Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Mr. Carrols Radio  (Read 35816 times)

Jeff Scott

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #15 on: August 21, 2011, 12:17:42 PM »

Was anything ever found relating to Mr. Carrol's http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/2000Vol_16/occult.pdf supposed post loss radio conversation with AE?

Brad

Thank you for unearthing this link from the archives.  It does raise some interesting subjects.

"Terry Linley, TIGHAR # 2297, is now working with the family to try to locate any surviving logbook or documentation that would shed further light on this fascinating development."

Repeating Brad's question, did anything ever become of Terry Linley's discussions with the Carroll family?  Was this line of investigation closed or remain unresolved, like so many other elements of the Earhart story?
It's not too late to be great.
 
Logged

Jeff Scott

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #16 on: August 21, 2011, 12:30:00 PM »

Well answering my own post, it occurred to me that if there was something to the W40K/Francis Carroll topic it would be discussed in the book Finding Amelia.  There's no mention of Francis Carroll in the index.  The relevant section of text says this:

"...Betty could not make it out. It sounded something like 'W40K Howlandport' or maybe 'W O J Howlandport.' The phrase may have been 'WPA Howland airport.' During preparations for Earhart's world flight, the construction of the landing field on Howland Island was known as the 'WPA airport project.'"

WPA was the Works Progress Administration, one of Roosevelt's controversial New Deal programs comparable to the current "stimulus."

Based on this section of the book, I'm guessing nothing came of investigating Francis Carroll possibly communicating with Earhart.
It's not too late to be great.
 
Logged

Chris Johnson

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Trying to give a fig but would settle for $100,000
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #17 on: August 21, 2011, 12:47:03 PM »

Based on this section of the book, I'm guessing nothing came of investigating Francis Carroll possibly communicating with Earhart.

I also looked for something in Rics book and like you found nothing.  Looks like its dead in the water, why I don't know but would suspect its to do with AE not being able to receive radio transmissions.
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2011, 02:08:57 PM »

Reception & transmitting was by the V-aerial stretched from cabin mast to rudders . A belly aerial (of which I am not sure that it was presenr , pictures are not ad fundum convincing , that is , I saw photographs showing the two wires running (front end) longer than the aircraft , suspecting it is manipulation) may have been formerly used for an RDF installation (Hooven) which was removed from A/c due to its weight : it may also have been for a Glide Path Receiver which was however , not installed in NR 16020 .
Logged

Andrew M McKenna

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 645
  • Here I am during the Maid of Harlech Survey.
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2011, 12:24:33 AM »

Reception & transmitting was by the V-aerial stretched from cabin mast to rudders . A belly aerial (of which I am not sure that it was presenr , pictures are not ad fundum convincing , that is , I saw photographs showing the two wires running (front end) longer than the aircraft , suspecting it is manipulation) may have been formerly used for an RDF installation (Hooven) which was removed from A/c due to its weight : it may also have been for a Glide Path Receiver which was however , not installed in NR 16020 .

Can you cite what evidence you are relying upon when you say  "Reception & transmitting was by the V-aerial stretched from cabin mast to rudders" ?

I suspect you have not done your homework.  Ric and others would be a better source than I, but at this point I believe it has been well established that the dorsal V antenna was used for transmitting, and the belly antenna was for receiving.  RDF was through the loop over the cockpit.

This configuration, and the loss of the belly antenna, explains why the Itasca could hear her transmissions from the dorsal V, but she could not hear them as the receive antenna was missing, except when she was trying to DF on them using the loop. 

Your assertion that the belly antenna didn't exist at all is countered by the fact that photos of the aircraft clearly prove that the starboard belly antenna was re-installed during the repair by Lockheed .  Further, professional forensic image analysis of the L-10 taxing to the runway at Lae indicates that the belly antenna and masts were there, so your assertion that the belly antenna photos are manipulated is countered by the evidence as determined by qualified forensic imaging specialists.  What are your qualifications as a forensic imaging specialist?

The Hooven DF "Sense" antenna mounted on the port side of the belly was not re-installed after the Hawaii crash, however the starboard side belly antenna was clearly re-installed after repair of the aircraft by Lockheed.  In fact, the starboard belly antenna is the one antenna that existed throughout the life of the aircraft preceding the dorsal V, and remaining after the trailing LF and the Hooven sense antenna were removed.

