Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 10:39:49 EDT From: Denise Subject: Frend Bilong Otha Fella! Regarding the image at http://www.lib.purdue.edu/earhart/images/VIII.G.7.jpg I've seen this before: two palm trees on a headland overlooking the sea, the shape of which encompasses a plane, a ship and an island. (But where the Maltese Cross is, on the horizon, was the setting sun, from memory.) It was on the cover of something - a book or a pamphlet - but I can't place it further than that, although I remembering copying the picture myself as a very young child. This looks similarly like a copy done by a child, although one a lot older than I was. Was it on the cover of a prayer book? A book of psalms? A school text book? Nope! Can't place it. But if I remember, I'll let you know the source. LTM (who didn't encourage copying) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 10:56:36 EDT From: Denise Subject: Nei Manganibuka Angus: "Nei Manganibuka" in Fijian renders into something very close to "The Strong Powerful Vagina" ... I imagine it's something very like that in Kiribati. LTM (who was into goddesses) Denise ************************************************************************* From Ric I wonder if the "buka" part is a reference to buka trees. In Gilbertese the prefix "I" (pronounced "EE") means "of". For examlple, I-Kiribati is "people of the Gilberts", and I-Nutiran is "New Zealanders". We know that, according to ancient tradition, Nei Manganibuka came from an island southeast of the Gilberts called Nikumaroro that was covered with buka trees. That's why the first Gilbertese delegation to Gardner with maude and Bevington in October 1937 named the island Nikumaroro. Might Nei Manganibuka be somethng like "Great Vagina of the Bukas"? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 11:02:07 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Nauticos Someone has close ties to Nauticos on the forum, I forgot who, but what equipment did they use for their deep water search? ************************************************************************** From Ric Anybody have specifics? As far as I know they were planning to use towed-array sonar to sweep the entire target area and then check any "hits" with a camera-equipped ROV. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 11:16:17 EDT From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Frend Bilong Mi (Friend Belong Me, My Friend) And a piano was once described as follows: "Big black box, many white teeth, go bong-bong, make fine music!" Cam Warren *************************************************************************** From Ric That's not Pisin. It may be an English transliteration of a Pisin description of a piano. The problem with Pisin is that it is no one's first language. It's a very simple "trade language" that everybody can use, but its simplicity necessarily makes it cumbersome. For example, the word "bilong", sometimes shortened to "long", signifies the possessive AND all prepositions. A sign on the helicopter ramp at the airport in Port Moresby says: "itambu long stanup clostu long balus" which, of course, means "It is forbidden to stand up close to the bird". Here's a classic example to Pisin practicality. Milk is "susu". A bra is "susu pants". ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 11:17:28 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Nei Manganibuka Perhaps it's a reference to the place of origin, the source of life, or "mother earth". ltm, jon ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:24:57 EDT From: Roger Kelley Subject: Terms... First the Fijian term, " "Nei Manganibuka". Now the Pisin term, "susu pants". What's next? :-) LTM, Roger Kelley ************************************************************************* From Ric Nei Manganibuka is not a Fijian term. It's Gilbertese (I-Kiribati). If I wanted to say "You're confused." in Pisin I'd say, "Yu fela bagarup tu mas." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:28:48 EDT From: Pat Gaston Subject: Pidgin I had never thought of Spanish or Portuguese as sources of pidgin, but it makes a lot of sense. "Pickaninny" surely derives from "pequeño" (little one) or "pequeñito" (even littler one). In the dialect of Northwest Spain, which produced most of the country's seafaring men, the latter term would be rendered "pequeniño." It's a pretty short trip from there to "pickanniny." "Calaboose" comes from the Spanish "calabozo" (dungeon or jail). Another Spanish term for the slammer is "juzgado" (hoos-GAH-thoh), whence we get "hoosegow." LTM (who needs something to do while waiting for Nauticos' press release) Pat Gaston ************************************************************************* From Ric No need to think of Spanish or Portugese as sources for New Guinea pidgin. They weren't out there. Think Aussie and American slang. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:30:02 EDT From: Charlie Wood Subject: Airstrip orientation ... Howland Island Could someone tell me the orientation of the Howland Island airstrip that was awaiting Earhart on her arrival? I'm interested in it in standard aviation usage, i.e., Rwy 10-28, or 9-27. or what ever it happened to be. Of course, if you know the exact magnetic heading of the Rwy, I can use that, too. Thanks for the help. Charlie Wood ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:41:33 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: Nei Manganibuka and Adamant Well thanks Denise for sharing that with us- you learn something new every day with Tighar! On the basis of the name alone I think we can rule AE out as N.M.! And as for your explanation Ric (hang on I'm just trying to get back on my chair) - your reputation as a vendor of outrageous speculation has just been seriously enhanced! On another topic, I am in communication with an ex crew member of HMS Adamant. Do you have a copy of the crew pic you can e-mail. Hopefully we can see if at least this part of the story checks out. As far as I can tell she was based in Ceylon and western Australia at Freemantle and a Pacific tour seems unlikely. Of course its possible that AE & Co accidentally flew on a reciprocal heading and we should be looking in the Indian ocean somewhere. Itasca must have picked up that far flung harmonic again. Regards Angus. *************************************************************************** From Ric <> Whad I say?? We never had a "crew pic". The photo that was said to show members of the crew was taken from a launch about two hundred yards off a tropical beach where a couple dozen guys are hanging about in shorts. I don't know how you'd recognize anybody. We checked Adamant's logs at the PRO back in 1989 and we have her movements from June 1945 to Dec 1947 after which she returned to England. In July and August of '46 she was in the Solomons but never went east of there. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 14:34:57 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Re: Nauticos Press Release That's a good point. Where is the Nauticos press release? Has anyone seen anything in any of the newspapers anywhere? Nothing in Kansas City....yet. Would be interesting to hear the official story. Carol Dow ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 14:36:47 EDT From: RC Subject: Airstrip orientation ... Howland > From Charlie Wood > > Could someone tell me the orientation of the Howland Island airstrip that was > awaiting Earhart on her arrival? Measured from Sheet No 1198 Islands in the Pacific USN 1945: Three strips are shown. True bearings and length in feet are: 043/223 usable length, approx. 3100' 090/270 2400' 169/349/ 6300' Var. 9deg. 24 min East [East is Least ...] RC ************************************************************************** From Randy jacobson In the official report to the Bureau of Air Commerce, the map indicates three runways: NE/SW 3023' length N/S 3200' E/W 2440' These were the only directional markings, other than a rose compass on the map. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 14:37:34 EDT From: Tom Strang Subject: Air Miles Lae - Howland With GPS technology in mind - What is the actual air mileage between Lae and Howland Island? Resectfully: Tom Strang ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 14:44:32 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: Nei Manganibuka and Adamant > Whad I say?? Sorry - but I fell about laughing at your interpretation of the meaning of Nei Manganibuka. Maybe you're right, but where the buka trees come into the picture is difficult to imagine. A strange coincidence about the wreck photo story is that the USS Bushnell was also a submarine tender. Makes one wonder about conspiracy theories again. By 1946 she was renamed and took part in the Bikini atoll tests. She was certainly in the Pacific in 46. Did they stop off at Gardner, their old stomping ground and discover the electra wreckage? Or did they call in at Mili and find it there? Gardner is not exactly en route from Oahu to Bikini but there were various exercises in operation. Of course AE may have landed on Bikini. The ship did spend some time at the island before the test, taking data. If so there won't be much left of the electra now. The ship was only 19 miles from the bomb when it detonated. I'm not suprised they wanted to have some sand on hand. I've seen some of the ships logs but not all. Those I saw gave no clue. The crew pic might give some clues as to whether the crew were Brits or not, even if no-one is identifiable. However, if Tighar doesn't have it there's not much we can do. Regards Angus. ************************************************************************* From Ric All we have is a very muddy photocopy of the photo of the guys on the beach. How do you tell if a guy in dark shorts is a Brit or not? (Somebody is sure to have a good punch line for that one.) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 14:47:07 EDT From: Kerry Tiller Subject: Re: Frend Bilong Mi (Friend Belong Me, My Friend) > From Ric > > Here's a classic example to Pisin practicality. Milk is "susu". A bra is > "susu pants". In what language is "susu" milk? Motu? I ask, because in Visayan (Cebuano and Ilongo anyway - languages of the Central Philippines), "susu" means Breast. The Tagalog (central Luzon/Manila) word is "dibdib". The only word I ever heard for milk anywhere in the Philippines was "gatas". Two very different cultures having the same word with a related meaning intrigues me. I spent a little time in Papua New Guinea (Port Moresby, Lae and Rabaul) but not long enough to catch any of the native languages. Those all being coastal towns with Burns Philps everywhere, I did hear a great deal of pidgin. Not hard at all to understand after awhile. LTM (and, no, I am NOT going to make a reference here to her susu pants) Kerry Tiller *************************************************************************** From Ric <> Dunno, but I agree that it's interesting. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 14:51:49 EDT From: Denise Subject: Re: Nei Manganibuka Ric, you say "I wonder if the "buka" part is a reference to buka trees", yes, at a guess, it would be, but the word would be used more metaphorically, as a reference would be to the qualities those trees are thought to possess. LTM (who liked quality trees) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 15:05:09 EDT From: Frank Wolfe Subject: Re: Air Miles Lae - Howland I get 2556 miles from Lae to Howland on my GPS -- I would like to know the status of the recent search conducted by Nautico. Frank Wolfe *************************************************************************** From Ric I posted this on April 27: Sorry I can't divulge the source for the following but let's just say it is very reliable. Nauticos has concluded its deep water search and has found nothing of significance. They were at sea for 35 days and searched an undisclosed portion of their targeted area. There were numerous equipment problems. They are eager to go back but will need to raise more money. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 15:34:01 EDT From: Al Jeffries Subject: Re: Nauticos Press Release Carol asks: <> Try searching using google, ask jeeves or yahoo Al Jeffries ************************************************************************** From Ric If and when Nauticos issues a press release I would think that it will appear with their other press releases on the Nauticos website at http://www.nauticos.com. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:28:56 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Adamant > From Ric > > All we have is a very muddy photocopy of the photo of the guys on the beach. > How do you tell if a guy in dark shorts is a Brit or not? (Somebody is sure > to have a good punch line for that one.) I would imagine that as service personnel they would be wearing service issue shorts. Presumably these did differ from American garb in length colour etc. As far as I was aware both navies would be wearing white shorts but perhaps someone can confirm or deny this. Angus. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:30:32 EDT From: Charlie Wood Subject: Re: Airstrip orientation ... Howland Thank you Randy and RC for the great Rwy info. I did learn after posting (from Long's book) that there were 3 Rwys on Howland. I subtracted out the Mag Var, converted to closest Rwy hdgs, and came up with: 3/21 ... presumably "the NE/SW" Rwy, 8/26 ... presumably the "E/W" Rwy, 16/34 ... presumably the "N/S" Rwy. I was struck by the 6300 ft length for 169/349 vs 3200 ft length listed in the Bureau of Air Commerce doc. Gee, a 6300 ft strip for an Electra? ...Amelia wouldn't have believed her eyes. Oh well, when GIs are doing the work, cost is no object. Gotta love the mag var in units less than a degree. Let's see, prob the compass/DG was marked every five degrees. Mag Var = E 9 deg, 24 min ... I love the memory aid , "East is Least" ... my favorite, though, don't know why since I live on the US East coast, is "Easterners are Odd" for the hemispheric altitude rule. That Californian is probably still chuckling over his creation. Does anyone know if the referenced "Sheet no 1198 "Islands in the Pacific, USN 1945" might be posted on the Internet somewhere available for download? Thanks again for the great help Charlie ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:33:42 EDT From: Marjorie in Montana Subject: Re: Frend Bilong Mi (and her susu pants, too) I loved the "susu pants" for bra, too, and can't resist mentioning that the word my Chamorro-Saipanese maid used for breast was "sisu." Although we left Saipan before my daughter was two, at three she collapsed in hysterical laughter on a street corner in San Francisco when I pointed out my neighborhood seafood store to my mother. "A sisu store?" she screeched. "You can buy sisu in a store?" LTM (who's probably still wondering 30 years later about her granddaughter's weird sense of humor) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:35:04 EDT From: Denise Subject: Mother Tongue! Kerry asks: In what language is "susu" milk? The answer to that one, Kerry, is pretty much all of them. It's one of the big commonly used nouns - like those for water, boat, spirit, devil, ghost, garden, anchor, fish - for the entire region. So, there you go, the entire she-bang of the Polynesian, Melanesian and Micronesian Islands use a variation of susu (like suthu, sutu, sucu) as the word for milk and it makes you wonder if it's in anyway descended from an Indo-Arayan stock word behind our words "suck" and "succour". LTM (herself a great succourer) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:36:32 EDT From: Rod Subject: PURDUE BECOMES AMELIA EARHART CLEARINGHOUSE extract from AOPA ePilot -- Vol. 4, Issue 18 PURDUE BECOMES AMELIA EARHART CLEARINGHOUSE Purdue University this week became the largest repository for all things Amelia Earhart. Thanks to a gift of nearly 500 of Earhart's personal papers and memorabilia from her family, the school now stores the most comprehensive collection of materials related to her life, career, and mysterious disappearance. Many of the artifacts have not been seen by the public. Earhart, who disappeared over the Pacific in 1937, served as a visiting instructor at Purdue, starting in 1935. The announcement of the contribution this week also kicked off the school's "Countdown to 100 Years of Flight" celebration that honors the Wright brothers. Rod ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 14:37:10 EDT From: Peter Subject: Susu <> Susu is the Malay word for milk. LTM, Peter. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 16:53:53 EDT From: Bob Sherman Subject: Howland airstrip > I subtracted out the Mag Var, converted to closest Rwy hdgs, >and came up with: > 3/21 ... presumably "the NE/SW" Rwy, > 8/26 ... presumably the "E/W" Rwy, > 16/34 ... presumably the "N/S" Rwy. You got that right! > I was struck by the 6300 ft length for 169/349 vs 3200 ft length listed in > the Bureau of Air Commerce doc. Gee, a 6300 ft strip for an Electra? I measured the length of the proposed runways [cleared strips ...] & rounded down to 6300 ft. There may well have been some geo features that did not allow the full length. > Gotta love the mag var in units less than a degree. Let's see, prob the > compass/DG was marked every five degrees. Mag Var = E 9 deg, 24 min ... They measured and so noted. The users can round as they please. 9 degrees is O.K. for flt. planning; at my arm chair, it is a N-S runway. > ... "Easterners are Odd" ... I'll buy that. > Does anyone know if the referenced "Sheet no 1198 "Islands in the Pacific, > USN 1945" might be posted on the Internet ...for download? I'll send you a copy if you like .. Need address. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 08:35:49 EDT From: Herman Subject: Re: Howland airstrip Should 169/349 been read as a RWY 17/35 ? Would make things easier to understand. 6,300 ft was a lot of runway for 1937 ! Average length tended to be 3,000 ft. I flew in the Electra (L10A). Take off with a full load (full power at 2,300 RPM and 36.5 inches of mercury) takes 2,200 feet, which is covered in 20 seconds. Herman ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 08:36:46 EDT From: Suzanne Astorino Subject: Re: Air Miles Lae - Howland Since this topic is up, here are the actual figures that AE used: http://www.lib.purdue.edu/earhart/images/IX.C.8.jpg (file size = 989kb) Description: Flight Analysis Data Sheet from Howland Island to Lae It has the exact same figure as Frank Wolfe gets on his GPS, 2556! LTM, who never once burned her susu pants! Suzanne ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 09:30:59 EDT From: Ric Subject: Research update The new TIGHAR Tracks will be mailed to members later this week and will show how documents and maps from the Kiribati archives help explain some of the features we see at the Seven Site. For example, it now appears that a series of shallow depressions not far from the lagoon shore are probably the result of an experimental 1941 coconut planting done at Gallagher's direction to see if that part of the island would support agricultural development. The experiment eventually failed, but it may explain why at least the lagoon-side portion of the site was maintained at least until 1949 when a British official (Lands Commissioner P.B. Laxton) was shown the site and described cleared underbrush and a "house built for Gallagher". The next TIGHAR Tracks will review what we've learned about the artifacts and animal remains that were collected during Niku IIII. They tell a fascinating, if still somewhat puzzling, story. One of the artifacts in particular - 2-6-S-45 "The Knob" - has proven to be especially interesting. Scanning Electron Microscope analysis by the U.S. Naval Academy Nondestructive Testing Laboratory in Annapolis, Maryland has determined that the knob is a lead casting around a steel insert. The face of the knob has raised letters and numbers. Cleaning in water with ultrasound has confirmed the presence of the word "PATENT" followed by two letters that are probably "ED", so the full word is probably "PATENTED". Two smaller figures are probably "no." standing for "number" and then there is what appears to be a seven digit string of numbers beginning with "18". It could be a United States utility patent issued between 1931 (when 1,800,000 was issued) and 1933 (when 1,900,000) was issued. The knob is similar in size and general appearance to adjustment knobs on aeronautical sextants, for which there were many, many patents issued during this general period. The artifact is presently at the Photek Forensic Imaging laboratories in Portland, Oregon where Jeff Glickman and his associates will try to pull up more of the numbers using X-ray and CAT-scan technology. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 11:53:55 EDT From: Ric Subject: British patent research Tom King notes that the phrase "PATENTED" followed by the number somehow sounds more British than American. I wonder if the seven digit number makes any sense as a British patent. What say Her Majesty's Own Forumites (HMOF)? LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 09:50:31 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: British patent research Re British patent numbers. Ifland's book on celestial navigation has a select list of patents related to sextants. Some of the British patent numbers and dates listed are: # 17,840 - 1909 # 10,949 - 1914 # 26, 764 - 1896 # 11,753 - 1903 # 5,960 - 1905 I don't see a pattern and he didn't list any more modern British patents related to bubble sextants. I would think there are some. However, it doesn't look like the patent numbers would be in the millions in any case. If the number on the knob has a comma and is in the hundred thousands, then maybe. blue skies, jerry **************************************************************************** From Phil Tanner It seems from the Patent Office web site - see http://www.patent.gov.uk/patent/history/oldnumbers/after1916.htm - that British patents only reached seven digits in 1966. Assuming the versions on the web site are exactly as rendered in patent marks, they are all prefaced by the letters GB. Numbering started at 100,001in 1916 and by 1936 had reached 439,856. ltm Phil GB2276 *************************************************************************** From Simon Ellwood #2120 > Tom King notes that the phrase "PATENTED" followed by the number somehow > sounds more British than American. As a Brit, it doesn't sound gramatically correct to me to follow the word "PATENTED" with a patent number. Maybe it's a date, or a phrase like "PATENTED IN ENGLAND............." ? >I wonder if the seven digit number makes any sense as a British patent. According to the UK patent office's web site, there are seven digit codes, but only after 1965. Before then, six digits from the current system's inception in 1916 until. LTM Simon Ellwood #2120 *************************************************************************** From Ric Thank you gentlemen. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 09:56:06 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Re: British patent research I guess from all this patend stuff is that you wish to find a link to Captain Fred Noonan. I believe that we know what the Captain owned, navigational wise, is there a possibility? ************************************************************* From Ric The only sextant that we know Noonan owned is in the museum in Pensacola. We do not know what kind of navigational equipment he owned or used on the Earhart flight. Therefore, whatever we find out about the knob I see no way to conclusively link it to Earhart or Noonan and thus there does not appear to be any potential for the knob to be a "smoking gun". ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 10:06:56 EDT From: Jerry Jurenka Subject: New Description of Final Take Off at Lae Dear Ric: This just came to me on the back cover of The Zontian, the official publication of Zonta International. While you are probably familiar with Alan Board's photos, I did not want to take the chance that you are not. The description of the takeoff in the last paragraph is unique to anything I have read before. I include the article in its entirety. Jerry Anne Jurenka Last Photos of Amelia Earhart When Alan Board, an employee of Guinea Airways and amateur photographer, took photos of Amelia Earhart at Lae (New Guinea) airstrip just before her takeoff, chances are he knew he was witnessing history but probably didn't realize he was making history. Board's photos were among the last taken of the pioneer aviator. This past spring, Board's son, John, donated three of these photos to Zonta International and to Zonta District 24. Headquarters staff is currently working on a display to highlight these important historical images. Here is the description that Alan Board wrote on the back of one of the photos on 2 July 1937: Final Take Off, Lae 1937 Now almost at ocean end of strip. No choice but to continue. Plane jumped over slightly raised road at ocean end and almost pancaked on water. Not sure if props actually touched water, but two lines of spray followed plane for possibly miles. For about 20 miles the plane was not gaining height. *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Jerry. Very interesting. We've had Alan Board's photos for a couple of years now but I received them electronically and so we don't have any information about notations on the back. A note written by the photographer on or near the time of the event is pretty good documentation. Other accounts describe the airplane settling after takeoff and flying very close to the water until it was out of sight. It seems clear that the thing was so heavy that it would only fly in "ground effect" until some fue had been burned off. Talk about "pucker factor"..... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 10:50:17 EDT From: denise Subject: Re: Quick Query << Scott West? Was he the "back seat man" on any of the Lexington's search planes for A.E.? >> Could be. I don't know. Anyway, if he was aboard the Lexington he didn't see anything but the sea. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 10:56:27 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Pucker factor Ric said: "Other accounts describe the airplane settling after takeoff and flying very close to the water until it was out of sight. It seems clear that the thing was so heavy that it would only fly in "ground effect" until some fuel had been burned off. Talk about "pucker factor"....." It also speaks to AE's piloting skills. Ground effect on the 10E is what? -- four or five feet? So those prop tips would be just inches, at best, above the water. Trying to hold that altitude for several miles go way beyond pucker factor; I think you're just entered the "Oh, baby don't fail me now -- PAH-LEEEEAZE!," realm. LTM, whose best puckering days are behind her Dennis O. McGee #0149EC **************************************************************************** From Ric As I recall, ground effect is half the wingspan. The wingspan of an Electra is 55 feet so it might not be quite a tight as you imagine but it would certainly get your attention. Did I ever tell you about the time.......no, let's not start one of those rounds. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 13:17:00 EDT From: Al Jeffries Subject: Re: Research update More about patents: It may be the US patent office changed form "patent" to "patented" as some time during the time period in question. Note too the actual use of an patented object may be hidden in obscure phaseology i. e. "Cylindrical wooden object filled in its center with a material capable of making a visible mark" is a pencil. The Patent and Trademark Office's website is easily searchable back to 1790. Further, the sextant may have been patented as a design patent. Al Jeffries *************************************************************************** From Ric Wouldn't it be up to the manufacturer to decide whether to say PATENT or PATENTED? The Patent and Trademark Office's website is easily searchable if you have the patent number. Searching by category is a lot trickier and there were many, many patents issued in the early 20th century relating to sextants . U.S. design patents are still only six digit numbers. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 15:11:38 EDT From: Mark Subject: Re: Research update Yes, according to both the US and British patent office, it's up to the manufacturer how to mark the object being patented. They simply do not regulate this area. I'm pretty sure the only requirement is that it *be* marked in some fashion, but the wording is up to the manufacturer. In addition, it is not possible to rely on the "GB" designation to infer British patent holding unless the object is intended for international sales. Again, using the "GB" *on the object* is up to the manufacturer. A third complication (at least in British use) is that prior to granting of the patent, some manufacturers print the filing number of the application as evidence that the patent has been applied for. This number would not match the later-assigned patent, although I believe it is recorded. I'm afraid that without the patent number, it would be very difficult to show what the object was (or was attached to) through the patent offices. Unless, of course someone out there has a LOT of time on his/her hands... More likely, we could prove the reverse... For example, Ludolph (or their knob suppliers) never marked their knobs with patent numbers in that particular format, therefore this knob did not come from a Ludolph sextant. (Of course, I don't KNOW that - it's just a hypothetical example). LTM, - Mark in Horse Country (Most of the above info comes from correspondence with the USPTO and BPTO, BTW...) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 16:11:11 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: British patent research "Patented" in Britain is not usually followed by the patent number and tends to be more descriptive of the goods as something worth patenting. I have a 1938 Jaguar oil filter housing marked "( Pat no. 377715 ie 6 digits). This patent was established in about 1932 from memory. Pat xxxxxx is also common ( ie without the No.) The GB prefix is something I don't remember seeing quoted as a part of the patent number. ************************************************************************** From Ric "Patented" as merely a statement rather than being followed by a number also rings true to me. However, there are definitely two something-or-others immediately following PATENT (i.e. PATENTXX) and if they're not the letters "ED" I can't imagine what they would be. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 08:49:07 EDT From: Frank Wolfe Subject: Re: Research update I have been reading your discussion about sextants. Bo McNeely, told me that Fred used an Octant borrowed from the Navy. Frank Wolfe ************************************************************************** From Ric That would probably be the Pioneer Bubble Octant #12-36 that Harry Manning borrowed just prior to the first attempt. Harry was a Lt. Cdr. in the Naval Reserve and so had the connections. The instrument came from the Naval Aviation unit at North island, San Diego. After the wreck in Hawaii, Harry quit the project and Fred signed for the Navy instrument, promising to return it to North Island at the conclusion of the Earhart flight. Bo was with AE and Fred in Miami so his impression, as expressed to you, that Fred used the Navy instrument would seem to be an indication (but, of course, does not prove) that he did not replace it with something else in the interim. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 08:57:41 EDT From: James Nason Subject: New Forum Subscriber Just thought I'd introduce myself. I'm James Nason, 20, from Basildon, Essex in the UK. I'm not particularly a fan of AE but after watching a film this afternoon: ("Amelia Earhart: The Final Flight Tue 7 May, 1:10 pm - 2:40 pm 90mins Drama based on the events surrounding the celebrated aviation pioneer's fateful flight over the Pacific in 1937, from which she never returned. Starring Diane Keaton and Rutger Hauer. [1994] www.bbc.co.uk") I have become interested in the disappearance of her, Fred Noonan and the aircraft. Mysteries seem to attract me , I have long been interested in the 'Jack the Ripper' murders in Whitechapel London during 1888 and would now like to learn more about this mystery. I seem to remember (I think I do...) a documentary a few years back about the subject. I can't find anything about it on the TIGHAR website but in this documentary a search was made of an island where a crashed aircraft was found. I can't remember whether they decided it was the Amelia's Electra or not, maybe someone can tell me either way. I'd also like to know what happened to George Putnam after Amelia's disappearance, just out of interest. Anyway, hope I haven't waffled on to much, Cheers James **************************************************************************** From Ric Welcome James. If you like mysteries you've picked a doozy. You'll want to read as much of the material on the TIGHAR website as you can stomach. That island you saw on the documentary will soon start to seem like your back garden. For a good history of what happened to George Putnam after his wife went missing you might read "The Sound of Wings: The Life of Amelia Earhart" by Mary Lovell (St. Martin's Press, 1989). ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 10:38:50 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Octants Ric said: "That would probably be the Pioneer Bubble Octant #12-36 that Harry Manning borrowed just prior to the first attempt." Do any of the Forumites know of a web site or such where we could go to get a look at a Pioneer Bubble Octant just to see what one looks like? LTM, who avoids the bubbly Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ************************************************************************ From Ric Doug Brutlag has an Army Air Corps A-7 WWII vintage bubble octant but I've never seen a photo of an early Pioneer Bubble Octant. One never knows what may be lurking on ebay. The following treatise by antique sextant expert Peter Ifland (written way back in 1997) provides some background: In the early 1930s, Pioneer Instrument Division of Bendix Aviation, produced a civilian model aircraft bubble sextant that closely resembled the military models. The one example I have in my collection, now at the Mariners' Museum, reads on the plaque on the instrument: "Octant Type 3004A Serial 246 Pioneer Instrument Division of Bendix Aviation Corporation, Bendix, New Jersey U.S.A.". The numbers on this sextant bear some relationship to the numbers stenciled on your box - 3500 and 1542. Could the first two digits in this civilian notation refer to the year of production? My instrument comes in a green painted wooden box but my notes do not indicate any stenciling on the box. (I will check this point with Mariners'.) My instrument appears to be the same model as the instrument Lindbergh used in his 1933 survey flights for Pan Am. It is likely that Pan Am transoceanic navigators would be familiar with this type instrument. Generally, navigation instruments belonged to the Company (in this case, Pan Am) but individual navigators may well have owned one for their personal use. As to other manufacturers during the 1930s: The only other US manufacturer that I know of during this era was Brandis and Son of Brooklyn, NY. They seemed to have a lock on the Navy's business while Pioneer had the Army's business. Brandis produced conventional marine sextants, sometimes with bubble artificial horizon attachments that were used in the air. One of these, now in the Smithsonian Air and Space collection, is a Navy MkI sextant with a military serial number "40-31". I've never seen a conventional aircraft bubble sextant from Brandis but they may have made some. Of course, many other manufactures came on stream in the late 1930's to supply the military as part of the war build up. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 10:50:28 EDT From: James Subject: Re: New Forum Subscriber Are there any good books on the search I should keep an eye out for? James *************************************************************************** From Ric TIGHAR's senior archaeologist Dr. Tom King, in collaboration with three other TIGHAR researchers (Dr. Karin Burns our Forensic Osteologist; Dr. Randy Jacobson our Oceanographer; and Kenton Spading, an archival research specialist) wrote a book about TIGHAR's search as an independent project. It's called "Amelia Earhart's Shoes" and was published by AltaMira Press in 2001. It's available from Amazon.com or directly from the publisher at http://www.altamirapress.com/Catalog/SingleBook.shtml?command=Search&db=^DB/CATALOG.db&eqSKUdata=0759101302 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 10:54:42 EDT From: Charlie Subject: Present Airport at Lae, New Guinea Is there presently an airport at Lae, New Guinea? If so, can someone tell me its current official name? I've searched the Internet for "Lae Airprot" without success. Thank you very much. Charlie ************************************************************************** From Ric << I've searched the Internet for "Lae Airprot" without success.>> I'll refrain from the obvious smartass comment. The strip used by Earhart was recently closed and replaced by a bigger airport farther from town. I don't recall the name of the new facility. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 12:22:21 EDT From: Phil Tanner Subject: New Airport at Lae The new Lae airport is called Nadzab LTM Phil Tanner 2276 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 15:24:34 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Octants Re Pioneer bubble octants. Weems has photos of a Bureau of Standards model D (made by Bausch & Lomb) and a Pioneer octant, pages 307 and 308 respectively, in his Air Navigation book, second edition, 1938. They give you the general idea, but details are fuzzy. blue skies, jerry ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 15:25:33 EDT From: Charlie Subject: Re: New Airport at Lae Nadzab ... of course ... with such a common-place name as that how come I couldn't come up wiith it? :)) Help much appreciated. Charlie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 16:04:04 EDT From: Christopher Ferro Subject: Yahoo! Groups - Sextants There is a Sextant group on Yahoo! Groups that seems to be at least somewhat active. I am a member of the group, though I can't remember WHY I ever joined. I did a quick search of their archives for "Amelia Earhart" and "Earhart" and "Noonan" and came up empty. That leads me to conclude that no one from TIGHAR or this forum has posted there. Just thought I would pass it along if anyone wants to see if they have anything or are anyone useful for us. I personally don't have the time. It is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/Sextants I think. LTM (Who could come up with a more eloquent last sentence), Christopher (reeling in Wheeling) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 08:57:09 EDT From: Gary LaPook Subject: Re: Octant To learn about the Pioneer octant ( which is the same as an A-5) go to: http://www.geocities.com/fredienoonan/octant.html ************************************************************************* From Ric Thanks Gary. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 09:02:51 EDT From: Charlie Subject: More Earhart Airport info requested Learned Nadzab is the current Lae Papua New Guinea airport, but evidentally not the location that Earhart left from for Howland Island (too far from the ocean). Can someone please help me with the lat/long coordinates of the 1937 Lae Airport and its runway orientation + length? I'm looking for the same information for Caripito, Venezuela. i.e., the lat/long coordinates of the Caripito Airport and its runway orientations + lengths? Even partial information would be helpful. Many thanks in advance. Charlie ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 11:20:53 EDT From: Ric Subject: New weather information I just received this from a gentleman by the name of Jack Clark in Australia. His letter came as part of a PDF file showing the original documents to which he refers. *************************************************************************** Dear Ric, I have been researching the disappearance of Amelia Earhart & Fred Noonan for some 5 years. About a year ago I discovered the Tighar web site and have since been following the activity and learning a lot. I now believe I have some data that may be of interest and possibly clarify a couple of points. The data is the rainfall figures for Lae 1937. Obtained from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (the only relevant data they have) and the weather records for Ocean Is.(O degrees 52 mills. S 169 degrees 35 mills. E) for 2nd. July 1937, 0800/2000 hrs. Zone time. 2100 1st. July/0900 2nd July GCT obtained from the British Met. Office, National Meteorological Archives, Bracknell, UK. The interest in this information is, I think, that the rainfall figures for July 2nd show a rainfall of 43.9mm.(1.7 ins) followed by 36.3mm (1.4in). on the 3rd.(Amelia was very lucky to get away at all on the 2nd.). This large build up of approaching cloud I feel is the reason she took a SE course, initially, instead of a NE. course and climbed to 10000 ft. in order to avoid it. The weather at Ocean Island is significant because the second observation of the day at 2000 hrs Local Zone time was only some 3 hrs. prior to Amelia passing approx.75 nautical miles south of the island (allowing average ground speed of 115 kts.) The significant weather at 2000 hrs. Zone time is given as Wind (surface) NE. force 4 Beaufort Scale which equates to 13 to 18 mph (11.2 to 15.6 kts.). The wind speed reading on the attached copy is unreadable in the fold of the Log Book but I have rechecked with the Bracknell Met Office & they have checked the Log and the speed was force 4. Cloud at that time was zero. There had been 1/10 of Cumulus at the 0800 Zone time observation, coming from the East indicating winds aloft as Easterly. Weather between the observations is given as broken cloud (bc), at the 2000 hrs observation it is given as blue sky (b). The weather diary for the day shows Fine and Clear. The significance of this report is it shows that Fred Noonan would have had opportunity to make celestial observations, a fact which some researchers seem to think may not have been possible. Regarding the 0518 position report. This has to be a Local Noon position sighting. Checking the http://mach.usno navy.mil US Navy web-site and going to Data Services I Position of Sun & Moon IAltitude & Azimuth for one day, and entering the Lat. Long.coordinates, date and time zone (10 hrs East) shows this to be so, and relates approximately to where one would expect the aircraft to be after two hours flight on a SEcourse. This noon sighting is mentioned as a possibility in Elgin & Marie Long's book:" Amelia Earhart: The Mystery Solved." Simon & Schuster 1999. (page 17). This noon sighting is a routine check made by navigators as it gave them an accurate Latitude. If the above weather/rainfall data I have given is passed on or displayed in any form it is subject to copyright by the two Met offices involved. In the case of the rainfall data The Australian weather bureau requires the Bureau always be acknowledged as the source of the original data and it not be used for Commercial purposes. If the data is presented in any other form-graphics etc. the presenter must indicate that they are responsible for any repackaging of the material but the original source was the Bureau. For the Ocean Island data the source should be acknowledged to The Met Office,National Meteorological Archive, Bracknell UK. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 11:36:07 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Nauticos Nauticos didn't put out a press release when they left, and they didn't put out a press release when they came back to port (after all the hoopla). Nobody has anything on them (except Tighar). I can't find anything from anyone's newspapers. How do they expect to raise funds....such being the case. Goofy, that's what it is. Carol Dow #2524 **************************************************************************** From Ric Oh, I dunno. If you were a company that liked to say that it had never failed to find what it was looking for, what would you do? Amelia who? Maybe they'll get around to putting out a press release. Maybe not. At this point it hardly matters. Two professional deep sea technology companies have now tested Elgen Long's hypothesis at a total cost of something over two million dollars and have not found the airplane. That doesn't mean it's not down there but I suspect that it does mean that Crashed & Sank as a testable theory has crashed and sunk. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 14:23:36 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Nauticos This is an answer to Carol Dow's question. Nauticos' silence can be compared to what happens in the airline business. When airlines launch a new service to some new destination they want everyone to know and do so with a lot of fanfare, balloons, an orchestra playing at the gate when the inaugural flight departs and press releases. When they discover the route doesn't pay they stop the service quietly without fanfare, balloons, orchestra and certainly without a press release. LTM **************************************************************************** From Dennis McGee Ric said: "Two professional deep sea technology companies have now tested Elgen Long's hypothesis at a total cost of something over two million dollars and have not found the airplane." Same could be said about us also, right? Ric also said: "That doesn't mean it's not down there but I suspect that it does mean that Crashed & Sank as a testable theory has crashed and sunk." I dunno. I'm willing to bet it still has legs. There are enough rich contrarians with over-sized egos out there that at least one of them will think HE has the answer. Most like they will use the example of Mel Fisher and his efforts to find that Spanish galleon (Atochca?) off the coast of Florida. Fisher found it and silenced all of his critics. But then again he was working in about 100 feet of water, not several thousand feet. It'll be interesting to see who else grabs the bait on Crashed and Sank. LTM, who is still afloat Dennis O. McGee #0149EC **************************************************************************** From Ric <> No, I think there's a big difference. Our work has consistently produced positive results. Baby steps, to be sure, and nothing yet that is by itself conclusive, but piece by piece we've assembled a jigsaw puzzle of hard evidence that is now complete enough that you have to postulate some pretty outlandish and totally speculative things for the picture to look like anything but Amelia Earhart. The trouble with a deep water search is that there is no trail of evidence to follow. It's all or nothing. You can't adjust your hypothesis based upon new information except to say, "It's not here so maybe it's over there." Will more investors buy into the Crashed & Sank treasure hunt? Who knows? I've been astounded at the money that has been spent so far. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 14:24:42 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: More Earhart Airport info requested They didn't use Jeppesens in 1937. The information AE used was sometimes rudimentary, often a written note a a piece of paper containing rudimentary information. I couldn't find anything on Lae airfield. I did find information on Caripeto. The notes AE had on this airfield describe it as follows : "All weather field of ample size approximately fifteen miles South of Caripeto or fourteen miles north of Maturin".You can look for yourself at www.lib.purdue.edu/earhart/images:IX.C.1.d.jpg LTM (who thinks flying was less sophisticated in the old days) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:15:44 EDT From: David Katz Subject: Re: Nauticos I think Carol Dow and Herman De Wulf have mischaracterized something here. Nauticos made no fanfare about either their departure or their search. In fact, they have gone to great pains to keep both a secret. They made no announcement whatsoever before they left and have, apparently made none since. David Katz ************************************************************************* From Ric That's true. They did court the media during the planning phase of their search but clammed up as soon as they were ready to go. They're certainly under no obligation to tell anyone but their investors anything. TIGHAR, by contrast, is a nonprofit foundation and operates in the public interest. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:16:53 EDT From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: Nauticos While I'm no expert on aviation, navigation or the like, the more I read and listen to those better informed than me, I'm convinced that our Niku hypothesis makes the most common sense to me. I have the map of her flight from Lae to Howland and the LOP as the background on my screen here at work. Every day I find myself looking at the map and asking myself what would I have done? Without question, with my butt on the line, I would have flown SE down the LOP with the good chance of finding a landfall to put the Electra down. Turning NW would seem to me a careless and life-threatning decision. Of course, I'm still a newbie but the Nikku hypothesis just makes plain common sense to me & I think it's fair to say that AE & FN weren't stupid. LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:48:04 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: New Description of Final Take Off at Lae >Not sure if props actually touched water, but two lines of spray followed >plane for possibly miles. For about 20 miles the plane was not gaining height. Isn't it very likely that the 20 miles statement was a little exaggerated? Th' WOMBAT ************************************************************************* From Ric Seems likely. How far away could you see a Lockheed 10 skimming the wavetops? I would think that five miles would be pushing it. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:49:26 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: New Airport at Lae > The new Lae airport is called Nadzab And it's not actually "new". As we've discussed before, Nadzab was very, very active during WWII. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:50:10 EDT From: Frank Wolfe Subject: Re: More Earhart Airport info requested Reply to Charlie's request for lat and long for Howland and Lae New Guinea. Howland N 00 degrees 48.000' W 176 Degrees 38.00 Lae New Guinea S 06 degrees 44.000' E 147 Degrees 00.000' ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 09:34:46 EDT From: Phil Tanner Subject: Intellectual rigour There's a neat little lesson in precision in research tucked away in the recent stuff about British patent numbers, and I'm the one who has slipped up. Simon Ellwood and I seem to have found the same information at the Patent Office web site, but he said the numbers reached six digits in 1965 and I said 1966. Of course, if a number well into six digits is listed as the first issued in 1966 and they are still in five digits at the start of 1965, then they reached six digits during 1965 not 1966. It doesn't matter in this context, but in other circumstances it might. LTM (if I'm still allowed to say so) Phil Tanner 2276 *************************************************************************** From Ric Speaking of rigor, Jeff Glickman at Photoek has identified 19 possible symbols on the face of Artifact 2-6-S-45 ("The Knob"). Working in the visual spectrum he has resolved the first of a group of symbols that we think may be the word PATENTED as being consistent with the letter P. That may sound like a no-brainer but there is a big difference between our subjective guess and Jeff's objective measurements. He'll get as much information as he can in the visual spectrum (i.e. hi-tech, specially lit digital photography and enhancement of the acquired image). Yesterday he discovered that some areas on the knob face flouresce under "Long wave" Ultra Violet light and that will help bring up more detail. Even if all of the symbols can not be resolved in the visual spectrum he'll at least be able to narrow the possibilities on the unresolved features (i.e. this might be an eight, a three, or a five, but it can't be a one, a four, or a seven). He'll then proceed to more elaborate techniques such as X-Ray and CAT scan to try to detect changes in the metal created during the casting process that may reveal the the identiies of the unresolved symbols. I'll pass along more updates as they come in. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:24:32 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Jeff Glickman at Photek Is Jeff doing this new work gratis? Whether or not, he deserves a long round of applause from the forum for the professional service he is giving to TIGHAR. It sounds like he is equipped to handle just about anything. In recognition of his efforts, perhaps TIGHAR can name its new forensics lab, now under construction on the 14th and 15 floors of TIGHAR Towers, in his honor. :-) LTM, who scans only the written word Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ********************************************************************* From Ric Jeff is indeed doing all of this gratis and we are most appreciative. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:27:26 EDT From: Eric Subject: New forum subscriber I'm a new member who discovered TIGHAR as a result of my collecting recordings of the old time radio show THE LUX RADIO THEATER. During the broadcast of 6/21/37, it was announced that AE would be a future guest, after she got back from her around the world flight. (She was undoubtedly acquainted with the program's host Cecil B. DeMille, who worked at the same studio as GP and who was an avid booster of American aviation.) During the broadcast of 6/28/37, it was announced that AE's appearance would be postponed as her around the world flight was running behind schedule. This piqued my interest to go on line to find out more about current efforts to learn the fate of AE. The first web site I found was TIGHAR's Earhart Project, and the first article I opened had to do with the message traffic to and from Gerald Gallagher regarding the bones found on Gardner Island. (At first, I thought I'd stumbled onto a Clive Cussler-type novel posted on line!) After spending almost an entire day reading and re-reading the articles posted on the Earhart Project site, I suddenly realized that I'd developed an insatiable craving for the latest updates on the Earhart Project that could only be satisfied by becoming a member and receiving the journal & monthly newsletter and subscribing to the daily Earhart Forum. As a new TIGHAR "cub," I'm currently taking a "crash course" (no pun intended) on AE and the final flight in order to get myself up to speed on the information that's being discussed in the forum. (In addition to reviewing the forum archive files, I've just finished reading the Goerner book and am now reading Elgen Long's book. Next on tap is THE SHOES OF AMELIA EARHART.) At some point, I would like to contribute my own comments and observations to the forum. I'm delighted to be in TIGHAR, and look forward to an active and rewarding membership. Eric (NAS North Island, San Diego, CA.) ***************************************************************** From Ric Welcome aboard Eric. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 17:58:06 EDT From: Al Jeffries Subject: Re: Jeff Glickman at Photek Once this is "all done" and smoking guns found, the story will make one heck of a NOVA two hour special Al Jeffries **************************************************************************** From Ric We've already had a very unpleasant experience with WGBH/NOVA so we're not real likely to get involved with them again. We had a two hour NBC News Productions special in 1992, and a one hour ABC News documentary and also a one hour Discovery Channel documentary in 1997. Our work has also been covered in about a half dozen other documentaries by the History Channel and Fox and the E! channel, etc. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 17:59:53 EDT From: Scotty Thompson Subject: Reading characters I keep seeing all the trouble folks are having in an attempt to read the characters on an item. When I was a young man I remember seeing friends bring out the date on coins that were totally obliterated and unreadable. My friend had a little bottle of what was called "Coin Date" liquid. He would just rub it on the coin and in a few seconds, wella! The date was perfectly legible. I have no interest or knowledge of coin collecting but maybe someone can remember this stuff or what it "really" was. I searched the key words with my search engine and got no results that seemed like what I was looking for. Hopefully this will help. Sometimes a stray thought can save the world, other times it's just a stray thought. Scotty Thompson ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 18:01:20 EDT From: Margot Still Subject: Re: New forum subscriber I would also like to add my welcome to Eric and dare say he is in for the ride of his life. He will be amazed at the bizarre things he will learn and the things to which he will be exposed on this forum. 1. The forum wakes up in a new world every day. 2. They can also be vicious but I think they have had all their shots. 3. To quote the Most Handsome Head TIGHAR, "The forum knows all, tells all." Being thick skinned helps considerably, too. LTM, MStill, #2332CE ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 18:10:53 EDT From: Charlie Subject: Lae runway Thanks to all who have helped me gather info on the airports at Caripito, Venezuela; Lae, New Guinea; and Howland Island. It is much appreciated. Only need Rwy orientation for Lae. I recall that there were two Rwys on that field. It was a different location from Nadzab, though, which is some 17 NM from the coastline. The Lat/Long that Bob Sherman sent looks good. His library must rival Purdue's. He also sent an awesome print of Howland Is. airport layout. re Caripito, did a lot of Internet research ... nothing on Caripito Airport. Did run into this comment from a guest book in a Venezuelan expat web site. "Comments: I was Chief Pilot for Creole Aviation from 1935 until 1958 when I retired. I lived in Caritito (sic) from 1935 to 1945 when I was transferred to Caracas and worked from there until retirement. Do you remember the Company planes?" This gentleman's response to my follow up e-mail: I think I can answer most of your questions. Now as to this so called "Caripito" airport. In the first place, there never was a Caripito airport. The terrain in and around Caripito was too rugged. However, we did have an airport named "Cachipo", and it was located About 1-1/2 kilometers almost due south of Quiriquire and out in a Savannah. Quiriquire was about 15 kilometers south of Caripito, so Earhart was fairly close in saying 15 miles south of Caripito. Also She was close in saying the airport was about 14 miles north of Maturin. I don't think I ever saw any figures for the Latitude and Longitude of the airport. There were two runways- one east-west and one northeast-southwest. Each were about 3500'. The runways were made by using a road grader to clear off the vegetation and then levelling the surface. It was then sprayed with several coats of crude oil. The light ends of the crude oil would evaporate, thus leaving the heavy ends.this would seal the ground so that the rains would not soak in-even in the rainy season of from 90 to 100 inches of rain. We built all our runways the same way at all our wildcat well locations. It was a quick way to prepare an all weather runway at very low cost. Unfortunately I was not there when Earhart arrived. I was at the Lockheed factory in Burbank, Cal. taking delivery of a new Lockheed 12 airplane that the company had bought. After receiving your e mail I quickly went through some of my Venezuelan pictures and found one 4x5 of the Cachipo airport. It shows our hangars and also Pan American Airways passenger facility. ******************** Well, no one is going to rewrite the history books. Amelia called it Caripito so it will alwats be that. I found it fascinating ... sorry it doesn't pertain to the Howland Island mystery. Strangest of all, this guy, he's got to be 87-90 yrs of age, who I found via the Internet, lives right in my hometown ... Fort Myers, FL. It's a small world! I've omitted his name ... didn't ask permission to post his e-mail msg on this group list ... will ask permission to do that on his next reply. If anyone has access to Lat/Long of Venezuela's Cachipo Airport, sure would appreciate knowing it. Thanks again to ALL for the wonderful support. Charlie **************************************************************************** From Ric Charlie, I've been assuming (incorrectly) that you are aware of the "Lae Gallery" of photos of the Lae airport on the TIGHAR website at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/27_LaeGallery/27_LaeGallery.html As you'll see, Lae had one runway, 15/33. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 18:11:48 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: A coincidence? There it was in today's Washington Post crossword puzzle: 53 Across, six letters, "Kiribati capital." Hmmm. I won't lie to you, I had to look it up. (Sheesh, I hate when that happens.) LTM, who is never cross Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 18:22:48 EDT From: Alan Subject: Re: Artifacts I looked at the web site again and at the artifacts. Item #2-6-S-21F was a little difficult to see clearly from those angles. For me but maybe not for others. Items 2-6-S-03A and B look like sequencing parts. By that I mean those little knotches might allow another part to sequence from knotch to knotch. I've seen pieces like that before. I just took my radar detector apart because the off/volume switch didn't work. It had a part similar to those artifacts allowing the switch to go from off to on to several degrees of volume. 03B may be bent because it is supposed to be bent so that it would function at right angles to whatever it was fastened to. The material reminds me of material used in nautical things. (I'm a long time sailor of racing boats) A sextant or an octant? I haven't a clue. Alan #2329 *************************************************************************** From Ric Angus Murray has been helping us with 03a and 03b. The screws appear to be brass American "No. 8" 15/16ths woodscrews manufactured to a specification that was current from the 1930s to 1970. The plates are probably aluminum but apparently not "aircraft" aluminum, and are definitely amateur-made rather than manufactured. The best theory we've had so far about how they were intended to work is Angus' idea that they are rotating catches, possibly used to secure accesories in a sextant box. The screw would not be tightened down hard - just snug. The serrated edge provided a grip for a fingertip and the empty hole accomodated a pin to lock the catch in place. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 10:06:04 EDT From: Thomas Van Hare Subject: New Earhart website There's Earhart in the air, or should I say "on the web" from CMG Worldwide, a company in Indiana with offices in LA/Hollywood and, of all places, Rio de Janeiro, that represents dead personalities (do you need to use Joe Louis as a character in your next film? well, you better clear it with CMG, which represents the family and Joe's heirs). CMG has launched the new Amelia Earhart website: http://www.ameliaearhart.com/ Nice URL to have, an ok website, and a major PR push all designed to foster brand awareness of CMG out there (and yes, they do represent Earhart). All in all, interesting. (And thank you for the timely view of the bottom of the wing, with N-number clearly showing, as well as the outline of the flaps....) Thomas Van Hare **************************************************************************** From Ric Ahh, the seamy side of the legend.... The estate's claim to ownership of all things Amelia, policed by CMG, has been honored more in the breach than in the observance. Major marketing campaigns by big corporations (Apple, The Gap, etc.) have used Earhart's image with impunity without a peep from CMG. That may have something to do with the fact that big corporations have armies of corporate attorneys and CMG may not want to see the estate's basic claim challenged in court. CMG tends to pounce on small-time commercial exploitation of the Earhart name and image, but Linda Finch fought their challenge to a line of wearables she wanted to put out and won. CMG jumped on TIGHAR once about us calling our investigation The Earhart Project. When it became apparent that (like that old tobacco ad) "we'd rather fight than switch" they backed off. I think they're on shaky ground with their new website. I note that they use several photos that I know are copyrighted by the estate of the photographers and they don't even have them credited. That door swings both ways. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 10:08:38 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Earheart in Belgium I wonder if anyone on the forum knows AE's itinerary while in Europe after her Atlantic crossing in the Lockheed Vega in 1932. I'll tell you why. There is a picture in a new book on the history of the Brussels airports that will be on sale on Monday, 13 May. The author is a friend and gave me an autographed copy. For those interested : Brussels had two airports since 1919. The first was built at Haren after WW I, the second at nearby Melsbroek after WW II. Following the building of a new terminal in 1958 it was renamed Brussels Zaventem airport because the terminal no longer stands on Melsbroek territory. This being said, on page 36 of the book is an interesting picture of mrs. Putnam and husband having just arrived by airplane at the old Brussels Haren airfield in 1932. The caption says the day was Sunday, 12 June. They sailed back to the USA on 20 June 1932 in the French liner "Ile de France". In the picture the couple can be seen standing under a high wing airplane. Of this aircraft part of the starboard wing and two struts can be seen. It's impossible to identify the type but it definitely wasn't the Lockheed Vega because of the struts. I wonder what type the aircraft, why AE came to Brussels and from where. She and her husband toured Europe after her Atlantic crossing in May. They had probably been invited by the late King Albert I at the Royal Palace as had been Charles Lindbergh in 1927 (but of Lindbergh I know he traveled in the "Spirit of St. Louis"). Does anyone on the forum have any information on AE + GP's itinerary during their European tour ? LTM (who is always eager to learn) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:10:18 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: New AE site Conspicuously absent from the "Links" page is a link to TIGHAR or any site dedicated to learning about her last flight. All of the books and videos are linked to Amazon.com and they offer a "Business Opportunity" link where people can approach the company with ideas to use AE's name, voice, or image. Tom King's book is not mentioned though Elgin Long's is, though that may be more a function of timing than a deliberate omission. All of this commercialism raises the question whether or not they are going to use any or part of their profits to help solve the mystery. Anyone placing bets on that issue? LTM, who staunchly refuses to sell rights to her name! Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:19:26 EDT From: Bob Perry Subject: Oakland symposium Today's San Francisco Chronicle had a big splash about the Earhart symposium put on by Ron Reuther in Oakland next weekend (5/17-5/19). You are quoted in it and are obviously aware of the event. There appears to be nothing new planned, except perhaps for Earhart buffs to tour old hotel sites where Earhart supposedly stayed. Of all the photos TIGHAR has of Earhart's shoes, the one in the paper is one of the best I've seen, although the shoe is no longer a hot issue. Bob # 2021 ************************************************************************** From Ric The article can be found online at http://www.sfgate.com/cgibin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/05/13/BA35854.DTL ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:22:59 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Another talk scheduled If there are Forumites in the San Joaquin Valley or vicinity, I'd like you to know that I'll be doing an illustrated talk on TIGHAR's work and signing copies of "Amelia Earhart's Shoes" at California State University Bakersfield on the evening of July 9, sponsored by the Kern County Archaeological Society and Buena Vista Museum of Natural History. Details will be forthcoming as they're developed. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:36:25 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Artifacts That seems as good a theory as any, Ric. I noted in a previous note no one had a picture of a Pioneer Bubble octant. Did I read that correctly? And while I'm at it what was the instrument showing in the jpeg file I sent you of Noonan's position in the Electra? I have located a real Pioneer bubble octant from the Earhart era and asked the owner if the two knotched little artifacts ring a bell with him as to the octant or any other instrument Pioneer might have made. I also have access now to Pioneer's extensive data base on their instrument manuals. Not all are there but most of them. Alan #2329 *************************************************************************** From Ric Gary LaPook sent a link to his website where he had reproduced a page from the 1938 Weems "Air Navigation" showing an undated Pioneer bubble octant. The instrument in your jpeg was a pelorus - basically a rotatable telescopic sight mounted on a fixed compass rose oriented to the aircraft - used to take bearings on landmarks. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 11:40:33 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Artifacts I went through the entire list of manuals but no luck. They were all from contemporary flight gauges for the most part. My contact (General Manager I think) is pursuing this with the current owner of the Pioneer Instrument Company who is the son of the founder. That's where the old octant resides in a display case. I'm not holding out that this is anything but another dead end. If I can get a photo of the octant I'll post it to you. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 11:35:11 EDT From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For Tom King, I live in Huntington Beach. Are you planning any appearances in Orange County? At Ric's suggestion I read your book and thoroughly enjoyed it. It put a lot of things in perspective for me. Any new books in the works? I have a friend who is the Public Relations director for Barnes & Nobles who might be helpful in planning a future booksigning. Ric has my phone numbers and I would enjoy hearing from you. LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 11:59:17 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Oakland symposium Interesting.. It looks as though Howland isn't the only island "in the wrong place"... " stumbled into hostile Japanese airspace. A third, newer camp says she may have survived briefly as a castaway on the tiny, ***equator-straddling*** atoll of Nikumaroro north of Samoa. " Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:17:32 EDT From: Eric Subject: Jungle crash sites Some of you might be interested to read about the work being done by the DOD's JOINT TASK FORCE FULL ACCOUNTING (JTF-FA), which sends teams to Southeast Asia to locate and identify the remains of U.S. aircrews listed as MIA. (Team accounts of efforts to locate and examine jungle crash sites dating back 35 years or more are very similar to those of the Niku expeditions.) There are a number of JTF-FA web sites which provide background information on the teams and their activities. One good example can be found at: http://www.flagshipnews.com/archives/oct182001_4.shtml If nothing else, these accounts will give you a good idea of what one can reasonably expect to find in the way of artifacts and human remains at jungle crash sites which, more often than not, had been disturbed by local native scavengers. Eric, NAS North Island, San Diego, CA. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:18:15 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For: Tom King Also, Tom, you have a book review for the Kansas City area scheduled. I lost the details, Can you RSVP, sil vous plait? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 15:33:16 EDT From: Ric Subject: Nauticos Press Release Thank you to several forum subscribers who have forwarded copies of this press release just issued by Nauticos: For Immediate Release Contact Lynn Jourdan 410-859-8080 Nauticos Makes Progress on Amelia Earhart Search Two-Thirds of the Search Area Completed In March and April, a team of ocean explorers from Nauticos Corporation conducted a deep sea search for Amelia Earhart1s lost Lockheed Electra. The team sailed aboard the R/V Davidson and was supported with equipment and in-kind services from a number of organizations, including the U.S. Navy (through a cooperative research agreement with the Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command), Rockwell-Collins, Konsberg-Simrad, and James Cameron - Earthship Productions. The $1.7 million expedition was funded largely by Nauticos, with significant support from private investors. The expedition was led by Elgen Long, famed aviator and Earhart researcher, author (with his wife Marie) of Amelia Earhart: The Mystery Solved. Operations were managed by Nauticos executive vice president Tom Dettweiler, veteran of numerous deep ocean discoveries, including the Titanic, the Japanese submarine I-52, and the Israeli submarine Dakar. A search area was developed using Nauticos1 proprietary RENAV to analyze the wealth of data collected by the Longs and others. The search was conducted with a deep-sea sonar system developed by Nauticos called NOMAD, which was towed near the bottom of the Pacific Ocean at the end of a 10,000 meter (33,000 feet) steel-armored, fiber-optic cable. The expedition was to have lasted 60 days, with 40 days search time to cover at least 600-square nautical miles. However, six weeks into the mission, after 27 days of survey, the cable winch hydraulic system failed, ending operations. The NOMAD sonar system performed flawlessly, covering 630-square nautical miles of ocean bottom at a depth of 18,000 feet at better than one meter resolution. During one deployment, NOMAD was at depth for a record 257 hours, nearly eleven days of continuous operation. NOMAD remains fully capable of deep ocean operations. 3We accomplished a tremendous amount, having covered two-thirds of our search and gaining great experience operating in this area. We have begun winch repairs and plan to return to the site near Howland Island in the near future to complete the search,2 said David Jourdan, Nauticos president. Founded by Jourdan in 1986, Nauticos conducts deep-ocean exploration and recovery missions for the U.S. Navy, and provides engineering and technical support to government, industry and scientific organizations. The company also endeavors to find, preserve and protect underwater cultural heritage for future generations. The company is headquartered in Hanover, Maryland. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 15:34:42 EDT From: Steve Subject: Re: Jungle crash sites I went to their MIA Conference in Strasbourg and met a lot of them. A really good set up and they are starting this year to work on sites in Europe including the underwater crash sites of aircraft. Best regards Steve ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 08:10:48 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For Carol Dow Yup, I'm scheduled to give my Ameliaschpiel as speaker at the Wright Day dinner held by the KC 99s, on December 1, 2002. I don't yet have further details. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 08:29:53 EDT From: Ric Subject: New off-topic book Just received a copy of Prof. Mark Peattie's new book "Sunburst: The Rise of Japanese Naval Air Power, 1909-1941" (Naval Institute Press, 2001, ISBN 1-55750-432-6). Prof. Peattie's earlier book "Nanyo: The Rise and Fall of the Japanese in Micronesia, 1885-1945" (Univ. of Hawaii Press, 1987, ISBN 0-8248-1087-2) is required reading for any serious student of the Earahart disappearance. This latest offering has no particular relevance to the Earhart case but it's a rarity among aviation historical books (i.e. well-written and scholarly) and would be an excellent addition to the library of anyone interested in the Pacific war. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 14:03:15 EDT From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For: Tom King Do you have any plans for talks in Southern California? I read you last book & loved it. LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 14:11:30 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: The Bonaire Interesting news in the local paper today. It seems that the Bonaire (66' sailboat from Orange Coast College) washed ashore on the island of Nonouti, in the Gilberts. The vessel was abandoned near Hawaii when the main mast threatened to punch a hole in the hull. Upon seeing the wreck on the reef, the locals stripped it to the bone. This brings up an interesting question. Seeing the Electra, would the locals stay away from it, being very superstitious or would they quickly dispose of the object of their good luck? *************************************************************************** From Ric Interesting. Eventually floating stuff washes up somewhere. What makes you think that the locals were "very superstitious"? It's easy to think that they might not have recognized its newsworthiness but I don't know why they wouldn't merely use whatever pieces seemed useful. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 09:12:44 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For Mike Haddock and others who've asked about planned talks in Southern Calif. None are planned right now. I try to arrange talks in places where I travel in my consulting and training business, and right now I don't have anything firmly planned south of the Tehachapis. I also need somebody (bookstore, local society, library) to sponsor and advertise the talk, and hence some time to get it set up. I am involved with a project in eastern Riverside County that could require my being in the LA area sometime in the next couple of months, but there's no schedule yet. If people have any ideas about sponsors and good times to speak, I'd be happy to see what I can work out. Thanks for the kind words about the book, Mike; glad you liked it. My talk illustrates the book's high points and goes on to cover current research results from the Seven Site. TK ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 10:09:28 EDT From: Ric Subject: Research update Although the forum has been pretty quiet lately there's a whole going on behind the scenes that should soon give everyone plenty to talk about. - The 1,069 (count 'em) fish bones and fish bone fragments recovered from the Seven Site have been examined by thems as know from fish bones and we have a seven-page draft report. The big question we're trying to answer is whether these represent meals eaten by the castaway(s) or local islanders. If the former, what do the number and types of fish and the implied methods of preparation tell us about the castaway? Once the report is finalized we'll put it up on the website. We'll include some good photos of the kinds of fishies represented so that the report is more meaningful to folks (like me) who can't necessarily distinguish Carangoidae from Bothidae right off the top of their head. - We also have a preliminary report from the Smithsonian on the bird bones recovered from the site, with some very interesting observations. Turns out that most of the bones are from Frigate birds - not at all the type of bird I would have thought most likely to be caught and eaten. It also turns out that the bones we found on the surface near the water tank are all wing bones and the bones we found buried with fish bones and evidence of a fire are (no surprise) from the body. Same birds? Don't know yet. Castaway or island worker behavior? Don't know yet. - This report just in from Jeff Glickman at Photek re trying to decipher the symbols on Artifact 2-6-S-45 "The Knob": TIGHAR artifact 2-6-S-45 was x-rayed today (Friday, May 17) at Providence St. Vincents hospital in Portland, Oregon. The artifact was imaged using a newly installed digital fluoroscopy system from GE. The fluoroscopy system had insufficient resolution to image the symbols on 2-6-S-45. The radiologist in charge elected to perform no further imaging as the fluoroscopy results strongly suggested the other x-ray units would be incapable of imaging 2-6-S-45. I am continuing the visible spectrum analysis of the artifact, and will switch to more intensive lighting techniques to maximize the value of the images of the artifact's surface. In addition, to supplement the visible spectrum analysis, we are investigating access to a laser interferometer and a research nuclear reactor to create neutron absorption films. Sincerely, Jeff Glickman Photek Board Certified Forensic Examiner Fellow, American College of Forensic Examiners http://www.PhotekImaging.com - Angus Murray is working on a report on the two little fastener artifacts (2-6-S-03a & b). - In my copious free time I've been working along on the Niku IIII documentary. So much great footage to choose from (60-plus hours) and so many stories that could be told.... One bugaboo in making a documentary is always finding good music that is free from copyright restrictions. I'm playing with the idea of using some popular tunes from the 1930s that seem to fit our situation quite nicely ("You're Getting to Be A Habit With Me", "Ten Cents A Dance", etc.). I wonder how to find out if that stuff is old enough to now be in the public domain? - An Earhart Project Advisory Council (EPAC) made up of selected TIGHAR expedition veterans and researchers will meet in July to begin the planning for Niku V, now scheduled for the summer of 2004. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 13:09:43 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Re: Research update I'm real curious on this one. How do you tell if a fish was eaten by a castaway or local islander? ************************************************************************** From Ric I'm not sure we can, but some possible clues would be: - if it's a kind of fish that islanders never eat then it probably wasn't eaten by an islander. - if it's a kind of fish that only lives out in deep water and can't be caught without a boat then it was probably not eaten by a castaway because it's a pretty safe bet that a castaway doesn't have a boat. There may be other clues but those are a coouple that come immediately to mind. Everything is the way it is for a reason and the trick to most investigations is figuring out what questions to ask about why things are the way they are. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 08:17:52 EDT From: Frank Wolfe Subject: Re: Research update I would suggest that you should look for human bones rather than fish bones, then take the DNA. Frank Wolfe *************************************************************************** From Ric (Another chance to hone my diplomatic skills and practice deep breathing exercises...) Frank, we BUSTED OUR ASSES FOR THREE SOLID WEEKS IN 100 DEGREE HEAT looking for human bones. We collected what bones were there and we're doing our best to learn what we can from them. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 08:33:23 EDT From: Lawrence Glazer Subject: music in the public domain According to the Public Domain Music website (www.pdinfo.com), "music and lyrics written by an American author and published in 1922 or earlier are in the public domain in the U.S. [i.e., under U.S. law; may not be in public domain in other countries]. The above applies to written music and lyrics, NOT SOUND RECORDINGS. Virtually no sound recordings are in the public domain (the exceptions being those few which have been expressly released to public domain). So, if Ten Cents a Dance was written in 1922 or earlier, you can use it but you'll have to recruit some musicians to record it. Now that might be an interesting internet collaboration for those TIGHAR's who are good musicians but bad researchers. LTM, who was worth a lot more than ten cents a dance. Lawrence Glazer #2424 ************************************************************************* From Ric Thanks Lawrence. That's exactly the information I needed (although not the information I wanted). Oh well..... Although we have an abundance of musical talent in TIGHAR it was specifically the sound quality of the 1930s recordings that I was after. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:36:02 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Research update Let me add a bit to Ric's diplomatic response to Frank Wolfe's suggestion. &^%%$#@!#$%&!! Now -- Frank, we have looked for (and continue to have people looking for) the bones that went to Fiji in 1940. We've looked in basements and attics of buildings where they might logically have been; we've looked in bomb shelters where they might have been taken during the War; we've gone through the anatomy collections of the Fiji Medical School. There are still places to look in Fiji; given the resources we'll look there. We went to the Seven Site largely because we hoped to find teeth that might have been lost from the skull when it was buried and subsequently re-excavated; teeth are very good reservoirs of DNA. We excavated the pit where we think it most likely the skull was buried; we screened the soil through 1/4 inch screen, then through 1/8 inch screen, then scanned it under UV light; we didn't find any teeth. We performed experiments with crab behavior that convince me that finding human bones OTHER than teeth at the Seven Site is a real, real long shot. There are, however, still places we might find teeth (or conceivably bones) at the Seven Site; given the resources, we'll pursue them. In the meantime, we've found the fire features that closely approximate Gallagher's description of the fire remains found with the bones in 1940, so we're investigating them to see what we can learn. It's really not that we haven't tumbled to the idea that human bones with DNA would be really good things to find. If you have any hot ideas about how to find them, I'd be delighted to hear what they are. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:38:13 EDT From: S. Wesley Smith Subject: Re: Research update Be easy on Frank - he can't help it that he is a would've, should've guy, AKA second-guesser, back-seat driver, empty suit. Regards, S. Wesley Smith ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:40:30 EDT From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: Research update Exciting news! Looks like we'll have lots to talk about soon! I liked your response to Mr. Wolfe but I prefer the caustic responses I find so funny! Oh well! Keep up the good work my friend! LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ************************************************************************** From Ric I trust that Frank found the responses adequately caustic. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:44:13 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Music copyrights I'm sure that ASCAP would be able to tell you. A friend of mine used to have a biergarten restaurant with a polka band playing on weekends. Somebody from ASCAP asked the band to play "Happy Birthday", which they gladly did, and my friend subsequently got a letter from ASCAP demanding royalty payments. Apparently they have some kind of blanket system for charging for copyright use, but I don't remember what he told me about it. Also, it seems to me that he said there's another group similar to ASCAP that also owns or manages copyrights to published music, so you'd probably want to research that as well. If I recall correctly, copyrights last a LLLLOOOOOOONNNNNNGGGGG time. ltm, jon ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:47:42 EDT From: Ric Subject: 2002 Course and Field School Details and registration information for this year's Introductory Course in Aviation Archaeology and Training Expedition are now up on the TIGHAR website at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Histpres/courses/CA2002/CA2002course.