Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:41:40 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Sextant Navigation

Someone told me I should pick up a copy of the American Practical Navigator by Bowditch to find out about sextant navigation. So thanks to the Internet I scored a 1938 edition. Oh boy. This sucker is about 800 pages of which two-thirds are data tables. I haven't seen this many stat tables since my college copy of Standard Mathematical Tables. Guess I'll stick with GPS. My question to all the Forum navigator experts is whether this book was considered the bible in its field, or whether there are other key references. Also, I know that Weems and his school was a leader in air nav work, but was he the only one or were there others of equal renown at the time? And is there a bible of air nav knowledge which navigators like Noonan would have used? Thanks.

blue skies, -jerry
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:41:47 EST
From:         Mike Everette
Subject:      Radio Log

In response to Ric's questions of 1-29-99 re interpretation of Itasca's log entries:

At 0614 local time:
WANTS BEARING ON 3105 KCS // ON HOUR // WILL WHISTLE IN MIC ABOUT 200 MILES OUT // APPX // WHISTLING // NW

She is obviously asking Howland or Itasca to take a bearing on HER signal, on 3105.  She is whistling into the microphone in order to give the radio operator at the DF receiver on Howland a signal which is easily recognizable, should he have to tune around to find her.

At 0645 she obviously asks for another bearing on her signal, from Howland or Itasca.  This again appears to be on 3105 KHz.

At 0758 local time:
KHAQQ CLNG ITASCA WE ARE (LISTENING) BUT CANNOT HEAR U GA ON 7500 WID A LONG COUNT EITHER NW OR ON THE SKD TIME ON HALF HOUR

Hmmmm.... this presents the crucial question. "Cannot hear you..."   AE asks Itasca to transmit on 7500 KHz, with a long count.

Can she not hear them on 3105? (Probably.  At least this is one way to account for the request... maybe the skip distance has gotten long, so that she is now in a "dead zone" for 3105 between her and Itasca. (And yes, it is possible that in such a situation she could not hear them, but they could indeed hear her.)  But, why ask for them to transmit on a frequency she cannot reply on?  I don't know.)

Why the "long count"?

One answer:  she needs them to transmit something she can easily recognize, so she can tune her communication receiver to that frequency and be sure she has their signal.  This seems the simplest, most easily explainable answer based upon what we think we know for sure.

Why 7500?

I can't answer that.  Seems to me that if she was going to ask for a different frequency, she might have asked for 6210 because she could talk and hear on the same one....

Was she asking them for a signal upon which she could take a bearing?

Good question.  If we take the context of the 0800 message:

KHAQQ CLNG ITASCA  WE RECD UR SIGS BUT UNABLE TO GET A MINIMUM PSE TAKE BEARING ON US AND ANS 3105 WIL VOICE / NRUI DE KHAQQ LNG DASHES

and ASSUME (careful!) that this means AE received Itasca's signals ON 7500, and was "unable to get a minimum", it sure seems like that may have been it.

HOWEVER:

Was Itasca ALSO transmitting ANYTHING on a frequency between 200 and 1500 KHz, in this time period?  Did they have any kind of beacon operating?  Did they have an operator working a low frequency transmitter to provide some kind of homing signal?  Does anything in Itasca's logs point to this?

If so, then the answer must be that she couldn't hear the "beacon."

If not, well... I do not know the answer.  I know what many may say it sounds like, looks like, smells like, tastes like, and feels like... That she may have been trying to take a bearing, aboard the aircraft, on a 7500-KHz signal.... but, in truth, that may not be what it IS.

At this point I am not prepared to say that this is what it is.  Again, given the state of the art in 1937, I just do not think she had any such equipment... but we may find out something more which will add better light on this.

73

Mike E.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:41:53 EST
From:         DustyMiss
Subject:      Interesting item on eBay web site item#60465365

This is for sale on ebay along with other sextants, you may wish to log on to ebay and check out the other ones, or I can send them to you if you think seeing photos of other sextants would help - Cheerio - Dusty

Title of item:  Nautical,Brass Sextant,Wood Box,Nice,No Resv.
Seller: boat4sale@aol.com
Starts: 01/25/99 18:23:09 PST
Ends:   02/01/99 18:23:09 PST
Price:  Currently $137.50
To bid the item, go to: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-
cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=60465365

Item Description:

Nautical,Brass Sextant,Wood Box,Nice,No Resv.

Nice old (?) sextant. Not sure how old it is. Looks Very nice.With original wood box. Thanks
NO  RESERVE !!!
Buyer to pay shipping/handling and insurance if desired. Please allow time for
personal check to clear or send m.o. for quick shipping.
Please check out the other auctions we currently have running on eBay.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:09:13 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Radio Log

According to Itasca's radio logs, they were sending 7500 and 3105 at the same time between 0758 and 0800 local time.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:13:59 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Radio Log

One quick thought on AE's radio equipment, pertaining to the "why 7500?" question:

Although I don't remember the models and specs of her equipment, if the radio was tunable rather than crystal controlled, the 7500 spot on the dial may simply have been a spot that was visually easy for a not-real-great radio operator to identify, and at the same time be certain of which frequency that they were operating on, for certainty of reception. Seeing a photo of that model of rig face forward may answer some questions from a radio operator's point of view. Are any such photos readily available?

Just curious,
Gene Dangelo, N3XKS,   # 2211
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:11:20 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Sextant Navigation

American Practical Navigator is the bible for navigation.  I also have a 1938 edition, and it is an excellent source for how to navigate from basic principles, along with time zone info, location of islands, etc. Outstanding source material!
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:34:18 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Model prototype in

The long-awaited prototype master for our Electra models arrived today.  Over the next couple of days we'll be examining it closely and comparing it to the specs (as published on the TIGHAR website at
http://www.tighar.org/airplane.html).  We'll also mount photos of the prototype on the website along with our critique for the edification of those who have ordered models, and the encouragement of those who are considering placing an order.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:39:51 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Research CDs in

The CDs of the Amelia Earhart Research Library, Volume 1, have arrived and will be shipped out this week to all who have ordered them.

For a description of this valuable rersearch tool see
http://www.tighar.org/Projects/CDad.html
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:42:40 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Certificates sent

Everyone who contributed to the Reynolds Challenge funding drive should have received their certificate by this time.  If you're a Commodore, Mate, Bosun, Crew, or Deckhand and didn't get a certificate please let me know.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:26:37 EST
From:         Daryll Bollinger
Subject:      PAA FROs

I received a couple of e-mail replies from FROs, Flight Radio Operators, from the old Pan Am Clipper days about this HF/DF question that we have discussed lately. I thought I would share them with the Forum. Mr Peacock I believe has me confused with Mr. Tim Coyle.

Daryll
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Subject: Clipper DFing

I seem to remember having some e-mail with you previously, but I cannot find it. Glad to hear from you.  Seems to me you were writing a book on history of navigation.

I sent a message to someone who had some inquiries on the same general line, and those comments are still posted on the PAA website, about halfway down the message list "RE: Early Pan Am Flight Navigators". Date of comments 11/23/98 Dick Peacock.

That will answer most of any questions I am able to field.  Basically, our DF activities involved use of AM Broadcast band Stations when near coastlines and cities, but I do not remember utilizing BC stations other than those in the US. We also took bearings on island communications stations like VRT, Bermuda, and CTH, Horta, Azores, on 1638 kc, and LF, possibly 333 or 375 kc. I am a bit rusty about the exact LF used by these stations, but I do remember that we transmitted from the Clipper on 333 and 1638, with a trailing-wire antenna, so they could take bearing on us. We had instrument let-down procedures using manual DF for all the operating bases, but I never did have any occasion to use them except in training flights near LaGuardia.

I do not remember the frequencies used except for those mentioned above.

About your second question regarding HF/DF from the aircraft.

My memory is rusty here also, but I do remember we kept color-coded maps showing our DF bearings or fixes, if lucky, during the long night flights between Bermuda and Azores. My dim recollection is that we did this on 1638 and 3285, but I am really sorry I can't say for sure. I know we used 5165 and 6563 for comms, also, but I don't think the DFs would work that high.

There are a couple of other ex PAA FROs who are on E-mail, and I suggest you try them for better info. They had more flying time than I did, and their memories should be of more help to you.  Check with Bob Norloff, W4GEX, at bobnor@*** and also try Ralph Conly W6VT at etconly@***.

Good Luck
Dick Peacock, W2GFF

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Subject: Re: PAA DF

Dear Mr. Norloff,

I found your name and e-mail address on the PAA website. I have a couple of brief questions I would like to ask you if I may. I am interested in the frequency ranges PAA used in their DF work.

#1. Frequencies the Adcock stations used.

#2. Frequencies the Clippers used on airborne DF from the aircraft.

#3. Did you ever hear about any HF/DF high frequency direction finding being done from aircraft?

I would like to thank you in advance for any response that you might have.

Sincerely
Daryll Bolinger

Dear Mr. Bolinger,

Thanks your e-mail. From my knowledge relating to DF work Re HF, only occasionally were adcock bearings received and this was on the mid-atlantic from stations in Bermuda and Horta. The frequencies used were generally in the 6 and 8 mhz. range.

MF bearings were taken from the aircraft on ships at sea and ground stations including broadcast stations on a frequency range of 300 to 1600 khz. Daytime bearings were generally reliable but at night unless close to the station the sky and ground wave gave erratic bearings. I cant recall of hf/df work being done from the aircraft.

Bob Norloff,
ex panam FRO, 1940-1947.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 2 Feb 1999 19:57:39 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Harry Maude

I thought I should share with the Forum the letter I just got from Harry Maude, founder of the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme, who was responsible for the colonisation of Nikumaroro.  I've corresponded with him sporadically over the years, and most recently had written him after reading some of the correspondence Ric and Kenton brought back from England.  One of the wireless messages identified him as the one who conceived of a commemorative plaque to Gallagher on the island; I wanted him to know that we intend to replicate the plaque (we have the text) and replace it on Gallagher's monument next trip.

"Dear Dr.King,

Thank you for your letter of 20.1.98 which has arrived at a propitious time since, for a wonder I am able to acknowledge it.  My wife and I, both over 90, are now living in the MountainView Hostel for the Aged and I doubt either of us lasting much longer, as we are both getting very frail.

It was a pleasure being able to help you with your queries, and I wish you the best of good fortune producing something of permanent value out of them.

Wishing you all the best,
Yours ever
Harry Maude

If I can be as gracious as that at the end of my life I'll count myself fortunate indeed, Earhart or no Earhart.

Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 3 Feb 1999 15:30:43 EST
From:         Blake Herling
Subject:      Dr. Mims

This is my first posting, so if I do something terribly wrong just tell me it's time for the penguin on my telly to blow up & I'll get the point. What I'd like to ask is basically off topic as far as solving the AE/FN mystery, but I just have to ask. I was reading Dr. Mims' story in a back issue of Tighar Tracks vol. 11 #3 & am just curious if he was asked whether or not on return trips to Gardner (during his PBY time) he or any of his crew ever tried to get additional information from the settlers as to the exact location of the airplane wreckage they (the settlers)talked about & were obviously using parts from? Or if he or his crew(s) ever did any scrounging around the island looking for the wreckage themselves? I know from the article that they realized how far away Howland was & seemed to have dismissed Gardner as AE/FNs final resting place, but still as aviators you think they would have had a real curiosity as to the origin of the obviously aircraft related parts they had seen in use by the fishermen. In addition to realizing that the fisherman were using aircraft parts, they also seemed (from the article anyway) to realize that the parts were not from a large military type aircraft.

