TIGHAR

Amelia Earhart Search Forum => The Islands: Expeditions, Facts, Castaway, Finds and Environs => Topic started by: Stephen Hinkle on March 10, 2011, 01:29:03 AM

Title: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Stephen Hinkle on March 10, 2011, 01:29:03 AM
I wondered if there is any evidence that Fred Noonan tried to go get help while Amelia was left behind, when they found they were the only two on the island.  Sometimes when there is a scenario like that, one goes to get help while the other stays to see if anybody comes and I wonder if he tried to do that because he was the man and Amelia was the woman (back in those days, sometimes the men had more responsibilities in days like this)?

I was curious, did Amelia or Fred have any tools or supplies to make a makeshift boat or raft of some kind with the vegetation that was available on Gardner Island?

If Fred were to attempt to swim to an occupied atoll, where was the closest place that was inhabited that he could boat or attempt to swim to?  Tarawa? Ellice Islands?  Gilbert Islands?  Another Phoenix Island?  Were any of the other phoenix islands inhabited or occupied at the time (i.e. Baker, McKean, Jarvis, etc)?  I did some searching on Google Earth and it appears that the distance between islands to boat or swim was quite far.

I was thinking that he may have attempted to swim or boat to shore somewhere to try to get help and did not succeed might have been his fate when he realized that the Itasca and USS Colorado did not come to help and the plane ran out of fuel and the batteries depleted so the radio transmitters went dead.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 10, 2011, 05:16:44 AM
I would think that when they flew to Niku, they knew that there was not other island close by, so swimming would be out of the question. Especially, if Fred were injured, as some have speculated.
I would also think that it would have taken time to make a raft, or boat, ans time certainly was NOT on their side.
Tom
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 10, 2011, 06:18:15 AM
I was curious, did Amelia or Fred have any tools or supplies to make a makeshift boat or raft of some kind with the vegetation that was available on Gardner Island?
There were actually two lifeboats on the island - washed up after the Norwich City disaster.  One was still there in 1938.  Not sure about the other one.

If Fred were to attempt to swim to an occupied atoll, where was the closest place that was inhabited that he could boat or attempt to swim to?  Tarawa? Ellice Islands?  Gilbert Islands?  Another Phoenix Island?  Were any of the other phoenix islands inhabited or occupied at the time (i.e. Baker, McKean, Jarvis, etc)?  I did some searching on Google Earth and it appears that the distance between islands to boat or swim was quite far.

The closest was a coconut operation on Hull Island 114 nautical miles to the east, but there's no way Noonan could have known about it.

Unless and until we find solid evidence that Fred died on the island, an attempt such as you suggest has to be seen as one possibility.

Quote
I was thinking that he may have attempted to swim or boat to shore somewhere to try to get help and did not succeed might have been his fate when he realized that the Itasca and USS Colorado did not come to help and the plane ran out of fuel and the batteries depleted so the radio transmitters went dead.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Walter Runck on March 10, 2011, 04:52:05 PM
Quote
Unless and until we find solid evidence that Fred died on the island, an attempt such as you suggest has to be seen as one possibility.


I've wondered about this as well.  Consider:

1.  There seems to be more physical evidence of a woman on the island than a man.
2.  The man we think was there was a sailor and a navigator. 
3.  A sextant box was found, but no sextant. 
4.  There was at least one life boat on the island when they arrived (I think one capsized and had a hole cut in the bottom to release the occupants, not sure which one the Kiwis found. 
5.  Another life raft or boat could have fetched up on the island from another source.

I've struggled to accept the FN injury theories as well.  Certainly possible, but only the thinnest of evidence exists and short of a diary or skull with damage incurred before death, no way to prove it.

Hardest part of an FN escape theory to accept for me is the water situation.  If they found water casks from the Norwich City, why chance the open sea with your most likely landfall being someplace just as desolate as Gardner?  If they didn't find water, odds of a successful voyage are pretty slim.  At least on land, there was food, chance of rain and chance of visitors.  Better the devil you know?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 10, 2011, 07:19:43 PM
The thing that bothers me is that none of the credible post-loss radio messages that have intelligible content include any mention of the island's name or lat/long.  If Fred was conscious and competent it should have been a piece of cake for him to figure out where they were on the first night.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Walter Runck on March 10, 2011, 08:16:35 PM
The thing that bothers me is that none of the credible post-loss radio messages that have intelligible content include any mention of the island's name or lat/long.  If Fred was conscious and competent it should have been a piece of cake for him to figure out where they were on the first night.

Bothers me too, but as a professional (him not me),  I find it hard to believe he didn't know where they were (at least Lat/Long if not by name) before they ever touched down (and maybe got hurt).  Hence my interest in the charts available at the time and any indications of which ones he was carrying.

FWIW, one of the books (Longs I think) mentioned AE trying to learn a little of the celestial art.  With all of the flight planning and cockpit time, she would have had to ignore an awful lot not to have some of it soak in.  If she had a working sextant/octant and one of the sight reduction books she might have been able to figure out her present position herself. 

Even if she couldn't take or reduce a sight, she knew enough DR to keep or at least understand a track and knew that they had flown x many hours at y knots on a course of z degrees from Howland ("we must be on you").   She certainly knew they were on an island southeast of Howland and probably had a pretty good idea how far on what bearing. 

You almost get the sense from the intercepts that the guys listening knew more about where she was than she did.



Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 11, 2011, 08:01:26 AM
Even if she couldn't take or reduce a sight, she knew enough DR to keep or at least understand a track and knew that they had flown x many hours at y knots on a course of z degrees from Howland ("we must be on you").   She certainly knew they were on an island southeast of Howland and probably had a pretty good idea how far on what bearing. 

Dana Randolph heard her say, "Ship on reef southeast of Howland."  That seems to be the best she could do.

For me, her "we must be on you" comment is evidence that she didn't understand what Fred was doing.  Without an RDF bearing, the most Fred could know was that they had reached the LOP that ran through Howland.  If they were bang on course, Howland should appear but otherwise there would be only empty ocean.  I suspect that at some time after sunrise, while AE was trying to get Itasca to take a bearing on her, Fred passed her a note saying something like "ETA 1900" meaning that at 1900 Greenwich they would reach the LOP that ran through Howland. Amelia apparently took it to be an ETA for Howland.  I don't think Fred would say "we must be on you." Without a three-star celestial fix there was no way for him to navigate to a specific point.

Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Walter Runck on March 11, 2011, 12:51:44 PM
Even if she couldn't take or reduce a sight, she knew enough DR to keep or at least understand a track and knew that they had flown x many hours at y knots on a course of z degrees from Howland ("we must be on you").   She certainly knew they were on an island southeast of Howland and probably had a pretty good idea how far on what bearing.

For me, her "we must be on you" comment is evidence that she didn't understand what Fred was doing.  Without an RDF bearing, the most Fred could know was that they had reached the LOP that ran through Howland.  If they were bang on course, Howland should appear but otherwise there would be only empty ocean.  I suspect that at some time after sunrise, while AE was trying to get Itasca to take a bearing on her, Fred passed her a note saying something like "ETA 1900" meaning that at 1900 Greenwich they would reach the LOP that ran through Howland. Amelia apparently took it to be an ETA for Howland.  I don't think Fred would say "we must be on you." Without a three-star celestial fix there was no way for him to navigate to a specific point.


I'm not sure I fully agree with "Without an RDF bearing, the most Fred could know was that they had reached the LOP that ran through Howland."  Here's why:

The crux of my argument is that determining latitude in the later stages of this flight was more important than longitude.  If you're on the right course, you're gonna get where you're going (Howland) sooner or later and it wasn't like they were going to miss a connecting flight if they got in 40 minutes late.  But if you're drifting right or left and you end up a couple of hundred miles (< 10% of total flight length) north or south, you might miss not only visual contact, but RDF range as well.  Splash.

They were flying almost due East, hence their longitude was dependent primarily on their speed over ground and time aloft, while their latitude was dependent primarily on their ability to stay on the intended course, i.e. the left/right error of their flying.  

First the longitude.  With no drift measurement or other means of determining winds aloft, they could only determine SOG by measuring longitude and time aloft and then backing out a number for speed made good.  This would then be extended along a DR track to compute future positions.  So Lines of Position derived from landmarks or celestial observations (preferable LOPs that ran N-S) were crucial for determining longitude, SMG and ETA.  Most important for ETA was the sunrise observation, as the sunrise LOP would be the last "easy" N-S LOP before the more difficult sun sightings were the only ones available.  This is consistent with their flying the 158-338 line later in the day.  It was the last good LOP they had.

Now the latitude.  Any sighting of a northern star during the overnight would allow for a nice tight latitude determination.  I don't know how visible Polaris would have been from their altitude (it disappeared at the surface between 1 and 2 degrees North of the equator) that night, but Capella, Hamal and Mirfak would all have been in the right place to provide a good lat fix.  If a dawn fix was obtained on a star that would give them their latitude, then they only had a couple of hours of drift (N-S) uncertainty in their DR track by the time they got to the advanced LOP going through Howland.

I know they reported partial overcast at one point, but they only needed an occasional N-S fix to measure left/right error.  With the built-in artificial horizons of the octant and the Brandis, all FN needed was to see the star itself, not the natural horizon.

Unless the weather had been a wipeout since the position they reported by radio during the night, I think FN had a pretty good idea where they were, not just that they had hit the advanced LOP.  Before I'm accused of applying too much hindsight, I approached this from the perspective of "how would you try to find Howland if there were no RDF?".  Whatever you think of FN as a professional, he had bet his life on this flight.  You will have to decide for yourself to what degree he would have been willing to depend on outside assistance.  My premise is that he was sitting there in a plane with the tools, techniques and experience necessary to do a lot more than just get AE close enough to Howland so that someone on the ground could bring them in.  I think he used them to the fullest extent.

The USNO has an online celestial navigation calculator (http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/celnavtable.php) for anyone who wants to see what was where when.  (BTW Marty, Mercury was down, Venus was up and the moon was in a pretty good spot as well).  

This is the data I was using for rough work:






 

Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 11, 2011, 04:06:58 PM
If your assessment is correct, why didnt he find Howland?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Erik on March 11, 2011, 05:34:34 PM
The thing that bothers me is that none of the credible post-loss radio messages that have intelligible content include any mention of the island's name or lat/long.  If Fred was conscious and competent it should have been a piece of cake for him to figure out where they were on the first night.


 Here  (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=pVIfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=J9IEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2178%2C945762) is a newspaper reporting a post-loss message.  It gives a lat long location remarkably close to Gardner.  Excusing timing errors in calculating longitude, that puts the reported position within about ~20 miles or so of the island.  Even more impressive if the sextant somehow became damaged or severely out-of-spec due to a hard landing.

From the article it reads.....
The Southeast Missourian - Jul 8, 1937
  Ray Havens, Conrad creamery worker, phoned the Great Falls Tribune that at 9:40 p.m. Wednesday, he heard a man's voice giving a position and saying "all's well."
   A few minutes later, he said, he picked up a second message, which he gave as follows: "Position 173 west longitude and 5 south latitude."


Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Erik on March 11, 2011, 05:44:50 PM
If your assessment is correct, why didnt he find Howland?

I think Walter was just saying that Fred knew much more than just..... "Without an RDF bearing, the most Fred could know was that they had reached the LOP that ran through Howland." 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Bruce Thomas on March 11, 2011, 07:45:04 PM
It gives a lat long location remarkably close to Gardner.  Excusing timing errors in calculating longitude, that puts the reported position within about ~20 miles or so of the island.
Actually, that long/lat position is more like ~106 miles east of Gardner.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Walter Runck on March 11, 2011, 08:21:44 PM
If your assessment is correct, why didnt he find Howland?

Dunno.  Or, speaking more epistomologically, this is a known unknown.  From the Waitt video of Howland (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9c3yZ0xeHw), finding it navigationally is not the same as finding it visually.  The speculation I am least uncomfortable with is that they were pretty close and just didn't establish visual contact with Itasca/Howland, looked around as long as they dared and then went to Plan B.  What a difference two-way comms (just voice, not even RDF) could have made at this point.  A couple of minutes worth of smoke, searchlights, some gunfire, a heliograph/signalling mirror, listening post on Howland, burning tar barrels, steam at high speed and make wake circles around the island, who knows?

To me, one of the weirdest aspects of the whole business is the lack of recorded transmissions during what we believe was their transit to Gardner.  Who makes plans to meet someone, talks at them all the way in, can't find them, gives up and leaves without telling them they're going?  Especially if they're gonna hit you up for a ride home?

Also, my theory lives and dies with their ability to take a sight on something off to the side of the aircraft (Southern stars would work as well as the ones I picked, I just have a cultural bias towards the stuff I'm familiar with).  If they couldn't get a sight overnight, then all they would have had is the advanced sunrise LOP and whatever sun or moon sights FN could have made between dawn and their ETA at the Howland LOP.  Which would bring us right back to your thoughts about the assumed starting position for the run to Gardner.

I owe the donut hole theory another reading and consideration.  Maybe the airborne version of latitude sailing I described is somehow complementary to it.

Also, Erik brings up something I read and forgot about:

Quote
From the article it reads.....
The Southeast Missourian - Jul 8, 1937
  Ray Havens, Conrad creamery worker, phoned the Great Falls Tribune that at 9:40 p.m. Wednesday, he heard a man's voice giving a position and saying "all's well."
   A few minutes later, he said, he picked up a second message, which he gave as follows: "Position 173 west longitude and 5 south latitude."


What's the provenance of this report?  I remember reading it, but don't remember the verdict.  If legit, it would seem like FN was on the job at least until they stopped moving.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on March 11, 2011, 09:32:32 PM
To me, one of the weirdest aspects of the whole business is the lack of recorded transmissions during what we believe was their transit to Gardner. 

See the last section of "Radio Propagation" (http://tighar.org/wiki/Radio_propagation) for a suggestion that AE had chronic problems with 6210 kcs, the frequency to which she said she was changing in her penultimate message. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Transmission_timeline)
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 12, 2011, 08:11:27 AM
If they couldn't get a sight overnight, then all they would have had is the advanced sunrise LOP and whatever sun or moon sights FN could have made between dawn and their ETA at the Howland LOP.  Which would bring us right back to your thoughts about the assumed starting position for the run to Gardner.

We know from the notes taken by Associated Press reporter James Carey, who was present in the Itasca radio room, that in her first radio transmission heard by Itasca at 02:45-48 on the morning of 2 July, he understood Earhart to say "sky overcast."  We of course don't know how long the sky had been overcast or how much longer it remained so.  At 04:53 the Itasca radio log has her saying "PRT CLDY" (presumably "partly cloudy") but was it partly cloudy above or below her altitude and were the clouds broken or scattered?  The imprecision of AE's reports provides fertile ground for interpretation and speculation.  What is certain is that Noonan was not able to find Howland by celestial/DR navigation and, as you have pointed out, with good access to the night sky it seems like he should have been able to pull it off.  We'll never know exactly what happened, but the scenario that fits what we do know has Noonan unable to keep the flight on course during the night due the inability to take celestial observations. Stronger than anticipated crosswinds push the plane southward so that it hits the advanced LOP well south of Baker. They explore northwestward for perhaps a half hour but then must reverse course and proceed southeastward on the line to have the best chance of finding land before their fuel runs out.


The Southeast Missourian - Jul 8, 1937
  Ray Havens, Conrad creamery worker, phoned the Great Falls Tribune that at 9:40 p.m. Wednesday, he heard a man's voice giving a position and saying "all's well."
   A few minutes later, he said, he picked up a second message, which he gave as follows: "Position 173 west longitude and 5 south latitude."

What's the provenance of this report?  I remember reading it, but don't remember the verdict.  If legit, it would seem like FN was on the job at least until they stopped moving.

Here's entry for this report from the still-being-finalized catalog of post-loss radio signals.


Signal #   173
Z Time/Date   0540 July 8
Local Time/Date   2240 MST July 7
Niku Time/Date   1840 July 8
Agency/Person   Ray Havens
Location   Conrad, Montana
Freq (kHz)   3105
Content   Havens claimed that he heard a radio message from Earhart’s plane at 2240 MST.  He said he heard a man’s voice give a position and say “All’s well”.  Havens said that a few minutes later he heard another message “Position 173 west longitude and 5 south latitude.  Okay, but help needed.  KHAQQ”, and called the Great Falls, MT, Tribune so that, he said, someone could be notified who could quickly tune to 3105 kHz.  Luke Wright, of the paper’s editorial staff, was called at home.  He tuned his receiver to 3105 kHz and said they he heard a voice, presumably a man’s, but could not distinguish the words. 
Source   Billings, MT, Gazette, July 8, 1937; Helena, MT, Independent, July 9, 1937.
Niku water level   -0.1m
Probability   Less than 1 chance in a quadrillion.
Qual Factors   The Niku tide level permitted engine operation.  The reported time was two minutes after Niku sunset at ground level, but the western part of the propagation path was still sunlit at ionospheric altitude; consequently, signal absorption loss virtually precluded reception at Conrad.  No station in the central Pacific heard these signals; nor did the COMFRANDIV special monitoring station at San Francisco.  If a signal from Niku could be heard in Conrad, it also would be heard by at least one of the 6 FCC airport stations in Montana, all required to listen continuously on 3105 kHz.  The position Havens reported was near Niku, in the Phoenix Islands, but the theory that Earhart was in that area had been in the press for days, and Havens could have picked the coordinates off a map.  The man’s voice that Wright heard was most likely from an aircraft talking to one of the FCC airport stations in Montana.   
Credibility      Not Credible


Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Stephen Hinkle on March 12, 2011, 11:20:19 PM
Ric mentioned, "The closest was a coconut operation on Hull Island 114 nautical miles to the east, but there's no way Noonan could have known about it."

