no AE expert, just humbly asking questions TNX

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

This puzzle humbles all of us.  Welcome aboard!

About the Canton engine:

I'm afraid I can't agree that it's our best clue.  At this point it's uncorroborated anecdote.  The bones in Fiji are better because we KNOW that they were at least there at one time.  The anecdotal accounts of aircraft wreckage on Niku are also better because they are somewhat corroborated by photographic evidence.

About the Wreck Photo:

Assuming that the photo is not a hoax, it is certainly true that the airplane in the Wreck Photo existed at the time the photo was taken.  Whether it still exists and where it is if it does are questions that are as yet unanswered.

About generator only on right-hand engine:

All we know is what was said at the time by people who supposedly knew.  I would certainly not head out around the world with two engines and one generator.

About postulating modifications or repairs by AE and FN:

Even if they had the tools, what we know about these two indicates that their aircraft and electrical repair expertise would be challenged if they needed to change the batteries in a flashlight.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:27:50 EDT
From:         Maria Magers
Subject:      Re: Ruby's Last Name

My daughter lives in Salt Lake City and has agreed to try the Mormon Library for a reading of Ruby's last name.  If someone else has already done this, let me know so I can save her the trip.

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

Thanks Maria.  Nobody has told me that they are definitely doing anything in this regard.  If anybody out there is already in contact with the Mormon Library speak now.  Otherwise, if nobody responds by, say, Monday morning I'd say go for it Maria.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:43:38 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Re: "Dog Theory"

I don't think a dog (or pig) theory is absolutely needed to get the skeletons dispersed:

I read somewhere on the site, that Gallagher in one of his official messages to his bosses, specifically stated that the coconut crabs chewed and scattered many of the bones. For what we know of Gallagher, chances are that this was not an idle speculation, but likely if was common knowledge amongst his Gilbertese people. Quite possibly they knew that's what happened to bones left over from a pig roast. May be that knowledge of the interaction of coconut crabs with bones is still around in the islands nowadays?  Anybody knows?

Another point I didn't quite see brought forward is the location of the 2 skeletons:

I don't really have any experience with starving to death;  I would think that 2 people in such circumstances are unlikely to pass into a coma a the same time (say a few hours...)

Then, if I was the survivor,  I think I'd do the following:

1==if left with enuf strenght and with tools, I'd bury the other guy. Or: 
2==lacking tools, I'd try piling a rock cairn on top...
3==I'd move my campsite a ways from a decomposing body!!!

I'd think the 2 skeletons said to have been seen by the first Gilbertese in 1938 were some distance apart.

It's also quite possible that one of the 2 was injured in the landing and died soon afterwards.

How would that fit with everything else, Ric???

Christian

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

Generally speaking, it's better to accept the word of the primary source than to assume that the contemporaneous observer is mistaken.  So, in principle, if Gallagher said that crabs did the deed, they probably did.  An exception would be in the case where better information is available today than was available to the contemporaneous observer, as in the case of Hoodless's evaluation of the bones.  Was Gallagher drawing on Gilbertese expertise in blaming the crabs, or was he making an assumption based upon his own perceptions about coconut crabs?  I don't know. So far we haven't been able to come up with a documented instance of crabs moving bones.  We do have one documented instance of a skeleton (cat type) remaining intact on Niku.

About the two skeletons:

We don't have any real evidence that there were two skeletons.  We know there was one, but the second skeleton is still in the nether world of folklore. Starvation does not seem to be a likely cause of death on Niku.  There's lots to eat.  Thirst is a more likely culprit, or infection from injury.  I agree with your options about what to do if you find yourself stuck with a dead friend on Niku.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:52:50 EDT
From:         John Thompson
Subject:      Re: Amelia Earhart Centre

> So if I understand this correctly, you've just asked permission and
> publicly stated your desire to try to make the AE Centre self-sufficient
> by doing your own fund raising.

Precisely!!

NOW If I can clearly communicate that simple notion in a single email around the world, why cannot my nearest, if not so dearest, city administrators grasp that basic concept.

Are all city officals so???

>Way to go John.  We'll make a Yank out you yet.

The AE, that little piece of Ireland that is forever American....

Maybe a remake of the old John Wayne classic, to be called "Thompson: The Unquiet Man"

John
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:56:12 EDT
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: GRISSOM'S SPACE CAPSULE

Speaking of trawler nets!

Anything to be gained by dragging the lagoon area (as in search and recovery type activity) in addition to your sonar? Although the chances of netting a bone wielding crab are small.

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

Not exactly whatcha call archaeology.  It would also take forever.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 15:33:38 EDT
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Bones, all them bones...

Any news on the status of the bone search in Fiji?

LTM
Roger Kelley   #2112

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

The latest word from the Fiji Museum is that the buildings to be searched have been identified.   The project has met with skepticism and even derision from some (uninformed) quarters but we have not only the enthusiastic support of the Fiji Museum but also the full cooperation of the office of the President of Fiji in this endeavor.  I did an interview by telephone with Fiji Television a few nights ago and it's clear that there's a lot of interest about this in Fiji.  Just how much searching will actually get done before our team gets there is June remains to be seen, but we're of course eager to help in any way we can.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 22 Apr 1999 15:43:08 EDT
From:         Don
Subject:      Re: new forum attendee initial pos

>About the Wreck Photo:
>Assuming that the photo is not a hoax, it is certainly true that the
>airplane in the Wreck Photo existed at the time the photo was taken.

This is by far the best assumption I've heard all day!

Don

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

Yeah, I thought I'd just boldly go out on that limb.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:50:16 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Clancy Search Advisory

The Malvern library is on Graham Road.  It can't be far from Clanmere, Graham Road doesn't extend very far.  I can find no e-mail address for the library or for anyone working there.  I'll write a letter to the library and hope it will end up with someone interested enough to tell us what they know, or can find out about Clanmere, present and past.  Of course, I'll invite e-mail response in the interest of saving some time -- and to make it easy to respond!
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:52:16 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Amelia Earhart Centre

We've gone this far, let's keep rattling the cage!!  Another round of e-mail is in order!   <talk.back@bbc.co.uk>

What can we think of that might help John get some funding or support of some kind?  Ideas of this sort would be good in an e-mail to "Talk Back" at this point.  Show them that we really are prepared to DO something.  But what?

=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:30:09 EDT
From:         Robert Klaus
Subject:      Occams Razor

I agree absolutely that the simplest theory is the best.  Sir William of Occam (British mathematician and logician), in his Principle of Parsimony said; "Do not include in a theory one more element than is absolutely necessary to explain the observed facts".  This does not mean that your theory will be correct, merely that it will be less likely to be incorrect.  The principal came to be known as Occam's Razor because it allows you to shave off unnecessary elements.  At each step ask yourself if the general theory will still work with this element removed? If so, leave it out.

The current scenario includes a miraculous wave which can move an airplane and drop it among trees without so deranging the foliage as to arouse comment by the search pilots.  It also must either leave signs of previous human habitation, or leave survivors on the island to produce new signs.  That is an unsupported element which is not necessary to explain the observed facts.

The gas explosion idea includes only elements which are known to have been present at the time.  If you need an alternative ignition source, you mentioned that the transmissions cut off abruptly at around midnight on July 4.  Fumes could have been ignited by the aircraft radio or electrical system.

As to the possibility of the search pilots missing the airplane pieces on the tidal flat, I think they could have missed small enough pieces, but anything approaching a whole airplane would have been seen, that's what they were looking for.  Also, incidentally, if the aircraft was so destroyed as to be hidden in four feet of water then the wreck photo is definitely invalidated.  The remains in the wreck photo could not have been covered by the water.

Korzybski's "General Semantics" is a text which deals with "the meaning of meaning", or, perhaps more clearly, how we know what we know.  It is a highly recommended book for anyone involved in physical or historical research, or criminal investigation.

LTM
Robert Klaus

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

Actually, that's not what Occam said and what he did say has been taken waaay out of context and applied in ways he never intended (we had a huge and excruciatingly erudite discussion of this on the forum several months ago). But that's beside the point.

We're trying to construct a scenario which would:

1.  Put the airplane on the island intact enough to send radio signals for roughly 2.5 days.

2.  Do something to the airplane that would render it invisible from the air 7 days after the disappearance.

3.  Leave at least one person (specifically AE) alive and well enough to leave signs of recent habitation and survive long enough to die and be eaten by crabs, dogs or cannibals (just kidding).

4.  If such a scenario can be imagined which would also leave the airplane looking something like the Wreck Photo, so much the better.

The real problem with postulating speculative scenarios is that we end up making judgments about things we really don't know squat about.   How would big waves break up a Lockheed 10?  How much of the wreckage would be visible from the air? How hard is it to see wreckage on the reef if there is surf running?  How hard would it be to get that airplane to blow up?  Could anybody survive such an event? etc. etc.

As a general rule I always remind myself that any time someone (including me) uses the term "would have" what they're really saying is "I don't know, but based upon what I think I know, I'm guessing that....."

The explosion scenario is one I've argued for myself.  It could have happened.  But when I'm looking for forces that could disassemble an airplane on or near the shore of that island, it feels more comfortable to use something that is always right there (moving water) than something that requires a complex sequence of events (an explosion).

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:35:13 EDT
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Where'd the airplane go?

Explosive forces can behave in sometimes inexplicable ways.  I know personally of a natural gas explosion in a small stone cabin which blew the roof away from the walls, setting it down on top of the walls again, as well as blowing out all the windows in the place except a glass panel about 2' x 3' in the front door.  My theory is that when the guy struck the match to light his morning cigarette, his back was to the door, and his body created enough of a buffer or baffle that the glass remained intact.  Although flash burned, he survived.  Smoking can be hazardous to your health...

Point is, maybe the door to the airplane was open providing a vent, or maybe some other factor was present which might have caused one engine to be damaged and not the other.  Maybe the starboard engine was running at the time of the calamity, and ripped itself loose.  Lots of possibilities.
ltm
jon  2266

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

If I can't find my car keys maybe I left them in my jacket pocket, or maybe terrorists broke into my house and stole the keys.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:36:45 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      A Vega for the Centre?

I understand that the Vega Amelia flew the Atlantic in -- and landed at Derry -- is in the Smithsonian.  I wonder if it would be a neat thing to have a good, accurate model of the Vega in the AE Centre at Derry?  I have no idea what kind of space is available but there would surely be room for a model at some scale.

I believe we have one or more model builders, par excellence, among the forum folks.  Would it be fun to build a Vega model for the AE Centre?  The fact of someone doing such a thing might be good PR for the Centre.  It wouldn't take much money, just a lot of time and effort.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:23:38 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

Shame on you Ric!  How many times have I told you there was no nasty weather or surf during that time frame (the week she disappeared)?  It is easy to check via all available ship logs, which denote swell and sea conditions, along with wind.  The first two are excellent diagnostics for large area sea conditions, and the conditions were calm!  The conditions are also checked via the Baker, Howland, and Jarvis diaries.  Calm, I say!  Quit ascribing events to nature that are not realistic!

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

(Don't worry folks.  We fight like this all the time.)

Calm?  What's calm?  On the morning of July 9 when Colorado is standing a few miles off Gardner her deck log shows a sea state of "1" (defined as "moderate swell - calm or light sea").  Now look at the photo of the reef-flat on Gardner taken that morning.

