========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:18:55 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Weems Letter For Dennis McGee Check out PVH Weems book, "Air Navigation", published by McGraw-Hill 1938 2nd edition & 4th edition 1955. It's in the chapter, Navigation In Flight in which he talks about accounts of navigation in long distance flights of the era. Quote"The accuracy of fixes was very gratifiying. By that, an accuracy of approximately 10 miles is implied. My experience is that such a degree of accuracy is about the average one can expect in aerial navigation". Quote from Fred's letter to PVH Weems on methods & procedures aboard Clippers to Hawaii Intertropical convergence zone: last time I looked, in July the pattern shifts towards the north with the southern boundary just about right on the equator with winds out of the east. Lae lies on latitude S6'34'' and Howland N0'48". Flying west to east they would be abeam the area to start and in it the last few hundred miles or so. Again, this area is noted for alot of clouds associated from storm activity. I cannot help but wonder how well one can take sextant observations at night in this area of the world. Doug Brutlag #2335 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:26:26 EST From: Harry Poole Subject: Re: W40K In relation to the amateur operator W4OK. F.G. Carroll (spelled as Carroll) had the First name of Francis, not Fred. His wife's name was Leone. In 1938, he was an engineer at radio station WJNO, and had moved a few miles to West Palm Beach from Lake Worth. Both he and his wife eventually retired in Fort Pierce, and both died in 2000, within the last 8 months. I am trying to locate any children they had that still may live in the area, and might have some information that could help. In addition, I will try to check the local West Palm Beach paper for any related information, if I can do it by mail. West Palm Beach is too far for me to travel. However, I thought we had another TIGHAR member in the West Palm Beach area. Harry ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Harry. Sorry about assuming that you could check the Lake Worth paper. Okay gang, who do we have that lives in the Palm Beach area and will admit it? I seem to recall having a cousin who lives in Ft. Pierce. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:32:19 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Celestial Choir As sargent-at arms of the new leaner & meaner Earhart Forum, would you consider the idea of those interested members of the celestial choir trying a research experiment? I've made a chart of the area from Howland to the Phoenix group showing locations of the land masses(islands) using exact latitude/longitude coordinates. It is on 2 pieces of paper each 12''X 14". When butted up together you have a custom made chart for the geographical area showing the land masses & lines of lat/long. To the sailors & navigators in your group, it is simply the VP-OS sheets otherwaise known as universal plotting charts. With this projection one can plot LOP's in great detail & simulate some precise dead reackoning if desired. How about those interested parties who know something about navigation(celestial prefered but not required) each take a copyu of the sheet(s), run some calcs & estimates as they wish and lets see what comes up. Might put this LOP question to rest. I'll send out copies to choir members on request and one to TIGHAR if you'd like to put it on the website for others. Doug Brutlag(who prefers not to have to dodge swings of bowie knives & pirate cutlasses') #2335 *************************************************************************** From Ric Choir members who would like to participate in Doug's exercise can contact him directly. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:40:42 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: FN and Weems We have a copy of the letter. FN wrote it in reply to a Weems' letter we don't have and didn't find. The FN letter appeared in both one of Weems' books on air navigation and also in the May 1938 issue of Popular Aviation. It is dated May 11, 1935. Excerpts from it are in the Eighth Edition. Dennis, your brain cells are slipping. Probably related to Halloween, no doubt. blue skies, -jerry ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:48:37 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Navigation discussion Contrary to popular opinion the ITCZ does not "sit on the equator" it migrates north and south, so Ric and Randy hav told us something a lot of people don't know. Also, the weather report of CUmulous cloud about half way enroute, and the similar weather at the Howland end al night strongly suggest that for a lot of the way Fred WAS able to get regular celestial fixes all night. July is also the calmest part of the year in the region. Around this time of year major tropical storms begin to sneak up on us. Most of the bad weather and storms then are directly related to moist air in proximity to land masses. Depending how close they were to the equator they possibly could see Nauru workings at night from altitude as a glow in the distance. I believe the uano workings were at an altitude of around 180 feet above sea level. A 5000 candlepower light 5600 feet above sea level may only be visible to ships at 34 miles, but to an aircraft at 9000 feet it is a whole other ball game. One or two degrees from the equator and they just might, given a few breaks in the clouds. Bearing in mind it was not just one light, but the greater part of an island that was lit up. Picture flying at night - and how far away you can see small towns at night. Then add the light high up for good measure. One thing that does bother me though. I thought Nauru's elevation was about 180 feet. The phosphate workings were. All I'm trying to establish here is to confirm once and for all that Noonan almost certainly "arrived" at the immediate vicinity of Howland. The Ontario weather report certainly kills some of the "Fred may not have got a fix" speculation. Next question, although the winds aloft would be very different. Did Ontario give a wind speed and direction for the night? Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric Ontario logged surface winds out of the East at 3 or 4 knots until 22:00 local after which they swung around out of the ENE and increased somewhat to 5 or 6 knots. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:14:59 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: W40K > From Warren Lambing > > Ric and Bob > > Is there anyway to ascertain, where the Ham operator in Wyoming may have > been? Might be of interest to see if he could be in the same GC. > > Regards. > Warren Lambing > ************************************************************************** > From Ric > > How about 1408 Tenth Street, Rock Springs, WY? (Ron Bright has been in touch > with the local paper.) The great circle bearing (GCB) from Lake Worth Florida (W4OK) to Rock Springs is 309.6 degrees. The GCB from St. Petersburg to Rock Springs is 310 degrees. So those three sites are virtually on the same great circle. But the great circle containing Niku and Rock Springs does not include St. Petersburg or Lake Worth. This raises new questions, as if we didn't have enough already: Did Rock Springs hear Earhart and relay the intercept live to W4OK? Did Betty hear the relay and W4OK being called by or responding to Rock Springs? This gets curiouser and curiouser. LTM, Bob Brandenburg, #2286 ************************************************************************** From Ric "Rock Springs" is Dana Randolph, a 16 year old "amateur radio fan" with an "inexpensive commercial set". He ain't relaying nothin' to nobody. Dana is also an African-American in a town that has a black population of .01 percent. The fact that he was investigated and that the authorities agreed that the message he heard was "thought to be from KHAQQ" indicates to me that his report is highly credible. So far in my plotting of reported post-loss signals I can tell you that at the time Dana is reported to have heard what he heard (15:00Z on July 4), Coast Guard San Francisco is hearing nothing on 3105 but within 15 minutes (at 15:15Z) Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii takes a "doubtful" bearing of 213 degrees on a rough carrier on 3105. A 213 degree bearing from Mokapu passes very close to Gardner Island. The reported time of Dana's signal is fairly shaky (a Honolulu Star Bulletin article that has his name as Charles and his age as 12) so it may be that PAA and Dana are hearing the same transmission except that PAA is hearing the badly degraded primary frequency while Dana is hearing intelligible voice on a harmonic. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:16:21 EST From: Gary Payne Subject: Re: 150 SE by 50 E This thought has kind of tasked me throughout the discussion of this particular message. Anyone considered if it could have been "WE ARE 150 MILES SOUTH EST(imated) BY 50 MILES EAST"? Either a typo in the original transcription or actually misheard? Just a thought . . . --gary payne (a lurker going gently back into that good night) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:18:52 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Position reports I said: >At no radio position report was a time provided when the fix was valid Ross asked: >How do we know? As stated earlier in my previous posting, I examined all radio transmissions and nagivational fixes, according to the actual chart used, for comparison. When either condition was not met (i.e. radio position reports or chart), I could not make the determination of report validity. Only those cases (actually the Oakland to Honolulu leg) formed the basis of my report. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:26:54 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Amelia and the shoes For Richard L -- For what it's worth (very little), my pet speculation has Noonan dying and Earhart injuring her foot, which swells to the point where it won't fit in her shoe; so at the Aukaraime site she puts on one of Fred's, leaving the other one and one of her own, and hobbles on to the Seven Site where she expires. Accounts for everything, but entirely, entirely speculative. LTM (who prefers slippers) Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:35:31 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bevington's recollections of Niku > I think we have > gotten all there is to get. I wonder about asking Eric to sketch the "bivouack site." Kenton keeps reminding us of the mounds and pits at Aukaraime, and while I have a lot of trouble thinking that they could represent the low piles of rubble that Eric and Harry saw, it would be interesting to see if Eric can summon up a visual image that he could sketch, for comparison. With dimensions, hopefully, so we could make some better judgement about whether such a mound might cover a body. TK ************************************************************************** From Ric As long as we all understand that such a sketch would be valuable only in the most general sense of establishing some sort of scale for the size of the "mounds." Or perhaps the same purpose would be served if Gerry asked him to estimate the dimensions of the mounds. I'm very leery of sketches drawn from ancient memories because it's so easy to subsequently think of them as accurate representations. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:44:34 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Fred, aren't we overdue? OK, let's set the record straight. At Howland, sunrise was at 1657Z, and was the nautical sunrise. This converts to 0527 local time. Civil Sunrise was at 1723Z, or 0553 local time. Local time determined by +11.5 TZ for the Itasca...Howland was at +10.5, so add an hour to the above. Using Nautical sunrise, here are the sunlines at Howland: 1745Z 66.9* 1800Z 67.0* 1830Z 66.8* 1900Z 66.2* 1930Z 65.2* 2000Z 63.7* 2300Z 27.9* At the time of AE's last transmission, 2013Z, the LOP would have been approx. 154/334*. However, Noonan could not directly measure the LOP direction, but could only calculate it based upon the height of the sun above the horizon. There would be little incentive to re-check the LOP of sun height at this time, as there is not enough difference in angle from the sunrise LOP. It would, however, give FN a double-check on his DRing the LOP to Howland. *************************************************************************** From Ric Is that 27.9 at 2300Z a typo? I assume that these numbers are for observations taken at the surface. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:01:14 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Antenna and propagation simulations For th' WOMBAT >> Another quick question from WOMBAT. What effect would "ground" have on propagation of the Electra's radio signal and also on reception? << When a transmitter antenna is in proximity to ground, the radiated field at a distance from the antenna is the resultant of a wave radiated directly from the antenna and a phase-reversed wave reflected from ground. The ground-reflected component is computed by the "method of images", in which the ground is replaced by an image of the antenna at a distance H below the ground plane, where H is the height of the real antenna above the ground plane. Because of this image relationship, the conductivity of the ground is a determinant in the strength of the radiated field. Clearly, a perfectly conducting ground is the ideal case, more about which later. According to the reciprocity principle, a receiving antenna has the same image relationship with ground as does a transmitter antenna except, of course, that the incoming wave induces current in the receiving antenna - - in contrast to the transmitter antenna in which current generates the outgoing wave. By driving a copper pipe into the ground (I use a length of steel concrete reinforcing rod - - works well for SWL), or connecting to a water pipe, you put the ground reference (the chassis) of the equipment, transmitter or receiver, at the same electrical potential as actual ground, thus getting maximum benefit from the image effect. The fuselage of the Electra was the ground for the dorsal vee antenna and, being aluminum, was close to a perfect conductor. So the antenna had a virtually ideal ground whether airborne or on the ground. Water on the reef flat contacting the metal parts of the aircraft's undercarriage had little if any effect on the performance of the antenna - - the ground that it "saw" was the fuselage. On the other hand, if the Electra had been made of non-conducting materials - - say, a wooden frame covered by fabric - - then the dorsal vee antenna would have behaved as if in "free space" when the aircraft was in flight, and would have behaved like an antenna close to ground when on the reef flat. LTM, who says ground is good. Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:02:19 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: 150 SE by 50 E Ah. Thank you. I'm wondering if Mr. Russell might have misheard something like "drifting" as "fifty" and reconstructed the rest. Imagine Earhart saying something like "We think we're about 150 miles SE of Howland but may have been drifting east." I know, utterly unknowable, but.... TK ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:15:03 EST From: Richard Lund Subject: Re: Amelia and her shoes >From Ric: >If the Japanese had been on Niku you might think that the people who lived >there might have noticed, not to mention the U.S. Coast Guard station near >the 7 site. In the words of the immortal Homer Simpson "D'OH" I spent a week and a half searching the web for any indication that the japanese may have been to Niku and what did I do--- miss the most obvious thing!! You know when I was new to the forum I was scared to say anything because I didn't know anything,I think now my biggest problem is I know enough to make comments but I still don't know enough to be accurate enough. LTM Richard L #2376 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:22:02 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Re: Janet and Gardner Island Janet is not telling anyone to go fly a kite, believe in "harmonics," read "Betty's" tea leaves, etc. If I've been declared "personna non grata" by the "yabba yabba doo...back to Niku TIGHAR crewe" so be it. If y'all want to exchange E-mail with me about all the junk TIGHAR found on Gardner, y'all have my e-mail address. Janet Whitney ************************************************************************* From Ric Nobody declared you to be "personna non grata". I've cut you more slack than anyone I can think of and I'm still willing to post anything intelligent that you may have to contribute, but peer reveiw is a bitch. Get over it. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:32:23 EST From: Bill Moffet Subject: W8AQQ in 1937 Taking Janet Whitney's information (Thank you, Janet.), I emailed the Quarter Century Wireless Assn. and today received the following from Jim Walsh, W7LVN, General Manager, in reply to my request for the name and address of W8AQQ in July 1937: "In the Fall '367 Callbook: William R. Scott, Box 85, Forestport, NY" I suspect that Mr. Scott is a "silent key" inasmuch as W8AQQ was listed in 1993 to Mr. Kallio in Huntington Woods, MI. Knowing it doesn't help our quest, in reading Mr. Russell's report of what he heard, it occurred to me that he may have caught part of a "rag chew" between a couple of radio amateurs. In July "cold weather" doesn't make much sense on an Equatorial island--nor even 25 miles north of Utica, but a "bad cold" might. A look at Eastern New York shows Forestport to be about 50 miles east of the eastern end of Lake Ontario. Holland (sounds like Howland), NY is a little town some 25-30 miles southeast of Buffalo and appears to be around 180 miles as the crow flies due east and a little south of Forestport. Well, it's just a thought. LTM Bill Moffet #2156 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:45:31 EST From: Vern Klein Subject: Wristwatch/Chronometer One more time with wristwatches, although I doubt the subject can advance the project. In Fred Noonan's letter to P. V. H. Weems, and published in Weems' book. Fred wrote: "Time pieces carried were a Longines Civil Time Chronometer and a Longines second-setting watch. The latter was set to correct G.C.T. at all times by checking with the chronometer. This watch was of the arm type, but the strap was removed, and the watch clips on the octant were adjusted to accomodate the brackets on each side of the watch. I prefer such an arrangement to carrying the watch on the arm." Of course, he's writing of the navigational equipment used on the PAA Clippers. The watch we see Fred wearing may be one of those seconds-setting watches and approaching being a chronometer in its own right. I wonder if that watch may be the origin of the idea that Fred carried his chronometer with him at all times? *************************************************************************** From Ric Interesting. I have a local expert and collector of chronometers with whom I can check about the Longines products mentioned. It also makes sense that Fred, after arriving in Lae, takes his watch that he has had clipped to the octant and puts it on a strap which he has just fastened around his wrist in the photo. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:01:53 EST From: Terry Ann Linley Subject: Re: W40K Well, I have to (sheepishly) admit that I've NOT been following all the threads on the Earhart Forum, and this one slipped by me! Thanks for the Head's Up, Ric . Please give me a few days (like through the weekend?), and I'll get back to you ASAP. LTM (who wishes there were more hours in her day!), Terry (and a few minutes later) Well, I don't know who said "there's no time like the present," but I decided to go ahead and make a couple of phone calls: the first to a good friend who is a Fort Pierce native (and knows LOTS of people), and the second to the Fort Pierce Tribune, the local newspaper. I've not heard from my friend yet, but the Tribune searched back through it's Obituaries and found that Leone Carroll passed away on 9 September 2000 and left ONE SURVIVOR: a daughter, Nancy Carroll. In the Fort Pierce telephone book, there was an 'NA Carroll' listed, so I left a message on the answering machine. Stay tuned....... LTM (who knows that busy people get the job done!), Terry ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks cousin! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:03:32 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Noonan-Weems To Doug Brutlag: Thanks for your clarification regarding the Noonan-Weems connection. I was curious because the 1938 2nd Edition of Weems' book, "Air Navigation" has two prefaces, a reprint of the 1st Edition preface and a new preface for the 2nd Edition. In these prefaces, Weems thanks various individuals who help him write the book, mentioning by name and rank such luminaries as Col. Charles Lindbergh, Paul (?) Gatty, Adm. Richard Byrd, and "my friend" Lincoln Ellsworth. No where did he mention Fred Noonan. It's rather curious that Weems quoted Noonan in the book, according to your earlier post, but "overlooked (?)" him in his acknowledgements in both prefaces, while mentioning all of those other fellows. I could understand the oversight in the first edition as a simple writing/editing error but it would appear to be something Weems -- a real stickler for accuracy, as navigators are -- would've wanted corrected in the 2nd Edition, especially since by that time his source was the now-deceased and semi-famous Fred Noonan, former star navigator for Pan Am Airways. Weems was not bashful about promoting his navigational skills and his school for navigators, and he quotes Fred in his book, which is widely held to be THE definitive work for its time on air navigation. Yet, he doesn't acknowledge Fred's contributions. Why? Hubris? Am I reading too much into this? LTM, who's a true believer Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:04:49 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: The Great Navigation Challenge To all interested Forumites: If you would like to participate in the navigation experiment mentioned in a previous posting(aka "The Great Navigation Challenge") Ric posted my email address to get your name in for a chart copy, brutavia@shout.net. Email your snail-mail address to me and after a few days to gauge interest I'll have copies of the chart made and sent out to all respondents. Make copies of the chart for yourself(no copyright infringements here folks!) in case you make mistakes or want to try different theories. I'm off to go do some aviating & navigating and will be back on Friday. I'll send a chart to Ric as well to post on the website as he sees fit. Doug Brutlag #2335 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:06:59 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Question regarding Wire in Aircraft I have a question relating to aircraft/airframe wiring practice in the 30s. Does anyone know whether solid-conductor wire was ever used in wiring harnesses? (I am referring to gauges from around 18 to 30.) Seems at first glance that stranded conductor would have been preferred due to less breakage under strain and vibration. What type insulation was used? Probably cloth covered, but was it multilayer, as in scc or dcc type? ("Single cotton covered" or "double cotton covered") I have seen a/c wire samples from the 40s which are, universally, stranded; and the cloth insulation may have a cotton "filament" running the length of the wire, separate from the jacket, wrapped around the conductor... this could often get in the way of soldering operations if not carefully stripped. These samples are usually cotton (?) insulated with a woven outer jacket, which may be a solid color (usually white) or marked in some way, perhaps with a color tracer thread. The scc and dcc wire I referred to earlier was, I know, common in radio construction. Many specs for "home brew" radio projects of the time called for coils to be wound with scc or dcc wire, and it was also used for hookup wire before plastic-insulated products came along... but, was this stuff ever used in aircraft wiring? LTM (who wraps everything real securely to keep bugs out) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 09:55:46 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: W40K > From Ric > > "Rock Springs" is Dana Randolph, a 16 year old "amateur radio fan" with an > "inexpensive commercial set". He ain't relaying nothin' to nobody. Dana is > also an African-American in a town that has a black population of .01 > percent. The fact that he was investigated and that the authorities agreed > that the message he heard was "thought to be from KHAQQ" indicates to me that > his report is highly credible. > > So far in my plotting of reported post-loss signals I can tell you that at > the time Dana is reported to have heard what he heard (15:00Z on July 4), > Coast Guard San Francisco is hearing nothing on 3105 but within 15 minutes > (at 15:15Z) Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii takes a "doubtful" bearing of 213 degrees > on a rough carrier on 3105. A 213 degree bearing from Mokapu passes very > close to Gardner Island. The reported time of Dana's signal is fairly shaky > (a Honolulu Star Bulletin article that has his name as Charles and his age as > 12) so it may be that PAA and Dana are hearing the same transmission except > that PAA is hearing the badly degraded primary frequency while Dana is > hearing intelligible voice on a harmonic. Your mentioning the shaky 213 degree bearing reminds me that some time ago I looked into that case, using large scale topographic charts. I was curious because the Mokapu site is on the northeast side of the Koolau mountain range that runs parallel to the northeast shore of Oahu. In particular, I was wondering if the mountains could affect the bearing accuracy. They would if the signal arrival angle was low enough, but not if it was high enough so that Mokapu wasn't in the RF shadow of the mountains. The vertical arrival angle of that signal from Gardner was about 1 degree. But the optical angle from Mokapu to the ridge crest, on the bearing of Gardner, is about 6 degrees. So it seems clear that the signal heard at Mokapu was "spilling" over the Koolau ridge enroute to Mokapu. The geometry of the path and the ridge alignment is such that a signal arriving at an angle below the optical horizon of Mokapu would be skewed clockwise as it spills over the ridge, and also would be substantially dissipated. That could account for the "shaky" character of the bearing. It's worth noting that the signal heard by Mokapu on 213 degrees could have originated from a source on a more southerly bearing - - not necessarily from a land source, perhaps a commercial aircraft operating between Oahu and Hawaii, or other islands to the south of Oahu. This doesn't mean it couldn't have originated at Gardner - - just something to keep in mind when evaluating possibilities. And, before anyone asks - - no, I haven't been withholding information. The 213 bearing issue wasn't salient at the time, and so I just didn't mention it. Given the recent new line of inquiry, it seemed pertinent to mention it now. LTM, Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:05:58 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Star(?) Witness/ Lt.Lambrecht I'll bat cleanup. Lt Lambrecht's flight on 9 Jul over Niku has been well documented.Weather clear,visibility excellent, could see a life raft at "5 miles", tramp steamer broken in two, etc.But a few questions remain. It is almost inconceivable that GP or the Navy Department would not have initated an additional explanation and interview with Lt Lambrecht and his observer after reading that "signs of recent habitation" were clearly observed on Niku (place not described) just 7 days after Amelia's loss- a place where not only GP but many other knowledgeable officials thought she might have ended up. And a place that may have been transmitting post loss signals that Lt. Lambrecht would have been informed.. Lt Lambrecht clearly differentiated "previous habitation" seen earlier that day at McKean with the "recent" habitation signs at Niku. He zoomed and circled but "took it for granted" that noone was there. (Tighar's argues he missed her and the plane) It sounds like everyone just took his report of 16 July for face value and never pursued a better explanation. Questions: 1. Was Lambrecht ever reinterviewed sometime later re his definition,location and description of "signs"? (Sort of ala Bevington) Any record thereof. 2. Since Lambrecht is deceased has anyone ever pursued his relatiaves for any "oral history", dairy, memoirs, writings, etc., re his observation on Niku that fateful day of 9 July 1937. It may be that his possible "oversight" haunted him down the line. "Signs of recent habitation" and "bivouacked" must be the most ambiguous words in the English language; E.B. White would roll over in his grave. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric We talk about Lambrecht's "report" but it wasn't a report. It was an article written for the weekly newsletter of the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics and only other naval aviators probably ever saw it. The official report of the aerial search was written by the Colorado's captain, Wilhelm Friedel, who said that no signs of habitation were seen on Gardner (directly contradicting the guy who was actually there). Goerner interviewed Lambrecht sometime in the late '60s, early '70s and said, in a letter to me, that when questioned about what he had seen on Gardner he said only that he had seen "markers of some kind." Second-hand anecdote, but it's all that we have. I spoke with Lambrecht's daughter at a U.S. Naval Institute seminar on the Earhart disappearance several years ago. She had nothing to add to the story. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:14:52 EST From: Warren Lambing Subject: Re: W40K If Betty's heard AE and W40K on July 5, and Dana heard AE on July 4, in Rock Springs Wyoming, and Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii here it's with in 15 minute on the same day, is there a GC between Rock Springs Wyoming Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii and Niku? I don't if it means anything, but it might be of interest to see if there is a pattern. Also Dana is hearing at 1500Z and Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii at 1515z, does that put Niku in the dark at that time? Regards. Warren Lambing *************************************************************************** From Ric Betty doesn't enter into this picture. Betty's event occurred between 21:30 and 21:45 GMT on an unknown day. Dana's event occurred around 15:00 GMT on July 4. The PAA Mokapu bearing was taken between 15:15 and 15:30 on July 4. The local time at Gardner during this period was 03:00 to 03:30. Yes, it was dark. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:15:36 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Navigation discussion The radiotelegram about Nauru's lights had a typo in it: 5600 feet, which was really 560 feet height. The Sailing Directions and topographic maps of Nauru bear out the correct 560 foot height. This incident should remind all of us that you can't always believe what you read, even if it is an original source. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:18:05 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Fred, aren't we overdue? Ric asked: >>Is that 27.9 at 2300Z a typo? I assume that these numbers are for observations taken at the surface.<< I don't believe that is a typo, as that is getting close to noon. The point of all this is that the LOP changes very little in the first few hours of dawn, then changes rapidly to near zero at local noon, where it changes slowly once again. Yes, these are for sea level. 1000 foot elevation changes the time of these fixes by about 8 minutes, IIRC. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:43:30 EST From: Bill Conover Subject: DQ Book Review Data Quality has placed it's review of the Long's book on-line at: http://www.dataquality.com/999bkrv1.htm I find it rather impolite of James Hurysz to have not credited TIGAR in his rather short list of reference citations, given the volume of postings generated by both he and Ms Whitney under the DQ moniker. Especially since his summary of "data quality", or lack thereof, in the book refers to a number of items about which DQ posted questions, and received from this forum, quality information as answers. It's also amusing to me that DQ has seen fit to misrepresent the review as having been done in Sept. 1999. Hardly a quality fact. Guess that might just define a lot of things. LTM, Bill Conover #2377 *************************************************************************** From Ric Hurysz' review is little more than a boring recitation of the basic information presented in Long's book - and he can't even get that right. Factual errors abound, and in the end he (rightly) criticizes the Long's for poor "data quality". It's fine with me that he doesn't acknowledge TIGHAR's contribution to his research. He apparently wasn't listening anyway. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:44:49 EST From: Vern Klein Subject: Re: Antenna and propagation >From Bob Brandenburg >The fuselage of the Electra was the ground for the dorsal vee antenna and, >being aluminum, was close to a perfect conductor. So the antenna had a virtually >ideal ground whether airborne or on the ground. And it was a pretty funny shaped ground plane, wasn't it? The fuselage was pretty much under the part of the antenna near the apex of the "V" and very close. Further toward the tail, the fuselage is below and to the side of either leg of the "V" and still quite close but gradually getting more distant. Who knows where the maximum current was in that strange shaped antenna for the fundamental frequency let alone possible harmonic frequencies? Do we have any idea what the radiation pattern of such an antenna arrangement might be other than it would be pretty high angle radiation? That sort of "V" configuratione was used a lot on airplanes. The radiation pattern must have been measured at some time. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:49:30 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Cold on Niku? > From Bill Moffet >In July "cold weather" doesn't make much > sense on an Equatorial island--nor even 25 miles north of Utica, but a "bad > cold" might. If Bill is referring to a radio call suggesting that Earhart/Noonan may have been experiencing "cold weather" in July at Gardner I'd like to suggest that they may have been. In my part of the tropics the temperature is around 80 degrees summer and winter. What happens is that in the middle of the year (the nearest we get to winter) the sun shines most days, but is not as hot as later in the year. Around Christmas, the sun is extremely hot, but cloud cover gives us a bit of shade. This is the time when we get major tropical storms. On the odd days with no clouds, we know it (gets to over 100deg). In July at night the temp does actually drop. One or two degrees is very noticeable, and if the temperature dropped to 75 or worse, 70deg after a few days around 80+ and near water, believe me they'd be cold. Even a breeze and some cloud in the daytime can feel quite cold at 75deg if it comes in suddenly. It is 86deg in here at the moment. If I run my airconditioner for a couple of hours it will drop to 82, and it would feel chilly after the heat of the day. Th' WOMBAT. *************************************************************************** From Ric AE and FN did not live in the tropics and 70 degrees is not cold. I've been chilly on Niku but only in a drenching rain with lots of wind. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:52:55 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Re: Fred, aren't we overdue? 1745Z 66.9* 1800Z 67.0* 1830Z 66.8* 1900Z 66.2* 1930Z 65.2* 2000Z 63.7* 2300Z 27.9* Randy's time/azimuth data are correct. By 2300Z the sun's azimuth is shifting rapidly toward the north. Computed data such as these are from a geocentric perspective. Sights have corrections applied to them (refraction and parallax) to correct to geocentric for comparison using the altitude-intercept method (to an accuracy sufficient for navigation). TOM MM ************************************************************************* From Ric That rapid shift around local noon is really impressive. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:56:34 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Celestial Choir (re: Doug Brutlag's project) Hmmm, this is a very interesting idea, but from another viewpoint I can't help but think that we should wait for the complete 8th Edition before attempting much. We don't exactly know what we'll see in the 8th Ed, but this might all be covered satisfactorily - in addition, the Choir acting alone will not have other info such as fuel management, weather data, radio propagation, or other supporting data which may have bearing on the overall nav problem. Once the 8th Edition is out, the Choir could tier off of much of that information with further analyses (if deemed worthwhile). We've got the Essential Conditions to check . Actually, although I'm pretty neutral in the Niku vs crashed at sea vs landed on some other island/reef debate, I'm certain that TIGHAR can put together a good navigational case for Niku. As fun as it is, the navigation does not seem to be the critical sticking point when looking at various alternatives. Doug, any of this make sense? Ric, any projected publication date for the complete edition? I realize that this is probably an unfair question considering the amount of volunteer labor involved, but I'll ask anyway. TOM MM *************************************************************************** From Ric I can't predict the completion date for the whole thing, but the navigation section (written by Randy Jacobson) will be the next segment mounted, probably within a week aor so. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 11:38:21 EST From: Steve Gardetto Subject: All Ashore FollowUp First, I'd like to apologize for inadvertently creating an eyesore on the Forum. I'd composed the original posting on this subject over a few days using MS Word, then did a copy-and-paste to an e-mail. When I opened the next EARHARTFORUM digest, I was horrified to see all the inserted codes (, =92, =93, etc.), which make the posts extremely difficult to read (and *I* was complaining about MEGO!). Thanks for your explanatory comments about the expeditions. It was your response to someone else's inquiry months ago that first interested me on this topic: namely, that of how you allocate the fixed resources of an expedition in deciding what to do and what not to do. Both you and Dr. Tom King alluded to the poor weather on the '97 expedition. I checked out the Website details of that visit ("Hell & High Water") but didn't see mention of the 4 team members staying overnight. How did that come about and was it in fact impossible to retrieve these team members from the island? In postings long ago, the habits of the native wildlife were discussed, specifically, their ability to carry off pieces of carrion, bones, etc. When Dr. King and the others were spending those unplanned nights ashore (are they thus qualified as "castaways"? - if so, time for a new T-shirt slogan!), did they have any problems with nocturnal visits from the creepy-crawlies? I also have a few more questions about expedition basics: When the team arrives ashore on a typical morning, and the workgroups head off in different directions, do the groups keep in contact via some sort of radio, or is there only a pre-arranged regrouping time? I'm guessing that to minimize the ship-to-shore transport of supplies, lunch is the only meal typically enjoyed on terra firma. Is the practice to meet somewhere on the island for a team feast, or does each group just break at it's own convenience? When the team arrives ashore on a typical morning, and the workgroups head off in different directions, do the groups keep in con tact via some sort of radio, or is there only a pre-arranged regrouping time? How many deployable boats does the Naia carry? If just one, I can imagine that it's care and well-being is high on everyone's nightly prayers. If there's more than one, are they of different sizes? Are they Zodiac-type inflatables or are they wood/fiberglass hard-shelled boats? I recollect seeing an old Jacques Cousteau clip (who knows, maybe it was Sea Hunt or Flipper) in which a boat - not the Calypso - towed divers underwater, who used a kind of flipperboard apparatus to steer themselves, in an attempt to search a large, relatively shallow area. Given the desire to search underwater areas at Niku, does this approach sound feasible, or would it simply provide an entertaining twist for the local sharks in obtaining their daily meal? Niku III wasn't able to use the ultralight because of bad weather. Was it even taken off the ship, and if so, how difficult was that? Do you intend to try to use it again on Niku IIII? LTM (who promises shorter posts in the future) Steve G., Tighar # something or other *************************************************************************** From Ric >>How did 4 team members staying overnight come about and was it in fact impossible to retrieve these team members from the island?<< Nai'a's crew had catered a special dinner on the beach (the only time that happened) and had brought ashore all kinds of food that had been prepared aboard ship. There were lots of left overs. As we were getting ready to return to the ship we received word that the weather forecast for the next day was for significantly higher seas, and since it was already a near-death experience just getting on and off the island, I was resigned to losing a day or so riding out the worst of the weather aboard ship. It was at that point that 4 team members approached me with the prospect of staying on the island, using the left-overs from the dinner as provisions. The up-side was that some work would get done despite the bad weather. The down-side was that if I left people ashore we were committing ourselves to staying on station at Niku no matter how bad the weather got - and nobody knew how bad it would get. We were, in effect, gambling that it would improve enough to let us get them off. I decided to take the gamble but I didn't like it. In the end, it worked out okay. The next day was bad but the day after was better and we were able to resume normal operations. The "castaways" got some work done and very much enjoyed their two-night stay on the island, but ironically the people at risk were the ones on the ship. If I had it to do over again - with similar weather considerations - I would turn down the request. The little bit of additional work that got done was not worth the risk to the expedition. Letting people stay ashore in good, stable weather however is a different situation. >> did they have any problems with nocturnal visits from the creepy-crawlies?<< I'm sure Tom King will be happy to answer that. >>When the team arrives ashore on a typical morning, and the workgroups head off in different directions, do the groups keep in contact via some sort of radio, or is there only a pre-arranged regrouping time?<< We do keep in contact by radio but we don't generally regroup for lunch unless we're all working close by anyway. If one group will be on a different part of the island they take their lunch with them. >>When the team arrives ashore on a typical morning, and the workgroups head off in different directions, do the groups keep in contact via some sort of radio, or is there only a pre-arranged regrouping time?<< No cooking, and MRE stands for Meals Rejected by Etheopians. Nai'a makes up sandwiches and fruit and bags of chips and such. It's generally brought ashore in a big cooler with some bottles of frozen water to help keep everything cool until lunchtime. The thawed but still-cold water is also welcome. >>How many deployable boats does the Naia carry? << Usually she carries two "Naiads" which have rigid alumiun hulls and inflatable sides - best of both worlds. There's a big one and a little one ( I forget the exact lengths). We base the big one in the lagoon and use the little one to ferry to and from shore. >> who used a kind of flipperboard apparatus to steer themselves,<< Manta-boards. We used them to search part of the lagoon in '97. Plan to use them again, towed behind a launch. The ultra-light aircraft was never even completely asembled in '97. It became obvious that the weather was far too bad to use it. Our research has now progressed to the point that we have no real need for aerial observation or searching. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 11:41:44 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Mokapu antenna location For Bob Brandenburg: When I examined a 1937 map of Oahu, the Makapuu antenna was located at a southwest facing mountain range, and was at its highest point. I don't believe there was a mountain range intervening with Gardner. Are you sure about its location? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 12:19:07 EST From: Ric Subject: Re W40K - new development We have an interesting development in the saga of Betty's notebook. You'll recall that among the first notations Betty made was: "W40K Howland port or WOJ Howland port" WOJ proved to be nothing, but W40K sounded like it might be a HAM call sign. Janet Whitney dug out the information that, in 1937, W40K was the call sign assigned to Francis G. Carroll of Fort Worth, Florida. Betty has never heard of Francis G. Carroll. Why was his call sign in her notebook as something that had been said by Amelia Earhart, if indeed that is what she had said? The fact that Mr. Carroll, like Betty, lived in Florida seemed like an odd coincidence so Bob Brandenburg did some checking. He found that a Great Circle from Gardner Island to St. Petersburg, if extended, also passes through Lake Worth (and nearby Palm Beach where, it turns out, Mr. Carroll actually lived in July 1937). In other words, if Betty could hear signals it is also likely that Mr. Carroll could (theoretically) hear signals, but Carroll - unlike Betty - could also transmit and (again theoretically) establish two way communication. If that had happened it could explain why Earhart had said his call sign. Harry Poole did some checking and found that, wouldn't you know it?, both Francis and his wife Leona died just this year and had been living in the Ft. Pierce area. TIGHAR member Terry Linley (who also happens to be my cousin) lives in Ft. Pierce and volunteered to try to find the only surviving child, Nancy. Her search was quickly successful and she discovered that Nancy Carroll, a retired Marine Corps major, lives just down the road. Francis Carroll had worked for a local radio staion and was an avid HAM. Nancy couldn't recall her father ever mentioning Amelia Earhart but Nancy's housemate "Smitty" (also a retired Marine) recalled that some years ago (between 1987 and 1992) while watching a television documentary about Amelia Earhart, Nancy's father had remarked " "I talked to her; I wondered what happened". Nancy didn't hear the comment and Smitty dismissed it as an old man's ramblings. Nancy feels quite sure that she has her father's HAM logs somewhere among his personal belongings and is now eager to help us verify whether or not her father may have, in fact, "worked" Amelia Earhart after she disappeared. Of course, a thousand questions come to mind about what may have happened and why nothing was ever done about it - but let's take it one step at a time. Terry is working with Nancy to locate the logs. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 12:27:56 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Manta boards > From Ric > Manta-boards. We used them to search part of the lagoon in '97. > Plan to use them again, towed behind a launch. I wouldn't recommend it, not while breathing compressed air anyway. The danger of arterial gas-embolism is too great and you are too far from a recompression chamber. It's deadly, especially in less than one atmosphere of pressure. If it is necessary to tow a diver on SCUBA, the speed of the towing vessel should be less than the swimming speed of the diver. At such a slow speed it will be much more difficult for the diver to inadvertently bounce up. But I still don't recommend towing a diver on SCUBA. On snorkel there would be no danger of embolism. Frank Westlake ************************************************************************** From Ric We're not talking great depth (about 20 feet) or great speed here. The visibility on the lagoon bottom is sucko and you don't want to get towed into a coral head. We're using the boards primarily to save the divers the exertion of self propulsion. But I'm not a diver. Any comments from experienced divers? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:26:03 EST From: Bruce Yoho Subject: Bud If I had a first name like Mr. Carrol had, I more than likely would have a nick name "Bud," should we ask the daughter this question. I do think your use of the ultra lite can be of service low level picture mapping of the island, for any further study, after returning home. Seems the forum grasps at any photo of Gardner they can get their hands on. LTM(who loves pictures) Bruce ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:29:24 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: Manta boards > From Ric > We're not talking great depth (about 20 feet) or great speed here. That's where the greatest danger is, the danger increases near the surface. > But I'm not a diver. Any comments from experienced divers? Sure. I agree with Frank. My experience is that of a Navy EOD diver. We would tow swimmers on snorkel, but never divers on SCUBA. If I remember correctly, most arterial gas embolism (AGE) cases experience death within the first ten minutes after surfacing. Many are dead before reaching the surface. In EOD, because of the type of work we do (did, I'm retired), we have the greatest number of AGE victims. And a particular unit I was in was at the top of the list. We had a chamber that was only 10 minutes away so we were fortunate to not have had any deaths though. An experienced diver can be safely towed, but the danger still exists that the diver will become preoccupied and inadvertently ascend without exhaling. It only takes one or two feet in some cases. AGE needs to be treated IMMEDIATELY by recompression to 60 feet. It used to be 165 feet and some chambers may still use those old procedures. How long will it take you to get a diver to a chamber? Rhetorical, I'm sure it is much too long. If you were doing this off the coast of a civilized area I would not be as concerned. Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric Hmmm. I'm glad this came up (no pun intended). ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:30:11 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location For Randy Jacobson: If the PAA site was at Makapuu Point, that would indeed be at the southeasternmost tip of Oahu, at the end of the Koolau range. If you are sure the antenna was there, and not at Mokapu, then I stand corrected. I was relying on the official message traffic, in which the PAA site is consistently cited as being at Mokapu, which is up the east coast of Oahu a ways, at Kaneohe Bay. I assumed that the antenna was also at Mokapu. It's not clear why the PAA people would be at Mokapu, as they said in their reports, if the antenna was at Makapuu. Is it possible that the PAA people didn't know the difference between the two sites and their spellings? Bob ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:38:43 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: All Ashore FollowUp Ric, I don't want to be difficult, but -- hmm, how to put this diplomatically? Your version of our overnighter on Niku bears virtually no resemblance to my recollections. As far as I can recall, there was never any prospect that Nai'a would have to flee wildly before the storm, therefore putting those aboard at risk if she had to wait around for us; the only prospect was of a day or two lost work. We actually got quite a bit of work done in the time we were ashore, and just incidentally saved the GPS base station -- worth what, $40K or so? -- from being washed away, along with a fair amount of equipment on the lagoon shore. We observed conditions on the island that couldn't otherwise have been observed, and that improves our perspectives on the dynamics of the place. At the time you agreed to our remaining ashore, I was very pleased at what I thought was a dawn of collegiality -- a recognition that we are your adult, somewhat competent, colleagues, not 12-year old cub scouts who have to be kept in order lest we hurt ourselves. I'm sorry to see that I was in error. As for creepy-crawlies, there were juvenile coconut crabs that rattled about all night in the pile of aluminum cans left over from the party. Since they were in their hermit phase, we wondered if any of them would trade their shells for Fiji Beer cans, but alas, none did. Once it got dark I went back and sat quietly in the midst of the village to see what it felt like -- and it certainly did FEEL creepy-crawly, but I can't say that anything tangible assaulted me. Nevertheless I beat a hasty retreat back to the fire. *************************************************************************** From Ric As is - no doubt - abundantly clear to all, you and I have very different approaches to the conduct of expeditions. That will have to be resolved before we get on another boat together but this is not the place to do it. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 14:38:40 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Re: Book Review of Longs' Earhart Book I did the research for the book review. It's a book review, not a book. In the end, we decided there wasn't enough information about Earhart and Noonan's disappearance to draw any conclusions. We qualified much of the Longs' information with the statement: "according to the Longs." We used "The Sound of Wings" as a primary source of information, since this book seems to be a respected source. I did a lot of "extra" research for my own knowledge. For example, I read much of Margaret Mead's published anthropological reaseach from her years in the South Pacific...and also some later criticism of her research. Our conclusion was that we couldn't draw any conclusions. What's wrong with that? What did TIGHAR want us to say? "Yabba dabba doo...Let's find Earhart on Gardner in 2002?" If so, we're sorry to disappoint you. Janet Whitney *************************************************************************** From Ric "We used 'The Sound of Wings' as a primary source of information,.." Well, when you use a secondary source as a primary source you can expect trouble. I have no problem with the conclusions you didn't draw. What disappointed me were things like: "...the Longs follow Amelia Earhart from her purchase of a Lockheed Electra for "research purposes" late in 1935, ..." The Longs don't say Earhart purchased the airplane in 1935 and, in fact, the order wasn't placed until March 20, 1936. "A third ship, the Coast Guard cutter Swan, was stationed between Howland and Oahu" The Longs know that USS Swan was a Navy seaplane tender. "Coast Guard time on the Itasca at Howland Island was 1 hour behind Honolulu time and 12 1/2 hours behind GMT. " The first two were picky. This one is not. Zone time for the Itasca was Greenwich minus 11.5 hours. The Longs know that too. "Amphibious scout planes from the battleship U.S.S. Colorado searched the Phoenix Islands between July 7th and July 12th, ...". The Longs know that an amphibious aircraft is one that can land on either land or water and that the Colorado's aircraft were float planes that could only alight on water. They also accurately describe the search of the Phoenix Group as commencing on July 9th. Shall I go on? And by the way, if your statement that: "A sister-ship of the Lockheed Model 10-E Electra that Amelia Earhart flew in 1936 and 1937 is now hangered at the Western Aerospace Museum. This restored Lockheed 10E was flown around-the-world=A0by Linda Finch in 1997 in a 60th anniversary commemoration." is true it must be a very recent addition to the museum. As of about two weeks ago the only Lockheed 10 at the museum was the 10A that has been there for years. Last I heard, Finch's bogus 10E was still in Texas. And not to be picky, but the thing in your closet is a hanger. Airplanes are kept in hangars. At least Jim kept your name off the review. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 14:47:41 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Star(?) Witness/ Lt.Lambrecht What would "markers of some kind" be in July 1937? Survey stuff??? Ron Bright ************************************************************************** From Ric From what survey? The New Zealand survey was the first one done and that wasn't until December 1938. HMS Leith was there for about 20 minutes on February 15, 1937 - just long enough for a boat crew to put up a flagpole with a Union Jack and a placard proclaiming the island to be the property of His Majesty. They did the same thing at other islands in the Phoenix and when Lambrecht sees flagpoles that what he calls them. One thing we can say with certainty is that whatever Lambrecht saw did not cause him to think it might be a sign that AE and Fred were there. The other thing we know for sure is that there was a castaway on the island in the years before 1940. "Signs of recent habitation?" You betcha. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 14:53:40 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Antenna and propagation Vern & Bob B. - I'm on the road, and hence away from my files, but Paul Rafford did a complete analysis of the radiation patterns on both 3105 and 6210, and even built a scale model of the Electra to verify his findings. This was done some years ago, and I believe Paul's report is in the NASM library. It included detailed information on skip zones and harmonic behavior as well. Paul recently surfaced on the Net, but I don't have his e-mail address at hand. (He does live in Florida). Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 14:54:31 EST From: Dave Givens Subject: Re: Manta boards I'm a Dive Rescue/Recovery Unit Leader for a County Sheriff's Department here in California and we do not tow divers as a rule. We do have some instances of towing Divers in the California Aqueduct but again it is only sometimes. It is simply to easy to get hurt doing this as some other postings have described better than I. And you are going to be a long ways from help. -Dave Givens ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 14:55:37 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Book Review of Longs' Earhart Book OK, Janet, I'll bite. What does Margaret Mead's research have to do with Earhart? LTM (who wishes she were as formidible as MM) TKing ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 15:03:03 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: W4OK Here is a question to put on the Forum. There was some discussion of this matter about a year ago... the probability that AE had organized some kind of backup communications plan, which included hams. I think someone, maybe Cam Warren or Bill Moffett, came up with a list of call signs. I thought I had saved this, but cannot find it. Would be interesting if W4OK showed up on this. If someone has copies of "Radio" magazine from 1936-37 (I do not have access to this) they should search within these for any articles on AE and hams. "QST" magazine from the era does not appear to have any such references, but I do have access to these files and will check again. I can also check "Radio News" from the period (but this is not principally a ham radio publication). Mike ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 19:59:44 EST From: Bill Conover Subject: Yellow signal kite? In re-reading the N.Y Times article of July 3, 1937, there is a quote attributed to GP that goes: "There was a two-man rubber lifeboat aboard the plane, together with lifebelts, flares, a Very pistol and a large yellow signal kit which could be flown above the plane or the liferaft." I wonder if the "large yellow signal kit" was meant to be kit(e) ? Obviously he would not know if it was still on the plane after Lae, but it does seem that for the 2nd attempt there may very well have been some type of item that could be flown as a distress signal placed aboard. We already know that she had the box kite with her for the first attempt. There just might be something to this kite business. LTM, Bill Conover #2377 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:04:50 EST From: Dean A. Subject: Re W40K - new development Just thinking out loud; if Earhart couldn't receive Howland/Itaska because of receiver/antenna problems and she was in the air fairly close to them, then how could she receive a ham from Fla.. ************************************************************************** From Ric I don,t know, but that's not the first question we must ask. The first question is, "Is there compelling evidence that she did receive signals?" and that's where the analysis of the entire body of alleged post-loss transmissions may be instructive. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:09:30 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Antenna and propagation For Vern: > >>From Bob Brandenburg > >The fuselage of the Electra was the ground for the dorsal vee antenna and, > >being aluminum, was close to a perfect conductor. So the antenna had a virtually > >ideal ground whether airborne or on the ground. > > And it was a pretty funny shaped ground plane, wasn't it? The fuselage was > pretty much under the part of the antenna near the apex of the "V" and very > close. Further toward the tail, the fuselage is below and to the side of > either leg of the "V" and still quite close but gradually getting more > distant. It surely was a funny shaped ground plane, and you have accurately described the situation. But it's not the shape of the ground plane that matters, only the distance from the antenna to the ground plane. > Who knows where the maximum current was in that strange shaped antenna for > the fundamental frequency let alone possible harmonic frequencies? The location of maximum current on the antenna, in and of itself, is not useful for evaluating the antenna. The key thing to know is the shape of the antenna radiation pattern, which includes its gain at any given azimuth and elevation angle. The antenna model I use (see the 8th Edition) does a nice job of computing the 3-dimensional gain pattern for any antenna. The model does, however, assume a flat ground plane. To accommodate the model, I measured (using TIGHAR scale drawings) the 3-D distance from the antenna wire to the closest point on the fuselage at 2-foot intervals along the longitudinal axis of the airplane and computed the root-mean-square value over all distances, which I then used as antenna virtual height over a plane ground in the model. To check on the reasonableness of the resultant gain pattern calculations, I ran a second set of model computations in which I defined the antenna as a set of connected discrete wire segments where the endpoint heights of each segment were the corresponding 3-D distances from the fuselage surface. The resultant gain pattern computed by the model was not significantly different from that obtained in the first set of runs. Since the model gave me essentially the same results in both cases, I opted to stay with the simpler antenna characterization. > Do we > have any idea what the radiation pattern of such an antenna arrangement > might be other than it would be pretty high angle radiation? Yes. We have a complete 3-dimensional radiation pattern for the antenna at any frequency of interest - - I'm running the harmonic cases now - - at 1-degree resolution in azimuth and elevation. Actually, the radiation angle of interest in any given case is the launch angle for the ray bundle that propagates along the ionospheric path to the receiver. For example, in the case of the Betty intercept, the launch angle for a signal from Niku to St. Petersburg is about one degree. But at harmonic frequencies above 10 MHz, the launch angle is in the range of 10 to 15 degrees, depending on frequency. The propagation model (see the 8th Edition) uses the appropriate transmitter antenna gain for each case. > That sort of > "V" configuratione was used a lot on airplanes. The radiation pattern must > have been measured at some time. It has indeed. There was some in-flight work done on a very similar vee configuration in 1938, to measure radiation resistance (see the 8th edition), which I have used to derive the radiation resistance of Earhart's vee, so I could get to the radiation efficiency of the antenna. I'm not aware of any measurements of the radiation pattern. Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:12:38 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: W4OK Questions Addendum Another possibility for mention of AE and hams might possibly be found in yet another ham publication of the era, "R/9" Magazine... but "R/9" and "Radio" Magazines merged some time in 1936. I don't have access to any files of "R/9" either... can someone help? If somebody else wants to take a look at "QST" Magazine from the period, I rather suspect that any mention of AE would be found in a little column called "Strays." These things are not indexed and will have to be read one at a time. Another long shot possibility for finding mention in "QST" is within the "How's DX?" columns, which will have to be read as well, no index. Yet another possible mention might be seen among the editorials "It Seems to Us..." I have looked through most of the QSTs from 1935-1938 but could easily have missed something; they deserve another look and several pairs of eyes are better than one. I do not recall seeing any feature article on AE in QST. My feeling is that "Radio" and/or "R/9" will yield something. Just gotta find the files. LTM (who'd rather read the mags than get nauseated looking at microfilm) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:16:18 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: W40K > From Warren Lambing > If Betty's heard AE and W40K on July 5, and Dana heard AE on July 4, in > Rock Springs Wyoming, and Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii here it's with in 15 > minute on the same day, is there a GC between Rock Springs Wyoming Pan Am > Mokapu in Hawaii and Niku? I don't if it means anything, but it might be of > interest to see if there is a pattern. Also Dana is hearing at 1500Z and > Pan Am Mokapu in Hawaii at 1515z, does that put Niku in the dark at that > time? Unfortunately, there's no common great circle through those three places. The GC bearing from Niku to Rock Springs is 044.7 degrees, and from Niku to Mokapu it's 031.6 degrees. Best, Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:21:11 EST From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: Star(?) Witness/ Lt.Lambrecht > One thing we can say with certainty is that whatever Lambrecht saw did not > cause him to think it might be a sign that AE and Fred were there. The other > thing we know for sure is that there was a castaway on the island in the > years before 1940. "Signs of recent habitation?" You betcha. Did I miss something, or was there another person recognized to have been trapped on Gardner? Are you talking about AE and FN? *************************************************************************** From Ric We know there was a castaway. We don't know for sure (yet) who it was. There was no other person known to have been marooned on Gardner. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:22:48 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Markers Do we know if or how the supply cache left after the Norwich City rescue was marked? LTM, Dave Bush #2200 ************************************************************************* From Ric No. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:26:31 EST From: David Evans Katz Subject: ham network? It is my recollection (from one of the myriad Earhart biographies) that she had arranged a network of ham operators to assist with communications with the first attempt at the World Flight, but that she had abandoned this network for the second attempt. I don't know if I am remembering this correctly, but I will check some of these (secondary) sources. Perhaps Ric knows the correct information off the top of his head. David Evans Katz *************************************************************************** From Ric Nope. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:28:22 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Re: DQ Book Review of Longs' Book I did the research for the book review. I don't have a background in aviation. In fact, it's been several years since I've flown on a commercial airline. I don't remember ever posting anything significant about airframe and powerplant matters on the TIGHAR listserver. I did comment about the illusion that the Electra's pitot tubes *appear* to not be parallel to the Electra's fuselage when the plane is taking off. I will correct what's "wrong" in the book review. It was written by someone who is VERY busy right now. The ISO 9000-2000 international quality standards are about to be released. The review was based on my research, but I didn't write it. FYI, papers (and some book reviews) are published in Data Quality as they come back from the reviewers. That may take over a year. Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:31:57 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location Oh my God! I never realized there were two different places, and two different spellings. This really confuses things, doesn't it? I've seen both referenced in the documentation, and never really thought anything of it. The antenna site I found was at the southeasternmost tip of Oahu. If Makapu is a city in and around Kaneohe Bay, at nearer to sea level, then I suspect my position of the antenna is more correct, but I won't bet mine or Ric's life on it at this point. *************************************************************************** From Ric The Pan Am station was at MOKAPU (according to their memos). (There's a great line from Apocalypse Now that seems appropriate here but it's too politically incorrect to quote.) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 08:45:59 EST From: Pete Subject: A million thanks (edited by Ric) Thanks to all of you! Before the Forum: my average 2.6, currently 3.8! Mike E has discussed propagation with me, K Spalding has been happy to talk tides with me, Cam and Janet have given me things to think about, and I know I've missed other credits but I thank you all! BTW, the Niku LTM was to be restricted to 80 pounds, with the pallet (normally 20 pounds, and the packing to survive the trip to Samoa) is where the 200 pound limit came in. It survives only as a design exercise for a CADD student in my Sociology class. ... I saw the actual air photo of Niku on the TIGHAR site, them saw for myself what factors would be up against to emplace the thing outside the reef, and how far tow it into the channel to get it into the lagoon. Time is not on the side of Niku IIII everyone, I'll foster crazy ideas and see what I can do, but Ric has the last call on all this. Remember, a camel is a horse made by a committee. Ric, If it is alright with you, I already know I must give yet another Presentation to the whole class (two down, two to go), but in Quarter 8 I'm alone when I do it, may I have my presentation be on how to mount an expedition in modern times? To those lucky enough to be there, despite what Niku will hand to you, keep in mind that you are personally on-site searching for Amelia Earhardt and Fred Noonan and can solve a very old mystery, and say right after to the world, and decades later to your grandchildren, "I helped find her". Once again, I thank you ALL! Thank you for your patience, your indulgence, your understanding, and your commitment. I myself can do little for Niku IIII, but let me get a chance if Niku 5 is needed! Pete (who really is working on not getting so wordy) ***************************************************************************** From Ric Pete, you don't need permission to do a presentation on how to mount an expedition in modern times. I will, however, give you a hint. It hasn't changed since ancient times. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 08:49:06 EST From: Rick Seapin Subject: Flares or meteors? Regarding the New York Times newspaper article, dated July 6, 1937, the Itasca reported seeing flares. Later they reported they saw meteors. I have seen hundreds of meteors, and they hit the earth's atmosphere at least at 17,000 mph, how can you mistake the two, who made the final call? ************************************************************************* From Ric That's not clear from the message traffic but the senior officer aboard Itasca was her captain, Warner Thompson. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 08:50:25 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: HAMS Dick Strippel ,commenting on the fate of Howland Island after July 37, said that "ironically,amateur radio operators,seeking to transmit to thier colleagues from ...remote places,set up " DX-peditions" to Howland, and the first was in 1938,less than a year after her disappearance. For the Ham researchers with access to 1937 articles,etc, it would seem that the results of their experiments with Ham equipment and receivers from Howland to the United States should be documented somewhere. It would be a newsy event and may have yielded some radio results pertinent to the Earhart/ Short-wave connection in the US including Florida. Maybe Ham Researcher Janet Whitney could help out. LTM, Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:01:25 EST From: Mike Holt Subject: Re W40K - new development > From Dean A. 2056 > > Just thinking out loud; > if Earhart couldn't receive Howland/Itaska because of receiver/antenna > problems and she was in the air fairly close to them, then how could she > receive a ham from Fla. It seems to me that whether or not AE heard the ham isn't too important right now. The first thing to know is whether the W40K tried to transmit to her. I've been on one side of several radio conversations in which the other guy couldn't hear me, but I kept trying to talk, hoping that if I stayed on topic that he'd hear me. What's on that GC line through Niku and St Pete, the other way around the world? Michael Holt *************************************************************************** From Ric Using the highly sophisticated string and globe method - Australia. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:05:09 EST From: Mike Holt Subject: The unknown castaway Ric wrote: > We know there was a castaway. We don't know for sure (yet) who it was. > There was no other person known to have been marooned on Gardner. Well, rats. What is known about this mystery person? ************************************************************************** From Ric Only what can be deduced from the bones and artifacts that were found and which have been the subject of rather lengthy discussions on this forum. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:09:00 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: DQ Book Review of Longs' Book To Janet Whitney: We all make mistakes, even myself. Ric does too, although we don't like to admit that. Being busy is not an excuse for errors, especially from an organization that prides itself on "data quality". It is very hard to write anything about Earhart running more than a few paragraphs without any errors...been there, done that. The best thing to do is to correct them as soon as possible. Ric is an excellent source for finding mistakes in any written, verbal, or video material. I sure wouldn't want to go to the movies with him...he'd point out all the flaws and spoil the fun for all of us. *************************************************************************** From Ric In my own defense, I come by it honestly. Try watching "12 O'Clock High" with my Dad sometime. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:12:03 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location The station (where people worked) may have been at Makapu, but the antenna at Makapuu...just a possibility...there were only a couple large antennas in 1937 in that part of Hawaii. Here's the location I have for the antenna: 21* 18' 43"N, 157* 39' 14"W, based upon a May 6, 1963 map of the Makapuu Pt. Radio Beacon (antenna farm at that time). Makapu is further north and slightly to the east, roughly 20-25 miles on a peninsula at Keneoe Bay, near sea level, and is now the site) of a Marine Corps base (also the site of Coconut Island, where the exterior shots of Gilligan's Island was shot...had to bring in other shipwrecks...). I just have to believe (undocumented) that PAA would have put their antenna on the highest available ground, not down in a valley surrounded by tall mountains, shielding them from Pearl Harbor! Trivia question: where was/is Wailupe, site of the US Navy radio station? Hint: don't look at today's maps... ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:17:10 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location Mokapu is a point of land, as in Mokapu Point. It's adjacent to the Marine Corps Air Station at Kaneohe Bay, about 12 miles up the coast from Makapuu Point, as the crow flies. Makapuu Point has a lighthouse. Mokapu Point does not. If you found the PAA Adcock antenna at Makapuu Point, then that must be the place. Seems strange, though, that PAA would consistently use the wrong place name. Bob ************************************************************************** From Ric "Found" the Adcock antenna as in found it on a map? Where did the Clippers land? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:17:58 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Antenna and propagation Re Paul Rafford - I'm in touch with Mr. Rafford currently and will be happy to provide contact info. Just contact me. blue skies, -jerry ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:18:53 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Wristwatch/Chronometer I am travelling away from my files, but this is what I remember about second setting watches. Weems was involved in the development of the second setting watch while he was still in the Navy, before he retired and set up the Weems School of Navigation. The first ones were used by the Navy. Weems says the first civilian to receive one was Lindbergh. I think Longines may have been the only company making them at the time. I believe FN had one. I think there is a picture of one in one of Weems' navigation books. blue skies, -jerry ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:22:52 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location For Randy Jacobson: Right after I sent my previous reply, I did a web search for Mokapu and Pan Am. Turns out there was a Pan Am radio station at Mokapu. NOAA has a summary of cyclones that have hit Hawaii over the years - - see http://www.nws.noaa.gov/pr/hnl/cphc/summaries/1900-52.html . One of the storms cited was the "Mokapu Cyclone" which hit August 18-19, 1938. The NOAA report consists chiefly of extracts from the August 19, 1938 issue of the Honolulu Star Bulletin. The pertinent extract states: "Between midnight and 3 a.m. a gale tore over the island, reaching proportions of 'whole gale' with a velocity of 60-3/4 miles per hour at the Pan American radio station at Mokapu". I'm wondering: if the PAA radio station was at Mokapu, then why wasn't the Adcock antenna there as well? There are several instances of PAA messages in which they mention closing down DF search for Earhart so they can work an arriving or departing PAA flight. I also recall reading (perhaps at the Pan Am web site) that their homing procedure required the ground radio operator to tell the aircraft operator to hold his key down long enough for the ground operator to get a DF bearing, which he then would pass to the aircraft. This suggests that the radio station and the DF station were collocated. Could there have been two PAA stations? Bob ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:24:21 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: ham network? For David Evans Katz - Yes, there was a ham network dedicated to tracking AE on the first R-T-W attempt. Walter McMenamy (NOT really a ham) was involved, along with several other real hams - mostly from Southern California. Sorry, I don't have the source material on hand - but probably next week. Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:29:31 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Bradford Washburn I just ran across an AP story, from earlier this year, about the Explorer's Club in NYC, which contains a brief interview with a 90 year old cartographer and mountaineer from Boston named Bradford Washburn. After mentioning that Washburn was a friend of Richard Byrd, it mentions that he was interviewed for the job of navigator on Amelia Earhart's round-the-world flight, but lost interest because he thought the radios were inadequate. Washburn is currently honorary director of the Boston Museum of Science, according to the article. I wonder if he'd be interested in talking to TIGHAR about his memory of AE's radio config (if he hasn't already). ************************************************************************** From Ric I talked to Brad way back in the early days of the project. His abortive involvement with the World Flight dated from very early in the planning before the airplane was even delivered. He met with GP and AE in Rye, NY and was, frankly, appalled at AE's cavalier attitude toward navigation and quickly decided that he wanted nothing to do with the whole affair. He never saw the radio set up in the airplane. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:33:24 EST From: Vern Subject: Re W40K >Nancy feels quite sure that she has her father's HAM logs somewhere among his >personal belongings and is now eager to help us verify whether or not her >father may have, in fact, "worked" Amelia Earhart after she disappeared. If he "worked" Amelia, he had to be transmitting in a Ham band -- to be legal, that is. Amelia would have had to tune her receiver to his frequency in one of the Ham bands. Amelia was stuck with 3105 and 6210 (and the possible harmonics) for transmitting, and none of these are in Ham bands. It sounds unlikely. Did Mr. Carroll "work" another Ham who was pretending to be Earhart? If so, the whole thing must have taken place on a Ham band frequency. If Carroll's log books show an Earhart contact in one of the Ham bands... then we know it was NOT Amelia Earhart. *************************************************************************** From Ric No argument, but let's remember that all we have at this point is a remembered comment "I talked to her; I always wondered what happened". Heck, he could have met her at a dinner. We need paper. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:55:03 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: Re: W40K Ric mentioned that: >...'Nancy's father had remarked " "I talked to her; I wondered what >happened".... Is it within the realm of reasonable 'speculation' that the gentleman _could_ have ...'talked to her'... by radio, sometime after she took off from Florida for San Juan, Puerto Rico, at the _start_ of the 'second' flight & that AE _might_ have 'jotted' down his call sign (at that time) in her notes, which 'notes' she _may_ have referred to (calls for even greater 'speculation') after landing at Gardner (or wherever), in 'desperation', after her radio broadcasting efforts to raise anyone else failed? In her 'notes' about the takeoff from Miami, AE did mention the fact that she was ...'tuned in to Miami's radio station WQAM, which was broadcasting summaries of weather conditions prepared by PanAm meterologists'..., though no mention of any other any other radio 'contacts', except ...'on a Spanish station'... where she heard her 'name' mentoned. ('Last Flight'...The Start'...) In the same chapter of that book, AE also comments..." What with such expert navigational help & the assistance of the Sperry gyropilot, I began to feel that my long-range flying was becoming pretty sissy. The ease & casualness were further accentuated by the marvelous help given by radio."..., interesting that the same deceptive 'ease & casualness' accentuated by that same radio, would ultimately prove to be a significant factor in the flight's undoing! Don Neumann *************************************************************************** From Ric As has been pointed out, there are some real frequency incompatability issues that argue against AE having any two way conversation with any HAM. The ONLY instance of true two-way communication I can recall is the July 1st test flight at Lae. I have to wonder how the "HAM network" allegedly set up to follow the first WF attempt was supposed to work and what it was intended to accomplish. Among the "books" aboard the aircraft at the time of the Luke Filed inventory were: - "Radio Aids, Navigation" - "List of Broadcasting stations" (Berne?) - "List of Coast Sations and Ship Stations" (almost certainly the Berne list) - "List of Aeronautical stations and aircraft stations" (Berne again?) - "List of Stations performing special services" (Was there such a Berne list?) No mention of a list of amateur stations. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 10:00:36 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: Flares or meteors? > From Rick Seapin > Regarding the New York Times newspaper article, dated July 6, 1937, > the Itasca reported seeing flares. Later they reported they saw > meteors. I have seen hundreds of meteors, and they hit the earth's > atmosphere at least at 17,000 mph, how can you mistake the two... Lookouts on ships are the newest and least experienced sailors that can be found. A young lookout not having seen a flare before, and perhaps not having seen as many shooting stars as you, could easily confuse the two. > ...who made the final call? Given the circumstances I can't imagine the skipper ignoring such a report. Frank Westlake ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 10:01:47 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Re: Ham Radio in 1937 I am not a ham. I don't have any interest in becoming a ham. I understand that almost all the back issues of the ham magazine QST are available from the ARRL (www.arrl.org). This would seem to be a way of discerning who was talking to whom in 1937. Since propagation conditions today are similar to 1937, perhaps some hams could design some experiments using AM transmissions. I believe that almost all ham transceivers sold during the past 10 years can transmit AM with 40 watts or so of power. Perhaps a ham in Wyoming could try contacting a ham in St. Petersburg on various frequencies at various power levels. Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 10:04:26 EST From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re W40K - new development > From Mike Holt > ... I've been on one side of several radio conversations in which the other > guy couldn't hear me, but I kept trying to talk, hoping that if I > stayed on topic that he'd hear me. Is it possible that Betty heard two overlapping transmissions, one with a man's voice and one with a woman's? Marty #2359 *************************************************************************** From Ric That's a possibilty I'm hoping we can get a better handle on when I interview her on Sunday. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 10:15:10 EST From: Ric Subject: No forum Sunday & Monday Pat and I are leaving Saturday noontime to spend Sunday with Betty and Monday at Purdue University; home Monday night. I'll do the postings Saturday morning but there will be no forum on Sunday (as usual) or on Monday 11/6. Business as usual on Tuesday. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 11:12:06 EST From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: W40K - new development Ric wrote: > Using the highly sophisticated string and globe method - Australia. Are there any reports from Australia? I'll have a look at the site for the unknown castaway discussion. Michael Holt *************************************************************************** From Ric I'm aware of no reports of alleged post-loss messages heard in Australia. I'm not sure you're getting the point about the "unknown castaway". The bones Gallagher found were those of a castaway. He thought at first that he had found Earhart but the examinations of the bones by Isaac and Hoodless apparently convinced him and his superiors that it wasn't Earhart. Hence, an "unknown castaway" on Gardner Island. I think his first impression was correct. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 18:38:18 EST From: Van Hunn Subject: Re: Book Review of Longs' Earhart Book In your comments to Janet Whitney, you said the last you heard, Linda Finch's bogus 10E is in Texas and not in the Western Aerospace Museum. I just called the Denton airport and confirmed that, yes, Linda's aircraft is still there as part of the local museum. For the benefit of forum menbers that may not know, Denton is a city about 30 miles north of Dallas/Fort Worth. The airport is small and uncontrolled (no control tower operators): however, it is probably the only airport in the world that has TWO Lockheed 10's. Besides Linda's, there is a 10A (s/n 1079) that belongs to a medical doctor. LTM, Van ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 18:46:05 EST From: Vern Subject: Re: W4OK -- Rethinking Rethinking the possibility of Mr. Carroll having "worked" Amelia. If it's true that Amelia contemplated working with Hams on the first attempt, that possibility may still have been in her mind when she was trying to contact anyone at all from somewhere in the Pacific. The Ham bands may have been about the only place she heard any activity. And the broadcast band? Of course, this all requires that her receiver was working again. If Carroll had been aware of any plan to work with Hams on the first attempt, he might have been looking for such communication possibility during the second attempt. In that case, no doubt he would have been aware the Amelia's transmitting frequencies. Harmonics? Was that business of hearing better on some harmonic such common knowledge at that time that he would have listened for Amelia on the possible harmonics of her two known transmitting frequencies? I'm suggesting the possibility that Carroll was hearing Amelia on some harmonic of her transmitter and she was hearing him in one of the Ham bands -- a frequency near her harmonic which was in the frequency region of the "skip" opening between Florida and the central Pacific at that time. Sometime it does work both ways. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 18:48:21 EST From: Jim Tierney Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location In answer to question on where the Pan AM Clippers landed in Hawaii---- They landed in the harbor at Pearl Harbor... The Clipper base/mooring was in Pearl City in the Middle Loch -North and west of the NB at Ford Island.... Pearl City is west of Honolulu/Waikiki on the north shore of the harbor... Jim Tierney ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 18:52:52 EST From: Rick Seapin Subject: Manta boards Years ago, when I was into S.C.U.B.A., I had the opportunity to use a torpedo. No, not the kind that is shot from a sub, but an electrically driven unit which pulls a diver along the ocean floor. They were cumbersome and heavy. However, I'm sure that nowadays, the propulsions devices must be state of the art and light weight. ************************************************************************* From Ric Would the same concerns apply to a "torpedo"? *************************************************************************** From Van Hunn In response to some warnings posted by forum members concerning Manta Boards, I offer the following: The Manta Boards we used in the 1997 lagoon search were part of the dive equipment belonging to the live-aboard SCUBA ship Nai'a. These Manta Boards are made of plywood about three feet wide by two feet. There are holes to attach a towing rope, and two slots for the diver's hands. The diver is in complete control of assent and descent by either tilting the board up or down. While being towed, if the diver turns loose of the board, he/she will stop while the board continues on and soon floats to the surface. These boards were excellent equipment because: A. The diver did not have to do any navigation over the grid area to be searched. The boat driver did the navigating by visual sighting of bouys outlining the grid. B. Propulsion was from the the boat instead of the diver's legs, making it easy to search much more of the grid without exhausting the diver. Divers were towed at about swimming speed in order to see more and to make it easier to avoid coral heads. I am happy to no diver was injured; however, the Manta boards had a few scars from bumping coral heads! Is towing a SCUBA diver as dangerous from an embolism standpoint as some have said? Yes and No. For a noncertified or nonexperienced diver, Yes. For an experienced diver, No. I cannot imagine an experienced diver ever holding his/her breath while ascending--whether being towed or ascending for any reason. Additionally, divers all over the world use other devices for towing. One of the most popular is the battery operated diving Scooter--these could actually be more hazardous than boat-towing because the can take a diver much deeper. Also, we have all seen TV diving shows where a diver is being towed by manta rays, whale sharks, or other creatures. Again these are not for the inexperienced divers. Since this subject surfaced (!) a few days ago on the forum, I called two friends each of which owns a dive shop. Both said essentially the same thing--experienced divers only. By the way, our local fire department does employ towing of their experienced SCUBA divers when doing bottom searches. What about the experience of the TIGHAR Team divers? Both the owner/operator and the chief instructor of Nai'a are Master certified, instructor certified and have years of experience. Another diver, Tommy Love, is a medical doctor with specialties is decompression sickness and a lot of SCUBA experience. I am Master certified, Open water instructor certified(emeritus), and NACD Cave Diver certified. I hope the above helps forum members with the Manta board question. LTM, Van ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 19:25:01 EST From: Ric Subject: Birch Matthews It is with great sadness and regret that I must tell you all that our friend Birch Matthews died suddenly and unexpectedly this past weekend. I don't yet know what happened. I have just now received an email from his family informing me of his passing. Birch was a fine gentleman who was always eager to share with us the Lockheed 10 data he had collected over the years and his impressive knowledge of aircraft and engine performance. We will miss him. I've told the family that I will forward to them whatever messages of sympathy the Forum may wish to express. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 19:26:03 EST From: Tom Van Hare Subject: Re: Cold on Niku? > AE and FN did not live in the tropics and 70 degrees is not cold. I've been > chilly on Niku but only in a drenching rain with lots of wind. I suppose it may also get cold if you are all wet from wading in the surf and the wind is really blowing, but this would be a temporary thing -- until you dry out -- and not something you would see fit to comment about on the radio. Thomas Van Hare ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 19:27:26 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location > From Randy Jacobson > > Here's the location I have for the antenna: > > 21* 18' 43"N, 157* 39' 14"W, based upon a May 6, 1963 map of the Makapuu Pt. I plotted your coordinates on a 1:24,000 topographic map, and sure enough that position is at Makapuu Point at an elevation of 520 feet above sea level. And it does have an unobstructed "view" on the bearing 214 degrees true. That location is shown on the map -- dated 1983 - - as a U.S. Coast Guard Reservation. So, what was PAA doing up at Mokapu Point? > Trivia question: where was/is Wailupe, site of the US Navy radio station? > > Hint: don't look at today's maps... This is appears to be too obvious, so I smell a trap. But I'll play anyway. Wailupe is at 21* 16' 47" N 157* 45' 35" W, on the shore of Maunalua Bay between Koko head and Diamond Head. The Navy radio station was there until just after the attack on Pearl Harbor, when the station was relocated to Wahiawa. Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 19:28:19 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location For Bob Brandenburg >I'm wondering: if the PAA radio station was at Mokapu, then why wasn't the >Adcock antenna there as well? I have no hard info but my interpretation is as follows: There could be two sites: a receiving station or DF station, plus a transmitter site... or maybe "communications" site, separate from the DF site. That would make good technical sense. If the transmitters were close by the DF, the noise and "splatter" generated by a transmitter could cause interference to the DF. 73 Mike E. _ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 19:31:25 EST From: Dave Givens Subject: Re: Manta Boards >Would the same concerns apply to a "torpedo"? No -these are diver controlled. We just need to avoid the uncontrolled ascent aspect of being towed without the diver having the controls. -Dave Givens *************************************************************************** From Ric I think Van Hunn answered the concerns about Manta Boards. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 19:40:28 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: AE and the Hams AE would have contacted ham operators by transmitting on either 3105 or 6210 KHz, and listening for replies on frequencies in a ham band. This is called "crossband operation" and is still practiced in some circumstances today... notably, during the Armed Forces Day period when hams "work" military stations like WAR, AIR or NSS (HQ of Army, Air Force and Navy) among others... WAR, for instance, might transmit on 4020 KHz (outside the 75-meter band) and advise that they are listening for replies on, say, 3850 KHz which is inside the ham band. As for how Carroll may have worked her (notice I said MAY), a number of problems arise. The WE 20B receiver AE had only tuned HF freqs from 1.5-10 MHz. This includes the 160- 80- and 40- meter ham bands. Phone operation was allowed in the 160- and 80- (75 meters is the actual term used for the voice portion of the band, 3800-4000 KHz) bands, but in 1937 there was NO phone operation in the 40-meter band (7000-7300 KHz)... it was CW only. Therefore the only bands AE could have heard hams TALKING on, were 160 and 80/75. I have doubts that 80 meters could make it to Niku... and 160? 99.9999999% sure, NO WAY. AE's receiver could not tune the 20 and 10 meter bands (14-14.4 MHz, 28-30 MHz) which are the best possibilities for a stateside signal getting to her.... UNLESS: She was not using the WE-20B, but.... ANOTHER TYPE RECEIVER. One that had a wider tuning range. I know Ric and I disagree on this point, but this event, IF it happened (and we do not know it did, yet) MIGHT be evidence that she had a "second" or a "different" receiver... as Joe Gurr claimed, remember? But let us PLEASE not get a tangent going yet, on this...!!! As for harmonics working "both ways" (!?) I doubt it... But, if she could hear hams on 20 meters, she and Carroll MIGHT conceivably have encountered a scenario where some hams (including Carroll) operating on, say, 20 meters, were discussing hearing her, on some harmonic (but neither AE nor Carroll may have realized the AE transmission was on a harmonic)... and AE heard this conversation. AE, realizing she could be heard, may have in fact been able to establish a roundabout crossband contact... but here's another factor that throws doubt on this. It would likely mean that one of the hams involved had to be listening on both the ham freq AND AE's harmonic at the same time. Remember, NONE of AE's possible harmonics fell into any ham band. There were no "scanners" in 1937, so that means the ham would possibly need 2 receivers to accomplish this.... Not many hams in the 30s had more than one receiver... could not afford it... but it is POSSIBLE. I don't know how PROBABLE, though. LTM (who overhears EVERYTHING) and 73 Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric All true, I'm sure. The odds seem astronomical - and yet - what are the odds that a series of letters and numbers written in Betty's notebook just happen to match a ham call sign that just happened to belong to someone who lived on the same Great Circle between Gardner and St. Pete and that this person just happened to have made the comment that he "talked to her"? This is very strange. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:11:01 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: W4OK -- Rethinking Have I overlooked something? If AE was in 2-way communications with a HAM, then her receiver/antenna system must have been working. If not, then her only method of receiving would be through the loop DF, which is not a very good antenna. It sounds to me like this pursuit of 2-way communications is in potential stark contrast to the main hypothesis of what happened to her receiving antenna. ************************************************************************ From Ric Yes, it seems quite clear that the aircraft's only operational receiving antenna was the loop, and yes, a loop is not as efficient as a long wire, and yes, we'll go anywhere that the evidence leads whether or not it agrees with our hypothesis. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:12:52 EST From: Warren Lambing Subject: Re: AE and the Hams I know Betty's notebook put it in daylight hours, but I am hoping that Mr. Carroll Ham log will either confirm,, or for some unknown reason show a more reasonable time. Please consider Rock Springs Wyoming, put Niku at 3:30 AM in the Dark a reasonble time for AE to transmitt on her frequencies and a less likely time for the Harmonic's to be heard, however in Rock Springs it is thought that they were heard arround the 15000 KHZ area on the dial, not impossible, but considering Niku was in the dark, it of course brings up lots of questions. Lets see if Mr. Carrolls log (if it still exists) sheds new light or brings up more questions. :-). Regards. Warren Lambing PS Thanks to Bob Brandenburg for answering my previous question. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:22:06 EST From: Subject: Re: Fred's letters >>From Don Jordan, > AMEN brother. . . .amen!!!! But I'm still trying!!!!! Will make another >attempt next week. I'm all fired up again. . . . >Don J. I suspect that lady is not going to risk dying and leaving those letters to fall into.." who knows what hands." I think she'll destroy them, if she hasn't already done so. It seems to me the only hope, if there is any, is with that "favorite nephew." Has he seen the whole collection? I wonder if he can get a look at them to see if he thinks there is anything of interest to us? It's a poor substitute for looking for ourselves but it is probably the best we can hope for. That lady is NOT going to let us get our hands on those letters. *************************************************************************** From Ric Don and I have been coordinating our efforts on this. I'm going to write (yet another) letter to the "favorite nephew." He has seen all the letters but, of course, someone who is not steeped in the lore like we are can not recognize what's important and what's not. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:27:01 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: ITU titles > Among the "books" aboard the aircraft at the time of the Luke Field inventory > were: > - "Radio Aids, Navigation" Is this a USN publication? I have a similar sounding publication, "Radio Aids to Navigation", but later a few years. Pretty thick book, Bible sized. > - "List of Broadcasting stations" (Berne?) I don't have this one, unfortunately, but that title sounds likely. > - "List of Coast Sations and Ship Stations" (almost certainly the Berne list) Yes, verified, that is the ITU title. >List of Aeronautical stations and aircraft stations" (Berne again?) Yes, verified, that is the Berne title. > - "List of Stations performing special services" (Was there such a Berne > list?) This book includes the kind of information you would find in the Navy book, above, plus stations for aviation, not found in the Navy book. Looking thru it, but not having the Navy book to hand, i am wondering if the Navy book was redundant. (plus a couple lbs. of extra weight.....) -Hue Miller *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Hue. I have no idea whether "Radio Aids, Navigation" was a Navy book. Redundancy, however, seems counter to the weight concerns. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:30:48 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Ham Radio in 1937 > From Janet Whitney > I understand that almost all the back issues of the ham magazine QST are > available from the ARRL (www.arrl.org). This would seem to be a way of > discerning who was talking to whom in 1937. ARRL has the magazines collected on CD now. Years 1930-1939 are $40. However, i don't think this magazine would shed much light on the topic. Stateside stretches like WY-FL would not rate merit in any "DX" column. Seems like a contact with, or even reception from, the crashlanded 10E, if discussed in QST, would have come up already in these discussions. This is not an obscure magazine. > Since propagation conditions today are similar to 1937, perhaps some hams > could design some experiments using AM transmissions. I believe that almost > all ham transceivers sold during the past 10 years can transmit AM with 40 > watts or so of power. Perhaps a ham in Wyoming could try contacting a ham in > St. Petersburg on various frequencies at various power levels. I feel that this is re-inventing the wheel. This is not a long distance stretch and would certainly be reasonable with even pretty low power levels. There are military radio enthusiasts running AM with realistic power levels ( i.e. of similar era and purpose equipment ) on the weekends, generally in the area 3870-3890 kc/s. and such contacts are par for the course with levels of 50 watts or even less. ( Schedules appear in "Electric Radio" magazine ). Old Forest Service AM equipment operating in the 3-mc/s band has been reported (in the old days) as working out a "couple hundred miles" with typical operating power of 2 watts. ( It's the sending station's antenna that's all important.) -Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:33:15 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: HAMS > From Ron Bright > > For the Ham researchers with access to 1937 articles,etc, it would seem that > the results of their experiments with Ham equipment and receivers from > Howland to the United States should be documented somewhere. It would be a > newsy event and may have yielded some radio results pertinent to the Earhart/ > Short-wave connection in the US including Florida. I say there's nothing magic or extraordinary about the Howland, Niku vicinity. I say as much could be gained by looking at records of long distance radio from the mid-1930s from all Pacific origins, incl. NZ, Samoa, Philippines, even Australia, to the United States, to get an idea of what was really do-able, what was achievable in the realm of reality. The fact of cross Pacific to USA communications on 7 MHz up is established, even with low power down to 15 watts or so. The question now is whether the antenna on the downed plane, and possibly the transmitter's power output in the higher registers, would allow such range also. Since the goal of such "ham radio expeditions" (which by the way are limited in time and resources similarly to the Niku expeditions) is to rack up as many contacts from as far away as possible, they wouldn't be expected to be spending much time experimenting with sub-optimal antenna setups, rather with ones with proven best performance while being still field-constructable. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:40:44 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: WOJ I am wondering if the non-assigned call letters "WOJ" in the Betty notebook are really a corruption of "W4OK". I do not think this so far fetched. Under conditions of weak signal voice reception, the listener has to put up with: Atmosperic noise, crashes of static (mostly on the lower frequencies), fading in and out of audibility, impulse noise from automobiles (ignition system radiation, on higher bands), drift of vacuum tube receiver requiring tuning readjustment, and sometimes stray noises from other transmitters or even other listener's receivers swishing thru the frequency range. The listener, probably not trained in any shorthand system, has to try to keep up with content at speech rate and try to note it down, with varying degrees of these challenges. It's inevitable drop-outs occur. The listener tries to keep up and sometimes the drop-outs get filled in by imagination - best guess - sometimes colored by wishful thinking. ( SW listening club newsletters talked about weak signals being not infrequently mistakenly reported as some desirable rare station.) Another factor, of course, is variations in the distant speaker's voice inflections. I can see it possible, if one iteratiion of the "W4OK" call letters was splattered by noise, or any of the above factors, it could come out as best-guess "WOJ". This applies to any of the names or numbers recorded in these reported receptions. Those travel-information stations on 530, 1610 etc: try - or recall - hearing one at the margins of strength, like when entering or leaving its coverage zone. Usually, i've found, the voice quality is fairly crappy, being recorded (seemingly) off a telephone into a low-fi recording system. This, i think, replicates fairly honestly the voice "quality" you could expect to hear from an aircraft transmitter with the typical carbon microphone + path noise. See how many iterations of the call letters at the end of the recording, it takes you, before you are pretty sure you have it right. Hue Miller *************************************************************************** From Ric The entry in the notebook makes it pretty clear that Betty wasn't sure whether the person said W4OK or WOJ. Since W4OK is a real call sign and WOJ is not, it would seem to be more likely that her first guess was correct. Of couse, it's also possible that the person was saying. " I could sure go for a PBJ" (i.e. peanut butter and jelly sandwich), but I doubt it. The part I have a hard time making any sense out of is "Howland port". ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:45:19 EST From: Bill Moffet Subject: The Ham List In response to Mike Everette's posting of 2 Nov re. the group of radio "hams" organized for AE's first RTW flight, the reply was made via Randy Jacobson but the data came from "Bob, 0902 (and K6EMN)" in a posting of 12 Jul 1999. W4OK is not on the list. The following were named: W6NNR (later W6DI) Guy Dennis W6BGH Karl Pierson (of the Patterson Radio Co.) W6ALJ Frank Christman W6CUU Charles Cheatham W6EGH Wally Gee W6CQK John Pitts Following were listed by call signs. I've added their countries: VS1AB Straits Settlements (Singapore) HS1PJ Siam VU2AX British India ST2WF Egypt (or Sudan?) PY7AA Brazil PZ1AB Surinam (Netherlands Guiana) VP3BG British Guiana [Guyana] HP1A Republic of Panama XE1G Mexico Bob ended this list with, "After the take off crash in Hawaii, this group of amateurs were 'pushed aside'. plans changed, and their talents never utilized", and he added, "This information is from an article in CQ magazine by Bill Orr, W6SAI". The Itasca logs yielded the following in addition: K6GNW Yau Fai Lum, Howland I. K6ODC Ah Kin Leong, Howland I. K6GAS Harry Lau (Howland I. & aboard Itasca) K6INF Baker I. K6PAF Honolulu K6KPF Honolulu LTM, Bill Moffet #2156 *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks for digging that up Bill. Very useful. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 11:16:07 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Re: WOJ I was able to confirm that that this callsign was never assigned to a broadcast station by the FCC and its predecessors. I could not confirm whether or not this callsign was ever assigned to a shortwave utility station, coastal station, ship, etc. Janet Whitney *************************************************************************** From Ric It does not appear in the 1937 Berne List of coastal stations or ship stations. What's a short wave utility station? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 11:18:24 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Old radio magazines If someone with access to a University library with good periodical files can do it, please check to see if they have either "Radio" or "R/9" magazines from 1935-38. (Janet, does your school have these? If so, would you, please, be willing to search these years for references to ham radio and AE?) I suspect any references may be found in the period from 1936 to August or September 37, but it may go back further. The references may appear as small paragraphs in the middle of various "news" columns, rather than feature articles. I would also check Letters to the Editor. This will take some time but it may yield some very useful information. We need to know not merely who was involved in the ham radio connection (actually we have one list of names and call signs), but how the network was supposed to operate -- frequencies, times, etc if available. It would also be nice to know why the ham network seems to have been set aside after the first world flight attempt. As I said before, I do not have access to these files. Some schools with engineering libraries may have them in bound volumes, or they could be on microfilm. I have never heard of these magazines being archived on CD-ROM but if they are, please pass me a source for them! I have searched QST from 1935, 36 and 37 but did not see anything. It is worth a second look though. In case someone should wonder, CQ Magazine began publication in 1945. 73 Magazine came along in 1960 or 61. LTM (who knows Midnight Oil can be more expensive than gasoline) and 73 Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric I'll check Purdue on Monday for any further explanation of the ham network. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 13:36:16 EST From: Ric Subject: Interview with Betty This is a preliminary report on our extensive interview with Betty, a shorter interview with her friend and neighbor John H., and our visit to Purdue University. We shot nearly four hours of videotape and several rolls of still photos. It will take us a while to get the interviews transcribed, but here's a summary of the most significant new information. We now have the original correspondence between Betty's neighbor/friend John H. and Fred Goerner concerning the notebook. John first wrote Goerner's publisher, Doubleday and Company, in July 1970 asking for Goerner's address. On August 2, 1970 Doubleday replied that they couldn't release Goerner's address but if John would write a letter they would forward it to Goerner. On August 10, 1970 John wrote a letter outlining the basics of Betty's story. On August 21, 1970 Goerner wrote directly to John saying that he "would be pleased to hear more information with respect to the message your friend received in 1937." John wrote back and included a transcript of the notebook entries and some explanatory notations. On September 4, 1970 Goerner wrote back, "Well. to tell you the truth Mr. (H), I can't make anything out of the message Mrs. (Betty) received. the figures do not seem at all relevant, especially the supposed position reports. it almost sounds as if several broadcasts were being received on the same frequency at the same time." He then asked some questions about trying to establish the date and whether Betty had received any correspondence from the Coast Guard. He closed with, "I do appreciate your having taken the time to communicate with me about the matter. I'm just afraid though that without a great deal more clarification of the messages it would be impossible to make any determination from them." John wrote back answering his questions as best he could and suggesting that Goerner might be able to find something in Coast Guard records. Goerner sent John a postcard on September 21, 1970 saying that he would "pursue the matter with the Records Division of the U.S. Coast Guard ... I'll let you know if anything turns up." Whether or not Goerner actually did any follow up is unknown but John never heard anything further from him. The real significance of the signed and dated correspondence with Goerner is that it confirms that Betty's notebook and the story associated with it existed long before TIGHAR's investigations. ************************ John H also had notes dating from that time documenting Betty's mother's recollections. Betty's father died in 1969 but her mother, Olive, lived until the 1980s. According to John's notes, Olive's recollection of the incident is slightly different from Betty's. Betty did not remember her mother being present while AE was being heard but Olive said that she did hear some of the tranmsissions and that she recognized Amelia's voice, having heard her on a commerical radio broadcast fairly recently. It was also Olive's recollection that the neighbor, "Russ", WAS able to hear some of the transmissions but not as well as Betty. Olive remembered that her husband had been skeptical at first but after listening for a while had become quite excited and had taken the notebook with him when he went to inform the Coast Guard. Betty is adamant that she retained the notebook while her father went to the Coast Guard station. ******************************* It was Olive's recollection that the radio was a "Sears Roebuck Silvertone cabinet set." ******************************* John H. also looked up W40K and identified him as Francis G. Carroll who, in 1970, was living in Smyrna, Georgia. He intended to contact Carroll but never got around to it. He also identified W40J as Weldon W. Shows of 1470 Bates court N.E., Atlanta, Georgia; but agian, did not contact him. ********************************* Betty, by the way, had never heard of Francis Carroll, never knew anyone in Palm Beach, and seems to have ony the vaguest notion of what a HAM is. ******************************************************* Betty's recollections during the interview were generally consistent with what she had previously told us. She was, however, able to clarify some important points and confirm that she just does not remember others: - Betty simply does not recall what day it was or whether she already knew that Earhart was missing when she heard the transmissions. She's quite sure she knew that Earhart was on a round-the-world flight. In 1970, according to John's notes, she talked to her mother and they decided that it might have been the first day that Earhart was reported missing. Betty does not recall that conversation. - The question of what frequency the transmissions were on is unanswered and apparently unanswerable. Betty has no idea. It was her practice to sit at the base of the radio with her back to it and reach back up over her head to turn the dial when she was cruising for interesting short wave stations, so she has no visual memory of where the needle was on the dial. Betty did not have any particular short wave station of program she usually listened to and can not recall hearing musical signatures for any station. - We talked at some length about the nature of the signals she heard. They would fade in and fade out with sometimes only a few words in the middle of a sentence being intelligible and these she would write down. Sometimes the content of the message was so interesting, dramatic or upsetting that she just listened. Sometimes there would be silence for several minutes and Betty would fear that there would be no more, but then Amelia would come back on very abruptly and clearly. - The curious notation on page 44 just below and to the right of "31.05" is "11:H". Betty can not explain what it is supposed to mean. The "11:" is consistent with the way she makes notations of time and the "H" is the way she makes a capital H. - The explanatory note in the upper left corner of page 49 was written in quite recently - probably within the past ten years - when Betty wanted to make sure her grandchildren would understand what the notes were about. The explanatory note in brackets on page 51 ("This was man with her talking sometime too.") was written at the same time. - The notation in brackets on page 53, however, was made at the same time as the rest of the notes and is, in fact, the last entry she made before turning the page. She had the definite impression that Earhart had found something written down that she thought might be important information to transmit and was repeating it several times. Betty tried to get it on the line beginning with the word "South" but wasn't sure she had it right. The entry in brackets was the last time and the one she was surest about, but she was still not entirely certain, hence the question mark. What she wrote down is quite obviously intended to be a lat/long position and seems most logically interpreted as "South 3 degrees 09 minutes, 165 degrees East". Ballparking those coordinates on a map of the Pacific I noted that they seemed to fall very close to the direct route from Lae to Howland somewhere just south of Nauru. The next day - Monday - when we were at Purdue, I checked a National Geographic map of the Pacific that is in the Earhaert collection and has pencil marks on it which seem to be in Noonan's hand. (This is the same map we discussed earlier on the forum which has Enderbury Island in the Phoenix Group underlined). There is a pencil line drawn from Lae to Howland and, upon closer examination, the midpoint of the route is carefully marked with a plus sign. That, of course, is where the USS Ontario was supposed to be positioned. After I got home last night I checked the Ontario's log for July 2, 1937. During that day she steamed from 3 degrees 9 minutes south latitude, 165 degrees 11 minutes east longitude at 8 a.m. local time; to 2 degrees 59 minutes south latitude, 156 degrees 20 minutes east longitude at 8 p.m. local. In other words, Betty seems to have heard coordinates that represent a position very close to the midpoint on the Lae/Howland leg. This could be extremely significant. Although there was mention in the press that the Ontario would be stationed at the midpoint of the flight, I don't recall that the actual lat/long of that midpoint was ever published (we need to check that). It makes no sense that AE would be tranmsitting a position that could not possibly be her present position unless, as Betty says, Noonan was incapacitated and she really had no idea where she was and was just reading numbers off a map in desperation. We need to calculate the coordinates for the actual midpoint of the Lae/Howland flight. Does 3 degrees 09 minutes south, 165 degrees east represent the precomputed midpoint? Or is it Fred's notation of where he really was at the midpoint of the flight? This could give us a clue as to how to interpret the other strings of numbers Betty wrote down. **************************************************************** The rest of our research at Purdue was less productive. We looked at pair of Amelia's trousers that are in the collection hoping that they had buttons we could compare to ours, but the pants had only zippers on each hip. Incidentally, the leg measured 39.25 inches long and the inseam was 29 inches - which seems a bit short for someone who was supposed to be 5 feet 8 inches tall. The paperwork referring to the first world flight did not include any reference to a HAM network. Much of the Earhart collection is unavailable at the moment because it's being scanned and put on line. The project is far from complete and is still in a Beta test phase. ************************************************************************* Bottom line: Betty's notebook is getting harder and harder to explain unless it is an imperfect record of genuine post-loss communication from Amelia Earhart. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:10:04 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: ELECTRAs Van is right about Denton being the only airfield in the world having two Electra's. Of the four airworthy Lockheed Electra's remaining, the others two are in Canada and in Australia. For those interested : -one is c/n 1115, registered NX726T and owned by Lynda Finch of San Antonio, Texas. This aircraft was originally built as a Lockheed 10A with 450 hp Pratt & Whitney Wasp Junior engines but has been brought to Lockheed 10E standard by its present owner, being re-engined with the more powerful 660 hp Pratt & Whitneys Wasp. -A second is a Lockheed 10A, c/n 1091, registered N241M and belonging to Dr. James R. Almond of Denton, Texas. -A third is c/n 1116, registered CF-TCC and owned by Air Canada. It was first purchased in 1937 by Trans Canada Airlines and handed over the the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1939. After the war it had various owners until it was bought back by Air Canada (successor to Trans Canada Airlines). It is operated in summertime only for PR purposes, mainly to help raise funds for the airline's "Dreams Take Flight" charity. During winters it hibernates in Winnipeg, where it is on exhibit in the Western Canada Aviation Museum. The interesting thing about CF-TCC is that yours truly flew in it last summer. -The fourth is registered VH-UZO (c/n 1107) and belongs to Laurie Ogle, of Sydney, Australia. This aircraft was originally built as a Lockheed 10B for Ansett Airways of Australia with the 440 hp Wright Whirlwind engines. I'm not sure which engines it has now. -Mention should also be made of a fifth Electra although this one is a bit special. It is c/n 3501 (a special construction number rather than one falling within the 1001 to 1148 range given to other Electra's). Designated XC-35 it was an experimental aircraft with a pressurized cabin of circular section specially designed for high altitude research by the US War Department which ordered it in June 1936. The XC-35 has two turbo supercharged Pratt & Whitney XR-1340-43 radials of 550 hp and was operated by the US Army Air Corps to collect information on pressurized cabins and turbo supercharged engines. Trials began in August 1937. Helped by tailwinds the XC-35 averaged 350 m.p.h. (305 kts) at 20,000 ft while on a flight from Chicago to Washington. The Army Air Corps was awarded the Collier Trophy in 1937 for having sponsored the research program. After its conclusion the Army Air Corps set the XC-35 aside. It is now part of the collection of the National Air and Space Museum, Washington DC. *************************************************************************** From Ric There are at least a dozen Lockheed 10s in existence. Finch's, Almon's, and the Air Canada airplane have been extensivley rebuilt and are airworthy. I can't speak for the airplane in Australia. The only existing aircraft that was built as a 10E belongs to Grace McGuire of Rumson, New Jersey. She has been rebuilding the airplane to airworthy condition for many years and is (reportedly) nearing completion of the project. Finch's aircraft is c/n 1015, not 1115. The aircraft was not brought to it's present 10E standard by Finch but by its earlier owner,VARIG Airlines in Brazil. The engines are 550 h.p., not 660 h.p. LTm, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:11:01 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: ITU titles > Among the "books" aboard the aircraft at the time of the Luke Field > inventory were: > - "Radio Aids, Navigation" A correction to my note: "Radio Aids to Navigation" was not a USN publication, but it was a US Government publication. From something called "US Coast and Hydrographic Service", or something like that. When i find this book again i will forward the exact source, for the sake of accuracy of records. The copies i have are WW2, but the data inside is all pre-WW2, including from enemy states - there is just some kind of disclaimer page stating that services may be interrupted - a strange kind of seeming impartiality, or ignoring the war going on all around. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:31:28 EST From: Tom Ruprecht Subject: Forensic Imaging Project Could we please have an update on the Forensic Imaging Project of the old Niku reef photos? ************************************************************************ From Ric There hasn't been anything new on that project for some time. What we really need is a very high resolution scan of the original print of 1937 photo that Bevington took and whihc show the "dot" and the "dash." We already know that the apparent dot and dash in the 1939 New Zealand survey photo are not in the same place as the object(s) in the Bevington photo but whether they represent something else, nothing at all, or the same objects but in a different location - we just don't know. Getting a high res scan of the original Bevington photo is complicated by the fact that it is now in the Oxford University collection and they're not keen on turning loose of it. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:32:37 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: The Ham List > From bill Moffet > In response to Mike Everette's posting of 2 Nov re. the group of radio > "hams" organized for AE's first RTW flight.... Pure speculation dep't: with a network of volunteers like this....one thing AE or backers could/ should have done: sacrifice the 500 kc/s channel, and have installed a frequency just above the 7 mc/s ham band, and then ask the FCC for special limited-time permission for just these hams to operate there. Just for a backup / emergency channel. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:34:31 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: WOJ Nor did I find WOJ listed in my various Berne volumes 1935-1937, or the Dep't of Commerce list of all USA callsigns 1935. I was going to close the book on WOJ but i thought to take a look in one stray later volume, "List Alphabetique des Indicatifs d'Appel des Stations Terrestres, Mobiles, et Fixes" "Le Bureau de l' UIT Janvier 1947" and it says: WOJ Hialeah, Florida FX [ "Station performing a radio- communication service between fixed points (point-to-point)" ] Curiouser and curiouser. No other info! This is just a list of callsigns,worldwide. "Point to point" generally applies to stations forwarding press (news), long distance telephone (like to high seas or overseas), stations linking branches of some company, police or military stations linking with others in same category, etc. As a fitting example of the latter, Hialeah had a commercial SW station WAX, which appears in both my listings for 1935 and 1947. This station belonged to the Tropical Radio Telegraph Company and handled telegrams to ships and other lands points for pay. Someone have "Utility station" listings for the 1940s? I wonder if WOJ was another, competing, "public correspondence" station? Say, i'll put that question to a radio-oriented mail group, and report back...unless someone else jumps in with info. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:35:47 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: ham network? She may have abandoned it, but I bet any hams that had been involved would still be listening out regardless. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:37:23 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Ham Radio in 1937 > From Hue Miller >> Since propagation conditions today are similar to 1937, perhaps some hams >> could design some experiments using AM transmissions. > I feel that this is re-inventing the wheel. This is not a long distance > stretch This is second guessing Janet, but I wonder if her point had to do with establishing the viability of a hoax? If it wasn't her point, I still wonder.. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:38:34 EST From: Dick Pingrey Subject: Receiving Antenna Isn't quite conceivable that upon landing AE and Fred noticed the damaged receiving antenna and simply made a temporary antenna from a spare length of wire. The length of the receiving antenna, after all, is not critical. Dick Pingrey 908C ************************************************************************** From Ric Assuming there was spare wire available. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:40:31 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: airplane triple antenna This has to do with the use of 3 separate antennae on the 10E, in it's early configuration. One (I, at least) would have thought some use of relay switching would have simplified things by reducing the need for antennas down from 3 to 2 or even just 1, but for whatever reason, such was not the way it was done, at least in some cases. This describes an aircraft with 3 antennae - none are on the belly. the V - appearing antenna (actually 2 antennas) opens in the opposite direction to that on the 10E - i.e. the apex is toward the rear, not the front. from "The Key Wagger" of Washington Technical Institute, Seattle, March 1933, article "The Airport Station at Boeing Field" : "A strut near the back supports two antennae extending [one] to each wing: one for radiophone [ transmitter ], the other for ground station reception. A small wire from the top of the strut to the rudder and back to the bottom of the fin constitutes the antenna for the A and N receiver". (No belly antennas at all on this aircraft. "Transmitter is crystal controlled and the final [is a ] 50 watt power amplifier...." ) IF the 10E at one point was analogous in its configuration, it would go like this: belly ant #1 - communication receiver belly ant #2 - A&N (Radio-Range) LF receiver antenna dorsal, V-antenna - HF transmitter I don't know why the antennas couldn't be combined, but as we discussed some time back, there may be some advantage to not using more relays: less parts to fail, and also maybe more desireable for CW telegraph working. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:47:27 EST From: Subject: Search of the lagoon It just occurred to me, what is the sediment like in the lagoon? Does the sea feed the lagoon and when the lagoon is full does it drain back into the sea? 63 years of sediment, that will certainly cover a radial engine. Has everyone measured the depth of the lagoon at different times? Does it raise and fall during certain times of the year (longshore transport). The precious P&W engines may be under 30 feet of sand and silt. Underwater metal detectors anyone? *************************************************************************** From Ric Sediment buildup on the lagoon floor is very slow and we determined in 1997 that the lagoon depth today is not significantly different than it was when the Bushnell's team sounded it in 1939. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:50:36 EST From: Jonathan Einarsen Subject: A Vintage Ride I apologize in advance if this sentimental rambling is too far off topic, but it suits my mood and contains a long-standing curiosity. A number of years ago I crewed for a hot-air balloon at a rally in Hagerstown, MD. At that rally I met a man named Peter Brice who had flown to the rally in a vintage Lockheed Electra "similar to the one Amelia Earhart was lost in." He and I got along rather well and he offered to take me for a ride. I can remember being amazed how hard it was to see much of anything immediately in front of the plane with the tail on the ground and the steady beat of the engines (his engines had a synchronizer problem). It's unfortunate that I lacked the knowledge at the time to be more observant of the cockpit stylings and equipment. But I mostly remember feeling a direct connection to the past. A personal tie to Amelia Earhart and her story. I was about 22 then. I've often wondered since joining this forum what might have become of Mr. Brice and his Lockheed. If anyone out there knows him, thank him for the ride again for me. Sincerely, Jonathan Einarsen *************************************************************************** From Ric I haven't talked to Pete in years. His airplane is (was?) a Lockheed 12A Electra Junior. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:52:37 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: WOJ again Re the Betty reception, the question is now, when was WOJ first on the air. I am unable to determine this. My Berne lists do not include a general call letter book before the 1947 date. My 1935 Dep't of Commerce list of all US non-ham call signs does not list this station. So i am unable to resolve the date closer than between 1936 and 1947. I posted the question to a classic-radio email group but received no replies. Perhaps i can find a SW stations list from a magazine in those years, but that takes a bit of digging.... Since WOJ was in Hialeah, FL, it may appear in the city phone book, or failing that, in city business records. Since the call letters were not a recognition point for customers and suppliers of such a for-hire communications service, unlike broadcast stations, the WOJ location may be listed under its owning company, instead of by the call letters. If it proves difficult to find, it might help to look up the Tropical Telegraph Company's station (WAX) and see what category in the phone book, or business listing, it's under, then look for years with WOJ's owner listed. If it proves out that WOJ existed in '37, we are just a little further along in deciphering Betty's notes, but if WOJ was not in business til years later, some new assessment of the reception is needed. Probably some of this Hialeah research can be done by remote control, but i'm going to leave it for now to some one closer to the city Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 14:54:03 EST From: Phil Tanner Subject: Unsolicited testimonial Some weeks after getting my password for access to the online Eighth Edition, I have at last found a couple of hours free from work and driving my daughter to swimming and riding activities to delve into it. I'd like to say a big thanks to the authors of the sections already available, and strongly recommend any Forum readers who haven't already done the necessary for access to do so. LTM, Phil 2276 *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Phil. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 15:03:03 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Interview with Betty The position of 3*9'S, 165*E is the position reported by the Navy for the USS Ontario (same reports provide the Myrtlebank position), but is/was not the precise location where the Ontario was on the overflight. This position was not published prior to the World Flight, but was mentioned in Navy radiomessage traffic and perhaps news media by July 4th time frame. Where the navy got this position is unknown, but it was probably obtained by plotting the mid-way point on the Lae to Howland flight on a map. *************************************************************************** From Ric Sounds like those coordinates were the "agreed upon", planned or assigned location for the Ontario. Logicaly, Noonan would have those coordinates as where he could expect Ontario to be. I'll try to pin down exactly when they appeared in the official message traffic and I'll also review the press coverage we have to see if they were mentioned by AP, UP, or the Herald Trib. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 18:51:48 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Midpoint The notes on your interview with Betty are very interesting. Haven't had time to study them in detail yet, but I wanted to get back to you ASAP with the answer to your question about the midpoint of the track from Lae to Howland. The rhumb distance from Lae to Howland is 2255 nmi, and the midpoint is at 3° 2' South, 165° 10' East. I read this from DMA chart INT-52, which has a resolution of about 2 nautical miles. The position written in Betty's notebook is about 7 miles south and 10 miles west of the midpont. It could be FN's estimated position, or it could be his prior estimate of the midpoint position. If he had a smaller scale chart than I have, it would be an easy mistake to make - - lay off the rhumb track, bisect it, and pick off the midpoint coordinates. Bob *************************************************************************** From Skeet Gifford I measured the mid-point DISTANCE of the Lae-Howland leg on a Lambert Conformal chart, scale 1:7,000,000. It is S02 18 E164 52. This is the route assumed to have been planned that dog legs around New Britain. A Great Circle route Lae-Howland would be about 28 nm north of the above point. ************************************************************************* From Ric This is very interesting. It is obviously NOT the case that either the casual observer or the meticulous navigator can plot the midpoint of the Lae/Howland route and reliably come up with 3 degrees 9 minutes South, 165 East. It's obviously an arbitrary, agreed upon position "representing" the midpoint. Next question. Who knew about it and when? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 19:08:50 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: ELECTRAS According to my information (which is Air Canada's) there were four airworthy Electra's (at least there were last summer A.D. 2000). Therefore I take it that the one in Australia is also still flying. But I'm not sure it is still a Lockheed 10B. It may have been re-engined. Is there anyone Downunder who can find out ? I don't have Laurie Ogden's address. All I know is that he lives in or around Sydney. Ric's information that there are at least a dozen Lockheed 10 remaining, including probably the one and only 10E remaining of the 18 ever built, is interesting. Minus the four airworthy ones mentioned above (and the XC-35 at Smithsonian) that means there are at least another 7 around. Any idea where they are ? Does anyone know where this information can be obtained ? The 10E normally had a pair of 600 hp P&W Wasp S3H1s. If Lynda Finch's Electra has 550 hp engines it is not quite a 10E, is it ? It engines have the same power as the XC-35. LTM (who likes to know where precious things have been left) Herman *************************************************************************** From Ric Herman, you've got some bad information. There were 15 10Es built - not 18. They all had Pratt & Whitney Wasp R1340 S3H1 engines which were 550 h.p. Later versions of the R1340 (such as the AN1 variant that was on the North American AT-6) were 600 h.p. Surviving Electras I know about are as follows: 1. c/n:1005 Model: 10A Delivered: 10/25/34 Status: Partial Condition: Unrecovered wreckage Owner: Myles Carter, Carter Air Service Location: Hay River, Northern Territories, Canada (Note: Owner planned recovery in 1999. Not known if recovery was accomplished.) 2. c/n:1011 Model: 10A Delivered: 12/21/34 Status: Mostly original to last operational use. Condition: Assembled and relatively complete. Outdoor storage. Owner: Pima Air Museum Location: Tuscon, AZ 3. c/n:1015 Model: 10A, later converted to 10E configuration Delivered: 3/7/35 Status: Rehabilitation modified to resemble NR16020. Condition: Airworthy Owner: Linda Finch (aircraft is for sale) Location: Denton, TX 4. c/n:1026 Model: 10A Delivered: 6/10/35 Status: Original to last operational use. Condition: Assembled and displayed. Indoor storage. Owner: Fred Patterson Location: Western Aerospace Museum, Oakland, CA 5. c/n:1037 Model: 10A Delivered: 9/24/35 Status: Original to last operational use? Condition: Excellent Owner: Displayed at the Science Museum Location: London, england 6. c/n:1042 Model: 10E Delivered: 12/6/35 Status: Undergoing rehabilitation as replica of NR16020 Condition: Had been damaged in fire. Now roughly 80% rebuilt. Owner: Grace MacGuire Location: Oldbridge, NJ (Note: This is the only 10E known to survive) 7. c/n:1052 Model: 10A (XR20-1) Delivered: 2/19/36 Status: Undergoing rebuild Condition: Partially assembled. Indoor storage. Owner: New England Air Museum Location: Windsor Locks, CT 8. c/n:1091 Model: 10A Delivered: 4/16/37 Status: Rehabilitated with many modifications. Condition: Airworthy. Indoor storage. Owner: Dr. James Almond Location: Denton, Texas 9. c/n:1095 Model: 10A Delivered: 4/20/37 Status: Partial Condition: Displayed as a cut-away fuselage. Owner: Museum of Technology & Transport Location: Auckland, NZ 10. c/n:1107 Model: 10B Delivered: 7/8/37 Status: ? Condition: ? Owner: Marshall Airways Museum Location: Bankstown, NSW, Australia 11. c/n:1112 Model: 10A Delivered: 10/1/37 Status: Reconstruction Condition: Assembled and displayed. Indoor storage. Owner: Canadian National Aeronautical Collection Location: Ottawa, Canada 12. c/n:1116 Model: 10A Delivered: 10/13/37 Status: Rehabilitation Condition: Airworthy Owner: Air Canada Location: Winipeg, Alberta 13. c/n:1130 Model: 10A Delivered: 10/17/38 Status: Partially rebuilt as replica of NR16020 Condition: Disassembled and stripped. Indoor storage. Owner: Emil Buehler Foundation Location: National Museum of Naval Aviation, Pensacola, FL 14. c/n:1138 Model: 10A Delivered: 8/26/39 Status: Painted as c/n 1095 Condition: Assembled and displayed Owner: Museum of Technology & Transport Location: Auckland, NZ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 19:10:40 EST From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: ITU titles Hue Miller wrote: >A correction to my note: "Radio Aids to Navigation" was not a >USN publication, but it was a US Government publication. From >something called "US Coast and Hydrographic Service", or >something like that. Could this be the (US)Coast and Geodetic Survey, or a branch? There are all sorts of links, including an antique map of Wake on-line. Try Dan Postellon Tighar #2263 LTM (who asks directions, but never uses a map) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 19:13:47 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Route Lat/Long Coordinates Would it be much help if I emailed you the latitude coodinates for the Lae-Howland leg that intersect each degree of longitude along the way via great circle route? (RE: Betty's notebook) Doug Brutlag #2335 *************************************************************************** From Ric No need to go to all that trouble right now but I'd be interested to know what latitude your calculations say intersects 165 degrees East. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:38:34 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Re: Midpoint I doubt that I have exactly the agreed upon coordinates, but using the following for Lae and Howland- Lae: S 6d 44.1m, E 146d 59.3m (Sorry, I can't remember where I got this. Hope it is close.) Howland: N 0d 47.8m, W 176d 38.1m ("New" position) Others may have slightly different coordinates, but hopefully these will do for this purpose. After a quick run of those numbers with my hand calculator (and for the Mercator route, table lookups for meridional parts) I'd say- Great Circle Route Midpoint: S 3d 7.5m , E 165d 14.5m (at E 165d Lat would be about S 3d 10.5m) Mercator or Rhumb Line Midpoint: S 2d 58.2m, E 165d 12.5m (table lookups make this a little coarser an answer) It is not readily apparent to me which (GC or Mercator) FN would have used - they are so close that one could argue for the Mercator for simplicity. The GC midpoint is for practical purposes equivalent to your interpretation of Betty's coordinate. Slighly different start and end coordinates would change things a little. Virtually every navigator would scale out something different if measured on a chart. Tom MM ************************************************************************** From Ron Bright If I understand your question you asked who knew where the "midpoint" (approx) was and when did they know it since it was an "arbitrary...position representing the midpoint". Where: It seems the entire Navy and Coast Guard knew that the Ontario was going to be stationed at the "midway" point between Lae and Howland. Itasca radioed Coast Guard SF on 27 June 37 that the Swan, Itasca and the Ontario were on "station". When: The Lexington Commander in his report of 20 Jul 37 indicated that the station was"3 degrees South, and 165 East",and obviously Ontario received orders in late June to be at that Lat/Long. Common knowledge officially; I don't know when that report was made public. The Ontario's midway position(not lat/long) in the Pacific was reported in the NY Times on 24 Jun 37. Radio traffic from Ontario-Itasca must have been heavy. The 3 degrees, 9 mins South and 165 is no doubt a planned, agreed upon position but perhaps not the absolute exact mid-point. The final question is how would that lat/long be transmitted via short wave/Electra radio within the first few days of Earhart's disappearance.(U nfortunately, we do not know when Betty received the transmission) There seems to be no other reference to Ontario, in her notebook. And as you point out what earthly reason would AE have in sending out Ontario's position?? She was not 50% off. Some jerk could have made a good guess at the midway (Ontario's position) and threw that into the mix! ltm, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Randy Jacobson Please accept my humble apology, as the information I provided earlier was incorrect. The Navy had the Ontario located at 3*S, 165*E, according to the Earhart Search Report, Lexington Section, Annex B, page 2 (the annex that discusses facts, rumors and hypotheses). All documentation regarding instructions to the Ontario said for it to be halfway between Lae and Howland, for both the first and second attempts. No precise positions were provided. In addition, I went through all radio messages from the Ontario, looking for position reports (including weather reports) and found none in that area. Further, there is no documented weather report from the Ontario sent to the Navy during that time, which is entirely curious, as that was the primary source of weather info for the Fleet Air Base in Honolulu to provide AE. I've no idea how or where the Navy got the location of the Ontario. The imprecision, however, leads me to speculate that it was supposed to be an approximate position only. Based upon all available information, AE had no real idea of where the Ontario actually was, except that it was at the halfway point. The real question is why would AE be providing navigational data several days later that had no bearing on where she ended up (no pun intended). Most curious, most curious... ************************************************************************** From Ric I disagree with your suppositon that Ontario's position was supposed to be approximate only and Earhart had no idea where the ship would actually be. Ontario's assigned plane guard station was 3*5' S, 165 E. How do I know that? On March 14, 1937 Ontario was enroute from Samoa to her assigned plane guard station for the first attempt when she reported: ONTARIO CROSSED ONEHUNDRED EIGHTEITH [SIC] MERIDIAN ENROUTE TO PLANE GUARD STATION LATITUDE 03 05 SOUTH LONGITUDE 165 00 EAST FOR EARHART FLIGHT (see MSG4, Record No. 1453) This is, by the way, the ONLY time that Ontarios's assigned plane guard lat/long appears in ANY of the message traffic either before or after the disappearance. Earhart cracked up at Luke Field before Ontario actually reached her assigned station, but this message at least tells us specifically where she was headed. If Ontario had orders to proceed to that specific position it seems safe to assume that the Earhart flight had also been informed as to just where they could expect Ontario to be. When Ontario is ordered to do it all again for the second world flight attempt no new coordinates are assigned. She is just told to go to the previously assigned position. If Noonan, in preparing for the second attempt, made a notation (on a map or otherwise) of the lat/long where Ontario was supposed to be ( a reasonable thing to do), that notation can be expected to have been 3 degrees 5 minutes South, 165 degrees East. Ontario's log, in fact, shows that she did not go to any one position and stop but cruised around the general area. Likewise, the position described in the Lexington report (3*S, 165*E) is a generic description. It's neither specifically where Ontario was supposed to be nor where she actually was. The position written in Betty's notebook seems to be 3 degrees 9 minutes South, 165 degrees East - with a question mark indicating that she's not sure she heard it right. The numbers "5" and "9" are the most easily misunderstood of all spoken numerals - that's why we now say "five" and "niner." If the 9 she heard was actually a 5, then it's an exact match to Ontario's assigned plane guard position. If the 9 was heard correctly then it's probably Noonan's notation of a celestial fix at the midpoint of the flight that showed him to be a bit south of course. It looks to me like Betty's notebook contains an extremely obscure piece of information that can reasonably be expected to have been written down aboard the Electra and was not available to the general public. This is a McGuffin folks. It's presence in Betty's notebook means that the transmissions she heard almost certainly came from Amelia. To disprove that hypothesis you have to show that: - the Earhart flight was not told where the Ontario was specifically supposed to be. - the "agreed upon" lat/long for the midpoint was publicized. Ron Bright's suggestion that "some jerk" could have made a guess at the midpoint and just happened to hit upon these coordinates does not explain why a hoaxer would have Amelia giving coordinates that could not possibly represent her present position. That is, of course, also what bothers Randy. But if we're going to assess whether or not the coordinates written in Betty's notebook may have been said by Amelia we have to take them in the context of the situation described by the other notebook entries. AE has no idea where she is. Noonan is hurt, delirious and worse than useless. Time is running out. The water is rising. She is desperately sending out any information she can find that might help someone figure out where she is. We know that it was Noonan's habit to write little notes to himself and to her regarding position, heading changes, miles covered, miles remaining, etc. Some of those scraps of paper from earlier in the flight are in the Purdue collection. Is it so hard to believe that under these circumstances AE could pick up such a note and read it off, not taking time to plot out what it meant? LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:43:22 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: ELECTRAS > 10. c/n:1107 > Model: 10B > Delivered: 7/8/37 > Status: ? > Condition: ? > Owner: Marshall Airways Museum > Location: Bankstown, NSW, Australia A current picture of the Aussie Electra is at: http://members.nbci.com/1alpha/classicaircraftsydney.htm I still have a couple of shots taken during restoration if anyone is interested. Bear in mind this is NOT a 10E.. Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric And it also doesn't look like any Electra I've ever seen in any period photo (and I've seen hundreds). That spit-polished finish is ludicrous. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:47:06 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Interview with Betty I wonder why Earhart had no contact with Ontario during the night.... Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric Because Earhart's instructions for Ontario were to transmit only on request and she never requested (or at least they never heard a request). ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:48:11 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Mokapu antenna location As reported by Captain Almon Gray (who was the PAA Assistant Communications Superintendent during flying boat era), "The second (ground radio) station to come on line was KNBF. It was located at Mokapu Point, on the east coast of Oahu...This station became operational around the first of April 1935. Around 1938-39 it became necessary to move the station to make way for the Marine Corps facility so it was relocated to Pearl City...All six of these "main line" stations were very similar. Each had three separate sites; one for transmitters, one for receivers, and one for radio direction finding. These sites were several hundred yards from each other to minimize the mutual interference." This information is from the Sparks Journal, Dec. 20, 1983. blue skies, -jerry ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:53:19 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Midpoint Coordinates The number I come with at longitude 165 degrees east: South 03degrees 03'.8 minutes. I also have the latitude numbers intersecting longitude(s) from 147 degrees east to 177 degrees west if you need it. Latitude Coordinates: 160' East-S4deg. 04.'4 161' East-S3deg.52.'4 162' East-S3deg.40.'4 163' East-S3'deg28'.3 164' East-S3deg.16'.0 165' East-S3deg.03'.8 166' East-S2deg.51'.5 167' East-S2deg.39'.1 168' East-S2deg.26'.6 169' East-S2deg.14'.2 170' East-S2deg.01'.6 Connect the points on your chart and you should have the great circle route from 160-170 degrees east. For what its worth, I come up with a distance from Lae-Howland 2237 NM, initial course 080 degrees true, midpoint occuring at 1119 NM into the route at waypoint S03'deg.02'.4min., East165'deg.07'.1. Doug Brutlag #2335 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:55:58 EST From: Jim W. Subject: Winipeg It is sad to see that Winipeg (sic) has moved. It is one of my favorite Canadian cities. I'll bet Saskatchewan is ticked that it was passed over in the relocation. Jim W. (P.S.) The plane is headquartered at the Western Canada Aviation Museum in (formerly?) Winnipeg, Manitoba. It is featured as its Airplane of the Month. Couple nice pictures and cursory history at www.historic-flying.com/planeomonth/l10a.htm *************************************************************************** From Ric Sorry about that. No excuse. I should have looked it up. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:58:56 EST From: Kerry Tiller Subject: Re: ELECTRAS > 2. c/n:1011 > Model: 10A > Delivered: 12/21/34 > Status: Mostly original to last operational use. > Condition: Assembled and relatively complete. Outdoor storage. > Owner: Pima Air Museum > Location: Tuscon, AZ I did a little of the cosmetic work on this plane (read polishing corrosion off the skin); a VERY little bit of the work (couple weekends) prior to the opening of the Pima Air and Space Museum (called the Pima County Air Museum then) in May of 1976. The Lockheed 10A was one of the original acquisitions of the museum. Due to the AE connection (if you can't get a 10E, a 10A will do?), the local chapter of the 99s volunteered their time and labor (the Pima Air Museum is private/non-profit) to help "restore" (read "get cosmetically ready for static display") the 10A. Due to my friendship with one of the girls (oops, that's not PC) I got roped into lending some elbow grease. There was talk at the time of painting it in its original Northwest Airlines livery, but a quick check of their web page shows it (as of March 99) still without markings. I don't remember where the museum got the Electra from (the website doesn't say either), but I'm pretty sure it was flown into Tucson. I don't think the plane has ever been disassembled. The bulk of the original museum collection came from MASDIC, the military bone yard adjacent to Davis Monthan Air Force Base. Other planes, like the Electra were flown into Tucson in the early 70s. The most famous of these is an equally rare (in terms of surviving examples) B-24J that had been recently retired and donated to the museum by the Republic of India Air Force. It had seen service in Italy during the war (15th AF) and the local press dubbed it the "Pima Pisano" when it was flown into Tucson. The museum had no hangars in the 70s. The B-24 is currently inside one of the new hangars in late war polished aluminum with with nose art. Unfortunately, the Electra is still outside. I shudder to think what the southern Arizona sun has done to the Plexiglas. LTM Kerry Tiller #2350 *************************************************************************** From Ric We've been over, under, around and through c/n 1011 collecting data. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 11:10:20 EST From: Steve G. Subject: Underwater Searching In describing the underwater search done on Niku III, you memorably characterized the visibility in the lagoon as "sucko." Would you say the low lagoon visibility was due to the bad weather experienced by the '97 expedition, or is it a typical condition seen in previous expeditions? One of the aspects I've appreciated about the Forum is the feedback from the people who've actually set foot on Niku (i.e., "been there, done that, got the T-shirt"), demonstrated recently by the updates on the current battered state of the SS Norwich City. As one of the aims of Niku IIII is to search the offshore and coastal area around the Norwich wreck for Electra remnants, how do you envision that will be done? Is the water too deep or unclear or rough for wading or diving? Is it suitable to bring one of the "Naiads" into the area for visual or sonar searching, or is the risk of collision with unmarked coral/Norwich wreckage too great? Is there a significant difference in the area between high tide and low tide? Given that the surf there has been turbulent enough over 70 years to effectively reduce the hulk of the ship to scrap metal, how rough are the normal surf conditions on that part of the island, aside from storm-induced roughness, as in '97? It sounds like searching in this area holds some real possibilities, based on the information that hard research has turned up, but at the same time it looks to be particularly challenging. LTM (who in this case doesn't want to hear the cry of "Surf's Up!") Steve G., Tighar # something or other ************************************************************************** From Ric The poor visibility in the lagoon is, unfortunately, not a function of bad weather. There's a shallow layer of silt on the bottom that seems to get stirred up by just normal wind and chop. We've never seen good visibility in the lagoon. The search for wreckage near the Norwich City means dealing with two very different environments. The reef flat itself dries at low tide and is realitively easy to search. Just walk around. There is also nothing there unless some piece of debris got hung up in the Norwich City junk. Searching the ocean just off the edge of the reef means searching a ledge that is about 50 feet down and extends seaward several hundred feet. Divers from the Nai'a took a preliminary look at it last summer but saw nothing that looked out of place. As long as the sea remains calm, divers can be supported by a Naiad that can get right up to the reef edge. If the sea is not calm you probably don't want to be in the water that close to the reef face anyway. Beyond the ledge the reef drops off very steeply to several thousnad feet. We won't try to search that area. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 11:15:52 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Flight Plan? I know this is a long shot but I'll ask anyway. When you were at Purdue did you happen to find anything that resembles a flight plan or copy thereof that was filed for the Lae-Howland leg? I am curious how Fred's preflight planning might have chosen waypoints/reporting points along the way. I know documents indicate an almost total lack of position reporting information but I am wondering just how Fred did his flight planning. When he navigated at Pan Am, did he normally make out a flight plan/log/plotting chart using predetermined waypoints/reporting points or did they just make reports of position at agreed upon time intervals? I'm not Fred by any means but if I were trying to do the same trip today I'd base my waypoints on whole degrees of longitude, using them as position reporting time fixes as well, at intervals where a position report would be made at least once an hour if not more. I'm going to consult my library and see if Mr Weems can shed some light on this. Doug Brutlag #2335 -------------------- Ric; I know this is a long shot but I'll ask anyway. When you were at Purdue did you happen to find anything that resembles a flight plan or copy thereof that was filed for the Lae-Howland leg? I am curious how Fred's preflight planning might have chosen waypoints/reporting points along the way. I know documents indicate an almost total lack of position reporting information but I am wondering just how Fred did his flight planning. When he navigated at Pan Am, did he normally make out a flight plan/log/plotting chart using predetermined waypoints/reporting points or did they just make reports of position at agreed upon time intervals? I'm not Fred by any means but if I were trying to do the same trip today I'd base my waypoints on whole degrees of longitude, using them as position reporting time fixes as well, at intervals where a position report would be made at least once an hour if not more. I'm going to consult my library and see if Mr Weems can shed some light on this. Doug Brutlag #2335 ************************************************************************** From Ric There's nothing like that at Purdue. Chances are that all of Fred's paperwork concerning the flight was aboard the airplane with him. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 13:50:52 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: Earhart's voice >....sometimes only a few words in the middle of a sentence being >intelligible and these she would write down. Sometimes the content of >the message was so interesting, dramatic or upsetting that she just >listened. Sometimes there would be silence for several minutes and Betty >would fear that there would be no more, but then Amelia would come back >on very abruptly and clearly..... From my own, somewhat limited, experience with two-way radio communications, the use of a 'push-to-talk' Mic results in a _very_ abrupt & usually 'noisy' termination to a conversation, which is quite noticable to the person on the receiving end & usually conversations seem 'clipped' or cut short by the sometimes premature use of the P-T-T button. Did 'Betty' indicate any such sudden 'interruptions' of the several communications she was receiving? While AE's voice was to some extent unusual, with it's mixture of mid-western & 'down-east' accents, I'd question whether someone who'd heard her talk over a commercial radio station on one occasion, would have been able to 'recognize' her voice over such a long range, shortwave broadcast, especially under the circumstances described by 'Betty'. From military radio experience, we were always better able to recognize our buddie's 'key' on CW than we were ever able to recognize their voices on the two- way voice radio systems we employed Don Neumann ************************************************************************** From Ric There were many interuptions in what Betty heard but trying to remember and articulate their precise nature after 63 years is not a reasonable thing to expect her to be able to do. We have two other accounts of people recognizing Earhart's voice on the radio. Walter McMenamy who heard her transmissions during the Hawaii/Oakland flight in 1935 claimed that he recognized AE's voice when heard distress calls the night of July 2nd. Also, Nauru radio said that the unintelligible voice they heard on 6210 that same evening sounded like the same voice they heard from the plane in flight the night before "but without the hum of plane in background." Betty also claimed to have recognized Amelia's voice, although she can't recall now where she may have heard it before. She described the voice as "sort of whiny." I would agree with that general characterization of the sound. I would call her accent somewhat affected. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 19:23:22 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Midpoint Coordinates When considering the latitude of the midpoint, I suggest that you use the rhumb line coordinates, not the great circle coordinates. FN really didn't have the means to fly a great circle from Lae to Howland. To fly a true great circle requires near-continuous small course corrections, which were not feasible due to the limits of his navigation methods, and the inherent limited accuracy of the compass in the Electra. Even if he attempted to fly an approximation to a great circle by flying along chords of the GC, he still would need navigation precision that was just not available to him. His only practical option was to fly a rhumb course to Howland. That plots as a straight line on a Mercator chart, and the distance involved is only about 15 miles longer than the great circle distance. BTW, the rhumb course intersects the 165° East meridian at 3° 00' South. Bob *************************************************************************** From Ric That all makes sense, but Ontario - for some reason - was heading specifically for 3* 05 minutes South, 165* East. The similarity of those coordinates to the entry in Betty's notebook has got to be more than coincidence. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 19:24:57 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: ELECTRA Anyone interested in some great pictures of the Lockheed Electra and of Lockheed 10A Electra CF-TCC in particular should go to: www.acfamily.net/tcc Then click on PHOTOS. Go down to the fourth series (provided by Captain Al MacLeod). They're all great but going down to the third line of pictures, click on number four from the left and be in for a sight to be remembered. LTM (who said that a thing of beauty is a joy forever) Herman ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 10:00:44 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Yau Fai Lum Out of curiosity, what frequency and power was Yau Fai Lum's shortwave transmitter, K6GNW, located at Howland on 2 July ? He reportedly maintained daily schedules with Honolulu, Baker and Itasca. He must have had a pretty good short wave. Would his transmitting log still be around for 2-l9 July 37. Did Lum, to our knowledge, ever pick up any short wave signals post- loss? LTM, Ron Bright ************************************************************************** From Ric Tom Gannon, one of the "Two Toms" who first brought the Phoenix islands hypothesis to TIGHAR's attention, corresponded with Yau Fai Lum back in 1989. Gannon is also an avid HAM so his questions to Mr. Yau were of a technical nature. In a two page letter dated January 10, 1989 Mr. Yau provided the following information. "A half century is a long time ago to remember things accurately. For memory has faded and time has taken its toll. I will try to give you a short synopsis of my nine months on Howland Island. ... We worked for the Dept. of Interior, three Hawaiians from the Kamehameha School and myself, the radio operator. I had a SW3 radio receiver and a home built transmitter with a 807 in the final. the Zepp antenna hung from the top of the flagpole to a shorter pole 65 feet away. Our electrical sources were borrowed from the Army with their hand-cranked generator whihc put out 400 volts, storage batteries together with a generator-charger, and a dynamo. I had special authority from the FCC to operate on 31 meters on the Coast frequency, because the ham bands had too much QRM. ... I was never in contact with Earhart, for that was left entirely to the Coast Guard. My SW3 receiver only had a few coils in the ham band and two that I wound to receive the coast Guard frequency on 31 meters and a broadcast coil to receive KGMB in Honolulu. I do not know anything about hearing signals from Earhart after she went down." From this we can conclude that the references in the Itasca log to "Howland" hearing post-loss transmissions from the plane refer to Coast giard radioman Frank Cipriani, not Mr. Yau. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 10:03:08 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Pellegreno 1967 Commemorative Flight Electra's Whereabouts? Is this "fully restored'" Electra 10A still on display in Canada? Anyone seen it on display recently? Janet Whitney *************************************************************************** From Ric The airplane Pellegrino used is now on display in the Canadian National Aviation Museum in Ottawa. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 10:17:36 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Midpoint Coordinates I'm not sure that the great circle route would not have been possible as Bob Brandenburg suggests. I remember reading Charles Lindbergh's autobiography. In it he explains his navigation. It was dead reckoning across the Atlantic with regular course corrections as his flight progressed, according to his watch (which was a purpose designed Longines by the way). Lindbergh's compass certainly wasn't more sophisticated than Amelia Earhart's I suppose, given the fact that her Lockheed 10 was built ten years after Lindbergh's Ryan. Therefore I think that the theory of AE/FN flying the great circle route does make sense. And by the way, Lindbergh did get to the Irish coast approximately at the point he had calculated. That was some navigation ! If Lindbergh could do it (and fly his airplane at the same time), I don't see why Fred Noonan would not have been able to navigate with the same precision while AE did the actual flying. LTM (who always finds her way, even in the dark) ************************************************************************** From Ric As originally planned by Clarence Williams, her navigation consultant for the first attempt, Earhart was to make small heading changes every few hours (248*, 249*, 250*, 251*, 252*, and finally 253*, all magnetic) enroute from Howland to Lae. That approximated a great circle but would hardly be precise. Lindbergh used pure Dead Reckoning with hourly heading changes. He hit the Irish coast less than three miles from his planned landfall after flying a greater distance than from Lae to Howland. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 11:02:45 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Speculation Time Ric: Speculation time. Let's assume Betty is listening to the bona fide transmission of AE to anyone who can hear and she copies down AE's frantic ramblings of information previous compiled during the flight by Fred who is delerious & perhaps mortally wounded. She has no real clue where they ended up and Fred is in no shape to help her. The Electra crash lands on the reef and the airplane slowly becomes engulfed as the tide comes in filling the cabin with water. Fred may have been badly injured and trapped in the rear fuselage with AE perhaps able to disembark, but unable to physically remove Fred from the airplane, where he later died from injuries sustained or drowning after water completely flooded the cabin. Comments? Doug Brutlag #2335 *************************************************************************** From Ric Doesn't fit the scenario described in the notebook. If the water is "knee deep" it must be knee deep out on the reef, not in the cockpit, and the aircraft must be on its gear or the transmitter in the cabin would be submerged. In order for them both to be heard over the mic they have to be almost face to face and they have to be in the cockpit. Fred wants to get out of the airplane. He wants to climb out through the cockpit hatch but to do that he has to literally climb on and over AE. She won't let him do that, so eventually he goes back into the cabin and out through the door. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 11:04:06 EST From: Vern Subject: Movie question Some time ago someone mentioned a movie the depicted rather well the problems a navigator must cope with. A WWII movie about the crew that flew a "nose null" and didn't realize they had over-flown the airfield in North Africa. They flew on out into the desert. Can someone tell me the movie title and/or the name of the plane? ************************************************************************** From Ric Vern is obviously talking about the Lady Be Good. Was there a film? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 11:05:18 EST From: Vern Subject: Re: Receiving Antenna >>From Dick Pingrey > Isn't (it) quite conceivable that upon landing AE and Fred noticed the >damaged receiving antenna and simply made a temporary antenna from a spare >length of wire. The length of the receiving antenna, after all, is not >critical. >************************************************************************** >>From Ric >Assuming there was spare wire available. I've wondered about this and can't think of a source for a length of wire to string up. Of course, there was a lot of wire strung through the airplane but probably not easy to get to or to get free. But, if one really wants to do it, threre is usually a way. As far as hearing AM broadcast signals, such as Hawaii, the loop may have worked pretty well. The loop "coupling unit" (signal pre-amplifier) definitely could be tuned to the AM broadcast band. Given time to fool with it, they may have got that set up right. Whether they could have heard higher frequency signals with the loop is a lot more questionable. They heard the Itasca on 7500 kc but they were right on top of it. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:33:10 EST From: John Pratt Subject: Occult references Ric wrote: >It looks to me like Betty's notebook contains an extremely obscure piece of >information that can reasonably be expected to have been written down aboard >the Electra and was not available to the general public. This is a McGuffin >folks. It's presence in Betty's notebook means that the transmissions she >heard almost certainly came from Amelia. I see the logic that this is an "occult" reference. Actually, right now there are two such potential references: Mid Point Norwitch City which are candidates for "occult reference" status. The Norwitch City takes a bit more effort: >From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: >Whoa!!! Think on this one... >How was the name "Norwich City" actually pronounced??? >"NORWITCH CITY" or... or.. or... "NORRICH CITY" or... OR... "NORRICK CITY"? >That last possibility does "sound like" New York City doesn't it? >Thank goodness for a friend with an Irish brogue.... There is another reference: Suitcase in the closet in California If this reference is supported by the family, it demonstrates more directly than either of the above that Betty's Notebook contains internal evidence not available to the public. It may make this reference worth serious pursuit. Ric indicated that he had an appropriate method for inquiry. (I find it amusing that many of us first heard of AE through a brand of luggage.) If Betty's Notebook is accepted as convincing proof that post-loss radio communications took place, the next issue is validation of the contemporary assertion that the right engine must be running to power the radio. In fact, the Radio Rangers probably have a good estimate of current requirements for both transmitter and receiver already, along with documented knowledge of the batteries available in the Electra electrical system. The "Engine Operable" requirement seems to be well supported, but collecting the argument into one document might be worth the effort. LTM John Pratt 2373 *************************************************************************** From Ric I agree with you ... mostly. First, let's talk about the concept of the "occult reference" (a nice term that was, as I recall, invented by you). An "occult reference" is defined as information that is not accessible to the vast majority of contemporaries. I regularly use the concept of the occult reference as a way of assessing the credibility of psychics who offer their help in finding Amelia. Most of them claim to be able to contact or "channel" AE's spirit, so I tell them, "Before I spend a lot of your time and my time I'm sure you won't mind helping me confirm your ability to obtain information from Amelia. Due to an unusual circumstance, I happen to know a piece of information about Earhart that very few people, if any, know. As a matter of fact, it may be fair to say that the answer to the question I'm about to ask you is now known only to me and to Amelia. If you can correctly answer my question I will be convinced that either you can obtain information from the spirit of Amelia Earhart or you can literally read my mind. In either case, I will be immensely impressed and we will proceed from there. Ready? Here goes. What is the name of the hotel where Amelia stayed while she in Bandoeng, Java?" So far, merely asking the question has been sufficient to end the conversation. Nobody as yet has even tried to answer it. (If anyone out there thinks they know the answer please email me privately. I won't necessarily think you're psychic but I'll be very impressed nonetheless.) The point is, it's a classic and highly reliable method of assessing credibility - almost like a secret code. Okay, so are there any known occult references in Betty's notebook? Certainly such notatations as "KGMB" and "31.05" and references to "Howland" do not qualify. That information was widely available via the news media. However, if when Betty wrote "N.Y. N.Y." she meant "New York City" (she thinks that's a possibility but she can't be sure), then it a very small step to "Norwich City" and a dynamite occult reference - but there is just too much speculation involved to hold that possibility up as proof of anything. Remember, this is how psychics work - they provide general information that the subject then modifies to fit the desired message. In this case there is no reason to think that there is any intention to defraud or mislead but the wishful thinking process is still just as powerful - and dangerous. The suitcase in the closet can, I think, be considered a marginal occult reference. Without knowing whether the reference rings any bells in the Earhart or Putnam family folklore, the very fact that the quote specifies "California" means that the speaker was aware that the Putnam's at that time had more than one house and that one of the houses was not in California. That information was certainly not secret but neither was it widely publicized. How about W4OK? It turns out to be the callsign of a ham who was active in 1937 and who lived on the same great circle (radio propagation path) as Betty and Gardner Island - and there's an anecdote that claims that the individual said that he had "talked to" Earhart. An occult reference? Certainly. Just a coincidence? Perhaps, but the coincidence of Betty jotting down a random, misunderstood sequence of letters and numbers that has those properties is no less remarkable than the possibility that Earhart said them. It's the lat/long position that really floors me. This seems to be truly occult information known only to people intimately involved with the first world flight attempt and never made known to the general public. It's presence in Betty' notebook is all the more remarkable because is does not make sense as something that would be said by a rational Earhart or a rational hoaxer, but is entirely believable (to me anyway) as something that might be read from a note or out of a notebook by the terrified, desperate woman Betty's notes describe. Just as important as the occult references is the lack of disqualifyng references - described circumstances that are known to be incorrect. For example, Charles McGill of Oakland, California reported on July 6th that he had heard: "NRUI KHAQQ KHAQQ SOS SOS SOS KHAQQ 281 NORTH HOWLAND CANNOT HOLD OUT MUCH LONGER DRIFTING SLOWLY NORTHWEST WE ABOVE WATER MOTOR SINKING IN WATER VERY WET" Not only is the message suspiciously similar to the more fragmentary "281 Message" reported earlier by the US Navy, but the apparent description of an airplane afloat and still transmitting is contrary to our understanding of the reasonable possibilities. McGill, by the way, was subsequently investigated by the Coast Guard and found to be a hoaxer. Similarly, the note in a bottle recently touted as the "Noonan Document" said that the plane was sinking because "the starboard gas tank ruptured" (there were three fuel tanks in each wing and the rupturing of any or all of them would not cause the plane to sink). The letter, supposedly written by Noonan, also makes reference to Amelia wearing her good luck elephant hair bracelet (which she is said to have left behind in New Guinea). Interestingly, the hoax does not contain instances of information that might prove to be occult. Hoaxers fashion their tales from published information and their own imaginations. They don't generally include apparently nonsensical information because they want to be believed. In summary, I'll say again that I think Betty's notebook is a post-loss radio message McGuffin - a smoking gun that establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that transmissions were being made from the Earhart aircraft after it disappeared. The scenario described by the notebook supports, but does not prove, the Niku hypothesis. There are other islands the airplane could have conceivably reached. It does, however, (in my humble opinion) send the Crashed-and-Sank hypothesis to Davey Jones Locker. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:38:01 EST From: Harry Poole Subject: Movies/Songs in St. Petersburg I examined every page of the St. Petersburg times from July 1, 1937 through July 15, 1937 to see if any of the movies listed on Page 23 from Betty's notebook could be found. The purpose of this seach was to try to date at least one page of this notebook. None of the movies were listed on any of those dates, which leads me to conclude that the movies had actually been playing before July 1, probably in June. It took about two hours to review these July dates. If anyone would like a complete listing of what was playing during that period, e-mail me, and I will send it to you as an attachment. However, I don't think it will help in authenticating Betty's notebook. The movies I was looking for were: Black Legion - Humphrey Bogart God's Country and the Woman - Beverly Roberts Elephant Boy - Sabu Swing High, Swing Low - Carol Lombard & Fred MacMurray The Great O'Malley - Pat O'Brian Maytime - Jeannette McDonald A Day At The Races - Maureen O'Sullivan A Woman of Glamour - Kent Taylor During early July, 1937, there were five theatres with their listings in the St. Petersburgh Times. The Theatres were Florida, La Plaza, Roxy, Cameo and Playhouse. Most of these theatres carried two films a day, and most changed programs about twice a week. None of these carried any of the above films during early July. In addition, I looked for any reference to any of the song's in Betty's notebook. For the period of July 1 to July 15, there were no songs of any type (whether in Betty's notebook or not) that I could find listed in the paper. The closest was listings of radio programs offered on Sundays, but none of these offer any help. I have also transcribed all news about Amelia Earhart from the St. Pete times paper in early July. Again, if anyone would like a multi-paged attachment of this transcription covering news coverage of that period, please send me an e-mail with your address, and I will send it to you. My e-mail address is hhpoole@sprynet.com. Ric, I am convinced that Betty's notebook is authentic, but neither the songs or movies of her notebook has been authenticated by the St. Pete times in early July. LTM, Harry #2300 *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Harry. That's good work. Given that the list of movies is on page 3 the notebook and the Earhart notes begin on page 49 it's hardly surprising that none of the films were playing that week. We really don't know how long a period the notebook spans. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:41:26 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Bush knife! Bush knife! Ric said: "Vern is obviously talking about the Lady Be Good. Was there a film?" We beat that horse to death several times many moons ago. Where is that bush knife you were going to use to make this a leaner, more on-topic forum? :-) LTM, who is learning how to growl Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric I hear ya. I'm sending responses to Vern's request directly to him. That dead horse won't haunt the forum. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:47:24 EST From: Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194 Subject: Re: Yau Fai Lum A bit of interpretation of the technical stuff... The National SW-3 is a three-tube regenerative-type receiver. Very basic, very inexpensive, very lo-tech even for 1937, but very reliable. Made by National Radio Co. of Malden, Massachusetts, from about 1930 perhaps until or through WW2. It used plug in coils for coverage from below the broadcast band up to at least 20 MHz and may have even been usable to 30 MHz. While it's simple as they come, it's also "hot as a firecracker." It was known as the "Thrill Box" and a lot of 30s hams used it. The 807 tube in the home-brew transmitter is capable of about 50 to 60 watts plate power input, on CW, depending upon the plate voltage applied. Home built transmitters were the norm in the 30s. Parts were cheap and much more readily available than they are today. the Zepp antenna hung from the >top of the flagpole to a shorter pole 65 feet away. This antenna could probably be worked on the 80, 40 and 20 meter ham bands with no problems, using an antenna coupler/tuner. It would also work on the 31 meter band, which was in the 9.5-10 MHz region, without too much trouble. A Zepp is a pretty "forgiving" antenna. Our electrical sources >were borrowed from the Army with their hand-cranked generator whihc put >out >400 volts, storage batteries together with a generator-charger, and a >dynamo. I'd hate to hand crank a generator that put out enough power to run a 50-watt rig...! But if the transmitter had about 400 volts on the plate of an 807, that says to me about 40-45 watts input was it. Assuming an efficiency factor of 70% for a Class C amplifier in CW mode, they were putting out 25-30 watts. Entirely reasonable to work Honolulu on the frequencies mentioned, in daylight. > I had special authority from the FCC to operate on 31 meters on the Coast >frequency, because the ham bands had too much QRM. ... QRM is the Q-signal meaning "interference." That means the ham bands must have been pretty crowded back then, even way out in the Pacific. My SW3 receiver only had a few coils in the ham band and two that I >wound to receive the coast Guard frequency on 31 meters and a broadcast >coil >to receive KGMB in Honolulu. Hand wound coils were common and easy to make. If you did not have the one you needed for a particular frequency band, you'd just use a piece of cardboard tubing (toilet tissue rolls are good for this) and the base from an old glass receiving tube with a pin pattern that matches the coil socket. It's not hard to come up with a rough idea of the coil specs (# of turns etc); this receiver is very noncritical and forgiving. Just for information.... By the way, last year I was in communication via the net with David Lau, the grandson of Lt. Henry Lau. David told me then that Yau Fai Lum was still around, but did not say more. I have asked a number of questions of David, regarding his grandfather; but so far nothing new has come to light. I'll report whatever I find out. LTM (who likes home brew) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:51:23 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Something to think about... There is something about the Betty scenario that still makes me wonder. I am playing devil's advocate here. I remember seeing an old black-n-white TV show in re-run, something from the 50s that starred Robert Young, I think (who was later, Marcus Welby -- what a character name! -- MD). The show was called "Father Knows Best" (is that right?), and was a series/sitcom. One episode had a plot very similar, eerily similar, to our current topic. In this episode, one of the teenage kids is tuning around on the family's short-wave radio in the living room, when he or she comes across a transmission from a family aboard a boat... the boat, of course, in off the opposite coast from where the TV family lives. The whole crowd comes in to listen to what is obviously a happy outing, enjoying it vicariously... but, suddenly, there is an explosion aboard, or a fire! Or maybe they were caught in a storm, with the engine out. Frantic calls ensue to the Coast Guard. Position reports are included... but no answers! The Coast Guard station closest to the scene cannot hear anything but static, because of a storm. The TV family can hear every word. They are freaking out! Listening to a real live disaster! Father (Robert Young) gets on the phone, long distance, to the Coast Guard. At first they don't believe him, but finally he gets it across to them the position of the boat in distress, and that this is no joke, he CAN hear the signals. The USCG comes through in fine style, and the family gets a pat on the back for their role in the rescue. Fade Out. The End. Oh, by the way, the name of the boat in this episode is the "Betty Ann." As I said, this was produced some time in the 50s or at the latest the early 60s. Could it have a bearing (pun intended)? LTM (who watches Nick-at-Nite on a vintage TV) and 73 Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric Wow. Art imitating life or life imitating art? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:58:24 EST From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Midpoint Coordinates > ... Lindbergh used pure Dead Reckoning with hourly > heading changes. He hit the Irish coast less than three miles from his > planned landfall after flying a greater distance than from Lae to Howland. Does "Dead Reckoning" mean "no use of a sextant"? Marty #2359 ************************************************************************** From Ric That's right. Dead Reckoning means plotting out the compass headings and flying them (or sailing them or walking them), with suitable corrections for other factors like current or wind. To quote Slim himself, "The only thing wrong with Dead Reckoning is the name." and, no, it's not really "Ded (short for "deductive") Reckoning." I can show you where that horse is buried. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:32:39 EST From: Patrick Gaston Subject: Re: Position report? Ric wrote: "Is it so hard to believe that under these circumstances AE could pick up such a note and read it off, not taking time to plot out what it meant?" No, it's not so hard to believe -- in fact it's about the only thing in Betty's notes that would make much sense at all. What's difficult to believe is the entirety of the transmission, which portrays an Earhart reduced to such utter, incoherent panic that she is transmitting her struggles with Fred and reading numbers off paper scraps. It's hard to accept that, even in extremis, AE wouldn't say something like, "We are down on an island south of Howland. There's a shipwreck on the beach. I think the name is Norwich something." Admittedly the signal was fading in and out but nothing in Betty's notes comes close to a rational distress call, even a fragmentary one. If the transmission was authentic, it seems to me more evocative of a mid-ocean splashdown than an island landing. Your plane is sinking and there's nothing outside but miles and miles of miles and miles. Now >there's< a situation that might reduce even the most unflappable soul to emotional gibberish. Are there any contemporary accounts of Earhart's behavior under stress? She is generally portrayed as a cool customer, even when (frequently) lost, but that image may come mostly from her own writings. LTM Pat Gaston *************************************************************************** From Ric Of course, most of Earhart's long distance flights were made alone but we do have one account from Paul Mantz as related to his biographer Don Dwiggins in "Hollywood Pilot" (page 101/2): Fifteen hours forty-seven minutes out of Oakland the Electra crossed over Honolulu's Wheeler Field, for a new east-west record. Amelia had asked Paul to land the ship; she looked groggy from the long flight. Mantz described their arrival to us: "I took a reading on the radio compass - Makapu Point was dead ahead. I stuck the nose down and started the letdown, through the undercast. It was just dawn, and we could see the glow of lights. I went around Makapu Point and then crossed Wheeler Field. I wrapped it around in a steep bank to check the windsock. AE yelled, "Don't! Don't!" She was very fatigued and rather exuberant. She calmed down when I made a normal approach pattern and landed." That passage always struck me as very odd, but when you look at Earhart's flying career there are no references to aerobatics or any of the "cowboying" around that typifies young pilots. In fact, she resisted soloing long after her instructor thought she was ready. She wanted to be very sure she could handle any eventuality before she went up alone. It appears that Earhart was uncomfortable with anything but "straight and level" flying. Nothing wrong with that (as I'm sure most airline passengers would agree) but her panicky reaction to a mere steep bank rather tarnishes her nerves-of-steel image. There's also a piece of newsreel footage where Amelia is tryng out a new parachute training tower (Putnam was involved in the construction of the same towers that eneded up at Coney Island and the Airborne School at Ft. Benning). She sits on a bench and is hoisted up to the top of the tower at which point the bench drops a few feet before the 'chute blossoms and AE lets out with a terrified shriek. On another occasion she was supposed to go underwater in a hard-hat diving suit but when it came time to go over the side she couldn't do it. She was a very complex woman whose undeniable courage was apparently rather narrowly defined. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:40:39 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: Occult references > From Ric > In summary, I'll say again that I think Betty's notebook is a > post-loss radio message McGuffin - a smoking gun that establishes > beyond a reasonable doubt that transmissions were being made from > the Earhart aircraft after it disappeared. What does the propagation analysis say. Frank Westlake LTM (who knows better than to try aerobatics over Antarctica) ************************************************************************** From Ric I'll let Bob Brandenburg and Mike Everette provide the specifics on that one. It's my understanding that their analysis is not yet complete but the answer so far seems to be "not impossible." My attitude is the same as it would be if a psychic told me the name of the hotel in Java. Whether I, or anyone, understands entirely how the information was transmitted, it appears that the transmission did take place. I don't (yet) believe in psychics. I believe in Betty's notebook. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 20:15:59 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Midpoint Coordinates >From Ric > > That all makes sense, but Ontario - for some reason - was heading > specifically for 3* 05 minutes South, 165* East. Perhaps the navigator's chart was of small enough scale that he picked off 3* 05 South after laying the rhumb track to Howland. Or perhaps the Ontario had slightly different coordinates for Lae and Howland than we do. Or perhaps the Ontario CO though it best to be a few miles off the track to enhance the likelihood of his running lights being seen by Earhart if she was on track - - ship drivers tend to assume that aviators know where they are at all times. > The similarity of those > coordinates to the entry in Betty's notebook has got to be more than > coincidence. No doubt about it. Bob ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 20:19:33 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Occult references > What does the propagation analysis say. > > Frank Westlake > ************************************************************************** > >From Ric > > I'll let Bob Brandenburg and Mike Everette provide the specifics on that one. > It's my understanding that their analysis is not yet complete but the answer > so far seems to be "not impossible." The propagation analysis is not finished yet, but the results thus far suggest that the probability of Betty hearing Earhart on at least one harmonic when we think she did was about 20%, which is equivalent to one chance in 5. And, yes Ric, this is much better than the long odds I sent to you privately a while back. The reception probability hinges on several variables, including, inter alia, the details of Betty's antenna arrangement and the assumed output power of Earhart's transmitter at the harmonic frequencies. Thanks to Harry Poole's outstanding on-site work, we now have a pretty good understanding of how Betty's antenna could have been rigged. There are basically three ways her father could have run the wire within the house (the exterior arrangment seems pretty clear), and there are significant performance differences among them at the higher harmonics. The question of how much power Earhart's transmitter radiated at the harmonic frequencies of interest remains unanswered, so I'm currently assuming the full 50 watts rated output on each harmonic, just to bound the solution. If reception was impossible on a given harmonic with full rated power, then it doesn't matter what the actual radiated power was. But if reception was possible on a given frequency at full rated power, then the question of actual harmonic power radiation comes into play. I plan to address that issue by reducing harmonic power in discrete steps to see where the propagation fails, thus establishing the lower bound on feasibility. When all the calculations are completed, I'll send the details to Ric for posting so there can be review and debate about what the feasible radiated harmonic power levels could have been. If an informed consensus emerges on power levels that support reception, then we will have substantial support for the "Betty heard Amelia" hypothesis. If not, then we can make a conditional statement to the effect that reception was possible provided that radiated harmonic power levels exceeded some specified thresholds. BTW, I'm also working on the Rock Springs intercept, and preliminary results there are promising. But the devil is in the details and, to paraphrase Robert Frost, I have miles to go and details to check before I can report. Stay tuned, Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 20:21:15 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Re: Betty's Family's Shortwave Receiver Just as there are Electras in museums, the same model radio that Betty's family used must be in some museum or in some antique wireless collection. Perhaps it's time to dig one up and see how well it receives with an 80 foot antenna on various frequencies. My great-grandmother owned a big 30's Philco receiver with shortwave that my uncle has in his family room now. As I remember, the selectivity was terrible. And stations would constantly fade in and out when the dial was set at one SW frequency. Hams could often be heard over SW broadcast stations. Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 07:59:10 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Speculation Time > She has no real clue where they ended up > and Fred is in no shape to help her. I'm having difficulty with this speculation. Under what circumstances would AE not have a clue where she ended up? I could see some doubt if FN had been incapacitated about the time they left the Howland area but not if it happened upon landing at Niku. Even in the former case she would have known roughly where she was -- four hours SE of Howland on a small island or some reasonable report. I can understand her trying to read his notes off and maybe not understanding them but she should have been used to them by this time on the trip. I would think the first thing she would say is, "We're on the beach of a small island about X number of miles SE of Howland . It is probably one of the Phoenix islands. I'm fine but Fred is hurt. Need help as soon as possible." THEN she might start trying to pin down the location more precisely and trying to help Fred as he may be their only chance for survival. That's what I would do but then obviously I'm not AE. I suppose concurrent priorities would be attempt to make radio contact, look after Fred, prepare a signal fire, look for water and food, think about shelter. The amount of time and effort put into radio contact might be mitigated by the fact she had had no success of that all the way from Lae vs desperation of the situation. How much time spent on Fred could have been determined by his condition. She may not have thought about a signal fire if she thought someone could easily see the plane on the beach. She also might not of thought about food and water if she thought rescue should have been swift and the plane might have been her initial choice for shelter. That's my speculation for the year. My bigger concern is there seems to be no evidence any of that occurring. That might lead to a suggestion something other than that occurred. But what? Alan #2329 *************************************************************************** From Ric Based upon some very scant evidence and anecdotal accounts we formed a picture in our collective mind of where the Electra ended up and what subsequently happened to it and its crew. Then along comes Betty's notebook which seems to describe a somewhat panicky 911 call from somebody who is in a situation very similar to what we had constructed. Upon close examination it appears that the 911 call contains informatin that indicates that it is almost certainly genuine - if not perfectly understood. Is it reasonable then to question its credibility because it fails to accurately describe our preconceived notion of what the circumstance SHOULD have been like? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 08:01:11 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Off Topic Electra And I'd like to add that the fully airworthy Lockheed 10A Electra c/n 1116 (registered CF-TCC) is not only on display at the Western Canada Aviation Museum at Winnipeg (Manitoba) during the winter but that the aircraft flies in summertime with paying passengers, visiting major Canadian cities. Anyone who is interested in getting a taste of what it was like to travel by air in the Thirties or more specifically in a Lockheed 10A of 1937 vintange can get a 40 minute ride in it ! I'm told the fare will be 125 Canadian dollar in 2001, to be paid in advance in the till of the "Dreams Take Flight" charity. Anyone interested in flying the Electra should get further details at www. acfamily.net/tcc LTM (who believes that a flying thing of beauty remains a joy forever) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 08:10:39 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: Recognizing AE's voice >We have two other accounts of people recognizing Earhart's voice on >the radio. Walter McMenamy who heard her transmissions during the >Hawaii/Oakland flight in 1935 claimed that he recognized AE's voice when >heard distress calls the night of July 2nd. Also, Nauru radio said that >the unintelligible voice they heard on 6210 that same evening sounded >like the same voice they heard from the plane in flight the night before >"but without the hum of plane in background." .... AE was very well known to McMenamy, who'd no doubt spoken with her in person on occasion & could have been _expected_ to recognize her voice, even under the circumstances he allegedly encountered when he claims to have picked up her post landing messages... as for Nauru, they merely reported the _same_ (unintelligible) voice they'd heard _earlier_ only this time without the sound of aircraft engines... obviously that voice & sound of aircraft engines, in that isolated part of the Cenral Pacific, would have been reasonably concluded as belonging to AE, even though they'd probably never heard her voice before. In the case of 'Betty' & her mother, it seems (to me anyway) somewhat of a stretch that they 'recognized' AE's voice, having only heard it briefly on a commercial radio broadcast or possibly in a newsreel interview. Given the content & the intensity of the radio conversation, where she even identified herself as Amelia Putnam, they were probably convinced the voice they were hearing was actually that of AE, & not because of having casually heard AE's voice on some other occasion. Don Neumann *************************************************************************** From Ric All we can do is acknowledge the opinions expressed by the people who had the experience. If, based upon our own experience, we find their opinions incredible, that's always our prerogative. At a minimum I think we can probably all agree that whatever voice Betty and her mother heard was not inconsistent with what they thought Earhart sounded like. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 08:42:00 EST From: Warren Lambing Subject: WOJ again Please understand, a part of me wants to believe this is a for real reception of AE after landing on Niku, but part of me is very skeptical of it. So I will, at least half heartedly play Devils Advocate. It would great to know who W40K was working on July 4th or 5th 1937, to at least see what meter band he was working in. as far NY being the Norwich City, good possibility, but could also be W40K working a Ham in New York? For that matter WOJ, not sure if that has any significance, somehow I got lost as to how WOJ comes in, but since it appears to be a call sign for a shortwave station, it could be for example a Network feed. Please consider there are no satellites in 1937, and some Networks used Shortwave radio for a feed. Here is a quote from a web site dealing with the west coast networks. http://www.oldradio.com/archives/prog/westcoast.networks ____________________________________ The switch from CBS to Mutual was scheduled for December 29, 1936, the date which marked the expiration of the CBS/Don Lee contract. (In fact, for the last three months of the contract the CBS West Coast programs were produced at KNX and fed to KHJ for transmission to the network.[13]) The stations on the new Mutual network were the four Don Lee-owned stations, plus KFXM San Bernardino, KDON Monterey, KXO El Centro, KPMC Bakersfield, KVOE Santa Ana, and KGDM Stockton.[15] Also joining the network via shortwave hookup were KGMB Honolulu and KHBC Hilo. (A number of Pacific Northwest stations were added the following year.) _____________________________________________ Please note KGMB, was receiving the Network feed via shortwave, that shortwave feed relay had to have a call sign. WOJ appears from what Hue Miller wrote to be in the area of Miami FL, not a bad place to put some type of relay station, perhaps with feed out of NY NY. I want to believe it is the Norwich City, instead of NY NY, but it would be nice to get rid of some nagging doubts. Regards. Warren Lambing *************************************************************************** From Ric To summarize what we now so far about WOJ (thanks to Hue Miller): The January 1947 "List Alphabetique des Indicatifs d'Appel des Stations Terrestres, Mobiles, et Fixes" lists: WOJ Hialeah, Florida FX [ "Station performing a radio- communication service between fixed points (point-to-point)" ] No such station appears in the Dep't of Commerce list of all USA callsigns 1935 nor is there any such station in the Benere volumes for 1935-1937. Let's suppose for a moment that the station did exist in 1937 and carried a shortwave network feed from Mutual Radio in N.Y., N.Y. to KGMB, thus explaining why "KGMB" "N.Y. N.Y." and "WOJ" (and not, therefore, W4OK) appear in Betty's notes. By definition then we must also suppose that Mutual Radio was transmitting a radio drama of some kind that contained the other information in Betty's notes and that that drama was broadcast by KGMB. The abundant official radio traffic describing KGMB's activities in assisting with the Earhart search makes it very clear that no such radio drama was broadcast. KGMB did carry the March of Time broadcast on July 8 but that half-hour show with commercials and musical cues bore no resemblance to what Betty heard. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 08:49:45 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Re: Betty's Family's Shortwave Receiver >the same model radio that Betty's >family used must be in some museum or in some antique wireless collection. >Perhaps it's time to dig one up and see how well it receives with an 80 >foot antenna on various frequencies. That is an excellent idea. We should be able to narrow the field and come up with the correct model, and if one can be found, and we can get its owner to agree, we certainly can test it. Any meaningful test should, of course, include measurement of sensisivity and signal to noise ratio. Those are easy to do. >My great-grandmother owned a big 30's Philco >receiver with shortwave that my uncle has in his family room now. As I >remember, the selectivity was terrible. "Terrible" is a pretty general term. Most of those old sets seem to have selectivity of around 15 KHz, maybe 20. That is much wider than a communications receiver, but is consistent with the need to produce "high fidelity" audio. Anything sharper than 15 KHz will produce significant distortion of the audio due to "sideband clipping" in the I-F stage. This is not a problem in communications work because of the limited frequency response of voice transmissions, but for music, etc., it will really degrade the reproduction and a casual listener will not like it. >And stations would constantly fade in >and out when the dial was set at one SW frequency. This sounds, to me, like normal propagation phenomena at short wave. >Hams could often be heard over SW broadcast stations. This is the hallmark of poor image rejection. I would be willing to bet that you may have been actually tuned to the 14-MHz (20 meter) ham band, trying to listen to SW Broadcast, but actually hearing the images from the 19-meter SW broadcast band at 15 MHz... and of course, the ham signals were seemingly interfering, but really were right where they were supposed to be. In a superheterodyne radio with a 455-KHz I-F, the images pop up 910 KHz above the signal freq (or below, depending on which side of the signal frequency the local oscillator is operating on). I have seen the same thing happen with a 1939 RCA all-wave set that I own... it doesn't just happen on 20 meters but that seems to be the worst case. For Ric: Did Betty say anything to indicate how old the radio was, when they may have acquired it? For Hue Miller: Have you any Sears 'n Rareback literature from the 30s? LTM (who reads the Sears catalogue regularly, as she meditates) and 73 Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric It's Betty's recollection that the set was quite new. Her father "Ken" and their neighbor "Russ" had something of a friendly competion going to see whose radio could perform better. That's what prompted Ken to put up "the big aerial." I don't happen to have a 1930s Sears catalogue right handy but it seems like such a thing shouldn't be too hard to find. Locating a "Silvertone Cabinet Set" in a museum or collection could be a bit trickier. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:29:06 EST From: Ric Subject: The Psychic Wombat Predictably, Th' WOMBAT has come up with the answer to my "occult" question about Earhart's hotel in Java. It's "The Grand Hotel Preanger." No, he's not psychic, but he is "channeling" an impressive source of information. Purdue University has just begun putting its Earhart Special Collection on line. It's still in the Beta-test phase but there is already a ton of information available, and buried deep in the heap is a receipt from the Grand Hotel Preanger. Congratulations to Ross for digging it out. I originally learned the name of the hotel from a pencilled caption on the back of a photo sent to us by the widow of a Royal Netherlands East Indies Airlines captain who took pictures of AE when she was in Bandoeng. Last Monday when I was at Purdue I stumbled across the receipt that had recently been put up on the web and thought, "Hmmm, I'm gonna have to find a new question for the psychics." You can find the Purdue Beta-test at http://www.lib.purdue.edu/earhart/images/ It's still pretty difficult to use because there is no description of what each item is. You have to open something and look at it before you know what you've got and some of the files are huge. Nonetheless, there is already a lot of good stuff up and when they're done it will be a fabulous research source. You can download the stuff on the Purdue site but don't use it commercially without their express permission. We're going to be sending them copies of some of the original documents and photos we have and they don't (such as the Chater Report, the WPHC bone file, some of the Lae photos, Betty's notebook, etc.) so that they can be included in the Purdue collection. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:14:01 EST From: Rick Seapin Subject: Re: Speculation Time It has been well documented (New York Times, Los Angeles Times newspapers) that people in the know (Mantz, Putnam, Byrd) believed AE/FN probably ended up somewhere in the Phoenix island group. The question is: why was only a cursory search done of these islands? I can't put my finger on it, but something is not KOSHER with the search. *************************************************************************** From Ric Several of us have spent quite a few years now studying the search - how it was done and why it was done the way it was. There were mistakes made, no doubt about it. The initial actions of the Itasca are easy to fault and the captain's subsequent report is a classic case of cover-your-butt. The attitude of at least some of the searchers aboard the Colorado left something to be desired and the whole search operation was plagued with confusion and a lack of effective command and control. If I had to pick one key moment in the search when a crucial mistake was made it would be shortly after 10:00 a.m. on July 9 aboard the USS Colorado. The planes had just returned from their search of McKean, Gardner, and Carondelet Reef. The Senior Aviator, Lt. John Lambrecht, presumably made some kind of report to his commanding officer, Capt. Wilhelm Friedel. We don't know what he said, but somehow Friedel ended up writing an offical report that said that no signs of habitation were seen on any of the islands when in fact Lambrecht had seen clear signs of recent habitation on Gardner. The Sailing Directions which should have been available to Friedel described the island as uninhabited. What happened? - Did Lambrecht not tell his captain what he had seen at Gardner? - Did Friedel, in writing his report after the search had failed, conveniently forget to mention that his Senior Aviator in searching for lost people had seen signs of people where there should have been no people? Granted, it would have been a tough call. Do we stop and really search Gardner or do we continue our aerial search of the rest of the Phoenix Group where the airplane could be sitting right on a beach and the crew nearly dead of thirst and exposure? At the very least, when Friedel handed off command of the search to the captain of the Lexington a few days later, why didn't he say, "Be sure and send someone to check out Gardner. Our pilots said it looks like somebody might be there but we couldn't take time to investigate further."? Maybe he did say something like that, but there's no record of it. The other glaring failure of the search is the dismissal of the post-loss radio messages. We know now that some (like Betty's) were dismissed out of hand, while others - including the Wyoming message - were investigated at the time and judged to be genuine, and yet the Coast Guard later issued a statement that all of them had been investigated and proven to be either hoaxes or misunderstandings. The Earhart search was mismanaged and the mismagement was subsequently covered up but there is no indication that I have seen of a high level conspiracy to not find Amelia. "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere incompetence." LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:22:32 EST From: John Pratt Subject: Re Occult References >From Ric > >I agree with you ... mostly. > >The suitcase in the closet can, I think, be considered a marginal occult >reference. Without knowing whether the reference rings any bells in the >Earhart or Putnam family folklore, the very fact that the quote specifies >"California" means that the speaker was aware that the Putnam's at that time >had more than one house and that one of the houses was not in California. >That information was certainly not secret but neither was it widely >publicized. Possibly marginal, maybe more than marginal. A reference to a suitcase in a closet conveys very little information value in the usual mathematical sense, because there is a high probability that anyone has a suitcase in a closet. But the notes suggest that AE may have been sending this as a message to family. The most obvious reason is important suitcase contents. Consider Amanda's observation: >From Amanda > >That might have been where she was keeping her "popping off" letters. >But wouldn't they have had the "Honey, if anything happens..." >conversation before she left? "Popping off" papers might more probably be kept in a paper-storage location such as a desk or safe deposit box. A suitcase would be a relatively unusual (improbable) storage place. Other items of family significance might also be improbable to find in a suitcase. Therefore the prediction of the suitcase implied to contain things important to the family would be an unusual situation unknown outside a limited group. Occult, by definition. I doubt that the family, if they found and opened a suitcase containing personal messages or items, publicized the situation. At least, they would not have done so in the time frame of the Betty Notebook. So the (possible) tabloid headline is "Discarded Message Reveals Earhart Family Secrets". As Ric pointed out, information (or information pointing to information) unavailable to anyone else is a powerful argument. Also part of that requirement is that the information is not easily guessed (of high information content in the mathematical sense). Locally during the pollen season a statement "has kleenex in pocket" states a situation that only the subject can know but everyone expects. On the other hand a (measured, apparently) midpoint location is hard to guess and even less probable to be transmitted. So where would she leave the "popping off" papers or something like them? In a suitcase? Possible, but not the first place you would guess. Therefore I think the suitcase (and its contents) remains a potential "occult reference" whose power depends on its contents as well as its existence. LTM John Pratt 2373 ************************************************************************** From Ric Good point. I'll make some disceet inquiries with the Earhart (Morrissey) and Putnam families. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:29:39 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Take Sears Radio to Betty? If TIGHAR is able to borrow a Silvertone radio, wouldn't it be possible to take the radio to Betty and have her try to duplicate how she typically tuned it? Janet Whitney ************************************************************************* From Ric It was 63 years ago and she typically tuned it by sitting with her back to it and reaching back up over her head. What could we possibly learn by transporting a big old antique radio to a remote rural town so that Betty could play with the dial? If she placed the dial exactly on a harmonic of one of Earhart's frequencies we would all gasp and proclaim it to be a valuable experiment. If she didn't we'd dismiss it as meaningless. Let's focus our energies on research that will do us some good. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 10:33:28 EST From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: Speculation Time > From Rick Seapin > > It has been well documented (New York Times, Los Angeles Times > newspapers) that people in the know (Mantz, Putnam, Byrd) believed AE/FN > probably ended up somewhere in the Phoenix island group. The question is: > why was only a cursory search done of these islands? I can't put my finger > on it, but something is not KOSHER with the search. I always had the same impression of the search. It seemed to me that whatever was planned as a search quickly became a group grope and lost both intensity and direction. > From Ric > The Senior Aviator, Lt. John Lambrecht, presumably made some kind of > report to his commanding officer, Capt. Wilhelm Friedel. We don't know what > he said, but somehow Friedel ended up writing an offical report that said > that no signs of habitation were seen on any of the islands when in fact > Lambrecht had seen clear signs of recent habitation on Gardner. Does anyone know what Captain Friedel thought of having his battleship ordered to wander off on a search for a civilian woman? > At the very least, when Friedel handed off command > of the search to the captain of the Lexington a few days later, why didn't he > say, "Be sure and send someone to check out Gardner. Our pilots said it > looks like somebody might be there but we couldn't take time to investigate > further."? Maybe he did say something like that, but there's no record of it. What did Captain Friedel tell the Lexington? Was there a written report handed to the Lexington? What's in the Lexington log? > The Earhart search was mismanaged and the mismagement was subsequently > covered up but there is no indication that I have seen of a high level > conspiracy to not find Amelia. I read somewhere that it was the mid-30s when Annapolis was given a lot more attention that it had received in the past, after recognition of inabilites on the part of a large number of graduates (Check the fates of USN ships in the eara 1883-1938: there was a huge percentage of losses in non-combat situations. For the period 1938-1960, that number drops dramatically. I can work the numbers up again if anyone's interested.) Is it possible that some shortcoming their education had rendered the naval officers there less than willing to conduct a search? No, I'm not sure that knowing this, or quantifying it somehow, will do the Forum any good. > "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere >incompetence." Does anyone know who first said this? When I make a t-shirt that has this on it, I want to be able to have a proper citation. (I'm also looking for the first evidence of "What does not kill me makes me stronger," but I think that was from Star Trek.) *************************************************************************** From Ric We don't, unfortunately, have any candid comments from Friedel and his official report, of course, is very - well - official. The best indication of the attitude of the ship's company, however, might be the headline of the ship's newspaper The Colorado Lookout "PLANE SEARCH HALTS CRUISE". I have no idea who first said, "Never attribute to maggots that which can be explained by mere incontinence" but it seems particularly apropos these days. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 10:36:02 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Off Topic - Veteran's Day A totally off topic rumination while I enjoy a day off in advance of November 11... Our nation is experiencing something absolutely unique in its history, at this time. We don't yet know how it will all end, but we can rest assured of one thing: The matter will be resolved. It will be done in a manner consistent with the rule of law as defined under our Constitution. Think about these things: We exercised our right to vote, last Tuesday. In how many nations can people do this? In how many nations can the people be assured that the rule of law and the principles of liberty will be followed? We can, and do. And to whom do we owe our thanks for this? Our veterans. Take time to thank a veteran. 73 Mike E. ************************************************************************** From Ric This is the only Veteran's Day tribute I'll post. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 10:37:57 EST From: S. Wesley Smith Subject: Re: Take Sears Radio to Betty? Y'know Ric, I'm now pretty gun-shy about asking any questions for fear some in the forum will denigrate my curiosity. How can any person pretend elitism on this very public topic? I feel sorry for Janet Whitney. S. Wesley Smith *************************************************************************** From Ric Me too. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:01:59 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Re: Speculation Time > Upon close examination it > appears that the 911 call contains information that indicates that it is > almost certainly genuine - if not perfectly understood. The declaration of almost certainly genuine, especially at this stage, give me the willies. Especially if other "post loss messages" show promise via Bob B's work and the chronology project. I do agree with others who think that the other aspects of a message (radio technical issues and content/format) should play some part in the overall evaluation of authenticity. At the very least, Betty heard the coordinate description in several variations. Her first writing of South 391065 z or E can be interpreted so many ways as to be useless, and it contains the extra 0. The second version in brackets does look to be the same handwriting, but yet slightly different, as if it was written at a different time. You say that Betty wrote that at the same sitting, just before turning the page, but you are relying on some pretty distant memories for that. If the book was later shown to or even discussed with the Coast Guard or others, someone before TIGHAR may have played with the possible interpretations and suggested the bracketed interpretation which she then wrote down. Then there is the issue of how really secret this apparently pointless piece of info might be. Are you certain that the Putnam publicity machine didn't crank out huge amounts of radio and newsprint about how the flight across the Pacific was to be undertaken, with names of ships and close enough positioning to make this info public? A call to the local Coast Guard Station back then might have been enough to come up with a midpoint coordinate. Even a visit to a good library would do. Anyway, I would suggest a scaled rating system - maybe on a scale of 0 to 5, with 5 being certainly genuine - equivalent to the logged messages received by the Itasca or Lae. I would expect most would fall in the 0 to 1 range. Tom MM *************************************************************************** From Ric I pushed Betty hard on this during the interview (before I knew anything about the possible significance of the coordinates). She had already said that the explanatory note in the upper left corner of page 49 and the bracketed notation "There was a man with her..." on page 51 were added fairly recently (within the last ten years or so) and I had assumed that the coordinates in brackets on page 53 were also a later interpretation. Betty was adamant, however, that they were an original entry. I pointed out to her the similarity in the angled notation and brackets used on pages 51 and 53, but she was insistent that the entry on page 53 was original and tha she had bracketed it because she knew it was something important. This contention is borne out by a transcription of the notebook made by her neighbor, John H., when he contacted Fred Goerner in 1970. John's transcription includes the bracketed coordinates on page 53 exactly as they appear in the notebook (S 309' 165* E) but does not include the brackets notation on page 51 or the explanatory note on page 49. Was the Ontario's assigned position well-publicized? If it was we should be able to find it. All of that pre-flight publicity is still around. So far I've been able to find no reference to those coordinates anywhere except in the March 17, 1937 radio message from Ontario to her base in Tutuilla, American Samoa. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:04:52 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re Occult References > From John Pratt > A reference to a suitcase in a closet conveys very little information > value in the usual mathematical sense, because there is a high > probability that anyone has a suitcase in a closet. But the notes > suggest that AE may have been sending this as a message to family. > The most obvious reason is important suitcase contents. Were any of the post-loss messages broadcast by KGMB and identified as hoaxes or as suspected hoaxes? If Earhart heard one of her messages identified as a hoax, she may have been saying something with the suitcase comment that she knew was not common knowledge. It may have been a phrase that she only said to Putnam in private. For example, "when this is all over I'm going to fly to a remote island and ask you to get my suitcase out of my closet and meet me there." But the suitcase and closet wouldn't even have to exist for the phrase to have had some meaning. And if this was a secret phrase between Earhart and Putnam, I don't see how we could verify it now. Since my question may have been obscured by speculation, I'll repeat it: Were any of the post-loss messages broadcast by KGMB and identified as hoaxes or as suspected hoaxes? Prior to whatever we think may be the latest date that Betty would have heard the transmission. Frank Westlake LTM (who knows that you don't have to hold your breath to get AGE) ************************************************************************** From Ric We don't have scripts or transcripts of any of KGMB's news broadcasts during the search, so we don't know what was reported. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:09:55 EST From: Kerry Tiller Subject: Re: Speculation Time As for our frustration that the fragments in Betty's note book don't include stuff that we might expect a MAYDAY signal sent in the blind to contain; remember that Betty probably didn't tune in at the beginning of the transmission. It is even possible that by the time Betty tuned in, AE was in a two way conversation (of which Betty was only hearing AE) with W4OK. If AE thought she was (or really was) talking to a HAM in the States, it might make sense to transmit phone numbers to get a hold of people who had the contacts to help (like her husband). The suitcase in the closet may even have been an attempt by Amelia to send her own occult reference to George via the HAM, so that GP would know that what the HAM was reporting was really from Amelia. The KGMB and 3105 reference may have been AE trying to get W4OK to try to contact KGMB (since Amelia had no luck). If the transmission doesn't sound like a distress signal sent in the blind, maybe by that time it wasn't. It might be worth a try to find out if W4OKs log books might still be in existence. A "grandpa's old HAM stuff is up in the attic someplace" kind of thing. LTM (who likes to know who she's talking to) Kerry Tiller #2350 ************************************************************************** From Ric Mr. Carroll's papers are being searched. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:17:04 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: Interview with Betty >From Ric: > Olive remembered that her husband had been skeptical at first but > after listening for a while had become quite excited and had taken > the notebook with him when he went to inform the Coast Guard. Someone was looking into the Coast Guard's part in this. Did that turn up a dead end? > Betty is adamant that she retained the notebook while her father went > to the Coast Guard station. What about the neighbor? When Betty's father went next door he must've known at least the approximate frequency in order to have his neighbor tune in. There's also a very good chance that he would have given this information to the neighbor instead of tuning the neighbors radio himself. Are the neighbors still alive? I know there's been some discussion about the neighbors so I probably just missed something here. > The curious notation on page 44 just below and to the right of "31.05" > is "11:H". Betty can not explain what it is supposed to mean. I would expect it to be an abbreviation for "eleven hours." Colon's are rarely spoken and are probably associated with time more than anything else. I can't see any way that an eleven hour period is of any significance in this situation though, and this transmission doesn't appear to have occurred eleven hours after they left Howland. "Eleven and a Half" is the time zone, but that speculation doesn't do us any good. Frank Westlake LTM (who knows that experienced divers make mistakes) *************************************************************************** From Ric The neighbors are no longer alive. There may be children we can track down. It's worth noting that at the time of day Betty heard the transmissions in St. Pete is was around 11:00 a.m. in the Central Pacific. Betty's only other use of a colon in the notebook is in the context of noting the time ("since 4:30", "5:10", "5:30", etc.). ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:28:04 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Purdue list > From Ric > You can find the Purdue Beta-test at h>ttp://www.lib.purdue.edu/earhart/images/ > > It's still pretty difficult to use because there is no description of what > each item is. You have to open something and look at it before you know what > you've got and some of the files are huge. Actually I've been messing around inside the site for quite a while through the "back door". If you go in the correct way, you can search for specifics and also read a brief description of what each item is. Well for most of the items. As Ric says, some of the files run into over a hundred megabytes each. Here's the list. Sorry for the length of the post..: These descriptions will match most of the images at the URL Ric posted, Th' WOMBAT ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Wombat. Actually the list is way too long to be included in a forum posting. We'll probably do something like put it up on the Tighar website, maybe with direct links to the Purdue site if they don't object. Could be a dynamite research source. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:49:56 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Recognizing AE's voice Having heard Earhart's voice on a number of occasions I'd like to add something here. >as for Nauru, they merely > reported the _same_ (unintelligible) voice they'd heard _earlier_ only > this time without the sound of aircraft engines... obviously that voice > & sound of aircraft engines, in that isolated part of the Cenral > Pacific, would have been reasonably concluded as belonging to AE, even > though they'd probably never heard her voice before. Nauru was not manned by Americans. Have you ever heard an Australian accent? Or Spanish? Or genuine British? Well that's the difference between Nauru hearing Earhart and hearing someone else. They would certainly be able to pick up the accent on 6210. People in the US somethimes forget that unlike those of us living in civilized countries, (where we all speak one language) sometimes we need a dictionary to work out what people from different parts of the "States" are saying. A visitor to the US can travel from across a county line and discover a whole other language. I have little doubt that Nauru staff would have regognised Amelia's voice.. Th' WOMBAT (Just kidding about the "civilized" bit... really...) *************************************************************************** From Ric Good point. I wonder how "foreign" and distinctive Amelia's accent may have sounded to Betty and her mother. Although they lived in Florida they were not southerners. Betty was born in Idaho in 1922 and her family moved to Tampico, Mexico when she was nine months old. Her father got a job through his brother working in the oil fields down there. In 1926 the family moved to St. Petersburg because Olive was pregnant with Betty's sister Jean and there was concern that the medical care in Tampico was not all it should be. (Olive's parents had recently moved to St. Pete.) In 1929 the family drove to Spokane, Washington (that's right - drove from St. Pete to Spokane) where Betty's father Ken hoped to find work but the Depression hit and there was no work to be found. Meanwhile, Ken's previous employer in St. Pete - the power company - offered him a promtion from meter reader to clerk if he would come back. So back they went across the country and moved into the house where Betty lived when she heard Amelia several years later. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 11:51:49 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Speculation Time > My bigger concern is there seems to be no I see now I wasn't all that clear by this statement. What I meant was that there seems to be no evidence that my speculated radio call was made or at least not how I think I would have made it. I think there is sufficient evidence that TIGHAR's theory has excellent merit and that there is a lack of evidence or rationale for any alternative theory. Perhaps my suggested radio call WAS made and either no one picked it up or we have never heard from those who did. If Betty's notebook refers to a date of the 5th or later there is no reason to believe AE wasn't calling out for help on the days prior. Most likely she was. Again, either no one heard her calls or we haven't heard from those who did. That could explain why the Betty notebook call seems not to fit our scenario well. If she had been radioing for help in the expected manner for teo or three days without getting results and the anticipated swift rescue had not materialized it is no wonder the next series of calls might exhibit a bit of panic. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:10:13 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Take Sears Radio to Betty? Of course, the one thing that may be gained (preferably from taking Betty to the radio - probably much easier to do) is that it might "jog her memory" and bring back something else she's got just under the surface. Amazing the sorts of related details one can remember when handed the "weapon". Th' WOMBAT ************************************************************************* From Ric Betty really does not want to travel. She cares for her husband who has in in the early to middle stages of Alzheimer's. It seems to be true that objects can help trigger memories. That's why we asked her to explain the entries in the notebook by giving her the original notebook and we went over a lot of old family pictures while we talked about those days. Her memory seemed very sharp and she was fairly matter-of-fact about it all until the very end of the interview when she picked up a copy of Goerner's book that her neighbor John had brought along. She was talking about how glad she was that someone was finally paying attention to her story and how she never paid any attention to books like this because she had always known the truth about what really happened. As she idly flipped through the book she came across a photo of AE and she stared at it for a minute and then said, "You know, I can still hear her ..." and then she broke down and cried. It was rather an amazing and very moving thing to see. I think our four-hour interview got what Betty has to offer us and I'm not eager to put her through that again. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:14:18 EST From: Warren Lambing Subject: Re: WOJ again Sorry if I was confusing, I highly doubt KGMB was getting a shortwave feed off the east coast. I was just using it as a reference that shortwave was being use to relay network feeds, at least to a point, most U.S. network feeds where through ma Bell, via phone lines, however if you want to get a feed to certain areas across the ocean then shortwave was a possibility (and one that was apparently used, the reason for the KGMB reference). Miami would more then likely make a good shortwave feed to Africa, or South America. All I am saying it would be nice to get better dates on WOJ and get and idea of what it was used for, for all I know it could be use for CW. I am also not sure that WOJ would have anything to do with what Betty heard, other then perhaps being on or near the frequency she heard, which would be of interest. But is also of interest to rule it out. Regards. Warren Lambing ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:23:16 EST From: Warren Lambing Subject: Re: Betty's Family's Shortwave Receiver I am sure the people on this list can find one, I would be happy to take a shot, and I am sure other people have more connections then I do. Here is a picture of a 1937 Silvertone Radio for sale at the moment, which appears to have shortwave, from the picture at least. http://www.cris.com/~stwradio/silvrtn4565.htm Regards. Warren *************************************************************************** From Ric Cool! It's not the "cabinet set" but the insides might be the same and the dial is probably similar. I'll send Betty the photo and see what she says. $325 - restored. Opinions please ..... is there anything useful to be learned from this radio? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:24:21 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Recognizing AE's voice I saw a brief film clip of AE a couple years ago, with sound, and I still recall how her voice sounded - I suppose it's because it wasn't quite what I expected. Nevertheless, I'd bet that based on that film, I'd recognize a voice that sounded like AE, and I'm inclined to think that maybe Betty & her mother heard her voice in some context that they would remember (maybe the movietone news?). ltm jon 2266 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:27:09 EST From: Pete Subject: Silvertone schematics For the Radio Rangers I've found a site: www.nostalgiaair.org There's a directory there of over 30,000 schematics to radios, including the Silvertones. I've eliminated two models: the 4500A and the 6103A, both from 1937, as neither is a cabinet model. For Ric still checking on museums for vintage radios, trying to get one near Wilmington. I'll try the collectors' groups as well, see what those folks have to say. The quest continues..... Pete ***************************************************************************Fro m Ric Just friggin' incredible ... the information that can be found on the web, and the forum's ability to find it. Good work Pete. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:48:31 EST From: Vern Klein Subject: Re: Midpoint >We know that it was Noonan's habit to write little notes to himself and to her >regarding position, heading changes, miles covered, miles remaining, etc. >Some of those scraps of paper from earlier in the flight are in the Purdue >collection. Is it so hard to believe that under these circumstances AE could >pick up such a note and read it off, not taking time to plot out what it >meant? Yes, and I can easily believe that Amelia had what she THOUHGT was the last scrap of paper with their current position, but she had got hold of the wrong scrap of paper. She may not have been in a state of mind to realize the coordinates didn't make sense... if such coordinates meant that much to Amelia anyway. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:23:49 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: WOJ redux > Let's suppose for a moment that the station did exist in 1937 and carried a > shortwave network feed from Mutual Radio in N.Y., N.Y. to KGMB --I do not feel this would be the most likely situation, in this regard: a relay station servicing Hawaii would, i feel, be on the WestCoast. ( Altho i cannot disprove that idea, i could supply examples of "West Coast to Pacific radio circuits". Whatever WOJ did, i feel had to do with communications with probably So. America and the Carribean.) I believe Hawaii would have been serviced by special high-quality phone lines to the west coast, then relay station there. ( My father worked at such a station, but for teleprinter instead of voice circuits, in western washington. Let me tell you, the acres of antennas on telephone poles was something to behold, and made any long- distance radio enthusiast long to try out the top-notch receiver and antenna combination.) The lit i have, has only minimal info on WOJ. However, here are some clues that might help figure what WOJ did, and how it fits into Betty's picture: Hialeah FL fixed-point stations WNC, WNC2 thru WNC5, WOJ Lawrenceville, NJ fixed-point stations WNB, WOB, WOF, WOK, WON, WOT, WOT2 thru WOT5, WTZ (and maybe others i didn't see in the list.) The Berne call-sign list of 1947 makes it clear that these are not shore-to-ship telegraph stations, as were WAX and WOM, Hiahleah. I am thinking WOJ was an overseas telephone station of the AT&T network. The clue to me, is the number of callsigns at one plant, in this case especially the NJ site. ( Typically, the big stations with rows of transmitters had groups of callsigns assigned to them, callsigns differentiating frequency bands of operation or beam direction for one particular branch of the operation. ) And the seeming similarity in style of the callsigns in these 2 examples. If i'm right, proof of this should not be too long in coming, as there has to be some listing of this in the listener's reports to the radio magazines. As for nailing down more specifics on Betty's radio: I cannot access any catalogs for many months. ( living in 4 states in the last 10 years pretty well shuffled things.) The fact that it was a "cabinet set" ( i assume meaning the same thing as the more common, and now current term, "console radio", i.e. floor standing upright cabinet ) means that it MAY be better than average, but not necessarily. If one really wanted to research this, one could look into some collection of schematics for, say 1936-1937 and pick out the Sears models. There won't be all that many, and you can pretty well get an idea of their capability. If you want a real-life model to test, you can find a similar schematic from some other brand, say Sparton, RCA, Philco, etc., which gives you a similar capability with greater liklihood of finding such a set on hand. There's nothing magic in these schematics, manufacturers had to use basically quite close circuits, same tubes, etc. If you really wanted to be gung ho, you could feed in a talk show into the "external modulation" jack of a signal generator connected to your test radio. You adjust the test generators output downward til you start losing understanding of what is going on in the talk show speech. Then you measure the actual input to the radio with a selective voltmeter. That might be more realistic than the usual single-tone test. **************************************************** And further from Hue: Just happened to be relaxing with a '36 Short Wave Craft magazine and i see that it lists some of the call letters i mentioned in my last post, the call letters that i considered associated in some way with WOJ. Well, i see that these call letters are listed in this issue of SWC, but not in my '35 radio list. By way of explanation, i could only offer, that this was a period of explosive growth in radio communications, maybe like the growth of the telegraph almost 100 years earlier, or the growth of networked computers about 60 years later. One of the stations listed as being on the air 1936 is WNC Hialeah. I want to make clear that i believe this is only one callsign for the same international-traffic station, which i also believe, and believe time will prove, includes the facility or service with call letters WOJ. I consider that there is practically no more doubt that WOJ was in fact contemporary with the year Betty reports for her reception. Perhaps as the subject of call signs and locations and purpose and owner becomes clearer, i will compile and summarize that data, for the sake of TIGHAR's own files, if that is wanted. As for the purpose of WOJ: the listings for the "sister stations" (WOB, WOK, WNC etc. ) say, for example, for one specific call letter appearing on one specific channel, "Phones Bermuda evenings", or "Phones England mornings". I do not know whether that means "links overseas phone calls" or not, but i suspect so, in addition to one-way business messages, news reports, and such, anything that would pay. The Lawrenceville NJ radio site with many transmitters makes me suspect the owner was AT&T - or was it IT&T. ( Mackay and some other well known communications-company names of the same era only provided telegraphic messaging, as far as i know.) The lists also advise that some overseas stations in this "Phones somewhere" class, had regular broadcast programming at other hours. ( US stations were prohibited from this, i believe.) I vaguely remember from the early 1960s hearing such AT&T stations. There was no shortage of them. Satellite systems a few years later put a gradual end to that. Those of us who listened to news broadcasts up through the 1960s and a little later will recall the "shortwave radio" sounding reports filed by overseas reporters in our local radio news programs. To summarize: Altho i have not found the definite black-and- white listing yet- i am still working on this - it does appear that: 1) WOJ was one of a group of callsigns attached to a Hialeah FL shortwave communications station 2) the station did exist in 1937 3) the station provided voice messaging service - maybe including news reports and telephone traffic - to specific overseas countries - in the overall area of South America or the Caribbean - and probably on a fee basis (alto i don't think i can prove this latter part just yet.) ********************************************************* And again from Hue: >Miami would more then likely make a good shortwave feed to Africa, or South >America. I am wagering WOJ had nothing to do with broadcast relays at all. I suspect i will have proof of this in the near future. > All I am saying it would be nice to get better dates on WOJ and > get and idea of what it was used for, for all I know it could be use for CW. I believe the information coming in, will rule WOJ in. ( Yes, i did start out thinking i would prove that WOJ didn't come on line til later than 1937.) And that it will rule out CW operation. > I am also not sure that WOJ would have anything to do with what Betty heard, > other then perhaps being on or near the frequency she heard, which would be > of interest. But is also of interest to rule it out. You know, these old vacuum-tube receivers do drift, in their tuning. Depends on the ambient temperature, if it is steady or changing, the quality of the radio, and the frequency band. I would think up around 16-18 MHz she would need to tweak the tuning, to keep on frequency, at least once in a 20-45 minute stretch. I am thinking it possible the reception includes snatches of more than one thing going on. Else how explain 2 call letters for stations with highly different purposes? BTW, the "Fixed-point" stations WOJ, WNC, WOK, etc. were intended to sit on their channels; unlike ham radio, they really weren't intended, and may have been physically impossible, to retune, other than to switch to another defined channel. Also, the Fixed-point stations ran, as in the example of the stations above, at least 2000 watts, up to 5000, and not infrequently more. So at Betty's, this would, i think, be a very strong signal. More speculation, and not much help, sorry: but maybe the WOJ reception was an overload or image signal picked up on her radio? ( image = signal not really there, due to receiver limitations / weaknesses ). In that scenario, WOJ would have to be about 900 kcs away from the "actual" conversations Betty was listening to, and came in as a kind of "override". If i can find some actual frequencies for WOJ, i can maybe rule this in/out. Hue Miller ************************************************************************** From Ric The notebook says quite specifically W4OK Howland port "OR" WOJ Howland port. Betty did not hear both call signs. She heard something that might have been either. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:35:44 EST From: Marty Moleski Subject: "Never attribute to malice..." > From Mike Holt > "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere > incompetence." > > Does anyone know who first said this? When I make a t-shirt that > has this on it, I want to be able to have a proper citation. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Hanlon's-Razor.html says: Hanlon's Razor prov. A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, that reads "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." The derivation of the Hanlon eponym is not definitely known, but a very similar remark ("You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.") appears in "Logic of Empire", a classic 1941 SF story by Robert A. Heinlein, who calls it the 'devil theory' of sociology. Heinlein's popularity in the hacker culture makes plausible the supposition that 'Hanlon' is derived from 'Heinlein' by phonetic corruption. A similar epigram has been attributed to William James, but Heinlein more probably got the idea from Alfred Korzybski and other practitioners of General Semantics. Quoted here because it seems to be a particular favorite of hackers, often showing up in sig blocks, fortune cookie files and the login banners of BBS systems and commercial networks. This probably reflects the hacker's daily experience of environments created by well-intentioned but short-sighted people. Compare Sturgeon's Law, Ninety-Ninety Rule. > (I'm > also looking for the first evidence of "What does not kill me makes > me stronger," but I think that was from Star Trek.) What does not kill me makes me stronger. --- Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzche (1844-1900) "Maxims and Arrows" (8), Twilight of the Idols, 1889, tr. R. J. Hollingdale, 1968 http://www.mindspring.com/~samhobbs/alt-quotations/quotations.html#thatwhic hdoesnotkill Note to the TIGHAR moderator: feel free to apply Ric's Razor to this submission. Marty #2359 ************************************************************************** From Ric There's a corollary to Ric's Razor that says, "Erudition always trumps irrelevance." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 14:14:28 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Re: Speculation Time Thanks for the additional info on the notebook. The fact that the bracketed coordinate was in the 1970 transcription helps, but it still leaves about 33 years to have found it's way there. Here is what drew me to the concern. I believe I see differences in the bracketed coordinate in the S, E, 3, and to some extent the 5 from those clearly written as part of the sequential stream of info. Might be worth having someone who is qualified in such things look at it. The other issue which in retrospect I think I stated poorly is that anyone who knew that the flight was to be from Lae to Howland could have picked out (arbitrarily) the midpoint from a chart in a library, or made a call to a knowledgeable friend, and gotten something close enough to perpetrate a possible hoax. Nowhere does the message refer to a ship or other notable feature at that point - that would have been quite convincing, if the info was not public. Instead, it is just a coordinate along the route, and anyone could have picked that out reasonably well. There is a temptation to assign value to it because today we know that the Ontario was stationed nearby, but we are reading that into the message. Remember also that hams are interested in communicating with distant places, and may have had good charts/maps themselves. Tom MM ************************************************************************** From Ric One of the steps we have planned is to submit the notebook and handwriting examples we collected from Betty to a Forensic Document Examiner recognized as an expert witness by courts in California. I'll argue with you about the liklihood of a hoaxer hitting upon those exact coordinates. >>... anyone who knew that the flight was to be from Lae to Howland could have picked out (arbitrarily) the midpoint from a chart in a library, << But it's not the midpoint in the flight. >>or made a call to a knowledgeable friend, and gotten something close enough to perpetrate a possible hoax.<< The knowledgable friend would have to be intimatley familiar with the flight preparations. >>Nowhere does the message refer to a ship or other notable feature at that point - that would have been quite convincing, if the info was not public.<< You miss the point. If the message referred to the Ontario (the coordinates having been received by the hoaxer from his knowledgable friend) then it wouldn't make any sense at all for Amelia to be sending those coordinates. The presence of those coordinates in the notebook only makes sense if the speaker does not understand what they mean. >>Instead, it is just a coordinate along the route, and anyone could have picked that out reasonably well.<< No, it is not just a coordinate along the route. In fact, (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) it is not a coordinate along the route at all. It is (IF we assume that a "five" is heard as a "nine") exactly the assigned plane guard position of the Ontario. >>There is a temptation to assign value to it because today we know that the Ontario was stationed nearby, but we are reading that into the message.<< Yes, we are interpreting an entry that Betty was not sure she heard correctly (hence the question mark) very slighlty and in a logical way to something that fits perfectly. We're doing something similar when we select W4OK over WOJ, and when we connect "George" and "get the suitcase in my closet" and "Calf." into a single phrase. Our speculation about "N.Y. N.Y. or something that sounded like New York" actually being "New York City" and possibly therefore "Norwich City" is more of a stretch, but it's the same process. This is not changing the message to something we want it to say. We're starting from the assumption that the message was imperfectly heard (as noted in the original entries) and that whatever was actually said made sense to the speaker when she said it within the context of her situation. Wer'e looking for interpretations that turn apparent gibberish into meaningful communication. LTM, Ric Remember also that hams are interested in communicating with distant places, and may have had good charts/maps themselves. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 14:16:29 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Coast Guard records? I have a request in to the National Archives re the St. Petersburg station desk logs, records, etc for Jul 37. To date, no response. Status: Pending. Ron Bright ************************************************************************ From Ric Thanks Ron. We'll stand by. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 14:17:38 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: WOJ redux In the late '40s, "special high quality telephone lines" to/from the East and West coasts were still pretty much "lo fi" (probably 6 kc audio at best). And program material sent to NBC affiliates in the Hawaiian Islands was by 16" transcription disks (I know, I recorded them). I'd agree SW relay stations to the Pacific would be on the west coast, although it COULD be done from the east if necessary, providing the appropriate phased antenna arrays were in place. Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 14:18:38 EST From: Tom King Subject: Pooped out in the Pacific Can the all-knowing Forum give me a concise description of the lavatory facilities aboard Earhart's Electra? LTM (who's flushed with embarassment) Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 14:26:05 EST From: Rick Seapin Subject: Island survival If I remember correctly, Betty could have heard the post flight transmission as late as July 9th. That would be July 10th on Niku, right? That would be eight days on the island. I imagine AE and FN took some snacks with them on their long flight to Howland, sandwiches, fruit, tea or coffee. May be a small bottle of water. My question is directed to members and subscribers who have been to Niku in the summer time. Is it REASONABLY possible AE and FN could have survived eight days in that type of harsh environment? Judging from the Lae gallery pictures, both look extremely skinny and unfit for such an ordeal. *************************************************************************** From Ric Of course, we have zero information about what emergency provisions may have been carried aboard the airplane other than to say that weight was a major concern. We do, however, know that a cache of provisons was left by the rescuers of the Norwich City survivors in 1929 on the same part of the island where we think AE and FN came ashore. Supplemetal provisions aside, there is plenty of food available on Niku if you're hungry enough. Water would be the big concern you can catch rain from a passing squall (if there is a passing squall) and there were a few cocnut trees in bearing on that part of the island in 1937. Bottom line: it wouldn't be much fun but you could survive. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 19:53:03 EST From: Steve G. Subject: WX Forecasts, Etc. Thanks for your continued patience in answering my basic questions about the recent and pending expeditions. In describing how the 4 castaways on Niku III came to stay onshore, you mentioned, "As we were getting ready to return to the ship we received word that the weather forecast for the next day was for significantly higher seas...." How did the Naia obtain weather forecasts, and will there be any change on the next expedition? It sounds like you had at least 12-hour weather warning back in '97. IIRC, the last expedition tried out some satellite phones that didn't work so great, but I'm wondering if the Naia, as part of her normal dive excursion operations, has been upgraded with Internet access, allowing the team to possibly obtain longer-lead-time and satellite forecasts? Although the wide availability of digital cameras by prospective expedition members may make this question irrelevant, does the Naia have a darkroom, or are expedition photos only developed afterwards back on Fiji? Finally, you've vividly described, as a literally life-and-death adventure, the difficulties of coming ashore on Niku when the swells are running high. If Niku IIII is unfortunate enough to encounter similar wave conditions, do you have an alternative approach in mind for embarkation? LTM (who's had her share of ups and downs) Steve G., Tighar # something or other *************************************************************************** From Ric Nai'a's weather info came from an HF SSB radio fax system (I'm not sure how it worked). Our sat phone worked great. Don't leave home without one. I'm not aware of any internet-capable upgrade top Nai'a but, depending on the media arrangements, we may have that capapbility on the expedition. We've always done all of our photo developing after we got home. As you say, digital technology will change that somewhat but really good photos will still probably rely on conventional technology. Good photos depend on good optics and so far I have not been impressed with what has been available on digital camera bodies. Finally, we'll be going at a time of year that should greatly minimize the chance of tropical cyclone activity - but if we get real unlucky, we're screwed. There is no alternative way to get ashore (unless you have a helicopter handy). ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:31:06 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Batteries This may have been attacked already, but if we suppose radio use was attempted for 2 or 3 days, on battery power only, do we have any idea of the amp-hour capacity of the batts aboard the 10E ? Hue Miller ************************************************************************** From Ric That horse took a good beating on the forum a year or so ago but I wouldn't say it's dead. Anyone recall what we decided? If need be I can go back and plumb the forum archives. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:41:20 EST From: David Evans Katz Subject: lavatory facilities The lavatory on the Electra 10-A presently being restored at the New England Air Museum at Bradley Airport in Windsor Locks, Connecticut is located in the rear of the airplane. I assume that this configuration would also be in AE's 10-E. David Evans Katz *************************************************************************** From Ric The airline version of the airplane came with a "fully equipped lavatory, heated and ventilated" at the rear of the cabin. We know there was an enclosed compartment at the rear of the cabin in NR16020. If you entered the airplane through the cabin door, there was a door immediately on your right that opened outward into the cabin. That would be the lavatory in the airline version and it seems logical that there was at least a toilet in there in Earhart's airplane. With two pilots and an auto pilot aboard it seems like those arrangements would be adequate. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:44:25 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: WOJ redux > From Ric > The notebook says quite specifically W4OK Howland port "OR" WOJ > Howland port. Betty did not hear both call signs. She heard > something that might have been either. But why "W4OK or WOJ", one with a "4" sound but not the other? Why not "W4OK or W4OJ", both with a "4" sound, or "WOK or WOJ", neither with a "4" sound? I think there's a good possibility that she had heard both callsigns sometime prior and that when she heard them this time she wasn't sure which of the two she heard. Or perhaps she initially heard "W40K Howland port" then later thought she heard something that sounded like "WOJ" so she wrote "or W0J Howland port" below the first line. I've done this same sort of thing while trying to extract callsigns and frequencies from weak signals. If either one of those is true then she may have heard both callsigns. Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric I disagree. This seems to me to be a very clear case of either/or, not both. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:46:18 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Take Sears Radio to Betty? For Wesley - don't hesitate to ask - just remember, they can't eat you! Think it through, and go full steam ahead. Ric (not that he'd admit it) is exceedingly tolerant of honest curiosity or honest ignorance (that is, lack of knowledge). Ignorance can be fixed - stupidity is forever. And we've seen a few of those around here, but they don't seem to last. I'd feel sorry for Janet too, except that I think that she likes it the way it is for her .. even though she drives me nuts sometimes. ltm jon 2266 *************************************************************************** From Ric Okay, okay, I admit it. I'm a nice guy. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:02:31 EST From: Warren Lambing Subject: Re: Betty's Family's Shortwave Receiver Ric asked: >Opinions please ..... is there anything useful to be > learned from this radio? $325.00 looks high, Sivertone's are not very collectable, however there are many out there, $150.00 more reasonable, but I haven't purchase a radio in a long time. I really think you can find a working model of Betty's radio just identify the model. Whether it is useful I don't know. I will see if I can get some pages for Silvertone radios on Monday and Tuesday, don't know if I can but will give it a try.. Regards. Warren Lambing *************************************************************************** From Ron Bright There is no dispute that she heard a 2-3 hour transmission on her radio, as confirmed by mom and dad and supported by the notebook. It's the content or the source that is in dispute. She could have heard it on her car radio. In my opinion, even if you found her Silvertone radio in the basement, you can't replicate the signals she heard. If there was a question she made up the whole thing,an examine of her old radio might show she could not have heard anything on that frequency. But that is not the case. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric I agree. I can't see what playing aroud with an antique radio would prove. *************************************************************************** From Ken Knapp I just got motivated to look in a book I have. It's called "Collector's Guide To Antique Radios" by Marty and Sue Bunis. I looked up Silvertone radios, and noted all console models which show promise of being Betty's radio. They are: 1937 - 4485, 4486, 4487; 1936 - 1911, 1946; no year mentioned - 1580, 1650, 1720, 1806, 1822, 1835, 1851, 1972, 1993, 4585, 6138, 6156, 6192 I only wish there were pictures of these models in the book. Also, if it is of any value to the forum, I have a cassette tape around her somewhere I recorded when the Voyager was doing the round-the-world nonstop flight. It is a recording I made off the air of the communications taking place over the period of a couple days. I heard both sides of the communications, and it struck me it might be of interest in showing what the signals might be like from various places during the trip. Ken Knapp *************************************************************************** From Janet Whitney Didn't Sears & Roebuck contract with radio manufacturers to produce a line of radios that would bear the "Silvertone" label but were essentially the same as the manufacturers' own major brands? Just as Toyota Corollas and Chevrolet Prizms are produced in the same auto assembly plant today from the same major components with minor sheet metal differences? Also, I understand that there were many "utility" stations for all sorts of purposes before satellites and underseas cable networks became common. Earhart may have spoken with George Putnam by long distance telephone via a shortwave "utility" station owned by A T & T. Janet Whitney ************************************************************************** From Ric If I recall correctly, the last place that Earhart talked to Putnam by phone was Bandoeng, Java roughly ten days before the Lae/Howland flight. It's hard to imagine that conversation resembling anything Betty heard. ************************************************************************** From Janet Whitney If there is a Sears Silvertone radio like the one Betty's family used that is for sale, why not buy it, fix it up (if repair is required) and give it to her? I would be willing to send TIGHAR $20 for that purpose. Janet Whitney ************************************************************************** From Ric A sweet thought, and one I'd happily support - but first we have to figure out what radio it was and then find one. If it turns out that there is no Sears Silvertone model that matches Betty's recollection of what the set looked like, we have a problem. Who is wrong? Betty or her mother? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:05:45 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Take Sears Radio to Betty? Ric wrote: >It was rather an amazing and very moving thing to see. I think our four-hour >interview got what Betty has to offer us and I'm not eager to put her through that >again. What a trooper - I move you make her an honorary Tighar. ltm jon ************************************************************************** From Ric You betcha. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:43:16 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty hears Earhart/ McGuffin or Egg McMuffin ? I may be the lone standout, but I don't see enough credible,reliable evidence to support your definitive conclusion that the notation of " {S 09' 165 E (?)} appearing in Betty's notebook confirms conclusively that it came from Earhart . By Betty's own recollection, the "S 3 09' 165E ?" entry is a corrected or revised version of the original number "South 391065 E or Z " appearing on her normal line entry.This revision, she thought, might be what she heard, that is it was her "surest" recollection and thus she added it in the margin with a question mark. I see that the revised entry appears on a severe slant above the line in a quite different format ( minutes(' ) are added and a space between the numbers indicates a rather professional, latitude/longitude position. If the revised number were an immediate correction as she re-thought it, it seems to me that it would more than likely appear on the same line. Was that second entry written contemporaneously? What did she recall? Did her dad help her reconstruct that number. Thus Betty did not really know which number sequence was correct and took a second stab at it with the second entry. Thus this one single entry of an admitttedly dubious reconstructed number, that may or may not have been correctly recorded, is just not enough evidence to conclusively establish a real post loss transmission from Earhart. Whatever the reasons were for her lack of certainty, static, fading, etc.,the fact also remains that the first entry may be correct and that goes nowhere. Certainly we also must take into account Betty's state of mind and the circumstances of that intercept and how she recorded them. A teenager, aware of AE's flight, suddenly hears "Earhart" calling, an excited father who runs next door, a mom who "recognizes" AE's voice, intermittent signals, etc.; it is no wonder her accuracy may be off and less reliable than say a professional ham. All of these factors suggest an extreme caution in accepting this as a accurate document. Other explanations may be plausibe .The US airways were full of hams listening and attempting to contact AE .The ham network may be more of research tool than we think in explaining post loss messages, for instance the W4OK, KGMB, notes appearing in the notebook.( I'd like to look at the logs of W6BGH,W6ALJ, W6CU, and W6CQK, all amateur stations on the west coast, assigned to "monitor" AE.) Following up on the lack of signficant,position information heard by Betty, I must second Pat Gaston's opinion when he again reminds us that Amelia would have been absolutely out of her mind not to have broadcast some kind of approximate position during the three hours of Betty's intermittent ,but relatively good intercept. If AE could transmit various numbers, names, SOS,etc., she must be regarded as competent. It's also interesting to look at the numerical rearrangement of the first notation:South 391065 Z or E : the South 391 becomes S 3 09' and the last three digits 065 become 165 E. How does Betty explain the rather dramatic difference between say 391 (phonetic) changing to 309. "Nine" doesn't sound like "0" (zero); and "0"(zero) doesn't sound like "l". . Amelia knows damn well about where she is . AE had a compass,a world class navigator, who was then healthy and doing his best to navigate and find a position before crashing. AE, if she safely reached land,knew that her life depended on transmitting a "meaningful" position. If indeed she fortutitously grabbed one of Noonan's navigator notes that had the midpoint coordinates on it,(pure speculation) and transmitted it, she would certainly clarify that positon in her next three hours of transmisions. "That's the Ontario position". ( I believe the most likely note she had re positon was the one she radioed Lae: 4 33' S 159 06 E, a note that Noonan would have handed her.) It's nonsense she just started the broadcast with a position,then omitted it for the next crucial 2-3 hours. Other entries in her notebook damage the credibility of Betty's journal as a record of a genuine Earhart transmissions. Example of mind-numbing transmisions: look at the stream of numbers immediately following the so called midway coordinate- "fig 8-3 30 500 Z, "3E ;mj3b", and "z 38z-13 8983638". Its inconceiveable that AE would not have followed a genuine postion report of any kind with that sequence of meaningless, mumbo jumbo numbers.(Unless she wanted to give GP her PIN number, or lthe sponsor was MJB coffee!) Betty never hears any of AE's routine, normal radio protocol transmissions such as " Itasca, " (her lifeline and only point of contact in 20 hours) "KHAQQ," "latitude" "longitude" or any word associated with radio problems or bearings, or missing Howland, etc. She may have been in exigent circumstances, but she was mentally alert and physically able to operate a radio for some three hours. One of the most glaring omissions in the Betty notebook is Betty' failure or negligence to put a date or some relevant time marker on the notebook pages, or within weeks of the intercept. A teenager's behavior,maybe, but why didn't mom and dad add a date.The intercept of the century and noone in the family writes down what date. In sum it is too late to get an accurate reconstruction of her 1937 memory or lthe entries and thus I find it difficult to depend basically on this single entry to "prove" the "smoking gun" authenticity claim. It may have been written contemporanously but the analsyis of that ambigous entry comes far to late for me to place all my bets on. ( I wonder why the Betty's family waited some 33 years before contacting Goerner in 1970). And technically,forum short wave experts and experts that I have talked to, say it is virtually impossible ( one said "impossible") for a Flordia daylight reception of 3205 or 6210 between 3-6pm from 50 watt transmitter near Howland. Nightime maybe. I don't think we can depend on the one in a million shot to support without qualification the theory Betty received real signals from AE. Some radio guy has got to stick his neck out and give a best most probable chance of her receiving Earhart. How do we then account for the "S 09' and 165 E" position,if it were authentic and correctly recorded by Betty.The great question, if the premise is true. Although all the facts aren't in yet, my guess is that Betty mistakenly interpolated the first numbers she heard, South 391065 Z or E" to the second entry S 3 09' 165E .That first meaningless number suddenly becomes how a navigator would write a real lat/long position. Since Ontario was moving and noone knew exactly the lat/long, I would guess more of a sheer coincidence. Other signals of W40K and KGMB are heard. How do we explain that unless other short wave signals were coming through on Betty's set and mixed in with other traffic. These are some of the issues, and like Tighar's claim, are admittedly subjective interpretations of that data. I urge the forum,ham experts,radio experts,to continue to more closely examine the notebook. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric I assure you that we will continue to examine the notebook. If my conclusion is correct, further research should further confirm its correctness. If my conclusion is premature and unfounded, as you say, then further research should show that. I've been wrong before. One reason I'm willing to state my conclusions as soon as I feel I have enough information to reach a conclusion is that it prompts attacks like yours. If I'm right, I should be able to answer your concerns. That doesn't mean I will be able to convince you - that's a different issue - but I should be able to lay out reasonable answers to the challenges you raise. First, you apparently have not read the postings very carefully. You're still under the impression that the transmissions continued for three hours when, in fact, it is now quite clear that they spanned approximately an hour and three quarters. You are apparently not aware of, or reject, Bob Brandenburg's in-depth examination of the radio propagation question and prefer the casual judgements of "experts" who have not subjected themselves to peer review on the forum. You also characterize the coordinates in brackets as a "revision" although I have explained that Betty is adamant that the coordinates in brackets are NOT a later interpretation of the numbers recorded earlier but a separate record of another enunciation of the same information - so all of your speculation about how that entry came to be written is contrary to Betty's anecdotal recollection of how it came about. As it turns out, Betty herself has been puzzling over those two entries ever since the interview and she called me last night to explain what she thinks happened. As you know, the initial entry reads, " South 391065 Z or E". Betty thinks (and yes, this is 63 years later) that in her haste she transposed the numbers. " I tend to do that if I'm in a hurry.", she said. The second time she heard it, the numbers were clearer and she was more careful. Your argument is internally inconsistent. You caution that "... it is no wonder her accuracy may be off and less reliable than say a professional ham. All of these factors suggest an extreme caution in accepting this as a accurate document." and then you say, "Other entries in her notebook damage the credibility of Betty's journal as a record of a genuine Earhart transmissions. Example of mind-numbing transmisions: look at the stream of numbers immediately following the so called midway coordinate- 'fig 8-3 30 500 Z, '3E ;mj3b', and 'z 38z-13 8983638'. " You question my conclusion that this is a genuine, if imperfectly heard, communication by proclaiming that "Amelia knows damn well about where she is." It seems that your real objection to Betty's notebook is that it portray's an Amelia Earhart who does not fit your image of the woman. You're very sure that "She may have been in exigent circumstances, but she was mentally alert and physically able to operate a radio for some three hours. (sic)". Your all-knowing "would have" approach is further revealed in your opinion that: " One of the most glaring omissions in the Betty notebook is Betty' failure or negligence to put a date or some relevant time marker on the notebook pages, or within weeks of the intercept. A teenager's behavior,maybe, but why didn't mom and dad add a date. The intercept of the century and noone in the family writes down what date." Intercept of the century? It may come as a shock to you that the disappearance of Amelia Earhart was a news story of only passing interest to most people in 1937. Who are you to decide what someone would do in a context you don't begin to understand? You wonder "... why the Betty's family waited some 33 years before contacting Goerner in 1970." She didn't. In 1941, while working as a telephone operator who regularly put through long distance calls to government offices, Betty used that ability to contact someone in an official capacity in Washington (she now can't recall who) and told them all about hearing Amelia's distress calls. The person said he would look into it and get back to her, but he never did. How many attempts to get someone to pay attention to her would satisfy you? You say that "Other explanations may be plausibe." but you don't offer any. I agree, in principle. I just haven't been able to come up with any. I would love to hear an alternative hypothesis that explains what Betty heard. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:50:45 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: The Navy in the '30s Mike Holt wrote: > I read somewhere that it was the mid-30s when Annapolis was given > a lot more attention that it had received in the past, after > recognition of inabilites on the part of a large number of > graduates... In the period before WW2, the education and training environment in the Navy emphasized meticulous execution of orders, with no embellishments based on initiative. The slightest misstep could result in failure to be promoted. The predictable result of this atmosphere was a generation of officers who recoiled from the idea of exercising initiative, preferring to let their superiors take the risks. This situation so alarmed Admiral Earnest J. King, then Commander in Chief of the Atlantic Fleet, that he issued a letter on 21 January 1941, which outlined his philosophy of command. here are just a few pertinent quotes: "I have been concerned for many years over the increasing tendency - now grown almost to "standard practice" - of flag officers and other group commanders to issue orders and instructions in which their subordinates are told "how" as well as "what" to do to such an extent and in such detail that the "Custom of the Service" has virtually become the antithesis of that essential element of command - "initiative of the subordinate." "We are preparing for - and are now close to - those active operations (commonly called war) which require the utilization of the full powers and capabilities of every officer in command status. There will be neither time nor opportunity to do more than prescribe the several tasks of the several subordinates (to say "what", perhaps "when" and "where", and usually, for their intelligent cooperation, "why"); leaving to them - expecting and requiring of them - the capacity to perform the assigned tasks (to do the "how"). If subordinates are deprived - as they now are - of that training and experience which will enable them to act "on their own" - if they do not know, by constant practice, how to exercise "initiative of the subordinate" - if they are reluctant (afraid) to act because they are accustomed to detailed orders and instructions - if they are not habituated to think, to judge, to decide and act for themselves in their several echelons of command - we shall be in sorry case when the time of "active operations" arrives." The reasons for the current state of affairs - how did we get this way? - are many but among them are four which need mention; first, the "anxiety" of seniors that everything in their commands shall be conducted so correctly and go so smoothly, that none may comment unfavorably; Second, those energetic activities of staffs which lead to infringement of (not to say interference with) the functions for which the lower echelons exist; third, the consequent "anxiety" of subordinates lest their exercise od initiative, even in their legitimate spheres, should result in their doing something which may prejudice their selection for promotion; fourth, the habit on the one hand and the expectation on the other of "nursing" and "being nursed" which lead respectively to that violation of command principles known as "orders to obey orders" and to that admission of incapacity of confusion evidenced by "request instructions"." The conditions so eloquently described by Admiral King also illustrate the very state of affairs that some on the forum have intuited in their musings about why a more aggressive search of the Phoenix Islands wasn't carried out, either by the Navy or by the Coast Guard. Bob, #2286 *************************************************************************** From Ric Fascinating. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:53:07 EST From: Harry Poole Subject: Dating Betty's notebook A report from the St. Petersburgh Times. A complete analysis of twenty pages, covering twelve days of reports published in this paper offers several points for consideration . One point may help date Betty's notebook. A few other items are given later. The only report which might help date Betty's notebook was published on July 9, 1937, and referred to signals heard on Thursday, July 8, 1937. Arthur Monsees, a San Francisco radio amateur reported signals from Amelia, including the following items: 1) an SOS signed KHAQQ (Miss Earhart's call letters) 2) a statement "east Howland" 3) a statement "lights tonight" 4) a statement "must hurry" and 5) a statement "can't hold" If you compare these statements with Betty's notes: on page 49 1) SOS also on page 49 2) ..... Howland alternately on page 51 2) take it away Howland on page 55 4) hurry on page 57 5) can't make it It is still my conviction that the transmission was most likely received on July 3, but if the above report is accurate, it might be important to consider that the transmission might have been on July 8. The two notes are not identical, but they are quite similar, at least in general meaning, and the items are reported in the same order. In ddition, both notes are fragmentary, and would not be identical. But how could the Radio still be working six days after she landed? Another clue given may help. In this paper, Putnam refers twice to an emergency or special battery carried by Amelia. Although we have noted that there were two batteries, we sort of assumed they would run down together. After considering the matter, I think the main battery was used for the engine (especially starting), and the second was for the radio. After it ran down, it may have been several days before Amelia and Fred remembered the primary battery, and they then could discontinue it from the engine and use it for the radio. There was a reference to Bob on Betty's notes. There was also a reference to "bob" in the St. Pete Times. It referred to Amelia's hair style, a "bob" cut. I don't think this helps, but it might be worth considering. Putnam on several occasions refers to the many signals received and that all direction finding that was done on these signals points to the Phoenix Islands. [Of course we knew that]. For what's it worth, R.H. Bryan, an expert from the Bishop Museum in Honolulu was quoted in the paper. He has been to the Phoenix Islands, and stated that any landing on Gardner would probably result in damage to the aircraft. Several radio reports referred to seem to indicate Amelia was on or near Hull Island. Copies of these 20 pages are available for any Forum member. Hope this offers some food for thought. LTM, (who wants her voice heard) Harry #2300 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:18:47 EST From: Harry Poole Subject: Re: Island survival Island Survival - Notes published in the St. Pete Times were as follows: Article 1) Pair foresee ocean danger, and carried a raft. It is believed that the blazing equatorial sun is the greatest hazard while waiting rescue. Their plane itself with its great low wings, six empty gas tanks and light aluminum frame made itself a floating raft. They were also equiped with a Very pistol, and a large yellow signal kite. Special radio equipment for communication was also on the plane. Emergency rations and a plentiful supply of water was reported on board as they left Lae. Article 2) In a meeting between George Putnam and Mrs. Noonan. they discussed how long the down flyers could survive. Putnam speculates about firewood available on an island, fuel remaining in the plane, When Putnam was asked if they were safe, he prefaced his remarks with "If those signals are from the plane" He believed they could exist for weeks with the water, tomato juice and concentrated food carried on the plane. LTM (who's tired of Tomato Juice) Harry #2300 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:30:24 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's notebook/ Forensic analysis of I think a forensic statement analysis(somewhat different that a document analysis) will be in order, but content/style/punctionation,etc.,are subjective interpretations of the writer's purpose. I would provide the examiner all the information I could obtain re the exact conditions and circumstances of her authorship of the notebook, namely, the reception quality, but also her age, the excitement, the father and mother's role, her knowledge of AE, and her general writing style, an a profile of the writer. What stands out for me is that the five pages of the notebook are written in very nice, tidy, neat cursive handwriting,sequencially down on each line. Some sentences are over 6 words. No mistakes,no cross overs,no indication of rapidly transcribing an incoming reception, the number sequences are nicely written, margins almost perfect, and no indicia of a hurried, writing in a stress filled situation. We have all tried to take contemporaneous notes during an interview or transmissions and indeed it is difficult not to make some mistakes,scribbles,etc. That is remarkable given the circumstances she describes to you. Now look at the first few pages you furnished re her writing down songs as examples of her writing when she listened to them and compare them to the Earhart transcriptions. In the former we find carrots for a missing word, and a misstep in the writing of NO NO...they can't...." The second page has "recklessly" erased or omitted, and "I" is rewritten,and the whole style looks much more hurried, even written into the binding. The Earhart transcriptions are almost perfect. It is hard to imagine that she calmly,coolly wrote down Earhart's words so precisely, so neatly ,without a single mistake, and only one question mark appears and that's over the critical "positon" note. No question that is her handwriting, and she wrote those entries, but worth an expert's evaluation. You've talked to her, what do you think of that 1937 copying. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric There's no question in my mind about Betty's sincerity, but the vast majority of all anecdotal witnesses are completely sincere, even if their recollections are garbage. The neatness of Betty's Earhart notes indicate two things to me. - She was being careful because she thought this was very important. - She was not trying to copy down a stream of dialogue (as she would in a song lyric) but was writing down the words she could understand or pick out as important. The time notations on the pages suggest that each page represnts about 20 minutes and there are roughly 20 entries - one per line - on each page. It's obvious that this information was not coming fast and furious. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:32:03 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Purdue list >Ric wrote: > Thanks Wombat. Actually the list is way too long to be included in aforum > posting. We'll probably do something like put it up on the Tigharwebsite, > maybe with direct links to the Purdue site if they don't object. Could be a > dynamite research source. Actually I can probably do as well as that in the mean time. I'll send you the URL for the list and the other URL for the on-web search. But don't throw the list away - you may still need it. These projects have a habit of changing stuff. The main link on the Purdue website had errors and it was only accidentally that I got in at all. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:40:48 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: The Colorado Lookout Ric wrote : > "The best indication of the attitude of the ship's company, however, might be > the headline of the > ship's newspaper The Colorado Lookout "PLANE SEARCH HALTS CRUISE". Who was the editor of the ship's newspaper ? If Captain Friedel supervised this or if he was the one whowho decided on that headline then that was was indeed a clear indication that he did not take the search for AE seriously. If sombody of the crew was responsible as an editor he may just have discribed the situation : "The cruise is off, fellows. Now we've got serious work to do". LTM (who always wonders if what the papers say is true) *************************************************************************** From Ric The editor-in-chief of the Colorado Lookout was Ensign C.S. Foster, Jr. I don't know if the captain had to approve the headline and content, but it wouldn't suprise me. The content of the ship's newspaper leaves little doubt about the attitude toward the cruise and the search. We'll put it up on the TIGHAR website as a document. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:44:02 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Speculation Time > Remember also that hams > are interested in communicating with distant places, and may have had good > charts/maps themselves. And also that more hams have been involved in saving lives than in creating an elaborate hoax. I can't speak for the US, but in Australia Hams seem to take their hobby very seriously - the one thing that has bothered me about the hoax scenario. I imagine that in the 30's the knowledge and experience required to put together a short wave transciever was still fairly rare. On a relative basis, the parts were probably fairly expensive. Short wave transcievers - from what I'm told - were not something you just walked in and bought like a CB radio (which still applies in Australia today. Just to buy one you must pass an exam and show a licence). My long winded point is: I think Hams of the era would be more interested in genuine communicationn with Amelia than creating a hoax. Betty may have heard one end of a conversation with Hams theorising about what happened to Amelia, and if one had a world map, that may account for some of the information in the notebook. On the other hand, she may have heard a Ham talking to Amelia. Either way, I suspect that kind of hoax might be out of character for the Hams of the period. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:48:05 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Coordinate on route Well, I appreciate your responding to my concerns, and I think it is great to have the notebook looked at by a document examiner. One issue you raised which may be important is our understanding of what is meant by a "coordinate along the route." >>No, it is not just a coordinate along the route. In fact, (somebody correct >>me if I'm wrong) it is not a coordinate along the route at all. It is (IF we >>assume that a "five" is heard as a "nine") exactly the assigned plane guard >>position of the Ontario. For any practical purpose in 1937, I think the assignment of the Ontario's station could be considered midpoint in route. We don't know how it was developed. If scaled from a chart, we don't know how much care was exercised, what scale chart was used, or how thick a pencil was used, or how many times they went over it with dividers. If calculated, it was done with tables rather than a 13-15 digit calculator or computer, and the Lae and Howland coordinates may not be what we use today. I doubt that anyone really expected the flight to be within better than maybe 30 miles or so of intended track at that point, so I will speculate that stationing a ship at midpoint had a different meaning than today. Today, if we calculate the midpoint, we still get slightly different answers depending on whether we scale from a chart or use a computer or tables, and we may use different start and end coordinates, but in my view, all of these answers have supported the idea that the Ontario was stationed "on route." If you get too sticky about it, you begin to move out of 1937 open ocean or flight navigational accuracy and into the GPS realm. Heck, today, using your handheld GPS you could almost expect to pass the Grey Poupon. Tom MM *************************************************************************** From Ric I agree. The Ontario's assigned plane guard position was most likely what somebody calculated as the "midpoint" with whatever tools were handy. "Close enough for government work." Because of that it constitutes almost a random number. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:53:52 EST From: Mark Cameron Subject: Re: Speculation Time One small note... Betty's notes give us a partial glimpse at what may have been a call for help from AE/FN but contain only a few pieces of a much larger picture. They may have been on the air many times before this and became frustrated (or scared) as time went by and no response came through. I'm still not SURE that Betty's notes are what they appear to be but I can't qualify or disqualify them because they don't contain what we may think should be there; who knows what Betty missed before, during, or after she heard them. LTM (who wishes she'd taped everything she's heard over the air) Mark Cameron #2301 ************************************************************************** From Ric Amen. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:56:34 EST From: Chris Kennedy Subject: John H. Ric, do you think it might be a good idea to find out a little bit more about Betty's neighbor, "John H."? I was re-reading the interview results and noted that he seemed to be pretty bound up in the history of the notebook, even if not its actual contents (e.g., letters to Goerner, taking notes of what Betty's mother recalled, etc.). This seems a prudent precaution to take in view of the increasing importance of the notebook. --Chris Kennedy *************************************************************************** From Ric We interviewed John as well and have a good picture of his involvement over the years. John has been trying to get on the forum but is having trouble with his server. Once he gets that straightened out you can ask him questions yourself. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 13:02:24 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Why didn't more hear AE? > I can assure you: there was EVERY possibility, given the transmitter and > antenna she was using. And what power at 3x ? > Also, if these were harmonics being propagated via skip (as seems likely and > logical, and possible and probable), one had to be in the right place to > pick the signal up, as well as listening on the correct frequency. So you're saying the skip was as site-specific as say, 11 meters? If so, why is Radio Australia, among others, wasting time broadcasting on 17.8 MHz band? Hue ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:00:40 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: WOJ -conjuction junction Frank Westlake wrote: >I think there's a good possibility that she had heard both callsigns > sometime prior and that when she heard them this time she wasn't sure which >of the two she heard. Or perhaps she initially heard "W40K Howland port" > then later thought she heard something that sounded like "WOJ" so she wrote > "or W0J Howland port" below the first line. I've done this same sort of >thing while trying to extract callsigns and frequencies from weak signals. > If either one of those is true then she may have heard both callsigns. >********************************************************************* > From Ric > > I disagree. This seems to me to be a very clear case of either/or, not both. --From reading Short Wave Craft magazine for 1937, i am convinced WOJ is one of number of callsigns assigned to the AT&T station in Hialeah, serving So. America circuits. I do not know the operating frequency, yet, associated with this callsign. It seems that Betty may have synthesized these call signs into her (possible) AE reception. There's no practical reason, as i see it, for those call letters from Florida to appear in her AE reception log. I go with Frank. That seems to simplest, most reasonable explanation. The frequencies possibly used by WOJ or W4OK would not seem to fall near where the 6210 or 3105 harmonics fall. Hue Miller *************************************************************************** From Ric There are times when the English language can be quite ambiguous, but this isn't one of them. The notes clearly say that "W4OK" was heard OR "WOJ." The notes do not say, or imply, that more than one iteration of the letters and numbers was heard. The fact that both versions might be valid call letters is not material. I don't hear anyone arguing about how Betty could have heard 391065Z and 391065E. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:08:08 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's first entry/ Another look Try another look at Betty's first entry: South 391065 Z or E Rewritten: S 3* 9' 10" [1] 65 E The only additon here just is the added "1" in my bracket. That is basically no different than the rearranged numbers in the second entry of S 3* 09' 165* E. Given the static, fading, etc... Seems to me as an accurate midway point also. But that still doesn't prove the "coordinates" came from Earhart but it does support the validity of a coordinate transmission. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric The entry in brackets is clearly an attempt to render the same information as is presented in the earlier entry - except it makes sense. I see no reason not to accept Betty's explanation that the entry in brackets is the transcription of a second, clearer iteration. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:09:06 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Dating Betty's notebook Harry, dating the notebook comments might be further compounded by the reasonable probability that if AE was capable of broadcasting from the 2nd through possibly the 9th she would most likely be saying much the same thing each time....asking for help, expressing urgency, trying to give a position, etc. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:52:22 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: The Colorado Lookout > From Ric > The content of the ship's newspaper leaves little doubt about the > attitude toward the cruise and the search. We'll put it up on the > TIGHAR website as a document. What attitude should they have had? You don't seem to understand how a ship functions. How many people were on that ship? 1,500 or so? I'll use that number for this discussion, however inaccurate it may be. How many people does it take to conduct a search? Well lets see: - The Commanding Officer to oversee everything. - An officer placed in charge of coordinating the ships search efforts. - Six aircrew members to conduct the actual search. All other efforts would have been normal daily functions for the watch: navigation, lookouts, communications, launching aircraft, etc. So that's eight people, what do you do with the remaining 1,492? Manning the rails would've been a waste of time. Sending out boats would've accomplished nothing. So the remaining 1,492 crewmembers continue with their normal daily affairs. Crossing the line ceremonies are a great moral booster and I see no reason why the CO shouldn't have allowed it to occur. You have an obvious bitterness toward the government and military and I think you're letting that bitterness cloud your judgement Ric. Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric For the record, let me state my opinions about the attitude of the various parties aboard the Colorado toward the Earhart search. My opinions are based solely upon contemporaneous writings in official reports, private letters and articles in the ship's newspaper. Captain Wilhelm Friedell Friedell was a professional. Finding Amelia Earhart on his last cruise before taking a staff job in Hawaii would have been a nice feather in his cap, but putting BB45 aground on an inaccurately charted reef would end his career. He carried out his orders without putting his ship or his people at undue risk. Senior Aviator Lt. John Lambrecht This was Lambrecht's first cruise as a floatplane pilot. Previously he had flown off the aircraft carrier Lexington. To him, the search was something of an exotic adventure. Pilot Lt. jg William Short Short saw the search as "a royal pain in the neck" but he did his job as best he could. The ship's company There were probably as many attitudes as there were sailors but there was clearly a general feeling of being cheated out of an easy cruise and several days of liberty in Honolulu. The opportunity to initiate an unusually large number of "polliwogs" - the 196 ROTC cadets who happened to be aboard - was some consolation. In summary, I think everyone did their job. I think they all wanted a successful conclusion to the mission but I've never seen anything to indicate that anyone was taking it all personally. When the mission failed the main concern was to make sure that it was nobody's fault. It has ever been thus. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:57:05 EST From: Pete Subject: Betty's radio? Collector's think Betty's radio was maybe a 4588 radio. I'm sending this link as the Museum not only has a Silvertone 4787 console model, but also has a "PanAm" radio and a "DF" radio in the collection, plus a 5KW Western Electric Transmitter. Museum is in Huntington, West Virginia. The museum has a functioning crystal set, so the Silvertone may also be operational. http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/%7Epostr/MRT/index.htm At www.radiophile.com is a 1935 Zenith model 835. The caption with the pic indicates the upper 5th band limit of the thing was 44 Megahertz (Yes, 44 MEGS). With an upper limit like that, I'm sure the 15MHz harmonic of 6210 KHz was well within reach. the URL for the museum is http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/%7Epostr/MRT/Index.htm Pete (who is still working on the brevity thing) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:12:33 EST From: Fred Madio Subject: Re: Dating Betty's notebook Concerning the matter of dating the entries in the notebook -- a review of the LCDs (local climatalogical data) sheets for the most likely dates might help rule out some possibilities. Any electrical storm activity in the St. Pete area on the dates in question might have interrupted radio reception enough to make radio reception impossible. twenty odd years ago LCD data was available from the National Climatological Center in Ashville, North Carolina. A very long shot, but it might help. p.s: If you have the dates at your finger-tips, please email them to me, and I'll see what I can do Regards/ Fred Madio *************************************************************************** From Ric Fred, the dates in question would be July 2-9, 1937. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:21:54 EST From: Ric Subject: No Forum Tuesday There will be no forum on Tuesday, 11/14. I'll be at the U.S. Air Force Museum at Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, Ohio for meetings concerning the parts that the museum removed from the Douglas B-23 wreck at Loon Lake, Idaho prior to our arechaeological survey of the site last summer. The Forum will resume on Wednesday. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 09:43:16 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: WOJ -conjuction junction > From Ric > The notes clearly say that "W4OK" was heard OR "WOJ." > The notes do not say, or imply, that more than one iteration of the letters > and numbers was heard. The fact that both versions might be valid call > letters is not material. I disagree. The facts are that Betty claims to have taken notes from a transmission that she claims to believe was from Earhart sometime in July of 1937, and that in those notes are the statements: W40K Howland port or Woj Howland port Anything beyond those facts is merely speculation that is weighted by experience. I happen to believe that Betty is telling the truth and I also believe that she probably did hear a transmission from Earhart. But that's my problem and I am not trying to convince anyone that my beliefs are the truth. Nor am I trying to convince anyone that she heard both W4OK and WOJ sometime during the series of receptions. We will NEVER know if she did or not. My statement was intended only to show how such corrections do occur and that there is a good chance that they may have occurred that way in this case. It's speculation based on experience. I am not asking you or anyone to believe it to be truth. I am only offering it to hopefully broaden the search pattern to perhaps turn up more evidence. You do not know that it did not happen as I suggest it may have, therefore it is a possibility. My experience has shown that it is a realistic possibility. By the way; I just noticed that in her notes it is WHISKEY OSCAR JULIET, not WHISKEY ZERO JULIET, in case it makes a difference for anyone. Her small 'o' appears to be the same as the 'o' in "or" on the same line (I'm probably the last to notice). Frank Westlake (Again) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 09:45:52 EST From: Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194 Subject: Thunderstorms >Any electrical storm activity >in the St. Pete area on the dates in question might have interrupted >radio reception enough to make radio reception impossible Agreed that electrical storm activity would hamper reception... but in summer a thunderboomer within 100-200 miles can cause enough QRN (atmospheric interference) to be a real problem. Upside: The higher the frequency, the less of a problem this becomes. The point: Reception on the higher harmonics of 3105 and/or 6210, such as in the 12-24 MHz region, would be much less affected by QRN than the fundamentals. 3105 in particular would be cut to pieces by summer thunderstorm noise. LTM (who knows not to carry an umbrella in a lightning storm) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 09:47:27 EST From: Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194 Subject: Schematics for Silvertone et al The primary source for data on old radios is: John F. Rider "Perpetual Troubleshooter's Manual," which was published beginning in the late 20s I believe and ran through the late 40s. This was a subscription service, meaning that pages were issued as information was compiled on new model sets. There were something like 21 volumes. The Rider manuals were the predecessor of the Howard W. Sams "Photofact" consumer electronics service info series. Unlike the Sams publications, many of the Rider information sheets do not contain photos of the set in question. I understand these manuals are available on CD-ROM. They are kind of expensive. The University Library at North Carolina State has quite a few of the original print volumes however. I believe they have the master index, but I am not sure... without it, finding a specific diagram can be a real bear. I have a Volume XIII in my collection but have not looked at it in a long time, so don't know what years and what mfrs are covered. Each of these volumes can be up to 6 or more inches thick and each set listed may have about 3 or 4 pages devoted to it, depending upon complexity. Obviously something like a Howard or McMurdo Silver communications receiver will need more space than a home entertainment set. I can try to look up some of the numbers previously posted, if I can get to the library this weekend. 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 13:49:45 EST From: Kenton Spading Subject: Signs of Recent Habitation, Details The Forum recently revisited the issue of what did Lambrecht see? Did he report it to his commander?..and....Why wasn't more attention paid to the fact that Lambrecht said he saw "recent signs of habitation" on Gardner? Ric posed some excellent questions related to this. We can only speculate on what was discussed during Lambrecht's debriefing on July 9th. I offer the following information to the Forum in order to provide some context within which to ponder the Lambrecht question: Why no land search? To answer the Lambrecht question we first need to ask ourselves: could there have been anything on the island that may have looked like "recent signs of habitation"? One answer is.....yes, Earhart and Noonan could have been there. But there are also other possibilities. Lets take a closer look. Reports of various people seeing signs of previous habitation on Gardner/Nikumaroro Island are discussed below. Lets examine what other visitors saw and what they reported both contemporaneously and during later interviews or correspondence. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of visitors to the island nor is it meant to exclude what Lambrecht saw as being Earhart related. It is meant to provide the interested reader with a full menu of items from which to draw conclusions about what Lambrecht may have observed on Gardner/Niku and thus speculate as to why a land search was not conducted. Reference No. 1. NIKU Source Book, TIGHAR Archive 2. TIGHAR TRACKS, March 12, 1992, Volume 8, Number 1/2 3. Tom Kings personal files and Email messages to Kenton Spading (and others) 4. Kenton Spading's field notes and pictures from NIKU III and various Email messages to TIGHAR members and the Forum. 5. TIGHAR TRACKS, June 15, 1993, Volume 9, Number 2 1. 1891, John T. Arundel's Project Mr. Arundel obtained a coconut (copra) license for Gardner/NIku Island from the British government on Feb. 1, 1891. A group of natives were left on the island that year (some were reported to have arrived prior to 1891....). Apparently the project was abandoned sometime in 1892. This project resulted in the construction of buildings with galvanized steel roofs and a large water tank all of which were later observed and described by the Norwich City wreck survivors (see below). Later, in October 1937 Harry Maude reported 111 coconut bearing trees on Gardner/Niku gone to riot from the Arundel period. See Reference No. 1, Tab No. 3, Doc. No. 15. 2. 1892, His Majesties Ship (HMS) Curacoa When the HMS Curacoa visited the Gardner/Niku island on May 28, 1892, 20 Niue natives (under the command of an Englishman) were working on the Arundel coconut project. The British made a point of placing a Union Jack flag on the island as they were very concerned about documenting their claim to the island. See Reference No. 1, Tab No. 3, Doc. No. 15. We can speculate that, given the manpower and materials on the island, and with the possible knowledge that Arundel was preparing to leave later in 1892, that they may have constructed some sort of a permanent concrete marker or monument to hold the flag. They probably did not just stick it in a tree. 3. November 1929, Norwich City Wreck Mr. J. Thomas was a survivor of the S.S. Norwich City which ran aground on Gardner/Niku Island in November 1929. Mr. Thomas states in a hand written note, (original spelling and grammar left intact): "[On Gardner/Niku] Near the palms we found two desused galvanised roofed huts and a large water tank which were in a state [of] collapse, but which indicated to us that the island had at one time been inhabited most probably with a view of growing coconuts......." See Reference No. 1, Tab No. 3, Doc. No. 14. The huts and water tank Mr. Thomas refers to were undoubtedly left behind by the aforementioned John T. Arundel group. In addition, the Norwich City crew left behind two life boats and a substantial stack of provisions covered with a tarp. All of the above was in the vicinity of the wreck, a landmark which Lambrecht would have undoubtedly been drawn to. As an aside, in 1989, TIGHAR team members John Clauss and Veryl Fenlason photographed some very dilapidated wooden framing along the northwest shore of the island just north of the shipwreck. Upon reflection, these buildings probably dated from the Arundel period as opposed to the British 1938-1963 habitation of the island. TIGHAR also found the 1940 era British-built wood-framed COOP store in 1989 in a relatively intact state (although "desused" state). This suggests that Arundel's buildings and water tank may have survived fairly intact until Lambrecht's overflight in 1937 (only 8 years after Mr. Thomas observed them). 4. Her Majesties Ship (HMS) Leith, February 15, 1937 The HMS Leith visited Gardner/Niku on February 15, 1937 just long enough to erect a flagpole and placard proclaiming the island to be the property of His Majesty the King. (Niku Source Book, Section 2, Item 2). Earhart disappeared and Lambrecht flew over the island, of course, roughly 5 months later. Someone had certainly visited the island "recently" in 1937. 5. Colorado Search Planes, July 9, 1937 The following are some quotes from Lambrecht's report. I hesitate to even list them here as it is difficult to absorb Lambrecht's writing style, and therefore the overall theme of the report, without reading the entire thing. At this point I am going to assume that the serious readers will carefully read the entire report on the TIGHAR web site in order to place the selected quotes in their proper context. Lt. John O. Lambrecht (and crew) reported, in part, the following after the flight over Gardner Island on July 9, 1937. See Reference No. 5, Page 6. [quotes below listed in the order that they appear] ".........Enderbury, although a bit larger, was much the same as Phoenix. Here and there were what appeared to be oases with a few surrounding palm trees... no signs of habitation were evident and an inspection did not disclose the object of our search......" "........M'Kean did not require more than a perfunctory examination to ascertain that the missing plane had not landed here, and one circle of the island proved that it was uninhabited except for myriads of birds. Signs of previous habitation remained and the walls of several old buildings apparently of some sort of adobe construction, were still standing.........." ".......Here [Gardner] signs of recent habitation were clearly visible but repeated circling and zooming failed to elicit any answering wave from possible inhabitants and it was finally taken for granted that none were there........." "........There [Sydney] 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 and the planes headed northeast for Phoenix Island........" During an interview with Mr. Lambrecht in 1972 regarding what he observed on Gardner he stated that he saw "markers" (See Reference No. 5, Page 6). The "marker" Lambrecht remembers could have been a concrete monument/marker claiming British ownership from either the 1892 or the very recent 1937 British visit or something from Arundel or the Norwich City camp. 6. Eric Bevington and Harry Maude, October 1937 British subjects Harry Maude and Eric Bevington visited the island in October of 1937 to conduct a survey as part of a colonial resettlement project. Mr. Bevington stated in his diary that he saw "signs of previous habitation" on the island. During an interview in 1992 he stated that (as best he could recall) "it wasn't much.....like someone had bivouacked for the night" He indicated (without knowing where TIGHAR had been) that the place was near the area where TIGHAR found the shoe artifact in 1991 (SE part of the island). See Reference No. 2, Pages 6 and 7. Eric, however, could have easily seen something from the Arundel period or any of the later visitors. Dr. Tom King (TIGHAR member) corresponded with Mr. Maude. He asked him about the "signs of previous habitation" that Eric mentions in his diary. Maude remembered it as being [a] "pile of sand" (see Reference No. 3). During the 1997 Niku III expedition, TIGHAR found relatively large piles of sand/coral on the SE end of the island near the shoe artifact site in the area indicated by Bevington. It looked like a Babai pit or an abortive well from either the British or Arundel periods. (see Reference No. 4). We don't have evidence that the Arundel group was in this area but we no evidence that they weren't and a search for well water could take you anywhere. Wrap Up Thoughts: Anecdotes aside....a lot of the information was recorded contemporaneously. I will say up front that Lambrecht could have seen Earhart related habitation. I will also say the I am offering some speculative thoughts here. My goal is to get people thinking about the issue which could lead us to a better hypothesis. We do not know what Lambrecht told his commander and fellow shipmates when asked....."What do you mean by "recent signs of habitation" However, it is not too hard to imagine that he told them he saw: 1. the flag or pole left behind by the British only 5 months earlier or 2. the life boats and stack of provisions left behind by the Norwich City crew...or 3. the corrugated steel roofs of the huts or the water tank or other debris left behind by the Arundel group earlier and noted by the Norwich crew in 1929...or 4. some or all of the above The Arundel huts are less likely as he mentions huts on Sydney but not on Gardner (although see the artist story below) We can speculate that Lambrecht told his commander: "We checked out the island as best as we could. Repeated circling and zooming failed to elicit any answering wave. We tried hard, commander to get the attention of anyone who might have been there. We saw no signs of an airplane and, in my opinion, what we saw was not related to the lost fliers." The key words here for the commander were probably.....no signs of an airplane. The Colorado was sent to the Phoenix group on the strength of the post-lost signals/bearings. And the commander was told....the plane must be on land to broadcast. No airplane....no problem....lets move on. I am not prepared to fault the commander for this decision. It is much too easy in hindsight and from the comfort of our homes to do that. Lambrecht's description of what he saw on Gardner and Sydney as "signs of RECENT habitation" may be an attempt to contrast them to the obviously much older "stone" ruins he had just seen at McKean Island. Indeed, in my speculative opinion, his report can easily be interpreted that way. Thus he uses the word "recent". Whatever Lambrecht saw, it obviously was not a smoking camp fire, clothes hung out to dry or footprints in the sand. Clearly, he and in turn his commander, would have acted on that type of evidence. On the other hand, after seeing some old huts or life boats etc.. and getting no response from repeated zooming, it would not be worth the risk to life and limb to put a landing party ashore. Getting a landing party on to and off of the island is a very dangerous affair. There is an additional piece of very speculative evidence that suggests Lambrecht saw but did not mention Arundel's huts. A Colorado crew member (Ric: can you help me out with the details on this??) took notes as the ship visited the various islands. He had some artistic talent and as such drew pictures to accompanied his notes. For Hull he drew a canoe and people...and of course Lambrecht landed there and was visited by the locals in a canoe. For Gardner he drew a picture of native huts/houses (if I remember right, he drew huts for Sydney as well...Ric??). I hope this discussion sheds more light on the subject. Love To Mother Kenton Spading 1382CE *************************************************************************** From Ric Kenton, thank you for that excellent compilation and review. The Colorado crew member you mention, Yeoman Wayne Jordan, who was an enlisted man who worked for the "Colorado press" the ship's onboard news service for the crew. I've looked for the file and can't put my hands on it right now (damn!). As I recall, he drew huts on Hull and he did draw a couple of little huts on Gardner but when I asked him why he couldn't remember where that information had come from. I can't recall for sure whether there were huts on Sydney or not. I do remember that I asked him if he worked with or knew the people in the Aviation Section and he said, "No." Gotta locate that file. In addition to the rather fancy "Colorado Lookout" published at the end of the cruise, there was a daily news sheet distributed to the crew. Earlier this year we were fortunate to receive several original copies of these news sheets from a man who had them from his grandfather, a retired Coast Guardsman. The copies we have cover the dates July 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11, 1937. Unfortunately, the one day that is missing, July 10, is the issue that described the previous day's search operations over Mckean, Gardner, Carondelet Reef , and Hull (aargh!). I can only speculate that that particular day is missing becuase it was the most interesting day of the search, with Lambrecht landing in the lagoon at Hull. Excerpts from the news sheet for July 11th provide some hint as to how detailed these onboard news reports were: "The Earhart Search" by Special corrspondent to Colorado Press "Yesterday the Press contained a chart of the area covered 9 July and the prospective flight of forenoon 10 July." (I wonder if this is the sketch we got from Jordan?) "The prospective flight was carried out and in the afternoon Canton island was covered by a flight. Yesterday was a day of hope. Five islands were to be covered and if the Earhart plane had succeeded in reaching any one it was reasonable to assume the fliers were safe. As island after island was covered and the reports came in from the planes that no sign of human life existed on the islands, hope faded and finally when Canton Island, the last of the Phoenix Group, was searched without success the situation became dismally dark. ..." "Sydney was the only island (searched on the 10th) which showed any sign of recent habitation and in appearance was much the same as Gardner Island. It was dotted with groves of coconut palms and had the inevitable lagoon, large enough for a seaplane to make a safe landing. ..." In digging for Wayne Jordan's file I also came upon Lambrecht's written responses to questions from Fred Goerner. Some excerpts from these are also interesting: "It (the O3U-3) was an open cockpit biplane. The only navigational instruments were a magnetic compass, an airspeeed meter, and a turn-and-bank indicator. As I remember we noramlly cruised at 90 knots indicated airspeed. No voice radio - just Morse code transmitter and receiver with a trailing antenna. ..." Goerner asked, "Was any aerial photography of the Phoenix group accomplished during the search?" Lambrecht replied, " None officially. We had no photographic equipment. However, I seem to remember that some of the observers (the guys in the rear seats) had personal cameras and di get some pictures of some of the islands. i do not have any copies." Lambrecht also wrote, " I showed my letter (he's talking about his article for the Bureau of Aeronautics Newsletter that we call "the Lambrecht report") to Captain Friedell and upon reading it he said he was going to use it in his official report." In fact, Friedell's official report directly contradicts Lambrecht's letter with regard to signs of habitation seen on Gardner. Nowhere in four pages of answers does Lambrecht say anything about seeing "markers" on Gardner. That allegation comes solely from Goerner in a letter to me. In other words, we have to take Goerner's word for it that Lambrecht ever said it. I'm aware of nothing that indicates that the cache of supplies left behind by the rescuers of the Norwich City survivors was covered by a tarp. It would seem to make sense to do that but is it references somewhere? I have to disagree with your statement that, "Whatever Lambrecht saw, it obviously was not a smoking camp fire, clothes hung out to dry or footprints in the sand. Clearly, he and in turn his commander, would have acted on that type of evidence." That's a guess based purely upon your own opinion. We don't know what Lambrecht or Friedell "would have" considered worthy of further investigation. We do know that seeing people on the ground was sufficient to cause Lambrecht to take the risky step of chancing a landing in the lagoon at Hull. The only real clue we have as to what he saw on Gardner is his use of the word "recent." What qualified as "signs of recent habitation"? The only other time he uses that phrase is in describing Sydney Island: "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 and the planes headed northeast for Phoenix Island........". (We know that Jones on Hull had recently removed his laborers from Sydney.) It would seem from this that whatever a "sign of recent habitation" is to Lambrecht, it is not a hut or small shack. The only other thing we know of that the aerial searchers saw on Sydney were "letters scooped in Sidney (sic) beach spelling dozens Polynesian words including kele fassau molei seen from air ...". (Assoc. Press report filed July 10 from Itasca.) Marks in the beach sand clearly must be "recent" because the next big storm will obliterate them. It would seem, therefore, that what Lambrecht meant by signs of recent habitation in his description of Syndey Island was marks in the beach sand. It is also clear that those marks were not sufficient evidence to prompt a ground search of Sydney. I submit that an excellent case can be made that what Lambrecht saw at Gardner were marks in the beach sand that he attributed to human activity. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 13:59:43 EST From: M Zuschlag Subject: Marie misheard? One approach we could take to trying to understand the content of Betty's notebook is to focus on the repeated items, the rationale being whoever made the transmission, if they repeat something over the course of 1:45 hours, then it must important to them. Some repeated items make sense in the context of a distress call, whether real or hoax (e.g., calls for help, repeatedly identifying oneself, references to hearing or being heard). Then we have "NY" which is apparently Betty's abbreviation for "New York City." Jim McClure has suggested that what was actually transmitted was "Norwich City," and it makes sense that AE would repeatedly say this since, other than "help us," clues to their location would be the most important thing to communicate. Then there's "Marie." A delirious Noonan calling out for his wife Mary? It appears in two places, once in intimate proximity with "NY." Okay, let me first say what a dangerously slippery slope it is to take a line of Betty's notebook, assume she misheard it, and change it to something consistent with the TIGHAR hypothesis. Now I'm going to do it anyway. What if AE (and/or FN) didn't think they were on Gardner? What if she thought they were on Birnie, also a Phoenix island but about 190 miles to the east-northeast? "Birnie" sounds an awful lot like "Marie," and this explains its proximity in the notebook to the possible references to "Norwich City" --it's the part of the transmission where AE says "you'll find us at ...." Birnie is at 3*35'S, 171*33'W. I don't see those exact numbers in Betty's notebook, but the one closest to the latitude, the coordinate easiest to determine, is on page 53: "3 30 500 Z" (here I go, assuming Betty misheard again). It appears to be after the now-smoking "309 165," as if it were "Oops, I meant to read *this* slip of paper." In general, I see a lot of "3"'s --22 out of the total of 58 digits on all notebook pages, excluding the times Betty wrote at the top. The binomial probability of getting that many or more of an arbitrary digit if these were randomly generated numbers is about 1 in 6.5 million (five's are not over represented). Whatever numbers were intended, 3's appeared to have figured prominently, possibly due to the sender transmitting the same number repeatedly over the 1:45 hours. It's been asked, "If this is AE's distress call, why doesn't she give her location?" Maybe the answer is, she thought she was. Pushing it too far? Allow me the honor to punch the first set of holes: 1. Betty recorded "Marie" several times. Would she really have misheard it all those times? 2. How could AE and (especially) FN even think they were on Birnie? It's nearly 200 nm off the LOP (BTW, it wouldn't, by any chance, be 158 miles off the LOP?). 3. There is not one "7" among all the digits recorded (p<.05, BTW), suggesting they weren't even trying to send longitude (for either Niku or Birnie). What is really the chance they wouldn't at least have a reasonable guess on that? 4. So what's your point? This certainly can't be regarded as occult information. How does this help us authenticate the notebook, or advance the search in general? Commence fire. Assuming it's even worth the bullets. M Zuschlag *************************************************************************** From Ric I can't fault the logic but I do have a hard time seeing "Birnie" being consistently misheard as "Marie". If we're going to lose a "B" I prefer to lose the one in "Mary Bea." Also, Betty says that Marie was said by Fred. If Fred is contributing useful information it's not consistent with the rest of the scene described in the notes. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 14:14:16 EST From: Dave Porter Subject: W8AQQ update Just an update on Oscar Kallio, Huntington Woods, MI: (callsign W8AQQ from 1986-1996) I have been unable to speak personally with anyone in the Kallio household. I have called the published phone # at varying times on different days. There is an answering machine at that number, but the message on it does not identify the machine's owners by name. ("you have reached (248) ***-****, etc.) In the messages I left, I identified myself, and stated that Oscar's callsign W8AQQ had come up during some historical research, and that I just had a few questions about HAM radio. I left two phone #'s, but have received no callback. It has now been almost two weeks since my last call to the Kallio number. I am willing to continue to attempt contact if you think it relevant. I could simply stop by and knock on the door, leaving a short note and SASE if no one answers. This may all be irrelevant. Recent forum postings have established: (please make corrections if I've gotten something wrong) 1. Oscar Kallio did not hold the W8AQQ callsign in 1937 2. The 1937 W8AQQ (Mr. Carroll?) was located on the GC that included Gardner and the point of reception of the "W8AQQ intercept" 3. W8AQQ, as heard in the "W8AQQ intercept" may in fact be an example of Earhart's callsign KHAQQ being misheard. Let me know if you want me to try anything more. One of the detectives in the Huntington Woods police department was a college instructor of mine a few years back, so I think I can talk my way out of it if I'm ever accused of stalking the Kallios. LTM, Dave Porter, 2288 (who, on 11/14, was just an hour or so up the road from Ric at Wright-Pat, on account of being on a field trip with my daughter's preschool class at the Toledo science center) *************************************************************************** From Ric You have some misconceptions. I'm not aware that we have established that W8AQQ was not active in 1937 but, in any case, Mr. Carroll's call sign was W40K. I wouldn't worry too much about W8AQQ right now. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 14:17:53 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: WOJ -conjuction junction Ric wrote: >I don't hear anyone arguing about how Betty could > have heard 391065Z and 391065E. That's fine. I'll grant you, she said "391065Z -OR- 391065E. Now, back to explaining how a Florida ham callsign -OR- a Florida shortwave commercial traffic station, appear in her log of Amelia reception? Was the AT&T station talking to AE ? Did AE hear one of these, if so on what band? (Not 14 Mc/s ham band for sure.) If W4OK heard AE, why didn't he, a ham radio buff, talk about it with his on air friends? Word would have spread like wildfire, likely even make the ham mags. The appearance of those callsigns (or ONE of them, to be precise....) it seems to me, is a great difficulty for the case for authentic AE reception. The SW listener mags seem to be very, very quiet on the whole subject. That puzzles me. (honestly). Hue Miller *************************************************************************** From Ric Sounds like a lot of "would haves" to me. We know nothing at this point about what kind of guy Francis G. Carroll was. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 14:20:50 EST From: Harry Poole Subject: Re: Batteries Here is a summary of the information known about Amelia's batteries. There were two sets of Aircraft Storage Batteries located on the Electra, a main set of batteries in a well under the center section and an auxiliary set in the rear cabin. Each battery set was rated at 85 amp-hours (two Exide 6-FFHM-13-1, totalling 12 volts). The main battery set was used to start the engines, the auxiliary set was used to power the radios (transmitter and receiver). The life of the battery depends on the state of charge, and the percentage of time transmitting. The Westinghouse transmitter required about 50 amps, and the receiver about 5 amps. Thus, if transmissions occurred twice an hour for 6 minutes each, while the receiver remained on constantly, battery drain would be about (50 X 0.2)+5 or 15 amps per hour. This results in a radio life of about 5 hours. However, there was also the main battery available. Fred and Amelia may have realized that they could transmit even after the first set of batteries had drained down by replacing the auxiliary battery set with the main battery set, and that realization may have been several days later. LTM, Harry #2300 ************************************************************************** From Ric Remind me how we know that the main battery was used for the engines and the second battery was used for the radios. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 14:54:53 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's Earhart reception/ Genuine? I welcome your rebuttal of my statements that questioned the authenticity of the alleged Earhart' transmission heard by Betty, but as Gore said to Bush, you don't have to be so "snippy". A vigorous debate often yields the truth. A few remaining questions. . As I now understand , Betty says she heard two separate transmissions but now in retrospect the first number written contained some transposed numbers and the " S 3 09' 165* E (?)" (appearing in the brackets) was probably correct. Did Amelia report both position coordinates one after the other, that is sequentially? Or were there other transmissions made between the two coordinates. In other words was the bracketed coordinate S 3 09' 165*E (?) the next transmission ? (The next entry on line just below South 391065 is "fig 8-3. 30 500 Z" following her usual pattern) I have the impression,however, that three other transmissions and entries were made before she heard the S 3 09' 165* E. Did Amelia say the" minutes and degree" when reporting the second coordinate, or did Betty add the appropriate minute and degree symbols ? That is did Betty hear Earhart say, for example," South 3 09 minutes 165 degrees East . It appears that in Earharts first coordinate transmission of "South 391065 E or Z" she didn't say minutes and degrees. Did Betty add the spacing that seems to reflect a navigators type notation. Did Betty offer a reason or explain why she didn't put the quesion mark beside her first entry, the one she says she "transposed" some numbers and was less sure of its correct sequence and instead added the question mark to the second number that she was more positive about? (She probably can't clarify that) Most importantly,did neighbor John H who sent the transcript of Betty's notes to Goerner in 1970 include the bracketed,margin entry of S 3 09' 165 *E ? If it did, Goerner should have recognized that coordinate as a position enroute from Lae-Howland ,perhaps even the midway point, and he missed an opportunity to investigate an apparent Earhart post loss message. His letter says the supposed position reports didn''t seem "relevant". Thus I'm not sure he saw the above coordinate. Does Tighar have that John's transcript or just his correspondence. Did Betty have any experience or knowledge of such terms as latitude, longitude, degrees,minutes, etc that made it possible for her to recognize and consider these transmissions as coordinates LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric Sorry about that response. Must have been my evil twin "Snippy." He tends to respond in kind when someone attacks. I'll speak to him. I'll ask Betty to clarify what she heard, but let's remember that any clarification we get is anecdotal. Betty wants very, very much to help us and she'll be greatly tempted to tell us what she thinks we want to hear. As I explained earlier, Betty explained the bracketed entry off to the side as being the last thing she heard before turning the page. Therefore the other numbers must have come between two attempts to describe a position. Logically, this might suggest that all of the numbers between "South 391065 E or Z" and the brackets position were read off the same note or whatever and the position in brackets begins another attempt to state the same information again. We do not have a photcopy of John's letters to Goerner but we do have his first drafts and his copy of the transcription of the notebook entries he made at the same time he made one for Goerner. John's copy does include the brackets coordinates. Betty says that at that time, in 1937 between 8th and 9th grade, she was familiar with latitude and longitude and how they were written. I'm quite sure I knew about that before I started high school. Can an 8th grader in public school today recognize lat/long and write it down? Opinions from teachers? LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 15:05:17 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Dating Betty's Notebook/ Monsees report According to Donald Goldstein's book,"Amelia", Arthur Monsees, a SF radio amateur, reported hearing the signals on 8 July (time not reported) on 6250 Kcs "on which the Electra couldn't operate". Thus it seems that Monsees intercept was not Earhart but some other source.Don't know how much the Coast Guard investigated. Harry wrote out some similarities of recorded words and phrases which apppear in the same order in both Monsees and Betty's intercepts. ( Dillion writes "can't find" for the #5 statement of "can't hold"). Probably not enough words recorded by Monsees, unless there is more to his report if still around, to fairly compare the two. Maybe Harry you can put some sense to it, I don't know what to make of that radio frequency re Earhart's ability to transmit. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric Radio Rangers, how big a deal is the difference between 6210 and 6250 given possible slop in receiver dial calibration? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:25:51 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Betty's membership Jon Watson said about Betty: "What a trooper - I move you make her an honorary Tighar." Honorary, hell! Ric, send me the bill for a full membership for her. LTM, who blushes at dirty words Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric Yes sir. Thank you. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:28:11 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Pacific Chart The chart I concocted of Howland & the Phoenix island group has been sent and should be in everyone's hands in a few days or so. For our parties down under perhaps a few more days than that. Ric, yours is coming Fedex. Thanks in advance for everyone's participation. This should make for another lively discussion. Doug Brutlag #2335 *************************************************************************** From Ric Arrived today. Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:37:51 EST From: Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194 Subject: Re: WOJ -conjuction junction >From Frank Westlake >By the way; I just noticed that in her notes it is WHISKEY OSCAR JULIET, >not WHISKEY ZERO JULIET, in case it makes a difference for anyone A reminder: There was NO ham call sign issued with a numeral "zero" prior to WW2... so that possibility is outta here, in case someone was going to reopen the thread. Someone (maybe John H. alluded to it) mentioned W4OJ. Maybe we should look into that possibility...? 73 Mike E. ************************************************************************** From Ric Betty does remember hearing "ZERO" so she must have heard "OH" which could be a numeral or a letter. W40J was not something Betty wrote down but it is a ham call sign and John H. at least tracked down the name in 1970. Let's see what W40K's logbooks say before we chase more remote possibilities. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:40:07 EST From: Ric Subject: Re: WOJ -conjuction junction (correction) I wrote: "Betty does remember hearing "ZERO" so she must have heard "OH" which could be a numeral or a letter. " I meant to write: "Betty does NOT remember hearing "ZERO" so she must have heard "OH" which could be a numeral or a letter. Gotta slow down. Sorry. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:41:41 EST From: Fred Madio Subject: Re: Thunderstorms I've contacted the National Climate Center in Ashville NC, and they are sending me (w/in 2 weeks)via US Mail the daily weather summaries for the dates 2 through 9 July, 1937 inclusive. Hope they have something to say about any thunderstorm activities on these dates. If not -- and if the question still seems of interest -- the next step(s) might be to contact newspaper "morgues" in the St. Pete area to see if they can provide any information (e.g: ". . . yesterdays weather was . . .") R/. . . Fred ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:45:03 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's notebook/ Real time entry (?) Here might be a way to confirm that the entry of "S 3 09' 165* E (?)", the only entry written as a coordinate position , was made at nearly the same time as the number South 391065 in the notebook.(The coordinate entry was made in brackets at a slant in the right margin with a question mark). Today,Betty,now 78, says that she made that bracketed coordinate enty only after hearing a second, clearer report by "Earhart" shortly after the first number .Her best guess to the date of the notebook is the first week of July 1937. In 1941, Betty says she recalls orally reporting the AE distress calls to an official in Washington DC but noone got back to her. In 1970, a friend and neighbor, John assisted her in notifying Fred Goerner and sent him a transcript of her notebook that included the bracketed position coordinate. (Goerner apparently didn't think that coordinate was "relevant) Thus it appears that some 33 years past before John verified that that entry was present in the notebook, unless John was the neighbor at St. Petersburg,Fl., and saw the entry in July 1937. If John didn't see the coordinate until 1970, can Betty furnish a witness,a friend, classmate,relative,etc., that could verify that the entry was made contemporaneously in July 1937. Did she show that notebook to someone else in the summer of 1937. We may be left (as with many witnesses in the Earhart saga) with only Betty's recollection of the event. Because Tighar has always been critical of diarys,oral recollections, that were made months or years after the event (Vidal and Bellart,for example), a witness to her contemporary notation of that S 3 09' 165* E in July '37 would be of great value in authenticating the Betty notebook. LTM, Ron Bright ************************************************************************** From Ric John did not know Betty until shortly before the correspondence with Goerner. There seems to be no one left alive (except Betty) who saw the notebook in 1937. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:51:37 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Minutia RE: "habitation" Habitation. What a queer word to pop up in the writings of three different authors, Lambrecht, Bevington, and the "Special correspondent to Colorado Press." I assume Lambrecht and Bevington were college graduates so the nuances of the word of habitation (vs. "lived at,", "somebody there," "stayed" etc) were clear. As for the "Special correspondent," who knows. However, my limited experience with shipboard newsletters is that a (very!) junior officer oversees (the editor) a small band of enlisted guys to write, layout and print it. There is nothing to prevent the Special correspondent from also being the editor. The unusual thing is that the newsletter uses nearly the same wording and phraseology as did Lambrecht. Lambrecht said: "Here [Gardner] signs of recent habitation were clearly visible but repeated circling and zooming failed to elicit any answering wave from possible inhabitants and it was finally taken for granted that none were there........." The Special Correspondent said: ""Sydney was the only island (searched on the 10th) which showed any sign of recent habitation and in appearance was much the same as Gardner Island. " The difference is in past vs. present tense: "signs of recent habitation" and "sign of recent habitation." The Special Correspondent used his phrase on July 11, 2 days after the overflight of Gardner. When was the Lambrecht report written? If it is dated July 12 or later then it appears the newsletter editor must have talked to Lambrecht for details of his flight prior to Lambrecht writing his report. Not that any of this is a big deal, it is just that the phrase "signs of . . .habitation" keep popping up. It's starting to get on my nerves. LTM, a former editor Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ************************************************************************** From Ric Lambrecht's article for the BuAer newsletter was dated 16 July 1937. The ship's news sheet issued on the 12th is, therefore, the earliest occurrence of the use of the term "signs of recent habitation" unless, of course, it also appeared in the news sheet of July 10th (the pone we don't have) in describing what was seen on Gardner. Bevington, by the way, said "signs of previous habitation." ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:02:44 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: batteries? Harry Poole said: "There were two sets of Aircraft Storage Batteries located on the Electra, a main set of batteries in a well under the center section and an auxiliary set in the rear cabin." How far aft was the auxiliary battery set? Is it far enough aft to keep it dry if water outside is "knee deep"? Harry Poole said: "Fred and Amelia may have realized that they could transmit even after the first set of batteries had drained down by replacing the auxiliary battery set with the main battery set, and that realization may have been several days later." How does one access the main battery storage area? Is it accessible from the cabin? (I can't see either of them wading through knee deep water carrying a battery -- one slip, and zzzzzzt!) LTM, who has been aft herself Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric I should have corrected Harry's terminology before but I missed the error. The Lockheed 10 did not have battery "sets". The plane normally came equipped with one battery which was mounted in the belly on the centerline just forward of the main beam. In other words, get out of the pilot's seat, turn around, go through the doorway into the cabin, stop, look down, the battery is under the floor right there. - except to can't get to it. To service the battery you go under the airplane, undue a couple of fasteners, and the battery drops down on a tray suspended by a couple of bungee cords. Knee deep water around the airplane would not come anywhwere near the main battery. The second battery in NR16020 was mounted along the starboard cabin wall (that's the right hand side of the airplane Den) opposite the cabin door. Knee deep water around the airplane would not come close to that battery either. Knee deep water in the aft cabin of the airplane, however, would be over the top of that battery (but would still not threaten the main battery, assuming the airplane was in the three point attitude). ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:05:57 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Re: Dating Betty's Notebook/ Monsees report >From Ric > >Radio Rangers, how big a deal is the difference between 6210 and 6250 given >possible slop in receiver dial calibration? Given most 1930s receivers... NOT MUCH. And hardly worth splitting hairs over. We of course cannot ever know this, but it'd be nice to know how close this guy's receiver calibration was... how he "KNEW" he was tuned to "6250"... whether he may have had a crystal calibration standard (something that puts out harmonics of known accuracy every 100 KHz, to keep a check on the dial). This was not a standard feature on 30s receivers. Hams who had these, had "home brew" standards. Most garden-variety tube type communications receivers with "all band" coverage (i.e. broadcast band thru 30 MHz, almost a universal standard spec), even in the 1950s and 1960s (Hallicrafters, Hammarlund, National etc) had dial accuracy that would hardly be closer than anything in the 30s. LTM (who always knows where she is) and 73 Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric Thought so. Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:49:12 EST From: Kenton Spading Subject: Gardner Island Store and Australia I need some help from our friends in Australia or perhaps someone else who has some time to search either the Web or other sources. One of the files that Ric and I retrieved from the WPHC files in Hanslope Park, England contains an inventory of items in the COOP store on Gardner/Niku for the year ending Dec. 31, 1940 (an inventory done by our famous Mr. Gallagher). The inventory contains a line item for 10 pairs of shoes. I am trying to investigate this as a candidate for the shoes found by TIGHAR in 1991. The inventory for the store was supplied by an Australian company that is listed in the file as: Messrs. On Chong & Co. (Pty) Ltd.. I have a couple of questions in regards to this that I hope someone can help me with. 1. Does this company still exist in Australia and do they have old catalogs we can look at? 2. If not, is there a library, historical society or archive somewhere that would have a copy of their catalog for the 1930's, 1940's or other? (1939 or 40 would be nice!) A catalog might show pictures of the goods and maybe prices. The total cost of 10 pairs is listed as 1. 9. 2 which I am assuming means 1 pound, 9 shillings and 2 pence? However, the file indicates that there were problems with pricing the goods as no prices were provided when the goods were delivered. They had to guess at what the items were worth (as well as a some other complicating factors I won't go into here). In general, what can we find out about this company and the goods they were suppling to Gardner/Niku Island?? LTM Kenton Spading (who knows the Forum Aussies can crack this one) *************************************************************************** From Ric There may be an easier way to crack this one. Do you really suppose that when the heels wore out on the shoes sold in the Gardner Co-Op Store the island residents could take them down to the Gardner Shoe Repair Shop and get American-made Cat's Paw replacement heels? Let's say they could. If we can make the assumption that each of the 10 pairs of shoes listed in the inventory were equal in value, we should be able to get a feel for the wholesale price of a single pair. As I'm sure we all know, there were 20 shillings in a pound and 12 pence in a shilling. The lot was valued at 1 pound, 9 shillings, tup'nce or the equivalent of 350 (old) pence. Ergo, each shoe was valued at 35 pence or 2 shillings 11 pence. I'm not sure what the exchange rate was in 1940 but in 1944 (according to my father) a pound was worth about US$5. It looks, therefore, like the wholesale price of a pair of shoes in the Gardner Co-Op store was ballpark .75 cents. Figure a standard 100 percent markup and you have a pair of shoes that sold for about a buck fifty. The shoe we found was judged to have been a woman's blucher-style oxford with brass shoelace eyelets. I wonder how much a shoe like that sold for in 1940? Going by the published consumer price indexes (http://stats.bls.gov/cpihome.htm) prices in 1940 were generally 14 percent of what they were in 1983. If we guess that a pair of shoes like that sold for, say, $50 in 1983 then the 1940 price should have been around $7 (but I'd bet shoes tended to be proportionally more expensive then due to modern advances in materials and automation). In any event, $1.50 sounds awfully low and more in keeping with a very basic, cheap shoe intended for "native" laborers rather than the relatively high end shoe whose remains we found. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:54:55 EST From: Aaron Subject: Re: Marie misheard? One methodology for dealing with similar sounding words/names is the Soundex System which assigns an identical value to letters that sound similar. I'll spare the details as to how it works as they're readily available on the net. Interesting to note that Norwich codes out the same as NewYork - both are Soundex Code N620. Norwich = N620 NewYork = N620 The Soundex Key 1 B,P,F,V 2 C,S,K,G,J,Q,X,Z 3 D,T 4 L 5 M,N 6 R AEHIOUYW have no code are skipped when doing the coding. Aaron *************************************************************************** From Ric Cool! You mean there's a way to quantify this stuff? Got a URL? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 15:05:20 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Dating Betty's Notebook/ Monsees report Sounds like Monsee could have heard Earhart on 6250 even if broadcasting on 6250 regardless of the type of ham equipment. It might behoove us to find further details of Monsees intercept on 8 Jul since four or five entries are quite close to Betty's notebook. I don't know where to look unless Ric has more info that came in while contructing the post-loss matrix. Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric All we have at present is a mention in the NY Herald Tribune. Monsee lived in San Fransisco so there could be something more in the Chronicle. The Trib carried the story on July 9 but it's not clear when the message was supposedly heard. Without date and time information we can't plot it and see if it matches any other reports. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 15:19:15 EST From: Harry Poole Subject: Re: batteries? There seems to be some confusion over my terminology of sets. The radio transmitter used in Amelia's plane requires 12 volts. The battery used in her plane was the Exide 6-FFHM-13-1. That is a 6 volt battery. The only way that battery could drive a 12 volt radio is to have two batteries in series. I referred to these two batteries as a set, since they work together. When she left from Luke field, there were only two batteries (that I call 1 set) installed in the plane. Each battery was rated at 6 volts, 85 amp-hours. The two battery set placed in series would be rated at 12 volts, 85 amp-hours. These were the main battery you referred to above, and I referred to as a set (since there were two in series). However, during the rebuild of the plane after the Hawaii crash, including the modifications in Miami, I believe there was a second, auxiliary battery set installed. That second battery set in NR16020 was mounted along the starboard cabin wall, and was referred to as the Auxiliary battery. If I haven't made myself clear, or there are still questionss, please clarify. LTM, Harry #2300 ************************************************************************** From Ric You say: >The battery used in her plane was the Exide 6-FFHM-13-1. That is a 6 volt >battery. I'm not sure where you're getting your information but the Lockheed specs I have say that the Model 10E came equipped with "1 Exide Type 6-FHM-13-1 Electrical Storage Battery (85 ampere hour)". The airplane had a 12 volt system and one battery. Sort of had to be a 12 volt battery. You have it as a "FFHM" instead of a "FHM". Typo? Or the wrong battery? The second "auxilliary" battery was installed in the airplane before the first attempt. There is no doubt about that. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:36:35 EST From: Aaron Subject: Re: Marie misheard? Regarding a URL for explaining the Soundex System... http://www.mayrand.org/soundex-e.htm ************************************************************************* From Ric Fascinating. Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:45:28 EST From: Peter Thomas Subject: Mrs Putnam For Ross Devitt, Sydney Morning Herald Tuesday June 29 1937 MRS PUTNAM __________ ARRIVAL AT DARWIN ____ To Leave To-day for New Guinea ___ PROGRESS OF WORLD FLIGHT ___ ( From our Special Correspondent) DARWIN, Monday. Mrs Earhart Putnam ,(Miss Amelia Earhart), the famous American airwoman who is flying round the world, arrived at Drawin at 11:28 o'clock(local time) this morning. She had left Koepang at 6:30 a.m. ...................Tall and slight , with a sun-tanned complexion and tousled hair, airwoman, who was dressed in long ground slacks and an open-neck checked shirt, said in an interview that the trip had been more interesting than exciting. .................."First and foremost , I want to be called Amelia Earhart, and not Mrs Putnam, " she said. " Even my husband introduces me as Miss Earhart, and not as Mrs.Putnam."" .................... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:55:43 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Sears SW Radio Tests I think it's very important for TIGHAR to acquire and test a Sears Silvertone radio, same model "Betty's" family listened to in their home in 1937. How about a test date of June-July 2001 and a location somewhere in "Betty's" old neighborhood in St. Petersburg? Janet Whitney ************************************************************************** From Ric And what would you hope to prove by that? That Betty could have or could not have heard transmissions from Earhart? You can't settle historical debates with recreations. Thor Heyerdahl's demonstration that you could sail primitive boats from South America to Polynesian and from Africa to Central America did not prove that there was ancient cultural contact between those places. Pelegrino and Finch both flew Lockheed 10s around the world thus proving - what? - that Amelia Earhart did not disappear? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:59:32 EST From: Jerry Ellis Subject: Re: Betty's membership For Dennis McGee, Nice touch Dennis. I wish I had thought to have done that! Jerry Ellis /#2113 *************************************************************************** From Ric My Momma didn't raise no fools. How many of you good people would contribute to "Betty's Fund for Post-Loss Radio Research"? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:17:40 EST From: Dave Porter Subject: Lambrecht report question Kenton and Ric, Nice job of summarizing a LOT of info. One question: Can anything be made of the addition of the word "clearly" in Lambrecht's description of Gardner? SYDNEY ...signs of recent habitation... GARDNER ...clearly, signs of recent habitation... I note that in both cases, the same action was taken: "...repeated zooming and circling which failed to elicit any answering wave..." Why the minor descriptive difference if the "signs" were the same at both places? Could "clearly" mean "more recent"??? or "more out in the open"??? or something else entirely? Am I just grasping at straws here? OK, well, six questions then ;-) LTM, who notes that there was "clearly" no airplane visible to Lambrecht on Gardner Dave Porter, 2288 *************************************************************************** From Ric I see your point but I'd be hesitant to ascribe a lot of meaning to it other than to say that whatever he saw on Gardner wasn't hard to see. Logically, if he's taking about footprints or other marks in the beach sand there must be a lot of them. What the eye will tend to pick out is a disruption of the normally smooth stretch of beach. Speculating further (here we go) what might tend to show up best from the air would be signs of repeated traffic from the shoreline to the treeline and back in one fairly specific spot (as opposed to random footprints along the beach), especially if something had been dragged ashore. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:21:03 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: batteries? > either. Knee deep water in the aft cabin of the airplane, however, would be > over the top of that battery (but would still not threaten the main battery, > assuming the airplane was in the three point attitude). Some disbelief may arise from this statement, but I'll recount the tale anyway as it is relevant. About 16 years ago the yacht I was sailing developed a leak. I knew nothing until I felt the handling become sluggish. I hove to, (yes, we still do that when there's lots of wind and no automatic steering) and went to the cabin. Seeing one of the emergency fuel stoves floating towards me suggested all was not well below. Knowing the batteries (ordinary wet acid forklift batteries) were underwater I tried the hand pump, but the water kept rising. In desperation I tried the bilge pump switch. It worked! With the electric pumps going flat out, and my manual pumping I managed to lower the water a little. As soon as I stopped pumping the level seemed to stay the same, so I stopped pumping and started sailing. I finished up beaching the yacht on a coral island (one of the 74 we have locally) and waited for the tide to go down so I could repair the hull. The point is, even if the batteries were under water they may have still worked. The vents in the filler caps on mine must have been so small the amount of seawater that got in was miniscule. Th' WOMBAT (Wombat Tails??) *************************************************************************** From Ric For what it's worth, photos show that the second battery was not just sitting out on the cabin floor but was encased in a box with a cover. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:23:03 EST From: Ted Ostrowski Subject: Latitude & Longitude Primer Ric wrote: >>Betty says that at that time, in 1937 between 8th and 9th grade, she was familiar with latitude and longitude and how they were written. I'm quite sure I knew about that before I started high school. Can an 8th grader in public school today recognize lat/long and write it down? Opinions from teachers?<< 5th graders at my school are taught the basics of longitude and latitude, i.e. 35 degrees N latitude, 170 degrees W longitude and most can find these basic locations or write down say the general location of say Dover, Del. I do show and explain to them the concept of minutes and seconds for my advanced students so I would not be surprised that 8th and 9th graders were familiar with latitude and longitude. Now, just where did I put my eyeglasses? Ted. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:32:38 EST From: Ric Subject: Off Topic but worth it As you all know, we try our best to stay on topic and we'll stay absolutely non-partisan with regard to the current drama being played out in the American presidential contest, but the following is just too good not to share. *************************************************************************** From Pat With thanks to Don Ishler, a cousin of Ric's: NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INDEPENDENCE To the citizens of the United States of America: In the light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective today. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchial duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah, which she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The rt. hon. Tony Blair, MP for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect: 1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminium". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up "vocabulary". Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. Look up "interspersed". 2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. 3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn't that hard. 4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys. 5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through. 6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at least a US rugby sevens side by 2005. 7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if they give you any merde. The 98.85% of you who were not aware that there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky. The Russians have never been the bad guys. "Merde" is French for "shit". 8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 8th will be a new national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecisive Day". 9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean. 10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy. Thank you for your cooperation. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 11:33:05 EST From: Ric Subject: Colorado Lookout up An original copy of the Colorado Lookout is now on the TIGHAR website as a Document at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/ColoradoLookout/Lookout.html ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 11:36:50 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: The Great Navigation Challenge To members of the celestial choir: Before we try this number, I think it would be a good idea if we all read from the same songbook. In other words, we need to establish the conditions & parameters from which we will all work from. Here are a few starting suggestions. I encourage everyone to join in and add to the list as they see fit. * Establish and agree on a starting waypoint on the chart from which to navigate to Howland (I suggest waypoint N0.05' W180.00'). * Establish and agree on times(GMT) of waypoint passage & arrival at Howland * Sight Reduction method-Do we use the current HO 249 or 229? FN indicated a personal preference for Dreisonstok and I do have a copy in my possession. Try all of them & compare? * Establish parameters of flight: Cruise altitude, true airspeed, expected winds aloft & groundspeed, true course, mag course, wind correction angles, headings . * Celestial sights available-Sun, stars, moon, planets & corresponding expected Hc & Zn's. Again, I invite everyone to join in and add to the above list. Ric, another suggestion: If the possibility exhists that Betty heard AE read excerpts from Fred's navigation notes, there may be a chance that a corresponding number or wording may match some notebook content as we try to piece this part of the great navigation puzzel together. Not to preach to your choir, but keep your eyes open. I am hoping that this may shed some light on Betty's notebook. Doug Brutlag #2335 ************************************************************************* From Ric I don't want to load up the forum with correspondence on this exercise so I'll ask that anyone wishing to participate email Doug directly at brutavia@shout.net and just cc me. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 13:02:10 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Betty's fund? Ric asked: How many of you good people would contribute to "Betty's Fund for Post-Loss Radio Research"? The BFPLRR? Golly, I can't wait to throw my money at that one. How about a better acronym, Ric-o? Try these on for size: RAPS: RAdio Propagation Study PLASTER: Post-Loss Audio Study and Technical Evaluation Report BLISS: Betty's Lost Information Survey and Study PLEASE: Post Loss Electromagnetic Analysis, Study and Evaluation GATORS: Gardner Audio Telephonic Organized Rescue Service OK, they're a little lame. And I conceded that BFPLRR is more accurate, but hey, never let the facts get in the way of a good acronym. Any other ideas, guys and gals? LTM, who loves GRITS Dennis O. McGee, #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric How about simply "Betty's Fund"? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 13:24:13 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Gardner Island Store and Australia That's a good argument, Ric, and some ingenious research, though it will still be interesting to see if any of our down under colleagues can track down some more direct data. Another question about the shoes is, why did the store even stock them? Since people in Micronesian villages don't routinely use shoes even today, why would the store have found it useful to stock them? Knowing this might give us a clue as to what kinds of shoes they were. Could Eric Bevington shed some light on this? LTM (who's stepping out) Tom King *************************************************************************** From Ric Good question, and asking Eric is probably a good idea. Thinking back to our own experience and amazement watching our Kiribati Kolleagues stroll around barefoot on the island, I recall that when we needed to work in areas of coral rubble rather than out on the beach or back in the forested areas, they really wanted shoes on. That, of course, presents some problems because their naturally beefy build and years of going barefoot result in feet that are width E to the 10th power. It could be that the shoes at the store were work shoes for the land clearers who worked down at Aukeraime where the going can be pretty tough. In any event, the characteristic width of the Gilbertese foot is another big reason that the rather narrow shoe sole that we found (roughly a B width) is probably not from the store. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 13:26:02 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Sears SW Radio Tests If Janet wants to buy a radio, take it to Florida, string up 60 feet of antenna, and see what she can hear, let her.... ltm jon *************************************************************************** From Ric I wouldn't dream of stopping her. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:18:29 EST From: Ric Subject: A talk with Mr. Monsees On July 9, 1937 the NY Herald Tribune reported that Mr. Arthur Monsees, an amateur radio operator in San Francisco had heard what he took to be Amelia Earhart on 6250 Kcs. The message was: "SOS KHAQQ EAST HOWLAND LIGHTS TONIGHT MUST HURRY CANT HOLD" The words "SOS", "East", "Howland", and "hurry" also occur in Betty's notes. The words "can't hold" occur in the 281 message. Mike Everette did the research and found that there is an Arthur M. Monsees who currently holds HAM callsign W4BK living in St. Petersburg, Florida (of all places). Mike alerted me this morning and I just got off the phone with Mr Monsees. He is 86 years old, has been a ham since 1932, lived in San Fransisco in 1937, and heard a transmission that he thought might be Amelia Earhart which he reported to the Coast Guard. Bingo. Unfortunately Mr. Monsees does not have any logs or notes from that period and does not now remember much about the event, but he was able to provide a bit more information than was in the very sketchy 1937 newspaper story. The message was sent twice and it was in code, not voice. I asked him about the quality of the sender's "fist" and he said that it was not the best but perfectly readable. He didn't recall what day it was but he thinks that the time of day was probably around 9 p.m. because that's when he usually was at his radio. He had a homebuilt receiver that was not calibrated very accurately. His recollection is that the signals he heard were not really in the ham bands. I asked if he recalled the freqency and he guessed that it was something like 7500 Kcs. He did say that shortly after he made his report to the Coast Guard he received a letter from a Ham in Los Angeles saying that he had heard the same transmission. He does not recall the man's name or have the letter. Art Monsees is on line and was eager to visit the TIGHAR website as soon as he learned the reason for my questions. I'll suggest that he join the forum. What next? I half expect to get a phone call from Paul Mantz. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:25:41 EST From: Ric Subject: Colorado Lookout delayed I was a bit premature about the Colorado Lookout being up on the website. We ran into some loading problems. Most of it is there now and the rest will be up tomorrow morning. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:28:11 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's notebook/ Coast Guard verification I have received word from the National Archives and Records, where I was referred to by the Coast Guard historian, that "not every document created by the Coast Guard is retired to the National Archives....and it's not likely that such a localized oral report would have been appraised as permanently valuable." They provided the Coast Guard's records on microfilm NRS-246-C (Navy Historical records), but an examination of the content doesn't suggest that there would be the St. Petersburg records and those records have been examined by you and other researchers. To my knowledge, Betty's father did not report that the Coast Guard copied anything or made any formal report of his contact. Reportedly, he took Betty's notebook with him but that is contradicted by Betty. In sum, I don't think we can find anything to document the date of the notebook from her father's report to the Coast Guard. It is unlikely any desk logs remain and were not sure any such entry was made. I have no doubt that dad went to the Coast Guard but without a log of some sort we just can't come up with a date. And there is no indication the notebook was fully "transcribed" by the Coast Guard at that time. I don't think its worth pursuing for the best we can hope for is some guy came in and reported his daughter heard Amelia but we have no content available. The date would have been nice. Maybe Harry Poole can find some living Coasties who were on duty on 2-9 July 37 still around. As I understand, they did not notify the press for a possible followup. Unless Betty could recall a significant event that occurred about the same day or two i.ea Hurricane, there just isn't a way to date her entries. I'm out of ammunition. LTM,RON BRIGHT *************************************************************************** From Ric Doesn't surprise me, but thanks for trying. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:37:41 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: BFPLRR Ric suggested: "How about simply "Betty's Fund"? And your point is . . . . ? Ric, Ric, Ric. I'm trying to be gentle here. I'm a 90s kinda guy -- OK, I'm 10 years late -- but the point is the project needs a little bump, you know? Some pizzazz. Sizzle. Edge. Twang. Bite. Look. Feel. Jake. Image. You soaking this up? Not to put too fine of a point on it but maybe your . . . ah . . .let's say, lineage . . . is getting in the way. Scots make great bankers, lawyers, and generals but . . . Put the bush knife away for a day or two and open the forum up to suggestions for an alternate name for your new enterprise. Go for it. The only rule is that one of the words in the expanded acronym has to rhyme with "haggis." LTM, devoted to fun Dennis O. McGee #1049EC *************************************************************************** From Ric I will be pleased to entertain suggestions from the forum for the name of a fund dedicated to research into the possible authentication of alleged post-loss radio signals from the Earhart aircraft. It is TIGHAR's intention that the name of this fund will honor Betty, the person whose thoughtful actions in 1937 and faithful safekeeping of her notebook for 63 years have inspired us to take a fresh look at all of the alleged post-loss transmissions. Howzat? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:39:33 EST From: Vern Subject: Re: batteries? > Harry Poole said: "Fred and Amelia may have realized that they >could transmit even after the first set of batteries had drained down by >replacing the auxiliary battery set with the main battery set, and that >realization may have been several days later." The last time we flogged the battery/transmitting mule, I was left with the impression that there were two 12-volt batteries connected in parallel. This effectively provided a battery source of 12-volts with twice the capacity of a single battery and both were maintained charged by the one generator. And both were used to power all electrical systems on the plane, It's as though there was just one double-capacity battery. It's difficult for me to see how one battery could be used for engine starting and the other for powering the radio transmitter and receiver. There would have to be some kind of switching to charge one or the other battery if each was used to power different systems. I don't think that is likely. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:46:46 EST From: Subject: Re: Betty's notebook/ Real time entry (?) Is the writing in Betty's notebook in pencil, ink-pen, or what? I can't be sure from the images I can display. Can we do any guessing about when things were written on the basis of the physical evidence at hand? Do things seem to be written with the same instrument, the same hand, etc., etc? If ink, it might even be possible to campare ages of various words and phrases. ************************************************************************** From Ric All of the entries in the notebook are in pencil. A red pencil was used for some detailing in the portraits (lips, etc.) and for a few song lyric entries. All of the Earhart notes appear to have been made with the same pencil which was apparently a bit harder than the pencil used by Betty later to make the explanatory notes. The brackets coordinates on page 53 are consistent in appearance with the other entries on that page. The bracketed explanatory note on the preceding page is darker and is consistent with the explanatory notes on page 49. All of the entries in Betty's notebook seem to be in her hand but we'll be having a document expert look into that. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:13:10 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Gardner Island Store and Australia I'll bet you're right; I'd thought about their being for use on the reef, and decided that this didn't make any sense, but yes, in some of the areas of nastier coral rubble shoes would be desirable even for an I Kiribati or Tuvaluan. My wife's Chuukese "father" when she was doing her dissertation research said that he had "feet like ko" -- "ko" being Chuukese for "cow." As I recall, when he came to Saipan for a negotiating session with the government, he just wore flip-flops; his feet were simply too wide for any available shoe. LTM (whose feet are dainty) Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 19:52:39 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: A talk with Mr. Monsees Another one of those intriguing messages that initially sound so promising, but fail the acid test. To the best of our cumulative knowledge, AE did NOT have a telegraph key aboard the Electra. Cam Warren *************************************************************************** From Ric For once I have to agree with you. No key aboard the airplane. Competently sent morse. And July 8 (if that's when he heard it) is awfully late. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:02:40 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: batteries? You have PHOTOS of the Electra interior you haven't told us about? Lockheed documents indicate the pair of batteries were installed in the nose compartment, with a "change-over" switch in the cockpit, but I'd be happy to concede to your version if photos are available. What else do these photos show? Cam Warren *************************************************************************** From Ric This is real basic stuff. I have the same photos every Earhart researcher has seen - the ones taken before the first attempt with AE and Manning sitting on the table looking out the cabin window. The battery box for the aux. battery is clearly visible in the foreground. Photos in the Purdue collection taken in Karachi show the main battery under the centersection dropped down for servicing. What Lockheed documents do you have indicating that a pair of batteries was installed in the nose compartment? That would be a terrible place to install something that heavy. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:11:57 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Janet Test vs. TIGHAR "We Know What's Best for You...etc" Let's construct a REAL test of what "Betty" could have heard via her family's Sears Silvertone AM/SW receiver. Let's buy and restore a real Sears Silvertone receiver, same model in "Betty's" household to 1937 specs. After we're done testing the Sears receiver...let's give it to "Betty." *************************************************************************** From Ric A. We don't know that Betty had a Sears Silvertone AM/SW receiver and, if she did, we don't know what model it was. All we know is that her mother told John H. in 1970 that the radio was a Sears silvertone cabinet set, but none of the Sears cabinet sets from that era look like the radio Betty remembers. B. Assuming we had the very same radio Betty had, where are we going to get the time machine to exactly duplicate the radio environment 63 years ago? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:14:58 EST From: Terry Ann Linley Subject: Update on Francis Carroll Hello to my favorite cousin and fellow Forum Watchers! I know many (all?) of you are waiting anxiously for an update on Francis Carroll and any documentation that he actually 'worked' Amelia via HAM radio. About a week ago, I mailed information to Nancy Carroll (Francis' only offspring) from the TIGHAR website. I called Nancy today to touch base. She was intrigued by the information from TIGHAR and has promised to search her father's effects, but will not be able to do this until about mid- or late-December because of Holiday commitments. I did ask her to please look for QSL cards, radio crystals, photos of her Dad with his radio setup from 1937, etc., when she gets the time to do so. She promises to catch the ball and run with it, but wants to give TIGHAR her full attention AFTER the Holiday crunch is over. Please be patient!! In the meantime, if you think of items she might watch for while searching, please e-mail me directly at: terry34951@aol.com LTM (who KNOWS that good things come to those who wait....), Terry ************************************************************************* From Ric Thanks Ter. One question I have is - what did people call him? Francis? Frank? or some other nickname? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:06:25 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Mrs Putnam Peter, I assume you have checked the Sydney Morning Herald for the first two weeks in July, 1937 for any significant items? Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:21:14 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Update on Francis Carroll >I know many (all?) of > you are waiting anxiously for an update on Francis Carroll and any > documentation that he actually 'worked' Amelia via HAM radio. --Okay, we will anxiously wait, but i'm afraid it will turn out to be a very long wait: The "ham bands" are small portions of the shortwave spectrum ( in this situation, only at approx. 4, 7, and 14 MHz ) and these 300-500 kHz wide bands were further subdivided into separate voice and telegraph segments. The bottom line is, there were lots of ears focusing in on these bands, ears all over the place, more or less continuously tuning up & down, looking for interesting, far off, or rare stations. There's quite low probability, i feel, that a contact with, or message to, AE would have gone unobserved, and not then reported, by word of mouth, then in the ham press, regardless of whether F. Carroll's sense of modesty or whatever, restrained him from ever revealing the incident. Or, maybe it did go unobserved - one more Miracle in the chain. > I did ask her to please look for QSL cards, radio crystals, photos of her Dad > with his radio setup from 1937, etc., when she gets the time to do so. She > promises to catch the ball and run with it, but wants to give TIGHAR her full > attention AFTER the Holiday crunch is over. Please be patient!! --What are you looking for in way of crystals? What would a ham in 1937 be doing with crystals for 6210 or 7500 ? Nowadays you can get these frequencies for free - nobody wants them - as the result of massive WW2 production - but in 1937, crystals were much more expensive and less common - besides which, a ham callsign operating on such frequencies would be a quick trip to losing one's license ( this was before the FCC largely abandoned enforcement, as part of "deregulation" ) But, how explain the call letters in Betty's log? Did AE hear the callsigns, and try to call them? Did Betty hear more than one station that afternoon, and conflate the loggings? Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:23:47 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Betty's Family's Shortwave Receiver > http://www.cris.com/~stwradio/silvrtn4565.htm > > Regards. > Warren >Opinions please ..... is there anything useful to be > learned from this radio? --This is not a "top of the line" radio. ( Unlike, say, McMurdo Silver ). It size says, technically, "One RF and one IF" . That means adequate, par for the course sensitivity and selectivity. The SW bands are not "bandspread", i.e. the ranges are like 2-6, 6-18 MHz with markings like.... 8...8.5....9.0...9.5...10....11....12 ...13 just for example, compared to bandspread models, which divide out ranges of interest, like 9.0 ....9.2....9.4.....9.6....9.8....10 that means calibration is only very approximate, logging frequencies to more than one place is difficult ( "6" for sure, "2" probably, maybe, best guess for this, and rest is guesswork, as in trying to find 6210 ). Writing down the frequency you are actually tuned to is educated guesswork, and finding a station you want means tuning "a little below or above" the MHz digit want, and the wide tuning range means this radio will be drifty on the higher bands and need retuning over listening to one broadcast. A pretty average radio, similar to ones in millions of other homes. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:36:00 EST From: Ric Subject: Silvertone - not We've been doing some more research into just what radio Betty was listening to and, despite her mother's recollection in 1970, I think we can stop worrying about Sears Silvertones. By far the most contemporaneous clue we have is Betty's 1942 impression that her father-in-law's radio in Illinois was "just like" the one back home in Florida - so much so that the homesick bride took a photo of it. We have that photo. That radio is a Zenith and we know that that particular model only came out in 1941 but we should be looking for an earlier Zenith that looked a whole lot like it. Zeniths characteristically had black faces on the dial, as opposed to white on most other manufacturerer's sets. Betty definitely recalls a dark dial. When asked about her mother's recollection, she laughed and said, "Well, you had to know my mother. If the last radio Dad bought was a Sears then every radio was a Sears." According to Betty, as an employee of the power company, her father was often able to buy new electrical products at a discount before they were available to the general public. They had a "birdcage" refrigerator and a vacuum cleaner before any of their neighbors. Her father was always eager to have the latest technology. So if we find that a good candidate radio model only appeared in, say, 1938 it would not necessarily be disqualified. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:21:35 EST From: Kenton Spading Subject: Gardner Island Store and Australia The response to my request for help in investigating the Gardner Island Store inventory is unfortunate and all too narrowly focused. If I shared this approach to things, the Earhart Project would not be holding the Hoodless report today and subsequently the huge pile of data retrieved from Hanslope. Dogged research down what might seem like unlikey avenues is where the nuggets of gold lie. If the treasure was down an obvious, well marked road, someone else would have already found it. I am particularily dismayed at the use of anecdotes and speculation as reasons for not pursuing avenues of research. You could conclude, that my inquiry has no merit based on anecdotal information to include: 1. apparent anedotal knowledge of the world-wide distributon of Cat's Paw products 2. an anecdote that states one pound was worth $5 US in 1940, even if that turns out to be true....I remain disappointed in the use of anecdotal information to poison the Forum against a line of inquiry instead encouraging the pursuit. I am confused as to what the CPI index for the U.S. dollar has to do with the value of the English pound and, in the end, the exchange rates in the Pacific region from which supplies were purchased from vendors. The effects of inflation on the pound in the UK for the period 1750 to 1998 are well documented. Why look at U.S. numbers in 1983? I do not believe that we should conveniently forget that the Gardner Island store sold shoes in 1940 as the store may have also sold shoes for many years after that. Perhaps the vendor's sales records to the WPHC still exist. Perhaps those records show that oxfords were supplied to the store in say....1950. If you think the store was going to stock shoes that fit or were useful to the natives.....then you do understand government quartermasters. The belief that, the history of the Gardner Island store has no bearing on our research is, at least to me, very hard to comprehend. And....obviously....shoes are not the only issue. Note that we are we are trying to identify a whole bunch of artifacts (see Help Wanted on the Web) but at the same time ignoring a major supply chain to the island? I am bewildered that the forum was encouraged to ignore my request for help. In the future, I will find more covert ways of asking our international memebership for assistance. In the meantime, if someone, particularily from Australia, New Zealand or the Pacific region is brave enough to help me, I can be reached off-Forum at kspading@compuserve.com. LTM Kenton Spading ************************************************************************** From Ric Kenton, I'm sorry you're so upset. I certainly don't think that trying to find out more about exactly what kinds of shoes and other items were stocked in the Co-Op Store is a bad idea but I do think there are some logical impediments to shoes from the store being the source of the shoe parts we found. I was merely reviewing those points. I agree with your statement that "Dogged research down what might seem like unlikely avenues is where the nuggets of gold lie." but I'm sure that you would, in turn, agree that blindly following every possible avenue will produce gold only by blind luck. The trick is to pick the avenues that really are likely to produce gold even if those avenues may seem unlikely to the uninformed. Your example of the documents in England is a good one. You didn't start chasing the WPHC files because you wondered if, by chance, they contain something interesting. We already had Gallagher's correspondence from the archive in Tarawa so we knew that there really had been bones found and that there had been official communication with the WPHC. Your search for the WPHC files that would reveal the rest of the correspondence was supremely logical, brilliantly executed, and fruitful beyond our wildest expectations. The question of whether the shoes we found came from the Co-Op store is, in my opinion, a far different matter. Although certainly worthy of consider ation, the logical points I brought up, and apparently did not clearly explain, make it a genuinely unlikely avenue to follow. Let me see if I can do a better job explaining why: - The shoe we found has been identified as a woman's blucher oxford style shoe with a rubber sole, brass sholace eyelets, and a replacement heel of American manufacture. The size is 8 or 9 and the width is about a B. On the face of it, based upon everything we know about the people who lived on Gardner and the colonial government that ministered to their needs, this seems to be a highly unlikely shoe to be stocked by the island's store. - The anecotal references to the value of the British pound and the CPI were merely intended to illustrate in very general terms that the shoes stocked by the Co-Op store in 1940 were cheap shoes. It shouldn't be too difficult to establish what a shoe of the type that we found on the island sold for in England or Australia in 1940. - The shoe we found had a Cat's Paw replacement heel that was manufactured in the U.S. in the mid-1930s (according to a matching of the heel with an archived mold still owned by the manufacturer). We do not know how widely distributed Cat's Paw replacement heels may have been in the 1930s and '40s but for a shoe from the Gardner Co-Op Store to have had one would require that a) the heels were available (no replacement heels are inventoried), and b) there was someone on the island competent to do shoe repair. The alternative, of course, is that someone could have journeyed to some place where such heels and such repair were available. So it would appear that for the shoes, or a shoe, listed in the 1940 Co-Op Store inventory to be the one we found in 1991 it would have to the case that the store stocked shoes that were unlikely to fit their clientele, were very attractively priced, and were purchased and worn by someone who later went someplace where the shoes were re-heeled before the owner returned to Gardner and eventually lost one of the shoes there. I agree with your point that other shoes may have been sold at other times by the Co-Op Store but we have no information about that and without a logical reason to think that the store may have carried shoes of that description it hardly seems like an avenue worth following. The shoe we found is an interesting clue but it's never going to be a smoking gun. If we found that the Co-Op Store for some reason carried dozens of pairs of women's blucher oxfords and the women of the village were frequent visitors to the shoe repair shop (if there was one) at the American base at Canton during the war, it wouldn't change the fact that the shoe also happens to be like the ones Earhart was wearing. This investigation, like most investigations, has an almost infinite number of paths that could be followed. I can't agree with your statement that: "If the treasure was down an obvious, well marked road, someone else would have already found it." From what I've seen, the road to the Earhart "treasure" has always been obvious and extraordinarily well marked. It has just been very poorly followed. What makes it hard now is that the trail is so cold and cluttered with junk. As for your intention to "find more covert ways of asking our international membership for assistance" that's fine, but I'd remind you that the virtue of the forum is that ideas - yours, mine, and everyone's - are subjected to review and criticism. If you'd rather not take that heat, that's up to you. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:41:20 EST From: Peter Boor Subject: W4OK/W4BK Has anyone caught the similarity in pronunciation of double-you-four-bee-kay and double-you four-tee-kay? PMB. 0856C. *************************************************************************** From Ric Aaargh! I certainly had not. This gets real interesting. W4OK - Ham Francis Carroll who lived on the same Great Circle from Gardner as Betty and is said to have said he "talked to her." W4BK - Ham Arthur Monsees who lived in San Francisco and thinks it was "probably around 9 p.m." when he heard what he heard, but he can't remember what day. Well folks, 9 p.m. in San Francisco is 6 p.m. in St. Pete - within the time frame Betty's notebook describes (4:30 to 6:15 p.m.). There are a coupe of problems, however, with Art and Betty hearing the same transmission. Double-you-four-bee-kay and double-you-four-tee-kay sound very, very much alike, but it doesn't sound much like double-you-oh-jay whereas double-you-four-oh-kay does. Also, Art is quite sure that he heard code and Betty, of course, did not. Still, this just gets weirder and weirder. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:52:32 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Gyrocompass, Autopilot, and more A few questions for the pilots and air navigators on the forum. Was the Electra outfitted with a gyrocompass as well as a standard magnetic compass? If so, how and how often was the gyrocompass corrected on a long flight such as this one? Were celestial techniques used as was done on ships? How good was the Electra autopilot? Could it maintain a preset heading and altitude? Was it safe to leave the cockpit for brief periods with the plane under its control? In Mary Lovell's book, FN's letter to Weems contains a reference to using a Dalton Mark VII Navigation Computer. My web searches have not turned up much of value. Can anyone fill in some details? A mechanical device or a slide rule of some sort? I take it that FN did not have one aboard the Electra? Thanks, Tom MM *************************************************************************** From Ric >Was the Electra outfitted with a gyrocompass as well as a standard magnetic >compass? Yes. It was part of the Sperry Gyropilot (autopilot). >If so, how and how often was the gyrocompass corrected on a long flight >such as this one? As far as I know we have no direct information about that. "As needed" is the best presumption I can come up with. >Were celestial techniques used as was done on ships? Not sure what you mean here. Celestial techniques are slightly different when done from an airplane because you're up high and moving fast. >How good was the Electra autopilot? Could it maintain a preset heading and >altitude? Yes. >Was it safe to leave the cockpit for brief periods with the plane under its control? That's a tough one. There's no reference to Earhart ever doing that but there should also be no need. Fred seems to have ridden up front most of the time anyway and if AE needed to go back and use the "can" (for example) it seems like it would amke sense to have Fred at least sit there and monitor the autopilot. I'm not familar with a Dalton Mark VII Navigation Computer. Anybody? LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:54:27 EST From: Mark Prange Subject: Re: The Great Navigation Challenge I have a copy of the 2001 Air Almanac. Maybe its pages around July 2 could be made available for the curious to download. Same with the relevant pages from H.O. Pubs. 229 and 249. (From Ric: Please contact Mark at bethpage89@hotmail.com if you're interested.) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:59:27 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Mrs Putnam Att: Alan Caldwell - A few years back, I got a complete (?) collection of clips from the Sydney Herald about Earhart. Surprisingly slim - almost all of it Associated Press stuff from the States - and nothing new or startling. Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:00:57 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Betty's Family's Shortwave Receiver Silvertone radio? It is to laugh! You guys are getting all excited about nothing. Hue is absolutely right in his evaluation. I HAD one - an "all-wave" console model. Cam Warren *************************************************************************** From Ric See my posting titled "Silvertone- not". We're still excited. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:02:15 EST From: Terry Ann Linley Subject: Re: Update on Francis Carroll For Hue Miller <<--What are you looking for in way of crystals? What would a ham in 1937 be doing with crystals for 6210 or 7500 ?>> I don't even PRETEND to understand HAM radios or their operation. I'm merely doing as I've been asked to do by Ric and others who know a lot about this form of communication. I realize that Francis Carroll would have been operating illegally with the aforementioned crystals in 1937, but stranger things have happened, yes? The main point of my posting was to let the Forum subscribers know that results (if any) would take time, and that I would NOT be pushing Nancy Carroll for information during the Holidays. She wants to work solely with me, so I plan to give her the space she needs....kind of like a good waiter: always there, but rarely seen . Of course, if you or others have suggestions as to the kinds of things Nancy might look for in her search, feel free to e-mail them to me at: terry34951@aol.com I'll keep a list and pass them along when I talk with Nancy. LTM, Terry ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:12:33 EST From: Pete Subject: Mr. Monsees I think having Mr. Monsees on the Forum would be definitely to TIGHAR advantage. He has a unique perspective, being a HAM since '32, and would have better insight into the radio equipment of the Pre-WW2 era. I don't think his contact being CW is really a prob, as even I can take one of the Morse cards and make up a message to key in a few minutes. Okay, so we have Betty's notebook for a vox transmission and now two CW intercepts for California. Was the Wyoming intercept vox or CW? Still no word from FCC regarding WOJ, has anyone asked AT&T themselves about their old Hialeah stations? I can if you'd like, I don't think they'd mind a query from an Electronics Student. I'm going to talk to the ex's Grandmother about radios, she's in her 80's and might have seen a Silvertone with a dark dial. My best to all Pete ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:19:10 EST From: Pete Subject: Relevent Data? Ric, sharpen the bush knife, I don't know where this would fit. Phonecon with my Ex's Grandmother regarding radios. I found that she once worked on Zenith radios and another brand she could not remember (possibly Philco), and the dial was dark if the cabinet was dark, dial light if cabinet light. She said the dark Zenith dials were bronze-like in finish. Also revealed was that regardless of brand, all radios used an external antenna, but most were smaller than the TV aerials that came later. She said she saw very few Silvertones as a teen, the Zeniths being more common. One thing she said that may have bearing on why so few intercepted an AE post-loss transmission. "Mostly, folks kept to their favorite channels, and didn't search the short-wave bands much since they came in so bad". Thanks to TIGHAR, my research skills have been vastly improved. My work sked lets me have late mornings to do as I will. Should I take a notebook to visit the nursing homes around for anecdotal info? I'm in North Florida, but there are plenty of retired folks around here. How does one know when to pronounce the horse dead? That part of researching I don't know yet. Hoping to measure up, Pete *************************************************************************** From Ric A horse is dead when the facts have either been acertained through primary non-anecdotal sources or we've reached a consensus that sufficient sources do not exist to ascertain the facts. Resurrection is always possible through new sources. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:24:57 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: W4OK/W4BK 9PM in San Francisco is 12PM (Midnight) in St. Petersburg, FL, not 6PM. Shame on you for not knowing which way the world turns... ************************************************************************** From Ric I HATE it when that happens. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:36:33 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: PURDUE Collection links and suggestions I have now had a number of people ask me about the Purdue documents and photos. The stuff IS there, but there are errors in the web site and they may or may not be there to slow down traffic until it is complete. I believe they are genuine errors but received no reply from Purdue when I advised them. All the links to the material have earhart spelled as "aerhart". If you click on a link, then drop the first "a" and refresh the page you'll get there. In the mean time, here's what is where. I posted the descriptions previously. The Purdue home page is: www.purdue.edu At the bottom right is a search window - type in earhart and click the SEEK button. Among the links you should find http://www.lib.purdue.edu/spcol/earhart.html which will take you to the THOR search engine. At the top is a link to the earhart collection http://www.lib.purdue.edu/aearhart when you get there, you'll get a "not authorized to see" message. Correct the spelling of the name to "earhart" (drop the "a" off the front"). Now you have FTP access to the files using the list I posted some time ago. Go into the "Images" directory. At http://gemini.lib.purdue.edu/earhartdisplay/ you can search the Earhart collection. Also, if you go directly to http://www.lib.purdue.edu/search/ click on "By Title" and you'll get a list of what's in the collection. Click on "Full record" then leave the search window blank, you'll get everything in the directory with a thumbnail. Be warned - cable is the way to go here - I think there are about 750 files in it! Once you have the list you may find that FTP using the browser is the way to go. Some files are around 200MB and a lot are PDF. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:46:37 EST From: Steve G. Subject: Niku Map I've been using the map on the Tighar Website (http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/MapsandPhotos/maps/Nikumap.html) to follow the discussions about island events and activities. It's well laid out and shows most of the major features of interest. I was reaching the point of deciding that to more closely follow the events of the coming expedition and to fully understand what's been done on the previous expeditions, that I'd have to assemble my own large wall-mounted map. Then I got to wondering if there might be any revenue possibilities if Tighar were to prepare such a map, perhaps including some of the aerial photos that have been taken (are any useful satellite photos available?), and possibly some water depth contours from maritime charts or topographical information. Some obvious choices of photos to include would be the Norwich City wreckage, the village remnants, the "7" site, the Coast Guard station, and the blasted reef channel. The idea would be that in a large, easy-to-read scale, one could "follow along" on the next expedition. I don't know what the production costs of such a map would be, nor the potential demand. Is this idea too far out there? LTM (who's at the age of appreciating easy-to-read stuff) Steve G., Tighar # something or other *************************************************************************** From Ric I kinda like the idea. Other comments? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:52:25 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: cousins Terry Ann Linley said: "Hello to my favorite cousin . . . " Now, Ric, this is at least the second cousin we've heard from here on the Forum. Doesn't the TIGHAR administrative procedures handbook address the issue of nepotism? :-) LTM, who loves most of her relatives Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric Yes it does. Two of my brothers are TIGHAR members, my Dad is on the forum (although so far he only lurks), TIGHAR's website is hosted by a company owned by my youngest brother, and I sleep with TIGHAR's President. Nepotism is a characteristic of all monarchies. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:02:34 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: DAlton Mark VII Computer Orginally developed by Ensign Phillip Dalton(Navy). I could publish the 9 pages of info on it in front of me but I won't. Bottom line: It's the original E6B-slide rule on one side & winds on the other. There are other models of computers bearing Mr. Dalton's name including a double-drift, Type C plotting board, E1A w/double drift. Doug Brutlag #2335 ************************************************************************* From Ric Thank Doug. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:41:36 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Niku map I think Steve G. has a great idea. I, too, have reached "a certain age" when larger type and brighter lights are appreciated. A large-scale detailed map of Niku and the surrounding waters would be a great help for all of us. In fact, how about poster sized (approx. 40'X30") in a horizontal format with appropriate keys and legends on the bottom. I'd buy two, one for framing for my office and the other for home use. LTM, who is far past "a certain age" Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric Although I won't post them all on the forum, we've had a good response to this suggestion. Looks like something we should do. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:49:06 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Using the can Some recent discussions here have brushed against the ungainly topic of using the lavatory on the 10E. Strictly from a safety standpoint, wouldn't crawling over the gas tanks in the fuselage be kind of dicey. In the pictures I conjure up from my imperfect memory I seem to recall there being very little space between the top of the tanks and the top of the fuselage. Additionally weren't many of the fuel fittings/plumbing for the tanks on the top? Wouldn't this configuration make it risky to climb atop the tanks and possibly loosening a fitting or two on your way to or from the loo? Over a 20-hour period, I would think that at least a half dozen trips aft for each flier would be necessary. That being the case, the risks of damaging at least one of the fuel tanks and/or its plumbing seems rather high. LTM, whose is too delicate for much of this discussion Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************************** From Ric No big deal. From the photos, I'd characterize crawling back and forth over the tanks as no worse than "a bit awkward." There seems to have been a platform above the tanks that provided a smooth surface to scoot across. The filler necks for the tanks were against the port side cabin wall but they don't look particularly delicate. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:50:34 EST From: Mike E. the Radio Historian Subject: W4BK a "non-horse" We do not need to ponder over the W4BK/W4OK matter... W4BK was not the call sign of Arthur Monsees in 1937, and does not fit the equation. At that time Mr. Monsees lived in San Francisco, CA and held the call sign W6HJP. Mr. Monsees' reception report was publicized in one of the San Francisco papers at the time. Either the SF Examiner or the SF Chronicle. One of those newspapers sent a photographer to Mr. Monsees' home and took pictures of him and of his ham station. Mr. Monsees tells me that some time later, he was contacted through the mail by another ham operator in the Los Angeles area who told him he'd heard the same signals. Unfortunately, Mr. Monsees (now 86, but very sharp and doing well physically, thank goodness!, and living in a retirement community in Florida) has lost his logs and notes from the time, as well as any newspaper clippings. Someone who lives in the SF area and could search the newspaper files from the time period might be able to locate the articles. If they can be copied, Mr. Monsees might appreciate having a copy. LTM (who hopes she will still be sharp at that age) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:51:45 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: St Petersburg Radio Did the St. Petersburg newspaper for the week of 2-9 July contain a standard radio log for the local radio stations for the programing, both AM and FM stations. I'm curious to the nature of the programing specifically around 3:30 to 6:00 pm and for radio experts to speculate whether any relevant broadcast in AM/FM could creep into short wave frequencies on her radio. From city directories, any way to identify any prominent ham clubs in ST. Pete in the summer of 1937and see if any hams are around today. If Betty heard Earhart, for that long of time ( 1 3/4 hrs) it seems someone else may have heard similiar phrasing, words, etc.,contacts with Francis Carroll. Who knows. Maybe Harry knows!! LTM, Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:55:01 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Gyrocompass, Autopilot, and more Gyrocompasses deviate 15 degrees per hour because of the Earth's movement and therefore require correction "as needed". Therefore if you leave them alone for an hour you'll be 15 degrees off your plotted course. ... I feel AE checked her course and therefore her gyrocompass probably every 20 minutes. I have one technical question about the Sperry Gyropilots. Were these things slaved to the compass in those days or were they built to sent the airplane merely in a straight line ? LTM (who used to watch the liquid compass with one eye and the gyro with the other) ************************************************************************** From Ric It's my impression that they were not slaved. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:04:10 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Dalton Mark VII Computer Adding on to Doug's description of the Dalton Mark VII Computer, from a Weems catalog of goodies. Price $5, knee holder extra for $2. The text says, "A popular computer, laminated vinylite construction, designed to help the pilot or navigator solve quickly any of the following navigational problems: - Conversions between compass, magnetic, and true bearings or courses. - Solution of all types of wind problems. - Solution of interception problems. - Speed-time-distance computations. - Airspeed corrections. - Altimeter corrections. - Conversions between statue and nautical distances or speeds. - Off course corrections. - Fuel consumption problems. On the tail piece is space for recording airspeed meter calibration and also space for keeping a flight log. May be cleaned after each use." The size is 5" wide by 11" long. The circular computer is at the top, covering about 40% of the total length. Below the computer is the "tail piece" which has a flight log grid line format. Backside has winds. The Dalton Mark VIII, Dalton E 1-B, and E 6-B ($10) are also listed in the Weems catalog. blue skies, -jerry *************************************************************************** From Ric I wonder how well "laminated vinylite" holds up on a lagoon bottom after 63 years. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:05:29 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: cousins Ric says, "Nepotism is a characteristic of all monarchies." So is inbred insanity. blue skies, -jerry ************************************************************************** From Ric That explains a lot. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:19:45 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Gyrocompass, Autopilot, and more >Not sure what you mean here. Celestial techniques are slightly different >when done from an airplane because you're up high and moving fast. Well, thanks to all for the great info. Actually what I meant by celestial techniques was this. Celestial techniques such as sunrise/sunset amplitudes or the computed azimuth of a celestial body could be used with relative bearings taken with a pelorus to check the ship's true heading sea and validate required compass corrections. Was this a common technique in aircraft? Tom MM ************************************************************************** From Ric I'll have to leave that question to the Celestial Choir, but Noonan did have a pelorus aboard the aircraft. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:26:30 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Sextant I know you've been in touch with a descendent of the master of the Norwich City. Has there been any information on what type of sextant he used. If there has, I've missed the thread. Did he rescue it from the ship? Did he rescue its box? Are there any photos of his sextant or its box in the family collection? Are there any old family documents that might include a receipt or other details about it that could be traced? I'm sure this has come up before, but I haven't seen anything on it (I missed a lot of the early posts). Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric There is nothing about a sexant or a sextant box in all of the literature about the Norwich City disaster. Nobody "rescued" anything from the ship. The one lifeboat that was launched was swamped as soon as it hit the water. Everybody had to swim for their lives. Some stuff, Including the lifeboat and three bodies, washed up on the beach. The captain's great niece, Janet Powell, is a TIGHAR member and is on the forum. Any infromation in the family about the ships' sexant Janet? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:35:19 EST From: Denise Subject: Pacific Island Shoes Regarding the type of shoes sold in the Pacific during the 40s, I don't know ... but I do know that the shoes sold in the 50s, 60s and 70s through small island stores, came mainly from mainland China, except for the moulded plastic ones which came from India. There was also a thriving trade for the black leather "policeman's sandals" made in Fiji, because, as you point out, Pacific Islanders have feet which are usually too broad for normal shoes. The higher priced range of items, seldom bought by the islanders, sold through the Burns Philp (SS)chain, came from New Zealand and, less frequently, from Australia. There was, now and again, the odd pair from Argentina or Brazil, but those were imported specifically by Meanger's Shoes in Suva and were not shipped anywhere else in the Pacific. To this day, I know of no shop in Fiji, Tonga or Western Samoa which has ever stocked American shoes and I assume it was the same elsewhere in the Pacific. American shoes were just too expensive ... and, as you say, far too narrow for Islander feet. Hope this helps. LTM (who herself wears a Size 9 narrow) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:38:23 EST From: Denise Subject: Pacific Island shoes - Furthermore ... In addition to my earlier note, the shoes in question could not have come from someone from the British Colonial Service - say, Honour Maude! Wear American shoes? Phsaw!!!!!! We were total shoe-snobs and all wore bespoke shoes made by our favourite "little man in London" who kept our foot measurements on file and who always remembered our names and the countries where we were stationed. A visit to him was an absolute MUST every time we "went home" and we always ordered everything we needed from him. The thought of buying American shoes - and moccasins to boot! - Oh, PLE-EASE!!! It would never have happened. LTM (who misses those days enormously) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:42:41 EST From: Vern Subject: Zenith Radio Receivers >That radio is a Zenith and we >know that that particular model only came out in 1941 but we should be >looking for an earlier Zenith that looked a whole lot like it. Zenith produced some pretty fancy radios in the mid-1930's. For example, I was just looking at a Model 1000Z "Stratosphere." This is a 25 tube superheterodyne! This may not be Betty's radio but it may be similar. The schematic diagram is dated 11-14-1934. There are several features that are rather uniquely Zenith. Betty might remember some of them and perhaps confirm that the radio was, in fact, a Zenith of one kind or another. the Rider Perpetual Trouble Shooter's Manual does not provide pictures but there is a sketch of the dial with some features that Betty might remember. Some of these Zenith receivers had a "tuning eye" that the old timers will remember. It's a unique sort of thing that Betty would probably remember if her radio had one. I can provide a drawing of what the dial of that receiver, and other models of about that time, looked like. As I say, there are a number of uniquely Zenith features that might ring some bells with betty. I'm searching for pictures of some of those sets but have nothing right now. The "Stratosphere" model had not one, but two, RF amplifiers and two IF amplifiers. The IF frequency was 485 kc. I'll guess it had microvolt sensitivity, easily. It covered the AM broadcast band and four SW bands. It gave continuous (overlapping) coverage from 535 kc to 63,000 kc. Yes, it had what they called a UHF band from 19.5 MHz to 63.6 MHz. This thing could have heard Amelia Earhart's alleged transmissions if anything could! Assuming, of course, a reasonably good antenna -- like some 60 feet of wire strung across the backyard to a utility pole. And that's an almost omni-directional antenna, especially for high-angle incoming radiation -- "skip" having been bent through the ionosphere. This receiver has a lot of "bell & whistle" stuff that accounts for some of those tubes and an awesome audio amplifier accounting for a total of 12 tubes. There are three rectifier tubes in the power supply, That leaves 10 tubes for the real business of receiving a singal. Three more tubes are associated with amplified AVC, QAVC (Quiet the receiver until you find a moderately strong signal) and a "shadowgraph" tuning indicator -- I THINK this is the little rudimentary cathode-ray tube that served as sort of a signal-strength meter (S-meter). Now we're down to about seven tubes.... 2-RF amps., Mixer, Local Oscillator, 2-IF amps., detector -- comes out about right. LTM (Who remembers a big old Zenith that was pretty impressive even in 1946 *************************************************************************** From Ric You must be, like, psychic. Yesterday we were able to confirm that the Zenith 1000Z "Stratosphere" is indeed the model that Betty's family had. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:44:42 EST From: Peter Boor Subject: Sperry Gyropilot re Sperry Gyropilot etc. - When I was navigating (in the 50s, much later than Fred) the E4 autopilots did drift in azimuth, if they were not slaved to the magnetic compasses (N1s, in our case). If we needed to plot the drift to correct, we used astrocompasses to measure azimuths. Astrocompasses were oriented to the aircraft by calibrated mounts, as were the later periscopic sextants; so as a celestial elevation uses a horizon (or coriolis-corrected bubble) for reference, a celestial azimuth requires a mount calibrated to the aircraft centerline. I don't see how Fred could just poke his sextant out the window and measure a good celestial azimuth, with no reference to the aircraft. He might have been able to back in an estimate of azimuth gyro drift over a long flight, if he trusted his mag compass. And to hold altitude, the autopilot must have been slaved to the pitot/static system. And good catch, Randy. Our earth does spin so that St. Pete time is three hours ahead of San Fran. PMB #0856C. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:58:08 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Using the can I must have missed the response to my original question: how DID one use the can in the Electra? TK ************************************************************************** From Ric Enter lavatory compartment, close door, lift seat, sit down...shall I continue? I take it that your question really has to do with whether or not it was a chemical toilet that had to be emptied. I don't know, but the Electra did not come equipped with bomb bay doors so I expect that it had to be emptied. Anybody know anything about early airline can technology? Is this issue in any way related to the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, F-84 Thunderjet, or F-105 Thunderchief? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:59:36 EST From: Mike E. the Radio Historian Subject: Re: St Petersburg Radio >I'm curious to the nature of the programing specifically around >3:30 to 6:00 pm and for radio experts to speculate whether any relevant >broadcast in AM/FM could creep into short wave frequencies on her radio. There was no such thing as FM in 1937, at least in the south. What FM there was, and that was all experimental, was centered in NYC. >From city directories, any way to identify any prominent ham clubs in ST. >Pete in the summer of 1937and see if any hams are around today. One common listing in the regular telephone-directory Yellow Pages was "Radio Amateur Clubs," at least in larger cities. I have never seen such a listing in a City Directory such as the Hill Co. may have published. It's difficult, but not impossible, to track old ham call signs. As for names, about the only way I know of (and someone please correct me if I am mistaken!) is to hand search the old editions of the Radio Amateur Callbook Magazine, which was published about 2 to 4 times a year... and this is organized in one way only, alphanumerically by call sign! It might be someone could take a day or so and cruise the 1936-37 call books and just look for St. Petersburg addresses... that isn't too hard, just slow -- IF you have an old call book (I do not). The present web data bases for ham radio are not that old. The best is qrz.com and their oldest data is 1993. The American Radio Relay League (US national ham radio organization) doesn't have these old records either, apparently... and even if they did, it'd just be for ARRL members and not every ham belongs to ARRL (then or now). Of course, just knowing who were the St. Pete hams in 1937 does not mean (a) they are still with us today or (b) any of them heard anything. LTM (who lets her fingers do the walking) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:19:29 EST From: Doug Brutlag Subject: Celestial Azimuths "Swinging the compass" in the air was routinely performed by navs with a Pelorus as you mentioned. Checks were made for calibrating the compass & for deviation. They could also do it using a drift sight if a Pelorus was not available provided that the body used was the sun and its shadow could be observed through the drift sight. In a pinch there was also a technique using the radio mast as a shadow casting apparatus. The fuselage or wing would be graduated so that the relative bearing of the body when the airplane was in flying attitude could be measured. Now doesn't that $99 GPS make you feel lazy? Doug Brutlag #2335 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:27:48 EST From: Ric Subject: Betty's radio Based upon further research and checking with Betty, we feel that we now have her radio pinned down to one of the high-end Zenith models. These included: Model # #tubes saleprice Riders reference 1000z 25 tubes $795 6-29 & 10-35 16-a-61 16 tubes $375 7-27 16-a-63 16 tubes $450 7-27 16-e ??? 16 tubes ???? 7-26 no reference in Betty has specifically identified a photo of the Model 1000Z "Stratosphere" as being like the one her family had at the time she heard Amelia. This model can be seen at http://members.aol.com/azarc/zenithst.htm We're presently checking to see if any of the 16 tube radios also came with cabinets that had the specific decorations and features Betty remembers. In any event, it now appears that Betty was listening to a very, very good radio. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 08:42:53 EST From: Kristin Tague Subject: names,pride 1) Betty's Project. Two cents to follow. I work in marketing (which still makes this just my opinion) and I think that trying to find a "jazzy" name for Betty's Project is a dead end street.The evocative thing about this project are the people. I think that has been true all the way through - Whether it is "The Earhart Project" , "The Noonan Project" certainly the Fiji bones work could be named "The Gerald Gallagher Project" if we were to decide to honor his original diligence while following up his work. I think it is just that direct connection with a compelling group of people and the fascinating way that their point of view, experience and work intertwine throughout that touches those of us involved and those that might be. 2) Just a philosophical note. It is interesting that in several instances we have a record of someone on the "front lines" being involved in the Earhart story or being thrust into involvement; Betty, Gerald Gallagher etc. In most cases these people took the evidence they saw or heard first hand quite seriously and did all in their power to follow up on their assessment that they had critical information. It is at the next step , with some distance from the experience, that there is hesitance to go public with a report, suggest a possibility to one's peer in another government , to follow up without bias. It's almost as if Earhart's fame worked against her ,as if people were wary of making a fool of themselves or just making a mistake about such a famous figure. Kris ************************************************************************** From Ric Excellent observations. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 08:56:03 EST From: Tom King Subject: The 'can" So there's nothing in Lockheed's plans and specs? Sheesh! Maybe now we know what those corks on chains were for. TK ************************************************************************** From Ric There undoubtedly are plans and specs for the "can", but we don't have anything like a complete set of engineering drawings for the Model 10. They're on several reels of microfilm at NASM. ************************************************************************** From Dough Brutlag I flew a DC-3 years ago that had a "honey bucket" aka chemical toilet. Saw something similar on a DC-4 a time after that. There is a story involving President Harry Truman who is rumoured to have told the pilots flying "Sacred Cow"(the 1st air force 1-a DC-4) when they would fly over a a city where there resided a particular politician who had disagreed or caused him some gas in some way, to let him know in advance and he would head for the can. My Dad said his nickname was "give em hell Harry". Guess dropping A-bombs wasn't the only thing in his repertoire. Doug Brutlag #2335 ************************************************************************** From Kerry Tiller This forum has some strange fixations. LTM [Loos, Thunder & Mysteries] Kerry Tiller *************************************************************************** From Troy Off-topic about airplane lavs and a contemporary aviator's view of meeting AE The first toilet on an airplane was in the early 1920's, "invented" by early female avaitor Mary Alice Gatling Beatty of Birmingham (her husband was another pioneer aviator). The toilet is available to see at the Aviation Hall of Fame in Birmingham, Alabama (makes you wanna see it, huh?). The first "heads" were nothing more than a modesty screen put up where one of the passenger seats were and with an open hole in the floorboard of the airplane. There was a note on the "door" that said "Passengers will please refrain from using the lavatory while on the taxiway". Another intersting first, instead of being christened her first time over the equator, she became the first air-traveler to christen the equator...... I asked her once if she had met AE and she said she did, once. Her impression of her, I recall, was not a positive one. I don't know the words she used, but I would say snippy and confident beyond her abilities. Neither her nor her husband (Donald Croome Beatty) were in the least surprised that she was "lost at sea". Their attitude was one of "I would've been surprised if she had made it." They did not think much of her abilities, but they had also been flying since the home-built days of the 19-teens and were "OX5-ers". LTM (who will be **relieved** when this discussion is over) Troy Tighar Lurker number something *************************************************************************** From Herman De Wulf It is related to the Thunderbox. Why not ask somebody who still flies Lockheed 10A Electra's ? They must know what kind of thunderbox/can they have in the airplane. If you want a name I can provide one. *************************************************************************** From Ric I assume you mean the Air Canada airplane. I'm not opposed to asking but I'd be surprised if it was any help. Old airplanes that have been returned to service are not a reliable source of information about what those airplanes were like in their original configuration. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:18:28 EST From: Chris Kennedy Subject: Re: Betty's radio I am sort of curious to know what information caused us or Betty to second guess her original recollection that the radio was the Sears model? --Chris Kennedy ************************************************************************** From Ric As explained in my original report to the forum on our interview with Betty, her neighbor John H. had notes of a conversation he had with Betty's mother circa 1970 in which she said the radio was a "Sears Silvertone cabinet set". After researching Sears Silvertone cabinet sets we found that none fit the very strong recollection Betty had of the features of the cabinet. Our source for those recollections was a photo Betty had taken in 1942 of a radio owned by her father-in-law . She had taken the photo specifically because the set was "just like" the one back home in St. Pete. The photo actually shows a Zenith model that didn't come out until 1940 but the cabinet features she remembered were the same as those used in the 1935 Zenith 1000Z. From purely an investigative standpoint, Betty's 1942 recollections as expressed in her photo of the radio "just like" the one back home, trumps her mother's 1970 recollection. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:24:19 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Betty's Family's Receiver and "Harmonics" From the photos of the Zenith Stratosphere receiver it appears it had electrical bandspread tuning (separate tuning knobs for main tuning and tuning across a band). Also, if you multiply 3105 and 6210 by 2,3,4,....you will see that none of the harmonics of 3105 and 6210 would fall close to what were the U.S. ham bands in 1937...especially not to what were the phone segments of the U.S. ham bands in 1937. Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:40:44 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: St Petersburg Radio Are there any federal/state agencies that would have records of ham call signs and hence operators in Flordia in 1937,specifically those in St. Pete. Didn't Janet Whitney track down Carroll. Somehow or another, Betty heard W40K ,most likely coming from Carroll. Can AM broadcast frequencies,say local AM radio, bleed into Betty's shortwave receiver? If its impossible, no sense looking up AM programing on or about 4-9 Jul. Did we answer the question if KGMB AM (1320) from Honolulu could be heard on short wave in Florida independent of Earhart's radio. KGMB was certainly broadcasting alot re Earhart,and Tighar says we are not sure if Earhart was listening to KGMB and that she was the source of the call sign found in Betty's notebook. In other words how did KGMB get into Betty's notebook for it seems it must have been heard during that broadcast. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric Betty has no recollection of hearing any broadcast by KGMB and nothing in her notes sounds like any known KGMB programming or what KGMB was sending to the Earhart plane. Betty wrote "KGMB" as something that she heard Earhart say. It's apparent from the notes that Earhart was hearing something over her headphones. One thing my (still unfinished) compilation and "timelining" of post-loss receptions shows very clearly is that several reputable stations heard very credible responses to KGMB's requests for Earhart to reply with "dashes" on 3105. It seems entirely reasonable that Earhart would make reference to KGMB in later attempts to establish contact with someone. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:44:00 EST From: Don Jordan Subject: How to use the can Tom King asked: How do you use the can in the Electra? To which Ric replied: From Ric "Enter lavatory compartment, close door, lift seat, sit down...shall I continue"? *********************** I'm surprised at you Ric! I think you're slipping! Everyone knows you don't "lift the seat and sit down". You can lift the seat and stand up. . . .or you can lower the seat and sit down, but you don't lift the seat and sit down!!!! That's just asking for trouble. Also, if you are so endowed as to be able to use the facility without sitting down. . . and don't lift the seat. . . that can get you into trouble too. Especially if you're married to one who must sit down. And, if you are, don't forget to lower the seat, or that could be a whole new set of problems!!!! Don J. ( Sorry just hadta) ************************************************************************** From Ric First the time zone, now this. Bad week. Shoulda said "cover." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:55:25 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Sextant A sextant is often a "personal" item to a sea officer, whilst at other times it is a part of the ship's inventory. I wonder if there's an inventory of the Norwich City's nav equipment somewhere. Maybe the sextant had a number stencilled on the box. One thing I find interesting. I believe the Gardner sextant box was "on display" on someone's office for a while (Vaskess?). If it had been floating around in salt water then lying on a beach under a tropical sun, if just might have looked a bit too beat up to display (driftwood box). Of course we don't know what condition it was in, but if it was worth having on a desk or shelf in an office, and the numbers were clear, it must have been reasonable. Suggests limited exposure... If we found the serial number of the Norwich City sextant it may just rule out one of the two logical possibilities for the origin of the box. Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric We're reasonably certain that no inventory of any kind from the Norwich City survives. If we could, by some quirk of fate, discover the serial number of the ship's sextant it might or might not relate to the number on the box. We have yet to see a sexant box where a number written on the ooutside of the box matches the serial number of the sextant inside. The point you raise about the apparent not-so-bad condition of the box has troubled us too. This does not sound like a box that was found through beachcombing. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:56:58 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Pacific Island Shoes Burns Philp as a company are still around (or at least they were two years ago). When I worked on cattle stations 25 years ago, the Burns Philp Store in the nearest town (usually a hundred or two hundred miles away) was the only place you could buy the necessities of life - clothes, boots, hats - unless you used mail order. A couple of times a year we "Ringers" (what would be cowboys and ranch hands in the US) would go into town to the horse races, and stock up on such stuff. I guess it might be possible to track down something historical like supplies to Gardner if they kept records, but as Denise suggests, Burns Philp New Zealand may have been the supplier, and I doubt records that early would be around. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:58:36 EST From: Robert Klaus Subject: Re: Gyrocompass Wouldn't a gyro be off course fifteen degrees per hour at the North or south pole, and zero degrees per hour at the equator? (for error rates in-between check a sine/cosine table) A gyro course near the equator should be valid for a fairly long period. Robert (Klaus, not Klauss) *************************************************************************** From Ric Is that right? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 10:02:00 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Niku 2001 I'm hearing that the Russians are going to bring MIR down next summer "in the Pacific ocean somewhere east of Australia". Perhaps you should do a little research and find out when this is going to happen and in what general area "east of Australia" they're talking about. It could ruin your whole day to have a space station come down on your head. Wouldn't it be ironic, after all this time, that all the possible evidence that might still exist on Niku is wiped out by the remnants of a de-orbiting spacecraft? LTM, Tom *************************************************************************** From Ric We'll issue hard hats. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:00:15 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Burns Philp > From Denise > > Regarding the type of shoes sold in the Pacific during the 40s, The > higher priced range of items, seldom bought by the islanders, sold through > the Burns Philp (SS)chain, came from New Zealand and, less > frequently, from Australia. > > LTM (who herself wears a Size 9 narrow) For those who may wonder about Burns Philp, the following is plagiarised from http://www.johns.usyd.edu.au/su/macleay/burns_philp.htm A part of the Macleay University Museum (A Museum of the History of Science at the University of Sydney). There, now it's NOT plagiarism! James Burns had been running his shops in Queensland since 1867 but it was not until 1883 that Burns went into partnership with his former employee Robert Philp to form Burns Philp & Co. In 1880 they had acquired the mail contract to run to Thursday Island and this was the beginning of an active interest in Melanesia & Polynesia which lasted until the late 20th century. Over the course of these years Burns Philp and other companies which they held controlling interests in were intimately linked to the development of industry in the area. In the 1880s Burns Philp was involved in the labour trade which was known as "blackbirding" mainly at the behest of Robert Philp who was also an aspiring politician but two official enquiries into conditions on board their ships the 'Heath' & the 'Hopeful' coupled with a downturn in the sugar industry in 1886 led them to look for other ways of making money in Melanesia where most of the labour was recruited. In 1891 they opened their first stores in New Guinea at Port Moresby and Samarai, most of the profits were derived from retail and the Sandalwood trade although they also had government mail contracts and transported goods and people to Missions and other European enclaves in Melanesia By 1901 they had 4 overseas stores, Port Moresby, Samarai, Vila and Nukelofa and the first years of the 20th century saw Burns Philp and Co (and its offshoot the Solomon Island Development Company) actively buying land to set up Copra and Rubber plantations in the Solomon's, New Hebrides, and New Guinea. This activity continued, although never with huge success, until the beginning of the second world war which saw many plantation owners leave their properties and return home. Wombat Tail: Burns Philp was still active 2 years ago (refer my other posting). Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:02:16 EST From: Subject: Hue MillerRe: Betty's radio Ric wrote: >...it now appears that Betty was listening to a very, very good radio. A caution from a contrarian: let's withhold conclusions til we see the all-revealing schematic. Audio power tubes, dual rectifiers, quality wood cabinets add NOTHING tho the long-distance ability of a radio, altho they do boost the price, the perceived quality, and the quality and strength of the tonal output. It can be, that a radio sold for x dollars is no better, for our needs, than one that sold for much less. We are talking consumer electronics. Tube count or dollar count are not that revealing. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:11:17 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Zenith Radio Receivers Mike wrote: > Now we're down to about seven tubes.... > 2-RF amps., Mixer, Local Oscillator, 2-IF amps., detector -- comes out about > right. Yes, this is a very good radio, for a civilian radio. The only fault i can see, is that from your description, and i may have it wrong, the dial system still has that crummy widerange tuning, like 6-19 or something like that, in one band, which means the stations really whiz by, and it's almost impossible to find a station by more than the 2 most significant digits of its frequency. ( Of course, Betty did not use the dial readout anyway.) We could get figures for the sensitivity by looking at other receivers, sold for another market where such figures counted more than tube count, which used a similar "front end" layout. Maybe like the Army BC-312 or the RME 69 or similar set. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:11:25 EST From: Kenton Spading Subject: Gardner Island Store and Australia Thank you for your response to the issues swirling around my effort to learn more about the Gardner Island Coop Store. We are miles apart on the issue of why it is a good idea to find out more about the Gardner Store just like we are an equadistant apart on why we should know more about the lost Norwich City sailors. I can think of a number of reasons why these lines of research could be fruitful some of which have nothing to do with shoes or bones. That research is not likely to prove what happened to Earhart but it could alert us to possible red herrings within the body of evidence which in itself moves us forward (e.g. good job on the bookcase). I perfer to not have loose ends hanging around while you are comfortable with them as long as you can logically explain them away. That is not meant to be a critism, it is simply two minds working differently. Ric wrote: >As for your intention to "find more covert ways of asking our international >membership for assistance" that's fine, but I'd remind you that the virtue of >the forum is that ideas - yours, mine, and everyone's - are subjected to >review and criticism. If you'd rather not take that heat, that's up to you. I welcome review and/or criticism if it is backed up by facts or at least an opinion and the suggestion to find the facts. Instead of guessing at what the shoes are worth you should have been asking the forum for help in establishing their real worth. Instead of guessing whether or not Cat's Paw products were available in the Pacific, you should have asked for help. Why blindly assume that all native women have wide feet? It is one thing to have a Forum member put a negative spin on an idea. It is an entirely different matter for that negative spin to come from the moderator. Related to that is the fact that the voices on the Forum are not equal. Your voice and opinions carry a lot of weight. When you come back with a negative spin on an idea posted on the Forum, folks are less likely to respond especially given the Forums history for attacking people and their ideas. You,....above everyone else, has to be careful not to dis an idea too early before it has a chance to germinate or before someone who is looking for a way to help sees his/her chance and jumps in. Or is every single TIGHAR member in the Pacific region already up to his/her ears in research endeavors and as the research gatekeeper you do not want to overload them with an idea that you personally do not perceive to be fruitful? Should we keep the whole Forum team idling until a VERY obvious line of research comes along? Would it not be nice to know more about the Coop store? Who knows where that research could lead? In my opinion, you need to become more aware of how your presence and comments on the Forum affect the liklihood that certain folks will choose to participate. In the end it it is your Forum and you have the right to foster an atmosphere that suits your taste and TIGHAR's needs. I personally don't think that that atmosphere maximizes Forum member participation but perhaps it is not meant to. In the end that gets to the root of my frustration as the Forum does not lend itself well as a research tool for folks outside of TIGHAR headquarters who have ideas for research that differ from yours. Here is an interesting concept...... Do Forum members have the option to post something to the Forum with the request that you not comment on it initially until the idea can germinate a little bit or until someone can offer to help? I say this knowing full well that this is a closed Forum. LTM, Kenton S. *************************************************************************** From Ric That's a very tactful a way of saying, "Why don't you keep your big fat mouth shut for a change." Believe me, I'm not offended. I understand your frustration but I'm not sure that I can do much about it. The way TIGHAR is organized, The Earhart Project is not run by committee. It really is my baby - and while I need and want all the help I can get, and I try very hard to give credit where credit is due (and there is lots and lots of credit due to many, many people), it's still my butt, my reputation, my career, and my livelihood on the line to a far greater degree than anyone else's. I have the dubious distinction of being the only person in the world who makes a living looking for Amelia Earhart. I certainly didn't plan it that way (What do you want to do when you grow up Ricky?), but that's how it has turned out. So be it. I don't run the project the way you, or others, would run the project - I'm blessed and cursed by my own intellect, education, and experience - but I try to keep an open mind and learn from the vast array of bright and talented people (like yourself) who choose to participate. Literally every day I have to make decisions about whether to encourage or discourage specific avenues of research. If I didn't and simply urged everyone to chase down everything we'd soon be buried in irrelevant data ( I've seen it happen). There has to be focus and that means accepting some loose ends in the interest of moving forward. This is analagous to consciously leaving a few enemy outposts in our rear while we move forward toward the objective. There is always the danger that one of them could turn out to be more dangerous than we think it is but the alternative is getting hopelessly bogged down in mopping-up operations before we dare to advance. I am very much aware of the influence of my comments on the forum and my objective (as long as we're using a military analogy) is always to keep the column moving toward the objective. That means identifying and encouraging good people, maintaining morale, finding logistical support (funding), constantly assessing and re-assessing what we know and what we think we know, and figuring out what road to take next. To answer your question "Do Forum members have the option to post something to the Forum with the request that you not comment on it initially until the idea can germinate a little bit or until someone can offer to help?" I'm afraid the answer has to be no. If I offer that option what do I do when a conspiracy buff wants to launch a discussion of the relative merits of the recollections of Bilimon Amaron versus the testimony of Tom Devine? If I forego my job as moderator the forum will quickly lose its focus, volume will go through the roof, and we'll be worse off than we were before we went (by popular demand) to the "leaner, meaner" forum. I will, however, offer this alternative. I'll post, without comment, an invitation from any forum member for other interested forum members to contact him or her directly for an off-forum discussion on any even vaguely Earhart-related topic. We've done just that on several lines of investigation. Sometimes I'm cced. Sometimes not. It seems to be a good system. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:13:28 EST From: Mike E. Subject: The "can" The "can" in the Twin Beech C-45/SNB was indeed a "can"... about 10 gallons size, round bucket, with a black plastic lid. Betcha the one in the Electra was similar in configuration and location. I have one... liberated from an ex Navy bird being turned into an airframe trainer... anybody want it? (Makes a great camping accessory... Niku IIII?) In the C-45 the "meditation room" was in the tail compartment, to the right of the cabin door, also where the radio equipment was mounted. (Does that explain "rotten signals"?) Bet it was cold in there. Let's dump this topic! It stinks! LTM (who knows no job is finished till the paperwork is done) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:21:22 EST From: Peter Boor Subject: The "can" Many years ago when I worked for Lockheed Aircraft Service Company in Ontario CA there were a few older gentlemen flight line mechanics with over 30 years with the company. I was always soliciting stories from them about their most interesting assignments. One of them who happened to be assigned to the 10E for delivery told me about how involved AE was in the final days. He said that one day AE discovered the relief tube, and went ballistic, cursing and swearing, like "What the hell do you guys expect me to do with this damn thing"... He said that they all ran around until finally somebody suggested a solution that seemed to be satisfactory to AE. He didn't say what it was - that's how I learned that she could be quite earthy in her speech... Strictly hearsay...PMB 0856C. ************************************************************************** From Ric There's a story - I've forgotten the source - that the solution was a metal cup, with a fur rim no less. Like you say, strictly hearsay. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 18:29:15 EST From: Rick Seapin Subject: Betty's Radio Are you sure about those radio price (375.00-795.00) tags? That seems extremely high for 1937. My parents lived in Los Angeles at the time and there was no way they could afford a radio of such a value. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 19:47:28 EST From: Patrick Gaston Subject: Re: Monsees intercept If Art Monsees heard an AE distress call on July 8, 1937, then query whether the transmission could have originated from Niku given TIGHAR's hypothesis that the Electra had been reduced to unrecognizable smithereens by the time of Lambrecht's overflight on July 9. Factor in the time difference between San Francisco and Niku, and we are now down to -- what? A matter of hours for the complete destruction/disappearance of an intact airplane? Any analysis of alleged post-loss radio signals must take into account the fact that Lambrecht and his wingmen saw nothing resembling aircraft wreckage on July 9. That's six pairs of eyes, folks. As for "signs of recent habitation," we now know that huts left behind by the Arundel party were still standing in 1929 and, presumably, were sketched by a Colorado crewman in 1937. Was Lambrecht capable of discerning the age of these structures from the air? We will probably never know the answer, although I seem to recall an extended discussion on this Forum a year or two ago regarding the difficulty of picking out detail from altitudes as low as 500 or 1,000 feet. The point is, I think it's too early to categorically reject the Arundel huts (or any of the other artifacts noted by Kenton Spading) as Lambrecht's "signs of recent habitation". (I do hope the "Colorado Press" for July 10 surfaces, as it certainly appears the Press was taking the search seriously regardless of Lambrecht's chatty, after-the-fact wrapup.) And I think we need to keep in mind that the beach in the area of AE's presumed touchdown was clean as a whistle on July 9 -- unless the "Lambrecht photo" is not what we have always assumed it to be. LTM Patrick Gaston ************************************************************************** From Ric Well, we don't know what day Art Monsees heard what he heard. We do know that the story appeared in the paper on the 9th, so the 8th is probably not a bad guess. Nine P.M. in San Franciso would be (here we go again..) 5:30 P.M. at Gardner. Lambrecht and the boys came up over the island around 8:00 A. M. the next morning so that's fourteen and a half hours at the outside for the seas to rise, the tide to come in, the surf to come up, and the airplane to be sufficiently reduced so that it's obscured by the white water along the edge of the reef at high tide. For that to happen the airplane does not have to be completely destroyed. Far from it. All that is required is that the gear collapse and the airplane be sitting on its belly, in which case no part of the aircraft is more than 6 and half feet from ground level. High tide at Gardner is 4 to 4 and a half feet. Add a couple of feet of white water near the reef edge when swells are running and the surf is up - and the airplane effectively disappears. I'm puzzled by your statement that "...we now know that huts left behind by the Arundel party were still standing in 1929 and, presumably, were sketched by a Colorado crewman in 1937." What we know about the huts left behind by the Arundel party is that they were NOT standing in 1929. Quoting Norwich City survivor J. Thomas, whose written description of Gardner Island is the only reference we have to the huts: "Near the palms we found two disused galvanized roof huts and a large water tank, all of which were in a state (of) collapse." It seems rather unlikely that the huts had erected themselves eight years later when the Colorado crewman made his sketch. I'm further puzzled by your observation that the beach in the Lambrecht photo is "clean as a whistle." The beach in that photo is two miles from where I suspect Lambrecht saw marks in the sand that he described as "signs of recent habitation." LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 09:49:52 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: The 'can" I agree there is probably no point in asking the present Air Canada Lockheed 10 pilots since the aircraft has been overhauled completely. But you might want to talk to Captain Raymond B.Clark who flew the Electra on its delivery flight from Booksville, Florida, to Winnipeg, Canada, in January 1984. The a/c was still registered N3749 then and still in its original state. The aircraft was captained by its then owner, Bud Clark. Lank discribes the Electra and its toilet in a report on the ferry flight : .."an old metal aircraft with little insulation, a rotten cockpit heater and no real toilet". So that's what the toilet looked like back in 1984, which was what is was back in 1937. One can find the full report with all the flying details,engine settings, etc. at www.acfamily.net/tcc. Then click HISTORY, then click A VERY CLASSY LADY. I'm sure the webmaster (Alan Rust) can find you the whereabouts of Lank for further description. LTM (who must be familiar with flying thunderboxes) Herman. *************************************************************************** From Ric Perhaps Tom King wants to pursue that avenue of research. He's the one who raised the question. I have a hard time relating the can on the Electra to solving the mystery of its disappearance. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 09:52:21 EST From: John Pratt Subject: Burns Philp Burns Philp seems to exist. They look like a corporate conglomerate. See the URL provided by Wright Investor's Services: http://profiles.wisi.com/profiles/scripts/corpinfo.asp?cusip=C03655870&B1=Get+Profile The company does not seem to have a homepage, but the address is...... 51-57 PITT STREET SYDNEY N.S.W. 2000 Australia and phone..... +61 2 92591111 no e-mail or homepage listed. I propose not to follow up; they wouldn't understand my accent. LTM John Pratt 2373 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 09:53:58 EST From: John Pratt Subject: Zenith Stratosphere I can see why she took a picture of it: http://www.antiqueradio.com/Radiofest18_Elgin_11-99.html Also http://members.aol.com/azarc/zenithst.htm Is there a plan to do sensitivity tesing on one of these things? LTM John Pratt 2373 ************************************************************************** From Ric The Radio Rangers tell me that we can learn what we need to know from the schematics. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:20:43 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Gardner Island Store and Australia > The way TIGHAR is organized, The Earhart Project is not run by committee. > It really is my baby... Ric, this reminds of of my copilot questioning me as to why he had to do things "my" way. I told him we did things because regulations say so, because the tech order says so, because I think it is best and finally because I'm the aircraft commander. I have a lot of respect for a benevolent dictator. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:56:34 EST From: Roger Kelley Subject: Purdue collection. During past forum discussions numerous topics have been explored. Three of those were: 1. Off loading parachutes at Darwin or Lae to save weight. 2. Removal of the Electra's right side control column in order to increase cockpit space for Noonan to work while up front. 3. Identifying the fire extinguisher / thermos found on Niku during past expeditions. I was surfing through the Purdue collection last night and discovered a photo with caption which drew my attention, Purdue image # XI.B.7.a which is a photo taken in Darwin, N.T. The photo depicts Amelia, Fred and a man in a white suit standing next to the cabin door of NR16020. On the ground near them is a pile of equipment apparently removed from the aircraft. Three items which are interesting are a tail wheel tire, control column yoke or steering wheel and a large light colored bottle. These three items are resting upon and around at least one parachute and other unidentified items. Were these items being loaded or off-loaded? I think they were being off-loaded. First the tail wheel. Why would Amelia be lugging around a spare tail wheel when gross weight of the aircraft is critical? Was this the original tail wheel of NR16020? Another photo in the collection, image # XI.A.4.d, depicts Amelia and a mechanic repairing a tail wheel, possibly on NR16020. If image # XI.A.4d is in fact NR26020 during repair of it's tail wheel, when and how did damage occur? Might prior damage to the tail wheel have contributed to damage of the antenna system during the take off roll at Lae? Did the tail wheel assembly fail a second time during the Lae take off roll? A close examination of the aft portion and tail wheel assembly of NR16020 during Amelia's departure from Lae may provide new information. If the tail wheel assembly was damaged or failed during take off, what effect would the damaged tail wheel assembly have on Amelia's landing on Niku's reef? Second, the control column yoke or steering wheel. If the yoke depicted was in fact removed from the right side of the cockpit of NR16020, why was it removed? Is it reasonable to assume that Amelia would carry a spare yoke, or is it reasonable to assume that one of the two yokes failed sometime during the flight and was replaced? Most likely the right control column yoke was removed to improve Fred's working environment up front. The removed yoke was discarded as the photo might depict. Lastly, does the light colored bottle or cylinder depicted exhibit any resemblance to the "fire extinguisher" previously discussed on this forum? I won't even venture a guess due to the fact that I have no photos immediately available of TIGHAR artifact # 2-4-V-100. I'm sure a quick comparison would provide the answer. For those who wish to examine the photos mentioned and comment, they can be found at : http://gemini.lib.purdue.edu/earhartdisplay/list.cfm?type=subject&Criteria=Earhart%2C+Amelia%2C+1897-1937--Photographs. LTM, Roger Kelley *************************************************************************** From Ric I don't know whether the Darwin photo shows items to be loaded aboard the Electra or items that were off-loaded, but I suspect the former. Here's why. 1. As noted in earlier postings, contrary to what was published in Last Flight, the parachutes were picked up, not dropped off, in Darwin. 2. The bottle in the Darwin photo bears no resemblance to a fire extinguisher. It appears to be a nitrogen bottle for servicing the aircraft's landing gear struts. 3. The photo you reference (# XI.A.4.d) does not show Amelia and a mechanic repairing the tailwheel. It was almost certainly taken in Miami (the only place where Amelia seems to have worn that polka-dot shirt) and it shows the tailwheel lashed to a wheeled stand. This is entirely consistent with "swinging" the aircraft's compass - a logical operation to be performed prior to setting out on the World Flight. Aside from the control wheel, everything in that stack can be explained as items that were collected in Darwin in preparation for the flight from Lae to Howland. The fact that parachutes were sent ahead for collection at Darwin suggests that abandonment of the aircraft in flight was seen as preferable to ditching (a decision I would agree with). The landing at Howland would be made on a very rudimentary coral airstrip that had never before been used. A bottle of nitrogen for the struts and a spare tailweel seem like logical precautions to insure that she'd be able to depart from Howland after what might be a pretty punishing landing. The position of the stack in front of the door also strongly suggests (to me) that this was stuff to be put aboard. Think about it. When you unload a vehicle you don't usually make a pile right in front of the door. It's when you're getting ready to load a vehicle that you assemble the pile of stuff. The control wheel is a puzzlement. I can see the logic in removing the co-pilot side yoke to make more room for Noonan, but I can't explain its presence on this pile. It's a component of the airplane and not heavy enough to be worth leaving behind. You don't need a spare (the things do not tend to break). Strange. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 10:52:09 EST From: Ron Dawson Subject: Max Alan Collins It would interesting to know why novelist Max Allan Collins, in his Nate Heller novel about AE titled FLYING BLIND, said that AE was known as Mill to family, Meelie to cousins, and Mary to friends including Fred Noonan. Literary license or based on fact? Smooth Sailing, Ron Dawson 2126 *************************************************************************** From Ric Interesting. I haven't read the book but from a review provided by another TIGHAR it sounds like Collins, for all his fascination with conspiracy theories, is well-steeped in Ameliana. I'll make some inquiries with the family. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 10:56:44 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Gyrocompass > Ric, > Wouldn't a gyro be off course fifteen degrees per hour at the North or > south pole, and zero degrees per hour at the equator? (for error rates > in-between check a sine/cosine table) > A gyro course near the equator should be valid for a fairly long period. > Robert (Klaus, not Klauss) > *************************************************************************** > From Ric > > Is that right? That's correct. The gyro is usually expected to precess less than 3 degrees per fifteen minutes but it is subject to greater precession the further one gets from the equator due to the curvature of the earth's magnetic field, especially at high latitudes. I assume AE's DG was not a slaved gyro. The one in my Texan wasn't. SOP was to reset every 15 minutes which was mentioned in a previous post. Alan #2329 ************************************************************************** From Doug Brutlag Gyrocompass errors: What Robert is talking about is Apparent Precession or drift. This type of error is caused by the fact that the earth is rotating on its axis, but the gyro wheel remains rigid in space. Error does increase as one travels from the equator to either pole. At the poles the drift rate is 15.04 degrees/hour. The second error is changes in Magnetic Variation. Encountered enroute, it will cause the mag compass to disagree with the gyrocompass so it must be adjusted for as the changes occur. You and all our aviators out there know how to find it on the chart. The first 2 errors are predicable. The 3rd is not. Precession is caused by forces acting on the axis of the gyro wheel itself. Friction, which is impossible to totally eliminate from the bearings in the gimbals, is causing the gyro to precess from its original position, which becomes apparent in errors of the airplane's heading indicator. Precession error in most gyrocompasses is considered acceptable if drift rate is no more that 3 degrees every 15 minutes. If there is a drift rate in excess, one should suspect worn or faulty gyros with maintenance action required. Doug Brutlag #2335 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:02:16 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Relevent Data? Am I missing something or is all this stuff about radios an attempt to prove Betty could not have heard what she heard? I didn't know there was any doubt that some folks have heard skip broadcasts and others haven't. I don't think it could be shown to be impossible. As to why others didn't hear AE broadcasts there are too many obvious reasons to worry about it such as they weren't listening to their radio or not on that frequency or for geographical or weather reasons, etc. Alan #2329 ************************************************************************** From Ric I don't think anyone would allege that it was impossible for Betty to have heard Amelia but, on the face of it, it does seem highly unlikely. That's why we've been digging beyond "the face of it" to see if it might have been a lot less unlikely than it would seem - and, so far, the answers have been very encouraging. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:03:22 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Mrs Putnam > From Cam Warren > > Att: Alan Caldwell - > > A few years back, I got a complete (?) collection of clips > from the Sydney Herald about Earhart. Surprisingly slim - > almost all of it Associated Press stuff from the States - > and nothing new or startling. Thanks, Cam. I had no doubt someone had checked out papers in that area. I suppose some item might exist in some local paper somewhere that wasn't picked up by a news service but we would not be likely to come across it. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:38:43 EST From: Chris Kennedy Subject: Re: Betty's Radio Rick Seapin wrote: >Are you sure about those radio price (375.00-795.00) tags? That seems > extremely high for 1937. My parents lived in Los Angeles at the time and > there was no way they could afford a radio of such a value. I have problems with this, too. My thoughts and suggestions are as follows: 1. I have read many times that during 1937 and 1938, the nation fell back into severe depression following a brief improvement in the mid-30s. People who actually lived through this have confirmed it. This "second depression", was in some ways more deep than the first. Surely a time to avoid expensive purchases if possible. It really was WWII which pulled us out, ironically. 2. Even without a second depression, upwards of $800 was a TON of cash in the late '30s, and future prospects were pretty bleak. This is a short way of saying that only very well off people were likely to pay a lot of money (especially up to $800) for a radio unless it was somehow used to generate money for the family. Here, I get the impression that Betty and her family used it for entertainment, and were not in a position where they would spend this amount for a radio. Still, maybe the family splurged on this, so perhaps we might ask Betty whether, in her judgment, her family would've paid this amount of money in the late '30s for this radio. This may change her opinion about the Zenith. All this brings up a larger point. That is, I have been amazed at all the disagreement among the radio experts on the Forum, and think some of this work needs to be brought under stricter control and channeled. Consider this: First, I see no real consenus over what equipment was/was not aboard the Electra to begin with. Obviously, some analyses are much better than others, but it's difficult to reach a conclusion about the capabilities of equipment when you're not sure of the equipment you are evaluating. My guess is that the capabilities of the Electra to send/receive must also be evaluated considering the equipment as a unit, and not individual pieces----similar to the argument that the best stereo receivers will sound no better than the speakers they are attached to. Second, it is my impression from the volumes of postings that, even when people can agree on the make and model of a piece of '30s radio equipment, opinions diverge wildly as to the capabilities of that equipment. This applies to both the Electra and the Zenith, and further complicates the analysis. We are already seeing debates about the capabilities of the Zenith's tubes. Let me suggest this: a. While this radio debate needs to keep going with respect to the Electra and has real value in explaining why all the plans to use radio contact and direction finders failed with respect to the Itasca, I think it may be a bit of a waste of time with respect to the Zenith/Betty. We're not even sure whether this was her radio, and we're unlikely to agree on whether this radio or any other could have heard Earhart's transmissions. Of course, all this assumes the transmission/reception system aboard the Electra was functional and capable of being heard to begin with, which we several months ago were stating definitively was not the case given the loss of the antenna at Lae. I won't even touch the further issue of atmospherics, the sun spot cycle, phases of the moon, etc. b. Therefore, why don't we wrap-up using further time and resources to evaluate the identity and capabilities of Betty's radio, whatever it was, with what we have found out to date, and concentrate on further evaluations of the information in the notebook AND other matters which have absolutely nothing to do with Betty's notebook. After all, if the information in the notebook is "occult" and thereby confirmed as definately comming from the Electra, the capabilities of Betty's radio are confirmed and the issue is moot. --Chris Kennedy *************************************************************************** From Ric This is the old and perpetual "Which-avenues-are-worth-following?" question. First, let me clear up a slight misconception. We never thought that the loss of the antenna on takeoff at Lae degraded or removed the airplane's ability to transmit. Quite clearly, the airplane was transmitting just fine right up until the time AE changed frequencies at 20:13 Z. Likewise, it is also apparent that the airplane still had the ability to receive because Earhart said she heard the itasca's "A"s on 7500 Kcs at 19:30 Z. Because the belly antenna was gone, and because she was trying to DF, it seems pretty certain that she was hearing the "A"s over the loop. Secondly, while there has been a great deal of debate about what radios were and were not aboard the airplane, and even though there is still not universal consensus about that issue, those discussions have nonetheless been very valuable in constraining the possibilities and permitting us to make informed guesses about what the airplane's radio system was and was not capable of doing. That information has been, and continues to be, very useful in the re-examination of all of the alleged post-loss radio signals that was prompted by Betty's notebook. By learning as much as we can about not only what was heard but how it was possible for it to be heard, we're able to unravel the mystery of the post-loss signals. A better understanding of how Betty's signals were heard should allow us to intelligently evaluate the other alleged post-loss signals and derive more information about what was going on aboard the airplane during those crucial days following the disappearance. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:46:37 EST From: Bill Moffet Subject: Gyrocompass, Autopilot and more Happy Thanksgiving to all! My PIF (USAAF Pilot's Information Manual of 1943 corrected to May 1, 1945) adds a few items that might indicate where compasses and auto pilots stood in WWII and it's probably safe to ASSUME gyro compasses and autopilots were less advanced in '37. 1. "The magnetic compass...consists of an airtight case filled with a special fluid in which a compass card assembly is pivoted. It is subject to many errors; mainly deviation and the errors produced by turning, accelerating or decelerating the airplane. A compass correction card mounted on the instrument panel shows the amount of deviation." (This is followed by an explanation of "northerly turning error" and the effects on the compass of changes in speed--and how to correct for (or ignore) them.) "The magnetic compass is difficult to use in turbulence. The compass should be swung frequently in order to keep the compass correction card up to date...Keep metal objects and electrical equipment (such as headphones) away from the compass." It's my 55-year old recollection that swinging the compass was done on the ground with the use of a large circle painted on the tarmac with the points of the compass indicated. The procedure was conducted by the ground crew (perhaps overseen by a navigator or other specialist. It could also have been done in the air with the navigator "calling the shots". I took a new B-17 to Europe and a new F-7B to Biak, checking both out quite carefully before leaving the US, and don't recall swinging the magnetic compass. 2. "The Gyro Flux Gate compass is a remote indicating earth inductor compass consisting of gyro-stabilized flux gate transmitter, an amplifier, a master indicatorand from 1 to 6 remote indicating repeaters. It is not subject to the error of the magnetic compass except when the gyro flux gate is caged. A true heading is always indicated by the master and repeater indicators, because of compensation for variation and deviation. Its upset limits are 65 [degrees] of climb, glide and bank." The text goes on to explain how to cage and uncage the gyro, then, "If you exceed the upset limits...cage and uncage the instrument...then in bold print: "Leave the gyro uncaged at all times except those indicated above." It's again my recollection that if the plane was so equipped we flew by the flux gate, simply checking it against the magnetic compass occasionally to see they were in general agreement. Pilots were responsible for operation of the flux gate unless there was a navigator aboard. 3. "Use the directional gyro with the magnetic compass. It is not a direction-seeking instrument and because of precession must be checked every 15 to 20 minutes against the magnetic compass and reset. The instrument is reliable in turbulence, in contrast to the magnetic compass. If the instrument drifts off cardinal headings more than 3 [degrees] in 15 minutes report it...Leave the instrument uncaged at all times except in maneuvers which exceed its upset limits" (which were 55 [degrees] bank, climb and glide). In multi-engine planes (which I usually piloted) we used the directional gyro because of its stabilty--it didn't fluctuate in rough air --but checked it against the magnetic compass at short intervals. 4. "Two types of automatic pilots are in general use: suction driven or electrically operated. Operating instructions for each vary widely...In operating either type remember to trim the airplane for hands-off flight before engaging...Some slight adjustments of the auto pilot to correct for small changes of load balance are permissible. However any change of large load balance (such as transfer of fuel, dropping bomb loads or dropping auxiliary tanks) necessitates your disengaging the pilot and trimming the airplane for hands-off flight before you attempt to use the instrument again." In bold print: "Don't depend solely on the gyro-horizon indicator of the A-3 or A-3A automatic pilot as an attitude reference when flying on instruments." I think it safe to say that Amelia's autopilot was controlled by its gyro and not slaved to the magnetic compass. As I recall Sperry was a pioneer in the use of gyroscopes-- which were subject to precession and had to be checked against the magnetic compass quite often. Development and integration of autopilots utilizing stable compasses, e.g., the flux gate and later ones, were not yet used in the '30s. If literature exists on Amelia's autopilot, it might we useful to check it out, but it seems to me that both she and Fred knew its foibles by the time they reached Lae and consequently kept a close eye on the instrument panel to be sure the autopilot wasn't in command of the flight. LTM Bill Moffet #2156 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:48:57 EST From: Vern Subject: Re: Betty's radio Ric wrote... >Based upon further research and checking with Betty, we feel that we now have >her radio pinned down to one of the high-end Zenith models. These included: >Model # #tubes saleprice Riders reference >1000z 25 tubes $795 6-29 & 10-35 >16-a-61 16 tubes $375 7-27 >16-a-63 16 tubes $450 7-27 >16-e ??? 16 tubes ???? 7-26 no reference in > >We're presently checking to see if any of the 16 tube radios also came with >cabinets that had the specific decorations and features Betty remembers. In >any event, it now appears that Betty was listening to a very, very good radio. It would be nice if we could confirm that Betty's radio was, in fact, Model 1000z. I wonder how similar the cabinets were? Does Betty remember the doors being on her radio? It seems all the large Zenith radios of that period had the "Shadowgraph" tuning indicator. The "Shadowgraph" appears to be below the dial on the 1000z. I have the impression that some of the other pictures in the Rider Manuals showed it above the dial. I'll have to check that again. I could be very wrong. Schifferbooks.com has a book on the history of Zenith Radio that includes an illustrated catalog of every model produced between 1919 and 1935. That might be helpful if anyone was interested enough in such a book, in general, to shell out $29.95, softback. This will take you directly to the Zenith Radio book -- and some Zenith history: http://www.schifferbooks.com/antiques/radio/0764303678.html The 16-a-61 and 16-a-63 have 1-RF amp. and 2-IF amps. (456 kc). That also makes for a pretty decent receiver. They have 4-bands that don't go as high as the 1000z but do cover all the possible harmonic frequencies of AE's transmitter, up to 18,630 kc. Oddly, they include a low-frequency band as band-c, (150 kc to 370 kc) Band-d is back to the high-frequency region again -- 7.000 to 22,500 kc.. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:50:40 EST From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: The 'can" > From Ric > > ... I have a hard time relating the can on the > Electra to solving the mystery of its disappearance. Agreed. But part of the attraction of TIGHAR's research is to help people to recreate in our imaginations all of the experience of the last flight. It's all part of our love for historical research. "Inquiring minds want to know"--even when the knowledge isn't entirely practical or particularly useful. Marty #2359 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:01:13 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: The 'can" Herman wrote: >at www.acfamily.net/tcc. Then click HISTORY, then click A VERY CLASSY > LADY. From the above link: Taxiing visibility forward is a little restricted and with differential throttle and rudder little breaking is needed for directional control. Isn't that exactly what I've seen Earhart criticised for on this forum? Someone blamed that for the Honolulu crash. Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric Differential power is useful for taxiing, as described, but - according to Paul Mantz - should not be used to keep the airplane headed straight during the takeoff roll. He criticized AE for "jockeying " the throttles on takeoff. For what it's worth, based upon my own limited experience with tailwheel twins (Twin-Beech and DC-3) I'd have to agree with Mantz. If you start playing around with the power on takeoff you just can't react fast enough if she starts to get away from you. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:09:07 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: The 'can" Actually, I asked on behalf of a colleague who was speculating on reasons for "personnel" to have been "unfit" during the World Flight. I think I've learned enough, and have passed it (as it were) on. Thanks to all. LTM (who says "oh, poop!") Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:12:33 EST From: Janet Whitney Subject: Testing "Betty's" Family's Radio There should definitely be a test of the radio. The argument that there is too much computer RFI and other RFI today may or may not be valid. It depends on the number of computers that generate RFI in the neighborhood of the receiver. Plenty of RFI was generated by power lines, X-ray machines in hospitals and doctors' offices, and by auto and truck ignition systems in the 1930s. Also, Florida has some terrible static on the lower AM and SSB HF frequencies from lightning. Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:18:41 EST From: Denise Subject: Pacific Island Co-op Suppliers Wombat suggests that Burns Philps may have supplied Gardner Island Co-op with trade goods. Mmmm? No! Thinking about it, I don't think it's at all likely. In fact, thinking about it some more, it's so unlikely it's not worth pursuing. Although I've never known the full extent of their dealings, I did work in Burns Philp (SS) in Suva for three years, eventually as a buyer in Fashion, Cosmetics & Perfumes and Manchester. It was my job to order goods from manufacturers (in Australia and New Zealand) then ship them to OUR OWN STORES in the islands. Although I don't know for sure that I'm right - I've never looked at records - it makes sense that since we had our own stores everywhere in the Pacific and Australasian regions, it's highly unlikely we would EVER have limited our market by shipping goods to stores outside our domain. Like Wombat points out: the whole point of Burns Philp operations was that people DIDN'T find those items everywhere, and had to stockpile whenever they came to town. In fact, scraping back through fragments of memory, I'm getting something that could prove this: There was this one time when we ordered in too many of those Christmas gift packs of perfume (you know the ones I mean) and I suggested we get rid of them by selling them to stores in islands which didn't have a Burns Philp ... and Head Office laughed out loud and told me to stop being stupid. So when I say that Wombat's suggestion is totally unlikely - that this just wasn't going to happen - does everyone agree? Have I made my case? Does this now cut the subject off dead? Denise *************************************************************************** From Ric I'm not sure how the Burns Philps came into the picture anyway. As far as I know, we don't have much information about the Gardner Co-Op Store execpt that it was there and we have an inventory. I've always assumed that it was provided by the colonial authorities for the benefit of the colonists (rather than an outside franchise) but I don't know why it was called a "Co-Op". ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:54:39 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Gardner Island Store and Australia I can't let the following go without a comment: Ric said: > The way TIGHAR is organized, The Earhart Project is not run by committee. > It really is my baby... And Alan said: >Ric, this reminds of of my copilot questioning me as to why he had to do >things "my" way. I told him we did things because regulations say so, because >the tech order says so, because I think it is best and finally because I'm >the aircraft commander. > >I have a lot of respect for a benevolent dictator. And I say that I think we have a couple of models of project leadership at war here. One is the military, and perhaps aviation, model in which you've got to have taut discipline with one person unquestionably in charge; the other is the team research model in which a group of colleagues collaborate in figuring out what to do and how to do it. Neither model, I submit, is entirely and exclusively the right one, but I tend to think that the benevolent dictator model is best applied when one is in situations resembling war or the operation of aircraft, not when one is engaged in ongoing, multi-party research. Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:58:01 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Testing "Betty's" Family's Radio > From Janet Whitney > There should definitely be a test of the radio. To what end? Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:02:51 EST From: Steven Eck Subject: The yoke on the pile Why wait untill Darwin to remove the yoke to make more room for Noonan? It seems to me that if you were going to remove the co-pilot side yoke to make room for Noonan it would have been done sooner than Darwin. Steven Eck *************************************************************************** From Ric Good point. Speculating: It may be that the yoke was the one thing in the pile that was to be left behind to get shipped home. (It's on the top.) It may have been removed fairly early in the World Flight and had been kicking around in the back of the airplane long enough. Darwin was the last "civilized' place they would visit before setting out across the Pacific. Anything to be shipped home should be left there. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:03:51 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Max Alan Collins I seem to recall AE was sometimes called Meelie when very young just as her sister, Muriel, was called Pidge, for whatever reason. I know in the late 70s in my conversations with Muriel AE was only referred to as Amelia. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:05:21 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Pacific Island Co-op Suppliers << I don't know why it was called a "Co-Op" >> As I recall, it's because that's what it was; the colonists all owned shares, and it was headed by a locally elected board. I know that Harry Maude was instrumental in establishing the practice in the Southern Gilberts; my recollection is that he'd seen it in operation in Tuvalu. As for Burns Philps, its operations are pretty intimately intertwined with those of the colonial service throughout the area. Recall, for example, that it was to Burns Philps to which the G&EIC turned for help in responding to Putnam's request that a search be made for an alleged unmapped reef where he thought Earhart might have wound up, resulting in Isaac Handley's voyage to Katagaman. TK ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:06:53 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Betty's Radio Att.: Chris Kennedy, Rick Seapin The valuation placed on Betty's Zenith (?) radio, vintage 1936, seem more likely to be a price placed on a surviving example (in mint condition) in the year 2000. As I've mentioned previously, a late '30s Sears console cost me $16.95. Best guess for a top-of-the-line Zenith with all the bells and whistles - primarily an enhanced audio system - wouldn't be much more than 3-4X; certainly not more than $75-100. Yes, the actual radio/df gear on the Electra remains a mystery - perhaps on purpose. Given Putnam's desire for generating maximum publicity about the flight, doesn't that strike you as odd? Which has long led me to suspect there was a reason. Such as the existence of the RA-1 receiver and RDF-1 HF/DF system, which apparently came out the Bendix "back door". It's operational failure, for one reason or another, was reason enough for GP and Bendix to clam up on the subject. To Ric; and others just poised to pounce on my fanatical theories; note I said "I suspect", and "apparently". This missing piece certainly fits the puzzle, and should be taken under consideration. Evidence points in that direction and I've yet to see any solid proof of a contrary scenario. Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:07:59 EST From: Phil Tanner Subject: Re: Co-Op store I don't know if there is a connection, but there would have been "Co-op" stores on every high street in Britain at the time. These were run by the Co-operative Movement, which was also a political party, as mutual societies for the benefit of members with all profits ploughed back in, but in all respects bar the absence of private ownership were just like any other shop. I suspect it is just a generic term for any community store owned by its customers, but maybe there were offshoots in colonies. The Co-op Movement had its origins in the notion of working class self-help, I believe in the north of England, but was easily the biggest chain in the country because of the huge number of branches. The party was very closely linked to the Labour Party and well within my lifetime some Labour candidates at elections carried the formal title "Labour and Co-Operative", but I don't know if any still do. The retail chain has been in severe commercial decline in recent years - brought about at least in part by failing to move with the times - and has been under pressure as business has reduced to the extent that its sites are worth far more to the owners empty than as currently managed. A very large Co-op in my own town closed down two or three years ago. ltm (who prefers to shop at Tesco) Phil 2276 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:10:00 EST From: Bob Sherman Subject: The belly antenna (again) > For Mike E. > > It's apparent from the notes that Earhart was hearing something over her > headphones. Consider ... If AE's ventral antenna was .. as some think .. her HF recvr. antenna, then the plane would have to be on at least one gear and above water for AE to hear HF, post landing .. RC 941 ************************************************************************** From Ric The ventral antenna is gone, but the loop is still there. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:12:52 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Electra Airspeed > Herman wrote: > >at www.acfamily.net/tcc. Then click HISTORY, then click A VERY CLASSY > LADY. > >From the above link: There are a few more gems in there, obviously making allowance for the fact that the 10E's engines were different things like "6000 feet. Engines were set at 1800 RPM and 27 inches of boost for 155 miles per hour" or "At 8000 feet, 1850 RPM, 26 inches, 155 miles per hour, indicated air speed with 0 deg. F " and "The flight plan called for 4+00 (four hours and no minutes) (with 6 hours fuel on board) burning the 100/130 fuel at 40 US gallons per hour." "Because cruise altitude increases of even 100 feet resulted in an indicated air speed (IAS) loss of 10 miles per hour I " "The air was absolutely smooth until it was brought to my attention that one of the crew had gone to the toilet area (with quart sized metal can in hand).suddenly unforecast clear air turbulence appeared out of nowhere. So did the visibly embarrassed bathroom occupant!" are still interesting and give a limited insight into the Electra when compared to Earhart's 10E. I suppose the main reason for the quotes above is to encourage people on the forum to go have a look at http://www.acfamily.net/tcc/delivery.html It really is worth it if you want to put yourself in the cockpit with AE and FN for a few minutes. The other reason is that one of the things we've never had was the actual airspeed the Kelly - Johnson telegram figures would give. Here at least is the probability that they were calculated to give the same average I.A.S. as the flight plan - 150mph!. (In fact, if this pilot's story is correct, the 10A would fly for up to 28 hours on 1100 gallons..... at 155 mph Hmmm?) I have always wondered if the 38 gallons/hour was throttled back to a lower speed. The notes on this page would suggest that for the first 7 hours while the airplane was grossly overloaded with fuel, they progressively reduced the power settings until they were down to a bit over normal loaded configuration (fuel and passengers - 10 passengers weigh about 250 US gallons.) At the same time they could maintain their planned IAS of 150mph. Obviously all this has been looked at in the past, but we didn't have any confirmation that the Kelly Johnson figures related to 150mph. These figures also happen to agree with the figures from the Finch Flight, but previously there was nothing to compare them with. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:14:16 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Pacific Island Co-op Suppliers Denise and I have our wires crossed. This came about after Denise wrote ", sold through the Burns Philp (SS)chain, came from New Zealand and, less frequently, from Australia." Knowing Burns Philp were active in the Pacific in the early days, I thought it possible that they (as trading in the Pacific was among their varied interests - albeit trading in human flesh as well as goods) may have had an interest in supplying stores such as the PISS operation. They certainly did supply our station stores with everything from shoes to shovels. So I replied: "I guess it might be possible to track down something historical like supplies to Gardner if they kept records, but as Denise suggests, Burns Philp New Zealand may have been the supplier, and I doubt records that early would be around." There should end the confusion..... On the other hand, the Co-Op there should have been the same as anywhere else in the region. A group of people buy "shares" in the proposed store and the money from these purchases the goods. Any income is used to buy replace the goods sold and some of the profit is returned to the shareholders often by discounting goods. This snippet is for Denise (who worked for Burns Philp). My old "local" Burns Philp store at Normanton was credited as the original store where the entire Burns Philp empire started. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:17:13 EST From: Phil Tanner Subject: Search and rescue This is a quote from a report in the on-line Melbourne `Age' on the eventual rescue this week of a fisherman off southern Australia. Okay, the searchers had no plane to look for, but they knew the area in which his boatd had gone missing. It shows that even with today's refined search and rescue techniques planes looking for people can go right by:. "In the course of 50 hours, 15 of them spent swimming and the rest lost and disoriented in desert scrub, Rodd saw search planes scouring the waters and the coastline. But they did not find him." "Just on darkness three planes flew almost overhead. They did not see him. Bundling up armfuls of seaweed he made a bed on the edge of the mangroves. He crawled underneath, piling seaweed on top to keep sandflies away" "In the distance, he saw the roof of a farmhouse. He half-ran, half-hopped towards it "giving it everything I got", in the hope of help. When he got there, it was abandoned. He could hear planes overhead so he broke in through a side window and found matches. He lit a fire in a drum in a clearing near the house. Smoke billowed into the sky but the searchers did not see it. "They just flew past. You don't know what it's like when you can hear them and they're just there." *************************************************************************** From Ric Yup. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:15:36 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: The 'chutes in Darwin >From Ric: > >...1. As noted in earlier postings, contrary to what was published in >Last Flight, the parachutes were picked up, not dropped off, in Darwin.... In ...'Last Flight'... in the chapter titled...'Down Under'... AE states: ...'At Darwin, by the way, we left the parachutes we had carried that far, to be shipped home. A parachute would not help over the Pacific'... Are we saying that AE never made such statement, didn't know what she was talking about, lied about it or that GPP was taking more than his usually liberal, editorial license as the publisher ? Unfortunately I don't recall the Forum discussion of this topic, so rather than regurgitate something that has been beaten to death on a previous occasion, perhaps you might recall the month it was discussed so I could refer to the archives for the facts supporting the contention that the parachutes were _picked-up_ at Darwin, contrary to AE's statement that they were dropped-off? Still seems (to me at least) strange that two people, who'd never parachuted from an in-flight aircraft before, would elect to make their first such jump in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, leaving on board whatever survival gear (if any) they might need to survive on the open sea. (Certainly FN was acquainted with what necessary gear was required for survival on the open sea, having himself (reportedly) survived several sinking ships during WWI.) Additionally, I seem to recall that most flyers in the Pacific Theatre during WWII, given those two choices _usually_ elected to 'ditch' their aircraft in the water, as long as their planes were not so badly damaged as to preclude any reasonable chance of survival in taking such action . Don Neumann *************************************************************************** From Ric It's faster to regurgitate the source than to dig it out of the forum archives. The June 28, 1937 issue of the Sydney Times(?) newspaper carried a story under the headline "Mrs. Putnam Arrives. Enthusiastic Welcome At Darwin." The account of the arrival is quite detailed and includes the following paragraphs, "One of her first actions was to ask the Civil Aviation Officer (Mr. Alan Collins) whether two 'Irvin caterpiller 'chutes' had arrived from America. Fully tested and ready for immediate use, the paracutes were sitting in Mr. Collins' office. As a safeguard against emergency, they will be carried on the hazardous final stages of the flight." I don't know how the story got turned around by the time it was published in Last Flight, but there seems to be little doubt that the book got it backward. A clue to the logic behind the decision might be found in Linda Finch's observation that the nose section of the Model 10 is constructed of very light gage aluminum (mostly .025 inch) and might be expected to crumple during a ditching, trapping the occupants. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:16:45 EST From: Tom MM Subject: Thanks for the info I want to thank those who dug around in their files or memory and came up with info on the Dalton computer and early gyros. As a small boat sailor and general navigation nut, gyros are not something that I have encountered, and it is great to have that info along with air navigator's experiences. I really appreciated people taking the time to indulge my curiosity. Thanks, Tom MM ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:19:55 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Gardner Island Store and Australia Tom King wrote: > but I tend to think that the benevolent dictator model is best applied when > one is in situations resembling war or the operation of aircraft, not when > one is engaged in ongoing, multi-party research. Of course you are right, Tom, but I prefer my own way in most situations, not just war or flying. That is particularly true when it is MY ballgame and MY livelihood resting on the decision making. In my law practice I routinely ask for advice from my peers but then make my own decision. There is no vote. I signed on to this forum with the understanding there was one leader, that I was welcome to input all I wanted and I could disagree all I wanted but in the end the decisions would be made by that one person and not by majority vote. I'm happy with that concept in this organization. If I was a partner, making my living here, I would feel differently. I agree with the general procedure this forum is following. I think it is reasonably logical and scientific. I have trouble occasionally with the group going off on what I consider senseless rabbit trails and I sometimes say so. However I recognize if all those trails were disallowed many would become bored. They give us something to do and something to fuss at each other about, keeping our little fingers busy. What would everyone do if they couldn't worry about whether an old time radio was a Zenith or a Victor or how much it cost in 1937? Or whether huts were falling down or still standing, or whether it was overcast on July 2, 1937 or what the tide was at Gardner that day? Whether a coop sold expensive shoes to poor native workers or not? Or what Janet has to say today? Some of this is important and some is idle and useless chat. Busy work. I'm glad someone else decides what is useful and what is not. I'm glad it is not by vote. I don't WANT to decide. I just want to contribute where I think I can be of help and piss and moan when I disagree. Rule by committee is certainly "fair" to all members but a classmate reminded me once that we don't erect monuments to committees. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:23:10 EST From: Skeet Gifford Subject: Benevolent Dictator Sorry Tom. As a product of BOTH the military and the airline, I must side with Col. Gillespie. I submit that certain endeavors are not optimum to the team/matrix concept of leadership. The military and airlines have already been offered as examples, and I have personally experienced these from both ends of the command playing field. Life and death decisions must sometimes be made without delay. If the mission/flight ends in disaster, one person is responsible. In the case of TIGHAR expeditions, there is one other factor. Assuming all participants survive the event, one person, and one person only, stands to lose everything. The rest of us just walk (or swim) away and rejoin our lives already in progress. As you suggest, the team approach would work very well when there is time to deliberate each issue, and when the penalty for a wrong or untimely decision is not irreversible. The design of next-years automobile is probably a team decision. Closer to home, the trek to Loon Lake was accomplished as a team (Ric, Dr. Smith and the other regulars). But there is a big difference between Loon Lake and Niku. No sharks in Loon Lake. In the airline biz, Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) training addresses disputes within the cockpit and provides appropriate resolution, while preserving the integrity of command responsibility. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:27:37 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Betty's Radio Cam Warren wrote: <> Cam: You can see a contemporary 1935 Zenith advertisement at: http://oldradiozone.com citing "A choice of forty models" ranging from "$20 to $750". Incidentally, the advert shows a Z1000 Stratosphere model. You can find additional confirmation in Padgett's Zenith Index for 1930-1935 at; www2.gdi.net/~padgett/zen30-35.htm He states that the Z1000 was introduced in 1935 at $750. BTW, while researching the Zenith receivers, I was in contact with a collector/restorer of vintage Zenith radios. He says that there are about 25 Z1000's known to exist and that they sell for about $12,000 each when restored to original condition You can visit his web site at www.JohnJeanAntiqueRadio.com Bob Brandenburg #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:31:04 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: The yoke on the pile > From Ric > > Good point. Speculating: It may be that the yoke was the one thing in the > pile that was to be left behind to get shipped home. Darwin was the last > "civilized' place they would visit before setting out across the Pacific. > Anything to be shipped home should be left there. Therefore it would be rather surprising if there's no yoke in the Purdue collection. Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric There is no yoke or any other artifact shipped home during the World Flight in the Purdue collection - just maps, notes and photos. There are a few items of Earhart clothing but they date from before the flight. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:32:30 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Debris Just a thought... With the large number of smallish heavy metal parts on board the Electra, many of them packed in paper or cloth, I'd suspect that if the Electra broke up on the reef there would be considerable magnetic material (rusting) there. Having said that, there's obviously the N.C., but I'm referring to small conglomerations of stuff rusting together. There was a full tool kit (lots of small items that, once the kit broke open, would stay where they fell among the rocks), a carton of Prop bearings (relatively heavy), Wrench for the Prop Hub (too big for the tool kit) and other things that tend to stay put even in heavy seas for years. These things would fall to the bottom as the Electra was pounded to pieces and lodge in small places. Among this debris are lead and brass objects of a type the N.C. would not carry. This is assuming the Electra was broken up and is what Emily claims to have seen. If the Electra was dragged off the reef - that's another matter. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:37:19 EST From: Mike Malik Subject: Re: Max Allan Collins Actually in this book, entitled FLYING BLIND, the main character, Nate Heller, refers to Amelia as AMY, a take off of her initials A.M.E. Several other nicknames are lmentioned, but for the majority of the novel, it is AMY. In the book, Nate Heller is hired by GP to be Amelia,s bodyguard while she is on a publicity tour. The ending of the story presents yet another idea as to what really happened to Amelia and Fred Noonan. All in all, if you get the chance to read the book, do so. It is very well writen, for being a fictional mystery. Mike Malik *************************************************************************** From Ric Here's Jim Tierney's review of FLYING BLIND. **************************************** Story is about a private detective-told in flashback who agrees to go back to Saipan to look for and interview people about AE in March of 1970 .... His story unfolds-starting with being hired by GPP in 1935 to act as bodyguard for AE on a lecture tour . They go off together in the car and he gradually falls in love with her. They wind up in Burbank-at Lockheed and in Paul Mantzs house-where he observes AE and another woman pilot getting it on together and later that same night-he and AE do it and start an affair that ends after some months and GPP fires him......... He comes backinto her life again in 1937 just before she leaves on her 2nd trip. She goes off and disappears and he starts to check out the rumors about her .the plane and the Govt........ He drags in every speculation/rumor as part of the plot-- He talks about- the Navy personnel,the locked hangar, substitution of a new plane with the new special engines after the Hawaii crash. Ping pong balls in every available space, yada,yada,yada.........also the big secret cameras........ He does say she was not a remarkable pilot and frequently was over her head in situations and aircraft.......Oh-there is also some mention of AE being possibly pregnant with his child......AE doesnt trust FN because he drinks and has been forced to use him by GPP because he works cheap... She disappears and things are quiet...He hears the rumours about the Japanese and Saipan,etc.....In Mid 1940 he is recruited by a Mr Miller of the CAA-whom he met in 1937-and James Forrestal-a govt. Us Navy employee - yes, that James Forrestal- He even works in Irene Bolam to go to Saipan and check out the stories and bring her back-because they know she is alive... He is taken to Saipan by Capt. Irving Johnson on the Yankee and put ashore alone in the garb/disguise of an Irish Priest with IRA connections... He gets to see her and tries to bring her out... He sees FN killed right in front of him in a jail by a Jap cop with a machete...He and AE try to escape that night and they almost make it to the Yankee but AE is shot while swimming-He is pulled aboard by the first mate who later turns out to be Sterling Hayden-the movie star.......... She drowns in the water or does she??????? In 1970 they find out that a woman was blindfolded and shot/executed and put in a small grave that they never really find-BUT they find the blindfold she wore...... In Summary---Dreck -with a capital D Sorry to bore youwith this -but I had to tell somebody LTM Jim Tierney. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:38:28 EST From: Bob Sherman Subject: Belly Ant. . Still.. > from Ric > > The ventral antenna is gone, but the loop is still there. A small aircraft loop is about the poorest HF antenna one could imagine for 'DX' [distance], particularly when it is but a few feet above ground. Aircraft radio, and sometimes the loop did surprise one by occasionally getting distant stations .. at 8,000 to 12,000 ft. 'agl', however. RC 941 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:46:49 EST From: Chris Kennedy Subject: Re: Betty's Radio To Cam Warren: Thanks, I hadn't thought to think that the price given was perhaps in 2000 dollars, not 1937 dollars. Otherwise, I don't have the knowledge or technical expertise to evaluate the transmission and reception abilities of the Electra and Betty's radio, but it is clear to me that, separate from the equipment, there are too many variables inherent in the situation that no one is sure of (e.g., what was the condition of the Electra at the time of the transmissions, notwithstanding the equipment aboard) that make any analysis of questionable benefit. Janet Whitney suggests a "test". How on earth would you replicate the conditions of 1937, and the conditions of the Electra and Betty's radio in 1937, to even set-up a test? That's why I suggested concentrating on the "occult" side of the equation---if you can prove this, the capabilities of the Electra/Betty's radio to transmit and receive is proved, which is I think the point of all the technical analysis work and Ms. Witney's test, to begin with. --Chris Kennedy ************************************************************************** From Ric As you'll note from the earlier posting by Bob Brandenburg, Cam's speculation about the price is incorrect. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:50:03 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: receiver comparisons It might be worthwhile to learn what radio the neighbor was using, the neighbor who was unsuccessful in hearing the message Betty heard. This might add one iota of evidence to support that her radio, the suggestion is a superior model of Zenith, was suited beyond the ordinary set for pickup at the higher frequencies, those including possible harmonic frequencies we are interested in, say 15-18 MHz. I suggest this difference in signal-processing circuitry is more of an issue to the difference in results, than the difference in antenna set-ups at the two homes. -Hue Miller ________________________________________________________ Technical stuff from my inquiries to another group: "The AR-88 was an early 1940's design, and is marginally hotter than the sets you mention. [ other late-1930s radios with 2RF + 2 IF type circuit ] Over the years I've made rough measurements on various sets when they were on my bench. You can generally discern a 30% AM signal down to about a microvolt or less, and "a couple of microvolts" will bring the signal up out of the noise where you can measure it. 10 microvolts should get you comfortable listening on most of these sets." --Al Klase And, re differences in performance, between radios, on higher frequencies ( 20 meters =~ 14 MHz, 10 meters = 30 MHz ) : "I tend to use the ability of a receiver to hear 'antenna noise' as a reasonable measure of sensitivity. If the noise coming in from the antenna overcomes the noise generated within the receiver, then the receiver will hear any signal coming in from the antenna that is above the atmospheric noise level. The pre-war receivers with 1 RF, in particular my RME-69 and 70, NC-200 and Howard 438 and 436A all can hear antenna noise up through 20 meters [note: the neighbor's more standard-model radio? ], but it disappears into the receiver noise somewhat above that. The 2 RF receivers, in particular my HRO and SX-28 [and the Zenith top of the line ] , can hear antenna noise through 10 meters. " --Jim Hanlon ************************************************************************** From Ric Unfortunately, we don't know and probably can't find out the type of radio owned by Betty's neighbor. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:51:56 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Sears SW Radio Tests Ric wrote: >You can't settle historical debates with recreations. You *could* rule it out, or possible. But the problem here is you cannot really, practically set up the simulation: who is going to set up a replica of the antenna on some Pacific island, and who's going to control for propagation conditions *just like* 1937 ? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:57:34 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: A talk with Mr. Monsees > On July 9, 1937 the NY Herald Tribune reported that Mr. Arthur Monsees, an > amateur radio operator in San Francisco had heard what he took to be Amelia > Earhart on 6250 Kcs. The message was: > "SOS KHAQQ EAST HOWLAND LIGHTS TONIGHT MUST HURRY CANT HOLD" So what would this mean, "east [of ] Howland", and " [seeing?] lights tonight" ? >I asked if he recalled the freqency and he guessed that it > was something like 7500 Kcs. I suggest this quoted frequency not be seen as a stumbling block to appraisal of the Monsees report. Since his receiver was homebuilt, the calibration was undoubtedly rough, and probably depended on look-up tables from dial settings. I suggest instead of a hard and fast 7500 Khz, the consideration of the actual frequency be expanded to include "in the same receiver band range as the 40 meter ham band". This would allow for possible reception of the 49-meter aircraft fequency, but the 3.105 and the 15 or 18 MHz harmonic frequencies would not be likely. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:10:51 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: The yoke on the pile I went to the Purdue collection and looked at the photo in question. I don't know if you noticed, but along with the equipment, at the right edge of the picture is what appears to be a gallon (give or take) can. AE is holding some other kind of can, and on the floor of the airplane, visible between AE and FN, there is another smaller can. These suggest maintenance or repair, to me. I think their equipment isn't being left behind at all - I think they just had to get it out of the way because they needed to get at something in the airplane for servicing / repair / seal a leak or some such. That, to me, explains why the equipment piled outside is not things we believe were left behind, and also why they haven't been carted away - you don't haul something off if you intend to put it back right away. ltm jon 2266 *************************************************************************** From Ric We did a rather in-depth analysis of that photo (including forensic imaging of the cabin interior) way back when we were researching the navigator's bookcase that we found in 1989. With sufficient resolution you can read the labels on the cans. They're both lubricants. The paint can style container on the extreme right of the frame looks identical to a can in a photo of the airplane being loaded prior to departure from Burbank on May 20th. The square can AE is holding says "Mobilubricant" on it. The can on the floor of the airplane just inside the cabin door is tomato juice. Aside from the question of the yoke, everything else in this photo looks to me like loading consumables, spare parts and emergency gear for the remainder of the trip. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:20:25 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: AE in custody > From Tom King > > William says: > > The Japanese interred many caucasian females for the duration of the war. At > least dozens, probably more than 100. > > Sounds reasonable, William, but do you have a source for that? US Army nurses and US civilians captured in the Philippines were held at a prison camp in the Philippines throughout the war. No doubt some other reader here has a better memory for the camp name, was it Santo Tomas? I have a Japanese "Philippines Victory" picture book which puts a happy face (glory) on the US surrender and shows crowds of US civilians interned at the camp. In addition, there are several accounts of US or Dutch civilian women interned at camps in the Philippines or Indonesia. I am looking at one now, "Evidence Not Seen", a very moving and thought provoking book, even if (like me ) you are not a theist. Some of the caucasian women, like the oriental captures, were forced into Nippon army prostitution, which (among other things) contributed to less than completely joyous welcome for Hirohito when he visited Europe in the 1980s. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:25:46 EST From: Denise Subject: Source of the Shoes Ric says: I'm not sure how the Burns Philps came into the picture anyway. It entered the picture over Mr Spalding's ponderings on the subject of the source of the shoes in the Co-op ... he wants you to look into the subject in more depth to definitely exclude the possibility that they may have been American-made Catspaw Brand blucher-style Oxfords. I'm on your side here. I fully believe it's a waste of time. Putting together a collective mental picture of every small Pacific Island store I've ever been into and after canvassing around friends who also grew up in the Islands, the shoes in question would have been Chinese-made rubber flip flops, or Fiji-made Policeman's Sandals, or maybe, at a pinch, Chinese-made white canvas plimsols (you can cut the sides out of them, see). There is NO WAY ON EARTH they would have been any type of American shoe. In fact, there is no way American shoes could have got onto our area of the Pacific - not through Government Agencies; not through Burns Philps (SS); not through any of the usual Pacific trading routes. The only way it would have happened was if they came in on the feet of an American ... Oh no! I've suddenly thought of a way .. through a "Goodwill" crate sent to the islands through the Columbian Fathers. Well, that certainly puts a chink in my certainty. And anything in the crate not wanted by anyone would have been put into the local store for sale! Damn! Damn! Damn! Damn! That is just sooo annoying! OK, Mr Spalding, I concede that maybe you do have a case - a tiny case, but one nonetheless! LTM (who hates certainty-chinks!) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:30:15 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Zenith Stratosphere > http://members.aol.com/azarc/zenithst.htm I compared the Zenith photos against the advertising literature i have for the McMurdo Silver Masterpiece (1938). The Silver is the equivalent, in signal handling capability, to the Zenith, as the front end circuitry appears similar. The Zenith does have more baroque woodwork, and the dial seems more desirable because it is larger, and has 4 more tubes (not ones essential to signal-snatching ability). The Zenith i would think, also sounded better, by using 3 speakers of medium size instead of the one large 18 inch speaker on the Silver (altho i read that people's taste in "hi-fi" was actually different in those days). The Silver sold for $285 - 338 depending on cabinet. The "list price" was $519 - manufacturers were playing that game even then. I would guess the Zenith could sell for a maximum of $50-100 more than this. These figures represent, i believe, 2 or 3 months of average respectable wages. The price one paid for "gingerbread", as my brother calls consumerisms in electronics equipment, is pretty substantial. For around $200, you could get a ham or industrial communication type receiver, that was actually technically superior - but couldn't perform as the focus of the living room, in appearance or tone quality. Hue Miller *************************************************************************** From Ric See the earlier post from Bob Brandenburg. The top of the line Zentih did have a "list" price of $750. I guess the "Stratosphere" referred to the price. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:09:18 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Huts and radios Ric said: "What we know about the huts left behind by the Arundel party is that they were NOT standing in 1929. Quoting Norwich City survivor J. Thomas, whose written description of Gardner Island is the only reference we have to the huts: "Near the palms we found two disused galvanized roof huts and a large water tank, all of which were in a state (of) collapse." Well, compared to today they did have a "funny" way of expressing themselves in the old days. In the phrase " . . .which were in a state (of) collapse." the reader is told the verb (check with Pat "The Predicate" Thrasher on this) is one of continuation. That is, the object/subject (the huts) are still doing the verb (collapse) thing. It implies that action is not yet complete because if it were complete it would be expressed in the past tense -- collapsed. Now, Pat may correctly argue that in this construction the verb should be in gerund (collapsing) form, but it is also correct as Ric quoted it. In any event, I interpret Mr. Thomas's statement to mean the tank and huts have not totally collapsed and are in fact collapsing. Ergo, they are still easily recognizable as to their original intended use, regardless of their deteriorated or dilapidated condition. Nonetheless, whether or not these are the "signs of recent habitation" Lambrecht saw remains unknown. Issue number two, the cost of Betty's radio. I too gagged when I saw Ric's posting of Betty's radio costing nearly $800, and I agree that was a ton of change in those days. Did Betty's father buy it new, or get it second had? Considering the times, I imagine expensive items could be picked up for song, if a buyer was in the right place at the right time. Or, even if it was bought new, he may have gotten one heck of a deal from some store that was going under. LTM, who is reviewing her grammar Dennis O. McGee #1049EC ************************************************************************* From Ric You have a point. I suspect that the structures John Clauss photographed in 1989 are the same ones we surveyed as "the European-style house" in 1999 and are, in fact, the remains of the Arundel "huts." In '89 there were still timbers standing and corrugated sheeting on the ground. Everything was on the ground by '99 and little, if any, of the sheeting was left. It was clear from artifacts found in the ruins that others had visited the site in more recent years ( for example, a pile of liquor bottles, one of which appears to be dated August 1949. That was the year Nutiran was first cleared.) Whatever their "state of collapse" in 1929, it seems fairly obvious that they were not usable as shelters because the Norwich City survivors built their own shelters back in the bush. As for Betty's family being able to afford such an expensive radio - Betty says that her family was often the first in the neighborhood to have new electrical appliances. She suspects, but does not know for sure, that employees of the power company (like her father) could buy new appliances at significant discounts to get the products out into the neighborhoods and thus promote sales and, of course, consumption of electricity. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:01:16 EST From: David Evans Katz Subject: Re: Earhart in custody My father was among the American forces that liberated Santo Tomas University prison camp near Manila in early 1945 (4th Engineers Special Brigade). In describing the story of the liberation to me, he said that there were thousands of internees, mostly civilians, and at least 300 women and girls among them. His description of the liberation was very emotional (he was near tears when he talked about it). According to him, they were in a race to get there before the Japanese could execute them. David Evans Katz ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:05:25 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's radio/ Short wave capabilities Is there a dispute today in the forum that Betty's radio, whatever it was, could not receive the short wave broadcasts from the Electra, specifically the 3105 and 6210 frequencies, independent of all the other variables ? Thus that is why the forum is investigating the make, model, bands, schematics, tubes,etc., of the radio?? Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric My understanding is that reception on a harmonic of one of those frequencies is much more likely. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:15:45 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Huts and radios > Ric said: >Quoting Norwich City survivor > J. Thomas, whose written description of Gardner Island Is the full text of this description around anywhere? Or is it in a book? Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************************** From Ric No. As far as I know, none of the Norwich City stuff is published in a secondary source and the primary sources are pretty hard to come by. "The Wreck of the Norwich City" probably deserves its own section on the TIGHAR website (whenever we can get to it). ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:23:50 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: The yoke on the pile Makes sense that it's being loaded. If not following a repair or some such, then maybe just to rearrange things one last time before the last part of the flight. I suspect, from looking at the yoke, it was a pretty easy attach / detach, and as you pointed out, wouldn't weigh much. No reason to leave it behind, and every reason to bring it along. Not knowing what was coming up, and what resources would be available, I expect they wanted to bring their own critical supplies. Besides, didn't I read someplace that AE almost exclusively drank tomato juice in lieu of eating when she was flying? ltm jon ************************************************************************** From Ric I'm not sure that it was in lieu of eating but she was a big tomato juice fan (she said tomAHto). ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:26:14 EST From: Andrew McKenna Subject: No key aboard the airplane? Suppose you are stranded for several days, and after numerous attempts to send voice messages without success, and with your batteries at the point where you can't recharge them (we're finally out of gas), you find yourself thinking about alternatives. How do we make the most of what is left in the batteries? Fred, the old mariner, starts thinking about it. He knows that sending morse takes less power than voice, and since they have had no response to their voice messages anyway, he might as well try to find a way to send morse. He gets out his swiss army knife and disects the mic and fashions a rudimentary Morse key out of the components. Then he sends a last ditch message in morse as the batteries drain out for the last time. Would explain the use of morse late in the game (July 8th) only after all else failed. OK radio guys, how difficult would it be to make a key from scratch components? Please confirm that morse takes less power than voice (which is why it is still used to identify radio aids to navigation, VORs NDBs etc.) LTM who knows necessity is the mother of invention Andrew McKenna 1045CE ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:31:40 EST From: Tom Robison Subject: Re: AE in custody From Hue Miller >US Army nurses and US civilians captured in the Philippines were >held at a prison camp in the Philippines throughout the war. No >doubt some other reader here has a better memory for the camp >name, was it Santo Tomas? Santo Tomas was a university before the war, and was used by the Japanese to house "internees" and other "civilians" whose military status was dubious. It is known, for example, that at least one American Army Officer was interred for a couple years at Santo Tomas, posing as a civilian engineer. (this fella was later a governor of Indiana, one our better ones, though his military service in the P.I. raises some questions about ethics, honor, duty, etc.). Any Army or Navy nurses who were captured after the fall of Bataan or Corregidor would NOT have been taken to Santo Tomas, if it was known that they were military personnel. These women were, in general, subjected to the same treatment as their male P.O.W. counterparts, and were jailed under deplorable conditions. They suffered much the same fate at the hands of the Japanese as the men did. At least three movies come to mind that were made about the plight of nurses and other female personnel imprisoned by the Japanese in the P.I., but for the life of me I can't remember the titles of any of them. One was made before WWII ended, I think, and starred Claudette Colbert, et. al. Another more recent one starred Susan Sarandon, et. al., and one that I saw just recently was about a group of female prisoners who started a vocal orchestra. This one starred Glenn Close and others, including Christy McNichol. To read more about it, I suggest *Parade of the Dead* by John R. Bumgarner, and *We Band of Angels* by Elizabeth Norman. TomR *************************************************************************** From Ric Dead Thread Alert. This is the last posting on this subject. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:37:13 EST From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Re: The yoke on the pile. << From Ric Good point. Speculating: It may be that the yoke was the one thing in the pile that was to be left behind to get shipped home. (It's on the top.) It may have been removed fairly early in the World Flight and had been kicking around in the back of the airplane long enough. Darwin was the last "civilized' place they would visit before setting out across the Pacific. Anything to be shipped home should be left there. >> Maybe we've got it backwards, and the yoke is just being installed so that Noonan could take some yoke time to give AE a break during what was surely the longest leg of the trip. Seems to me you could make an argument either way. Do we know the yoke was installed before Darwin? Any pics or printed comments? LTM (who gets tired just thinking about 20 hour flights) A McKenna 1045CE *************************************************************************** From Ric Okay, that's a possibility. If that's what is going on then it raises the possibility that maybe the autopilot has been acting up - except there is no mention of autopilot maintenance in Lae. Unfortunately we have zero information about the yoke, one way or the other. It's just there on the pile. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:40:28 EST From: Denise Subject: Linda Finch Does anyone know what happened with pilot Linda Finch's 1997 attempt to duplicate Amelia's final journey? Denise ************************************************************************** From Ric Yeah. She did it, sort of. She and her sponsors didn't get nearly the publicity they expected (as witnessed by your question) because most media recognized it as a meaningless publicity stunt. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:59:14 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: 'chutes in Darwin >From Ric: > >One of her first actions was to ask the Civil Aviation Officer (Mr. >Alan Collins) whether two 'Irvin caterpiller 'chutes' had arrived from >America. Fully tested and ready for immediate use, the parachutes were >sitting in Mr. Collins' office. Something just doesn't make sense about this Sydney Times, 'parachute story'. Why would AE/FN fly 3/4 of the way through the flight, over considerable inhospitable terrain that would have precluded any kind of 'emergency' landing & where parachutes would have been the only possible means of reachng the ground in one piece... then evidence much concern as to whether the 'chutes' had arrived from America, for the last legs of the flight... almost entirely over the vast reaches of the Pacific Ocean, where, whether 'ditching' or 'chuting' into the drink would be equally hazardous to one's well being? Perhaps just more evidence of the somewhat casual approach the flight's planners took in preparation (or lack thereof) for this venture? Don Neumann *************************************************************************** From Ric Or just evidence that they had a different opinion than you do about the hazards and how best to deal with them. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 12:15:13 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Re: No key aboard the Electra? Andrew McKenna said: "Fred . . . . knows that sending Morse takes less power than voice . . . [so] he gets out his Swiss army knife and dissects the mic and fashions a rudimentary Morse key out of the components. Then he sends a last ditch message in Morse . . ." This scenario would dismiss Betty's notebook entries indicating that FN was injured and incapacitated by the accident. It also assumes he knows enough about the innards of a microphone to hot wire that bad boy into sending Morse. If FN was that smart, wouldn't he also have been bright enough to know where he was and send THAT information first and often, whether by voice or Morse? And better yet, don't you think he would have tried the hot wire trick a lot earlier on, rather than waiting six days until the batteries are almost dead? Yeah, he COULD have done it, but I think he would've done it on July 3, or so, while he still had plenty of juice to push that signal further and further out. And I think he would have sent out a position report time after time, after time, after time . . . . LTM, Who knew Morris -- short kid, glasses, brown hair . . . Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:12:33 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Fred incapacitated? As to Fred being incapacited, one scenario is that he could have regained some abilities or had coherent spells throughtout the time span. I incurred a massive skull fracture in 1970 which hospitalized me for over a week (8" top center to rear base). I had times that I was coherent, and times that I was incoherent. Most of the time I don't remember at all, just a few seconds here or there. For instance, I don't remember the fall, the trip to the hospital or any of the hospital stay until midday the next day (the fall was around midnight). I remember being loaded in an airplane the next night, into an ambulance later (at night - could have been minutes, hours or days). I remember being on a table or gurney with doctors and nurses all around. I remember waking up in a ward with a dozen or so other patients and a loud and noisy male orderly who's noisy routine with pans or metal objects of some kind put me in a moaning and groaning routine, so they moved me to a private room. My injury was on a Tuesday night and I "woke up" the following Monday morning - seemingly fully cognizant of my surroundings and goings on. I didn't like what was on the wall mounted tv so I got out of bed, climbed on a chair and changed channels. A few minutes later a nurse came in and seeing that I was awake (and now back in bed) and asked me who changed the channels. I explained that I had - she shrieked and ran for the doctor, who came flying into the room to check on me. I was discharged the following Friday, tho I had still some recovering to do. I had inner ear damage which made me walk like I was on a constantly tilting deck for several more weeks. But, eventually, I made a full and complete recovery and surprisingly, my coordination was improved from what it was before the injury. All this despite the news the doctor initially told my parents that I would be lucky to survive and would probably be permanently disabled should I pull thru. So, Fred could have recovered at some point a day or two or three after the initial landing a! nd performed some other functions that he couldn't do at first. LTM, Dave Bush #2200 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:21:56 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's notebook v. recollections Perhaps Tighar has not yet had time, but Tighar was going to clarify with Betty whether she heard "Earhart" verbally use the terms "South", which Betty may have abbreviated to "S", and heard the words "minutes" and "degrees" in the entry S 3 09' 165* E (adding the appropriate symbols). That might explain why she wrote it in the latitude/longitude format .Compare this with her first entry of " South 391065 E or Z" that was written without any minutes,degrees and not in a lat/long format, just simply 6 letters in a row with no indication it was a coordinate. Did Betty recall retuning her short wave station/frequency during the 1 3/4 hours of intermittent transmission because of static,fading, sound level. ( I know I am always fiddling with the band on my s/w receiver during a broadcast). Goerner may have been right when he thought this could be some amalgamation of short wave broadcasts in and around that frequenct that were mistakenly written as one continuous voice reception. LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric I asked Betty those questions and she really can't remember. Throughout our association with Betty I've been impressed by her willingness to say that she just doesn't remember when, in fact, that is the case. It makes the things she says she does remember that much more credible. Ultimately, of course, the document has to stand on its own. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:24:12 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: The yoke on the pile. I know flyers have done weird things but leaving behind the yoke looks a bit farfetched to me. I know the Brits used to fly four engine bombers with a single pilot during WW II (but a full crew of anything else, including gunners), but they were Brits. Circling the world and crossing the Seven Seas in a twin engine Lockheed 10 with a single pilot in 1937 seems un-American to me. After all it was the US who imposed (at least) two engines and two pilots on all public transport airplanes in 1932. This requirement in fact gave birth to the twin engine/two pilot generation of aircraft of which the Lockheed 10 was one of the first and fine example (Lockheed gave up the idea of a new single engine to succeed the Orion because of it and designed the Electra instead). Would AE/FN throw out the yoke ? What about conformity to airworthiness requirments ? What about abandoning the safety of two pilot operation ? Even with the extra comfort of an autopilot two pilots would still mean extra safety. And extra comfort to fly the plane on the long stretches, of which some would last some 20 hours ! From what we learned about the Electra's vulnerability to "turbulence" when the toilet is in use, I think it made sense to have somebody at the controls. I also fail to see why the right hand yoke should have had to be removed to make room for FN. To provide more room for observing the sun or the stars ? He could just as well observe them from behind the wheel. And he would be able to relieve AE at the controls when she got bored with flying or wanted to rest, without having to climb over each other. As for parachutes. Well, any pilot feels these things are a last resort, something you only use when there is no other option. Abandoning an airplane by parachute over the ocean is the last thing to do. You stand a better chance to be found staying near your plane, especially if it floats. Today they teach pilots to stick with their airplane and wait for rescue. Ditching (with gear and flaps up) gives the best chance of surviving. Baling out over the sea diminishes one's chances for survival unless there's a SAR waiting below. Without it, you're dead. Remember AE/FN couldn't count on SAR waiting for them. They were out alone out there. All they could hope for was an island. LTM (who thinks parachutes are fine for making sheets to keep you warm) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:25:18 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Betty's notebook/ "Occult " references One of the mysterious entries in Betty's notebook was the name "Bud" in the context of "Hello Bud" with no clues in front of or behind the name. In Morrisey's book, 196-198, numerous photos are credited to "Bud Mitchell" in heretofore unpublished photos reportedly taken by Stanley Hicks, Paul Mantz's photographer. Bud is identified in the acknowledgements as a 0X5 aviation pioneer, whatever that is. Maybe someone knows Bud's relationship to Amelia Earhart to justify her calling out to "Bud". I haven't seen any other Buds in the persona of the Earhart saga. LTM, Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 15:38:01 EST From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: No key aboard the airplane? Andrew McKenna wrote: <> A key is basically just an interruptible switch. Boy scouts used to make keys out of old tin cans, all you need is a springy strip of metal and a few screws. Morse can be understood better than voice, particularly if there is a lot of interference. I would expect the same amount of noise from a code or voice transmission at the same power level, but the code would be understandable for a greater distance. Dan Postellon TIGHAR #2263 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:32:52 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Linda Finch I'd like to comment on Ric's observation on the Finch flight. Any flight around the world today is meaningless if it is only a publicity stunt. Even in 1937 it was said by some that AE's flight was meaningless. Most of the publicity she got was from her disappearing. Still, AE wanted to prove something to herself. Anyone flying around the world in a ULM today does so to prove something to himself. For today there is nothing left to be proven. Remember how we all got up at impossible hours (at least to those who did not live in the US) to watch Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon in 1969 ? And how thrilled are the press today by the launching of yet another Space Shuttle ? As for the Finch flight, I remember her Lockheed 10A (turned into a 10E) Electra aircraft was the main attraction at the Le Bourget international airshow in 1997. I saw it, I touched it, I photographed it. So did thousands of other visitors from all over the world. People were cueing to catch a glimpse of it. Pratt & Whitney were heavily involved in the project and made no secret of it that they provided the engines, getting all the publicity out of it they could get. The airplane was for that brief time of the 1997 Le Bourget international airshow the centerpiece of the Pratt & Whitney outside static show. P&W got all the publicity they wanted... from the aviation world. To the non-aviation world (and that included the press) the Finch flight didn't matter. What was there left to be proven by flying around the world in 1997 ? It had been done so many times before. It had even been done only a year or so before by some French flyers in a Lockheed 18 Lodestar, sponsored by J&B (yes, the Scotch whisky). But it mattered to Pratt & Whitney or they wouldn't have used the airplane to attract attention (of the aviation world) to their other engines. As for Finch's commemorative flight of 1997, how many people today care about the launching of yet another Space Shuttle ? By the way, the French guys who flew the Lockheed 18 around the world preceding Linda Finch did so because J&B thought it was good publicity for their whisky. They learned from AE. For the over water flights their Lockheed 18 was filled with ping pong balls to keep it afloat.... Just in case. LTM (who believes the challenge is in achievement and can only seen by the initiated) *************************************************************************** From Ric French guys? Lockheed 18? Ping pong balls? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:36:10 EST From: Mike E. Subject: Re: No key aboard the airplane? Andrew McKenna wrote: >OK radio guys, how difficult would it be to make a key from scratch >components? Please confirm that morse takes less power than voice (which is >why it is still used to identify radio aids to navigation, VORs NDBs etc.) It would take more than just a telegraph key to make the radio work in CW mode, as it was modified... there was a changeover switch involved to go from "phone" to "cw". This required a plug to go into the transmitter. If they did not have one, it'd be impossible-to-very-difficult to fabricate one in the field... especially without a wiring diagram (and the skill to read that diagram) and a soldering iron. Don't even think about a battery powered soldering iron... those things would kill a battery as fast (almost) as the transmitter. And I am not sure I have ever seen reference to a 12-volt powered iron from the 30s. If one wanted to send Morse the easiest way would be just use the mic button without tearing the mic apart (which would, in my humble opinion, be kind of a dumb thing to do). Assuming the mic was broken, or deemed to be, the quick-and-dirty way to send Morse is just to touch two wires together, if you can ID the right two wires (in this case, push-to-talk and ground). However the radio was not at all intended to be Keyed on CW, in voice mode. And sending Morse this way, with this radio, would actually consume MORE power, because of the constant start-restart, and surge currents associated with this, of the dynamotor power supply (an ampere-pirahna). And by the way, VORs and NDBs don't use true CW emission. They are tone-modulated with Morse telegraph characters. It is true that tone modulated Morse is still easier to read, on a weak signal, than a voice identifier... AE's radio had no tone-modulated telegraph emission capability. LTM (who is not a mechanical ignoramus) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:41:29 EST From: Chris Kennedy Subject: Re: No key aboard the airplane? Please clear up some confusion---I am under the impression that both Earhart and Noonan had a problem with Morse. Was it that they didn't know it altogether, or else could only transmit it or receive/interpret it very slowly given the state of their familiarity with it? --Chris Kennedy *************************************************************************** From Ric Our most contemporaneous description of Earhart's and Noonan's ability to send and receive morse (or lack thereof) is in the Chater Report which can be found on the TIGHAR website at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Chater_Report.html It says, in part: "On enquiry Miss Earhart and Captain Noonan advised that they entirely depended on radio telephone reception as neither of them were able to read morse at any speed but could recognise an individual letter sent several times. This point was again mentioned by both of them later when two different sets at Lae were used for listening in for time signals. " ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:45:58 EST From: Ken Knapp Subject: Re: No key aboard the airplane? Andrew McKenna wrote: >OK radio guys, how difficult would it be to make a key from scratch >components? Please confirm that morse takes less power than voice (which is >why it is still used to identify radio aids to navigation, VORs NDBs etc.) I have seen morse keys made out of everything from scraps of tin cans to microswitches. It's even possible to send morse by just plain keying and unkeying a microphone. As far as it taking less power than voice, the answer is yes and no. A 50 watt signal using morse (CW) would be intelligible at a greater range than a 50 watt AM signal. It would also be readable under more adverse conditions. Not being familiar with the transmitter, I cannot say if a CW signal would consume less battery power than an AM signal. Also, VOR's and NDB's are not transmitting a true CW signal. It is modulated AM. If it were true CW, it would be difficult if not impossible to home in on. Ken Knapp *************************************************************************** From Ric See Mike Everette's posting on this subject. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:08:00 EST From: Kenton Spading Subject: Collapsed Huts, Not Dennis G., Thank you for pointing out that indeed there is a high probability that Arundel's Huts were still standing on Niku in 1929 and as such were likely recognizable in 1937. I interpreted the message from J. Thomas the same way you did. As long as you resurected the subject I will respond to some questons asked by yourself, Dave Porter and others subsequent to my detailed posting related to Lambrecht's "Signs of Recent Habitation" report. I remind the Forum that the HMS Leith visited Gardner/Niku on February 15, 1937 to erect a flagpole and placard proclaiming the island to be the property of His Majesty the King. Something related to this "Recent" visit to Niku is certainly a candidate what Lambrecht observed. LTM Kenton S. *************************************************************************** From Ric I'll concede that huts in a "state of collapse" might not be entirely "collapsed" and may even have been recognizable as such in 1937. I'll also concede that HMS Leith's flagpole with placard may still have been standing, although none of the poles and placards Leith installed on the other islands of the Phoenix Group were reported by Lambrecht, nor did Maude and Bevington mention a flagpole on Gardner when they visited the island in October. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:10:43 EST From: Kenton Spading Subject: Sources of the Shoes Denise wrote: >he [Spading] wants you to look into the subject in more depth to definitely >exclude the possibility that they may have been American-made Catspaw Brand blucher-style >Oxfords.......OK, Mr Spalding, I concede that maybe you do have a case...... Thank you for your insights. In a number of posting (including the one above) you have made a big issue of the fact that the British would not be caught dead wearing American shoes or that American shoes would not be available in the Pacific. One of the key words in your argument being "American". However, the shoes have not been identified as being "American". We do not know what country the shoes, that TIGHAR found in 1991, came from. We do know the country where the replacement heel came from. But we do not know the country of origin of the original heel or for that matter the shoe itself. Regarding Burns-Philip.....We know the vendor that supplied the store (On Chong). Burns-Philip was considered but they lost out. The basic history of the store is well documented. Please note the spelling of my name....Spading (no L). LTM Kenton Spading ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:20:37 EST From: Renaud Subject: Re: French guys in a L18 Ric wrote: >French guys? Lockheed 18? Ping pong balls? Herman, could have you noticed who were these guys ? Could that have been another attempt by the Baudry/Pescarolo team ? LTM ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:26:10 EST From: Troy Subject: Re: Betty's notebook/ "Occult " references regarding OX5: Having several members of my family who were OX5'ers, it was (probably no living members now) an organization of pioneer aviators who flew the OX5 Motor (before airplanes had "engines" but just "motors"). I am not sure of the last year of production for the OX5 motors, but in 1985, all the members of OX5 seemed to me to be in their 80's and 90's. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:28:38 EST From: Capt. J. W. Clark Subject: Capt. Clark's book Ric: In view of the apparent interest of forum members in Santo Tomas University, used as prison for civilians by the Japs, perhaps you would like to quote from my book "SSS", pages 453-454 which covers the "coming out" party in early July 1945 at Tom Dixie's "Kitchen" for former inmates, reference to torture, etc.---Regards, Capt. J. W. Clark ************************************************************************** From Ric Although this thread is dead on the Forum, anyone wishing to contact Capt. Clark about his book can reach him at jclark@goldinc.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:36:02 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: French guys in L18 Ric wrote > French guys? Lockheed 18? Ping pong balls? I think they were three Frenchmen (one Air France captain Patrick Fourtick and co-pilots Hubert Auriol and Henri Pescarolo) and one Canadian engineer (Arthur Powell). In June 1987 they planned to break Howard Hughes' 1938 speed record flying around the world in a propeller driven aircraft (Hughes' was a Lockheed 14 Super Electra). They came to Liege (Belgium) on one of their training flights one day. That's when I saw them and their all-black Lockheed 18. I took some notes then. That's how I find their aircraft had been built as a Lockheed C-60 (c/n 2427) and had been delivered to the US Army Air Force as 42-55966. In 1945 it was brought to Lockheed 18 (civilian) standard. Its US history is unknown to me. But around 1984 or 1985 it was standing unused at an airfield near Miami FL when it was acquired by Scotch whisky distillers J&B. It was restored to flying condition by Arthur Powell and flown to France via the Azores in November 1986. It was then overhauled at Reims (France) and painted all-black with the J&B logo. I remember it had been equipped with extra fuel tanks to bring the airplane's endurance to 20 hours. When I saw them at Li=E8ge the crew told me they intended to take 36,000 ping pong balls on board for their flight, apparently having learned from Amelia Earhart's mishap and hoping this would keep their airplane afloat if they had to ditch... I don't know what happened to the aircraft later. I did turn up again in 1998, however. It is now owned by the Sabena Old Timers (S.O.T.) who bought it in France. The S.O.T. are a non-profit organization formed by retired Sabena mechanics who are restoring it to make it fly again. Their motivation is that the C-60 was used by Sabena (Belgium's national airline) between 1943 and 1946 on its African network (Belgium was occupied by the Germans in WW II) and flew a weekly military-only scheduled service linking Johannesburg (South Africa) and Cairo (Egypt) via Leopoldville (now called Kinshasa) in support of the Allied war effort. This is all off-topic I'm afraid, but for the ping pong balls. Why didn't AE think of them ? *************************************************************************** From Ric Tell me you're not serious. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:49:12 EST From: Denise Subject: Reply to Mr Spading Dear Mr Spading (Note I dropped the L) OK, I have conceded on the shoe - but only on the proviso that there was an American priest based in the immediate vicinity of Nikumaroro during the 30 years in question (this could be easily checked. I have the e-ddress of the Columbian Fathers' Pacific Head Office in Suva if you'd like to take it further) ... but I am not giving you an inch on a replacement heel. Quite apart from the fact that such a thing couldn't have come in on any of the normal trade routes, having them in the store would be as ridiculous as, say, bringing in tape cleaning heads to sell to people who have barely heard of a VCR. And this is entirely the point. Shoes are barely a priority in the islands today, and when Amelia touched down in the Pacific they were so NOT a priority they had barely stopped being considered a food group. I'm not kidding about that. In 1937, it was only about forty years since the Monasavu Villagers ate Reverend Baker's boots - with Reverend Baker still inside them. (The subsequent ridicule teaching the islanders that there was more shame in eating shoes than there was in eating missionaries.) Shoes were so hardly understood in fact - and no Pacific Islander will thank me for telling you this since it is a source of embarassment to them these days - ours is the first generation who didn't think you wore shoes for the SOUND. That's correct. They honestly believed Europeans wore shoes for the sound they made when they hit the ground; that a shoe was actually a sort of strange, exotic, rather needless and slightly foolish musical instrument! And thus they didn't want to wear them unless they had to - a visit to the city, say, or to go to church - and when they had to they found them so hot, sweaty and so desperately uncomfortable (their feet were so broad they couldn't fit them properly) they invented their own type; the Policeman's Sandal - and they wore those instead. (This type of footwear is - along with flipflops for less formal occasions - still the predominant shoe in the islands today.) So think about it! Why, then, would a store run by Pacific Islanders have a replacement heel - even a non-American replacement heel - in stock? Surely, if shoes had so very little meaning, a replacement part would have none at all. And, besides, since they hardly ever wore shoes, they'd hardly need to get them re-soled. Furthermore, if anything ever wore out, they'd replace it or fix it with something at hand, not bring something in. They were and still are great improvisers. So, that is my point. Nothing has changed. As it was with shoes, excluding the possibility of the replacement heel coming in on a shoe worn by an American, and excluding the possibility of it coming in already attached to the unestablished unwanted shoe from the unestablished crate donated to the island by Goodwill via the Columbian Father who we haven't even established was in the Phoenix Group, it just wouldn't have happened. It would not have been there! Let me underline this by quoting from a dear old Irish priest who was one of the people I canvassed on the issue of American shoes AND replacement heels ending up in Our Pacific. Without giving this priest - who has spent over sixty years all over Our Pacific, with long residences in parishes in the Gilbert and Ellis Group, and the Wallis and Futuna Group - a context for my question, I asked him if he could think of a way an American replacement heel from a 1930s pair of woman's moccasins could have ended up on an stretch of uninhabited beach in the Phoenix Group. He thought about it for a while and shook his head. "The only vaguely logical explanation for it," he said, "... is that it came from Amelia Earhart!" There you have it! For him it could only have been A.E. He did not even allow for the possibility of that unestablished Goodwill crate! Have I convinced you? I do hope so. But if I haven't, drop me a line (you have my e-ddress) and I'll give you a way of getting in touch with the Columbian Order, and you can go off chasing it as much as you wish. No! Sorry, Mr Spading. I've looked it up. Since The Columban Fathers are the source of the Pacific's American priests, and since the Order didn't turn up anywhere in the Pacific until 1952 - and didn't travel beyond Fiji anyway - there could have been no American priest in our region of the Pacific during the thirty years in question. So let's extract him from the equation. No priest! No Goodwill crate! No alternative explanation for the replacement heel! For your private information, and to save space in this forum, I'm sending the history of this Irish/American Order's dealings in the Pacific, which I've extracted from their website, to your personal e-ddress. I will send you their e-ddress in Fiji if you decide to take it further. LTM (who always considers the sound when she buys shoes) Denise P.S. Total misunderstanding! ON CHONG is the name of the trader! I get it now!! The wording in your posting was so ambiguous, I thought you were talking about Burns Philps' having dealings in Cambodia. Not so! Well, that just strengthens my case. A Chinese trader would have brought in goods through Hong Kong. Those goods would mainly have been Chinese in origin. Thus we're DEFINITELY talking flip flops, plimsols, and the ubiquitous black leather policeman's sandals - shipped up from Fiji. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:05:29 EST From: Don Jordan Subject: Ping Pong Balls This story about ping pong balls has come up again. I have never heard of Earhart's Electra being filled with ping pong balls and I have studied the Earhart mystery since the mid 1950s. However, I must say that a very long time ago, I saw a publicity photo of a pilot stuffing ping pong balls into the open areas of the wings of his airplane. At this point, I have no idea who it was, or what airplane it was. I just know I saw that picture. The balls were in little bags as I recall. I don't know anything about the Electra having ping pong balls, but I do know it was attempted at one time, by someone! Don J. ************************************************************************** From Ric This is actually a rather famous dead horse from the early days of this forum. Ping pong balls (50,000 of 'em) were stuffed into the wings of the single-engined Vultee V1A "Lady Peace" flown across the Atlantic and back in September 1936 by Dick Merrill and Harry Richman. An interestig aside - "Lady Peace" was equipped with one of the same prototype Hooven Radio Compasses that was installed aboard NR16020 in October of that year. That's the state-of-the-art direction finder that Earhart had replaced with "old fashioned" Bendix loop the following March. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 12:26:11 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: I'm impressed . . . Out of true curiosity, who is this Denise who knows so much about Christians, cannibals, and circuitous trade routes in the South Pacific? I agree with her well-reasoned argument regarding the shoe debate (and, yes, Ken (no "L") Spading has a right to demand we dot the i's and cross the t's) but I'm curious how Denise acquired her knowledge. LTM, who dreams of a pacific life Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 12:31:55 EST From: Oscar Boswell Subject: Re: French guys in L18 Herman wrote: >This is all off-topic I'm afraid, but for the ping pong balls. Why didn't AE > think of them ? >*************************************************************************** > From Ric > > Tell me you're not serious. Well, as I remember, Dick Merrill had ping pong balls (in the wings) on his first Atlantic flight (Vultee "Lady Peace") - so perhaps the idea is not entirely absurd. *************************************************************************** From Ric My incredulity was directed at the idea that ping pong balls would have been of any use in an airplane that should already float like a cork, or that they would have done any good given what appears to have happened to the airplane. On the other hand, 50,000 or so ping pong balls would give us lots of artifacts to search for. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 12:32:40 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Betty's notebook/ "Occult " references For Troy, Would Amelia have known or associated closely with Bud Mithchell the 0X5er in California; he ended up with a collection of her photos? Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:50:08 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Mocassins v. Oxfords. . For Denise, Maybe there is a linguistic differnce between American usage and your priest friend's usage of "mocassins" that he beleived AE was wearing.I thought the sole was matched to an american style blucher oxford often seen in AE's photographs with her Electra. Sacajewea yes, Amelia no!! LTM,Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:59:33 EST From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Reply to Mr Spading For Denise: We American Jesuits have had some missionaries in the Pacific for some time (Philippines, Micronesia, Fiji, Guam, Yap, ...). I don't know the whole history, but you shouldn't say that the Columbans are the sole source of American priests in the Pacific. ;o) Marty