Why would a belly antenna for a glide path receiver be installed if the glide path receiver was never installed?  Doesn't make sense, why do you suggest it?

You are wildly speculating at this point as to the purpose of the belly antenna, which only indicates that you really have no real idea of the antenna configuration on the aircraft, and are only guessing instead of reviewing the research that has already been done, or presenting research of your own. 

If you want to challenge the research that has already been done, thats fine, but be prepared to present evidence that is compelling, not just your opinion and guesswork.

Searching Google for "TIGHAR Belly antenna" yields lots of material.  Of particular interest is discussion in the old Forum on the history of the radio gear over time.  See Ric's post of 6/21/00 to get a better understanding of what antennas were installed and removed prior to the second attempt.  It would serve us all to think about the answers to the questions Ric poses regarding the purpose of the antennas at different points in time.

<<<
From Ric

Okay, let's get into this. What was the function of the belly antenna? I don't pretend to know for sure, but I think that the history of the airplane might provide some clues. I'll be very interested to have your opinion on the following facts and questions.

1. When the airplane was delivered to AE in July 1936 it had a WE 13C transmitter and a WE 20B receiver, the same radios (or so it would seem) that it had when it disappeared. However, there was no dorsal antenna on the airplane at all. There was a belly antenna identical to the one that was apparently lost at Lae with a lead-in that entered the fuselage right under the copilot's seat where the 20B receiver was mounted. The only other antenna on the airplane was a trailing wire that deployed from the extreme tail of the airplane, just under the navigation light. At that time the airplane appears to have no DF capability at all.
What, in your opinion, was the function of the belly antenna at that time?

2. Sometime around October 1936 the Hooven Radio Compass was installed. This involved a separate receiver mounted on a fuel tank in the cabin, a dome-shaped antenna on the cabin roof, and another belly antenna that ran parallel to the original belly antenna but on the opposite (port) side of the airplane. The trailing wire in the tail remained unchanged.
What, in your opinion, was the function of the new belly antenna?
What, in your opinion, was the function of the original (starboard) belly antenna at this time?

3. In mid-February 1937 Earhart flies the airplane to New York to announce her planned World Flight. While she's on the east coast Western Electric installs a new dorsal vee antenna. All the other antennas remain unchanged.
What, in your opinion, was the purpose of this antenna?

4. Back in California in late February the trailing wire is moved from the extreme tail to deploy from a mast under the cabin. Right around March 1st comes the big change in DF equipment. Hooven's Radio Compass and it's domed-shaped antenna go away and are replaced by the Bendix loop over the cockpit. The belly antennas -- both port and starboard -- remain unchanged.
What, in your opinion, is the function of each of these antennas at this time?

5. The airplane goes to Hawaii, gets wrecked, and comes back to Burbank for repairs. When it come out of the shop several changes are apparent in the antenna set-up.

the dorsal vee has been lengthened by moving the mast forward.
the trailing wire is gone.
the port side belly antenna (that had been added when the Hooven DF was installed) is also gone.
Unchanged are the Bendix loop over the cockpit and the starboard side belly antenna.
What, in your opinion, is the function of the belly antenna at this time?

There is no change to the airplane's antenna configuration while it is in Miami or later (until the belly antenna gets knocked off in Lae.)

LTM,
Ric

>>>>
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Forum/Highlights81_100/highlights93.html

A. McKenna
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2011, 01:32:36 AM »

All true, but nowhere in reports (Gurr , etc) and literature is a remark about a belly antenna in operation . But the best proof that the (lost ..?) port belly aerial was not for receiving is , that between Lae and Nukumanu 2-way communications were excellent according to Balfour´s experience . Only after sunset o/b of A/c contact after channel shift was interrrupted . Also , during the Howland approach operations Itasca´s signals were confirmed from aboard A/c , be it that voice & RDF communications were erratic by timing (not : time) failures . That Itasca signals would have been heard via RDF only is an impossibility : only 1 radio receiver collecting all signal was installed . Thence , the loss of , or the operational status of a belly antenna meets inherent criticism by contradiction .
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #21 on: August 22, 2011, 01:44:24 AM »

Your pt. 2 on the function of a belly antenna . To avoid ambiguity of direction , advanced RDF installations have 2 aerials , one loop , one long wire called sense antenna . It is possible that the port belly wire was used for the Hooven instrument ; I do not remember the exact outline of this but will go back to archived set up .
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2949
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2011, 11:26:55 AM »

Searching Google for "TIGHAR Belly antenna" yields lots of material.  Of particular interest is discussion in the old Forum on the history of the radio gear over time.  See Ric's post of 6/21/00 to get a better understanding of what antennas were installed and removed prior to the second attempt.  It would serve us all to think about the answers to the questions Ric poses regarding the purpose of the antennas at different points in time.