(http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Documents/Lambrecht_Photo.html)

There is clearly surf breaking all across the reef-flat.  I can tell you that you sure as heck wouldn't want to be standing on the coral in those conditions. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.  In fact, it's impossible to stand on the coral in those conditions.  What do you think would happen to a little Lockheed 10 in that environment?  Rolled up in a ball is the answer. The surf in the Lambrecht photo is not sufficient to toss the main body of wreckage up into the tree line, but it is (in my opinion) sufficient to break up the airplane and obscure the wreckage from overhead observation.  The true storm that ultimately puts big chunks of wreckage up in the bushes can come along much later - maybe months later. What were the sea conditions at Gardner around midnight on July 4th when I speculate that the surf became bad enough to force abandonment of the aircraft?  I don't know.  And neither do you.  The closest vessel recording  sea conditions that day was Itasca which was about 500 miles north and experiencing sea state "1" and "2" which, based on the Lambrecht photo, was more than adequate to cause the damage speculated. (Phfffft.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:57:40 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Re: Where'd the airplane go?

Chances are that Tighar knows about the following, but I can't remember seeing it on the Website...    (Can't wait for an indexed FAQ!)

1==I'm looking at a British chart, with a comment:

"From a US Gov't Chart of 1943"

Has Tighar got all the archived reports left from that survey?  Were airphotos done as well? I have somewhere a book on WW-II Tuvalu, where it says the names of the ships which did similar surveys around the Ellice's to get ready fot the airstrips needed for the Battle of Tarawa.  Possibly the same survey ships which did Niku?

2==I also have a topo map, copyright Kiribati Gov't, 1995. Series: DOS 367P,   Sheet: Phoenix Islands.   It says : ""Air photography by Royal Australian Survey Corps,  Aug-Sept 1985" No sketch to show whether the entire Phoenix were covered in air photos. I suppose the more different air photos Tighar has got, the better...

If any Forum people want a topo map, the address is: Ordnance Surveys, International Div, Romsey Road, Southampton, UK, SO16 4GU

The UK put it together for Kiribati... Although  of a large scale (1:25,000), these maps show little details: no local names for Niku. Just 2 shades of green for land, and a couple shades of blue for the ocean side lagoon.

It does show 3 "Doppler Satellite Station"...  ?3 geodetic points surveyed with the old Transit system?  Possibly useful for Tighar's GPS survey to tie into... Although I'd think  Tighar would only need its own local datum!

One interesting point in (roughly) comparing the 2 map/chart, is that the shore line for Nuziran, just by the shipwreck, is definately bulging west on the 1985 topo! Say 150feet. Is it a cyclone accumulation of coral rubble, with some not-so-old brush on top???  It IS  hard to tell if the green color could have been carelessly hand applied on that topo map... It's about 1/8inch wider on the 1985 topo. My understanding is that topo maps are traced to well under a mm accuracy...

3==Another one of my Tuvalu books is about the big Cyclone on Funafuti -in the early '70's I think. Not so far from Niku...  Interestingly one ocean shore of Funafuti ended with a HUGE accumulation of coral rubble, just outside of the exixting ancient layers, and is yards tall, quite a few yards wide, and miles long...  So it does happen that the shorelines move, but we are talking real storms. According to my USA-DMA Pub #107, June is the very end of the cyclone season in the SW Pacific...

Is it known if there were any good storms around Niku and Howland between July 2 and July 9th, when the search planes came for a look see?

I'd think it more likely that AE had a very rough landing, lost a wing and an engine on the reef, while the rest of the plane continued on its momemtum to end up in the bush, a few yards from the shore line.

I don't understand why every body is so keen to have the plane engines run to recharge batteries. What is the Amp/hours of them batteries?  Wouldn't they run the radio 3-4 times for 20min, to satisfy the "known" post loss transmissions?

The July 9th existing air photo seems to confirm that the tide was up, and it wouldn't take much wind driven chop to conceal the submerged wing...  Ric said that we have some other photos possibly showing metal parts on the reef, but this only after modern hi tech study.  The wing being light and bulky could easily move and vanish anywhich way one wishes. The Kanton engine on the other hand, being so heavy and compact, could end up in one of the many large and small shallow depressions on the reef, and never move again. Mostly submerged, until Bruce would see it from a chopper... By the way, if the Electra center beam of the wing is soooo strong, what is the likeliness of an engine attached to it, of shaking loose?

Kind of sort of ties in with the "Wreck Photo".  Then the Gilbertese settlers would avoid the area where human remains had  been found in 1938, et even forget about the plane remains after a couple generations?  While the bush grew more impenetrable around it?  Can one easily wade from the village to Nutiran?  Ric, what is Nutiran like? No coconut groves? Not suitable?

If not done yet, it might be useful to search the reef  in the known likely area, for small pieces of the plane, with a line of people spaced say 10ft apart, following a search grid, a bit at a time, at each Low Water.  For example in the case of Bruce's engine, magnetos and such, after a few years of corrosion, are sure to have broken off. As this is heavy and compact, it would not go very far before coming to rest in some recess of the reef.  Also many fragments of the cylinder cooling  fins could be still around.  No machete clearing work needed here.

My two cents for now!

Christian
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Whew!  Lots here.  Let's see.

Gotta get me one of those topo maps.  I wasn't aware of it.  Any idea what they cost?  Is there a website?

My hunch is that the bulge of Nutiran is an error.

No big storms between July 2 and 9 of 1937, but I don't think we need one.

Credible (?) post-loss transmissions went on - off and on - for two and a half days.  That's way more than the batteries could handle without recharging.

About an engine breaking loose;
The center section is immensely strong but the engines are. of course, removable and are attached to the mounts by just four bolts.

Wade from back and forth between the village and Nutiran?  I did it once and I won't do it again.  It's about belly-deep at low tide and there are lots and lots Blacktips (as in sharks) to make life interesting.  Nutiran was planted to cocos circa 1949 and several large pits were dug for the cultivation of "babai" (taro).  Bottom line: prior to 1949 there was probably little activity on Nutiran.  Between '49 and '63 there was considerable agricultural activity inland.  Our anecdotal accounts of kids playing on wreckage date from the late '50s/early '60s.

A search of the reef flat in the indicated area is certainly on the agenda. What makes it tough is that there is a scattering of Norwich City debris in that area also.  It's a lot different than airplane debris (big, clunky, brass or rusted iron), but everything has to be looked at.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:17:14 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

Ric wrote:

> As I understand it, that just doesn't happen.  Normally the weather
> comes in from the east or southeast.  Any big storm comes in from
> the west or, more usually, northwest.  In other words, big storms
> don't hit the island from this way, then that way, pushing things
> back and forth.

I disagree. Ever been in a hurricane or typhoon, Ric? Here is what it is like (been there for Hurricane Andrew).... This same pattern is true in most tropical systems, even those that do not quite make Category 1.

To explain, think of yourself dead in the path of the monster. It is a low pressure system with counter-clockwise wind action. When it first hits you, you get gusty winds from the north or north-northwest. Then, as you enter into the main wind field, velocities and gusts increase at the surface, tending more and more from the north.

Depending on the overall motion of the system and speed of the winds, you also experience varying degrees "surge", which is a water flooding phenomenon -- think of a flooding tide with large wave action in advance of the wind field and within it, sometimes as much as 10 or more feet of high tide water pushed ahead and within the system. This pushes in on the NW side of the system and typically causes more damage than the wind field.

Now, as you hit the eyewall, wind velocities are highest, from straight north (again, recall that this is a description of the experience of a "direct hit" and in the northern hemisphere). Surge, tornados, and straight-line wind gusts cause the most damage at this phase. Then you enter the eye. The skies clear, wind abruptly dies down. The wave action on the ocean becomes a medium chop.

Then, when you are through the eye, you enter the opposite side of the eyewall. Winds are now 180 degrees in reverse, from the south. Surge is not as much of a factor, except what remains of the impact from the leading side of the system. Wave action on the already flooded coastal areas is now churning at the maximum and in the exact opposite direction of what it was on the leading side of the system.

As the system continues westward, these southerly winds decrease and eventually slowly die down. Sometimes on the backside of the system you will get the opposite of surge, where the system pulls the water from the opposite direction, such as away from the western coast of the land mass. Back earlier in this century, a hurricane passing up and off the west coast of Florida actually created a "reverse tidal action" of such proportion that Tampa Bay emptied of water and people were able to stroll across on foot.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the NORMAL experience of a typhoon or even a large tropical storm event, if you are hit head on, does indeed involve a 180 degree wind reversal, by definition.

Thomas Van Hare

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

Have I ever been in a typhoon?  I don't want to talk about it.

But Niku is up close enough to the equator that big systems don't normally hit that far north.  Typhoons (actually they call them Tropical Cyclones in the southern hemisphere) are born in those latitudes and manure hits the fan farther south down around Funafuti and Fiji.

The bad weather that hits Niku is known as The Westerlies because that's where it comes from.  Consequently, the storm damage to the island really does seem to be confined to the NW, W, and SW sides.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:22:06 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Plane Wreckage

The reason why this photo was taken was because the Sailing Directions for the Phoenix Islands and the accompanying chart show that Gardner Island itself was much different in actual extent and area than shown.  We know of no other photo from this expedition, nor were the other islands so off from the charts (MacKean was 10 miles or so misplotted, but its area was correct).  Capt. Friedell of the Colorado made an extensive series of measurements (bearings) of the north and southern tips of Gardner, so that a better geographic map could be produced.  He basically said so in a letter to the Navy Hydrography Office.

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

But the letter makes no mention of the photo and the "north arrow" hand-drawn on the photo points due west.  Saying flat out that the photo was taken for a particular reason is speculation, not documented fact.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:46:35 EDT
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Red or orange?

Sorry to revive a well-worn thread. The following message came to me via another mailing list. The review of the 1/72 scale Electra may be of interest. My question is, did we decide on the shade of "red" that was applied to the various edges of AE's 10E? Was it really the "international orange" or was another color agreed upon? And were the colors applied to the underside surfaces as well?

Reply to me privately if you wish, or to the sender below. Thanks
Tom #2179

+++++++++++++++++++++

A Czech firm, Special Hobby, has recently released a 1/72nd scale model of the Lockheed Model 10 Electra.  Included in the kit are decals for the most famous Electra of them all, Amelia Earhart's 10E Special.

(As an aside to modelers, this kit is vastly superior to the odd 1/53rd scale Electra released last year by Williams Brothers.)

The Special Hobby kit is of a stock Electra with the full complement of fuselage windows.  Earhart's aircraft modified by fitting fuel tanks in the fuselage and most of the windows were removed.  I've glued the windows in and plan to fill and sand them flush, then add the row of fueling ports that were on the port side of the fuselage on Earhart's aircraft.

What stumps me is the color scheme.  The aircraft was certainly an overall unpainted aluminum, but I'm mystified by the red wing leading edges and horizontal tail surfaces.  I've looked at the web pages of both Tighar and Linda Finch.  (Tighar is the group trying to solve the Earhart mystery and Linda Finch is the lady who flew Earhart's route in 1997 in a restored 10E.)  The red seems to appear and disappear on both Amelia and Linda's aircraft, but I could find no explanation.  On both aircraft, it LOOKS like they departed in an overall natural metal finish, with the red being added somewhere along the route. (I'm guessing that perhaps Finch duplicated that aspect of Earhart's flight as well.)