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:44:37 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: Research update Its an interesting point that you managed to find over 1000 very small fish and bird bones and although there was a large amount of the skeleton missing from what Gallagher collected, the team was unable to find a single human bone. It seems likely that Tighar looked much harder than Gallagher did, although of course, they may be looking in the wrong place. Are bird, fish and turtle bones more durable? One would imagine that the crabs would remove bird, fish and turtle bones from the site if they removed human ones and yet many remain. It would be an interesting exercise to establish just how complete the bird, fish and turtle skeletons are. If they turn out to be very complete, maybe where they were found is not the same place as where the skeleton was found. (ie these fish, bird and turtle bones are not the ones referred to by Gallagher) I appreciate that the problem is compounded somewhat by the fact that there are perhaps a number of the same species and so it would be difficult to assign bones to an individual but I imagine some conclusions can be drawn. Regarding how to better find them, I believe that bones as well as teeth fluoresce in the ultra violet. One can even distinguish between the mixed bones of individuals in this way because of colour differences. This technique could perhaps identify individual birds, fish etc from mixed bones. It could also be used as a search tool at night. You might need a portable generator, but a few large UV strip lamps as used in discotheques would make a search at night feasible. It may be of course that coral also fluoresces, in which case one would have to rely on colour difference. Regards Angus **************************************************************************** From Ric Good comments and suggestions. Bear in mind that the bird, fish and turtle bones that were found were not scattered hither and yon, nor were they found in a general sweep of the area. Specific, well-defined sites were identified by finding a few bones on the surface. Those sites were then gridded off into 2 meter x 2 meter archaeological "units" which were then meticuloulsy excavated in layers, 10 cm at a time. Bones were picked out visually as the excavation proceeded and afterward the dirt was also screened and examined again. Then it was spread and inspected in the dark with a UV light (just as you mentioned) and the smallest bones were recovered that way. The point is, the human bones that Gallagher did not find were (most logically) moved some distance from the corpse by crabs, rats, or whatever. The fact that we didn't find human bones right there near where we think the castaway died is hardly surprising. If fragile bird bones have survived all this time, it certainly seems like more robust mammal bones should have also survived. The trouble is, those bones are probably now widlely scattered across an area that is covered with underbrush so dense that you have to see it to believe it. The area we cleared last summer represents only a fraction of the area that could contain important bones and artifacts. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:46:01 EDT From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Music copyrights > Also, it seems to me that he said there's another group similar to ASCAP that > also owns or manages copyrights to published music ... BMI and SESAC are the other two big players (pun realized): . Paying for a commercial license to perform music is probably beyond TIGHAR's resources or intentions. :o) If you know who owns the rights to one piece, you can probably negotiate a reasonable price for a reproduction of that one piece. I did this in the 70s for a songbook that, in the event, never got published. Marty #2359 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:47:04 EDT From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Re: Research update << From Ric Although the forum has been pretty quiet lately >> Mercifully so.... Thanks :-) LTM (who was hyperventilating keeping up with the old Forum...) A. McKenna ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:52:38 EDT From: Eric Subject: Another possible explanation Being new to the forum, I've made it point to read AMERLIA EARHART'S SHOES as well as the Elgin Long book and various TIGHAR TRACKS issues from the last several years. Having now been exposed to the information and various points of view contained in these publications, I've come to the conclusion that AE and FN probably did reach Gardner Island, that they most likely landed on the reef, and that they remained with the Electra for several days sending out distress calls. By the end of that time, they were undoubtedly suffering from sleep deprivation, dehydration, hunger, shock, heat exhaustion, and any injuries they might have sustained during the landing on the reef. Although I'm not a medical professional, it would seem to me that they could not have survived much longer, left to their own resources. The TIGHAR Hypothesis has them finding the cache of provisions left behind by the NORWICH CITY survivors in 1929. But there could be another explanation that I've not yet seen discussed or debated; mainly that, when the Electra landed, there might already have been one or more people on Gardner Island who were there without the permission or knowledge of the island's controlling authority. Had this been the case, it is likely that AE and FN could have made contact with and received assistance from them. Most likely, it was a small party made up of people with the skills necessary for surviving on a desert island, including experience in food and water procurement. (There is nothing in AE's background to suggest that she had any survival experience or training. Being a seaman, FN might have been at least aware of some of these skills, but would he have been in any condition to put them into practice?) Depending on how long this unauthorized party had been on the island, they might have discovered and made use of the NORWICH CITY cache and created the signs of habitation noted during the July 9th Navy fly over. If they had access to a boat, they could have supplemented their diet with deep water fish. Depending on the motives and intensions of this unauthorized party for being on Gardner Island, the appearance of the two fliers (and the possibility that a rescue party might soon be arriving there) might have prompted them to abruptly leave, abandoning the two castaways to their fate. This hypothesis might be utterly without merit, but then again, it might help to explain some of the physical evidence collected on Niku. I'm passing it along for what it's worth. Eric, NAS North Island, San Diego, CA **************************************************************************** From Ric Ohhhhhkay....let's examine this hypothesis. Unauthorized persons on Gardner who help AE and Fred but then leave and don't take them along or tell anybody about them later. What sort of unauthorized persons would these be? Pacific islanders? From where? Using what mode of transportation? Europeans? Same questions. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:54:54 EDT From: Mike E. Subject: Re: Music copyrights The "other group similar to ASCAP" is Broadcast Music Inc., aka BMI. Copyrights do indeed last a long time. They are good for at least the life of the author plus 75 years. Some copyrights are for the life plus 120 years. A copyright is like a piece of property. Anything you can do with a car or a home, can be done with a copyright: buy, sell, trade, give away, will, assign, etc etc. Copyrights are renewable, and if in force when the holder dies, become part of the holder's estate. The estate, or the person to whom the copyright is willed or otherwise passed, can keep it in force by renewing it. That episode involving "Happy Birthday" was dirty pool... but, it also serves to illustrate how zealously copyrights can be enforced. Actually, the copyright for "Happy Birthday" is absolutely the MOST violated in the world. If you use that music in a film or play, you durn well better have the rights to use it! You can find the whole story on copyright on the web site for "Library of Congress Copyright." Also, a good primer on the subject can be found within the web site www.redinkworks.com but this is in terms of literary and film properties, more than music. The principles are the same though. The most important thing a copyright gives the holder, is the keys to the federal court system, in the event of infringement. LTM (who always covers her bases) and 73 Mike E. the Radio Historian, Writing Teacher and Screenwriter ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:00:30 EDT From: Peter Subject: Music Off topic, but please don't Frank me -have just found "In Search of AE" CD on Amazon: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/glance/-/music/B00005RFH3/026-4320056-4790804 Unfortunately it's 70's folk not 30's dance band music and of course there's copyright... Sounds interesting, though. LTM Peter *********************************************************************** From Ric You might be surprised at how many people write songs about AE (and send me their CD). She seems to be a great inspirer of songwriters, especially Country & Western songwriters. You'd think she disappeared in a truck with her dog. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:07:52 EDT From: Gary LaPook Subject: AE Symposium and celestial I flew up to the symposium on friday with a friend in a C-182. He did the flying and I used my MA-2 sextant to find OAK. I precomputed the altitudes and azimuths and plotted them on graph paper so it would be easy to compare the sextant altitude with the precomputed altitude, find the intercept and plot the resultant LOP. I use an Air Force issue Polhemus Celestial Computer, CPU-41/P which makes plotting the LOP very fast. I aimed 30 NM south of OAK and intercepted the sun line at 0021Z and flew a 001 True heading into OAK Worked perfectly. Approach even gave us a clearance through the class bravo with out a hassle. I shot 5 sun lines in an hour and a half and the worst one was 8 NM off when compared to GPS fixes. The old system still works perfectly. gl **************************************************************************** From Ric Why wouldn't it? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:09:47 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Research update For Angus -- The question of why the fish, bird, and turtle bones bones survived when human bones apparently did not was troubling as soon as we began to find the former. One possibility was that the crabs weren't interested in bones that had wound up in a fire, but we were quickly disabused of this notion when we camped on the beach and found juvenile coco crabs literally darting into the embers of our fire to snatch lamb bones. I then did an informal experiment in which I buried fresh (post-dinner) lamb bones in a very crabby area at various depths, ranging from about 1/2 inch to 3 inches. Rather to my surprise, I found that NONE of these bones got dug up. It appears that a quite light covering of dirt (sic -- coral rubble, sand, duff) effectively discourages the crabs. I suspect, though I've no way of proving it, that the fire areas were deliberately covered up with "soil" to discourage the crabs from scrabbling around, and this preserved the bones therein. This doesn't account for the surface scatter of wing bones from frigate birds, however; these pretty clearly were NOT covered up. My guess is that as the wings were cut off they were tossed into the Scaevola, where they hung until they dessicated and fell to the ground, whereupon they weren't of any interest to the crabs. But this is ONLY a guess. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 14:42:22 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Another possible explanation Giving some credence to Eric's hypothesis is the fact that we have a couple of VERY vague, third-hand stories about a fisherman in the Solomons who allegedly claims to have been on Niku and received AE and FN there. We've never been able to track this story down anywhere close to its source. It's certainly not impossible, but it seems like the introduction of a lot of unnecessary variables. **************************************************************************** From Ric For what it's worth, the story is that this guy claims to have BURIED Amelia Earhart - which doesn't fit very well with Gallagher's account. However, we do have another second-hand anecdote about a woman who claimed to have been on Gardner with the first colonists and was shown "the grave of a pilot". Neither anecdote feels like yet another version of the bone-discovery story. Sort of makes you wonder if, somewhere along the line, somebody thought to be associated with the fabled "airplane that was here" got buried. We've read an awful lot about the Phoenix Group in those days and I'm not aware of any instance where "unauthorized" people - islanders or Europeans - were known to have visited any of the atolls. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 14:49:50 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Re: Hull Island At one time you expressed an interest in exploration at Hull Island. The question I'm raising about Hull is would it have been visible from 7,000 ft. similar to the Marshall Chain or the Gilbert chain and/or archipelagoes (assuming Earhart & Noonan were willing to expend the fuel to climb to higher altitudes). And, there is another question.... what about the position of the sun and glare off the ocean Earhart experienced at Howland. Evidently, it was fearsome. How much of a factor would that be at Gardner and/or Hull? Can you make an estimate or would anyone on the forum like to tackle the problem? If it hasn't been tackled already. My thinking is would Earhart & Noonan logically risk trying to find another isolated island such as Gardner or Hull? After three or four flying hours to Gardner, how much glare from the sun are we looking at and (assuming the weather was clear) how much reflection off a silver ocean are we looking at? I know Gardner has an atoll, which would have made it more visible. But what if they missed Gardner, how visible would Hull Island have been? Alan Caldwell, some time ago, sent me an awesome E-mail of what the sea would look like (with a hot tropical sun in your face) at Howland... when Earhart was in the vicinity. So, we are need of a pilot's decision....what would you do if? If Carol was flying her Bonanza out there in the middle of the ocean, I would have turned around and headed for the Gilberts in one half of a New York City second. Trying to find isolated islands and more isolated islands in the middle of nowhere has no appeal to me (personally). I don't care how much fuel was left in the tanks, I would have ditched the airplane and paddled all the way back to the Gilberts as fast as I could paddle (if I had to). So who cares about the airplane? Let the insurance company pay for it. It crashed in the ocean....so, get another one. In the meantime, the name of the story is save your rear end from the sharks. This bugs me Ric. Also, Ric, you're a pilot, so pilot to pilot would you really head for another isolated island after a search disaster at Howland? And the question of the hour....how isolated is Gardner? So what's the answers you guys. Interesting arguments. I know the line of position points to Gardner Island, but how far down the line of position were they? Ric, compliments to you as being the best organizer known to man (almost). *************************************************************************** From Ric Like you, I would do whatever seemed to provide the best chance to save my butt. From what I've been able to learn about the situation faced by Earhart and Noonan, it loks to me like the best course of action is to run southeastward on the LOP. If you do that and miss Gardner you do not come anywhere near Hull. I think it would be interesting to have a look-around on Hull (now Orona) but I certainly wouldn't expect to find any Earhart-related material there. LTM, Ric By the way, there was no insurance on the airplane. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 15:14:48 EDT From: Chris in Petaluma Subject: Re: Another possible explanation I'm afraid to ask this, but could there have been someone else already marooned on Niku when AE arrived? Extremely unlikely, but possible? I don't suppose there were any records of missing boaters in that general area? Sorry Ric, Chris #2511 ************************************************************************** From Ric No need to apologize. It's a legitimate question. The short answer is no, we've found no record of any boat or ship or airplane reported missing in the Central Pacific for several years either side of the Earhart disappearance. How about missing persons? We found a record of only one. Sometime after all the press reports about the search for Earhart, a French woman wrote to the British in Fiji asking if the white person seen on Hull Island by Lt. Lambrecht (Burns Philp overseer John W. Jones) might have been her missing husband, Albert Culas, who she said was "lost at sea" in 1934. Monsieur Culas was, according to his wife, "a sailor on the Eider." What ship does she mean? Did it sink? If not, it would seem that Albert probably fell overboard. (If he simply jumped ship in some port of call it doesn't seem like he would be described as being lost at sea.) So - what Eider are we talking about? We found only one ocean-going vessel in the British Mercantile Navy List of 1933 named Eider, and she was also on the Lloyds Register for 1936-37, but that doesn't mean she was the only Eider out there. The fact that Kent couldn't find a British Seaman's Card for Culas would seem to indicate that the British-registered Eider is the wrong Eider. I have two original copies (1937 and 1941) of something called the "Berne List." This is a "List of Coast Stations And Ship Stations" published by the "Bureau of the International Telecommunication Union" in Berne, Switzerland. It's literally a directory for every coastal radio station and ship's radio in the world. If a ship has a radio, she's listed in the Berne List along with her nation of registry, international call sign, and radio capbilities. It seems safe to say that, by 1937, virtually every seagoing vessel had a radio of some sort, so the Berne List is also a quite complete list of every ship in the world. In 1937 there are five Eiders. - two American vessels, one owned by the Bureau of Fisheries and the other a naval vessel. - one British ship (probably the Eider in the Mercantile Navy List. - a German ship. - and (lo and behold) a French ship. It seems safe to eliminate the two American ships (because they are both government owned and not likley to have a French national in the crew), and we can eliminate the British ship (because Culas did not apparently have a British Seaman's card). That leaves the French ship which, after all, would seem to be the most likely in the first place. In 1941 the two American ships are still around, as is the German ship. But the French and British ships no longer appear. Hardly surprising. There's a war on. Could Monsuier Albert Culas, who was "lost at sea" in 1934, be the source of the bones and artifacts found by Irish? For that to be the case, it must be reasonable for : A. the bones to be those of a man B. Culas to have with him, or acquire on the island, the artifacts found with the bones. If Culas was aboard the French "Eider" listed in the 1937 list, he was not lost because the ship sank. If he fell overboard, it seems unlikely that he was carrying a sextant box, a bottle, a small cask (or something that would explain two corks with brass chains), and a pair of women's shoes. Could he have found all that junk by beachcombing on Niku after washing up there? In theory, sure. But if we say that about Culas, then we can say it about anyone who might have washed up on Niku. We're saying that the artifacts are meaningless as clues, and that may be true, but it certainly seems more likely that it is not. Add to this the fact that we have no information about what part of the Pacific the Eider was in when Culas was lost and, at least in my opinion, the chance that the bones and artifacts on Niku belong to poor Albert is so remote as to be not worthy of consideration. The idea that Albert was in residence on Niku when our two aerial castaways arrived ascribes qualities to the island that are pretty Bermuda Trianglesque. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 15:16:45 EDT From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: Another possible explanation Now it sounds like a novel: AE and FN land, are taken in by a party already on the island ... and what happens? Are they murdered? Taken away in the yacht or on the canoes? Are they lost at sea? This is almost as good as the scenario that has the U.S. sending a duplicate of the Electra, crewed by a man and a woman, to fly over the Japanese bases. In this, the real Electra vanishes while the fake one is captured. However, both scenarios do permit some questions to be answered. Too many "ifs" need to be fulfilled. (On the other hand, the folks on the island might have been the Japanese navy: then the capture story might work out to be linked to the Gardner crash hypothesis --- Forgive me, Ric.) LTM (who always helps crashed fliers), Mike H. (Richmond VA) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 15:22:41 EDT From: Patrice Jarosz Subject: Re: Another possible explanation Tom King says: <> "Unnecessary variables?" You mean like, maybe new clues that don't fit the profile? LTM, who would have to push it as far as it went anyway... *************************************************************************** From Ric Perhaps you could enlighten us as to what these new clues are? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 10:46:38 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Another possible explanation For Mike Holt -- If you're looking for a mildly far-fetched novel about AE and Niku, check out "The Shadow of Wings" by June Knox-Mawer (London, Orion Publishing, 1995). Knox-Mawer has AE crashing just off Niku's fair shores, struggling ashore (losing a shoe) and collapsing under the Scaevola, where she remains in an amnesiac state until picked up by a British colonial administrator and his I Kiribati sidekick, who take her back to Tarawa. Here she remains as the Brit's sex slave until the Japanese invade and her "protector" flees. She lives out her days in a convent, where she is discovered sometime in the '60s by her daughter, a BBC journalist. Because she was pregnant, see. And Noonan was drunk, but sufficiently on top of things to aim for the Phoenix Islands down the LOP. It's actually a pretty good story, that manages to combine virtually every hypothesis there is about Earhart's disappearance and add a number of twists of its own. And yes, Knox-Mawer credits TIGHAR (and Ric, and Eric Bevington) for inspiration. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 10:55:37 EDT From: Alan Subject: Re: Hull Island > If Carol was flying her Bonanza out there in the middle of the ocean, I would > have turned around and headed for the Gilberts in one half of a New York City > second. Carol, keep in mind our flyers were heading East into the sun on the way into Howland. Heading SE to the Phoenix Islands the sun would not be in their face but rather off their left wing. As to flying back to the Gilberts I posed a question to the forum asking how Noonan could navigate to the Gilberts with the sun behind him and giving only speed lines and no course line. No one responded. I pose that question again to you. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 10:59:31 EDT From: Frank Wolfe Subject: Best Guess As a result of my comment about fish bones, one of your readers asked if I had a better idea as to where AE and Fred ended their journey. I may as well venture my opinion. The plane seemed to fly to the left of course. The trip from Natal to Dakar had two course corrections, but still missed destination. A puzzled AE wrote a note to Fred, "What put us north". On the way to Howland, we know they flew under an overcast. The ETA was way off. I suspect that they were unaware of the winds aloft The early depletion of the gas supply may have been due to changing altitude up and down, then darting left or right, in a vain attempt to find a hole in the clouds above so that Fred could get a shot at the stars. I doubt that they adjusted speed in order to offset an unknown winds aloft. I think they hit the sun line on a radial of 337 degrees. Fred was known to be good with the octant, so this should be a good guess They turned to the right on a heading of 157 degrees, the radio signals got stronger, they probably got to within 60 miles of Howland, but just couldn't believe they had missed the island that far. Surface wind at Howland;-- looks like smoke from the ship is blowing to the north west, I am guessing about the camera angle. It was her habit to call in position reports, even when no one was apt to be listening. She called in the only sure thing at her disposal, "flying up and down 157-337. If an island had been in sight you can bet she would have included that fact in this last report. I flew bombers during this time frame, we knew almost nothing about ditching. I suspect that she is in 16,000 feet of water, on the sunline 60 to 200 miles out. I think you will find AE and Fred sitting on the bottom of the ocean, still strapped in the plane, having stalled the plane too high and plunged straight in. Hope this guess at the situation does not upset too many of your readers, I seek the most probable. Frank Wolfe **************************************************************************** From Ric Not upsetting at all. In fact, it's rather reassuring that someone with your grasp of the facts reaches the conclusions that you do. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:22:05 EDT From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Of crabs and fish Tom King says: << I then did an informal experiment in which I buried fresh (post-dinner) lamb bones in a very crabby area >> I don't believe that we experimented with putting a fish carcass out there did we? But I do remember some story about a fish skeleton lying out basically intact. where did that come from? I wonder if the crabs act differently when eating a fish than a lamb bone. They probably have lots of opportunity to eat fish, but don't often get a meal of mammal. Kinda like feeding candy or spinach to kindergardners, the feeding frenzy might be different. Another experiment for next time? Andrew McKenna in Boulder *************************************************************************** From Ric They eat the rats. In fact, there is some indication that they actually hunt the rats, so mammal meat shouldn't be all that unusual. I would think that a crab living on the island would have chances to dine on birds and rats as often as fish. The fish story comes from a fish that was caught and cooked on a beach fire by the Nai'a crew during the 1999 trip. The fish was filleted and the remaining carcass was left on the cold coals. Over the next few days the little crabs cleaned every speck of flesh off the bones but left the skeleton completely intact. We never saw a big coconut crab working on it though. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:25:18 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Visibility As long as we're just talking' about this and that, Carol is thinking maybe the reason why Earhart slipped down to 1,000 ft. was because they were searching for better visibility from the glare of the sun and the reflection off a silver ocean. Thinking I am be this might an explanation is making sense sometimes.....lower altitude might have meant less glare off the ocean. I think that would compute. Anyone want to comment? Yes? No? Maybe? Thinking? Is this a valid point? Carol Dow #2524 *************************************************************************** From Ric I don't see how a lower altitude would result in less glare. The descent to 1,000 feet was almost certainly to get below the bases of the scattered cloud deck. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 12:26:59 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Re: Hull Island & Carol vs. Alan Caldwell Alan Dear, With all due respects to your navigating experience, they just flew over the Gilbert Islands and the usual procedure in such an event is to make the proverbial 180 degree turn. I've done it a few times, and I didn't have a navigator on board. Earhart knew the headings, and if they had to make a shoot, she could have swung the airplane around long enough for Noonan to do his act.....then back on course for the Gilberts. So, you go fly that airplane. I'll stick with my original contention...scramble for the Gilberts. Earhart was sitting in the left seat. So who was in command of the airplane? You tell me. Also please consider Noonan already had one "fail" situation on his hands. If I was Earhart I wouldn't have taken any more chances on more "fails." Thumbs down Major Caldwell. No more isolated islands. Where the sun was for navigational purposes is not that much of a consideration. Also, consider the fact that they could have run into adverse weather conditions at Gardner (although the weather was reported as being clear at the time). However, the weather reports in that part of the world in 1932 were notoriously inaccurate. ...you're dealing with the tropical convergence zone. If I was flying that airplane I would have told Noonan thanks but no thanks. Also, consider the fact the Gilberts were located in a very visible archipelago. If they missed one island, there were plenty of others sitting around in the vicinity. I personally believe that would have been the overwhelming consideration in this case. Sorry, you lose Major. No sale. I don't buy that...pilot's prerogative. But who knows what really happened. Nobody knows. All we can do is guess. I'm sure I'm going to loose this argument....over to you, Alan. Ms. Carol Dow #2524 *************************************************************************** From Ric Okay. That's it. The Bad Facts and Stupid Conclusions Meter has gone off the scale (again). This thread is dead. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 12:33:45 EDT From: Eric Subject: Follow-up from Eric From Ric I guess I really jumped into it with both feet when I suggested that someone might have been on Gardner Island when AE and FN landed there. However, here is one possible scenario which could answer Ric's questions: During the mid-1930's, the U.S. and Great Britain were actively involved in "colonizing" uninhabited Pacific islands for use as refueling stops for transpacific commercial air travel. While this did not directly pose a threat to Japan, the Japanese were undoubtedly interested in knowing what was happening in an area that they considered as within their sphere of influence. Therefore, in addition to their usual network of local agents, they would have been highly motivated to clandestinely establish a forward listening post either on one of the American Equatorial Islands (U.S. territory) or the Phoenix Group islands (British territory.) Being uninhabited and away from major shipping lanes, Gardner Island would have been an ideal choice for such a post. The team chosen to man this listening post would, by necessity, have had to been small in number -- perhaps not more than 3 or 4. Deployed so far from Japanese-controlled territory, this team would probably have been expected to be more or less self-sufficient, able to operate without direct contact with their chain-of-command and with a minimum amount of outside support (including little or no expectation of being re-supplied with provisions.) However, Gardner Island and its surrounding waters could easily have provided most of the food that they would have required, assuming that they processed the survival skills needed for living on a desolate atoll. The team members might not even have been Japanese or connected with the Japanese military, but recruited from the islands controlled by Japan. There might even have been someone of European ancestry on the team. At least one or two members would have had to know how to operate radio equipment, understand Morse code and have a good understanding of English. The vehicle used to transport them Gardner was most likely some sort of water craft capable of longer sea voyages. (After delivering the team, it might have been stationed close to the island to give the appearance that it was engaged in fishing.) Once on Gardner, the team established a camp along the southeastern lagoon shore, taking care not to leave too many signs of human habitation that could reveal their presence. As day followed monotonous day, the team's radio watch probably heard nothing more exciting than routine message traffic from the Coast Guard cutters ITASCA and the ROGER B. TANEY as they made regular visits to Howland, Baker and Jarvis islands to re-supply the young Asian/Hawaiian men (U.S. citizens) who had been employed to live on these islands for the sole purpose of establishing U.S. sovereignty. The discovery of the NORWICH CITY survivor's camp and the provisions that had been left there might have provided them with a welcome change from their usual diet of rice, fish, sea turtle, coconut crabs, giant clams, and birds. The monotony abruptly ceased on June 25th when the ITASKA arrived at Howland. Judging from the radio intercepts, it was obvious that an unusual amount of activity was taking place there in preparation for some important event. A 24-hour radio watch was probably established Had they also been monitoring international short wave broadcasts, the team might have been aware of the progress and route of Amelia Earhart's around the world flight, and connected this with the activity at Howland. In any case, early on the morning of July 2nd, they began to intercept radio messages between the ITASKA and what sounded like an inbound aircraft. As the morning progressed, the transmission signals from the airplane became louder and easier to understand, indicating that it was coming closer. (Those monitoring the transmissions might have begun to note the tone of increasing frustration and confusion that had crept into the messages being sent back and forth.) The airplane was last heard from at about 2013 GMT. The ITASKA continued to transmit messages on 500, 3105 and 7500 kilocycles in an unsuccessful attempt to reestablish contact. At about 2213 GMT, message traffic indicated that the ITASKA had gotten underway and had begun to search for what was apparently the overdue airplane. Later that morning, the listening post team was undoubtedly startled by the sound of an airplane overhead. That night, they began to pick up voice messages on 6210 kilocycles. The signal strength was such that the source of the transmissions had to be very close to Gardner. The team might have realized that what they were hearing was the lost aircraft, attempting to radio its position and ask for help. Of greater concern, however, was the fact that, if the airplane was on or near Gardner Island (and the signal strength indicated that it was) there was a real possibility that the listening post might be discovered during a rescue attempt. The transmissions on 6210 kilocycles continued intermittently for 2 days. A reconnaissance party was sent out and discovered the wreckage of a twin-engine aircraft on the reef just north of the wreck of the NORWICH CITY and near where the waves normally broke. At some point, this recon team made contact with AE and FN, who had either waded ashore or who were still in the aircraft. More than likely, the two fliers were suffering from sleep deprivation, dehydration, hunger, shock, heat exhaustion, and any injuries they had sustained during the landing on the reef. Seeing that the aircraft's passengers were civilians and unarmed (and that one of them was a woman), it is unlikely that the recon team behaved in a hostile manner. It is even possible that they provided the two fliers with water, and helped them salvage some of their key navigational equipment. In any case, AE and FN were probably in no condition to resist and would have been only too glad for any assistance they could get. It is logical to assume that the recon party brought the pair back to the team's campsite near the lagoon, where they were given food and were probably questioned. Perhaps some member of the team recognized Amelia Earhart or knew that she was an important person. However, they must have realized that there was now a strong likelihood that a rescue party would soon be coming to Gardner looking for her. The listening post was shut down and the team evacuated Gardner Island. There are at least two possible explanations for what happened next: (1) Assuming that rescue parties were near at hand, the listening post team eft AE and FN behind at the camp, possibly too weak to adequately care for themselves or to signal to any search aircraft. (2) AE and FN were taken along when the team left Gardner Island and eventually ended up in territory controlled by Japan. Again, this is just a scenario (and not necessarily one that I believe myself.). However, if any of the artifacts collected from Niku (i.e. knob, radio tube parts, etc.) turn out to be of 1930's Japanese origin. Eric (NAS North Island, San Diego, CA) **************************************************************************** From Ric We'll keep that in mind. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 12:35:47 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Of crabs and fish For Andrew McKenna There may be lots of variables involved in what crabs like to eat and when/where they like to eat it. We noticed last time that the crabs on the leeward side of the island (except around Kar's experiment) seemed less aggressive than those around the Seven Site. No idea why, or even whether this observation reflects reality. State of maturity, reproductive cycle -- might be lots of things that would influence them. And doubtless fish would smell different from mammal, and that might have an influence. The whole question of how they sense meat in the area is an interesting one. When I laid out my first parcel of lamb bones near the Seven Site and went away for an hour, by the time I got back there must have been fifty or sixty crabs within ten meters of the bone pile, maybe a quarter of them actually on the pile, the others sitting quietly in trees, up on scaevola stalks, on logs, seemingly watching like spectators at a football game. They must have gathered in from some distance, pretty fast, presumably in response to pretty faint smells, and I particularly wondered why they were being so polite. Why stand there quietly in a circle watching your buds chow down? Why not pitch right in? Lots to learn about Birgus latro. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 12:37:33 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Another possible explanation June Knox-Mawer was familiar with TIGHAR's research when she wrote the book, being intrigued by Amelia Earhart having had childhood roots in the Pacific. When she grew up she moved to Britain and worked for the BBC as a journalist until around 1990 when she retired. I and other TIGHARS) tried in vain to contact her some time ago as we felt she might have additional information that could be useful to TIGHAR. Her colleagues at the BBC (the older ones who still knew her) told me that she retired to a remote place in remote Wales. They even provided me with her telephone number. I called her several times at her home but all I can say is that she never answered the phone. I don't know what has became of her. If she retired in 1990 chances are she may no longer be alive. If she is it would be interesting if any TIGHARS In the UK would care to continue the search ? LTM (who never read the book but would like to) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:47:26 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: Hull Island & Carol vs. Alan Caldwell > From Ric > > Okay. That's it. The Bad Facts and Stupid Conclusions Meter has gone off > the scale (again). This thread is dead. Obviously Ric is too bored with repeating the oft made arguments against the Gilberts but perhaps if I'm succinct he might make this the final post on the subject. Against: 1)Difficulty in taking sun shots when the sun is behind you 2) 170 miles further than to Gardner 3) Rescuers would tend to look in the last place you told them you were (and perhaps this was on 137-337) 4) Fuel may have been lower than we think because a) they may have had to fly many miles in ground effect at uneconomical power settings. b) they may have had to dodge around weather c) they almost certainly had a headwind (of unknown strength at all stages) d) they may have flown a large offset if celestial navigation was lacking e) we know they were late wrt to their ETA. 5) Gardner was closer to Itasca (350nm). The radio probably had a range of about 400 miles on the fundamental frequency.The Gilberts were over 500 miles away. 6) They more likely than not, either found Gardner accidentally whilst searching for Howland or they reached a point travelling southeast where they knew that unless they had missed Howland, they must be so far to the southeast that Gardner was only a short distance away but the Gilberts far more than the 520nm or so direct from Howland. 7) They would both have probably been desperately tired and would rather not have had to fly the much further distance to the Gilberts. 8) The more time spent, the greater the danger of running short of fuel and crashing or ditching, of having no reserve of fuel to run the radio, or of having an accident due to overtiredness or making navigational errors for the same reason. For: 1)Excellent navigation (not evident at this stage) might bring one to an area where there were a number of possible landfalls closer together than in the Phoenix islands. 2) Sun behind you easier than sun abeam for avoiding glare when searching Conclusion: No contest. Regards Angus ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:48:01 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Another possible explanation Thanks, Herman. I remember and very much appreciate your efforts to locate Knox-Mawer a couple of years ago. We recently got another mailing address for her, and I sent off a letter last week. We'll see if it works this time..... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:50:07 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Best Guess I was at the Earhart Symposium held in Oakland over the weekend. Two groups, as everyone knows, are searching the ocean bottom for the Lockheed. They made summary reports of their recent activities. My recollection is that they said the bottom was 17-18,000 feet. Both groups are searching NW of Howland, generally within 100 miles of it. Timmer's group says they covered 600 square miles and had 2 to 3 good target hits. They said they were working 30 to 60 miles from the island. He showed some sonar scans of the target hits. They plan to go back and take pictures of the objects. Long/Nauticos had equipment problems and were not able to cover their entire search area . They definitely plan to go back and cover the area not searched, which includes most of the area Elgin believes has the highest probability of success. Their search cost $1.7 million. Neither group knows what specific area the other is searching and there is a good chance of some overlap. Blue skies, jerry ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:16:25 EDT From: Peter Polen Subject: Re: Best Guess > They definitely plan to go back and cover the area not > searched, which includes most of the area Elgin believes has the highest > probability of success Maybe I just don't get it. But why wouldn't you search the highest probability area first? Peter ************************************************************************** From Ric Good question Peter. Maybe they're saving it for last - like dessert. Or maybe Elgen's favoriite area is not the same as Nauticos' favorite area. Or maybe it's just "spin" on a failed search. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:40:34 EDT From: Tom Strang Subject: Gilbert Island Navigation ? Anti - Gilbert Island Theorist Forum: If FN could not navigate with the sun to his back - Does that mean AE & FN could only fly East in the AM and West in the PM? Respectfully: Tom Strang *************************************************************************** From Ric Of course not, but the position of the sun really has nothing to do with why it's not an option to turn back for the Gilberts. If you KNEW that you had flown over one of the atolls of the Gilberts archipelago several hours ago and you KNEW what the winds had been doing since then, it might make sense to try to retrace your steps. But that is not the case. IF they flew over one of the Gilbert islands (possibly Tabitauea), it was in the wee hours and the pitch dark and at high altitude with probably at least some cloud cover below. The chances of them having been able to see anything of the atoll (very little moonlight, no electricity, no lights), much less identify it, are virtually nil. Remember, when they got to where they thought Howland should be and it wasn't there, all they knew for sure was that they weren't where they thought they were. You can't navigate to a known point from an unknown point. They had a pretty good hunch that they were somewhere on the advanced LOP but the Gilberts are NOT a safety net of islands spread conveniently to the west of Howland. They're a widely scattered handful of atolls far to the west and northwest. Compared to running southeastward down the LOP that is known to intersect three islands, turning back for the Gilberts would be an insane gamble. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:45:51 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Music > >From Ric > > You might be surprised at how many people write songs about AE (and send me > their CD). She seems to be a great inspirer of songwriters, especially > Country & Western songwriters. You'd think she disappeared in a truck with > her dog. Yeah, but the island would have had to be Alcatraz (prison, you see). And there would have to be something about a train in it..... ltm jon *************************************************************************** From Ric Well, let's see....there's an old joke in the project about searching for Amelia's train. It got started back during the 1989 exepedition with a scratchy radio transmission from one of the teams about identifying the "terrain". Maybe there are some possibilities here that could be explored. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:47:46 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Follow-up from Eric > However, if any of the artifacts collected from Niku (i.e. knob, > radio tube parts, etc.) turn out to be of 1930s Japanese origin . . . Maybe that's why we are having so much trouble deciphering the patent number on the knob - it's in Japanese! ltm jon ************************************************************************** From Ric I'll pass the suggestion along to Jeff. He'll be thrilled. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:29:00 EDT From: Charlie Subject: The TIGHAR Hypothesis Before me I have my treasured copy of TIGHAR TRACKS, Volume 15, dated 1999. In it is the superb article: The TIGHAR Hypothesis, with supporting evidence. Question: Is that article, perhaps updated, available on your website? I yearn for a specific URL to direct my friends (and myself) to the best guess of "What Happened" based on the most current facts. Thank you also for previously directing me to the Lae photo gallery. Good photos, interesting info. Unfortunately, I have not been able to locate that page again. With such a wealth of infornation on your website, have you considered a "Site Search" feature? Thanks, Charlie *************************************************************************** From Ric The URL you're looking for is http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Overview/AEhypothesis.html It's current as of November 2001. We do have a search function on the website (scroll all the way down to the bottom of the home page) but it I just noticed that it's down for some reason. We'll get it fixed. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:30:48 EDT From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Re: Music copyrights What I understand as an owner of several music copyrights dating back to 1970, is this: prior to 1978, the term for copyright duration was 28 years, after which it was renewable for one more 28-year period, and at the end of which it became public domain. In 1978, the U.S. Copyright law was revised, and the term for copyright of musical work became the life of the author plus fifty years, at which point it became public domain. At that time, works initially copyrighted under the prior version of the law were still subject to the terms of the prior law. If it has again been changed since 1978, I am not certain, though in this information age, I would not be at all surprised. Best Regards, Dr. Gene Dangelo, # 2211 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:35:52 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: The Noonan Project Here are the results of the search in the 1930 Census for Fred Noonan. Census records are privileged information for 72 years and 1930 was just released this April. Fred's Soundex card was found in this microfilm Louisiana M2054 Roll 99 The Census page was found in this roll. Louisiana (New Orleans) T626 Roll 802 Incidentally, the soundex card indicated the census page would be found in ED 51, sheet 194, when it was actually found on ED 36-51, sheet 33A. The census was taken on April 14, 1930. Fred, age 36, was living with his wife, Josephine, age 28, and his mother-in-law, Vera Sullivan, age 48, at 5909 Catina. , New Orleans. No children, three years after their marriage. Fred's birthplace is listed as Illinois (which we knew already), his wife's, Georgia. I had hoped we would pin down his parent's birthplaces, but Fred gave them both as "United States" rather than something more specific. He simply may not have known. This reinforces my belief that Fred hardly knew his parents, his mother dying when he was very young, and his father probably sending him to be raised elsewhere. Occupations: Fred gave "aviator". Industry was "Commercial Flying". Josie gave "Stenographer" . Industry was "Cement Office". When asked if he were a veteran, the response was "no". (This should put to rest allegations he had a USN commission). I will send you and Jerry a copy for your files. Question for the science types: Is there any DNA reason to pursue descendants of someone who I believe to be Fred's maternal uncle? Smooth Sailing, Ron Dawson 2126 **************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Ron. Good information. Very much in line with what we already knew but always nice to have more confirmation. Rest assured that the Conspiracy Crowd will continue to refer to him as Lieutenant Commander Noonan, as does the National Museum of Naval Aviation. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:55:27 EDT From: Chris Ferro Subject: Re: Best Guess > Maybe I just don't get it. But why wouldn't you search the highest > probability area first? > Peter > ************************************************************************** > From Ric > > Good question Peter. Maybe they're saving it for last - like dessert. Or > maybe Elgen's favoriite area is not the same as Nauticos' favorite area. Or > maybe it's just "spin" on a failed search. Maybe some of the problems they encountered precluded the search of the high probability area - sea conditions, visibility, currents, etc.... LTM, Christopher (dealing in Wheeling) *************************************************************************** From Ric Their planned search area was, at most, only 2,000 sq. miles and they covered 640 sq. miles in 27 days of search operations. You don't find big differences in weather, sea state, or currents in such a small patch of open Pacific. Visibility is not an issue. They navigate by GPS. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:06:20 EDT From: David Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation ? I'm sure you have been over this issue at some point in the forum but I am wondering about this: If they were going to land at Niku or another place then why didnt AE just relay that info by radio? Why did she not transmit anything like that after her, at least as far as we know, last transmission? How many ships or other places were listening to her transmitts? If it was just mainly the Itasca maybe the operator there could have heard another message from her but couldnt understand it --and having no way of knowing how important every word from her would become later , simply dismissed it ---and then when it did become important after the disappearance he did not say anything for fear of retribution? This whole thing of who heard what and when and which ones were real and not sounds like todays politics of what did the president know and when did he know it! Guess I have asked to many questions in one post. Thanks--David **************************************************************************** From Ric Yes, this has been discussed to death. You can find many references in the Forum Highlights - but in a nutshell: In Earhart's last inflight transmission heard by Itasca (at 08:43 local; 20:13 Z) she said she was changing frequencies to 6210 kcs. Itasca had been hearing her fine on 3105. There was nobody else close enough to hear anything. After she changed frequencies Itasca stopped hearing her. The logical conclusion is that, for some reason, Itasca was unable to hear her on that frequency. Any pilot can tell you that there is nothing unusual about losing communication after you switch frequencies. It just happens. Normally you then switch back to the frequency that was working, but in this case AE didn't know that the previous frequency had been working. The post-loss transmissions that started to be heard that evening are a completely different problem. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:07:47 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation ? > Remember, when they got to where they thought Howland should be and it wasn't > there, all they knew for sure was that they weren't where they thought they > were. You can't navigate to a known point from an unknown point. They had a > pretty good hunch that they were somewhere on the advanced LOP but the > Gilberts are NOT a safety net of islands spread conveniently to the west of > Howland. They're a widely scattered handful of atolls far to the west and > northwest. Compared to running southeastward down the LOP that is known to > intersect three islands, turning back for the Gilberts would be an insane gamble. I can't add to that paragraph but I wanted to see it repeated so that perhaps it might sink in with the few that are having difficulty understanding that one can not simply "retrace their steps" or flight path in this case. My only change might have been to type it in 24 point. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:08:43 EDT From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation ? I agree! I find it hard to believe why people don't understand your point that flying north and east on the LOP makes no sense at all. It's very helpful to me to look at a map of the area when I read these postings. I sometimes wonder if other people are looking at a map as well. I mean no disrespect to my fellow forumite, but when you look at that vast expanse of nothing but water to the north on the LOP it just would be suicidal to turn north. That's why I support the Niku hypothesis wholeheartedly. I'm learning, I hope, as we go! LTM (who always has a map at hand) Mike Haddock #2438 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 08:24:47 EDT From: Tom Roberts Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For Tom King: Do you still have connections at UCR (University of California, Riverside)? That's not too far from L.A., Orange County, San Diego, etc. I can guarantee at least two attendees if you spoke at/near UCR. Tom Roberts, #1956CE, Riverside ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 08:42:23 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: The Noonan Project > Question for the science types: Is there any DNA reason to pursue > descendants of someone who I believe to be Fred's maternal uncle? > From Alan, who failed forensic science in the third grade Ron, if we were to find the missing bones DNA evidence would be invaluable and currently great success is being obtained using mitochondrial DNA to construct evolutionary trees. M. DNA is inherited only from the mother which in this case it would be reasonable to assume both Fred's mother and uncle would have the same M. DNA and Fred would inherit them from his mother. Unless I've missed something the answer to your question is yes. However here is the caveat. There is also a high probability the results could be false. If there is no match there is still a good chance there is a relation. Alternatively, if there IS a match there is a reasonable chance there is NO relation. From Nature Genetics the following quote. From Nature Genetics Volume 15 April 1997 ' "A high observed substitution rate in the human mitochondrial DNA Control Region" by Holland, Parsons et al. - "Our results have implications for the use of CR sequences in forensic identity testing, mtDNA is often employed to compare questioned samples to presumed maternal references. It is now clear that the mtDNA substitution rate is sufficiently high that differences between true maternal relatives will be encountered not infrequently, providing the grounds for false exclusion." Alan #2329 ************************************************************************* From Ric Alan's citation is interesting but I don't think it answers Ron's question. The key is that mtDNA is passed ONLY by the female. That's because, in the male, the mtDNA resides in the tail of the sperm and, as we all know, the tail never makes it into the egg. So, Fred's mother's brother (Fred's maternal uncle) can not pass on mtDNA to his progeny. Ergo, they can't help us in that respect. But back to Alan's posting.... If Amy Kleppner (the daughter of Amelia's sister) is a "true maternal relative" of AE and if I read the above correctly, then her mtDNA could be different from Amelia's. In other words, if we got a solid match between mtDNA from bones in Fiji or on Gardner (or Saipan for that matter) and Amy's mtDNA, that would be a conclusive identification BUT if there was no match it would NOT disqualify the bones as being Amelia's. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 08:48:41 EDT From: Dave Bush Subject: Noonan's Commission Just because Noonan said he wasn't a "veteran" doesn't mean he didn't have a commission. Veteran status usually means "war" veteran and you can hold a commission without having fought in a war. I don't know about pre- WWII regarding the common use of "veteran", but these days you don't usually call yourself a veteran UNLESS, you have military experience during wartime service (or Peacekeeping or Police Action service). For myself, I earned Army jump wings (but as a ROTC cadet) and only spent four months on active duty during the Vietnam era - so I am not a "veteran" by status, but am entitled to wear the Vietnam Defense Ribbon/Medal. Go figure! Personally, unless I had held some real duties or actually gone to Vietnam, I wouldn't call myself a veteran even if I had served the 6 month minimum to qualify for "veteran" status. LTM Yours, David Bush *************************************************************************** From Ric The Noonan Project (TIGHARs Ron Dawson, Jerry Hamilton, et al) has traced Noonan's professional career through his various and voluminous merchant marine paperwork. It is abundantly clear that the man was never in the Navy. My suspicion is that the 1930 census question about being a "veteran" was not subject to semantic interpretation but was intended to ascertain whether the subject might be eligible for veterans' benefits from service in the Great War. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 08:56:00 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation ? You know I would love to have a map of the area. Looking in the library at an Atlas is a far cry from accurate aeronautical maps. All the attempts I have made to find an aeronautical map of the Gilberts-Marshalls-Howland-Phoenix Islands have fissled. I even tried Jeppesen in Denver and ran into a stone wall. Have you got a source or does someone have a source? If Earhart turned back for the Gilberts you have to add in the strong possibility of tailwinds, possibly as much as 25-30mph at certain altitudes. Multiply that tailwind by 2-3-4 hours flying time, and you are looking at some impressive mileage. Ric, that would be an item you could sell on your website and make a buck for the effort. We are an investigative organization are we not? Carol Dow **************************************************************************** From Ric We are indeed an investigative organization, not a kindergarten. Surely a 500 hour Bonanza pilot knows how to order a World Aeronautical Chart (WAC) from any of the pilot supply outlets. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 09:00:41 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Best Guess Re Nauticos search: If they didn't find what they were looking for in the area searched, then it stands to reason that the area that they didn't search would have a higher probability of containing the object of their search. QED. **************************************************************************** From Ric Impeccable logic ... if it is known that the object of the search is somewhere in the designated search area. If I search half of my dining room for Amelia Earhart's airplane, my failure to find it does not increase my chances of finding it in the other half. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 09:03:02 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: The Noonan Project Is the affair Fred was having with Vera documented anywhere? Or is that just hearsay? ************************************************************************** From Ric Affair with Vera? Vera who? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 09:13:02 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation ? > In Earhart's last inflight transmission heard by Itasca (at 08:43 local; > 20:13 Z) she said she was changing frequencies to 6210 kcs. Itasca had > been hearing her fine on 3105. There was nobody else close enough to hear > anything. After she changed frequencies Itasca stopped hearing her. The > logical conclusion is that, for some reason, Itasca was unable to hear her > on that frequency. Any pilot can tell you that there is nothing unusual > about losing communication after you switch frequencies. It just happens. > Normally you then switch back to the frequency that was working, but in > this case AE didn't know that the previous frequency had been working Just a reminder, a similar thing apparently happened the night before in her transmissions to Lae. Th' WOMBAT ************************************************************************** From Ric It's possible, but not at all certain, that Lae's failure to hear anything from Earhart after the transmission received at 17:18 Lae time (0718Z) coincided with a change in frequency. Here's what Chater says: "Miss Earhart had arranged to change to 3104 KC wave length at dusk, but signals were very strong and the plane was then called and asked not to change to 3104 KC yet as her signals were getting stronger and we should have no trouble holding signals for a long time to come. We received no reply to this call although the Operator listened for three hours after that on an 8-valve super-heterodyne Short Wave Receiver and both wave lengths were searched. "It was presumed the plane had changed the wave to 3104, the reason for that being that Miss Earhart claimed it to be a better night wave than 6210 and had used it on her flight from United States to Hawaii previously." ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 09:42:34 EDT From: Christian D Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation and the "Gilbert LOP"? Not that I think it likely they went back to the Gilberts, but saying that "navigating back is not practical" might just not be a >>>good<<< reason; I can't quite remember what the LOP headings would be later that morning, but wouldn't they have been roughly parallel to the Gilbert string of islands? IF that was the case, then they had a rather good chance to strike one of the many Gilbert Islands, some rather big, by flying up and down the "Gilbert LOP". Even if their estimated latitude was off by 150mi by then... And a possible approx latitude from the Moon, while on the way? On the other hand the "Phoenix LOP" only comes close to 2-3 rather smallish islands! Lack of fuel is a better reason against the Gilbert option. (someone knows the direction of the sun LOPs, later on?) Christian D **************************************************************************** From Ric The Gilbert string runs along a roughly 120/300 line. By 2100Z (09:30 local) the sunline LOP had changed to 147/247. By 2230Z (11:00 local) it was something like 127/307. So by the time they might have gotten back to the general area of the Gilberts at - what, noon or later? - a sunline LOP may have fallen roughly along the string. The problem, as you say, is that they wouldn't have enough fuel to then run along the LOP, so the coincidence doesn't do them any good. The other point, of course, is that a decision to turn back for the Gilberts is a decision to abandon any chance of finding Howland while a decision to run down the 157/337 LOP is, in fact, a method of searching for their intended destination. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 13:43:43 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: The Noonan Project > Affair with Vera? Vera who? Is this a knock-knock joke? Vera Similitude? Vera da Hellis Earhart? *********************************************************************** From Ric Wombat, you better explain this one before it gets any worse. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 13:45:41 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Veterans! Dave Bush said: "I don't know about pre-WWII regarding the common use of "veteran", but these days you don't usually call yourself a veteran UNLESS, you have military experience during wartime service (or Peacekeeping or Police Action service)." Poppy-cock and balderdash! Veteran means exactly what it means: "an old soldier of long service; a former member of the armed forces; a person of long experience in some occupation". Combat duty has nothing to with it. If "veteran" status was conferred only for combat duty or duty in a combat zone, or service during a national conflict, then there are a whole bunch of us guys and gals out there that owe the Veteran's Administration a ton of jing-wah for the college educations and loan guarantees they have provided. Service to one's country is an honorable act regardless of the time or circumstances. Those who served in combat deserve the undying respect and appreciation of their countrymen, but please don't try to redefine the term "veteran" to exclude those who also served with equal unselfishness and honor. LTM, who's stripes are showing Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 13:54:28 EDT From: Eric Subject: The Howland-Gardner Connection The relatively close proximity of Howland Island to Gardner Island suggests the possibility that the young Hawaiian/Asian men (U.S. citizens) who were hired to live on Howland to establish U.S. sovereignty MIGHT have made some unauthorized (and therefore undocumented) visits to Gardner prior to it being settled. If such visits were made, these men might have observed things which could add to the useful store of knowledge about Gardner that TIGHAR has already collected. The Howland Islanders who are still living would have to be in their 80's. It might be well worth the effort to try and locate and interview some of them; also their children and grandchildren who might have heard stories about what went on there. Eric, NAS North Island, San Diego, CA **************************************************************************** From Ric We've talked to at least one of them - Yau Fai Lum - one of the radio operators on Howland. More to the point, the activities of the "colonists" on Howand and Baker are well documented in the Department of Interior and Department of the Treasury historical record. Gardner is over 350 nautical miles from Howland and it was British territory. The guys on Howland and Baker didn't have any kind of boat. They couldn't visit each other, forty miles apart, let alone make a 300 mile open ocean voyage. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 14:13:06 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation and the "Gilbert LOP"? > On the other hand the "Phoenix LOP" only comes close to 2-3 rather smallish > islands! Christian, don't tie your hat to the "Phoenix LOP" so doggedly. There is nothing to suggest Noonan obtained that particular course and never shot another sun line and/or never adjusted it to come closer or directly through any particular island in the Phoenix group. It's possible all he knew was that the Phoenix Islands were several hundred miles SE of Howland. It is also possible he knew their coordinates. We will most likely never know the answer to that. He may not have been able to get another sun shot because of weather obscuration but he might have. Again we will never know. We also don't know whether the LOP was plotted through the correct Howland coordinates or not. I think it is safe to assume they flew SE/NW on a 157/337 degree course at least for as long as they believed it would lead them to Howland or Baker. Not knowing exactly where they were on that line probably led them to stay on it for a long time. They may have never deviated from it or they may have finally decided they were too far south and may have adjusted it slightly to lead them to a particular Phoenix Island IF they indeed knew the coordinates of that island and NEEDED to adjust. They could have done that with or without an additional sun shot. Also keep in mind the 157/337 LOP may have gone exactly through Howland or exactly through the erroneous coordinates of Howland or 5 miles off or 10 miles off or off by whatever amount the celestial sun shot error was. So don't draw a line through the present coordinates of Howland at 157 degrees to see how close or how far it came from any place. Waste of time. Alan #2329 **************************************************************************** From Ric Speaking of wasting time......the fact is that we have a great deal of evidence to suggest that the Earhart flight reached Gardner. Whether they did it by running down the LOP or were guided there by Nei Manganibuka is unknown, unknowable, and doesn't really matter. The only thing that matters at this point is establishing, via hard evidence, the probability or improbability, that the events evidenced by cues on Nikuamaroro were associated with the Earhart disappearance. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 14:17:02 EDT From: Chris Rehm Subject: Re: Veterans! As a former paratrooper with 8 years active and reserve service I agree with Dennis. According to the Veterans administration a Vet is anyone who has served in the military , and has honorable discharge. I don't know where this idea comes from that your not a vet if you didn't serve during wartime, but it aint so. btw I have a certificate from the army for service during the cold war, spent 2 years in special ops in central America 1985-1987, etc etc etc I know quite a few vets that would find Dave's ideas insulting at best, and fighting words after a few beers..... for what little its worth, considering the lack of respect former soldiers, sailors marines and airmen get in this country for their time and effort sacrificed..... Chris Rehm **************************************************************************** From Ric Okay guys, you can put the flags away. All of us who wore the suit and drew a paycheck from Sam are veterans. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:01:20 EDT From: Jdubb Subject: Dr. King interview The following link is to a site where you can hear an interview with TIGHAR's very own Dr. King. It even provides a picture of the man himself. http://www.archaeologychannel.org/kingint.html Jdubb ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:11:14 EDT From: Oscar Boswell Subject: Re: Gilbert Island Navigation and charts Since we all need tutoring from time to time, I am not ashamed to request your help also. Just where does one get a "WAC" for the Gilberts ? (I know where you used to be able to get an ONC - but ONC M-16 has been discontinued.) The GNC is too small to be of any use. Thanks. Oscar ************************************************************************* From Ric I wasn't aware that M-16 had been discontinued but in terms of getting the kind of general impression of what's where and how far it is from hither to yon I would think that GNC 20 would serve nicely. It gives you the entire route from Lae to Howland including the Gilberts and the Ellice groups, plus the Phoenix and the Tokelau groups. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:40:32 EDT From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Veterans! For all the vets. Communication is an ugly thing sometimes. Yes, everyone who wore the uniform is a vet - until you go to apply for VETERANS BENEFITS - honorably discharged or not. I have 4 months active duty - took a hardship discharge when my parents were injured in a car wreck - but my official discharge date is also the "official" end of the Vietnam - er - conflict. So I am sort of in limbo. I can wear the wings, the medal, even the uniform - but no bene's! And I'm not complaining. In fact, I find it rather ludicrous. Heck, I'd get better benefits if I'd robbed the White House, raped the president's daughter and refused to serve in the military. The government would have even paid for my attorney and legal fees. Then given me a few years all expense paid vacation. I could even have gotten my college degree free instead of spending 15 years paying off the loans. Heck of a deal! You either laugh or you cry - I prefer to keep a PMA (Positive Mental Attitude) and laugh. My wife sent me an obit today - for Common Sense. LTM - Who still thinks Common Sense is alive and well, it just refuses to visit DC and the PC crowd. Yours, Dave Bush ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 09:01:58 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Carol orders a map For: Oscar Boswell Oscar, I ordered a GNC-27 from Sporty's Pilot Shop.Com for $4.25 plus postage. It looks like it might work, not sure. Wait 'til it comes in. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 09:37:19 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Re: Dr. King interview <> Is that Dr. Tom King or George C. Scott? ********************************************************************* From Ric I'm not touching that one. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 09:38:33 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Another talk scheduled For Tom Toberts Thanks, Tom. I'm afraid my contacts at UCR are pretty moribund, but the real issue is having something that pays my air fare to and fro. It's looking more and more like I'll be in LA and points east sometime in late June, though, and if so I'd be happy to try to work something out. My presentation is all self-contained on laptop and LPD projector, so anywhere a group can get together with an electrical outlet and a screen, I'm in business -- though I don't carry around books to sell. And obviously the more people we can get together to generate interest in TIGHAR and the project, the better. If we're going to solve this thing, we're going to need to raise some serious money. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 09:42:05 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: The Noonan Project > if we got a solid match between mtDNA from bones in Fiji or on Gardner (or > Saipan for that matter) and Amy's mtDNA, that would be a conclusive > identification BUT if there was no match it would NOT disqualify the bones > as being Amelia's. Not quite, Ric. Sadly in either case it is not conclusive. Courts are reluctant to use mtDNA. Alan #2329 *************************************************************************** From Ric So...you're saying that an mtDNA match between, say, bones or teeth found on Niku to a sample from Earhart's niece would NOT be a "smoking gun"? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 09:52:56 EDT From: Alan Subject: Re: The Noonan Project Ric, here is a URL that might better explain. http://www.nationalalliance.org/mtdna.htm Alan #2329 ************************************************************************** From Ric Okay, this is very interesting. Looks like there has been some new thinking on the significance of mtDNA matching and it also looks like we should NOT see possible surviving bones or teeth on Niku as potential "smoking guns". The bones in Fiji are another matter, especially if the skull could be found, but not solely because of possible mtDNA matching. I would imagine that a skull that matches AE's through visual reconstruction techniques AND an mtDNA match would be a smoking gun. Sure would be nice to find that skull. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 10:20:23 EDT From: Tom King (or George C. Scott, though I really don't quite get the joke) Subject: Re: The Noonan Project Ric says: Sure would be nice to find that skull. Sure would, which underscores the need to put in some serious research time in Fiji. We know of a couple of locations that would be worth searching further (hospital, WWII shelter caves) and there are undoubtedly others that haven't come to light yet. There's a good deal of archival and oral historical research to be done that might lead us to the skull and other bones (cemetery records, newspaper archives, personal papers of various WPHC personnel). And at the same time, there's the question of Gallagher's effects, which Gerry G. thinks might still be languishing in a warehouse somewhere in Suva. Unfortunately, the areas we know about that ought to be searched would be hard to do (the hospital is huge, and an active facility; the caves are mostly sealed up and would be dangerous to enter even if one could get in), and any significant further searching would require the permission and active cooperation of government at several levels. Just sending a few folks to Fiji won't do; it'll take a careful, coordinated, long-term effort. *************************************************************************** From Ric Agreed. Those bones are probably there someplace but it might be easier to find diagnostic artifacts on Niku. For that matter, the skull in Fiji is like the engine on Canton. Even if you find it and identify it, the chain of evidence is broken and you can't prove where it came from. That's not to say that we wouldn't or shoudn't try to find them if we can, but we should recognize the limitations of any conclusions we could draw. (I think he thinks the picture of you looks like George C. Scott.) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 12:05:37 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: The Noonan Project <> Guess I should get a helmet. Re. the skull -- granting that DNA matches are probabilistic, they're still highly, highly suggestive, and if we find, say, a tooth on Niku whose MtDNA matches that of Earhart's maternal line, and the tooth is in the area where everything else we have suggests that the skull was found in 1940, AND the sextant box with numbers similar to those on Noonan's, AND the woman's shoe -- well, that may not be everybody's smoking gun, but I don't know how much closer to one you could possibly get. ************************************************************************** From Ric As you've said many times, few accepted historical truths are established with "smoking guns" not only because smoldering firearms are exceedingly rare but a big enough pile of circumstantial evidence is actually more reliable than a single apparently diagnotisc object. The question, of course, is when is the pile big enough? That's an eye-of-the-beholder thing that varies with intelligence and education. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 12:08:35 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Dr. King interview - Or maybe the REAL Indiana Jones - ltm jon ************************************************************************ From Ric This business is far more perilous to one's ego than to one's body - and it's pretty tough on the body. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 12:45:16 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: The Noonan Project > So...you're saying that an mtDNA match between, say, bones or teeth found on > Niku to a sample from Earhart's niece would NOT be a "smoking gun"? I'd sure buy it but to be technical it would not be a 100% sure thing. I don't know what the percentages are but the error factor is sufficiently high that SOME courts have a problem with that data. Nuclear DNA is still the way it's done. Coupled with other evidence it would certainly be adequate. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 09:48:38 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: The Noonan Project Normal DNA testing (nuclear) would still be the way to go. mtDNA is only that which is specifically passed down from a female and its significance really came to the forefront with the work done in trying to show a genealogical tree back to early man -- er woman by the mtDNA of females. At the outset this was supposed to be a major genetic break through but once it was tested thoroughly for modern criminal purposes a few chinks in the armor appeared. It is still a great indicator for the overall genetic purposes for which it was used but when it comes down to a specific case it becomes a good corroboration but not hardly infallable. In our search on Gardner a genetic match of mtDNA would be a hell of a find. We're dealing with, in this case, a very tiny gene pool as opposed to matching folks in a large area such as the U.S. or even a particular state. Now if it DIDN'T match that fact would not necessarily be an eliminator small gene pool or not. Alan #2329 *************************************************************************** From Ric I agree that an mtDNA match between Earhart's niece and a bone or tooth found on Gardner would be a hell of a find, but our critics would point out that Garnder is hardly a closed gene pool and the castaway could be almost anybody from anywhere. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 09:50:17 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: The Noonan Project > Wombat, you better explain this one before it gets any worse. Ric, you should have known not to post that when I didn't sign it . Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 10:02:42 EDT From: Thomas Van Hare Subject: The Smoking Gun Ric wrote: > As you've said many times, few accepted historical truths are > established with "smoking guns".... In some cases, like the perverbial, "we chased him down after the murder and the gun was found still in his hand, smoking", you can get a solid chain of evidence. In other cases, the smoking gun of a complete, solid, DNA match doesn't prove guilt, ala O.J. Simpson. For TIGHAR, there may simply not be a smoking gun at all, particularly for a mystery that is 65 years old where the smoke has long since dissipated. When there is a smoking gun, it is usually immediately apparent to those who come upon the scene, which is why so many mysteries never become mystery -- they are solved on arrival. Nonetheless, with hindsight, it is interesting that there was a smoking gun moment in the Earhart Mystery -- it happened for Gallagher those many years ago when he first was handed a kanawa box full of bones and concluded that they were Earhart's. Thomas Van Hare **************************************************************************** From Ric Interesting observation. Of course, Gallagher was not handed a box full of bones and he never drew a firm conclusion that the bones were Earhart's - but, you're correct in that the possibility was seriously considered at a time when the available evidence was far more numerous and fresher than it is today. How the investigation got so badly botched is one of the more fasciating aspects of the whole sad story. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 10:35:37 EDT From: Thomas Van Hare Subject: DNA Matching of Teeth I would not be surprised that even if a DNA match from a tooth found on Niku was made with Earhart's niece, there would still be those who would say that it didn't prove anything. They'd probably say that Earhart was probably killed on Borneo by headhunters, one of whom made a necklace of teeth, which was subsequently traded to a lost Australian soldier in 1942, who survived and gave it to an American Coast Guardsman, who came to Niku to operate a LORAN station, who one night, while out drinking beer at his favorite hidden party spot, the Seven Site, he lost a tooth off of his necklace.... I've written this, to show that it takes more than one item to create a match, whether it be a shoe heel or a piece of aircraft plexiglass. The evidence must be conclusive and, though the human mind likes quick and easy conclusions, more than that is needed to prove the case. Thomas Van Hare *************************************************************************** From Ric I entirely agree. Any conclusion that rests upon a single pillar of evidence, no matter how convincing, is precariously balanced. I think that we also have to keep in mind that no body of evidence, no matter how broad, will convince everyone. Anyone who doubts that need only look at the ongoing Creationism versus Evolution debate. Which reminds me - there was a great quote in the newspaper recently in an article about the death last week of paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The Great Man could be rude and abrasive in person (ask me how I know) but he had an amazing mind and a real talent for rendering complex concepts understandable to lesser mortals. In describing his own wars with the Creationists he wrote: "Evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hiearchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away while scientists debate rival theories for explaining them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in the air pending the outcome. And human beings descended from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet undiscovered." Drawing an analogy to our own work, the facts we have established about events that transpired on Gardner Island exist regardless of whatever theories are advanced to explain them. The more facts we establish, the narrower the possible explantions become. That's why I have, in recent weeks, minimized discussions on the forum about purely theoretical issues like offsets and turning back for the Gilberts. Without facts they can lead nowhere. TIGHAR's efforts are focused on extracting facts from archival sources and from the raw data and material we have collected on the island. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 10:57:56 EDT From: Dan Postellon Subject: reason for lead knob There has been a lot of discussion on why one would want to make a knob from lead. Most knobs of any sort seem to be made from plastic, aluminum, or brass. Although the forum has come up with some unique reasons why it might be made of lead, it seems that lead is not an optimal material for knobs of any sort. You get a very short list if you put the phrase "lead knob" into a search engine like Google, and most of the "hits" are not references to knobs made from lead. There is one explanation, but unfortunately, it eliminates this artifact from consideration as AE related. During World War II, copper alloys were strategic materials, thus the "steel penny". Aluminum was restricted to defense use, mainly for aircraft. Does anyone know if sextant or other knobs were made of lead during WW II, in order to save the brass and aluminum for more strategic uses? In other words, could "the knob" be a WW II artifact? We may have to wait for the patent number to find out. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ************************************************************************* From Ric Doug Brutlag has been kind and trusting enough to lend me his pristine 1942-vintage Pioneer Instrument Division of Bendix Aviation Corp. Type No. A-7 Bubble Octant. I can't be sure what it is made of because most of the surface is well-protected by a layer of black enamel paint. A few unpainted parts seem to be aluminum. Where the paint is gone from a couple of the adjustments and the slots in some of the screws it's clear that they are brass. Nothing on the instrument responds to a magnet except the little spring steel clip that holds the battery in place. The instrument is surprisingly heavy but I can't say that any part of it has the feel (the softness) of lead. My guess would be that the octant is made of aluminum, brass, and, of course, glass. Nowhere on the device is there a patent number cast into the metal. All of the patent information - and there is a lot - is etched onto on little metal plates riveted to the side of the instrument. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 11:05:54 EDT From: David Kelly Subject: Re: The Noonan Project I could guarantee you that the only sure thing with all of this is that no matter how sure we are, and how much evidence is produced (even AE herself), there would be someone out there saying that we had it all wrong. Regards David *************************************************************************** From Ric Very true, but - to be brutally realistic about it - what counts is what the mainstream media think. If there is ever a consensus among the media that the Earhart mystery has been solved, then for most people it will become true. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 11:23:42 EDT From: Chris in Petaluma Subject: History Channel on AE Saw you and Tom King on their "Unsolved Mysteries" segment on the History Channel tonight. Seemed like they were pretty even-handed about it (and 2 hours long!). Interesting on the around the world flight upon approaching the African coast Fred told AE that they were north of their destination and to turn south. AE "felt" they were south of it and turned north regardless and landed in the wrong city. That scenario would repeat itself approaching Howland. I really wonder if there was a disagreement then? The History Channel claims they had a life raft aboard. I thought that was not the case? Chris #2511 **************************************************************************** From Ric The History Channel series is called "History's Mysteries". "Unsolved Mysteries" is a different series on a different channel. Lesson Number One: Never get your history from television. Television is entertainment. As has been discussed on this forum many times, the famous incident about the supposed disagreement between Amelia and Fred when approaching the coast of Africa appears to be a story AE cooked up to explain why they landed in the wrong place. The actual charts Noonan used (now on file at Purdue) do not support her tale. Nobody knows whether there was a life raft aboard or not. All we know for sure is that there was no life raft on the airplane when it was inventoried in Hawaii following the Luke Field debacle. If you ever had the opportunity to work with television documentary producers (any of 'em) you'd learn that concern number one is keeping the story interesting enough to keep the viewer away from the remote. The next concern is what visuals can be found that will serve that purpose - regardless of whether they actually show what we're talking about. And there's always an overriding concern about budget, of which only a small portion is relegated to historical research . The people who make these shows are not historians, they're TV producers. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 11:26:56 EDT From: Charlie Subject: Re: The Noonan Project re Noonan census information. Good job of locating the data. Especially since some of the census indexing at that era was WPA projects. Be aware that just because information appears on a census form, there is no guarantee that it is 100 pct accurate, although it "mostly" is. Census takers were 9 to 5 workers and when they knocked on your door to take the census, as they did in the old days, they gathered the entire household information from whoever was present. So, present information, names of people in the household, dates of birth, occupations had a high incidence of accuracy. Information about the past was notoriously incomplete or inaccurate unless directly provided by the subject in question. If the wife was providing the census information, and her husband was from another state, it is highly possible that she wouldn't know where the in-laws were born, even though her husband might. Military record information? Even less reliable when provided by a spouse. That's evident even today when reading the obits. My favorite in that regard "Born in 1918, he served in both WW1 and WW2." ... He must have been carried in his Papa's rucksack! Also sad proof that editors no longer proof/read what appears in their newspapers. Experienced genealogists never accept information unless independantly verified by two sources (That's not two books using the same source of information). One must be careful drawing conclusions from missing information on a Census form or General Information ... "Born in the US." All of this is very frustrating at times to experienced genealogists. Census reports are very valuable, but must be read with a skeptical eye ... often they are the jumping off point for further corroboration. Charlie *************************************************************************** From Ric Good points Charlie. In this case, the census data on Noonan mostly corroborated information we had previously gleaned from other sources. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:02:46 EDT From: Phil Tanner Subject: Re: DNA Matching of Teeth > I would not be surprised that even if a DNA match from a tooth found on Niku > was made with Earhart's niece, there would still be those who would say that > it didn't prove anything. Agreed. I don't imagine this story has made the news in the States, but a cause celebre here in the UK involving one of the country's last hangings for murder, in 1962, has just been resolved via DNA - the case also involved a rape. In a nutshell, the guy who was long thought to have been the victim of the ultimate miscarriage of justice has been proved guilty after all, to a probability factor of , I believe, hundreds of millions to one that the material could have been left by anyone but him. And STILL the TV people can find talking heads to maintain that the scientists might be mistaken. LTM, Phil Tanner 2276 **************************************************************************** From Ric I hear ya. Over here the watchword is "Remember. OJ walked." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:11:57 EDT From: Marjorie in Montana Subject: Truth and belief > From Ric > > Very true, but - to be brutally realistic about it - what counts is what the > mainstream media think. If there is ever a consensus among the media that > the Earhart mystery has been solved, then for most people it will become true. Ric--well said. Or to quote playwright Maxwell Anderson, putting words into Elizabeth I's mouth in his play "Mary of Scotland," It's not what happens that matters, no, not even what happens that's true, it's what men believe to have happened. LTM Marjorie in Montana *************************************************************************** From Ric History has been described as "a body of agreed-upon lies". ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:34:33 EDT From: Chris in Petaluma Subject: Re: The Noonan Project >From Ric >Very true, but - to be brutally realistic about it - what counts is what the >mainstream media think. If there is ever a consensus among the media that >the Earhart mystery has been solved, then for most people it will become true BUT, take away the media and your piers. What, in your own personal opinion, would satisfy you that Earhart was on Niku? Just the supporting evidence you have now? My personal opinion, it would still have to be something that would leave NO doubt, otherwise I'd lie awake at nights wondering if I was right. The media might be doing a service, because they will question it until there's enough evidence to shut them up. ID #"s or DNA is the only way to go to be sure. > The people who make these shows are not historians, they're TV producers. I totally agree. I was in the "film industry" and found that to be true. I worked in the effects for "The Right Stuff" not knowing about Chuck Yeager and the historical accuracies of the film. After seeing the film, (which I liked-very entertaining) I read up on the subject and found huge inaccuracies in it. Some was for time compression, others for entertainment. Wouldn't you think that truth and accuracy could be just or more entertaining than fiction? It's sad, but it's difficult to tell if any of these "documentaries" are accurate. One things for sure, that was you I saw being interviewed, right? Chris #2511 *************************************************************************** From Ric I'm not nearly that good looking. <> Long ago I came to accept the basic paradox of historical study - we have to try our best to know what is fundamentally impossible to know for certain. All history is opinion and it always comes down to what satisfies you as an individual. For some people it's whatever Walter Cronkite tells them. Others demand to see the original documents and draw their own conclusions. I can trace when I crossed the threshold of belief about Earhart being on Gardner to the moment in 1997 that I learned that Peter McQuarrie had found a file in the Tarawa archives confirming that Gallagher had discovered the skeleton of a castaway in 1940. Had I not already spent eight years immersed in the Earhart mystery and the history of the Phoenix Islands that information would have been very interesting but I doubt that it would have been an epiphany. However, knowing what I knew, that news hit me like a thunderbolt and there has not been a serious doubt in my mind from that moment on. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:39:25 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Re: DNA Matching of Teeth Just a reminder, the O.J. acquittal had nothing to do with DNA evidence. This was purely a racial thing on the part of the tainted jury. If a bone or tooth found on Niku matched the DNA of one of Amelia's relatives, it may not be the "smoking gun", but the barrel would surely be warm. ************************************************************************* From Ric The OJ verdict was probably a "racial thing" just as the Earhart Japanese-Capture theory is a racial/WWII thing. It may be that a publicly accepted "solution" to the Earhart mystery will have as much to do with timing and what the public is ready to accept than anything else. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:42:01 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Myrtlebank Does anyone have a course or times of postions of Myrtlebank in the vicinity of Nauru on the day of the flight? What made (Elgen Long ??) deduce AE passed 80 miles south of Nauru and is this likely to be correct or more northerly/southerly? Ontario was in the region of 3.00 South ie 148 m south of Nauru so presumably the "ship in sight ahead" refers to the Myrtlebank on this analysis. Comments? Regards angus. *************************************************************************** From Ric Randy Jacobson did an in-depth study of the question. I won't steal his thunder. Randy? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:49:37 EDT From: Robert Klaus Subject: The BWA artifact Forum usage for some time has been waffling between use of the term "Smoking Gun" and "Any Idiot Artifact". Both these seem mean strongly convincing evidence, with Smoking Gun perhaps requiring a higher level of proof the Any Idiot. Unfortunately exact definitions are lacking. Several items discussed on the forum have been asserted as definitive proof, although they have yet to convince most participants. The demise of the shoeites would serve as an example. Perhaps we should consider a level of evidence that might be called the "But What About...?" artifact. The BWA would be that piece of evidence that would itself require an explanation if the original proposition proved false. For example: a single aircraft piece that could only have come from a Lockheed 10 is found at location A. Subsequently all or most of NR-16020 is found at a distant location B. The theory that AE wound up at A would be disproven, but the artifact found at B would itself constitute mystery worth looking into. FWIW, LTM Robert Klaus ************************************************************************** From Ric I've always considered "smoking gun" and "any idiot" to be colloquial synonyms for what, in the trade, is called a "diagnostic" artifact - i.e. the thing that leaves no doubt about the validity of the subject hypothesis. However, as we've recently discussed here on the forum, doubt often persists - especially in a case as famous and as emotion-charged as this one. I think your comments are prescient. Once a compelling case has been made, either by an overwhelming preponderence of evidence or a diagnostic artifact, there will be a flood of BWAs prompted by years of misinformation. ( For example: I would predict that prominent BWAs would include the Morgenthau transcripts and Elgen Long's fuel calculations.) Answering such BWAs could occupy several lifetimes. The prospect of legitimate BWAs is another matter and would, as you say, have to be the subject of further investigation. At this time, however, I'm not aware of a legitimate BWA to our basic hypothesis. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:33:49 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: DNA and navigation > Agreed. I don't imagine this story has made the news in the States, but a > cause celebre here in the UK involving one of the country's last hangings for > murder, in 1962, has just been resolved via DNA - the case also involved a > rape. In a nutshell, the guy who was long thought to have been the victim of > the ultimate miscarriage of justice has been proved guilty after all, to a > probability factor of , I believe, hundreds of millions to one that the > material could have been left by anyone but him. And STILL the TV people can > find talking heads to maintain that the scientists might be mistaken. There is in fact justification for not believing that DNA matching has confirmed Hanratty's guilt. The evidence had been stored together with items belonging to Hanratty for forty years and had been contaminated. What is much more significant than the DNA match with Hanratty, (which one might well expect), is that there is no DNA evidence linking the other suspect in the case, Peter Alphon. The circumstantial evidence is that one or the other or both are guilty. In the absence of Alphon DNA, it is overwhelmingly likely Hanratty was guilty of the rape and murder. However, this is just a small part of the story. Hanratty was pointed out to the Police by the wife of the murdered Gregsten on a hunch. She was in the right place to point out the killer (out of all the people in the country!) ---- on a hunch?? No WAY. She had to KNOW he was the killer. In which case we have a conspiracy, and more likely than not, Alphon, who stayed in the same hotel as Hanratty just before the murder, was a part of it since he was a friend of Gregsten's wife!! ( I love these conspiracy theories) DNA evidence is not always conclusive in itself. It needs to be used in conjunction with other evidence and its absence can be as important as its presence. Like any evidence, it can be manipulated. Statistical evidence on DNA matching is often presented to juries in a biased way and juries often do not understand the significance of statistical evidence. When you look at all the religious zealots (read bigots) in the world who are all totally convinced they're right, which none of them are - I guarantee it, (no hint of irony in that statement), it makes one despair of objectivity where the human race are concerned. People believe what they want to believe, irrespective of logic, unfortunately. The people WE need (re Gardner) to convince are not the press or the establishment or the masses. Its us! If Ric REALLY believed the "Mystery was Solved" with the discovery of the bones reports, he would have given up the hunt long ago. Its that uncertainty that keeps us going. On another topic, what do we know about AE's capability wrt navigation? Could she use a sextant? Did she have any math qualifications? What level of navigation had she achieved on her own before the round-the-world tour? Regards Angus. ************************************************************************** From Ric <> Only a religious zealot is content in simply knowing that he's right. The rest of us want recognition that we're right. There's an element of ego in this work (there better be fame because there's sure as hell no fortune) but there is also the point that society can't benefit from the lessons of history if we don't know what they are. As to Earhart's math background, the following is an excerpt for the 8th Edition of the Earhart Project Book: ------------------------------------------------ 1925 - Following another bout of sinus infection necessitating more surgery, draining, and recovery, Amelia returned to Columbia for the spring semester of 1925 with the intention of earning a degree in engineering. Now short of money, she registered for only two courses, elementary physics and intermediate algebra. The algebra proved to be a problem. Her acceptance as a degree candidate at Columbia had been conditional upon completing that course but Amelia had had no math since high school. She received a C- which meant that she did not receive credit for the course. In an attempt to save the situation, she enrolled in summer school at Harvard University but instead of taking remedial instruction in algebra she signed up for a trigonometry course which assumed a thorough grounding in algebra. She worked hard and came away with an A, effectively erasing the stain on her academic record. Rather than return to Columbia, she applied for admission to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) because they accepted women on an equal basis with men and because they offered a degree in aeronautical engineering. Her financial situation was such that she could only attend if awarded a scholarship, but none was awarded. Amelia, her formal education at an end, took up residence in West Medford, Massachusetts where her sister was teaching junior high school. Although she never completed any program of higher education, Amelia Earhart was a good student and her schooling left her well versed in the liberal arts. She had an unusually fine knowledge of the classics, wrote well, and enjoyed music and poetry. She was also interested in science and had a fundamental grasp of biology, zoology, chemistry and physics. ---------------------------------------------------------------- As for Amelia's navigational prowess, I'm aware of no evidence that she had much of any. She seems to have conducted her flights by pilotage and dead reckoning. On two of her four solo over-water flights (Newfoundland to Ireland in 1932 , and Newark to Mexico City in 1935) she got lost. In preparing for the World Flight she went to considerable lengths to avoid taking the Radio Navigation flight test required by the Bureau of Air Commerce. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:35:22 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Myrtlebank I had the opportunity to be contacted by the third mate of the Myrtlebank, who was on duty at the time Earhart flew over. He claimed to have actually heard her. I wrote him a bunch of questions, mostly about what the Myrtlebank had been, where it was going to (Nauru), and what time it arrived at Nauru. By piecing together the basic course and speed, I was able to deduce that the Myrtlebank was a few 10's of miles north of the Lae-Howland great circle, and could well have been the ship Earhart saw. Monte Carlo analysis of the flight path gives equal (but poor) probability that Earhart saw either ship. My personal leaning is that it was the Myrtlebank, and that Earhart was using the RDF off of the Ontario, but with 180* ambiguity, thought that the Myrtlebank was the Ontario. Just an unsupported opinion. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:36:56 EDT From: Gary LaPook Subject: Charts The best charts to look at are the US DOD GNC (Global Navigation Charts) series of charts which a published on a scale of 1:5,000,000. GNC-20 covers the entire route of flight from Lae to Howland and, hypothetically, on to Gardner. Just by coincidence (or another conspiracy) the northern edge of the chart is at 48 minutes north and Howland is not plotted (very suspicious.) It doesn't cover the northern Gilberts or the Marshalls and you will need GNC-7 for that area. Other charts that might be of interest are JNC (Jet Navigation Charts) at a scale of 1:2,000,000. JNC-57 covers north of the equator to 18 north and 168 east to 168 west covering northern Gilberts and Howland. JNC 72 and 73 cover the areas from southern Gilberts to Phoenix islands south of the equator.. Even larger scale charts are the ONC series at 1:1,000,000. ONC M-7 covers the Phoenix islands, and L-16 and M-16 cover the Gilberts. Each of these charts costs $4.25 and are available from the DOD at 800-638-8972. They are also available at Sportys pilot shop for the same price. gl ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:37:52 EDT From: David Kelly Subject: Re: The Noonan Project I saw it on the tele, so it must be true. I read it in the paper so it must have happened. I heard it on the radio so it has to be occurring (remember Orson Wells)........:) The only flaw in saying that if the media believes it to be solved is that the media have a vested interested in it not being solved. Ambiguity and uncertainty creates great viewing. Regards David ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:24:38 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Perception Ric said: "Very true, but - to be brutally realistic about it - what counts is what the mainstream media think. If there is ever a consensus among the media that the Earhart mystery has been solved, then for most people it will become true." In the p.r. business the phrase is, "Perception is reality." LTM, whose perception changes daily Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ************************************************************************* From Ric I wonder if they understand that it's not true. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:28:49 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: The BWA artifact Ric, your use of "diagnostic artifact" is not quite consistent with standard archeological useage. Typically in archaeology "diagnostic artifact" means an artifact that's indicative of a particular time period or perhaps cultural group. A particular kind of fluted spearpoint is "diagnostic" of the Clovis period in American prehistory, for example; a particular pottery type may be "diagnostic" of Hohokam. But there's a good deal of wiggle room for arguing about how diagnostic a given thing is, and the phenomena they're diagnostic OF are big broad, soft squishy things like time periods and cultural groups. I've never seen "diagnostic" used to describe an artifact whose discovery would prove a given hypothesis to be correct. Not to quibble or anything.... *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks for the correction. That's why we have a real live archaeologist on board. So what term is used for what we mean when we say "smoking gun"? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:55:09 EDT From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: The Noonan Project As I have said many times I am an enthusiastic supporter of the Niku hypothesis. After watching the aerial video of Niku several times,I realized how big the atoll really is. With the scaveola as thick as it has been described, I think it would be fair to say that one could be standing 2 feet away from a significant artifact and never find it. My question is, how many more expeditions can we support without finding the conclusive evidence needed to solve this mystery? Based on the amount of ground cleared and examined on Niku IIII, it could take forever to cover all the areas of interest. Ric, I am in no way being critical of past efforts. It's just that the enormity of the work needed to be done could be greater than TIGHAR's ability to raise money. You know how much I enjoy this Forum but it really does concern me as to how long TIGHAR can raise funds to continue. If I were a wealthy man, the problem would be solved. So much for that theory. LTM (who appreciates all the hard work that has been done) Mike Haddock #2438 **************************************************************************** From Ric Be of good cheer. In my experience, the ability to raise money for further research has everything to do with whether or not you can show progress toward your goal rather than how hard or slow the progress comes. TIGHAR never has, and probably never will, get contributions from folks who want guaranteed conclusive proof on this very next trip. Nor will we get funding from those can't or won't see the progress we have made in 14 years and 6 expeditions (7 counting Kanton). Those who see the search for the solution to the Earhart mystery as something akin to searching for your lost car keys - either you find them or you don't - are going to see any expedition that doesn't find a smoking gun as a failure. Our support has always come from those who understand that solving this kind of mystery is a process, not an event. I don't know where the money for Niku V will come from, but I never know where the money for the next expedition is going to come from. What I do know is that our progress is real and I have great confidence that there are enough people out there with the intelligence and education to recognize it. Fortunately, those folks also tend to be in a financial position to be of significant help. Goes with the territory. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:01:09 EDT From: Phil Tanner Subject: Re: The BWA artifact > Perhaps we should consider a level of evidence that might be called the > "But What About...?" artifact. The BWA would be that piece of evidence that > would itself require an explanation if the original proposition proved false. We don't have our hands on it, but I'd like to propose a BWA. The sextant box documented as found on Gardner Island in a state too good for it to have been out in all weathers for a decade, ruling out a link with the Norwich City survivors, and too valuable a piece of kit for it to be plausible the New Zealand surveyors would have mislaid it. LTM, Phil Tanner 2276 **************************************************************************** From Ric The sextant box would indeed seem to be a BWA to anyone advancing the hypothesis that it came from the Norwich City or from the Kiwis. It's the one thing, so far, that argues persuasively for the castaway having not been dead for more than a very few years. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:02:41 EDT From: Angus Subject: Re: Myrtlebank Randy - Thanks, From your analysis, should I take it that 110 - 130 miles south of Nauru for Myrtlebank is probably nearer the mark than 80 miles south? Regards Angus. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:13:48 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: The BWA artifact > So what term is used for what we mean when we say "smoking gun"? "Smoking gun." Thing is, archaeology so seldom deals with single definitive artifacts that we really don't need a term for it. TK ************************************************************************ From Ric I had to ask. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:28:23 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Myrtlebank My estimate of the Myrtlebank position is approx. 2*30'S, 167*10'E to 2*5'S, 167* 8'E, and approximately 10 miles wide. The lower position is about 10 miles north of the great circle route. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:31:35 EDT From: Eric Subject: Suggested Reading Those of you interested in learning more about the U.S. Navy aircraft that were involved in the search for AE and FN should read JACKRABBITS TO JETS by Elretta Sudsbury. Despite the quirky title, it is a well-researched/well written history of Naval Air Station North Island, lavishly illustrated with hundreds of historic B&W photos from the 1920's, '30's and '40's. As noted in the text, most if not all of the Navy aircraft involved in the search were based at North Island. (The LEXINGTON sailed for the search area from there on July 5th, after loading 3 tons of supplies in less than 24 hours.) This book was originally published in 1967 and was updated and reprinted in 1992. I did an on-line search for used copies and noted that there are a number of them available at a variety of prices. (Also, check your local used book stores, since there are probably copies out there for sale that aren't listed on line.) Happy reading! Eric (NAS North Island, San Diego) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 14:13:49 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: Myrtlebank Randy, Thanks very much. I see that the time of this supposed sighting was 8.00 pm Sydney time. Would that be 11.00 pm Itasca time? Ric, How far from Howland would one logically expect them to stop taking speed line shots and descend under the cloud deck to look for Howland, bearing in mind the cloud height and the comfortable rate of descent? Regards Angus *********************************************************************** From Ric Good question. You want to stay high as long as possible to conserve fuel, but you don't want to risk overshooting the island. I'd want to be down below the cloud deck at least 25 miles out, maybe more. I would think that 500 fpm is a comfortable rate of descent in an airplane like that. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 15:28:33 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Myrtlebank I believe the time of the Myrtlebank/Ontario sighting was 1030 GMT. Nauru was at +11.5 time zone, and Itasca was at -11.5, and Howland at 10.5 time zone. That puts things at 2300 local time Nauru, midnight Itasca, and 0100 Howland. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:07:52 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: Myrtlebank Randy, I had gone on memory and the time was 8.30 pm Sydney time (not 8.00 pm) which as you say is 10.30 GMT. However 10.30 - 11.30 is 11.00 pm for Itasca rather than midnight isn't it? Regards Angus ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:15:33 EDT From: Thomas Van Hare Subject: Rates of Descent Ric wrote: > I would think that 500 fpm is a comfortable rate of descent > in an airplane like that. Actually, this opens up a minor can of worms, to what end I do not know. Today, the "standard" rate of descent is 500 fpm. But when did that come about? Was there a different standard in use in the 1930s? And how far out would a navigator of that era have advised the pilot to begin the descent? Is there any data or anyone who knows? Are there any old-timers who are around who can share their memories? Thomas Van Hare *************************************************************************** From Ric You're absolutely right to seek information about what was common practice in the context of the time. I would think, however, that the practicality of the 500 fpm rate of descent is a function of the performance of the machine. It's considered "standard" today for airplanes that perform in the same regimen as the aircraft of the '30s, i.e. cruising speeds, wing loading, power loading, etc. I imagine that an airline or business jet pilot would not consider a piddly 500 fpm rate of descent to be standard. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:26:47 EDT From: Glider Subject: Reverse LOP Hey everyone, I've been a lurker here since the rust spot near Niku was spotted on the Sat. photo and made national news. I've been following the forum digest and the Niku reports since then and have enjoyed it very much. I live in Gulf Shores, Alabama about 20 Minutes form NAS Pensacola, whose Naval Air Museum is one of my favorite haunts. I recently was working a few blocks from the house in Moble, AL where the airline pilot who had FN's sextent lived. Drove by it one day after it was discussed on the forum...very cool and errie. ( It's sort of a ranch style brick house not the old Victorian house I had hoped for. Wondered what might be lost in the attic.) I know Rick might have a little problem with what I wanted to ask about and I feel this may have already been done. If so I'd like to know where it might be posted. So, here goes. Something I have wondered about for a while is what position near Howland could be calculated for AE's turn onto the LOP by running a reverse plot from Niku (Gardner Island) using AE and FN's assumed knowledge of wind conditions vs what is know about the actual wind conditions along with other factors. A series of plots could be made to give a good general idea of where they were when they made the turn. 1) assume they turned north (ok NW'erly) first before heading south, 2) assume they turned south first, 3) did they spot Niku to starboard within assumed maximum visuality for time of day and atmospheric conditions, 4) did they spot Niku to Port, 5) did they spot NIku dead ahead, 6) plot all of the above based on maximum air speed, 7) plot all of the above for Minimum air speed, 8) plot all of the above with AE and FN's knowledge of wind, 9) plot all fo the above for maximum wind error, 10) plot all of the above assuming a climb to altitude for better visibilty at a point near the turn to LOP (or elsewhere). These plots should produce a circle within which the turn to LOP could be found . This would help answer some of the questions I see posted alot, such as did they over fly Howland or come up short, were they north of Howland or south. The plotted circle may show that all of these were possible, but at least it would set a range of possiblities. These plots and times could then be tied to the sighting by the Myrtlebank and by using a simular set of calculations produce another circle narrowing the area even more. These could also be tied in with times of radio messages from AE and the Itasca. I personally don't think they would have have flown a search pattern anywhere along the LOP except possible right at the end of their fuel reserves and even then they would have to have made some assumptions about where they thought they were and which way to turn. I might have gone for altitude at the end for better visibility in hopes of spotting land and for gaining a long glide path for best landing setup. But for AE and FN this would have been panic time, given the fact they obviously had not seen anything but water and they, like us, were wondering if they had packed the life raft, and of course this assumes they had not yet spotted Niku. Lot's of work, I know. But several folks here on the forum seem up to the task. LTM (who hates traveling in circles) Glider *************************************************************************** From Ric I suppose you could do it but I don't know what useful information it could produce. If we assume that they did reach Gardner we still don't know when that happened except within very broad parameters- sometime after 20:13 when Itasca last heard them and whenever we can feel sure that they must have been out of fuel - whenever that is. I think you'd end up with such a big circle that it would be pretty meaningless. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:29:11 EDT From: Mark Subject: Re: Suggested Reading >(The LEXINGTON sailed for the search area from there > on July 5th, after loading 3 tons of supplies in > less than 24 hours.) > on line.) Happy reading! > > Eric (NAS North Island, San Diego) Umm... at the risk of going off-topic, is the 3 tons in 24 hours a mis-type? That's only six pickup-truck loads. I would expect that it would take *far* less than 24 hours (more like a single pier crane lift?) to load that amount of supplies, even if hand-carried aboard by sailors. It also seems a terribly small quantity of supplies for one of the largest ships in the fleet. I'm not saying that loading, preparing, and setting sail with a ship that large (not to mention the rest of its group!) in less than 24 hours isn't a remarkable achievement - only that the 3 tons is a curiously small quantity to be of note in describing that achievement. Could it perhaps be more like 30 or 300 tons? Come to think of it, 3 tons couldn't be more than two airplanes... and is certainly less than twenty crewmembers... Maybe it's just the antihistamines this morning... :-) LTM, Mark in Horse Country ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:41:04 EDT From: Eric Subject: Re: Betty's Radio The radio on which "Betty" is believed to have heard AE's distress calls was tentatively identified as a Zenith model 1000Z "Stratosphere." If this is correct, Betty's family must have been quite affluent, since the Stratosphere sold for $750.00, a small fortune in those Depression years. (This may account for the fact that only 350 of these sets were ever produced.) A possible runner-up for Betty's radio could be a 1937 E. H. Scott Philharmonic XXX, which looks very similar to the Stratosphere. A nice example can be viewed at http://www.ironradio.com/scott.html The Scott set employs thirty tubes and was noted for its sensitive, long-distance, all-band receiving capabilities. Like the Stratosphere, Scott radios were custom-built and marketed to affluent buyers. (A listing of Scott owners reads like a "Who's Who" of famous people from the 1930's.) Still, the Scott Philharmonic was not quite as expensive as the Stratosphere and, as a result, many more sets were produced (and in a variety of cabinet styles, including some that were not unlike the Stratosphere's cabinet in appearance.) Betty's identification of her family's radio was based on her being shown a photo of a Stratosphere. Perhaps she was also shown a photo of a Philharmonic. If not, there is a possibility that she could have heard AE on a Scott rather than on a Zenith. Eric, NAS North Island, San Diego, Ca. *************************************************************************** From Ric Betty's father worked for the power company and, in those days, power companies were eager to encourge consumers to buy electrical appliances to boost demand. To that end, they had very attractive arrangements with manufacturers which made it possible for power company employees to buy new high-end appliances at bargain prices. Getting these fancy new products out into the neighborhoods was an effective marketing strategy. It is Betty's recollection that the radio was a Zenith. A key element in her memory is a cabinet stye that provided an opening in the front of the set below the tuning dial and knobs. She used to lie on her back with her head inside the alcove and reach up to turn the tuning knob blindly, just cruising for something interesting. That's the reason she can't tell us for sure just where on the dial she found Amelia. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:44:42 EDT From: Darrell Whitbeck Subject: Norwich City provisions Just out of curiosity.... Does anyone know Exactly just what provisions were left behind by the Norwich City? Was the water in cans or bottles? How long would it keep? Same with the food. Obviously it wasn't the dehydrated (MRE's) rations that (basically keep forever) that TIGHAR took on past exhibitions. I wonder how well/long the food would have kept in cans. Was the method for canning food in 1929 as good as it is nowadays? Please forgive my ignorance, but I am curious. LTM Darrell Whitbeck *************************************************************************** From Ric We share your ignorance and are equally curious. All we know is that a cache of provisions was left. We have no information about what it contained. From what little I know, canning technology was pretty good by 1929. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:52:46 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: PT-109 Interesting article in the paper this morning. It appears that Robert Ballard (the oceanographer who located the Titanic) may have located PT-109. The patrol boat was discovered in the Blackett Strait near the town of Gizo. I think it very odd that this plywood craft could have survived 59 years under the sea. If such is the case, then massive parts of the Electra (engines, struts, etc.) should be in fairly good shape. Or does steel and aluminum deteriorate faster than plywood? *************************************************************************** From Ric I haven't seen anything yet to indicate that Dr. Ballard found any plywood but wood from other shipwrecks has survived a lot longer than 59 years. There is plenty of reason to think that the massive parts of the Electra survive somewhere, but I don't see that this latest re-location of historic wreckage has any bearing on our work except to demonstrate once again that it's hard enough to find things that aren't lost, let alone find things that are. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 13:53:36 EDT From: Michael Hicklin Subject: Re Food Cans Food can technology was sufficiently well advanced by well before the time in question to make it a feasible option. Indeed some cans dating back to the fateful Antarctic expedition by Capt Scott in 1912 were opened in the Sixties. The contents were analysed and found to be in excellent shape. Re the Electra location. Far what its worth I tend to think that if it is at Nikomoruru, it is in the lagoon, having been ditched there rather than on the land. Best wishes in this ever fascinating work Michael Hicklin *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Michael. Unfortunately, Nikumaroro is a rather different environment than Antarctica - fewer penguins. Nevertheless, the British colonial officers and the workers on islands that did not yet have mature coconut plantings (like Niku) relied heavily upon "tinned" food, so we have to assume that canned goods held up reasonably well. Although I've mentioned it before, it's probably worth restating why I don't think a lagoon landing would have been Earhart's choice. It's a question of alternatives. If there was no place that looked like a gear-down landing would be successful then a gear-up ditiching in the calm waters of the lagoon might be attractive. Indeed, John Lambrecht commented upon the feasibility of such a ditching in his report, but Lambrecht was there at high tide when the reef flat was covered with breakers. At low tide the reef presents a very different picture and the island looks like it's surrounded by a giant empty parking lot. If Earhart arrived over the island at low tide she would have to be nuts to land in the lagoon, knowing that it would mean the certain loss of the aircraft and present a very real danger to life and limb. Given any reasonable opportunity it seems like she would opt for preserving the airplane in the hope that she could fix whatever was wrong with the radio, call for help, get enough fuel to take off and fly to Howland from whence she could resume her trip and salvage her career. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 13:55:07 EDT From: Angus Murray Subject: Shooting the sun How does cloud deck height affect one's decisions on altitude re taking dawn and speed line shots? Is there a height at which cloud interferes with a dawn shot whether one is under or above it? Are there any likely scenarios where Fred was unable to get sun shots on the way in to Howland? Regards Angus. ************************************************************************* From Ric I'll let the Celestial Choir answer that one. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:53:22 EDT From: Oscar Boswell Subject: Re: Rates of Descent Lockheed did a 37 page precompletion "Range Study of Lockheed Electra Bimotor Airplane" on the 10 E, which was finished on June 19, 1936 (parts of it are dated earlier). It gives data and procedures for an absolute maximum range attempt with 1200 gallons of fuel and a maximum gross weight of 16,500 pounds. Page 3 contains the following: "about 100 to 150 miles from the end of the flight, put the ship into a power gide losing about 250 to 300 feet of altitude per minute while maintaining cruising power output." (The graph calls for 150 indicated air speed in the descent, at a 200 hp per engine setting.) This, of course, is advice for maximum range, not for dealing with navigational or weather issues. Oscar ********************************************************************** From Ric I just recently received a copy of that document from Alan Caldwell but hadn't had time to study it. Yup, that's what it says. As you say, it doesn't allow for navigational or weather issues but , in this case it would seem that both would support the recommendation. In the absence of information to the contrary it would seem that a 250 to 300 fpm descent at 150 mph initiated 100 to 150 miles out is the best assumption for what they did. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 16:08:31 EDT From: Chris in Petaluma Subject: Lagoon and reef questions If the plane was in the lagoon wouldn't it have been pretty easy to find? Wouldn't the satellite photo have shown an outline or some indication it was under the sand or silt? How deep is the lagoon? Would a magnetometer detect something that large? Wouldn't you be able to make an educated guess as to the approximate location the Electra might have ditched? I guess if it were there and started leaking oil, it would be easier to find. Also, from the air, couldn't AE have seen the reef flat and still been doubtful that it was solid coral with no chuck holes? Could it look like something soft from the air i.e. mud, or something else? We know what the island is like now but did she have any idea of what it was made of? There are some mighty enticing things about the lagoon. Ditching anywhere but the lagoon seems most reasonable (if you feel you HAVE to ditch) because you're protected from the tides, weather, surf, and coral and it might be easier to get out of the plane in calm water and a close shore. Which is safer, to ditch in a calm lagoon or to try a wheels down landing taking a chance the landing gear might be suddenly ripped from under you? Chris #2511 ************************************************************************* From Ric <> The lagoon water is very murky. We can't reliably see the bottom in the satellite photo. <> Based on what assumptions? <> That sounds reasonable. <> My best answer to that is to look at the Aerial Tour video. Even though it was made at high tide, that reef looks plenty solid. <> Not to me there ain't. Landing a land plane in the water is always a very dangerous thing to do. <> I'd go for the wheels down landing any day. Even if the gear is ripped off and you slam down on the belly or even cartwheel - when the dust settles you can climb out and not worry about drowning. Landing in the water is a guaranteed bad experience. Even if you just bump your head hard enough to stun you, you're going to die. Given no other alternative, I'd much rather mush into the underbrush than ditch in the lagoon. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 11:51:13 EDT From: Suzanne Astorino Subject: Re: Betty's Radio Eric wrote: >The radio on which "Betty" is believed to have heard AE's >distress calls was tentatively identified as a >Zenith model 1000Z "Stratosphere." Pictures here, what a beauty. Zenith Strat models. Click on the 1000Z on the right. http://www.oldradiozone.com/strat.html More here, with links to click on the bottom of the page. http://www.azarc.org/museum/zenith_st0.html It's nice to now have a mental image of Betty surfing the dial! Suzanne ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 11:59:29 EDT From: David Kelly Subject: Bones in Sydney? At the risk of going over old ground, we have established the bones found by Gallagar did not make it to the Uni of Sydney as the anthropology dept has not record of them. Therefore, we suspect that they may still be in Fiji. Just a thought, what if they did get to Sydney, and did not get to the right department at the uni? I say this because, the Forensic Laboratories (CSI as you probably know them in the US) are located just over the road, literally. I suspect (and will confirm or otherwise) that they may have been attached to the Uni of Sydney. I wonder if they were waylaid on their way and are sitting in a cold corner of the Forensic Lab? I would imagine that a box of bones would have raised a few eyebrows from customs, even in the 1940's. Is worth following up or has other events overtaken it? Regards David ******************************************************************** From Ric For the bones to have been sent to Sydney it would have been necessary for that to happen without it being noted to the file. That's almost inconceivable unless it happened years later, which is possible but seems very unlikely. I see no reason not to check the Forensic Lab but I don't think there's much chance they're there. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 12:02:13 EDT From: Alik Subject: Re: Shooting the sun Angus asked: > How does cloud deck height affect one's decisions on altitude re taking dawn > and speed line shots? Is there a height at which cloud interferes with a > dawn shot whether one is under or above it? Are there any likely scenarios > where Fred was unable to get sun shots on the way in to Howland? > Regards Angus. > > ************************************************************************* > From Ric > > I'll let the Celestial Choir answer that one. This question is best answered by providing a rigorous definition of a "line of position". A line of position is: omicron = 90 - theta Where omicron is the longitudinal (and angular) differece between the position on Earth at which the celestial body being shot reaches it maximum height for that day and the meridian that crosses through your present position (with some qualifications that follow). "theta" is the angle as measured by an observer between the horizon and the celestial body. There's some fancy mojo you have to do to correct for things like seasonal tilt and altitude (called "dip"), but these corrections are all provided in any good nautical almanac. The almanac will also tell you at what longitude on Earth any given celestial body will be observed to reach it's maximum daily height at the moment you made the angular measurement. You can then find your "LOP" by algebraically summing the longitudinal position at which the celestial body is directly overhead (taken from the almanac) and omicron. This will give you a meridian of position, but because of seasonal tilt, it will not always run exactly north and south, but may be angled slightly. It is parallel to the day/night terminator - if that helps you visualize it. Clearly, then, you must have *a clear line of sight* from your point of observation to the horizon and to the celestial body simultaneously (this angle "theta" is measured with a sextant). I think it follows from that that the answer to your question is probably indeterminate, for all practical purposes, since the exact position of the clouds *at that time and that location* cannot be now observed. It would be a judgement call as to whether a pilot would, having looked at the cloud cover, decide to make a go of it. Perhaps reasonable inference may be drawn regarding that matter if extreme weather conditions were known to be present in the area (either extremely favorable or foul). If the weather were anything in-between, I would not infer anything from it. Alik ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 12:08:47 EDT From: Don Robinson Subject: Re: Rates of Descent As a NATS pilot in 1945 we started our letdown about 100 miles out, descending at 250 FPM. I dont remember being told to do it that way, but it seemed to be the way everybody was doing it. It worked very well for us in R5D's [C54]. DonRobinson ************************************************************************ From Charlie 500 fpm was standardized as the "maximum" rate of descent in the time of the DC-3, 1936, for unpressurized passenger aircraft to prevent discomfort to the passengers, ear popping, etc. The airlines established these standards and they included the numbers in the flight manuals. In practice, since those aircraft were low and slow compared to today's aircraft, pilots descended at an even lower rate of descent. If just the flight crew were onboard, on mail planes, cargo haulers, etc., I suspect they descended at whatever rate they liked, short of a dive :)) The DC-3 made its first flight on 17 December 1935, the 32nd anniversary to the day of the Wright Brothers' first flight. The initial rate of descent of pressurized aircraft can be thousands of feet per minute with no discomfort to the passengers. However, when they reach the altitude where the inside cabin pressure matches the outside pressure, then they, too, slow their rate of descent, because it is now an "unpressurized" aircraft. A nice convenience of the 500 fpm figure ... easy to calculate in your head how much time to allow for descent. Probably a coincidence. Charles Wood *************************************************************** From Ric Amelia had chronic sinus trouble - another reason not come down fast. Based on the Lockheed recommendations and the other input we've had, it seems a safe bet that the descent toward Howland was made slowly from at least a hundred miles out. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 12:11:13 EDT From: Denise Subject: Again with the coconuts! Note for Wombat: Since I assume you live in Far North Queensland, I guess you've been following the story about that guy lost in the Daintree Forest? The one who's just been found, barely alive, after 33 days? (He would have been in far better health, only he'd been bitten by a highly toxic snake!) Note, if you will, from the weekend's newspaper accounts, that the only thing he said he found to eat were coconuts ... AND HE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO OPEN THEM!!!! Does that change your thesis somewhat? Also, note to Ric: He also couldn't get out of the tree cover fast enough to signal to the rescue helicopters ... and those were helicopters ... which I assume travel a lot slower than planes! LTM (who knew her coconuts) Denise ************************************************************************ From Ric I love it. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 12:13:01 EDT From: Eric Subject: Loading the Lexington on 7/4/37 Mark wrote: > Umm... at the risk of going off-topic, is the 3 tons > in 24 hours a mis-type? That's only six pickup-truck loads.) The text reads: "The ship was outfitted for the operation [the Earhart search] in record time by the Supply Department and the Assembly and Repair Department. Three tons of stores and operating spares for a four-week cruise were gathered up and loaded aboard in less than 24 hours." Three tons does seem like a low figure. 30 tons would be more like it. Since the gathering and loading took place on a holiday (July 4th), the sailors who had to do the work must have been a very unhappy lot. Eric (NAS North Island, San Diego, CA.) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 13:16:04 EDT From: Oscar Boswell Subject: Kelly Johnson's Headwind Chart >From Oscar Boswell Last year, David Katz furnished Ric a copy of a rather curious chart showing the effect of headwinds on the 10 E. David told us that the chart had been exhibited at Elgen Long's presentation at the Hiller Museum, and that Lockheed "Report No. 487" was identified as the source for it. Ric sent copies to several forum participants, and after off-the-forum discussion, we agreed that because the chart lacked provenance, and because (with its modern typeface) it was obviously not the original, it should not be posted. Alan Caldwell recently gave me a copy of a 37 page report entitled "Range Study of Lockheed Electra Bimotor Airplane" and dated June 1936, which he has also furnished to Ric. The report is by Kelly Johnson and W. C. Nelson. It is Lockheed "Report No. 487", and is so marked on each of its pages. The format and appearance are similar to Report No. 465 and Report No. 467, which Birch Matthews obtained from Lockheed's files. Page 8 (Figure II ) of Report No. 487 is an "Effect of Head Winds and Tail Winds" chart, the CONTENT of which is substantially identical to that of the chart furnished by David Katz, though the APPEARANCE of the document differs (the original is on standard graph paper, and the notations are typewritten). Since this confirms the basic authenticity of the "Headwinds Chart" exhibited by Mr. Long, it seems appropriate to make a few comments about that chart, and Mr. Long's belief that it calls for a 10.5 mph increase in speed in the face of a 26.5 mph headwind (it doesn't). The first thing to note is that the chart seems all but useless for its theoretical purpose (calculating changes in airspeed to compensate for headwinds or tailwinds) because of the extremely small size (2 by 3 inches total) of the aircraft performance curves (which cover the entire range of aircraft performance at all weights from 9,300 to 16,500 pounds, and at all power settings). The presentation itself is elegant, but can one use it ? The theoretical technique is to extend a line from the speed of the headwind on the scale at the bottom of the chart to the performance curve for the weight of the plane, and then read the airspeed from the same speed scale directly below the point at which the line barely touches the performance curve (tangency). Because of the scale of the curves (and their flatness) it is all but impossible to determine tangency as a practical matter. I don't think Mr. Long used the scale and performance curves. How then did Mr. Long obtain his numbers? I think he jumped to his conclusion from the example given on the chart. The chart says that if the appropriate speed with zero wind is 150 mph, speed into a headwind of 20 should be increased by 4 (and with a tailwind of 20 should be decreased by 4). Mr. Long, you will remember, projected a headwind of 26.5 and said that the chart called for an increase of 10.5 in such conditions, from 150 to 160.5. I infer that Mr. Long drew the mistaken conclusion that for winds in excess of 20 mph the ENTIRE VALUE of the wind in excess of 20 should be added to the correction. (For a 26.5 mph wind, the correction would thus be 4 mph for the 20 mph plus the 6.5 mph excess over 20, for a total of 10.5 - too good a fit to be a coincidence.) A better rule of thumb would have been to note that a 20 mph wind called for an adjustment of 4, which is 20% of the wind component. A 26.5 mph wind would thus require an adjustment of (0.20 x 26.5 =) 5.3 mph, not 10.5. (Compare the discussion in Peter Garrison, LONG DISTANCE FLYING, pages 141-44 and passim indicating that when flying at V L/D the proper rule of thumb technique is to increase speed by one-quarter of the headwind component.) What does this tell us ? Well, it confirms that Lockheed (and Kelly Johnson) did give Headwind advice. And it indicates that that advice did not say speed up 10.5 mph into a 26.5 mph wind. Unfortunately, it also indicates that the advice was in a form difficult to undertand and to use. A disappointing chart, as a practical matter - perhaps it was intended to be reproduced at a much larger scale to permit productive use of the curves. When I first saw the Headwind chart, I was excited because - if authentic - it offered a sort of "Rosetta Stone" to derive all sorts of data on the estimated performance of the plane. With Report No. 487 in hand, there's no need to do that - the report itself gives detailed information on the performance estimates by Kelly Johnson and his staff for the Earhart 10E - including KJ's Maximum Range Flight Plan. Some of the numbers don't quite add up, but they are interesting. This is truly a case where a picture is worth a thousand words, and I can't compete with the charts. I also can't claim to have mastered Report 487 in the few days since I received it, but I already see a few things I want to point out to supplement our earlier discussions of performance, and I hope to do so in the not-too-distant future. Oscar **************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Oscar. We'll look forward to that. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 13:18:10 EDT From: PBS Subject: Re: Bones in Sydney? I agree strongly that it's more likely unidentified human remains would have been referred to a Forensic Pathology Lab, not an anthropology department, at least initially. However, I read the note about Uni Sydney as more of an 'option,' not something he would likely do without some prodding, or without someone raising specific issues. The note was the usual "cover your ass" reference about "seeking other opinions" that all physicians use [and use appropriately]. One thing I'm pretty sure about: If the bones were actually sent to an academic department [path or anthro] there MUST have been a paper trail, including documents and copies in multiple locations. Even if the bones were lost, misplaced, thrown out.... the paper trail would still be there [at least in part]. If there is no evidence of a paper trail, I very much doubt any bones were sent anywhere. PBS ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 13:23:43 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Betty's Radio I have to agree with Suzanne's comment about Betty surfing the bands. I can absolutely visualize a teenager (girl OR boy) with their head inside the cabinet for that extra volume / resonance, plus there being a sense of "traveling to far away places" when listening that way. ltm, jon *************************************************************************** From Ric There does seem to be something about the Earhart mystery that causes people to put their heads in confined spaces. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 13:23:56 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Again with the coconuts! We can only hope that, since the guy couldn't get the coconuts open, he at least got revenge by eating the snake.... ltm jon *********************************************************************** From Ric Unfortunately it sounds like it was more 'tother way 'round.