I am curious here.   Where was the closest place that Fred Noonan did likely know about that was habitated from Gardner Island / Nikumoro?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 13, 2011, 04:53:32 AM
Probably Samoa.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Walter Runck on March 13, 2011, 10:14:29 AM
If they couldn't get a sight overnight, then all they would have had is the advanced sunrise LOP and whatever sun or moon sights FN could have made between dawn and their ETA at the Howland LOP.  Which would bring us right back to your thoughts about the assumed starting position for the run to Gardner.

  We'll never know exactly what happened, but the scenario that fits what we do know has Noonan unable to keep the flight on course during the night due the inability to take celestial observations.

Change "the scenario" to "one scenario" and I'm all on board.  We're talking possibilities, not probabilities.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 13, 2011, 04:51:09 PM
Change "the scenario" to "one scenario" and I'm all on board.  We're talking possibilities, not probabilities.

If we speak only of possibilities without regard to probability then all possibilities are created equal.  In the case of the Earhart disappearance, abduction by space aliens is a possibility but I don't think that recognizing it as such helps us much. Japanese capture is another possible scenario but a realistic assessment of its probability shows it to be only marginally better than alien abduction.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Walter Runck on March 13, 2011, 07:27:23 PM
Change "the scenario" to "one scenario" and I'm all on board.  We're talking possibilities, not probabilities.

If we speak only of possibilities without regard to probability then all possibilities are created equal.  In the case of the Earhart disappearance, abduction by space aliens is a possibility but I don't think that recognizing it as such helps us much. Japanese capture is another possible scenario but a realistic assessment of its probability shows it to be only marginally better than alien abduction.


Agreed.  All possibilities are created equal.  They're just possible.  It's only by applying probabilities to their components that they start to take on relative likelihood and we can differentiate them on the basis of merit.  The scenario I offered doesn't require Japanese or Martians.  Just a little bit of good weather during the night and a bunch of bad luck during the day.  I may be being too pedantic on this point, so I'll skip the semantics and offer this angle.

One theory requires that they couldn't see something above them.  The other requires that they couldn't see something below.  The first had to be true all night and perhaps into the next day (I need to do some more work before I can comment on latitude by sun or moon after dawn).  The second only has to be true for whatever length of time they were within visual range of Howland.

I'm not claiming equal likelihoods here, but either of these ideas is orders of magnitude more likely than the kook stuff.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Bill Lloyd on March 17, 2011, 09:39:50 PM
One theory requires that they couldn't see something above them.  The other requires that they couldn't see something below.  The first had to be true all night and perhaps into the next day (I need to do some more work before I can comment on latitude by sun or moon after dawn).  The second only has to be true for whatever length of time they were within visual range of Howland.

I'm not claiming equal likelihoods here, but either of these ideas is orders of magnitude more likely than the kook stuff.
I am not sure that those are two distinct theories. If the sky was indeed obscured and Fred could not see a star then their only course of action was to hold track and continue flying toward their destination of Howland.

During darkness, Fred would have been unable to get an accurate fix on what the wind was doing to them and not until he clocked the sunrise, did he  know how far he was from Howland. At that time the stars had become invisible, therefore the course of action would be to continue the track towards Howland while Fred was attempting to determine latitude.

When he estimated that they had traveled the 200 hundred or so miles and arrived at or near the LOP that runs through Howland, he might have figured that the wind had pushed them south, but he still did not know how far and advised Earhart to fly up or down the LOP and try to see the Island or the Itasca.  When they could not see anything, Earhart transmitted, “we must be on you but cannot see…..”.   That whole scenario seems like just one theory to me.

Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: John Ousterhout on November 18, 2011, 07:14:49 PM
"...During darkness, Fred would have been unable to get an accurate fix on what the wind was doing to them and not until he clocked the sunrise, did he  know how far he was from Howland."
Although I have very little Celestial Navigation training, I cannot imaging FN not knowing their position, or at least their N/S drift,  from the available stars at that time.  That's 'almost' trivial navigation (you're welcome to quote me later).  It seem likely that Fred would have been able to calculate the N/S drift from wind upon reaching the sunrise LOP, and given AE reasonably accurate directions which way to turn, following the LOP, to raise Howland.
Whatever happened, they did not follow my assumptions.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on November 19, 2011, 01:10:37 AM
Even if she couldn't take or reduce a sight, she knew enough DR to keep or at least understand a track and knew that they had flown x many hours at y knots on a course of z degrees from Howland ("we must be on you").   She certainly knew they were on an island southeast of Howland and probably had a pretty good idea how far on what bearing.

Dana Randolph heard her say, "Ship on reef southeast of Howland."  That seems to be the best she could do.

For me, her "we must be on you" comment is evidence that she didn't understand what Fred was doing.  Without an RDF bearing, the most Fred could know was that they had reached the LOP that ran through Howland.  If they were bang on course, Howland should appear but otherwise there would be only empty ocean.  I suspect that at some time after sunrise, while AE was trying to get Itasca to take a bearing on her, Fred passed her a note saying something like "ETA 1900" meaning that at 1900 Greenwich they would reach the LOP that ran through Howland. Amelia apparently took it to be an ETA for Howland.  I don't think Fred would say "we must be on you." Without a three-star celestial fix there was no way for him to navigate to a specific point.
---------------------------
You only need two LOPs to determine a position. A third LOP only acts like RAIM on a GPS approach in that the third LOP acts as a check to catch gross errors in the two LOP fix. The Moon was available to provide the second LOP during all the relevant times.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 19, 2011, 06:44:03 AM
You only need two LOPs to determine a position. A third LOP only acts like RAIM on a GPS approach in that the third LOP acts as a check to catch gross errors in the two LOP fix. The Moon was available to provide the second LOP during all the relevant times.

So they really did reach Howland after all.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on November 19, 2011, 11:15:48 AM
You only need two LOPs to determine a position. A third LOP only acts like RAIM on a GPS approach in that the third LOP acts as a check to catch gross errors in the two LOP fix. The Moon was available to provide the second LOP during all the relevant times.

So they really did reach Howland after all.
Yep, and they pushed her plane into the ocean and then hid her aboard the Itasca so that they had an excuse to search the Mandated Islands. Unfortunately, during that terrible storm on the way back to Hawaii, Earhart and Noonan were lost overboard so they had to cover everything up to avoid the public outcry if people had found out that the Coast Guard allowed her to be lost overboard.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 19, 2011, 11:24:01 AM
Case closed.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on November 19, 2011, 01:00:13 PM

And their( AE&FN) bodies  were found by the aliens and returned to Roswell, NM, where the military confiscated them and took them to Wright-Patterson Air Base to study their brains and the advanced technology they learned while living with the Aliens.   LOL
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Irvine John Donald on November 19, 2011, 07:22:03 PM
Gee guys. That's just a little too simple. What about the theory that AE and FN were on the Zapruder film at the grassy knoll asking for directions? How did they get there?  And the conspiracy theory that Nixon was talking to them from the white house and those are the missing minutes from the Watergate tapes? 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dan Swift on November 21, 2011, 11:28:15 AM
Actually, Amelia Earhart is alive and well....and in a holding pattern over LAX.   
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Rich Ramsey on November 21, 2011, 01:19:28 PM
On a serious note! Does anyone think it is plausible that Fred went down with the plane? Betty did report that she heard them fighting and that he was not "feeling" well (sorry to over simplify that). Is is at all possible that he passed out, passed away or was somehow not able to get himself out of the plane. AE not having the strength to get him out had to leave him there when it washed over the side? I know how much Ric likes the "would have's" and such but I just think this is the easiest explanation to his vanishing (or lack of skeleton). I think when we find the plane we will find Fred in the seat waiting for that rescue.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Monty Fowler on November 23, 2011, 04:14:21 PM
Just tossing in my 2 cents on Fred taking off in one of the Norwich City's lifeboats - those things were made out of wood, and were apparently some distance from the water, judging from the photo of the one surviving lifeboat.

How many of you think you could, by yourself, get a many-hundred pound wooden lifeboat out of the bush, down to the beach, across the beach, across the reef flat undamaged and out into the open ocean, in July, at Niku, even if you were in tip-top condtion and had unlimited food and water?

Even for two desperate people , if that looked like the last extremity, the mechanical challenges alone would possibly lead to one or more coral cuts, which would get infected very, very quickly. Toss in dehydration, sunstroke, heatstroke, maybe an overly-curious shark, a jellyfish sting or two ... there are lots of ways to die on Niku. Dragging one of those lifeboats down to the water and trying to launch it would have merely speeded up the process.

LTM,
Monty Fowler
TIGHAR No. 2189CER
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: richie conroy on November 23, 2011, 04:24:26 PM
i think a few Tighar members wud like to push u out to sea in a sinking plane aswell  ;D
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 23, 2011, 04:48:12 PM
i think a few Tighar members wud like to push u out to sea in a sinking plane aswell  ;D

Here's a suggestion for you Richie.  Before you speculate about what TIGHAR members would like to do how about becoming one yourself?  Monty has been a dedicated member of TIGHAR for almost 14 years.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: richie conroy on November 23, 2011, 04:54:39 PM
i werent on about monty i was on about gary lapook comment on a few girls wud like to push him out in sinking plane

an soon as i have money available to donate am definitely gonna
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: richie conroy on November 23, 2011, 04:56:27 PM
sorry my bad it werent even him who said that so my apologise to gary
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Monty Fowler on November 23, 2011, 05:37:27 PM

... Monty has been a dedicated member of TIGHAR for almost 14 years.

Oh thanks for getting that thought stuck in my head! *goes off to ponder the mysteries of life while cracking open a Monty Python Pale Ale on this Thanksgiving eve*

LTM,
Monty Fowler
TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Brad Beeching on December 03, 2011, 10:09:56 AM
Since we are merely playing the "what if" game, how about this:
After sustaining fairly serious injuries in a very rough landing, Fred and Amelia are effectively trapped inside the aircraft. Amelia cannot reach the rear of the aircraft to retrieve the correct charts and instrumentation to allow them to positively identify where they have come down. After a time, Amelia is able to get free and find the name of the ship on the reef, and discover that the aircraft is able to run the right engine allowing her to recharge the nearly flat batteries. This allows further use of the radio. A few days pass, the airplane is being washed back and forth and Amelia cannot get Fred out of the cockpit hatch due to his injuries as well as her own. His condition continues to deteriorate until he passes away and Amelia abandons the wreckage to the sea. During the days that the aircraft was still transmitting, Amelia is forced to try to find help on the island, finding none she begins to understand what awaits her... (cue sinister music) ::)
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on December 03, 2011, 11:54:20 AM
But it appears that Fred is still with us when Betty hears them and may also be able to get out of the plane!
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Brad Beeching on December 03, 2011, 01:20:57 PM
I was simply putting a story together... one that I made up as I went along, (basically wasting electrons) Has something surfaced that leads us to believe Fred got out of the plane? The call Betty heard best fit the radio log on the 5th. The Colorado flyby was on the 9th, this story could have happened anytime between the crash and when the plane was submerged. IF something like this happened to our intrepid travelers, it might help explain why a mans voice was heard on some transmissions and a woman on others, (as well as both on still other transmissions).

Who knows? maybe Fred died in the plane and Amelia abandoned it because of the ahhh... smell...  :-\
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on December 03, 2011, 01:50:28 PM
maybe, maybe not but suppose we'll never know  ;)
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: richie conroy on December 03, 2011, 04:56:49 PM
because if u re-read bettys note's, on final page she says or thinks fred has got of plane an amelia is prepareing to leave the plane her self

 :)

 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Evan McIntosh on March 21, 2012, 04:28:20 PM
It seems from the information posted here, that Fred Noonan suffered one or more severe injuries during the landing. From the recorded radio transmissions, it sounds that he was in shock. This could occur from blood loss through scalp or other lacerations or long-bone fractures. he may have also sustained a skull fracture, subdural hematoma or traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. he may also have been confused and panicking from hypoxia perhaps secondary to a pneumothorax (or collapsed lung). It seems to me, that he may not have been physically able to leave the aircraft on his own, and Amelia Earhart may have not been physically able to get him out of the plane and to the shore. I suspect then, that he died within the cockpit shortly after landing. It is possible that Amelia established a campsite at the opposite end of the island so as to stay as far away from the plane as possible. Consider the psychological trauma of having her friend and navigator dead in the cockpit. I think most people would avoid the aircraft after something like that. Perhaps she ventured back sparingly, and at some psychological cost, to retrieve as many useful items as she could. Also, i don't know much about sextants but I assume they have a lens in them. Could that lens be used as a magnifying glass to start fires?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 21, 2012, 04:34:20 PM
I'm no expert but if you look at the post loss signals then there is evidence of a male sending signals from the Gardenr/Niku area.

Fred may be dead but on the days in 37 he was much alive (but not happy?)
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 21, 2012, 04:51:45 PM
It seems from the information posted here, that Fred Noonan suffered one or more severe injuries during the landing. From the recorded radio transmissions, it sounds that he was in shock. This could occur from blood loss through scalp or other lacerations or long-bone fractures. he may have also sustained a skull fracture, subdural hematoma or traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. he may also have been confused and panicking from hypoxia perhaps secondary to a pneumothorax (or collapsed lung). It seems to me, that he may not have been physically able to leave the aircraft on his own, and Amelia Earhart may have not been physically able to get him out of the plane and to the shore. I suspect then, that he died within the cockpit shortly after landing. It is possible that Amelia established a campsite at the opposite end of the island so as to stay as far away from the plane as possible. Consider the psychological trauma of having her friend and navigator dead in the cockpit. I think most people would avoid the aircraft after something like that. Perhaps she ventured back sparingly, and at some psychological cost, to retrieve as many useful items as she could. Also, i don't know much about sextants but I assume they have a lens in them. Could that lens be used as a magnifying glass to start fires?
Remember the whole idea that Noonan was injured comes from only one reported reception by Betty in Florida, and there is no other confirmation of that report. So your careful medical diagnosis rests on some pretty shaky ground.

This is from the Tighar analysis of radio reports:

------------------------------------------------


142 H - -
Identifier    52130KK
Z Time/Date    2130 to 2315 July 5 (Date uncertain; believed to be July 5 based on signal
propagation and other factors)
Local Time/Date    1630 to 1815 EST July 5
Gardner Time/Date    1030 to 1215 July 5
Agency/Person    Betty Klenck
Location    St. Petersburg, Florida
Freq (kHz)    24840 (4th harmonic of Earhart’s day frequency – 6210 kHz).
Content    See sources below.
Sources    Research paper Betty’s Notebook, on TIGHAR website; research paper Harmony
and Power (revised), on TIGHAR website; Finding Amelia, p. 172.
Probability    Varied from 0.0013 to 0.00000067 during the period
Qual Factors    Betty was extensively interviewed by TIGHAR, and key elements of her notebook
relating to occult information – facts Betty could not have known from sources other than what
she heard on the radio – have been validated. Details are available on the TIGHAR website.
Credibility    Credible

------------------------------------------------------
Note, even if the report were true, it was not received until July 5,1937, three days after the possible landing on Gardner. There is no reason to be so certain that Noonan was injured in the landing since the plane would have had to have ended up standing up on its legs in order to operate the radio so no, or little, damage to the plane and its occupants. Plus he could have fallen wading on the reef three days after the landing, falling and hitting his head, so no reason to think he couldn't go ashore at the beginning.

And look at the probability of this propagation, assigned to this reception by TIGHAR, 0.0013 to 0.00000067, somewhere between 1 chance in 769 to one chance in 1,492,537 and this only after utilizing the Rube Goldberg method of grasping at harmonics so there is reason to doubt that Betty even heard Earhart. There are other reasons that call Betty's reception report into doubt.

I have attached Brandenberg's original analysis of the probability of Betty hearing Earhart. This shows only a one chance in 878 and that only existed for the first half hour. In the next hour the probability of Betty actually hearing Earhart dropped off to only 1 chance in 344,827!  For the last 15 minute period the probability increased to 1 chance in 50,000. The current listing for the Betty reception doesn't break it down into these three periods but it makes sense that the periods mentioned in the first Brandenberg table also hold true for the current listing so after only the first half hour that the chance of Betty continuing to hear Earhart dropped off to the new estimate contained in the listing of one chance in one-million-four-hundred-ninty-two- thousand-five-hundred and thirty seven (1,492,537) yet the claim is that Betty heard Earhart for an hour and 45 minutes. So do you really believe that she heard that Noonan was injured?


gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 21, 2012, 04:56:03 PM
For once I agree with the esteemed Mr GLP that the whole FN injured/near death/etc come from one source, Bettys note book.

Reading 'Finding Amelia' I found many incidences of Radio reception from a male.  My argument/thought is that FN is incapacitaded ref Betty would NOT have been able to make those calls?

Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dan Swift on March 21, 2012, 08:47:55 PM
He may have washed over the reef's edge with the Electra if he was too injured to leave it.  Or, he may have been washed out to see from the shore.  Something tells me (my imagination I guess) that he parished early in the endeaver and AE was possibley alone at 7 site.  Waiting for..............
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 22, 2012, 06:51:05 AM
I suspect that we will get some of those answers at the symposium. Maybe some a little later than that.  If the theory is correct that FN perished in the Electra, I wonder what the chances are that there may be 'evidence' of that in the cockpit after 75 years-----when Ric & Co. find the cabin.
Tom
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Evan McIntosh on March 22, 2012, 08:45:44 AM
Your statistical analysis of the probability of Betty receiving the transmissions is interesting GL. However, by the same reasoning, nobody would ever win a lottery....but people win them every day!
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Irvine John Donald on March 22, 2012, 09:21:07 AM
Evan, I think you raise some interesting points but Gary is correct in his statements regarding the one source being Betty's notebook.  I tend to believe the radio propoagtion work done by Bob Brandenburg too.  However, IF you believe they landed on Gardner then you probably believe they transmitted from an upright Electra.  How injured could Fred be from that landing which wasn't rough enough to tear the landing gear out from under the aircraft like it did at Luke field.  At Luke Field, Fred wasn't in the least bit injured.  It is far more likely he got hurt after the landing as suggested by Gary.  Perhaps he put a leg into one of the many coral crevices and got a compound fracture thereby incapacitating him.  AE leaving Fred in the Electra while she went and explored the island for food and water.  We wont know unless a diary or some other evidence is found that tells us what happened.  Perhaps Tom S is right and Ric and company will find something in the aircraft to let us close this chapter.  Its still a long shot but 22 years ago everyone believed she crashed and died in the ocean near Howland.  TIGHAR keeps narrowing in.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Evan McIntosh on March 22, 2012, 11:12:47 AM
Some of the injuries that I describe would not necessarily kill someone immediately such as a pneumothorax (later becoming a tension pneumothorax), or a subdural hematoma. I guess the more basic question is why would AE make a camp site so far away from the plane since the plane would most likely be spotted first from an aerial search, and also provide a source of supplies and refuge from rain? If was in that situation, I think it would be wise to stay near the aircraft. It was solidly lodged since it apparently took several years to slip off the reef.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 22, 2012, 11:47:02 AM
Evan---Ive asked myself and others that question for a while now. I do have to disagree with the statement that it apparently took many years for the electra to slip off the reef. possibly off the deep end of the ledge to the bottom(?), but certainly it wasnt there during the Lambrecht overflight, or they would have seen it.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 22, 2012, 11:53:07 AM
Your statistical analysis of the probability of Betty receiving the transmissions is interesting GL. However, by the same reasoning, nobody would ever win a lottery....but people win them every day!
I don't claim credit for that statistical analysis, that is Bob Brandenberg's analysis. All I did was attempt to make his numbers more understandable by taking the inverse of his numbers that had too many zeros in them to make them easy to understand.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Irvine John Donald on March 22, 2012, 12:21:30 PM
Who really knows why the Seven Site?  Personally I believe it had to do with watching for rescuers.  If you look at an aerial shot of Gardner you can see that if you are on one of the long sides then you cannot see a ship on the horizon on the opposite side.  The island blocks it.  Therefore your maximum viewing area is at one of the two "tips" of the island.  The Seven Site gives you the best left to right view of the horizon with the minimum amount of walking (exertion without much water) and with the maximum ability to move quickly from one side to the other.  Not very scientific but look down on the map and ask yourself where the best place to watch for a ship on the horizon is. 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 22, 2012, 12:56:57 PM
Irv--thats makes sense to me now, other than something coming from the south. She would have to cross the lagoon. I'm still alittle confused :o on how she found herself at the 7 site.. Are we to presume the Fn was already gone? Its a long way from the landing site.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Evan McIntosh on March 22, 2012, 01:13:07 PM
Hi Tom,

I thought the people who inhabited the island a few years later remembered that there was a plane wreck on the reef?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 22, 2012, 01:35:30 PM
Evan,

indeed there are reports of wreckedge on the reef.  If you goto the main site or follow this link you will find a mind boogling amount of information.

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/AEdescr.html
 (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/AEdescr.html)

Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 22, 2012, 06:05:56 PM
Evan thats true. But----on July 9, 7 days after the disappearence, Lambrecht flew over the island, reported "signs of recent habitation", not aircraft wreckage on the reef. So----either the plane wasnt there as i already gone over the reef before breaking up and washing parts back on the reef as in the Norwich City wreckage, OR he didnt overfly the reef where the NC was, and the electra "could" have been. The 'repeated buzzing and zooming" leads me to believe they they DID fly over the shipwreck and the landing area, and did not see the plane. At 400 feet, and shiney, it should have been pretty visible IF it were there, or just hanging on the reef ledge.
Maybe we can find out what the depth visibility is at Lambrechts search altitute---but from the helicopter video, it looks pretty good to me. Perhaps that is another one of the assets the expedition could use to prove or disprove Lambrechts flight.
There is a chance it was there, submerged, and he missed it.
Ok---I'm crazy
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dr James Younghusband, D.C. on March 23, 2012, 10:33:24 AM
Tom, for the sake of  this discussion I am subscribing to the Nikumaroro hypothesis.

I have done some scuba diving, and perhaps my perception is distorted because I have not been diving in waters as pristine as those around Gardner, (though I have overflown Cuba and Grand Caymen on several occasions) but I have my doubts to whether an aircraft, even a shiny one like the 10e could be easily spotted at a depth of 400 feet. 

I also am left to wonder why the castaways were able to live for only a relatively short time on this island.  There are plenty of crabs, birds and fish to eat.  If the campfire is indeed theirs, they were able to make fire, and with fire comes the ability to put together a small still for separating H20 from salt, cook food, and signal for help.  It would seem by the time of the overflight mentioned above and the "recent inhabited" finding, they had indeed perished.

To me a logical explanation is that one or even both were injured during the landing.  It has been speculated that because the surface of the reef was smooth enough to land on they could not have been injured.  I have seen several accidents where there appeared to be little damage to the car, but the occupant was killed.  Conversely I have seen several accidents where one would believe no one could have survived, and yet all the occupants did survive.  There for I can in no way infer the continued health or safety of the occupants when involved in a ditch landing.  Further, it would then imply to me that because of the short duration of their occupancy, that both were likely injured and subsequently perished from their injuries.  It would also seem logical to my male chauvinistic mind that FN was more seriously injured than AE, and AE found herself having to attend him, and provide for both of them.  Following this logic, FN with a head injury could easily have wandered into the ocean while AE was asleep, thinking he was walking into the front door of his house in the states.  She awakes in the am, and he is gone.  Another possibility is he perished, and she was forced to bury him, in which case, his remains could still be buried on the island. 

This has likely already been mentioned, but my being new here please forgive me if I bring this up again.  Being a dog trainer/handler it makes me wonder if bring a cadaver dog on the next exploration of the island might not be a useful addition.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on March 23, 2012, 10:47:33 AM
I also am left to wonder why the castaways were able to live for only a relatively short time on this island.

"How to Die on Niku 101." (http://tighar.org/wiki/How_to_die_on_Niku_101)

Quote
Being a dog trainer/handler it makes me wonder if bring a cadaver dog on the next exploration of the island might not be a useful addition.

Can cadaver dogs find 75-year-old remains?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dr James Younghusband, D.C. on March 23, 2012, 12:08:01 PM
Yes, many ways to die, several ways to live.  Providing water for 2 is much easier than providing water for a village.  Providing water to drink much easier than providing water to accommodate a dwelling. i.e., washing cloths, washing dishes, bathing, sewage, etc.

Can a cadaver dog find 75 year old bones...  Never tried.  Would be possible to do some tests to ascertain this before any trip. 

Trained for a short bit with a lady who used a pristine white bone for her HR (human remains) object.  Her dog had no trouble locating it.  My dog recently found a cat that had been consumed in an apartment fire, she climbed to the top of what was left of a 2 story apartment, (compacted to a height of about 5') stuck her nose in the rubble pile and with confidence, "told me" where the cat was buried under 5 feet of compacted, burnt rubble.  A few days later they were able to dig in that location looking for the cat and found what was left of her exactly where my dog had indicated.  I was amazed she was able to tell it was a cat even after having been mostly consumed in a fire.  The vet had trouble saying it was a cat, but a very experienced fire investigator had little trouble.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 23, 2012, 12:20:47 PM
Dr Jim--
good points. read over the reports of the expedition teams that have been to Niku, walked the reef, worked in 120* heat, took their water to the island, etc.
Also remember----I havent been there, but many on this forum have. Andrew Mc Kenna has SCUBA'ed the reef. Excellent frst-hand information.
In the 7 days from the disappearance to the Lambrecht overflight, the Electra vanished. I would think that if there is enough evidence to convince Ric to go to State, and State to Ballard, and HE is convinced, I'd say something is there. The team that has put together all of the assets, the sponsors, the equipment , and the man and woman hours certainly would not have done all of that if there wasnt something substancial.
Hang with us-----this is going to get exciting.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Evan McIntosh on March 23, 2012, 01:24:16 PM
Tom,

i thought that people who inhabited the island several years after the disappearance noted substantial plane wreckage - or a mostly intact plane - on the reef at the suspected landing site. This would indicate that the plane wasn't washed off the reef for many years after landing - not days!
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 23, 2012, 01:39:46 PM
Dr Jim,

the cadavar dog sounds like a good idea, just as ground penetrating Radar did for the last expedition.  Howver Niku may look small but its a large and complex site.  Where would you start? Not the village as the remains of the islanders will be there.  The Seven Site? Not a bad place as its well known and maybe thats where Fred met his end.

Then where?  There are family plots with graves over many parts of the island.  The Vola may cover a site and K9 may not be able to access because of this.

Now if someone could prove that a dog could find 75 year old remains in a Pacific Atoll environment then you'd have my vote.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dr James Younghusband, D.C. on March 23, 2012, 02:00:19 PM
When I was young I saw a 727 go into Lake Michigan.  We had wreckage washing up on the shore for quite a while.  While this is a different situation as there were likely radio calls made from the airplane after it's landing, so it is it quite possible it was largely in tact after landing, I am guessing when I say, it would likely be shedding pieces that would wash up from time to time, even it were washed off of the reef mostly in tact.

Yes, I am quite hopeful this next expedition with the deep ROV equip could finally bring home real answers to one of the great mysteries of our time.  I am more than happy to contribute any info that I can about cadaver dogs or search dogs.  I presently have a dog that I work for search work, and have a young dogs in training. 

Chris,  A dog is a good working tool as they can cover a large area in a relatively short amount of time.  GPR from what I know if it, moves at a very, very slow pace.  In that kind of heat, much of the K-9 work would be done in the dusk to dawn time frame.  Only way I know of to test would be bury some old bones in the sand on a beach and bring in the dog.  Old bones would be somewhat difficult to get, but not impossible. 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Bruce Thomas on March 23, 2012, 02:05:30 PM
i thought that people who inhabited the island several years after the disappearance noted substantial plane wreckage - or a mostly intact plane - on the reef at the suspected landing site. This would indicate that the plane wasn't washed off the reef for many years after landing - not days!

Evan,

I've spent countless hours over the past 7 years reading as much of the contents of the TIGHAR website as I could, and still despair that there is so much more to read (while my aging mind tries to prevent retention of what I already have read), but darned if I can recall anything that alludes to any of the colonists seeing substantial plane wreckage, or a mostly intact plane, anywhere on Nikumaroro.

So, would you please point me (exploiting the easy-to-use markup conventions for links provided by the SMF software that this Forum uses) to the documents that tell of those things that I cannot remember ever having read here. 

As an example of how easy it is to provide a link (https://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,127.0.html) to any document on the TIGHAR website, and showing how easy it is to provide in a posting's markup, as well as an example of my Swiss-cheese memory, Earhart Project Research Bulletin #56 (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/56_WhereIsElectra/56_WhereIsElectra.htm) is something I re-read last night.  At first, I thought to myself, "Wow!  How did I miss reading this when it came out two years ago?!?!?"  But then, slowly, I realized that all the pictures and diagrams were indeed familiar, and that it was indeed something that I'd read before.  Even though it does describe that Emily Sikuli "saw debris that her father told her was airplane wreckage on the reef edge at low tide about 100 meters north of the Norwich City shipwreck," nothing in that communicates to me that the debris was substantial.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 23, 2012, 02:10:19 PM
Dr Jim

I've no doubt that a cadaver dog can cover large distances.

My reference GPR was not the slowness but the unpredicatble results that TIGHAR got with it.

With much of the island settled my concern would be for null positives.  Bodies but not those of FN/AE but the remains of settlers such as the two grave sites already dug by TIGHAR with the permission of the Kiribati Gov.  How patient would they be after 5 + more requests that disturbed the final resitng places of settlers.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dr James Younghusband, D.C. on March 23, 2012, 02:49:52 PM
Chris, I know of no fool proof way to conduct any investigation, all investigative methods have strengths and weaknesses.  I would not consider the discovery of a buried person a fault or false positive if it were an islander, but rather as an HR site to be logged for further exploration if appropriate, or avoided if already known.  In that way a diagram of all known HR sites could be marked and those not pertaining to the AE/FN search disregarded.  I would think it would be much the same with an ROV site.  Several  unknown pieces of salvage are discovered on any search, and these marked, for future reference.  It is from collecting these pieces of information that a larger picture may be drawn.

We know from earlier reports that several HR items were discovered, and recorded, partial skull, etc, but lost at some future date.  We also know from these records that there are still many parts of that same known cadaver still undiscovered and these are likely still within 100 yards or so of the original discovery site, as that is the longest distance I believe a crab etc, could move human bones. (speculation on my part)  I would think any bone recovered from that area, 7 I believe(?) would be of interest.  A whole cadaver from that site would be a huge find, but I would think single small bones, would be also be of extreme interest as any islanders would have been buried whole.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 23, 2012, 03:16:41 PM
Agree if K9 were a possible then the 7 site is ideal though possibly the crabs have devoured the bones but hey ho i'm not against the idea :)
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 23, 2012, 03:25:05 PM

Dr. Jim
With respect to cadavers and bones, go to Ameliapedia above, then Technical Papers, then The Wreck of the Norwich City by Janet Powell.  She details the incident and the rescue and writes about 8 crew members never found nor accounted for. Perhaps some or all of their remains washed up onto the beach during the period between  the rescue (Decenber 1929) and the settling of the Island (December 1938).

Read also the Emily Sikuli interview with Ric and Dr. King in which she relates hearing stories from her father and others about the presence of bones of as many as 10 individuals on the beach when the settlers arrived.  Bear in mind that she was in her seventies relating stories she heard when she was 12 or so.

Welcome to the venture.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dr James Younghusband, D.C. on March 23, 2012, 03:42:22 PM
So many bones, and such a small island.  Wouldn't it make sense to start any search for bones at the site where the original skull and shoe fragments were recovered?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 23, 2012, 03:51:52 PM
When I was young I saw a 727 go into Lake Michigan.  We had wreckage washing up on the shore for quite a while.  While this is a different situation as there were likely radio calls made from the airplane after it's landing, so it is it quite possible it was largely in tact after landing, I am guessing when I say, it would likely be shedding pieces that would wash up from time to time, even it were washed off of the reef mostly in tact.


NTSB Identification: DCA66A0002 (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=74466&key=0)
14 CFR Part 121 Scheduled operation of UNITED AIR LINES INC
Aircraft: BOEING B-727, registration: N7036U

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 FILE    DATE          LOCATION          AIRCRAFT DATA       INJURIES       FLIGHT                        PILOT DATA
                                                               F  S M/N     PURPOSE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-0030  65/8/16    LAKE MICHIGAN ILL   BOEING B-727        CR-  6  0  0  SCHED DOM PASSG SRV       AIRLINE TRANSPORT, AGE
        TIME - 2021                    N7036U              PX- 24  0  0                            42, 17142 TOTAL HOURS, 82
                                       DAMAGE-DESTROYED    OT-  0  0  0                            IN TYPE, INSTRUMENT
                                                                                                   RATED.
        OPERATOR - UNITED AIR LINES,INC.
        TYPE OF ACCIDENT                                         PHASE OF OPERATION
           COLLISION WITH GROUND/WATER: CONTROLLED                  IN FLIGHT: DESCENDING
        PROBABLE CAUSE(S)
           MISCELLANEOUS - UNDETERMINED
        FACTOR(S)
           MISCELLANEOUS ACTS,CONDITIONS - AIRCRAFT CAME TO REST IN WATER
         FIRE AFTER IMPACT
        REMARKS- N7036U CRASHED INTO LAKE MICHIGAN.

Index for Aug1965 | Index of months
------------------------------------------

Most experts thought that the pilot misread the altimeter by 10,000 feet, see attached image of the type of altimeter that was in use. In this image, the "minute" hand shows 180 feet and the "hour" hand which is really the "thousand foot" hand and shows zero "thousands" so the altimeter might be reading on 180 feet. but the triangle above the "1" is the "ten thousands" foot hand so the actual reading is 10,180. Apparently the 727 pilots didn't notice that the "ten thousands" foot pointer on their altimeter was not on the "1" but was on the "0."   

There is an error in the attached image. The "barber pole" area seen at the bottom of the image should not be visible and should be covered by a shutter connected to the "ten thousand" foot pointer and is completely covered by this shutter above 10,000 feet so should not be shown in the image. As you descend below 10,000 feet, more and more of this barber pole area becomes visible and is there to warn the pilots that they are descending through the last 10,000 feet down to sea level. The pilots apparently did not notice this additional warning. Because the possibility of mis-reading these three pointer altimeters, jets today have switched to drum type altimeters like the second attached image.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dr James Younghusband, D.C. on March 23, 2012, 04:05:32 PM
Yep, was standing on the beach that day with two friends.  Though "fire after impact," was not what we saw.  What I saw was fire before impact.  We were young and no one wanted to listen to what we had to say.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 23, 2012, 04:14:03 PM
agree that should a succesfull trial be carried out before and expedition to Niku (this years looks like its 100% focused on the dep sea search) then yes it makes sense to look again at the 7 site and its close environ.

But yest the island has many bones for its short history.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 25, 2012, 11:10:52 AM

There is an error in the attached image. The "barber pole" area seen at the bottom of the image should not be visible and should be covered by a shutter connected to the "ten thousand" foot pointer and is completely covered by this shutter above 10,000 feet so should not be shown in the image. As you descend below 10,000 feet, more and more of this barber pole area becomes visible and is there to warn the pilots that they are descending through the last 10,000 feet down to sea level. The pilots apparently did not notice this additional warning. Because the possibility of mis-reading these three pointer altimeters, jets today have switched to drum type altimeters like the second attached image.


(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=625.0;attach=1964) (https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=625.0;attach=1966)
gl
I went flying yesterday and took this picture of the instrument display. These flat panels are coming into use these days even in small planes but they add a lot to the price of a new plane. This is what is known as "a glass cockpit." The photo shows the "moving tape type display" of altitude along the right edge of the display. This format has been used for many years in jets before the development of "glass" and was then done with a mechanical display. The "tape" moves up and down and has a magnified section in the middle to clearly show your altitude which is 1680 feet in the photo.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 25, 2012, 09:34:18 PM
Evan---I dont disagree with what you are saying. In fact I would love to think that electra parts were on the reef and beach when Lambrecht fly over the island on July 9. He didnt report any 'visible' wreckage, only signs of recnet habitation. I would think that at 400+- feet he was flying at, and could see 'signs of recent habitation', he would also see parts of the electra on the reef or the beach. One of 2 things happend that day----Either the electra --all of it or including dislodged parts -were already over the reef ledge and out of visible site, or he didnt overfly the suspected area where the later inhabitants claim to have seen wreckage.
This also makes me wonder about the overflight in reguards to the Nessie picture. 'Something' is seen in the picture taken several months after the disappearance, and NOT seen 7 days after it happened. Now, if in fact Nessie is a landing gear strut visible in the picture, that means the it came off the plane sometime between july 2, and July 9, and the plane went over the reef ledge and out of sight from the air. It stands to reason that the search planes should have been able to see something breaking in the waves on the reef, unless the tide completely covered it. I would think that IF they saw it as not a part of the NC wreckage, they would have landed to investigate. If nothing else, to investigate the signs of inhabitation.
I'm just thinking that the overflight search may have been just that, flying over the island, and not really looking, just logging air time. I know thats a cruel thing to say. But, if Nessie IS a landing gear strut, how is it possible that it is there in the pic, and NOT there 7 days after the disappearance?
Someone smarter than me explain it so I can understand it.   
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dan Swift on March 26, 2012, 08:46:23 AM
That 727 had to have a low altitude warning system on it.  The Pilots would have known they were at a dangerous altitude plenty of time to recover.  Unless there was something else wrong or going on. 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 26, 2012, 10:34:40 AM
That 727 had to have a low altitude warning system on it.  The Pilots would have known they were at a dangerous altitude plenty of time to recover.  Unless there was something else wrong or going on.
Well,no. GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System) was not yet developed in 1965 and this was one of the accidents that led to its development and for the FAA requiring it in airliners manufactured after 1974, nine years after this crash.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Dan Swift on March 26, 2012, 11:03:56 AM
Wow, did not know it was that recent.  Before my time. 
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on March 26, 2012, 11:48:28 AM
Tom

You are way over estimating the ability of searchers to see something like the strut in the surf.  When you say "I would think..." you are only guessing.  The fact is that it is very hard to see stuff as small as the strut, or even a human being from 400 ft.  If you watch the aerial tour of Niku, it is hard to spot humans at 100 ft, never mind 400 ft and humans are larger than the strut.

You have to keep in mind the mindset of the searchers.  These guys were expecting to see a Lockheed Electra sitting on the beach, not scraps, or single humans.  When they didn't see an aircraft, they moved on despite the signs of recent habitation, etc.

In my mind, the probability of detection was very low given that there was no aircraft to be seen out on the beach or the reef flat.

Andrew



Evan---I dont disagree with what you are saying. In fact I would love to think that electra parts were on the reef and beach when Lambrecht fly over the island on July 9. He didnt report any 'visible' wreckage, only signs of recnet habitation. I would think that at 400+- feet he was flying at, and could see 'signs of recent habitation', he would also see parts of the electra on the reef or the beach. One of 2 things happend that day----Either the electra --all of it or including dislodged parts -were already over the reef ledge and out of visible site, or he didnt overfly the suspected area where the later inhabitants claim to have seen wreckage.
This also makes me wonder about the overflight in reguards to the Nessie picture. 'Something' is seen in the picture taken several months after the disappearance, and NOT seen 7 days after it happened. Now, if in fact Nessie is a landing gear strut visible in the picture, that means the it came off the plane sometime between july 2, and July 9, and the plane went over the reef ledge and out of sight from the air. It stands to reason that the search planes should have been able to see something breaking in the waves on the reef, unless the tide completely covered it. I would think that IF they saw it as not a part of the NC wreckage, they would have landed to investigate. If nothing else, to investigate the signs of inhabitation.
I'm just thinking that the overflight search may have been just that, flying over the island, and not really looking, just logging air time. I know thats a cruel thing to say. But, if Nessie IS a landing gear strut, how is it possible that it is there in the pic, and NOT there 7 days after the disappearance?
Someone smarter than me explain it so I can understand it.   
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 26, 2012, 11:54:49 AM
Tom, the Gilbert island colonists say they saw aircraft wreckage at this location. So does that mean it couldn't have gone over the edge so soon as like, before the rescue search?
Maybe the navy fliers were looking for a crash site on land and didn't give the surf line a second glance?
Maybe because they had to look over the side of their planes to see they missed the plane as they followed the coastline around Niku?
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 26, 2012, 03:55:28 PM
Tom

You are way over estimating the ability of searchers to see something like the strut in the surf.  When you say "I would think..." you are only guessing.  The fact is that it is very hard to see stuff as small as the strut, or even a human being from 400 ft.  If you watch the aerial tour of Niku, it is hard to spot humans at 100 ft, never mind 400 ft and humans are larger than the strut.

You have to keep in mind the mindset of the searchers. These guys were expecting to see a Lockheed Electra sitting on the beach, not scraps, or single humans.  When they didn't see an aircraft, they moved on despite the signs of recent habitation, etc.
Ahem...that looks like speculation too.
Quote

In my mind, the probability of detection was very low given that there was no aircraft to be seen out on the beach or the reef flat.

Andrew

We discussed this before and the Probability of Detection tables from the National Search And Rescue Manual show a high probability of detection IF Earhart and Noonan had been on  the island. And when you watch the helicopter fly around you have no trouble seeing the people wading out to the boat in the lagoon and this section of the video was shot from out over the sea on the north side of the island which is as far away as you can get and still be searching the island so the Navy planes were not farther away than this. The only way they would not have been seen is if they were purposefully trying to hide in the brush, a highly unlikely event.

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Colin Philip Cobb on March 26, 2012, 05:49:46 PM
Interesting developments with tighar, and exciting to represent the Derry side of the Earhart story at the conference.   Regarding the Nessie photo there appears to be a large amount tyre visable in the photo which makes it hard to compute what the very small amount of tyre is clinging to ,to be battered over 3 months in the sea and still hold fast.
Scale is an issue from the distance involved.  To tear the plane from the landing gear one would expect the majority of the landing gear to be submerged and firmly lodged in a reef where all that would be visable would be the strut. In this photo nearly all of the tyre is visable.  I will never cease to be amazed at what the eye wants to see it will see.
Like the loch ness monster and it's classic black and White images from the 1930,s theres clearly something in the photo but is it the monster? Or a bale of hay , rotting vegetation , a man swimming , a boat, birds, wave formations. 
This summer we may get the answer.

Colin Cobb




Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 26, 2012, 09:40:38 PM
andrew---i agree with you too! I'm going to rethink my little theory and get back to everyone.
For whatever reasons, the signs of recent habitation didnt warrant the flight to land. Ok I got that. The Electra obviously wasnt there either. We are assuming that Nessie is the gear strut, and was there when Lambrecht searched the island. It may that been obscured by the water. At any rate, they didnt see it. If they had, and could have landed and investigated, we might be looking at a whole new ball game here.
Things that mysteries are made of. I'm sure I'll some answers to my dunb questions at DC.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 26, 2012, 10:58:55 PM

Dan Swift
I remember that 727 crash you are referring to .  I had just returned to the suburban Chicago area after having been away in the Army, College, and Grad School for 8 years.

As I recall there were two such accidents involving the 727, a relatively new model plane at the time and the first commercial airliner, I think, with a "T" tail.  I recall speculation at the time that the elevator surfaces were not in air flow at certain nose-high configurations hence the pilot couldn't get the nose down and the plane stalled, spun and went into the Lake.

I don't remember whether they were on approach to OHare, Midway, of Meigs.

Thread Drift Alert. AOOGAH, AOOGAH.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Gary LaPook on March 26, 2012, 11:20:32 PM


As I recall there were two such accidents involving the 727, a relatively new model plane at the time and the first commercial airliner, I think, with a "T" tail.  I recall speculation at the time that the elevator surfaces were not in air flow at certain nose-high configurations hence the pilot couldn't get the nose down and the plane stalled, spun and went into the Lake.

You're referring to a deep stall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stall_%28flight%29).

gl
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on March 27, 2012, 04:57:25 AM
Yes, we've discussed the POD in the past.  You choose to interpret them your way, which is to give an unrealistically high probability.  I don't know anyone doing an actual search who would in practice assign such a high probability under the circumstances, but you wish to derive an unrealistically high probability to bolster your argument that AE was never on Niku, so use them as you wish.  I can't change your mind.

What you are saying is that if AE were half dead after a week with little water, lying back in the bush to get out of the sun, unable to get out in the open during the time that the aircraft were overhead, you would have seen her anyway since the probability tables (as you interpret them) say you would have.  That to me is unrealistic, you don't have to be purposely hiding to get missed during a search, subjects get missed all the time.  How would that be possible with PODs so high?

You must have some set of eyes, my friend, and since they are so good, I ask you where are the other 6-8 people who are were on the ground when the video was taken?  I know where they are, and I still can't see them even when the camera zooms in on them.  IF, when the helicopter came over, instead of wading in the lagoon, we all happened to be traversing the island from lagoon to beach under the canopy, which takes a good 15 minutes, we would have been impossible to spot, even with your eyes.

I would also like to point out that the video of the guys wading out is generally highly zoomed by the cameraman and doesn't accurately represent the ability of the Mark I eyeball.  The helicopter is also at considerably lower altitude than we believe the Navy aircraft.  If it weren't for the orange Naiad, the focus of the camera, and the fact that there are 3 of them, they'd be much more difficult to spot.   Not nearly an equivalent situation as spotting a single person from 400 ft without a skiff, even if they are in the open.

Think about it this way.  How many individual trees can you identify as individual and distinct in the Aerial Tour.  Using your POD methodology, you should be able to see and distinguish at least 85% of the individual tree trunks, but I seriously doubt that you can.  If AE was leaning against one of them, you'd miss her.

Your assumptions might apply for people standing out in the water or on the beach, but when you consider short duration of the overhead flight, the foliage, and the difficulty of getting into an open spot on the ground if you don't happen to be in one, your assertion that there would be a high probability of being seen is hopelessly optimistic given the scenario. 

Andrew



We discussed this before and the Probability of Detection tables from the National Search And Rescue Manual show a high probability of detection IF Earhart and Noonan had been on  the island. And when you watch the helicopter fly around you have no trouble seeing the people wading out to the boat in the lagoon and this section of the video was shot from out over the sea on the north side of the island which is as far away as you can get and still be searching the island so the Navy planes were not farther away than this. The only way they would not have been seen is if they were purposefully trying to hide in the brush, a highly unlikely event.

gl
[/quote]
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 27, 2012, 10:47:48 AM
One good point from the Nessie photo is that it gave the team a reference point from which to begin the underwater search of the reef. That and the eye witness accounts from the colonists led to the ROV footage and now, a full blown attempt to see what all this junk is, or was.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 27, 2012, 12:39:24 PM

Humourously, a lesson to be learned, Don't crop the photo till ya see all there is to be seen.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 27, 2012, 12:45:24 PM
As a matter of interest, how deep was the water at the location of Nessie? there seems to be an awful lot of 'tyre' showing in the photo, looks to be a matter of inches but again, it's all down to scale.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 27, 2012, 01:17:34 PM

Jeff N
I remember taking a Logic Course (Symbolic Logic 3101), a large portion of which was devoted to recognizing logical fallacies.  One of the fallacies was called "Appeal To Venerable Authority".
We see it all the time.  Such as What is good for General Motors is Good for the Country. or my favorite (paraphasing) President Richard Nixon, The President can do no wrong, I am your President,: I can do no wrong.  "Your President is not a Crook"  We all know how that turned out.

In this case I think that Ric and others have done a marvelous job in getting the "high-level" folks on board to lend credibility to the Niku search and give  whatever assistance (financial and/or otherwise) that they can.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 27, 2012, 10:14:13 PM
Jeff Victor---Andrew and Ric can best answer that question---they have both been there. I'd suspect 2 foot at high tide, but I dont want to guess. Maybe Ric or Andrew and chime in here, although I'll bet they are busy PACKING!!
Lucky Guys
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on March 28, 2012, 04:00:27 AM
Nessie seems to be located on the reef flat before it drops off into deeper water.  At low tide, there can be as little as just an inch or two of water on the reef flat, I've seen it where there is literally a small waterfall running off the reef edge into the sea.  We've walked out to the edge of the reef many a time, but best on a calm day.

At high tide, there could be as much as 3-4 ft of water on this part of the reef, compounded by waves.  If Nessie were lodged in a hole, only part of the tire would be above reef level.

There has been considerable work on the level of the tides in relation to a parked Electra, complete with graphics, but I seem to be hopelessly inept at searching the TIGHAR material.  Here are links I can find:

Tidal analysis
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/TidalStudy/TidalStudy.htm (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/TidalStudy/TidalStudy.htm)

Graphic of aircraft on reef, with tidal level
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/TidalStudy/reefflat.html (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/TidalStudy/reefflat.html)

Andrew
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 28, 2012, 05:32:22 AM
hey andrew--with the enhanced pic that was posted----the only way I see the the tire 'could'be visible is if if were inverted, as in upside down. Granted, I think it originally had the tire in a creavass, but if we couls 'see' a tire above the other part of whatever is there, it would almost have to be inverted.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on March 28, 2012, 05:45:00 AM
Hard to say.  Depends upon the state of the tide which I've not heard any estimate of for that day, and a few other things we don't have access to yet, like the forensic imaging analysis. 

I seriously don't think trying to analyze or enhance the photos off the web will be productive, fun maybe, but not enough resolution, so we're back to seeing bunnies again.

Hopefully a research paper on all of this will be produced soon.

Andrew
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Evan McIntosh on March 28, 2012, 07:06:25 AM
Has any evidence of FN been found at the seven site? If not why not? Also, why are there so many campfire sites? If I had established one, I would have used that for several days before shifting to another. If AE spent about a week at each campfire site, she would have been alive for approximately 7 weeks I would think.

Evan McIntosh MD, PhD
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on March 28, 2012, 08:59:29 AM
Has any evidence of FN been found at the seven site?

That depends on how you interpret the "evidence," such as it is.

Tom King, TIGHAR's lead archeologist, has a wonderful introductory article about the Seven Site (http://tighar.org/wiki/Seven_site).  It probably needs to be updated with information on things found since the first draft of the article.

Quote
If not why not?

There are only so many logical possibilities to answer your question.
Quote
Also, why are there so many campfire sites?

Many visitors over many years?

A ring of fires to keep crabs out?

Crabs attracted to stuff in old fires?

Some strange cooking technique?

Quote
If I had established one, I would have used that for several days before shifting to another.

If I had been Amelia, I would have landed at Howland after switching my DF system from 7500 kcs to 3105 kcs, so that I could hear voice transmissions from the Itasca.  Then we would have worked everything out from there.

Quote
If AE spent about a week at each campfire site, she would have been alive for approximately 7 weeks I would think.

TIGHAR has asked the folks examining the bird and fish bones how many meals they might represent.  Then that has to be added to an estimate of the food value of the clams.  I don't know whether a final report has been written on that question.  My fallible recollection is that the food value, if all the remnants came just from the person who left the bones behind, would not have sustained life for very long.
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Don Dollinger on March 29, 2012, 03:14:45 PM
Has any evidence of FN been found at the seven site? If not why not? Also, why are there so many campfire sites? If I had established one, I would have used that for several days before shifting to another. If AE spent about a week at each campfire site, she would have been alive for approximately 7 weeks I would think.

Evan McIntosh MD, PhD

Evan,

If ALL or even a large portion of the fire sites could somehow be attributed to AE then IMHO the purpose of so many would be that it would be very difficult to keep a fire going continuously over a long period of time due to the quantity of fuel (firewood) needed which would also have to be gathered and broken down and the need to spend alot of time tending to it.  I could see starting a fire to cook a meal and then allowing it to go out and then the next evening again having a new fire.  If that was the scenario it is rather puzzling as to why they would be in different places as you would think that she/they would have a central place that was reused for subsequent fires.  I can see them moving the site closer to a wood source like a felled tree or brush pile versus having to haul the wood across the site to the fire.  I can also see the ring of fires as suggested by Marty but again, I am thinking that the amount of energy and wood required for that scenario seems a bit much.  The most logical (which in this endearing mystery doesn't mean much) reason I could think of would be the multiple fires by multiple parties over the last 70 years.

LTM,

Don
Title: Re: What was the fate of Fred Noonan, site of camp?
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 29, 2012, 05:49:02 PM

Jeff, when I mentioned a reference point it was in the context of, where to put the ROV in relation to the newly discovered uncut version of Eric Bevingtons photo which I understand was discovered 1 month prior to the 2010 expedition. It would certainly have reduced the size of the box needed to be searched? If it was presumed/hoped/whatever to be part of the Electra then, logically, given the hypothesis, the rest of it (whatever it is) wouldn't be far away.