Print

[Cameron Scott]

Hello,

Is the bearing known that AE was flying from on Lae to Howland Is?

Also, what were the weather and light conditions that were in the area of Howland Is in the morning when she disapeared?

Thanks,
Cam

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

Is the bearing known that AE was flying from on Lae to Howland Is?

There wasn't one bearing.

If she was approximating a great circle route (the shortest distance between
two points), she would have flown a number of different bearings, as Lindbergh
did across the Atlantic.

And the next bearing chosen after finishing a segment would depend on
dead reckoning about the degree to which wind might have blown the
plane off course during the last segment--or last several segments.

Also, what were the weather and light conditions that were in the area of Howland Is in the morning when she disappeared?

If I remember correctly, it was cloudy only off to the northwest.  That's why the Itasca sailed off in that direction post-haste, thinking that if AE and FN had been anywhere else in the sky, they'd surely have spotted the island.

Links to several articles on this page that deal with the scene on the Itasca.

[Ric Gillespie]

Marty is correct about the changing compass heading but, of course, the other answer is, "Nobody knows what heading she was actually flying."

As to weather, the observations taken aboard Itasca and on Howland indicate that it was a typical Central Pacific morning with scattered cumulus clouds at about 2,000 feet.  The clouds did appear to be less scattered and more broken to the northwest.

[Cameron Scott]

Thanks for all the help.

So she would have been flying in a circle route like when an airliner flying from North America to Europe would fly north to the Greenland/Iceland area before coming back south?

If this is the case would it be plausible that since she was in the southern hemisphere, she would have flown south and then north? This would have put her on a general course coming from the South East towards Howland Is?

This is contrary to where the Itasca searched. Is it plausible that they knew more about her flight plan or was it just the clouds blocking the view of the island?

Cam

[Ric Gillespie]

Her final heading should have been 78° so she was approaching from the west/southwest headed east/northeast.  We know what the Itasca knew because we have all the pre-flight radio messages.

It's all in the book, Finding Amelia - the true story of the Earhart disappearance - available in soft cover for a mere pittance from amazon or in hard-cover with data-DVD, signed by the author, from TIGHAR at http://tighar.org/TIGHAR_Store/tigharstore.html

[Cameron Scott]

Thanks for the quick reply. I think I will have to get the book. However I still have questions and no book so please bear with me.

So from the link that was posted about the first 24hrs of the search, it said that the Capt thought she only had 30 mins of fuel left. From revious flights it can be estimated that she had 4 hours left. So is it plausible that at 105 kts/hr she should be able to fly another 420 'ish' NM?

I also read that she was believed to be close to Howland Is by the strength of her broadcast. What is considered close? Are we talking 10 NM, 50 NM or 100 NM ranges?

Cam

[Ric Gillespie]

So is it plausible that at 105 kts/hr she should be able to fly another 420 'ish' NM?

She wouldn't need to fly anything like that far.  It's 356 nm from Howland to Niku.  If she hit the LOP 100 nm southeast of Howland she would only have to go 256 nm. If she hit the LOP 200 nm southeast of Howl;and she would only need to go 156 nm.

The strength of the radio broadcasts suggest that she was at least 80 nm and perhaps as much as 210 nm from Howland. See "The 3105 Donut" in http://tighar.org/TTracks/2008Vol_24/1008.pdf

[Cameron Scott]

I guess this is the whole mystery, which you guys know far better than I do. I am just getting into this and I can't seem to shut down my computer because it is so interesting.

If she joined the LOP at 100 or 80nm she would have had the shorter route but would she have seen Niku?

If she turned SE along 157 just before Howland became visable at 1000ft, she would have been taken just West of Niku (within visual range). However, this line would have taken her past Baker Island which would have also been with in visual range.

I think the key is her ability to see Niku and putting her in a position to see it. With the radio traffic that was recorded, basically we have that she thought she was on them but couldn't see the Island and that she turned on 157. If she was travelling at 1000 ft when she sent the message, is it plausible to believe that she began to climb higher with time (and maybe panic), trying to get a better view?

Cam

[Ric Gillespie]

I don't think she was ever anywhere near Howland.  I think they hit the LOP about 200 miles southeast of Howland.  When she said "We must be on you ..." all she was saying was that they had reached the LOP which Noonan had calculated fell through Howland, Baker,near Mckean, and close to Gardner (Niku).  They probably explored northwestward (337°) for about 20 minutes but that still didn't bring them within visual range of Baker. They then turned around and re-traced their steps and kept going until Gardner came in sight.  Unlike Howland, Baker, or McKean; Gardner has a large turquoise-colored lagoon that makes it far more visible from the air than the other islands.

Climbing would create problems because if you're above a scattered cloud deck you can only see what is directly below through the gaps in the clouds.

[Cameron Scott]

Hello Ric,

Thanks for all the reply's. This is all very interesting.

For VHF transmission, you can deduct line of sight using the formula (the square root of Alt in feet multiplied by 1.23). With this you get just under 39 NM. This is a little out there for what the human eye can actually see. I am pretty sure that the flyers would have also had Bino's. So what would have been a reasonable estimate for what they could see? Would 39 NM be alright for thier field of view or would something smaller like 20 NM be better? I guess this is all relative to thier eye sight which is something we will never know.

I agree that she most likely came onto the LOP South of Howland Island. However, is it possible that she did not actually hit 157/377 in line with Howland? Could she have turned south east ten or twenty minutes early? I know this would be difficult because Noonan would have been watching a clock but the fact that they are missing, denotes that mistakes were made. 157/377 is a SE course and would have taken them towards Niku if they were West of Howland and Baker Islands. If they were east of 157/337 in line with Howland, it would have taken them farther out of sight of Niku.

Would an engine on an Electra work if the props were damaged? By this I mean the props could be pulled back from the force of landing right up to being ripped right off. They would have needed them to keep the engine cool but if they are starting and stopping the engine for short amounts of time when recharging this might have not been needed. Could they do it?

I don't think this makes any difference, just musings really.

Cam

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

For VHF transmission, you can deduce line of sight using the formula (the square root of Alt in feet multiplied by 1.23). With this you get just under 39 NM. This is a little out there for what the human eye can actually see. I am pretty sure that the flyers would have also had Bino's.

I'm pretty sure that no binoculars were listed in the Luke Field Inventory.

It's not just a matter of "seeing" the island, but of recognizing that what you are looking at is the island.  It's apparently quite hard to differentiate Howland from the normal pattern of cloud shadows on the surface of the water.

The Waitt Institute for Discovery has an excellent video on this page that demonstrates how difficult it is to spot Howland Island from the air.

... is it possible that she did not actually hit 157/377 in line with Howland?

Anything is possible, isn't it?

The increasing strength of the radio signals suggests that they were getting close.  Ric already pointed you to the argument about how close that might have been.  We know they missed Howland.  There are probably lots of possible ways of doing that.

[Ric Gillespie]

Even a nick in the tip of a prop blade can throw it out of balance and an unbalanced prop can tear an engine off its mounts. I don't think it's reasonable to postulate that the aircraft sustained significant propeller damage in the landing.

[Ricker H Jones]

The Luke Field inventory made by the Army after Earhart's failed first attempt did include  " Bausch & Lomb Field Glasses, 6 x 30 Serial No. 221939 with carrying case".  I, too, think binoculars would be very important to have, but there is no way of knowing if she carried them when she departed Lae.

It would also seem logical that Earhart was short of Howland Island when she maneuvered on 157/337.  Had she been east of Howland with the sun to her back, she may have had a better shot at seeing the island. 
Rick J

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

The Luke Field inventory made by the Army after Earhart's failed first attempt did include  "Bausch & Lomb Field Glasses, 6 x 30 Serial No. 221939 with carrying case".  I, too, think binoculars would be very important to have, but there is no way of knowing if she carried them when she departed Lae.

Thanks for the correction, Rick!  I didn't take time to re-read the inventory before I replied.  My bad!

It's actually a middling-important question.  Folks have often speculated that AE may have carried a lens from the sextant to start fires.  If she had any feel for lenses, she might have tried getting one out of the binoculars to use as a firestarter rather than using the tiny eyepiece from the sextant.

If they had the binoculars with them ...

If her mind worked that way ...

[Ric Gillespie]

It would also seem logical that Earhart was short of Howland Island when she maneuvered on 157/337. 

I don't agree that it is logical that Earhart was short of the LOP that passed through Howland.  Her arrival on that line was governed by Noonan's calculations that advanced his 157/337 sunrise LOP by Dead Reckoning until it fell through Howland (and coincidentally near Baker, McKean and Gardner).  I know of no reason to think that Noonan's calculation would not be accurate within about 10 miles.  When Earhart said at 1912Z, "We must be on you but cannot see you.." all she was saying is that the clock said they had reached the advanced LOP.  I think they were probably within 10 miles of the line but about 200 miles southeast of Howland.