There are a number of photos of Earhart's aircraft and most show no red, but a photo on the Tighar page, an aerial shot from above and to the right reportedly taken on 24 June 1937 over Java, appears to have the red added. The top of the horizontal stabilizer is certainly darker than the rest of the aircraft (of course, it's a black and white photo) and the edge of the right wingtip also appears to be painted.  Assuming the date is correct, the photo was taken only eight days before she disappeared.

Does anyone have any details on if/when/where the red was added to Earhart's aircraft?  Also, was the underside of the horizontal tail surface painted as well?

Dennis E. Sparks

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

I've copied Mr. Sparks in on this message.

We researched this in great detail.  The color and the color scheme are accurately shown on the three-view drawings at
http://www.tighar.org/airplane.html
The color pattern on the underside of the wing was identical to that on the upper surface.  The underside of the horizontal tail was not painted.

The color is not exactly "international orange" (which didn't exist in 1937) but is identical to Federal Standard 595B  12197 Dec 1989.  This was determined by matching the only known surviving scrap of painted surface from the original aircraft (a repaired piece saved by a former Lockheed employee).

The color on Finch's airplane is too red.

Earhart's aircraft was painted in Burbank early in 1937 in preparation for the first world flight attempt.  The only change after that was the loss of some paint from the leading edges during a torrential rainstorm over Southeast Asia.

Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:49:48 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

>In other words, big storms don't hit the island from
>this way, then that way, pushing things back and forth.

Uh -- well, there were some mighty big chunks of coral (like house size) up on the reef flat in '89 that weren't there any more in '97.  If they weren't dislodged from the reef edge and pushed NE (back) and then dragged back SW (forth), I can't imagine where they came from and went.  Unless Bruce has been back out there with a really big helicopter.

LTM
Tom King

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

Are we sure of that?  I didn't notice, but then I never notice anything.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:53:08 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: new forum attendee initial pos

>Numbers are probably written by a calibrator, rebuilder of
>precision optics.  find out who repaired sextants for PAA, airlines just send
>this stuff out for rework, hence unknown numbering system.

That strikes me as a really interesting idea.  How can we pursue it?

TK

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

Interesting idea, but a tall order to research.  We haven't had much luck finding Pan Am records of any kind concerning sextants.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:56:31 EDT
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: GRISSOM'S SPACE CAPSULE

Re. dragging the lagoon: it's also full of coral heads.  A real drag.

LTM (who's dragging)
Tom King

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

A "coral head" is a big growth of coral that reaches from the lagoon bottom to just below the surface of the water, sort of like a huge tree stump.  Not to be confused with Parrot Head or Dead Head.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:04:36 EDT
From:         Larry Turner
Subject:      Crabs and Rats

For a look at what life would be like on Nikumaroro and some photos and observation of how the crabs and rats behaved on the island read the article in National Geographic "The Crusoes of Canton Island " June 1938 pages 749-766.  One interesting note is that 4 Americans including a radio operator and 3 Hawaiians settled on Canton Island under the department of interior instruction on March 7, 1938. Also a group of 4 Hawaiians we put on Enderbury. It also says that American officials visited the two islands (Canton & Enderbury) in October and November of 1937, to prepare for the arrival of the permanent residents. Is there any records of these trips just 3 months or so after AE & FN were lost. Do we know who the Americans were? Did they look for AE & FN?

Page 762 has a picture of the crabs tracks covering the ground. Page 763 has a picture of the crabs hauling off a fish. Page 764 show now the island of Enderbury looked and stated that a horse and mule left there survived for several years. If a horse and mule can survive so could AE & FN. Given that Enderbury is bigger than Nikumaroro but same area & same type of atoll.

Also some pictures of hermit crabs and rats on Canton see National Geographic "Natures Most Dramatic spectacle & Eclipse Adventures on a Desert Island" Sept. 1937 page 361 to 394, and for some interesting history of the Phoenix Islands see National Geographic "American pathfinder in the Pacific" May 1946 pages 617 - 640.

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

Yes.  Good sources for info about Canton and the Phoenix Group in general, but Canton is very different from Niku. Also, those little hermit crabs on Page 763 are not hauling off that fish.  They're eating it where it is.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:13:00 EDT
From:         Dave Porter
Subject:      using forum stuff in everyday life

Thought you might be amused to know that I've been using information learned on the forum in my part time night job.  Three nights a week on the midnight shift, I respond to burglar alarms in commercial and industrial buildings here in the Detroit area, (explaining partly my fondness for firearms) and the radio dispatchers directions are occasionally, shall we say, hazy.  In the areas of town on the standard five digit street numbering system, I can usually tell by the # whether it is N/S or E/W of the cross street given, but some areas don't use the standard system.  So, for example, if I'm headed to an address on Orchard Lake Road, with a listed cross street of 14 Mile Road, and the directions don't state whether the address is N or S of the cross street, I use OFFSET NAVIGATION, approaching Orchard Lake Rd from 13 Mile Rd, knowing that I have to turn North to hit my target address.  Probably an application that never crossed FN's mind, but hey, it works.

Still curious about those letters stacked immediately behind some membership #'s.  Do they signify a particular skill or duty position within the organization?

LTM, Dave Porter, 2288

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

Nice to know that all this chatter is good for something.

Letters appended to TIGHAR member numbers mean:
B for Board - member of TIGHAR's Board of Directors
C for Course - has completed TIGHAR's course in aviation historic preservation and archaeology
E for Expedition - has served in the field on a TIGHAR expedition
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:19:35 EDT
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      FW: A Vega for the Centre?

I agree that a Vega replica or at least a scale model would be a great idea. I don't know whether there is room for a lifesize Vega at the Derry Centre but if there is, this is definitely an idea to be taken seriously. By the way, there are companies specializing in such replicas. These things are not really cheap but they look like the real thing. Depending on the room available a Revell kit might be something to begin with.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 23 Apr 1999 14:48:22 EDT
From:         Mike
Subject:      Fred Noonan

I am a new member to this forum and have enjoyed your work and all of the interesting information that you post. I have noticed, and perhaps it is that I am new to your forum, that most of the information posted as to what happened to Amelia Earhart centers on her and her abilities, even in the area of survival after her disappearance. My basic curiosity is about her navigator, Fred Noonan. Do you or do any of your members have much information on him? I met a gentlemen in Florida at an airshow that collects information and artifacts on Mr. Noonan and has an impressive collection. I was truly amazed at some of the things I learned about FN and his accomplishments in his life.

I don't understand why more people haven't addressed his abilities and what he may have done if faced with the situation of survival in a harsh tropical environment. From what I read about him, (by the way, the gentleman in Florida was working on a book bases solely on the life of Fred Noonan), he was a survivor. I find it hard to believe that if they both survived the landing on the island, he would have been survived by Ms. Earhart or would not have been able to have been somewhat inventive given his background.

Perhaps there is information out there on him and I just have missed it. I would be interested in your comments on him and that of any of your members.

Thanks for the opportunity to ask what may seem like a pointless question. Keep up the good work.

Mike

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

We are indeed VERY interested in Fred Noonan, to the point of having an entire research group working on trying to find as much information as much as possible about his personal and family history.  The Noonan Project, as it's known, has uncovered a great deal of new information and continues to work toward finding more.

Do you by any chance recall the name of the individual you met who collects Noonan memorabilia?  He sounds like a guy we need to talk to.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:04:58 EDT
From:         Tom Ruprecht
Subject:      Wreckage Play

>Our anecdotal accounts of kids playing on wreckage date from the late
>'50s/early '60s.

I know you have been able to contact former residents of Niku on other islands.  How hard would it be to find the kids who played on the wreckage?  They would be in their forties or fifties now.   Would it be at all productive to try?  It could help you to pin down the exact location in the bush, and they might remember some details that could give (anecdotal, I admit) clues as to the identity of the wreck, or what may have happened to put it there.  Perhaps useful to bring one back to the island on the trip prior to Niku IIII?  T

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

That's pretty much what we did (albeit serendipitously) on Funafuti in '97. Finding more former Niku kids would be almost as expensive as checking out the stories we already have.  Bringing a witness along would be even more expensive because it would mean leaving behind a team member.  My experience with bringing anecdotal informants to the field has been universally disappointing.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:22:51 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Amelia and Tibet

This may just indicate how widespread the interest in the Earhart Mystery really is right now.  Even the con artists have picked it up!

Antonio Gomez found this and brought it to my attention.  It's so far out I had to submit it.  I suspect Kalamazoo Net added the last line. It can be found at:
http://www.kalamazoo.net/c-comm/mtsee/vonreport.htm

The VonStompenheimer Report

Insight Unlimited reports a major breakthrough in the Amelia Earhart mystery. It was announced  today that Dr.  Basil VonStompenheimer, Zurich, Switzerland, is releasing all research data concerning his 30 year study into extraterrestrial systemized transitional phasewarp wave propagation delay phenomena.

Dr VonStompenheimer claims within this data he has recorded conversations between the Amelia Earhart Lockheed aircraft and an unidentified station of unknown origin somewhere in Tibet occurring on July 3, 1937.  This data, according to Vonstompenheimer, is 97 percent accurate based on complex computer aided digital analysis of 78 RPM records that have stored the data since August, 1942.

The information was undecipherable prior to today's digital processing now being employed to reproduce older phonograph records to today's standards, the reknown physicist claims. VonStompenheimer asserts the radio signals were recorded through a complex early origin space monitor station used by his group in Nazi Germany during World War II in a German V-2 Rocket test flight monitor program.

VonStompenheimer theorizes random electromagnetic propagation captivated between ionized layers to later be released into the extraterrestrial ether and stored for several years subsequently released back into earth's upper atmosphere via the Klatenberg phemomena to be chance recorded by German rocket engineers.

The noted scientist states that during polarization, reflection, refraction and diffraction of electromagnetic propagation between 120  and 50 meters the wave necessarily loses energy in travelling through the ionosphere, this absorption loss increases with wavelength and also with ionization density. The laws of the Kennelly Heaviside layer density absorption factors mandate cyclic variations in the ionosphere at the E layer, combined with F2 layer summer heights at some 250 miles, when loosely coupled with a factored sporadic E  layer ionization create an enclosure between the E and F2 layers where the signal travels with minimal loss until finding an opening allowing escape into space for ternal travel with zero dissipation.  These signals are then only subject to the speed of electron travel.  These integrated transitional radio waves then become the ultimate electronic memory storage device subject only to universal laws of dissipation and retrieval.

He claims the U.S. government pressured the scientist's group leader, Vernor Von Brawenklas, to suppress the data as a requisite for him to receive United States citizenship. VonStompenheimer, a group member at that time,  declined a U. S. citizenship citing as a reason his pressing demands involved in the rebuilding of his VonStompenhimer Precision Timepiece Ltd. factory in Zurich.

To obtain a copy of the VonStompenheimer Report, send $875.00, U. S.  currency to:
VonStompenheimer Laboratories
364 Bilstein Heberstrassse
Zurich, Switzerland

Attention:   Caveat emptor!

         ****************************************************
From Vern

Perhaps the strangest thing about this is that the name VonStompenheimer (could that be real?) leads to some web pages that look legitimate.  They have to do with schizophrenia.  I didn't spend much time on it but it looks for real.

So... There's this fellow who thinks he's VonStompenheimer and who posted the Tibet thing.  It's not unusual for a schizophrenic to hear voices.  One day while listening to some scratchy old 78 RPM records...  Well, you know!
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:33:49 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

Sea States run from 0 to 12 (Hurricane Force winds).  SS 1 and 2 are below white caps, meaning winds less than 13 mph of 11 knots.  This is considered mild, and FAC to oceanographers (flat-a_s calm).  The ships in the area would have observed high swell at short periods for a storm anywhere nearby at 1000 mile range, and they did not for the entire month of July.  So there!  Phffft back!  I agree that IF the plane was on the reef edge, then the surf hitting the island (don't forget the steep slope produces strong breaking waves ONLY at the reef edge during normal conditions), then it could have been broken up.  But NOT such that it ended up on the island such as the photo suggests.

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

How many times do I need to say this?  The wreckage doesn't NEED to be up in the bushes in order for the search planes to miss it.  A busted up Electra in the surf at high tide could be virtually impossible to see from the air.  The Wreck Photo could very well show the effect of a later storm of sufficient intensity to deposit the main body of debris in the bush.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:38:05 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Research needed

Can somebody come up with a URL for sales of British Ordnance Survey maps? They have a topo of Niku we'd like to get our hands on.

Thanks,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 12:13:49 EDT
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Lambrecht Up

Lt. John Lambrecht's account of the aerial search for Earhart conducted by planes from the battleship Colorado is now mounted on the TIGHAR website as Document of the Week at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Documents

The report we've reproduced is the unedited version Lambrecht submitted to the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics for inclusion in the Weekly Newsletter.  The version that actually appeared in the newsletter was toned down a bit and Lambrecht caught the devil from the brass for his "undue informality of expression."  We've also included a hand-drawn map Lambrecht made of the search flights.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 12:34:14 EDT
From:         B. Conrad
Subject:      Wreckage Burial

I was reading the forum posts this morning and I stumbled across something in my mind when one of the forum members mentioned about kids playing around the wreckage! From the resources that you guys have; did people on Niku ever at one point or another, bury their garbage and junk that they had no use for anymore! The reason I say this, is if you have actual evidence that the airplane did land there, but you don't have a trace, then it's a possibility that they buried the plane or debris parts after a time being, to prevent kids from getting hurt on it and from keeping it being an eye sore. Has anyone from the Team done any metal detecting in that area! Second question, is if this is true how much debris is likely to be found or is it likely that metal can survive preservance in sand! Anyway, let me know what you think and find out. Thanks!

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

If the wreckage is buried (and it well may be), the burial was most likely due to natural redistribution of sand rather than some kind of local beautification project.  The Gilbertese just don't think like that. We haven't done any metal detection work in that area, but we're gonna.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:22:39 EDT
From:         Rick Nigh
Subject:      Pigs

My understanding is that there were pigs on the island during the time the bones were probably scattered.  If this is true then they should be your prime suspects.  In my spare time, (such as it is,) I'm a Civil War re-enactor. 75th Ohio Volunteers.  In the aftermath of many battles it was wild and domesticated hogs, that tore up shallowly dug graves and scattered remains.  Dogs might do this, but pigs WILL.  The best known instances are after the battles of Fredricksburg and Chancellorsville / Wilderness.

LTM (Just before the battle)

Rick Nigh

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

Hmmmm.  Sounds like pigs are just as suspect as dogs, if not more so, in this case.  But again, I would imagine that the remains have to be interesting (i.e. more than just a pile of dried out bones) for Porky to do his thing. And any corpse on Niku is going to become a pile of dried out bones in a matter of a few months.  Ergo, if crabs didn't do the deed, and if dogs and/or pigs were the culprits, and if there were no dogs or pigs on the island prior to at least April of 1939, then the castaway(s) didn't die until a matter of months, not years, before that time.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 25 Apr 1999 11:27:17 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: Ruby's Last Name

Maria E Magers wrote:

>My daughter lives in Salt Lake City and has agreed to try the Mormon Library
>for a reading of Ruby's last name.  If someone else has already done this,
>let me know so I can save her the trip.
>****************************************************************
>>From Ric

>Thanks Maria.  Nobody has told me that they are definitely doing anything in
>this regard.  If anybody out there is already in contact with the Mormom
>Library speak now.

No such contact that I know of.  I did spend a couple of hours at the local public library here looking through a total of 15 books on surnames.  These included books specifically on british surnames and variations thereof-- English, Welsh, Scotch, Irish, etc.  And I looked at books on other European surnames as well as surnames in America.

I found NOTHING I could believe was a match.  The closest were, Mayall and Mayell.  Not so close were, Maryatt and Maryott.  I can't really buy any. 
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 25 Apr 1999 11:30:45 EDT
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      Lambrecht report

Great report by Lambrecht, and I'm glad we have the original version. I wonder how many people today, of any calling, could write as well as he did. As an aside, in today's P.C. (politically correct) environment, I can just see the consequences of similarly speaking out about the shortcomings of the system.

In any event, I couldn't help but be impressed by his and his group's aerial search effort in the Phoenix Is.

Thanks, Ric,  for finding and posting all these super documents.

Bob  #2021
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 25 Apr 1999 12:13:10 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Wreckage debate

To Forum Members and Ric:

I still argue with Ric about the weather during the week of July 2, 1937. My response to his scenario:

>1.  Airplane is landed safely on reef-fat and radio signals are sent, off
>and on, for 2 to 3 days.
>2.  High seas and violent surf destroy the airplane, leaving only
>scattered wreckage on the reef-flat when the Navy flies over a week later. Surf
>obscures the wreckage from observation, but "signs of recent habitation"
>(footprints, a campfire, etc.) are visible on the beach.

was that there is contrary evidence that there were not high seas enough during that week to destroy the airplane, based upon ship's and nearby island's records of surf, wind, swell, and seas.  Ric's further response was:

>The surf in the Lambrecht photo is not sufficient to toss the main body of
>wreckage up into the treeline, but it is (in my opinion) sufficient to
>break up the airplane and obscure the wreckage from overhead observation. The
>true storm that ultimately puts big chunks of wreckage up in the bushes can
>come along much later - maybe months later.

I agree with Ric that IF the airplane was at the reef edge, that is could be broken up by the surf breaking at the reef edge, and that eventually, parts of the plane could be strewn upon the beach, and possibly inland with a large storm sometime after July, 1937.  If you read Ric's scenario closely, it says that the plane is wrecked to pieces, sufficiently so that it cannot be seen by the Navy (due to surf action?).  If that is the case, then Ric clearly does not believe the plane photo purported to be AE's is really hers, as that plane appears to be carried, placed, or taxied into the bushes, where it disintegrates and/or falls apart.  A plane wreck on the reef edge would disintegrate pretty fast into many small pieces, and could not be carried intact to the shore and beyond as the photo indicates.  Ric, you can't have it both ways, so which scenario is the one you truly believe?  You should tell me and the forum why, and the pros and cons of each.

Your humble attack pig, Randy.

Randy Jacobson

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

First of all, the airplane doesn't have to be, and probably isn't, way out at the reef edge.  When the swells kick up, as shown in the Lambrecht photo, surf runs a considerable distance toward the beach before it peters out.  The bigger the swells, the more surf on the reef-flat, until eventually in really heavy weather you get breakers coming right up onto the beach and into the treeline.

At a time when the sea is calm, the airplane can be landed - say - midway between the reef edge and the beach, wherever the coral is smoothest.  A few days later the swell can increase to where the surf is reaching the airplane.

The Lockheed is buoyant so it doesn't take much surf at high tide to lift it up and plonk it back down hard enough to collapse the gear.  All radio messages cease and it probably doesn't take much scraping around on the coral before it's not buoyant anymore.  Once that happens, the highest point on the airplane is only about five feet so, at high tide with a surf running, all you see is white water.

You say, "A plane wreck on the reef edge would disintegrate pretty fast into many small pieces, and could not be carried intact to the shore and beyond as the photo indicates."

Remember what I said about statements of what "would" happen?  How fast and how much the airplane would break up depends entirely upon how much force it is subjected to.  It takes far less force to render it invisible from the air in the surf than it does to reduce it to tiny pieces.  The airplane in the Wreck Photo exhibits exactly the kind of damage I would expect from wave damage.  The parts that are missing (upper fuselage, outer wing panels, cowlings of the port engine) are precisely the parts that might get literally blown off an airframe engulfed by great volumes of moving water.  The apparent violent removal of the starboard engine and lack of damage to the port engine is just the kind of capricious damage that occurs in natural disasters.   The airplane in the Wreck Photo has not fallen apart or disintegrated in place.  The cabin roof has not fallen in (airplane cabin roofs don't do that anyway, as evidenced in abundant photos of old abandoned wrecks).  It is just flat gone.  The starboard engine has not simply fallen off.  It is just flat gone.  The nose section is still present but has collapsed down and to the side.  It is probably still attached to the center section by the thicker belly skins.

I don't want it both ways.  The Wreck Photo looks to me like the natural result of logical series of natural phenomena.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 25 Apr 1999 12:34:49 EDT
From:         Jim Van Hare
Subject:      Stompenheimer

The von Stompenheimer message is from someone I know here in Kalamazoo.  He is merely pulling your leg, and I guarantee he is not schizophrenic.  He is however a martial arts Black Belt (fair warning) and is the person who first made me aware of the Earhart Forum.  He's also extremely knowledgeable about radios and was a radio operator in the Army Air Force in WW2.  I think he's trying to tell us to lighten up and not take ourselves too seriously.

Cheers!

Jim Van Hare

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

We have an old saying at TIGHAR that we take the work seriously but not ourselves.  Other TIGHAR bumper-sticker philosophy includes little gems like:

"Adventure is what happens when things go wrong."
"Stuff is hard to find."
"There are a lot of places in the woods."
"It's never worth hurting live people to look for dead people."

and
Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 25 Apr 1999 12:42:37 EDT
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: plane wreckage

Randy Jacobson wrote:

> Sea States run from 0 to 12 (Hurricane Force winds).  SS 1 and 2 are below
> white caps, meaning winds less than 13 mph of 11 knots.  This is considered
> mild, and FAC to oceanographers (flat-a_s calm).  The ships in the area
> would have observed high swell at short periods for a storm anywhere nearby
> at 1000 mile range, and they did not for the entire month of July.  So
> there!  Phffft back!  I agree that IF the plane was on the reef edge, then
> the surf hitting the island (don't forget the steep slope produces strong
> breaking waves ONLY at the reef edge during normal conditions), then it
> could have been broken up.  But NOT such that it ended up on the island
> such as the photo suggests.
>
> *****************************************************************
> >From Ric
>
> How many times do I need to say this?  The wreckage doesn't NEED to be up in
> the bushes in order for the search planes to miss it.  A busted up Electra in
> the surf at high tide could be virtually impossible to see from the air. The
> Wreck Photo could very well show the effect of a later storm of sufficient
> intensity to deposit the main body of debris in the bush.

For what its worth, I have heard (anecdotal) of things called "rogue" waves, ie waves of immense size but with no known cause for their formation.  No one living today was on Gardner/Niku during this time, so it is mere speculation, but again a "possibility."

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

Rogue waves exist but I'm not comfortable basing a hypothesis on highly unusual events.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:39:47 EDT
From:         Robert Klaus
Subject:      Artifact 2-2-V-1

I've been looking over the web site for information on the big piece, and am not entirely clear just what it looks like now, or probably looked like originally.  I recall seeing it (and you?) on one of the television programs on Earhart, but did not record it at the time.

It could be very helpful in trying to identify this piece to have a photo of the present condition, and a scaled drawing.  This would allow forum members to make full size drawings to match up.

LTM (who used to fix airplanes)
Robert Klaus

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

It would probably be a good idea to have an Artifacts section on the website with photos and descriptions of each object we believe may have some connection to the airplane or the people.  I'll put it on the list.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:52:20 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Lambrecht report

Lambrecht's tone and candor are very much typical of the well-known independence and individuality of early pilots-- especially one who would catapult off a the deck of a ship and buzz around virtually empty ocean for hours on end.

william
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 11:01:36 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Calibration numbers

There has been discussion lately on the Earhart forum that the numbers on the lost sextant box may have been calibration numbers or numbers used by a rebuilder.  Is there any one on the forum that could explain in a short (2-3 paragraphs) passage why those numbers were "permanently' placed on the box and not simply noted on a paper log or something.  What was the purpose of the calibration, and would not that data change if the user knocked the instrument off-calibration and tried to reset it?

Any takers?

LTM, who prefers road maps and sectionals
Dennis McGee #0149

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

I can see Dennis' point.  If a sextant needs periodic calibration (does it?) then it needs it periodically (duh).  Stenciling a number permanently on the box doesn't make much sense unless it's useful in keeping track of this particular sextant in some unchanging context.  It also implies that there are lots and lots of sextants to be kept track of.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 12:23:23 EDT
From:         Jimmy Weez
Subject:      Rogue waves & the ocean bottom

Being new to the forum but not at giving my opinion, a true rogue wave is highly unusual but waves of varying sizes are a common occurrence, regardless of surf size.  All waves are, of course, not uniform and a wave of larger size is not uncommon.  An abnormally large wave can indeed come along in small surf and cause some damage to the area or people as witnessed just last summer off Assateague Island when my daughter Zoe & I were caught by one in knee-high water.

We can only fathom as to what exactly happened...

"The surf cometh, it gives & it takes away."

Continuing to comb the island(s) has its obvious merits.  Considering the talent the ocean has for hiding things, I believe expanding the radius of the search around the island(s) to include a wider expanse of the ocean floor has its merits as well.

                           JT
******************************************************************
From Ric

We of course did a sonar survey of the island's perimeter area in 1991 (at great expense) and came up with zilch.  A more detailed search would be even more expensive and, to be realistic, will not happen unless new and rather dramatic evidence turns up to suggest that it might be fruitful.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 12:29:42 EDT
From:         Smart Fix
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

Calibration:

For example (from my Army days): Army Test Measurement and Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE) are items that usually require calibration or verification (there is a difference). This equipment is maintained on a master list which identifies the equipment by model number and the period of calibration. If I bought an oscilloscope at a Defense Department surplus sale, I could most likely determine the following:

Whether or not the oscilloscope is a piece of TMDE equipment that is currently, or has been, enrolled in the Army calibration program. From there I might be able to determine what Army organization it previously belonged to. I may be lucky in that the calibration label is still on the equipment. In that case, my job is that much easier.

Each Army installation usually has a calibration office that coordinates the calibration and verification of its equipment.

Calibrated equipment (not sure about verified equipment) have on them a calibration label which indicates the date of current calibration, next calibration date, and owning Army organization. Additionally, most of the time tools like torque wrenches and dial indicators have the Army unit's identification engraved somewhere on the tool.

I would think that anyone familiar with sextants would know about their calibration and if there is any meaning to the numbers on the outside of the sextant box you mention.

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

From Ric

I wish it was that easy.  There is definitely significance to the numbers, but despite a great deal of effort by no small number of experts we haven't yet been able to determine what that significance might be.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:41:57 EDT
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Re: Lambrecht report

Bob writes:

>In any event, I couldn't help but be impressed by his and his
>group's aerial search effort in the Phoenix Is. Thanks, Ric, for
>finding and posting all these super documents.

Even making allowances for the gung-ho approach of flyers 60+ years ago, it still reads to me as if the pilot(s) took it a bit lightly. Too much faith in his own sweeping assumptions - e.g. "In fact, on any of these islands it is not hard to believe that a forced landing could have been accomplished with no more damage than a good barrier crash or a good wetting".

He says "the lagoon at Gardner looked sufficiently deep and certainly large enough so that a seaplane or even an airboat could have landed or taken off in any direction with little if any difficulty", but he doesn't take the trouble to land, although he does so at an inhabited island soon after. Writing "Gardner is a typical example of your south sea atoll" suggests to me he is thinking in stereotypes of tropical paradise and not considering the possibility that people could be there but too distressed after a week to be able to make themselves known. I can well see why the top brass wanted the report toned down.

LTM, Phil Tanner 2276

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

A couple of comments:

Lambrecht's landing at Hull made sense only because there were people there who could come in a canoe to talk to him.  Landing a float plane in one of those lagoons leaves you stranded out in the middle of the lagoon, unable to get anywhere near the shore for fear of running aground, and forced to keep the engine running to keep from drifting into a coral head and holing a float (in which case you would really be screwed).

There is also reason to believe that whatever Lambrecht meant by "signs of recent habitation" he didn't mean huts, shacks, or buildings.  When he sees those things on islands he specifically mentions them.  At Sydney Island, for example, he says,

"There were signs of recent habitation and small shacks could be seen among the groves of coconut palms, but repeated zooms failed to arouse any answering wave..."

This is almost identical to the language he uses to describe what he saw and did at Gardner, except there is no mention of shacks on Gardner.  So what does Lambrecht mean by "signs of recent habitation"?  Author Fred Goerner was
quite sure that it had nothing to do with Amelia.  In an October 1991 letter to Tom King he wrote:

"There is no mystery about (what Lambrecht saw on Gardner).  I knew Captain Lambrecht quite well, and we corresponded at length and spoke many times via telephone.  Lambrecht told me there were what appeared to be stone walls on a part of Gardner that appeared to have been part of what were once houses. Gardner had been inhabited in the late 19th and early 20th century."

Tom gently pointed out to him that there were no stone walls on Gardner and that the place had been "inhabited" only briefly by some laborers in the late 19th century.

In a February 1992 letter Goerner corrected his recollection:

"..I gave you a bad read in my first letter.  John said he saw what appeared to be stone walls or some kind of old construction on McKean Island.  On Gardner, he saw what appeared to be markers of some kind."

But in a March 1990 letter to me, Goerner had said of this same issue: John Lambrecht assured me that they were totally convinced that Gardner and the other Phoenix Islands with the exception of Hull were uninhabited.  His "signs of recent habitiation" on Gardner were undoubtedly the markers left by HMS Leith in March, 1937."

In my opinion, John Lambrecht never told Fred Goerner anything about what he saw on Gardner.  I suspect that the whole "markers" thing is Fred's own 1990 supposition coming back in 1992 as attributed to Lambrecht.  HMS Leith left no markers on Gardner in March of 1937.  On February 15, 1937 a shore party from Leith erected one flagpole onthe beach with a placard attached to it proclaiming the island as His Majesty's property.  The log shows that the party was gone from the ship all of 20 minutes.

So if Lambrecht didn't see structures or markers, what did he see?  There may be a further clue in something that was allegedly seen on Sydney.  Although mentioned in neither Lambrecht's report or Bill Short's letter to his father, an Associated Press report from the correspondent aboard USS Colorado dated July 10 reads as follows:

FLIERS CONFESS HOPE LOST EARHART AS FRIEDELL (captain of the Colorado) ENDED COLORADO PLANE SEARCH EVENING UNLESS POSSIBLE FINAL FLIGHT MONDAY STOP PHOENIX ASTERN STEAMING HOWLAND AND WHERE REFUEL DESTROYERS MONDAY STOP LETTERS SCOOPED IN SIDNEY BEACH SPELLING DOZENS POLYNESIAN WORDS INCLUDING KELE FASSAU MOLEI SEEN FROM AIR BUT PILOTS SAID LIFE UNSIGHTED DISCOUNTING POSSIBILITY WERE MESSAGES RELATING LOST PLANE

After considerable consultations with language scholars, the reported words KELE FASSAU MOLEI really don't make any sense. Lambrecht saw shacks, etc. on Sydney but saw no people because Jonesy on Hull had recently pulled off the Tokelau laborers who had been planting coconuts there.  But questions abound. Did the pilots really see dozens of words written in the sand on Sydney? Letters in the sand are certainly temporary enough to qualfy as signs of RECENT habitation. Or was this story just a gag the pilots were playing on the journalist? And if not, why would laborers write words in the sand? Most importantly, were there marks in the sand on the ground at Gardner?

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1999 15:21:45 EDT
From:         Daryll Bolinger
Subject:      Naval Tactics & Navigation:

My questions might seem to be off topic, but they are inspired by AE and her flying laboratory.

My question deals with Naval tactics and navigation before and during WWII.

I am sure we all have seen recent video of aircraft carriers launching aircraft with the large radar domes on them. These aircraft provide excellent radar platforms and displace the radar signature away from the carrier so as not to reveal the location of the carrier.

During WWII there was a film made titled " Wing and a Prayer ". In the movie a returning lone aircraft was trying to locate the carrier at night, without success. Upon hearing the aircraft overhead, one of the actors on the aircraft carrier, suggested radioing the aircaft and saying "we are right below you." The reply to the statement was, "that could give away the position of the carrier." Which leads to my question.

How did the returning carrier aircraft find the carriers after a long combat sortie?

1. The aircraft carrier (the airport) had moved X number of miles.
2. Radio Nav-aids (DF) would be useful to enemy aircraft.
3. Not all combat aircraft carried navigators for celestial navigation.
4. The Pan Am HF/DF method would also reveal the location of the carrier.

I know someone on the Forum can enlighten me. Thanks.

Daryll
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:21:42 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Naval Tactics & Navigation:

During the search for AE, the carrier aircraft personnel were briefed prior to their flight about where the carrier would be at the end of their mission.  Also, during daylight hours, it is rather easy to see the carrier, along with three destroyers stationed 1000 yards away.  Nighttime operations were never performed during the search for AE, and I don't know specifically when they were considered routine during WWII.

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

Also...none of the Colorado's planes was equipped with DF.  Their navigation was strictly dead reckoning.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:27:19 EDT
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Pacific Air Navigation in WW2

This is off topic to a great extent, but since Daryll asked the question about wartime navigation and how planes found their carriers, here is the scoop on it:

The Navy used what was called the "ZB" system of direction finding.   I am not certain exactly when this system first went operational, but I believe it was in place from about 1940 or 1941 onwards.

ZB was actually the nomenclature for the transmitter used aboard the ship to provide the homing signal.  This system operated in the 234-258 MHz UHF band.

US Navy aircraft were equipped with a homing receiver which operated in the same UHF band,  234-258 MHz. The first version of this equipment was known as the R-1/ARR-1.  Later it was replaced by the R-4/ARR-2 sets.

The aircraft carrier transmitted a signal using a highly-directional, rotatable antenna.  The UHF signal was modulated by a second signal of rather high frequency... somewhere in the 520-1500 KHz range (there were actually several standard modulating frequencies, about six or eight, which were called "channels").  These frequencies, of course, are far above the normal range of modulation frequencies for most radio transmissions (I am trying to simplify this, please bear with me...!)  The result was, there were effectively THREE radio frequency signals being transmitted by the ship, simultaneously... for example, 240 MHz plus the modulation frequency of (let's say) 1500 KHz (or 1.5 MHz), so the second RF signal ends up being 241.5 MHz; and 240 MHz minus the 1.5 MHz modulating frequency, so the third frequency appeared at 238.5 MHz.  The signals appearing at 238.5 and 241.5 are called "sidebands."

To make matters even more interesting, the 1500 KHz modulating frequency which produced the sidebands was ITSELF modulated, with information like coded letters or numbers.

The radio-frequency signal, 240 MHz and EITHER sideband, let's say 241.5 MHz, detected in the aircraft in the same receiver, "mix" together (the technical term is "Heterodyne") to produce a third frequency... actually, reproducing the "sideband"-producing modulation frequency... so when 240 and 241.5 "heterodyne" or "mix" the result is 1500 KHz.  The ARR-1 set fed the 1500 KHz signal to yet another receiver, operating in the low to medium-frequency range, which could tune to 1500 KHz and then detect and demodulate the homing information from the "sideband" signal.  The ARR-2 did not require a separate LF/MF receiver to do this.

The intent was that the transmitting antenna on the ship would rotate through the compass... so an enemy trying to d/f the UHF signal would not hear it continuously.  Also, the frequency of 234-258 MHz was thought to be above the operating range which Japanese d/f gear could work.  On top of that, you had to receive BOTH of the UHF signals simultaneously in order to detect the "real" modulation which carried the information needed by the aircraft.  Since the UHF transmitting frequency, and the high-frequency modulating frequency, were often changed, it was thought the system would remain fairly secure.

The homing information transmitted via the sidebands was varied over portions of the compass as well.

So, what if one of these receivers fell into enemy hands as a result of Japanese recovery of a downed plane... as probably happened?

The design of the receiver itself would challenge some engineers... the homing receiver's design would baffle some engineers at first (or second) glance, because the ARR-1 and ARR-2 will detect NOTHING  unless they hear  two signals off-the air, at the same time.  Reason:  the sets used the "superheterodyne" circuit... which was the accepted circuit design of the age, for receivers... but in the ARR-1 and ARR-2, the superheterodyne principle was not your "normal" application.

In a "normal" superheterodyne, a signal to be received is "mixed" with a second signal from a self-contained "local oscillator" in the receiver, to produce an "intermediate frequency" which is then amplified, and detected. The ARR-1 and ARR-2 had NO local oscillator circuit!  The "sideband" signal served in place of the local oscillator.

There is indeed some evidence that this system did  remain secure for quite some time.  Maybe the Japanese were not as smart as some give them credit for.  (Well, they did lose.... or did they?  Their cars are all over our roads!  And practically NO consumer electronic gear is made in U.S.A. any more.... think about it.  "Ah so, Yankee Dog... you think you win Second Wor'  War?  Think again.  Banzai!")

73, 88 to Mom (Who drives a FORD, is a Vegetarian, and watches only G-rated movies in the THEATRE, not on a VCR)

Mike E.

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

Well Daryll, there you go.  Got that?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:30:08 EDT
From:         Christian
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

I at last went and dug out my old sextant, last used in '76...

1===We are talking marine sextants.

2===Bought mine used, in '75. No date of manufacture, but it was "old", although it has built in arc illumination, using two "AA" batteries. s/n 38274, made by:   H Hughes & Sons Ltd, London     <England>

3===Varnished mahogany case, 11" accross the front, 11.5" long, 5.75" tall. Top and bottom panels fastened w/ 4 screws per side. All the side panels are dovetailed in the corners, each "finger" being 3/16" thick. There is a recessed flip out brass carry handle on the right hand side of the case; and hence, the 2 latches on the front swing to the left, that is DOWN when the case is held by the handle. There is also a small lock in the front -but of course I never did get the key...  :-( Top has small rectangular recess where, I think, I removed the previous owner nameplate

4===Sextants NEED to be checked for accuracy regularly. Mine has a Certifacate of Examination by "B Cooke & Sons Ltd", signed "H. Hudson" and dated "5/4/74". It is held in a metal frame secured with screws on the inside of the lid. It mostly gives the corrections to be applied to readings made at different places on the scale. In this case they vary from  -0.2 to -0.8 minute. Obviously: no point in doing a "calibration", if the results are not passed on to the end user with a signed Certificate!

5===No numbers marked on the wood anywhere...

6===My guess for the numbers are either Company inventory number, or, to match a particular box with an invoice number in a busy repair/maintenance shop...

Can't remember what the original questions were, but I hope this helps...

Christian
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:34:43 EDT
From:         Bill Zorn
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

I would think that a sextant would need to be checked periodically, otherwise the first time the user finds it out of calibration may be the last.

"went for an airplane ride and got lost"

Could the numbers on the box be a MSN (manufactures serial number) rather than  the owners inventory number, or a model number?

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

Sure, except we haven't been able to find any example of serial numbers being written or stenciled on the exterior of the case and we've never found a sextant manufacturer whose serial numbers fit the pattern of the numbers on the box.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:38:43 EDT
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

> Calibrated equipment (not sure about verified equipment) have on them a
> calibration label

Key word here is "Label."  A label can be applied over another label. Markings that are more or less permanent on an article indicate more permanancy as Ric previously stated.

LTM
and Blue Skies,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:50:05 EDT
From:         DR
Subject:      triangulation

Ric was anyone else monitoring Amelia's radio transmissions besides the Itasca?  If so would it not be possible to set up an experiment where the radio receivers, transmitters and locations were duplicated, signal strengths monitored and and Amelia's last positions triangulated?  This could give us a good idea of her final flight path.

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

As far as we know, nobody else heard Earhart's inflight transmissions on the morning of July 2nd.

Duplicating the equipment and locations for an experiment would probably be more expensive than just going to Niku and finding the airplane.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 11:00:33 EDT
From:         Dave Leuater
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

its obvious Ric,

63 some years ago some clairvoyant individual, (a skilled remote viewer and time traveler no doubt),  envisioned that this particular sextant box would become one of the primary focuses of a large investigation.  And so, in an attempt to obfuscate the truth, confuse the historians, muddy the waters, and sell more supermarket tabloids, he came up with a completely meaningless number to stencil on the box!  Hope this Pearl of wisdom helps!

LTM (Who probably will disown me now!)
Dave Leuter

PS I have an Occam's Razor too, but I can't figure out how to change the blade!

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

I see a marketing opportunity here.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 11:40:48 EDT
From:         William Webster-Garman
Subject:      Re: Pacific Air Navigation in WW2

Even more off topic, superheterodyne reception (sometimes referred to as "superhet"), which has been the standard in AM radio for 70 years,  has the side effect of cutting off the frequency response of an audio broadcast at around 5KHz, which is why AM radio has always had such a bad reputation for sound quality. But the transmission of AM is not superhet. It's direct modulation of the carrier amplitude. Try listening to an AM broadcast of music through a $5 crystal set attached to a good audio amplifier and speakers sometime-- the quality is astonishing-- better than FM. There are two serious drawbacks, however. The first is all the static. The second is that crystal sets have very poor selectivity (lots of stations in an urban area will tend to jumble together on a crystal receiver), which is why they went to superhet AM reception to begin with, and, in simple terms, why FM later gained popularity for its ability to suppress static and improve frequency response while maintaining the selectivity of AM superhet receivers.

william

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

From Ric

Enlightening, but most definitely off-topic.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:21:14 EDT
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      The Search for Ruby

Attached is the reply from Mrs. Hardy, at Malvern Girls' College regarding Ruby's letter.  Unfortunately she has been unable to locate anything thus far, but they are continuing to look.  I have asked her if she knows of an email contact at the Boys' College. I'll keep you posted if they unearth anything more.
LTM,
jon  2266

> Search for Amelia Earhart
>
> Dear Mr Watson
>
> My apologises for the lateness of this reply.  Malvern Girls' College
> has been closed for the Easter holiday and therefore I have only just
> received your E-mail.
> I was fascinated by your mail and wish you every success in your
> search. Unfortunately I do not think that we can help.  I have searched
> through our old year books for the name Ruby either as a member of staff or a
> pupil for the time around the war years but so far without success.
> I will however pass on your E-mail to our resident historian here, Mrs
> Pamela Hurle, who has written a history of Malvern Girls' College
> dating from its first days upto the present time, in case she may have some
> ideas.
> Should she have any suggestions, I will E-mail them on to you.
> Meanwhile looking at the letter itself, is the surname MORPETH  by any
> chance?
>
> Wishing you luck in your search
>
> Kind regards
>
> Judy Hardy.
>
> ================================
> Malvern Girls' College
***************************************************************

From Ric

Well, that's a very nice response and we now know more than we did.  Negative results are still results.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:24:40 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

>I can see Dennis' point.  If a sexant needs periodic calibration (does it?)
>then it needs it periodically (duh).  Stencilling a number permanently on the
>box doesn't make much sense unless it's useful in keeping track of this
>particular sextant in some unchanging context.  It also implies that there
>are lots and lots of sextants to be kept track of.

A sextant can definitely get out of calibration.  It does need to be checked.  Means is provided on all of them for adjusting them to read correctly.

But the numbers on the boxes, in one case stencilled, are most likely to be a numbering system to keep track of individual instruments.  The numbers may imply "lots and lots" of things to keep track of, but not necessarily all sextants.  There are probably other things, perhaps mostly navigational instruments of one kind or another, with similar numbers, floating around.

The most interesting numbers: 3500 and 3547 (Niku box and Pensacola sextant) may be 4-digit numbers because of an encoding scheme.  The 35 may be the year of acquisition, or of introduction into the system.  And they thereby rendered themselves vulnerable to the Y2K Bug!

That leaves room for up to 99 individual items of a particular type in the system.  They didn't expect to need more numbers.  But almost half of the "room" had been used up with sextant number 3547.

Just one theory.  But keep watching for boxes with numbers on them!

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

I can see the headlines now.

HISTORIANS THEORIZE THAT EARHART MAY HAVE BEEN FIRST VICTIM OF Y2K BUG.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:32:05 EDT
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Colorado's Search Planes/DF

While the Colorado's search planes may not have carried DF receivers as such, they were at least equipped with a very simple homing-type navaid, consisting of a fixed loop antenna arrangement which was coupled to a separate antenna input on the radio receiver -- which would most likely have been a Model RU series.  The loop was located within the cockpit area, and on many naval aircraft it was mounted right behind the pilot.  In some instances, it may have encircled a life-raft container.

The fixed loop would yield an aural "null" (minimum signal)  in the pilot's headphones, if the airplane was flying a course directly in line with a  radio station.  This is the sort of arrangement used to fly the old "range" courses on the domestic US airways, in the days before VOR.

Any use of this form of navigation aid would have been on low and medium frequencies, not on HF.

It is a very crude system, but works well if the pilot knows the location or identity of the station on which he is homing.  Only problem is, the simple system has a 180-degree ambiguity.  A pilot may not know if he is headed directly TOWARD or AWAY FROM the station.

I do not know how much operational use the Navy made of such a navigation procedure for aircraft at sea prior to the war; but most aircraft carried such equipment.

73
Mike E.
****************************************************************
From Ric

We have an excellent shot of one of the O3U-3s used in the search (Lt. Fox's airplane, #4-0-6) and there is sure no loop visible anywhere.  Would they really mount a fixed loop down inside that steel-tube fuselage?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:37:45 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

Regarding calibration of sextants and sextant boxes: one can easily interchange the same model sextant into different boxes, so numbers on the boxes are not necessarily tied with the instrument.  Calibration numbers and labels should be affixed to the instrument, not the box!!
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:41:49 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: triangulation

>As far as we know, nobody else heard Earhart's inflight transmissions on
>the morning of July 2nd.

A technically correct statement, but Radio Nauru heard AE, as did the Ontario the night before, I think, based upon undecipherable Z codes.  The Ontario could not make out anything readable...Also, Lae, NG definitely heard AE outbound!
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 28 Apr 1999 12:03:06 EDT
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      Lambrecht report

Re AP wire from Colorado, "Letters scooped in Sydney beach spelling dozens Polynesian words including KELE FASSAU MOLEI".  Suppose it's too obvious to turn those words upside down:  KELE bcomes 373 and perhaps an arrow; FASSAU "doesn't compute" to me but MOLEI looks like 1370 W.  Could these make a message if we had the rest of the words and they were flown over from the opposite direction?
LTM
Bill Moffet  #2156

***************************************************************
From ric

Interesting idea, but the numbers don't make much more sense than the words.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 28 Apr 1999 12:13:48 EDT
From:         Eleanor Ellis
Subject:      Question

Thank you for the great site and work.  I have a question -- Why can't the bones suspected to be Amelia's that are in the University of N. Carolina and Tennessee be tested for DNA instead of having to look for more on the island???  Thanks again,
Ellie

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

Boy, I wish we had bones in those places, or anywhere else.  All we have are measurements taken of the bones in 1941 and that is what Dr. Burns at UNC and Dr. Jantz at UT evaluated.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 28 Apr 1999 12:22:07 EDT
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Nickname?

Is it possible that "Ruby" is a nickname & not a proper first name at all?

By the way, Mike E. never fails to amaze with his vast store of radio related knowledge.

Incidentally, I seem to recall that after one of the great naval battles in the Pacific (Coral Sea? Philippine Sea?) one of the U.S. Naval commanders ordered all the lights on his carrier illuminated to guide it's planes back to the ship, when they were forced to return after sundown, in spite of the danger from possible, imminent submarine attack.

Don Neumann

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

I guess Ruby could be just a nickname.  Is there any way that the second word could be Tuesday?

Mike E. is actually a writer for the Jerry Springer Show and just makes that stuff up because he knows that nobody understands it anyway.  (just kidding)
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:22:51 EDT
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      Colorado's Search Planes/DF

I have always wondered how airplanes found their ships at sea in those days. Didn't ships carry some homing device or DF equipment enabling them to establish the direction from where a pilot was transmitting ? With that kind of equipment they couldn't know how far out he was but by establishing the direction from where he was transmitting they could give him a reciprocating course to bring him overhead. Enemy airplanes listening in had no use of the figures overheard since they didn't know which pilot and which station were involved. I understand the British used such a DF system in 1940 to help their  Spitfires/Hurricane pilots to get back to base. Such homing system gave a station no information on where or how far the airplane was, only from what direction it was transmitting. The pilot didn't know how far he was from the station either, but he knew that if he flew the given vector he would eventually come overhead the ship/airfield. This simple homer-system is still used at general aviation fields, only it now uses VHF and the vector is now called a QDM. But the system is the same. Can Radio Historian Mike E. offer any help ?
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:24:40 EDT
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Re: The Search for Ruby

For Jon:

>> I will however pass on your E-mail to our resident historian here, Mrs
>> Pamela Hurle, who has written a history of Malvern Girls' College
>> dating from its first days up to the present time, in case she may have some
>> ideas.

This sounds promising!  Just to be sure...  I gather that she has the entire letter, or knows where to find it on the TIGHAR web site.

It would be interesting to see that history of Malvern Girls' College to see how the things in Ruby's letter match up with the recorded history.  I wonder if that's what is on their web site?  I'll have to check again and see how detailed it is.

I sure can't see "Morpeth" in that signature -- can't see the "p" but it does looks like "y," like her "y" in Ruby.  I agree the end sure looks like "eth"
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:17:20 EDT
From:         Bob Sherman
Subject:      1935 -1939

For What It's Worth.  One of our retirees, Arlie Nixon, first navy pilot from Okla... served from '35 to '39 mostly in observation, some in fighters. told me the following: It was in spring of '37 when Adm. King took over that night and instrument flying from carriers became operational. Arlie was on the Saratoga at that time.

Thru 1939 at least, the plotting board was their navigation tool.  The wind at their operational altitude of 500' was about the same as surface & they spent a great deal of time est. wind dir. & vel.  They left the carrier with its position at the end of there mission (and the hour before & after) on their boards. All the rest was DR except for adding wind as they went along.

There was a 'lost ship' procedure that had two possibilities.  One, they all arrived back where the ship should be but wasn't.  They then formed a sweep line, spread out on either side of the skipper at a visual distance of seeing one plane beyond the one they were flying on.  The one who first saw the ship would climb & dive 100' up & down.  Each one would do the same, then close in on the one they saw doing the zooming.  Within minutes they were closed up and had the ship.  Arlie practised that once or twice .

Second possibility, only one or two planes lost.  They broke radio silence and either took a bearing on a signal xmited by the ship, or xmited & the ship gave them a heading.  Their loop was around the inside of the fuselage, between the two cockpits (radio oper./ gunner in the back).   They did not have voice, only cw.  They had a min. of 15 wpm to graduate so all were able to send and recv. adequately.  Radio contact between planes was allowed on certain occasions.  He flew the SBC-3, O2U, O3U (various models), SF, & others.  Most had the fixed loop but some of the later models had a moveable loop.  Loops were seldom used at sea but handy for patrols off shore. (used coastal marine beacons to verify course.

None of the standard operational planes had voice radio or ADF's, and none of the carriers had any navigational equip. for planes to use, except for the breaking of radio silence in case of 'lost ship'. He said that except for two 'practice times' none of his sqdn. Mates ever used it, despite many instances of bad wx and night, and patrols of up to 8 hrs.  He did say that twice they had to use the 'sweep line' and a couple times he got very close to making a distress call.  He heard later of the 'alphabet beacon' but never had any details.

As for me, I closed my eyes & went back over 50 years to the cockpit.. thinking 'YG' or 'ZB'.   I didn't tune a dial, but turned a selector switch to the letter or number of the day, thus I do not know what the freq. band was.  (I said earlier that it was LF)   In any event Arlie is positive that only the plotting board was in use when he left in '39.     RC
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:20:53 EDT
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Lights

Don Neumann wrote:

>Incidentally, I seem to recall that after one of the great naval battles
>in the Pacific (Coral Sea? Philippine Sea?) one of the U.S. Naval
>commanders ordered all the lights on his carrier illuminated to guide
>it's planes back to the ship, when they were forced to return after
>sundown, in spite of the danger from possible, imminent submarine
>attack.

Ric will chide us once again for being off topic, but this was Admiral Raymond Spruance, on (I think) the last day of the Battle of Midway, which would have been 6 Jun 1942.

Tom #2179

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

Chide, chide, chide.....
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:25:58 EDT
From:         Frederick R. Galea
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

The Boronia Art Gallery in Sydney, Australia, have for sale artifacts from the late Captain Frederick Neville Riley DSO (after a house clearance sale after the death of his widow). Riley served with the Blue Star Line between 1911 - 1962.  Offered for sale is: Sextant no 7774, Bell frame of broze alloy silver vernier scale, manufactured by Wilson Gillie and Bruce & Sons, London. In 1907.  Scratched initials 'N.T.A.' indicate used by Nautical Training Centre (Greenwich).  The Sextant has four index mirror shades and three reflectore shades, with horizon telescope, blank site scope, sighting binoculars and a Galilean scope for night sights.  In original brass handled fitted box Calibrated on the siver arc -10 to +155.

I mention this, for what it may be worth to the forum, as it appears that (all) sextants seem to have a four-figure.  Maybe these were 'block' figures allocated to the various sextant makers of those days?

My two cents.

Frederick R Galea (Malta - Europe)

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

I'm not at all sure that it's true that all sextants have a four-digit number.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:48:48 EDT
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      More on Colorado's Search Planes/DF

This is an off-topic excursion, but since the matter came up regarding a photo of one of the planes, here is some info which may be helpful or enlightening.

The fixed loops carried aboard 1930s Navy aircraft did not look like the round loops we are more familiar with.  The fixed antennas were wound on an open frame and usually had six or eight corners, so they looked a lot like a stop sign in outline.  The wire was exposed.  Such loops were usually mounted in the cockpit behind the pilot's headrest in metal skinned planes. The loop may have even encircled a life-raft container in single seat aircraft.

In early fabric covered aircraft, some loops were wound around the inside of the fuselage.

If your photo has good detail of the cockpit, take a close look and see whether an open-frame loop appears anywhere.  These things sort of resemble the "god's eye" made from yarn and popsicle sticks, except the loops have more corners and the wire is all around the outside rather than covering the face of the structure.  Some old-time home broadcast radios from the 1920s used a similar appearing stand-alone antenna.

73
Mike E.
*****************************************************************
From Ric

The photo is an air to air shot and reveals nothing about the interior of the aircraft.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 11:13:55 EDT
From:         Chuck Jackson
Subject:      THINK LIKE NOONAN

Some time ago someone on the forum suggested we might find someone who thinks like AE or FN.  Well here's one who says he does----trained by P.V.H.Weems, extensive celestial experience in the Pacific.  stumbled onto his analysis of the  Lae to ??????? flight in the gift shop at Western Airospace Museum at OAK.(A MUSEUM NOT TO BE MISSED). Says send $14.95 to Bowen P. Weisheit, 9 W Courtland St. Suite 201,Bel Air, MD 21014  ph 410-879-6464 fax 410-836-7654. title:" THE LAST FLIGHT OF FREDERICK J. NOONAN and Amelia Eashart"  do you already know of this guy?  if so, why haven't you brought him up?  I'll not comment on the book till others have digested it.  Is he on the forum?  He's put a lot of effort into it!!!!!!  No doubt, it'll provide a lot of grist for the forum mill  I've already passed it on for comment to the other 2 I've found who
"think like Noonan".
****************************************************************
From Ric

Got a copy of Weisheit's self-published treatise right here.  I'm sure we've discussed it at some time but there is nobody named Weisheit subscribed to the forum.  First of all, let's be clear that no one can "think like Noonan" except Noonan.  The opinions of people who operated in the same environment at the same time with similar training are likely to be valuable, but they are still just opinions.

Weisheit's analysis is, I'm afraid, typical of those offered by people who have considerable expertise in one particular field (in his case, aerial celestial navigation), but no education in historical investigation.  His work is chock full of assumptions based upon his own opinions which are stated as fact and are then used to support further assumptions, and so on. What he ends up with is a stack of "would haves" about a mile high that amounts to nothing more than fantasy unsupported by any real evidence.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 11:38:33 EDT
From:         William
Subject:      Re: Naval Tactics & Navigation

Just wondering, why Nikumaroo? I guess it has become common knowledge that F.N. missed Howland island to the left, but what if, while approaching the Sun line, they missed Howland to the right?

I know a shoe was found on Niku, but that was a very popular piece of footwear in the thirties, forties, and fifties. A lot of women were in the area during the war. A piece of an aircraft was also found. Again, there must have been a few thousand fixed winged airplanes in the vicinity. But those bones, yes, what's the latest on them bones?

LTM
William

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

I'm afraid the forum isn't set up to start this far back.

First, the island's name is Nikumaroro.

Second, I don't know if it's common knowledge that Noonan missed Howland to the left, but I do know that nobody really has that information.

Third, the facts concerning the shoe and airplane parts found on Nikumaroro are not at all as you describe them.  You'll find lots of information on thse subjects on the TIGHAR website at www.tighar.org.

Fourth, the latest on the bones is that there is a search underway right now in Fiji to attempt to relocate the bones that were sent there in 1941.  There should also be more bones on Nikumaroro but they'll probably be very hard to find.  We're planning a major search for 2000 and will be doing a preparatory reconnaissance this summer.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 11:56:21 EDT
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Calibration numbers

As we raise various theories regarding the numbers on the sextant box, I believe it is important that we remember how the numbers were originally described by Gallagher.

I am under the impression that the numbers were handwritten on the bottom of the box, in a somewhat casual manner.

I have been around enough large private companies and government bureaucracies to know that they DO NOT casually identify their expensive equipment with handwritten notations.  Equipment tags are usually permanently affixed (glue, screws, rivets etc.) so they can not be easily removed without damaging the equipment.  This method helps deter thieves and makes tracing things a whole lot easier if it does get stolen.

With that in mind, I think we may want to place less emphasis on the possibility that the sextant box    numbers are part of a large (i.e. Pan Am) firm's numbering system.  Also, I have a difficult time believing they are "calibration" data, simply because that data is SO valuable to the accuracy of the instrument that the owner would want to safeguard it and not risk loosing it through wear and tear on the exterior of the box.  (The few examples of calibration data presented on the Earhart Forum to date have calibration data safely preserved inside the box.)

My best guess would be that when found the box was no longer being used to carry/protect a sextant, and in fact was being used for something else.  I suspect that the numbers, while intriguing, represent something more mundane, such as a Lot # of an auctioneer when he sold the now-empty sextant case.

Of course, the Pensacola sextant case will blow all my theories to hell anyway, right?

LTM, an overly cautious matron
Dennis McGee #0149CE

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

The sum total of everything we know about how the numbers were written on the box comes from this passage in Gallagher's telegram of September 23, 1940:

"Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542 "

Your guess that the box may have been used for some other purpose is shared by Harold Gatty who is reported (in an file entry dated August 8, 1941) to have had the opinion the it "was used latterly merely as a receptacle."

I'll appropriate this little factoid to support my theory that the castaway(s) had survived on the island for a considerable period before succumbing.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Apr 1999 15:48:47 EDT
From:         Tet Walston
Subject:      Weisheit Book

I have a copy of "The Last Flight of Noonan", and agree that the mixture of fact (minimal) and the authors fictional assumptions, are confusing and unconvincing.

However, my observations of the known details of the last leg of the flight, lead me to believe that the end was most likely a crash into the sea.

Even allowing for the "Offset" method of finding a small island, the lack of radio operating skills of both flyers was a recipe for disaster.

Gardner Island is a long way from Howland, even if it lies on or near the last reported LOP.

Did Noonan pick the wrong offset? Did he think that they were NW of Howland, thus he would order a turn to the SE down the LOP. Why did they say they were circling?

Noonan was used to flying with a Radio Operator to assist in D/F, and Amelia was not well versed in instrument flying. Mantz had tried his best to correct this, but time was against him.

I hope your search leads to a definite conclusion, it would be wonderful to prove that we know the final landing place of Amelia  -- but what if the result is negative?

LTM
Tet
****************************************************************
From Ric

The beauty of the scientific method is that you always know what to do next. If you test your hypothesis and it proves to be false, then you use that new information to formulate a new hypothesis.  The most important thing is to make sure you're using the best informational available - and that's where you run into a little trouble with your hypothesis that she went down at sea.

- There is no evidence that Noonan used any kind of offset navigation.

- They almost certainly did not say they were circling.  That word was added to the Itasca log over the partially-erased word "drifting."  What she probably really said was "listening."

- There's no reason to think that Earhart's disappearance had anything to do with any lack of skill she may have had at instrument flying.  The weather was good.

- Gardner is roughly 350 nautical miles from Howland and, as you say, on the line Earhart said she was on at a time when she should have had the capability of flying roughly another 520 nautical miles.  To postulate that they did NOT reach Gardner is to say that they did not do something they were capable of doing and said they were doing, but instead did something else for four hours until they ran out of gas.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Apr 1999 10:37:29 EDT
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Calibration numbers

We have now finished a complete, item by item review of all records at BuNav. One thing we were surprised about is that since aviation sextants were considered too "inaccurate" for use on ships, they were largely the responsibility of BuAir. Therefore, we have now tasked the BuAir records as the next project.

Still, we can now say categorically that we have examined EVERY surviving record and letter at BuNav referring to the loans of equipment, of all sorts, out of Navy inventory during this critical period when a loan could have been made to Fred Noonan. We will now do this at BuAir as well.

Despite this clear delegation for aviation sextants from BuNav to BuAir, there was one loan of an aviation sextant that we did come across. The sextant is listed by number, 1120, which is interesting in that it is a four digit number, in other words the same number of digits that appeared on Gallagher's sextant box found on the island.

We have also come across a veritable treasure trove of information with regard to the establishment and surveys on the LORAN station there and have full confidence that these records have not been examined by others before -- for one reason, the one key record we have found is not for external review but has been preserved within the Archives system for use exclusively by NARA staff -- the fact that we had rights to review it should indicate the strength of our research team. There is some exciting information in there, including survey information and the names of all the people involved, etc., but we are still processing it.

More to come,

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

From Ric

Sounds exciting Tom.  Bear in mind that the one instance we know about where a BuAir "sextant" (Pioneer Bubble Octant 12-36) was loaned to the Earhart flight, the loan was actually made to Harry Manning rather than to Fred Noonan.  Manning held a commission in the Naval Reserve.  Fred was a civilian. I don't think that we can be very optimistic about BuAir records being much help in identifying the numbers on the Gardner Island sextant box.  There was a pretty firm consensus that the instrument it once held was an "old fashioned" nautical sextant.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Apr 1999 11:22:28 EDT
From:         Tet Walston
Subject:      Amelia and Fred

Noonan should have planned to arrive at the (now) well known LOP at the ETA for Howland, but made sure that he knew which way to turn to see/reach his destination. This was and is the safest way--arrange to steer either to the left or right of TRACK by adjusting the COURSE to STEER. When ETA is reached, turn in the direction planned.

Surely, if he was such a skilled navigator, he would have done this.

As for Amelia and Instrument flying, she would have to be careful during those long NIGHT hours I still think that a landfall of Gardner if it happened, reflects badly on the decisions possibly made by the crew.

Pity.

Tet

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

You're making the same mistake Weisheit makes.  You look at what YOU would have done which is, of course, what any GOOD navigator would do, and because Noonan was a good navigator, it MUST be what he did.  But you are not Noonan and you are not in the situation he was in.

Many thorists have proclaimed that Noonan MUST have used some kind of offset, but there is also a strong consensus among highly experienced navigators that if he felt that he had a solid fix on his position through celelstial observations during the night and every expectation of getting a DF bearing to help him fine tune his approach to the island once he got within a couple hundred miles or so, it is entirely reasonable to presume that he took a straight shot just as the Pan Am Clippers routinely did.

If Amelia needed help holding the airplane on course during those long night hours she had a Sperry GyroPilot autopilot for just that purpose.

The crashed-and-sank hypothesis looks great as long as you don't have all the facts.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Apr 1999 11:27:43 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Weisheit Book

As I stated before, FJN did use offset navigation on the Atlantic crossing. It is documented in the map used.

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

On the coast of Africa there was no expectation of navigational assistance from DF bearings. I thought we were talking about the approach to Howland. Do you see any evidence that offset navigation was used on that occasion?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Apr 1999 11:36:36 EDT
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: 1935 -1939

I seem to remember that the Lexington did take fixes on a couple of planes during the search, and that is in the record at the National Archives.

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

"Report of Earhart Search - USS Lexington" (page 8)

"By carefully timing the search , the start of which was announced by the flank commanders, the position of any given plane of the search could readily be determined at any instant.  Radio bearings were frequently taken both by the planes on their loops and by the ship.  These bearings served as a check on their position."
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Apr 1999 11:39:29 EDT
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      For What It's worth...

Was reading a book on B-29 operations in the Pacific, and came across this interesting passage...

"[One B-29] was ditched offshore when Iwo [Jima} was fogged in... The plane was towed ashore and parked on a reef, but broke up four days later in a bad storm."

If a storm can break up a B-29, one can only imagine what just a high surf might have done to AE's little craft. Mother Nature is an awesome critter.

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Apr 1999 12:18:59 EDT
From:         William
Subject:      Forum purpose

I'm sorry for the typo on Nikumaroro (Gardner) What I don't understand is why the FORUM cannot go back. I was under the impression that this FORUM was to share information on the disappearance of Amelia and Fred. To discuss possibilities into their mysterious faith. Who cares what Ruby's last name was? I guess Ruby would care. Who cares how WWII pilots found their way back to their carriers? I would imagine a wounded pilot, low on fuel would. But, Amelia and Fred were never in the military. There is honest speculation that Fred was a drunk and Amelia was not the pilot we think her to be.

I hope I'm not out of line. I find your FORUM most enlighting. But I'm a meat and potaotes man. I enjoy speculation, if there is some valid evidence to that speculation. I don't really like to spread rumors, and cloud the issues, but, sometimes rumors are based in facts.

Most respectfully submitted,

William

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

And most respectfully answered...the Forum's primary purpose is to help advance the search through sound research and the exchange of ideas and information among a broad base of interested people.  The purpose of the TIGHAR website is to provide a resource where interested people can bring themselves up to speed on what has already been learned so that they can make useful contributions to the Forum.

In addition to (so far) 40 articles from TIGHAR Tracks, 12 Research Bulletins, 6 Documents of the Week, plus maps, photos, film, etc. we have just added a Forum FAQs section which should make it even easier for interested people to acquaint themselves with what has been accomplished in the Earhart Project's 10 years of work.  We're constantly adding to the website and, for example, we haven't yet written the answer to the Was Noonan an alcoholic? question that you bring up. (The short answer is: apparently not.)  We do, however, have an answer for the question about AE's piloting ability.  You'll find a link to the FAQ section on the Earhart Project page.

Ruby's last name is important because if we can find Ruby we may be able to find out where Gerald Gallagher's album of photographs ended up.  And if those photos still exist they may include shots of the bones and artifacts he found on Nikumaroro in 1940 which we now strongly suspect belonged to Amelia Earhart.

How WWII airplanes found their aircraft carriers is admittedly pretty off-topic but we occasionally stray briefly into areas that are more interesting than apropos.

We all enjoy speculation and we do lots and lots of it here on the Forum, but we try to make sure that we're speculating only where we lack facts.

Love to mother (which is also explained in the FAQs)
Ric