This Ameliapedia article on antennas is a later attempt to synthesize all the available information I could find.
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Jeff Scott

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2011, 11:03:44 PM »

But the best proof that the (lost ..?) port belly aerial was not for receiving is , that between Lae and Nukumanu 2-way communications were excellent according to Balfour´s experience . Only after sunset o/b of A/c contact after channel shift was interrrupted .

The flaw in your logic is that both the Chater and Collopy reports contradict Harry Balfour's recollections.  Chater, in particular, refers to attempts at sending instructions to Earhart that were ignored:

"Miss Earhart had arranged to change to 3104 KC wave length at dusk, but signals were very strong and the plane was then called and asked not to change to 3104 KC yet as her signals were getting stronger and we should have no trouble holding signals for a long time to come. We received no reply to this call although the Operator listened for three hours after that on an 8-valve super-heterodyne Short Wave Receiver and both wave lengths were searched."

Neither report ever suggests two-way communication between Earhart and Lae was established.  Both of these documents were written in the immediate aftermath of the events.  Balfour's statements came 32 years after the fact.  Does memory typically get better after three decades or are primary documents from the time more reliable?
It's not too late to be great.
 
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2011, 12:06:52 PM »

The lower HF spectrum suffers adsorption by sunray . Amelia , by marginal knowledge and low specific experience rating , took the  "night time channel" literally and shifted from 6,210 to 3,105 kcs about sunset on board of A/c , whereas the sun was still 10 deg above the horizon @ eastern New Guinea causing the wave front to qench before reaching the Lae Airport aerials , by which contact with Balfour c.s. was suddenly lost .
Logged

Jeff Scott

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2011, 08:38:36 PM »

That doesn't answer my question.  The primary sources give no indication that Earhart ever heard anyone at Lae as you contend.  If 2-way communication was not established, the theory of antenna damage cannot be discounted.
It's not too late to be great.
 
Logged

Harry Howe, Jr.

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
  • Nuclear Physicist(Ret) Pilot(Ret) Scuba(Ret)
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #26 on: August 23, 2011, 09:09:38 PM »


After landing at Gardner, and realizing that the radios were their only connection with the outside world, they found the problem with the radio(s) and fixed them.  Common Sense.
No Worries Mates
LTM   Harry (TIGHAR #3244R)
 
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #27 on: August 24, 2011, 12:01:35 AM »

From Balfour we know that communications up to Nukumanu were excellent , if however , the contact was two-way is not recorded . At 1928 Earhart confirmed hearing Itasca´s signal ; without an aerial this seems impossible since connection of receiver was by coaxial shielded cable as usual to avoid engine spark pulse noise . Pilot never announced radio to be unservicable ; that the antenna connnection by some kind of banana plug was broken is for practice nearly impossible : connection is by coaxial (mostly Amphenol UG in the era) screw-cap .
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #28 on: August 24, 2011, 12:13:57 AM »

Normal fuel expenditure was 52 galls/hr for a 21 hrs 09 min range . 21h09m - 20h15m = 54 min . Did they after setting course for Gardner from the Howland region fly the distance (409 mls) in 57 minutes ?
Logged

Harry Howe, Jr.

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
  • Nuclear Physicist(Ret) Pilot(Ret) Scuba(Ret)
Re: Mr. Carrols Radio
« Reply #29 on: August 24, 2011, 11:58:34 AM »


HAC
Your consumption number is incorrect!
On previous legs of the flight AE had the fuel consumption nearer to 42 gallons per hour in which case over 21 hours they had about 210 gallons  more of fuel left  than you give them credit for.  210 divided by 42 is 5 hours plus your 54 minutes is close to 6 hours to make a 3 hour flight to Gardner (133.333 mph times 3 hours equals 400 sm)

Give it up!  They didn't run out of fuel and crash into the Ocean.  They made an off-field landing on Gardner, fixed the radio, awaited rescue, and when it didn;t come began to send out distress calls.
No Worries Mates
LTM   Harry (TIGHAR #3244R)
 
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 

Copyright 2019 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP