1. Why wait another two years to return if the recent trip provided (according to TIGHAR) some pretty concrete evidence that matches expectations of plane debris?
We need more time to analyze the imagery, decide what is worth investigating, and how best to investigate it.
Doesn't this allow for another two years worth of deterioration to the site?
Yes.
What about other researchers having the ability to swoop in and steal the discovery?
It would be sort of like stealing the Mona Lisa. It's theoretically possible, but what would you do with it? TIGHAR has an exclusive Antiquities Management Agreement with the Republic of Kiribati. Only TIGHAR can legally conduct Earhart research within the national borders of Kiribati.
2. I know these trips are not cheap. However, from the video footage of the supposed debris field, it looks like the objects are at a depth attainable to divers, sumersibles, or ROV's. If so, would that not pare back the cost considerably by eliminating need for automated search ROV's, and much higher cost technology such as what was used this last mission?
By "automated search ROV's" I think you mean AUVs (autonomous underwater vehicles). Yes. That technology proved to be totally inappropriate for the Niku environment. Like bringing a bird dog to a coon hunt. But the question of whether to use divers, manned submersibles, or ROVs determines the size of boat we need. Do we need a $30,000/day boat sailing from Hawaii (9 days each way) or a $10,000/day boat sailing from Samoa (3 days each way)?
3. How can TIGHAR believe they are this close to solving one of the greatest mysteries of the modern era but sit back for two years while it waits? It just doesn't make much sense. I know a lot of planning is involved. However, if someone had compelling evidence they knew where the Holy Grail was residing, I'm pretty sure they'd find the money and a way to get to it post haste. Solving the Earhart mystery would seem to me to be quite similar in many respects. I simply cannot believe Discovery Channel, or one of the other major networks, would not jump at the chance to be the one to monetarily fund a return mission much sooner if provided compelling evidence that supported what is being pushed here.
I assure you we have no intention of sitting back.
In the end, I'm not trying to be confrontational, and am excited by the prospects. Perhaps I'm naive to the process, but I am simply looking for a logical response to what I believe many others must be thinking as well.
Yes, you are naive to the process.
- Media like Discovery and Nat'l Geographic have far less money to throw around than most people assume. The sale of exclusive media rights covers only a small portion of the cost of TIGHAR expeditions.
- Suitable ships are hard to find and usually must be booked a year in advance.
- Fundraising is always the biggest issue. We ended this last trip nearly $400,000 in debt. That debt has to be retired before we can begin building the next trip.
- Although we're bigger than we've ever been, TIGHAR is still a small and struggling organization.
When we say it will take us until 2014 to be ready to go back out we're being optimistic. I think we can do it, but it's going to take a lot of work and support.