Its somewhat maddening sitting in front of a computer screen well over half a century away from that time & place talking about AE & FN, Kanton engines, mysterious sailors with seemingly 10E wreckage photos, hf/df, adf, coconut crabs, sextant boxes, bones, radio logs, etc...etc...etc... When a few people in history were lucky enough to have had access to the island, its settlers & possibly to the 10E wreckage(or parts of it), but for whatever reasons let it slip through their fingers.

I realize that Dr. Mims was part of the military & wasn't free to use the tax payer's PBY to do whatever he wanted, but from the article it appears that he made quite a few flights to resupply Gardner. A part of me wishes he'd of just taken a little time to poke around the island some. But then we would be sitting around with nothing to research or dream about. But its still a little maddening!!!...as is the Kanton engine!!!

Like I said not really relative to solving the mystery, but thanks for letting me ramble.

Blake

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Good questions.  Mims and his navigator were definitely intrigued by the story.  They knew that no U.S. aircraft were missing in the area.  After all, they were the search and rescue guys. Upon their return to Canton they asked the British District Officer if any British planes were missing.  He said no.

Mims did no searching for the airplane.  The islander who told him about it had not indicated that the airplane was still present somewhere on the island. He had only said that when the first settlers arrived there had been an airplane there.  When asked where it was now, he just shrugged.  Mims' visits lasted only a couple of hours, so there was little time for exploring.

What I like best about the story is that it was not Dr. Mims himself who approached us with his recollections, but his adult daughter who had heard the story from the time she was a child.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 3 Feb 1999 16:01:28 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      The scent of blood

In a few days I'm going to post a draft of the first section of the new 8th edition of the project book on the website.  It's a biographical sketch of our lady which purports to address only those aspects of her life which have a direct bearing on our attempts to solve the riddle of her disappearance. These are:

Ethnic background and physical characteristics - useful in identifying human remains.

Education and socio/political orientation - useful in speculation about her motivation and behavior.

Aviation accomplishments and expertise - useful in speculation about her performance during the final flight.

Even limiting it to these subjects, it's a lot of material.

I'll put it on the website in such a way that you can only access it if you have the specific URL, which I will post here on the forum.  Then I'd like you hyenas to rip it apart so I can fix it before it's published.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:06:17 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: The scent of blood

Ric wrote:

>I'll put it on the website in such a way that you can only access it if you 
>have the specific URL, which I will post here on the forum.  Then I'd like you
>hyenas to rip it apart so I can fix it before it's published.

Hyena??!! Excuse me?? I'm a Tiger, and damn proud of it!

But I'll be glad to rip apart anything you say, Ric. It seems to be good sport, nowadays.

Hyena, indeed... (mumble, grumble)

;>)
Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 4 Feb 1999 15:25:43 EST
From:         Bill Carter
Subject:      Re: The scent of blood

My wife says I'm a bear.

****************************************************************

From Ric

Okay, everybody gets to pick an animal.  We only have 550 forum subscribers and there are 32,674 species to choose from (I made that up).  So far we have tigers and bears.  All we need is a lion and we can do the Wizard of Oz.

My reference to hyenas was based upon the forum's propensity for high-pitched laughter, drooling, and devouring its victims alive while they writhe in agony.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:31:54 EST
From:         LIBLANC
Subject:      Re: The scent of blood

How about Foghorn/Leghorn????

***************************************************************
From Ric

Yeah, I see the resemblance.  And I often feel like Henry Chickenhawk (ya gonna come along quiet or do I hafta muss ya up?).

***************************************************************
From Russ Matthews

I'll take the (smilin') mule.

***************************************************************
From Ric

You'll have to tell the forum that story some time.

***************************************************************
From Jim Tierney

Referring to the second paragraph of your picture/message----

I am circling/salivating/fantasizing over the opportunities that will open up to rewrite your manuscript/passages/sections of the Eighth Edition....

Jim Tierney--0821

****************************************************************
From Ric

And I'll bet your eyes glow red in the dark.

****************************************************************
From Mike Everette

I'll take the lion.  I played that role in a stage production in high school...!

Mike E. #2194

****************************************************************

From Ric

Okay, I'll say it.

Lions and Tighars and bears - oh my!

****************************************************************
From Clyde Miller

Actually I believe recent studies have indicated that hyenas have been getting a bad rap and Lions have been getting all the glory.  Hyenas are very social and more of a predator than Leo.  They have been misrepresented as scavengers when in fact they are higher on the food chain than previously thought.  Of course what would MGM do with a Hyenas laugh instead of the Lion's roar?

Clyde
****************************************************************

From Ric

And so we end yet another set of highly intellectual and insightful postings to the esteemed Earhart Forum.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:48:10 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Chronometers

To Tom King

Thus far no information regarding Fred's chronometer(s) has been forthcoming. The only thing I've come across is contained in Fred's letter to Weems.  In case you have not noted that, he writes, relative to Pan Am flights...

"Time pieces carried were a Longines Civil Time chronometer and a Longines second-setting watch.  The latter was set to correct G.C.T. at all times by checking with the chronometer.  This watch was of the arm type, but the strap was removed, and the watch clips of the octant were adjusted to accomodate the beckets on each side of the watch.  I prefer such arrangement to carrying the watch on the arm."

About all this tells us is that Fred seemed to favor Longines timepieces. He had indicated earlier in the letter that the choices were his own and largely based on the fact that he had used them extensively and found them satisfactory.

I also recall reading somewhere, probably one of the many Earhart books, hence not necessarily correct, that Fred carried his chronometer in his pocket at all times.  That suggests something like a pocket-watch in size, but of quality and accuracy to qualify as a chronometer.

Having written all that, it seems we know nothing about what chronometer(s) may have been carried on the 'round-the-world attempt, either on the aircraft or on Fred's person.

******************************************************************

From Ric

For what it's worth, we have a good anecdote on this subject.

Way back in 1988 we interviewed Francis "Fuzz" Furman who was the Martin Aircraft factory rep in Bandoeng, Java when AE and Fred spent a few days there in late June (the Royal Netherlands East Indies Air Force had a bunch of Martin B-10s).  Fuzz spent quite a bit of time with Noonan both on and off duty.  One thing that stuck in his memory was that Fred always carried his chronometer in his pocket and was obsessive about checking its accuracy at any opportunity.  (Fuzz also said that he and Fred went out at night and that Fred never touched a drink, even though Fuzz was drinking.)

When the Electra's navigation station was set up by Paul Mantz and Harry Manning prior to the first world flight attempt, three chronometers were supposedly shock-mounted in the navigator's table in the cabin.  All that stuff was torn out during the repairs which followed the Luke Field crash and it appears unlikely that Noonan had it reinstalled.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:51:07 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Love to mother

For new forum subscribers who may be wondering what this Love to Mother (often abbreviated to LTM) business is all about, here's the story:

A few years ago, a woman named Patricia Morton was doing Earhart research at the National Archives and stumbled upon a telegram dating from 1945 which contained a whole list of messages to friends and relatives from internees at a recently-liberated camp in China. One was addressed to Mr. G.P. Putnam, 10042 Valley Spring Lane, North Hollywood, California  The text reads:

Following message received for you from Weihsien via American embassy, Chungking:

Camp liberated; all well.  Volumes to tell.  Love to mother (*).

The (*) is explained at the bottom of the page as meaning signature omitted. The State Department forwarded the message to Putnam via SpeedLetter (a type of quick-notice letter) on August 28, 1945.  The letter was sent by Eldred D. Kuppinger, Assistant Chief, Special War Problems Division. The document has no stamp to indicate that it was ever classified, nor does it have a stamp indicating that it was ever declassified.  Anyone who has ever obtained formerly classified documents at the National Archives knows that they are real careful about that. There appears to be no indication that the document was ever classified.   That's hardly surprising given the explanation of what a SpeedLetter is, which appears in the upper right corner of the document; "This form of communication is used in the interest of speed and economy.  If a reply is necessary, address the Department of State, attention of the Division mentioned below."

In Putnam's reply he merely updated his address and asked to be notified if anything else was heard.

Weihsien was not a prisoner of war camp. It was a Civilian Assembly Camp - an internment camp.  According to a 1995 letter by one of the American soldiers who liberated Weihsien on August 17, 1945 there were no Japanese military personnel in charge of the camp.  It was run by a Mr. Izu of the Japanese Consular Service.  All internees were well documented.  Amelia Earhart was not there.

On the 18th a general inspection was made of the camp and twelve internees were hospitalized and selected for early departure due to poor health.  They were evacuated by C-47 on the 28th, the date of the telegram and the SpeedLetter.

Why was such a message sent to Putnam?  Sadly, it was most likely a hoax.  In the years following Amelia's disappearance GP was beset by dozens of false leads and scams.  Some were financially motivated.  Others were apparently just cruel jokes.  Whether the Weihsien message was a joke or a mistake, it's quite clear that it was not from Amelia Earhart.  Nonetheless, the letter is frequently held up by conspiracy theorists as evidence that Earhart was "captured" by the Japanese, held prisoner, and returned to the U.S. after the war.  This telegram and the nonsense which has surrounded it in recent years has prompted those of us most involved in TIGHAR's Earhart research to adopt the "Love to mother" closing as a reminder to keep our objectivity and skepticism intact when evaluating any new evidence.

Love to mother,
Ric

You can order your very own Love to Mother shirt and refrigerator magnet on the TIGHAR website at

http://www.tighar.org
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 6 Feb 1999 08:15:16 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Chronometers

I should probably explain to all that I asked about the chronometer because we have the brass housing from an instrument, probably a chronometer, from the village site on Niku.  It's got a plaque identifying it as made by Negretti & Zambra, a British company dating back to the 19th century at least, whose descendant is still in business according to research done by Larry Crutsinger, Norfolk VA dealer in antique ship's clocks & chronometers (and new TIGHAR member?  He expressed interest and I pointed him to the web site).  The thing is doubtless from the Norwich City, but I just wondered.....  It's way too big for Fred to have lugged around in his pocket -- roughly 5" in diameter, and almost 4" deep.  Just didn't want to leave a stone (or hunk of brass) unturned.

Tom King
*****************************************************************
From Dave Kelly

The anecdote about Fred Noonan could be applicable to most naviguessers of the day. DME groundspeed readouts were non-existent, GPS, INS, IMU, TACAN, LORAN and radar were also years away.  The best navigators were those folks who spit shined their sextants, and fretted over the accuracy of chronometers. A bygone era I'm afraid, but a rich and exciting era of human skills and basic mathematical precision to guide the airplane from "A" all the way to "B".

****************************************************************

From Ric

There's a great Jimmy Stewart line from the opening scene in "Flight Of The Phoenix" where the grizzled old pilot, bemoaning the state of modern aviation, says to the copilot, "You know, Lou, it used to be that you felt like you had really accomplished something if you could just - - get there."

****************************************************************

From John Clauss

We have pictures of the Manning setup in a series taken by Al Bresnik.  It shows AE and Manning  sitting on  the nav station looking out the starboard side window.  What appears to be the chronometers are mounted on the edge of the station against the fuselage.

LTM
John Clauss  #142

****************************************************************

From Ric

That's right.  There are two such photos.  In what seems to be the earlier one, AE and Harry are sitting on the not-yet finished nav table.  Three instruments are mounted on the cabin wall beside the window: an altimeter, an outisde air temperature gauge, and an airspeed indicator.  In the second photo the table is finished off with three instruments (supposedly the chronometers) shock-mounted in its surface, but now there is only an altimeter on the wall beside the window.

From what little we can see through the cabin door in photos taken after the repairs were completed, there are no instruments on the wall and no sign of the table.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 6 Feb 1999 08:19:52 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: The scent of blood

Well, of course, MGM does laugh all the way to the bank!  But this being ground hog season, I might point out that sausage is a form of ground hog. Hope this is a timely message for those of you pondering the chronometer info we just received.  Does the ground hog carry a watch so he knows when to come out and check for a shadow?

SLFN (so long for now)
LTM (less than mentioned - motto of the conspiracy crowd)
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 6 Feb 1999 19:14:35 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Re: Chronometers

Remember a few months ago several of us were interested in the interior layout of A.E.'s Electra ?  Does TIGHAR have possession of the photos of the interior surrounding the navigator's table?  Would it be possible to scan the photo's and e-mail them on request?  Or, maybe the photos could be published in a future addition of TIGHAR TRACKS?

Interior photos, other than cockpit views, of historic aircraft are rare.  Be nice if we could get a peek inside.

Thanks,
LTM
Roger Kelley, 2112
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Unfortunately, no interior cabin views of NR16020 (after the repairs) are known to exist.  There are a number of cabin photos taken earlier in the airplane's career and they are useful in understanding the fuel system and general interior lay out, but the "navigator's station" photos do not represent the airplane as it was when it disappeared.  We'll run as many photos as we can in the 8th edition of the project book.

*****************************************************************

From Dave Kelly

A great movie, "Flight of the Phoenix" There are still men and women around that lament the automated, sterilized state of aviation. They may be anachronisms as they extoll the virtues of pilotage, dead reckoning and good ol' Kentucky windage applied in their daily battles with the elements, but we owe our heart and soul to their pluck and knowledge earned in the unforgiving classroom of aviation pioneering, where the graduates are those left alive to impart the truth.  Those who did not survive would teach us the hard lessons they learned; paying the ultimate price for our knowledge.
*****************************************************************
From Ric

I only lament the automated, sterilized state of aviation when I'm safely on the ground.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 8 Feb 1999 11:25:56 EST
From:         Bill Zorn
Subject:      Electra drawing

I was looking at the Lockheed Electra drawing that was in the last issue of Tracks, and I've got some comments, suggestions and criticisms.

Being in the drawing business myself  (prestressed and precast concrete) I notice a couple of omissions that really need to be addressed. I realize we are not trying to build an Electra scale or otherwise from this drawing, but I spent part of my time planchecking my own and others work, so I couldn't resist "redlining" your print.

1.What is the scale of this drawing? I realize one could work backwards with a scale, but traditionally, you place at the least a scale reference somewhere on a drawing

2. who drew it up? we poor draftpeople get none of the credit, and all of the blame somebody (Rick?) signed off on this. Unless this is a preliminary drawing. (in which case it should be marked "PRELIMINARY". and as we are an international
organization, it would have been nice to include metric dimensions as well.

3. the drawing needs to be dated as to its issue date. Nowhere on the drawing do I find the 1999 or 1998. In short the drawing needs some sort of title block. Something to place this document in time and space, and to give credit, where credit is due. And an issue date

4.  the port side engine in the top view there is a dim. 82.5". I assume this is centerline of prop to centerline of fuselage. but its not clear, there are no dim. lines or centerlines.

Is the centerline of thrust on an Electra 10E engine unit parallel to the centerline of fuselage? No way to tell from this drawing.

5. there is a dim. of 9'-0" from centerline of fuselage to a pair of parallel lines. what happens at this point? Change of dihedral? structural joint. Wing mating point? what.

There are no dim. for the side views other than a few station marks. Generally station 0 is the nose of the plane,  but it isn't shown on this drawing.

One of the side views should have been a "down and dirty view. Gear extended, flaps down cowl flaps  open.

Or does a 10E have cowl flaps? (It might be nice to indicate the control; surface travel angles.)

As one of Rick's scenarios is that the  mast or wire at Sta. 254 may have been snagged on the last take off, it might be nice to see the geometry involved.

Even a rough estimation of the engine would have been better than the black donuts shown.

A bottom view would be nice, but I realize you have a limited amount of paper space. Still that one artifact piece of possible fuselage came from somewhere. Even if the note reads "possible location for artifact whatever"

The shade of orange shown is actually quite close to one of my High school colors. It was called "Texas Orange"  or was it "Texas brown"

We had another name for it, but this is generally a polite forum, except around the holidays

Have you considered using this drawing as a possible fund raiser? Issue it (with or without my suggestions) as a limited edition print. On an archival paper. Make it a limited edition, numbered and signed. I'm sure quite a few people would shell out 40 or 50 bucks for something like that. I would even buy two or three. You would have to move the margins out to provide for matting and framing.

You could even hold back say 25% of the run, then when we find the plane, have the team sign each of the remaining prints then send them out. I'd even pay for the right ahead of time for somethin like that.

In a very extreme use, sign the prints on the left side, tear them in half, send out the left half only, then when we find the plane, send out the right half. signed with a pail full of ping pong balls.

I swear my membership renewal will be in the mail this week, and what the heck, think I'll even kick in for the 5 year this time.

LTM
william h zorn
#1562C
*****************************************************************
From Ric

I knew this was gonna happen.  I guess we should have included a little line at the bottom like they do on the TV ads for psychic 900 numbers "For Entertainment Only."  Neither Pat nor I is an artist or draftsperson, much less an engineer (I haven't driven a train in years).  We scanned in a number of drawings of Electras, closely examined our extensive collection of photos of NR16020 and resolved the various discrepancies as best we could to come up with a good representation of the airplane.  Our goal was to put out something attractive and accurate that TIGHAR members could tack up on a bulletin board or magnet to the fridge. We could have put in much, much more detail but the result would have been something cluttered and almost impossible to decipher. We decided to put in just enough detail and dimension to provide a feel for what the machine was like.  We didn't provide a scale or date it because we didn't want to create the impression that this was more than an illustration. And you are, of course, correct.  As a set of drawings it is totally inadequate.  As a set of informal annotated views of Earhart's Electra it's kind of nice.

And, no, the Model 10 had no cowl flaps.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 8 Feb 1999 11:59:36 EST
From:         Rick Seapin
Subject:      My two-cents

I've been a member of TIGHAR for two weeks now, and I thought it was about time I gave you my two cents worth. First, let me say how impressed I am with you individuals for the knowledge you have acquired, and the class in which you present it.

I have studied the disappearance of Amelia for over thirty-years, not as an active historian, but more as a minor hobby. However, as the years past, my thirst for answers became a little more demanding.

I first thought Fred was the primary culprit of the ill-fated adventure, he having made some grave navigational error. We now know leaving the low frequency radio behind in Florida, a faulty chronometer, and a malfunctioning radio frequency finder, added to their problems, and was a fault they would  share equally. However, when the duo reached the coast of Africa, why did Amelia disregard Fred's advice? She flew in the opposite direction in which Fred instructed her to fly, and in doing so, landed in the wrong place. Did she do the same thing when they reached the sun line (line of position) at Howland Island?

I believe Brennan was right, they were left of Howland Island when they flew left along the 157-337 line of position. I think it is evident that someone in the Electra made a mistake. Who?

With fuel running low and approaching Nikumaroro Island, Amelia had to make a decision on where to land the aircraft. Being an experienced Aviatrix, she chose a water landing. However, Nikumaroro is an atoll, it's lagoon filled with coral heads and patch reefs. The atoll is surrounded by coral reefs 100 to 300 meters wide. She would have to have made a controlled crash outside of the coral line. Razor sharp coral would tear an aircraft to shreds.

Scenario # 1. They died on impact, the Electra may or may have not broken in pieces, and now rest in approximately forty-feet of water. It's debris washing up on shore during heavy storms.

Scenario #2. They tried to make it to shore over the razor sharp coral and white-tipped reef shark infested waters, dying in the attempt.

Scenario #3. They made it to shore only to die of thirst and hunger. Nikumaroro has no fresh water and only five types of Rept/Amphibians. They had two weeks of food and water in the Electra, but what good does that do when the craft is underwater and their on land? Finally, Nikumaroro is considered a Sea level rise risk 9 island. That means the island tends to be underwater at times. The average height of islands in the Phoenix group is six feet. Not much protection during fierce storms.

I strongly believe that any future searches of Nikumaroro should be concentrated below the water surrounding the island, not the island itself.

Well, why do I feel like a rubbed myself with fresh hamburger meat and walked into a lions den? Nothing ventured, nothing gained. LTM

****************************************************************

From Ric

Welcome.  Those of us stalking about here in the Coliseum always like to see fresh meat walk into the arena.  (Don't worry about the blood.  That's why the footing in here is sand.)

Let me correct the first of your many misimpressions.  You have not been a member of TIGHAR for two weeks.  You have been a subscriber to the Earhart Forum for two weeks.  There's a difference.  If you'd like to become a TIGHAR member you'll find a printable membership form on the TIGHAR website (www.tighar.org).

Moving right along:
- no low frequency radio was left behind in Florida
- there was no faulty chronometer
- no malfunctioning "radio frequency finder"
- the whole bit about Amelia disregarding Fred's advice upon reaching the coast of Africa comes from the heavily edited "Last Flight" and is not supported by more contemporaneous documentation.
- your speculation that she "chose a water landing" is unsupported by any evidence.
- your various scenarios are based upon mostly bad information. For example: nobody knows how much food and water were aboard the Electra, Nikumaroro is never underwater, and the sharks on the reef are black-tips (and if you think that's a minor point, YOU stand in the water with white-tips and I'LL stand in the water with black-tips).

That said, you can hardly be blamed for having misconceptions.  For thirty years you've been reading books that are full of misinformation.  No one can draw valid conclusions from invalid data.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:06:28 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Off-topic but not off color

For all those who lament the automated, sterilized state of aviation I say the next time you want to fly yourself to Nashville for the weekend, go rent a Wright Flyer and tell me what a great time you had.  Getting there in leaps and bounces of 150 feet or so will make for a memorable journey.

Personally, I love the gadgets and gizmos.  If we all had to rely on pilotage and personal navigation, most of us would never get more than a couple of hundred miles from home.  And if we did, it would probably take us twice as long to get back.

LTM, who embraces all gizmos
Dennis McGee #0149

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Cockpit voice recorders show a significant change in the three most commonly heard phrases in an airline cockpit.  Prior the computerization of the flight deck, the three most often heard comments were:

- Wazat for us?
- Wha'd he say?
- Ahh sh--!

These have been replaced by:

-  Whazit doin' now?
-  Whyzit doin' that?
-  Ahh sh--!
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:22:54 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Re: Electra Drawings....

Ref: Bill Zorn's comments about the Electra drawings:-

Take it easy Bill, they weren't designed so we could actually build an Electra from them !! :-)

I too would have like to see some of the features you mention, but Ric only has so much time.

In view of your late membership renewal, seems like you're carving out a nice little job for yourself. I look forward to seeing the Electra drawings - mark 2 - courtesy of Bill Zorn. Thanks Bill    :-)

Oh, and Bill - could you please adjust the scale of the side views so they match the plan views. Thanks.

LTM
Simon #2120 (renewal paid)

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Members please note: We do appreciate timely renewals but all we can do is ask politely.  And besides, it would be a real shame if you had to get a "visit from Simon."
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:37:23 EST
From:         Kelly Maddox
Subject:      Enhanced Photography

I wanted to start off by saying I've been very interested in TIGHAR's work on Gardner Island since the first reports in 1989.  Until last week, when I discovered this website, I'd been limited to bits a pieces that I came across in the media.  I've spent the last week carefully devouring every word on this website, and I'm more convinced than ever that you are really onto something. Very impressive work!  I'm really on the edge of my seat regarding the Canton (Kanton?) engine search.

I didn't come across any discussion of this on the site, but I'm sure it is omething you've considered...

1. Do you think that the use of infrared or heat sensitive aerial photography might be of value?  Would vegetation obscured aluminum, or one of the engine blocks gain, lose, or transfer heat at a different rate than its natural surroundings, and therefore show up in heat sensitive photography?  I know tropical temperatures are very stable, but might it show up at dawn or dusk when there would be a predictable fluctuation?

2. Have you looked into the acquisition of high tech filtered satellite imagery from either a commercial or military satellite?  I know the military has some amazing methods of detecting camouflaged or obscured surface objects. The resolution and capability of enhanced satellite photography is simply amazing these days.

I realize these things are either inaccessible or cost prohibitive right off the bat, but what are your thoughts, findings, possibilities?

One other thing I was just curious about.  There is the mention of a "European style" house being built on the island.  Was this Gallaghar's (Irish's) house? If it is still there, what condition is it in? Was there anything interesting inside?

Sincerely,
J. Kelly Maddox

****************************************************************

From Ric

The real problem with getting infra-red aerial photography of the island is that the place is so darned remote that by the time you pay to put an airplane with the right technology overhead, you've spent enough money to put a team of people on the ground - which is always preferable.

We've looked and looked into the satellite imagery question and the answer keeps coming back - no meaningful existing coverage and no potential for sufficient resolution to see the kind of stuff we're looking for.

The "European style" house is alleged to have been in the island's Nutiran district and is associated with the stories of airplane wreckage reportedly seen in the late 1950s/early 1960s.  Gallagher's house was at the Government Station across the main channel in Ritiati district and was made primarily from local materials.  There were several wood frame buildings on the island, including the radio shack and the Co-op store.  We have not yet seen the European style house (or whatever is left of it) referenced in the plane wreckage story because we haven't looked for it.  We hope to remedy that during the reconnaissance scheduled for July.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:52:02 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: My two-cents

I'll see your two cents, and raise it to four. TIGHAR is assembling the fourth (or fifth?) expedition to "Nikku" In the previous expeditions, some artifacts were recovered, but fairly inconclusive artifacts. I agree that Fred may have made an error in his calculations, resulting in the flight intercepting the 157/337 LOP northwest of Howland and, discovering the error too late, called for a course reversal to the southwest,  with a prevailing headwind and higher fuel consumption at the low cruising altitude.  They would have had enough fuel for the return if all the calculations were correct, but apparently they were not. I don't believe Amelia would have ignored Fred's instructions, unless he was drunk. This was possibility.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Here we go again.  Let's have something other than uninformed speculation.

And if anyone was drunk it's just as likely that it was Amelia.  We've seen no evidence that either of them had a drinking problem at that time.  Fred didn't become an alcoholic until 1966 courtesy of Goerner's book.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 9 Feb 1999 10:00:45 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Not so off-topic

Let us not forget, Dennis, that the heroine coveted by TIGHAR was just such a pilot. Things are getting out of hand in the automation of aircraft and the ATC system.  "Gizmos" notwithstanding, pilots are much too reliant on computers to replace their basic skills in aircraft handling and navigation. Sure, a pilot can fly an aircraft if he or she so chooses, but nine times out of nine, the old heads are reaching for the A/PLT Command A/B switch somewheres before or after takeoff. Those poor schnooks in the MD-11 found out too late just how little control they have over those "gizmos"  Some smarmy narrator for the otherwise excellent series "Survival in the Sky"  chirped up an ominous statement as the epilogue to the series.."The technology exists to eliminate pilots entirely from the cockpit"  That technology has existed for years.

****************************************************************

From Ric

This thread may not be as off-topic as Dennis originally thought.  Dave's mindset sounds familiar.  I can just hear Amelia saying to Paul Mantz, "For chrisake Paul, get off my back about learning how to use that direction finder.  A real pilot doesn't need that newfangled stuff.  Relying on fancy technology to get you out of trouble is a good way to die young."
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 9 Feb 1999 10:02:49 EST
From:         Bill Moffet
Subject:      Chronometers

Re your posting 2/6 from King, Kelly & Clauss.  I think you have reasonably documented that Fred usually rode "up front" with Amelia.  The cockpit instruments included airspeed, altimeter & outside-air temp gages, so all Fred needed were chronometers, octant, charts and tables, plotting board (laptop?), parallel rule & pencil.  In short he could and did navigate while in the copilot's seat.  With the exception of the timepieces all the gages in the old nav station were redundant.  Yep, I do see Tom King's point about identifying the brass case found on Niku but unless we can find a true record of what was aboard lvg Miami or Lae - or exactly what had been removed beforehand.....Also are we discussing Fred's location or an interior plan of NR 16020?

LTM
Bill Moffet #2156
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 9 Feb 1999 10:06:44 EST
From:         Haley Mariel
Subject:      Pick an animal

This has thrown our conversation totally off the purpose of this site (our beloved Goddess)-but, I guess I'll join in on the fun and choose my species-all I've ever wanted to be, of course, is a bird...maybe a beautiful Queztal, and to be free to fly the horizon. I am usually just one to read and ponder over all the messages, but I just thought that I would respond, for a change.
                                         haley mariel

***************************************************************

From Ric

Very appropriate.  The Queztal is a mythical bird, just like "our beloved Goddess."
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:02:34 EST
From:         Andrew McKenna
Subject:      Whistling?

Given these two radio log entries:

At 0614 local time:
WANTS BEARING ON 3105 KCS // ON HOUR // WILL WHISTLE IN MIC
ABOUT 200 MILES OUT // APPX // WHISTLING // NW

and

At 0758 local time:
KHAQQ CLNG ITASCA WE ARE (LISTENING) BUT CANNOT HEAR U GA ON 7500 WID A LONG
COUNT EITHER NW OR ON THE SKD TIME ON HALF HOUR

Have you considered that "CIRCLING" -aka - "LISTENING" might actually be "Whistling".

What this sounds like to me is that AE was trying to transmit the Whistle on 3105 so that the Coast Guard could take a bearing on her, and expecting a verbal response on 7500.  Does that make any sense with the rest of the logs?

Andrew McKenna 1045C

****************************************************************

From Ric

Itasca did not have voice capability on 7500.  Earhart was told that in a message she received before she left Lae, although her request for a "long count" indicates that she did not grasp that fact.

My opinion that the mystery word was "listening" is based primarily on the construction of the rest of the sentence.  What she said was, "We are ???? but can not hear you." Our task here is to find what appears to be a missing present progressive participle in the active voice which might be mistaken for the initially logged word "drifting."  It seems reasonable to presume that the mystery word has, or sounds like it has, two syllables, the first of which has a short "i" sound and the second of which has an "ing" sound.  Candidates which come to mind are circling, whistling, list'ning, drinking, and a number of others which, although more entertaining, seem less likely.  Our best clue is the use of the coordinate conjunction clause "but cannot" which indicates that the mystery word describes an action which is not producing the desired result "to hear." In other contexts this is like saying,

"We are running but cannot catch you."
"We are sniffing but cannot smell you."

In other words, the mystery word should describe an action that, if successful, would let them hear. In Earhart's situation, the only word I can think of other than "list'ning" which fits this qualification might be "tuning", but that doesn't have the short "i" sound.  To suggest that the mystery word is drifting, circling or whistling is a bit like saying,

"We are sniffing but cannot catch you." Or 
"We are running but cannot smell you."

You can say it, and it's a perfectly valid English sentence, but it just doesn't make much sense.

I now await the onslaught of the forum's English majors.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 09:45:38 EST
From:         Daryll Bolinger
Subject:      English 101

At 0758 local time:                            D-F ing
KHAQQ CLNG ITASCA WE ARE (LISTENING) BUT CANNOT HEAR U GA ON 7500 WID A
LONG COUNT EITHER NW OR ON THE SKD TIME ON HALF HOUR

Daryll

***************************************************************

From Ric

I don't buy it for the reasons stated in my earlier posting.  She can't be D-Fing if she can't hear them.

****************************************************************
From Dennis McGee

Ric said:  "Our task here is to find what appears to be a missing present progressive participle in the active voice . . . "

Yikes!  Holy moley!  Gadzooks, Godfrey!

Have you no common decency, young man?  "[P]resent progressive participle in the active voice," indeed!  Hell, Ric I feel lucky to remember the difference between an adjective and an adverb. What you're really try to say is that you are looking for a gerund, right?

LTM, a noun
Dennis McGee #0149

*****************************************************************

From Ric

No Den, a gerund is the noun form of a verb, as in "the winning of the West." (he said, peering over the tops of his spectacles).

*****************************************************************
From Dean Andrea

>"We are sniffing but cannot catch you."

Sounds like you are hot on Amelia's trail.

*****************************************************************
From Cam Warren

OK - your conviction that the word was "listening" is a reasonable supposition on the face of it, and the analysis for McKenna, although a tad overblown, makes sense.

However, after reading just about every word written about AE, including the comments and impressions of friends and foes, I'm inclined to think "circling" fits the Earhart behavioral profile. Don't forget, Noonan was the hired hand - Amelia the STAR pilot. She would be quick to ignore Fred's advice if she had convinced herself that circling was the best course under the circumstances. (And yes, I've read all the arguments re the approach to Senegal).

Cam Warren

*****************************************************************

From Ric

There you have it ladies and gentleman - the difference between TIGHAR's approach  and the kind of reasoning that has typified Earhart research for 62 years.

*****************************************************************
From Chuck Jackson

After reading missive #1999-40-6 I smell an English major already!  maybe one who flunked out of flight school?  If AE expected heavy smoke to be issuing from Itasca's stacks, and if she (Itasca) was a coal burner, and since she was a Gov't ship (meaning low bidder=low grade coal that stinks-up the sky), AE would expect to smell her even if she (AE) was in IMC.  Hence, AE might say "We should be on you, but we can't smell you"  or  "We are circling, but can't smell you"  HUH?

*****************************************************************

From Ric

I am trying but cannot believe you.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 10:26:54 EST
From:         Rick Seapin
Subject:      Re: My two-cents

Fred became an alcoholic in 1966? What book have you been reading?

**************************************************************

From Ric

We have been able to find no documentary evidence whatsoever that Noonan had a drinking problem.  The notion appears to have begun with anecdotal recollections published in Fred Goerner's 1966 book "The Search For Amelia Earhart."  After that, everybody jumped on Noonan as the scapegoat.  Hence, my comment that Fred became an alcoholic in 1966.

*****************************************************************
From Dave Kelly

Speculation is about all we have, Ric.  There was much left to the imagination when the flight disappeared.  With so little to go on,  the "monday morning Matadors" have a lot of "bull" to fight over. The alternative to TIGHAR's theory is unquestionably that they had ditched. This will most likely be the verdict if you do not return with conclusive evidence on your next trip. (And I very much hope you will!!)  Say what you will about alternative theories,  they are as valid as TIGHAR's until you've proven otherwise.  I'll be retiring soon. and with much more spare time, I can delve more thoroughly into this matter.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Speculation is a valuable tool if it's used to formulate a testable hypothesis that is based upon established fact.  Spouted as pure opinion, it's just talk. I'm confident that, upon your retirement, you'll be gathering facts from which to formulate a hypothesis which you can then test.

*****************************************************************

From Walt Holm

>...the sharks on the reef are black-tips (and if you think that's a minor
>point, YOU stand in the water with white-tips and I'LL stand in the water
>with black-tips).

Actually, about the only way to die from white-tipped --reef-- sharks is that you accidentally trip over one while wandering ashore, thus cutting yourself on that razor-sharp coral.  Now, an ocean white-tip, that's a different story. WAY different.....

Cheers-

Walt Holm #0980C

*****************************************************************

From Ric

There are no white-tipped reef sharks at Niku, but we do see the occasional pelagic white-tip and you're right.  Those guys are no fun at all.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:12:24 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Not so off-topic

I believe the scenario TIGHAR adheres to includes speculation that the antenna for the DF on board the aircraft was broken. This being the case, they were in some way relying on that "Gizmo" to provide guidance toward Itasca. And when they needed it most.....  My mindset, as you put it, is not as crotchety as you suppose.  Safety has not improved with automation. In fact, the opposite has occurred. Pilots have become complacent, robotic serfs to a computer. You more than anyone should see this, Ric. If you were in the accident investigation business, then you know pilots are lulled into a false sense of security by computer automation,  just as Fred and Amelia were lulled into the belief that a viable DF signal would be awaiting them at the end of their journey.

****************************************************************

From Ric

What an incredible statement. "Safety has not improved with automation. In fact, the opposite has occurred."  What statistics are you looking at? Airline safety has increased steadily with the development of new systems. Accidents still happen, yes, and will continue to happen as long as we insist upon launching ourselves into the sky, but throughout the entire history of air transportation there has been a direct correlation between advancements in technology and improvements in safety.  Pan American originally developed the Adcock DF system because their pilots were getting lost over the Caribbean and running out of gas.  Of course, simply following a heading dictated by some guy on the ground turned the pilot into a robotic serf but the passengers actually reached their intended destinations more often and the airline thought that was a reasonable tradeoff.

Yes, reliance on automated systems can lead to complacency in the cockpit. Yes, pilots have become systems managers rather than aviators.  Yes, there is nostalgia for the old days of The High And The Mighty.  But the truth is that the record of getting people where they want to go and having them arrive in one piece is getting better and better.

What do you want to debate next?  Evolution vs Creationism?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:15:50 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Remote Viewing

Bear with me... I'll get this semi on-topic shortly.  At any rate, I think there's enough curiosity about The "Other" Earhart Search to justify this.

For this posting... A question.  Does the omniscient forum have knowledge of the US government, CIA or something, actually having been involved with remote viewing?

Out of curiosity I did some searching a while back.  About all I found was a book called "Psychic Warrior."  It's said to be, and is classified by libraries as, "non-fiction."  It's clearly pure fantasy.

I could not find anything of a factual nature.  I wonder if the government's involvement in remote viewing is an urban myth?

But my search DID turn up something that is sorta on-topic and I think the forum will enjoy hearing about it.  First you gotta try to answer the question!

*****************************************************************

From Ric

I can't help ya.  As far as I'm concerned remote viewing is when you click the remote and view the tube.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:24:45 EST
From:         Cam Warren
Subject:      Re: Pick an animal

> Very appropriate.  The Queztal is a mythical bird, just like "our beloved
> Goddess."

Wrong again!  The quetzal is very much a real bird, genus Pharomacrus, and is the national bird of Guatemala.

Cam Warren, who is more often right than wrong.

****************************************************************

From Ric

And I spelled it wrong to boot!  It's the Quetzalcoatl that is the Feathered Serpent of ancient Mexico.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:37:00 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Re: 157-337

I don't know where you're measuring from, but 157 degrees (true) from Howland Island runs right by Nikumaroro at about 350 nm.  Bougainville is about 250 degrees.

Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:44:10 EST
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: skip software

All true - but too heavy for most "tighar" members.  We should concentrate on what HF propagation was believed to be in the 1930s.

I strongly suggest one of the ARRL manuals from this era.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:57:33 EST
From:         Bob Lee
Subject:      Re: English 101

Since AE did not have suitable radio contact with the Itasca and did not see either Howland or the Ship when they reached what they believed to be the proper distance what would be the correct course action.  I mean would the proper action be to fly in a circle or what?

Regards Bob Lee

***************************************************************

From Ric

Here is the advice given in Air Navigation, the definitive navigational text by P.V.H. Weems first published in 1931 and, at the time of the Earhart/Noonan flight, the bible of aerial navigation:

"Finding A Destination.--During the daylight hours it is often impossible to get more than one LP [line of position], viz., that given by the sun.  If pilotage cannot be used (as when flying over water) or radio bearings are not available, this single position line may be utilized for finding a destination.

"The air navigator, having found a position line as he approaches his destination, continues flying on his course until the position line carried forward by D[ead] R[eckoning] passes through the destination.  He then turns right or left and follows the LP.  If, after a reasonable time, the destination is not sighted, he infers that he has turned the wrong way, and so reverses his track."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 12:06:04 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Remote Viewing

Coincidentally, yesterday on Paul Harvey's _Rest_of_the_Story_ radio broadcast, he reported on the kidnapping (some years back as you recall) of General Dozier.  According to his report, the building in which the general was detained was described in detail by these guys.  X-files or Twilight Zone?
jon

***************************************************************

From Ric

But was the General found because the remote viewers told the rescuers where to look, or was the General found by conventional searching and, after the fact, the remote viewers' descriptions were judged to be accurate?  I am aware of NO circumstance that was contemporaneously recorded by competent, unbiased authorities where a remote viewer actually found anything.  As you may know, there is a standing offer of $10,000 by illusionist and psychic debunker James Randi for the scientifically sound demonstration of ANY paranormal ability. You can check it out at http://www.randi.org
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 12:08:38 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Technological advances

Sactodave [Dave Kelly]said:

>Safety has not improved with automation. In fact, the opposite
>has occurred."

O-o-o-o-h, Davey, you're in deep kimshee, here!

Every great explorer has relied on state-of-the-art technology. Those that didn't, you haven't read about, right?  And why is that? Because they're dead, Dave.  D-E-A-D, dead. To ignore advances in technology is to relegate yourself to the ashcan of history.  There is a word for person thinking as you do -- Luddite.  Look it up.

Apollo 11 went to the moon in 1969 with four computers on board (I'm told) each with the capacity of the old 2nd generation "286" computer chip.   If I went to the moon today I sure as hell would want at least a 6th generation chip (Pentium II, AMD K6, etc.) in my computer.  Why, Dave?  Because I don't want to be
D-E-A-D, dead, Dave.

Dave, if you were running the Space Shuttle program would you use hot air to lift the vehicle or insist on putting vacuum tube-radios on board because at one time people did fly that way?

Gimme those gadgets, gizmos. and doo-hickies.  I love 'em.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 12:15:24 EST
From:         Bill Carter
Subject:      Re: Remote Viewing

At the risk of tarnishing further what is probably an already shaky reputation in the forum, I have to admit that I have a relative who worked for "the government" and helped design test parameters for CIA sponsored remote viewing experiments.  The researchers were trying to establish scientifically objective test procedures to determine three things: i) whether there was such a thing as remote viewing; ii)  whether remote viewing was something that the communists could use to spy on us; and iii) is remote viewing something we could use to spy on the communists. Publicized reports concluded that while the results of some experiments were something more than random guesses, the information gleaned from remote viewing was not reliable enough as an intelligence gathering tool, especially since satellites and other methods of data collection were available and much more reliable.  There might be more information at www.jse.com which is a web site for a group scientists some of whom were also involved in these projects.  Personally, I think it's a "much ado about nothing" type of academic curiosity which will not help TIGHAR and should not be used in the search for AE.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 12:35:33 EST
From:         Chris Kennedy
Subject:      Re: 157-337

It's my impression that the plane was at an altitude of about 1000' at least part of the time it was running along this line, and that you have an idea of the general idea of the position it was at (distance from Howland) at the time it went on the line.  I also believe it is possible to calculate how far one can see objects at sea level given altitude.  If all this is correct, it seems to me that it should be possible also to determine how far on either side of this line AE and FN should've been able to spot an island (for want of a better term I call this a "sight corridor"). Assuming my "assumptions" are valid, does Niku fall within this "sight corridor"?

Thanks!
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Your assumptions are correct, but the actual "sight corridor" (based upon real life experiences in seeing Howland from the air) is probably a lot narrower than a straight calculation would indicate.  In 1967 Ann Pellegreno and her crew didn't see Howland until they were within an estimated 10 to 12 miles.  A dead accurate 157 degree line from Howland passes 7 nautical miles east of Niku.  Whether AE and Fred could be that accurate is another question but it appears that they could be, conservatively, 3 miles east of a dead accurate line or 17 miles west of a dead accurate line and still see the island. =========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 12:37:46 EST
From:         Bill Hillier
Subject:      Re: Not so off-topic

I would like to comment on Dave Kelly's statements on airline safety. Tucked back on Page 4 of a recent issue of the Los Angeles Times was an article that was startling about US airline safety. In 1998 US airlines carried 615 million passengers without a single fatality. If one crash involving fatalities had occurred it would have been headlined on Page 1. Dave is more likely to get hurt by falling out of his computer chair than by being a  passenger on a US airline. 

Bill Hillier
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:01:19 EST
From:         Dan Postellon
Subject:      remote viewing/remote sensing

I always thought that remote viewing was only useful for finding ley lines or the site of Atlantis.  For remote sensing, to see what you can get by satellite, try <http://www.terraserver.com>.  Unfortunately, they don't have Nikumaroro on line (yet).

Dan Postellon TIGHAR 2263

****************************************************************

From Ric

Unfortunately, satellite remote sensing isn't much more help to us than remote viewing.  Just not enough resolution.  I'm afraid that on Niku  we're unwilling Luddites, whacking away with our bush knives and relying primarily on the Mark One eyeball.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 20:06:46 EST
From:         Bill Carter
Subject:      Re: remote viewing/remote sensing

15 years ago if one wanted a satellite positioned over Niku, he would have to pose as a representative of the Niku government and inform the U.S. that leftist guerrillas were trying to overthrow their peaceful south seas democracy.  The U.S. would then throw some weapons and training their way, provide a little monetary aid and top it off with satellite imagery to help the peaceful democracy locate and destroy the leftists base camps.  Of course, after securing U.S. said aid, the Niku ambassador would then take a direct flight from Wash D.C. to Moscow and tell the Kremlin that greedy capitalists were plotting to overthrow their Marxist state and they needed aid from their Marxist brothers.  Things are a bit more complicated today.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 20:04:19 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Pick an animal

>And I spelled it wrong to boot!  It's the Quetzalcoatl that is the
>Feathered  Serpent of ancient Mexico.

Well, as long as we're all dumping on Ric -- it's not THE Quetzalcoatl, either, just Quetzalcoatl; he's a deity.  Think Manganibuka, Ric, not THE Manganibuka.

LTM
Tom King

******************************************************************

From Ric

Swell.  Now I have TWO ancient deities pissed at me.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 20:09:54 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Remote Viewing

The report was unclear, and my recollection either fails me or I never knew, but I think you are correct; I think it was probably "an amazing coincidence".
LTM,
jon
ps - got my membership kit a couple days ago!

*****************************************************************

From Ric

That's incredible!  Just the other day I got this strong premonition that you would be receiving that material.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 20:34:25 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

We're not talking apples and oranges, here. The Space Shuttle is a space vehicle as well as a complex (and very expensive, innefficient) aircraft. There's a term for people like you,  "Tech Nerd"  Look it up. Though part of my duties involve computer upgrading and troubleshooting, I see the folly of planting big-gig, application packed boxes in front of secretaries and mechanics (pilots, too) Secretaries in our office cannot figure out the slightest problem with their machines, and barge into my office whining about their E-Mail, printer problems, freeze ups (and they wonder why they can't leave five applications open and be reading their E-mail at the same time)  ad nauseum. Computers in our mechanics section were quite large (3.0 gig, 200mhz, 56 modem...and that was three years ago) towers that we hooked up for the on-line ordering of parts. During a routine audit, it was found to have been "on-line" with Playboy, Penthouse, and several other morally questionable web sites. Have you ridden Amtrack and lived? Another computer accident waiting to happen. The two Korean Air accidents, 007, and the LA bound flight, were directly related to human interface with computers.  Ric is absolutely correct in his comical but accurate trancscipt of a flight crew trying to figure out the eccentric whims of some "gizmo" Though I'm sure he would not be laughing on an out of control, burning airliner.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Naw, I'm not gonna let you weasel out of this one Sacto.  What you said, exactly, was:

"Safety has not improved with automation. In fact, the opposite has occurred."

There are no apples and oranges involved.  You simply made a statement that is demonstrably untrue.

I also get this remote-viewing image of your co-workers rejoicing at your retirement.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 21:03:43 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

One more thing, are you a pilot?

****************************************************************
From Ric

Oh, I get it.  I'll show you mine if you show me yours huh?  Not that it makes any difference but I hold:

Commercial Certificate 1710943
airplane single & mulitengine land
instrument rating
4,000 plus hours Pilot in Command
no violations
no accidents
no incidents
soloed March 12, 1965

I've owned three airplanes - a Cessna 172, a Beech Debonair, and a Cessna 182RG ( I loved that Deb).  I have way too many hours flying night check runs in poorly maintained Twin Beechs, fond memories of flying a semi-pro ice hockey team around the Northeast and Canada in an even more poorly maintained DC-3, an abiding astonishment at having survived doing airshow work in a beat up Civil Air Patrol T-34,  sweet nostalgia for summer evenings doing lazy aerobatics in a 220 Stearman and no nostalgia at all for flying single pilot hardball IFR in light single engined airplanes.

These days I seem to spend more time riding on boats than flying airplanes. I'm not sure how that happened.  I don't much like boats.  A lot of people have a lot more time and experience in airplanes than I do.  That's okay.  I feel like I've done enough flying to get something of a feel for what it's like.

Your turn.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 10 Feb 1999 21:06:34 EST
From:         Don Widdoes
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

Thought I might reply regarding technology.  Several months ago one of our state of the art aircraft carriers lost the ability to steer because a Windows NT server went down.  I think I heard they drifted for about half an hour while they rebooted and screwed around with NT.  I'm all for technology, but it can bite you.  In the sixties you could get a timing light and a dwell tach and tune your car.  Try that today.  In my experience I have found that it's not the amount of technology, but how well you can use it that matters.

LTM
Don Widdoes 1033ECB
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:13:03 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

Safety has not improved. And why do airlines appear as the only flying entity? Corporate aircraft have their share of accidents, commuters too. The simple fact is that computers do not  add safety, merely automation and it's infamous sidekick, complacency. Another example?  The MD-88 at Detroit that took off with the flaps positioned incorrectly. The airplane stalled right at rotation, and the hapless crew was mystified as to the problem. There are automated systems that activate aural and visible warnings when configurations are not proper for takeoff, but these malfunctioned.  Of course, the crew would blame the lack of automation for the airplane not being configured for takeoff. WHAT KIND OF IDIOT WOULD SAY THAT??  All a pilot has to do is look down at the flap position indicator!  This is what I mean by automation; crews rely way too much on the "Gizmos" to keep them out trouble, and get into trouble by relying on them.
*****************************************************************

From Ric

One of the reasons I post stuff like this is because it's so reassuring to have you as a critic.

Would somebody please round up the statistics on accident rates for airline and general aviation for the past few years?  Dave won't do it.  He seems much more interested in his own opinion than in hard facts.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:19:55 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

I didn't ask you, Ric, I asked the "Tech Nerd"  But if you are interested, I am  commercial instrument multi-engine certificated. I have flown 2000 hours in many types of aircraft, including the T-34, T-28, Cessna 140,150,152, 172,182, P210, 310, Bellanca Super Viking, Mooney Super21 (with the "Johnson Bar Landing gear), Mooney Executive, Piper Cherokee 140, 180, 235, Arrow, Comanche, Colt, Tomahawk, Aztec, Grumman Tr-2, Traveler, Citabria, WC-135B, Aeronca Chief, Champ, and L- 16. No Accidents, 1 blown tire on the Mooney, and a major power fluctuation on the T34 (My one emergency declared) An alternator uncontained failure that produced some anxious moments in the Cherokee. I was in the Air Traffic Control (GS-2152-09) for twelve years as a civilian, and eight years in the military, including airfield management, Aircraft Delivery Overseas, Squadron Flight Ops, USAF Test Pilot School Flight Scheduling/ Data Reduction/ BoldFace procedures testing, and FLIP (Flight Information Publications) Specialist. I too, was a CAP search pilot, but nowhere near as experienced as my father. The first tme I became interested in AE was when I hopped on a "garbage hauling" C130 from Guam to Palau, and Yap Island, where a scientist from a major midwest university was discussing AE's fate with the Herky crew. He was convinced that she went down at sea, and if she and Fred survived, could have drifted in a raft to any one of the islands he was researching.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Okay Tech Nerd ( I guess that's you Dennis).  Whatcha got?

(I can guarantee that all of the women on the forum are imagining a bunch of six year old boys out in back of the garage saying, "Oh yeah?  Mine's bigger.")
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:54:10 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

Sactodave said:

>> "Safety has not improved with automation. In fact, the opposite
>> has occurred."
>
> Every great explorer has relied on state-of-the-art technology.

This was my impression as well.  Mountain climbers embraced the idea of using bottled oxygen pretty much as soon as it became possible.  Underseas explorers jumped on SCUBA as quickly as it developed.  There are numerous other examples.  I think that looking back on things we see (documentaries, books, etc.) the things these people are using and forget that at that time they were new and wonderful (and sometimes not well understood).

Bill

*****************************************************************

From Ric

I think that there is a valid observation to be made on this subject which has some bearing upon our understanding about what happened to Earhart and Noonan. It seems to me that the flight they were attempting, while challenging, was well within the capabilities of 1937 aviation and, specifically, within the capabilities of the aircraft and equipment they were using.  There does seem to have been an equipment failure aboard the aircraft which prevented the reception of voice radio, but even so, had the operating hardware been employed correctly the flight probably would have reached its intended destination.  That didn't happen, and it seems abundantly clear that the aircraft's failure to arrive at Howland Island was primarily due to the crew's inability to use the technology available to them.

It may be that we have an example of the kind of complacency which so bothers Dave Kelly.  Earhart and Noonan may have felt confident that they could find Howland Island because they had "gizmos" (i.e. the Itasca's direction finder and, as a backup, their own direction finder) which could find it for them. An analogy might be a pilot today who takes off for a destination which he knows is socked in with weather that is right down to minimums.  He knows that he is not proficient enough to hand-fly the approach but he also knows that the autopilot will do it for him.  He gets to the destination only to discover that he doesn't really understand how to program the autopilot.  Now his life depends on whether he has enough fuel to get to someplace where the weather is better.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:59:39 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: technological advances

Could we have some facts please on the drifting aircraft carrier?  This sounds like unsubstantiated urban rumor.  I'm sure the problem involved ghosts and not an NT server.  Were they anywhere near the bermuda triangle? And if true aren't we now part of a conspiracy that is putting in a public forum, TOP SECRET information concerning the primary steering mechanisms for our most powerful ships capable of surviving a war, but not an NT server breakdown?

Clyde Miller

*****************************************************************
From Ric

WE ARE DRIFTING BUT CANNOT BOOT YOU
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:07:48 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Flight English 101

Ric wrote:

> The air navigator, having found a position line as he approaches
> his destination, continues flying on his course until the position
> line carried forward by D[ead] R[eckoning] passes through the
> destination.

I know Ric is quoting from someone else's source here, but the fact is, the proper term is NOT NOT "Dead Reckoning", but rather "Ded Reckoning" which is short for "deductive reckoning".

I don't know about any of you, but I'd rather be deductive than dead any day. Of course, if I just plug-in my GPS (SactoDave's dreaded monster of a new technology that is bound to kill me someday), then I don't need to be either deductive or dead, I'll just get to my destination and land.

Thomas Van Hare
***************************************************************

From Ric

Tom is, of course, correct but I'm afraid that "dead reckoning" is one of those errors that is so entrenched in the language as to be almost impossible to eradicate.  Lindbergh his very own self is alleged to have said, "The only thing wrong with dead reckoning is the name."  My pet bugaboo is the rampant misuse of the word "hopefully" but I'm hopeful that I'll eventually get over it.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 12:18:46 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: English 101 (longish, but challenging)

Bob Lee wrote:

> Since AE did not have suitable radio contact with the Itasca and
> did not see either Howland or the Ship when they reached what they
> believed to be the proper distance what would be the correct course
> action.  I mean would the proper action be to fly in a circle or what?

I think that what Bob is saying here is just perhaps a bit more amplified of my earlier point on the CIRCLING vs. DRIFTING vs. LISTENING argument.

Ric and company surmise from available evidence that the radio operator first wrote DRIFTING, then erased this, and wrote CIRCLING thereafter because DRIFTING didn't make any sense. Now 60 years later, we should now conclude the operator must have meant LISTENING -- because it makes more sense than either DRIFTING or CIRCLING. Although a compelling story, I find this to be a leap of logic without any strong supporting evidence.

What we know is simply this (thanks to Ric's and Pat's astute investigation): The operator logged the word DRIFTING, then erased it and overwrote the word CIRCLING.

I cannot fathom how anyone can make the leap to decide today that 1) the operator guessed that it was CIRCLING rather than simply realizing that he wrote the wrong thing and corrected it; and  2) that despite the guess by the operator, we can now guess better and that what Earhart really said was the word LISTENING.

For a group so focused on proving everything by solid evidence, I am surprised that this goes without question.

To me, based on the limited, solid evidence at hand in the form of the radio logbook, it is equally plausible that the story goes like this: The radio operator logs the word DRIFTING, then realizes that in his haste to write he wrote the wrong thing and that the correct word is CIRCLING. He erases DRIFTING, writes CIRCLING and makes no further mention of it to anyone.

Out over the ocean, the scene looks something like this: Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan have run up and down the line couple of times and yet still have not found Howland. Fred says to Amelia, let's try doing timed legs (something like a box search) and do wide circles, perhaps 10 miles diameter or something (impossible to tell), up and down the basic line to see if we can find it. We've got a few hours of fuel, so let's try it that way and it will give us a better chance of finding Howland. Finally, doing this for some time, all the while calling on 7500, etc., failing to take good DF bearings, etc., they are running low on fuel. A last ditch attempt by Noonan has them fly south (toward where the most islands would be) and circle there as well. Low and behold, they see land: Nikumaroro.

And as for contextual arguments, if I was circling in a search pattern and trying to use the radio to get a DF or talk with anyone at all, I would think nothing of phrasing the radio transmission: "We are circling but cannot hear you."

Furthermore, to me, it is impossible to think that an expert, world class navigator like Fred Noonan would have stopped his navigation planning at the point of "we'll run up and down the line, and if we don't find the island, we'll die". If we are going to take a leap of logic, I would guess that he would have had a search plan in place for what to do if the island was not found when they ran up and down the line. And... well, that probably would have involved circling or some sort of box-like search pattern across and around the line of position.

Thomas Van Hare

*****************************************************************

From Ric

This is one of those wonderful arguments where, unless we end up finding AE's journal, no one will ever know for sure just what was really going on out over the Pacific or what was really said over the radio.

The original Itasca radio log, as preserved by Chief Radioman Leo Bellarts (bless his heart), contains numerous  strike-overs, xing outs, and platen misalignments.  There were quite obviously, and quite understandably, many cases where the typist had to go back and correct errors in his transcription of what he heard or thought he heard.  However, of the 114 lines of entries in the log between the first reception of "very weak signals on 3105" at 19:17 local time on the evening of July 1st and Earhart's cryptic last message at 08:43 the next morning, this is the ONLY instance where a word can seen to have been erased.  If nothing else, it is a big fat anomaly.

Your theory that it represents a case of the operator simply typing a word he never meant to type and immediately fixing it doesn't track with the rest of the log.  Other corrections are done as strike-overs because, in the heat of the moment, the operator doesn't want to stop, take his hands off the keys, roll the platen forward, pick up an eraser, lean forward, make the erasure, reposition the platen, and type the correction.  I don't think that it's a leap of logic to say that this correction, which comes smack in the middle of an important transmission from Earhart, was made some time later.  How much later is hard to say.  It is not until some 11 hours later that Itasca makes a report to headquarters and, for the first time, says that Earhart was circling at 0758.  In this same report, Thompson (the Itasca's captain) states that Earhart had "barely sufficient fuel under the conditions to make Howland" and that "Earhart apparently handicapped throughout night by cloudy weather as portions of received messages indicated cloudy and overcast weather."  Both of these statements are without foundation.  Thompson had no reliable information about Earhart's fuel state, and references to cloudy or overcast conditions during the night do not appear in the original log but were added into Thompson's later transcript.  By simply comparing the original radio log (which is the best indicator we have of what really happened) with the messages that Thompson sent to his superiors (which represent his version of what happened) it is very clear that a picture was being painted the primary purpose of which was to cover his own butt.

Taken in context, the erasure of the word drifting and the substitution of the word circling is highly suspect.  I realize that this makes me a conspiracy theorist, but I submit that the available contemporaneous documents suggest that there was indeed a conspiracy perpetrated by Warner Thompson to alter the record in such a way as to preserve himself from blame.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 12:48:37 EST
From:         Skeet Gifford
Subject:      Re: technological advances

I just gotta get in on this discussion!

While the contribution of computer technology to modern airliners is largely economic, there is also a measurable improvement to safety. The accidents and incidents often attributed to technology are most often Human Factors issues.

Our old nemesis, Pilot Error, remains a relative constant over the 45 years I have been involved in aviation. Airplanes are much more reliable today, which accounts for the profound increase in safety that has been enjoyed over the past two decades. That which is more recently becoming evident are Human Factors issues associated with design, manufacture and support. Perhaps the most famous example of this was the Apollo training accident that cost the lives of three of our Astronauts. A pure-oxygen environment was combined with a complex escape hatch.

There is a long-standing policy of the NTSB to find a single cause of an accident. Because the pilot was the last person responsible, he or she usually gets the blame. The deep legal pockets of the manufacturers and airlines tend to reinforce such a finding. But due to the vastly increased complexity of the environment in which we fly, small errors made by engineers, programmers and the like may contribute to the incident or accident. An interesting example, the Cali accident, may be found at:
<http://www.flightsafety.org/fsd_1998.html> and select <May-June 1998> You will need the ubiquitous Adobe Acrobat Reader.

As it was in 1937, and has been since, the last line of defense is a well-trained pilot who understands and applies the fundamentals--and has a couple of back-up plans for EVERY situation. The New Stuff, whether it is the glass cockpits and computers of today or Automatic Direction Finding equipment in 1937, SHOULD BE in addition to basic airmanship skills, not a replacement for them. Unfortunately, it is not always so. Some pilots today (and in 1937?) seem to forget the fundamentals when they acquire new technology.

Oh, almost forgot. Yes, Dave, I am a (retired) pilot.

Sorry, Ric. Too long.

Skeet Gifford, 1371CB

****************************************************************

From Ric

Skeet describing himself as a pilot is a bit like Heifetz describing himself as a fiddler.  In addition to being a retired airline pilot, Skeet Gifford has long been a consultant to NASA. Of course, he may also be a bit biased. That "B" in his member number indicates that he is on TIGHAR's Board of Directors.

*****************************************************************
From Dennis McGee

First of all, Dave, take your nitro pill, sit down, take a few deep breaths, count to 125, and repeat after me "I will not have a coronary."  When the vein in your forehead has stopped pulsating, read on.

Tech Nerd?  Me?  I don't think so. My reaction was solely to your statement:  "Safety has not improved with automation. In fact, the opposite has occurred."

Now, Dave, in your heart of hearts you've got to admit that was a pretty rash statement, wasn't it?  For every failure of technology there are thousands of daily success stories, you just don't read about them in the papers and they don't show up in the NTSB reports.

I believe your point is, Dave, that pilots can rely too much on technology.  This is true, we can.  Case in point, the American Airlines 767 that crashed in Columbia about 2 years ago.  The pilots were distracted and momentarily confused as to their position and then -- Boom -- contact with cumulus granite.

We still need well-trained humans to run our technology and well-trained instructors (like you, Dave) to teach us.  As pilots we still have the responsibility to maintain currency, use check lists, improve our situational awareness abilities, and a host of other things. All of these are made easier and -- in my book -- safer by technology. I can find my location over unfamiliar territory a lot easier by taking shots off of two VORs than I can by reading a sectional.  (GPS?  Sorry, I can't afford it.).  The VORs get me in the neighborhood and the sectional gets me to the house.

As for the staff at work complaining about their PCs freezing, programs not running, etc.  Isn't that your job, Dave?  And if it isn't, why are you doing it?  I think you need to talk to your supervisor.

Hell, Dave, I'm just a mid-level P.R. guy with a low-time private ticket -- no IFR, no multi, no commercial, no ATP, no CFI or CFII etc.  So I guess yours is bigger than mine.  But it goes to prove size doesn't prevent us from making stupid statements.

Now, let's not waste any more time on the forum with this argument.

LTM, who is mortified over this turn of events
Dennis McGee #0149
******************************************************************
From Bill Hillier

Ric, I don't have a breakdown that would indicate the number of accidents. I did report a few days ago that US airlines including those operating outside the US had no fatalities in 1998, a remarkable feat when one considers that they carried 615 million passengers. Bill Hillier  2264

****************************************************************
From Craig Fuller

Dave,

Lets take a look at the USAF safety record and see how technology has "hurt" them.

The following web site has their accident statistics from 1947 to 1997:

http://www-afsc.saia.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Flight/stats/usaf1097.html

You will notice that the average number of accidents has steadily dropped from 44 accidents per 100,000 hours of flying in '47 to in the mid '80s around 2 accidents per 100,000 hours of flying.


Craig Fuller
Aviation Archaeological Investigation & Research
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:05:49 EST
From:         Scott Zaden
Subject:      Re: Aviation Remote Viewing

I some strange E-Mails on this subject and thought I would comment.

>Coincidentally, yesterday on Paul Harvey's _Rest_of_the_Story_ radio
>broadcast, he reported on the kidnapping (some years back as you recall)
>of General Dozier.  According to his report, the building in which the
>general was detained was described in detail by these guys.

I can confirm this. Around Christmas week 1981 General Dozier was kidnapped by the 'Red Brigades' operating under a leader known as "Carlos". After the Red Brigade assignation of Italian political leader Aldo Moro there was enough concern for the General's life to bring in Remote Viewers. Ultimately viewers brought the search to the Italian town of Padua. After a miss with a civilian, a military remote viewer brought the team to a similar looking house in the same town. General Dozier owes his life to this whose drawings of the room he was held in were ultimately found to be correct

>I am aware of NO circumstance that was contemporaneously recorded by
>competent, unbiased authorities where a remote viewer actually found
>anything.

This is because you are not well read on the subject. While a little sensationalized, you still should see Jim Schnabel's book "Remote Viewers" on Bantam Doubleday Dell; ISBN# 0-440-22306-7. There is actually loads of info on this however the military program is still 95% classified. But, the military protocols on this process -called Controlled Remote Viewing - are being civilianized.

>As you may know, there is a standing offer of $10,000 by illusionist and
>psychic debunker James Randi for the scientifically sound demonstration of
>ANY paranormal ability.

James Randi is a clown/magician who is on the run. He is currently being pressured for his refusal to transfer his money to an independent third party for dispersment upon proof. New "proof" negotiations are currently underway. The men have learned the hard way not to proceed without assurances. Seems he has now added the words 'scientific prove' to protect himself. Yes RV works, but it wasn't scientific - so no money. Bottom line -- there may never be scientific proof as we know it. The whole thing is rather a publicity scam the military men do not even want to deal with. I would be very careful publicly identifying yourself with this guy.

In terms of an aviation score, I can shed some light on this as well.  In May 1978, the Soviet TU-22 intelligence aircraft (Code named "Blinder" by NATO) crash site was found in the dense jungles of Zaire by the American remote viewers before the Russians could get there. The target was tasked by Major  General Ed Thompson from the Pentagon when U.S. spy and infrared satellites failed to turn anything up. The Air Force's Foreign Technology Division physicist Dale Graff generated coordinate information from viewer Frances Bryan at Wright-Patterson Air Force base. The plane was also viewed by a Gary Langford at Stanfords' Research Institute in C.A. Subsequently the Pentagon sent the information the African Directorate of Operations who passed it along to the Kinshasa station chief. Bottom Line - the plane was in a river with only it's tail showing. Turned out the search team was some 70 miles off the crash site. When they got there the natives had already started to carry some parts away.

When Jimmy Carter asked how the plane had been found so quickly he was told of the project - which at the time I believe was called Operation Grill Flame. After this the Defense Intelligence Agency's Scientific and Technical Intelligence Directorate (DT) got involved. I have no knowledge any intelligence information from the salvaged wreck has been made public. And yes, in case you are wondering, AE's flight has been viewed as if it was target within the interests of the people if the United States. Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Scott Zaden
*****************************************************************

From Ric

Nowhere do you offer what I called for -  An instance contemporaneously recorded by competent, unbiased authority where a remote viewer actually found anything.

Let's make this easy.  I here and now challenge any remote viewer, psychic, map dowser, snake charmer, or Dionne Warwick herself to participate in a controlled experiment which can be overseen by a mutually agreed-upon third party.

The target will be an object on Nikumaroro the location of which is known only to me and a few other team members who will keep their mouths shut.

The results of the experiment- whatever they may be -  will be announced on this forum and on the TIGHAR website.

How about it?  I say remote viewers are frauds.  Prove me wrong.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:10:59 EST
From:         Suzanne T.
Subject:      Re: technological advacements

I don't know who does the hiring for the clerical support in Sactodave's world, but the clerical assistants who were in my division and others were professionals. They not only knew how to expertly run the necessary software, they were trouble shooters for execs who were challenged by it. They also kept their eyes out for new software and training opportunities. I will admit they had an advantage by working in silicon valley. My guess is that in Sactodave's work environment the clerical support hiring is lacking as is their training.

Best regards,
Suzanne T.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

I just hope that those people he busted for visiting morally questionable websites don't find out that he's on this forum.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:07:32 EST
From:         Skeet Gifford
Subject:      Flight English 101

I can't leave well-enough alone.

Air Force Manual 51-43, Air Navigation for Pilots, dated January, 1952, was my "bible" in training. It refers to the procedure as "Dead Reckoning." Thanks, Tom, for the derivation.

Skeet Gifford, 1371CB
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:13:31 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Speculation vs Scientific Method

Sactodave (Dave Kelly) wrote, "Speculation is about all we have... The alternative to TIGHAR's theory is unquestionably that they had to ditch."

TIGHAR's search team may or may not find identifiable airplane serial numbers of human remains that can be identified by DNA on Nikamaruru but that doesn't mean that their theory of what happened to Amelia and Fred is not true.  It simply means it is not fully proven beyond any reasonable doubt.  Regardless of what is found on the next Pacific trips TIGHAR's evidence to date is far more conclusive than the ditch in the ocean theory.  I don't know a single aviator with over water experience from the pre-electronic navigational period that would not conclude that Fred Noonan had a plan to find landfall if Howland could not be located.  The Phoenix Island group is the only logical alternate to Howland.

Dave also writes that, "Alternate theories are as valid as TIGHARs".  If he can show me that the alternate theories are based on sound scientific research then, and only then, would I agree.  So far I have seen none that meet that requirement.

Dick Pingrey 0908C
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:19:22 EST
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: Wreck Photo hoax?

After the neat web page on Howland as vacation spot, the credibility of everything from this source is now in doubt.

 --DICK

****************************************************************

From Ric

Are you somehow under the impression that the Wreck Photo came from that website, or do you think that TIGHAR had anything to do with the Howland Island web site?  One of us is very confused.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:30:00 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Aviation Remote Viewing

I did a little followup (there's a bunch of remote viewing stuff on the internet), a lot of it revolving around Ed Dames (haven't I seen his name on the forum?), and from what I could find out (about Gen. Dozier's situation), the rescue was the result of good work by local police; remote viewing did not apparently play any part.

LTM,
jon (2266)

******************************************************************

From Ric

Gee, that's not what Scott Zaden says.  Is it possible that there is some bald-faced lying going on somewhere?  Yes indeed, it's time to settle this once and for all with a good, controlled experiment.  Imagine the boon to society if we can put an end to this controversy at last.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 18:55:34 EST
From:         Rick Seapin
Subject:      Relationships

I just read all this techno stuff from you guys and I think you all have been playing with your trim tabs too much. It's time to lower your gear and get back to what is important.

I'm talking about relationships. Now Ric, I hear you grinding your teeth, I'll play by your rules. I'm talking about working relationships.

A good detective always educates him or herself with the people their investigating. You gots (slang) to understand their idiosyncrasies and picadillos to solve a crime or mystery,

I think we have all seen the news clip of Amelia's crash in the 50th state during her first attempt of a round the world journey. Did you see Amelia's face? She is all smiles, composed, and ready to take on another day. Look at Paul Mantz. This man is totally disgusted. Why?

Mantz was hired or volunteered to help Amelia fly the Electra. Ric, depending on what book you read.  Paul was at the controls when the Electra landed the night before. Some say it was an exceptionally hard landing. The next day Amelia was the pilot. During the take-off, the Electra skidded out of control and caused some $50,000.00 damage. Some blame Mantz's hard landing, saying it caused strut or tire damage. Mantz blames Amelia for her inexperience, and her habit of jockeying the throttles. I  guess a big mistake, I wouldn't know, I only piloted a Skymaster, and that slug would only do 120 knots in a dive with an anchor tied to it's cowl flap.

The point being, Amelia was under great stress. Not only from her husband George, but from herself. This was her last hooray, her Swan song, depending on what book you read. Then, without warning, Amelia takes off to eternity without informing Mantz of her intentions. Leaving behind some very valuable equipment, Parachutes, flares, low frequency radio, 250 foot trailing antenna, depending on what book you read.

Did Amelia get along and play well with others? Enter Fred Noonan. Daddy Warbucks (Putnum) wanted the best for his new bride, Noonan was the best. I was sad to hear that he was declared a drunk in 1966, twenty-nine years after his disappearance. Hide the bottles Fred.

What working relationship did Amelia and Fred have? The reason I ask this question is because of the telegram Amelia sent hubby from Lae. I'm paraphrasing,  "having problems with equipment and personnel." What did she mean by that? Having problems with the ground crew, the Lae officials, Noonan? If Noonan, then this twenty hour flight to Howland had to be a gauntlet. I wish I was a fly on the attitude indicator.

If there was  some disrespect between the two, hostility,  it could have caused a navigational error, and led to their doom.  I know, speculation. I'm not only interested in the location of the Electra and the where-abouts of Amelia and Noonan, I'm also very interested in what happened to cause this American tragedy. Love to Father, Mother gets too much attention.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

>A good detective always educates him or herself with the people their
>investigating. You gots (slang) to understand their idiosyncrasies and
>picadillos to solve a crime or mystery.

A good detective always educates himself or herself - period.  I submit that, at this remove, we can not possibly hope to understand the idiosyncrasies and peccadilloes of either of these people.  Nearly everything we have about Amelia's personality is filtered through her own and Putnam's sensitivity about her image.  We know almost nothing about Noonan's personality.

In my opinion, it is essential to any investigation to have an understanding of what kinds of things are knowable and what things are inherently unknowable.  There are always many more of the latter than the former.  I see no point in gossiping about Amelia's relationships.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 19:01:33 EST
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: Wreck Photo a hoax?

EVER SINCE THE HOWLAND ISLAND "HOAX,"WE CAN'T TRUST THE PERSON WHO POSTED THAT

****************************************************************

From Ric

S'Ok Dick.  Really.  The person that created the Howland Island website spoof is not on the forum.  Never was.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 19:21:06 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      Side Shows

OK guys. Recess is over. I know I don't have to click on emails with the titles of Remote Viewing and Technology/Safety, but jeez. At least the Ded Reckoning stuff was somewhat related. I think you're falling into the trap noted below:

"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience."

Surely, Ric, there are some useful investigations these idle minds can help with. And what's with "hopefully" anyway? My dictionary, Random House Unabridged, says, "Although some strongly object to its use as a sentence modifier, hopefully meaning,'it is hoped (that)' has been in use since the 1930's (see...I'm on topic by virtue of time period) and is fully standard in all varieties of speech and writing." Even AE and FN would have approved.

Blue skies, -jerry

****************************************************************

From Ric

Wouldst thou make this reverend tongue a slave to fashion?  That might very well impact our efforts to surveil the new paradigm.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 19:42:18 EST
From:         Amanda Dunham
Subject:      Re: Aviation Remote Viewing

Scott Zaden wrote:

>I some strange E-Mails on this subject and thought I would comment.

No kidding.  Remote sensing of assignations?!!!  There's been quite enough of that in Washington already.

Love to Monica,
Amanda Dunham

****************************************************************
From Jon Watson

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that a) anyone is lying, b) remote viewing is impossible, c) Amelia died in New Jersey.  IF there is someone out there who CAN and WILL provide specifics on the wreck site (okay, excluding the "crashed in the middle of the marianas trench" type report), then I say, if it falls within reason during the expedition, we (hey, I can say that now!) should check it out.  I agree that the preliminary test which you suggested would be an ideal way of ascertaining the viability (not necessarily the veracity) of the procedure.  At the same time, I wouldn't condone the expediture of a nickle of the membership's funds toward such a test; or even toward location of the site.  It seems to me that those who are in the business of remote viewing (which my forays into the 'net lead me to believe are mostly engaged in the business of selling training on how to do it, not in just doing it) anyway- those folks could get a huge industry boost if they were to come out and locate the crash site and have it proven that they located it.  But I'm not holding my breath.  By the way ... can I be the raccoon?

Love to mother,
jon 2266

****************************************************************

From Ric

Ed Dames has already gone on record with a specific location where he says the Earhart plane rests (it's in the Gilberts).  His promised expedition to recover said aircraft has not happened. Unfortunately, none of these bozos is likely to accept my challenge.  They never ever operate in the sunlight.

****************************************************************
From Gene Dangelo

While there is a vast preponderance of literature on the popular paranormal market right now (I know, because I actually read a lot of it) concerning remote viewing via reports from former military officers, etc., the ultimate test of the veracity of any such reports will lie in the correlation (or lack thereof) between remotely viewed events and actual matching occurrences in the empirically generated database. If it can stand the test of scientific method with a frequency beyond that of mere coincidence, then it has scientific value; if not, then it hasn't such value. The truth, i.e., the database, is out there!

Regards to all,
Dr. Gene Dangelo  #2211

****************************************************************

From Ric

Yeah, and next we're going to try to scientifically verify spontaneous human combustion.

****************************************************************
From Tom Van Hare

Ric wrote:

> Yes indeed, it's time to settle this once and for all with a
> good, controlled experiment.

OK, I'll kick off the first part of the remote viewing psychic experiment....

Just repeat after me....
VISUALIZE IMPEACHMENT
(and having written this, I will now duck and run for cover.)

Bottom line, all that psychic crap is well, just that. Given the clear interest most of those people have in money and fame, you'd think that they would visualize next week's lottery numbers from time to time.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 19:59:18 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: English 101 (longish, but challenging)

Not being either a conspiracy theorist or a radio guy, I don't understand why "circling" would cover Warner Thompson's butt any better than "listening."

TKing

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Why do I feel like Joe Gervais?

The change was from "drifting" to "circling."  Drifting just didn't make any sense at all and was rather obviously an error on the part of the operator. Can't have that.  Going in circles, burning up precious fuel, was just the sort of activity which supported Thompson's characterization of Earhart as incompetent and rattled.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:27:35 EST
From:         Daryll Bolinger
Subject:      RV, LB, GP

(Note from Ric:  I'll answer Daryll's questions as we go.)

Greetings to Ric and the Forum;

1.  Remote Viewing, post loss transmissions, messages in a bottle, these could all be examples of getting the truth out without revealing the messenger.

(You can get help for this problem.  Paranoia is curable now.)

2. >The original Itasca radio log, as preserved by Chief Radioman Leo
   >Bellarts (bless his heart),

I thought logs were Gov. property ?

a. This leaves me with the impression that Mr. Bellarts kept the logs.

(Yes.  As Chief Radioman, Bellart's was supposed to have custody of all paperwork pertaining to communications.  He later said that after Earhart disappeared bits of paper started to come up missing and he became concerned that some of the crew were collecting souvenirs.  He got permission from the communications officer to gather up and secure all of the original logs.  He ended up keeping them and eventually giving them to the National Archives.)

b. I also seem to recall that Mr. Bellarts was interviewed at one time.

(Yes.  Elgen Long interviewed Bellarts in 1973.  I have a transcript of that
interview courtesy of the Bellarts family.)

Did he indicate that he made the changes?

(The changes weren't made to Bellart's original logs.  Thompson added references to cloudy and overcast weather later when he wrote his report.  In the interview, Bellarts affirms that the discrepancies could not have been a simple difference of opinion about what was said because, at the time of the transmissions in question, the sound was coming in only over his headphones. Only later did he switch to the speaker.  There is no reference in the interview to erasing "drifting." Bellarts was not typing the log at that time. Another operator named Galten was.)

c. Can you say if the same typewritter made the changes?

(I'm not an expert, but it looks that way.)

d. If you can type the pages of a log, does this mean that the log was a
loose leaf type binder where you could add or subtract pages?

(My understanding is that these were individual preprinted forms that were put in the typewriter.  No indication that they were ever put in a binder.)

3. Can you tell the Forum more about George Putman after the loss of AE until his death?

a. My impression is that he continued to push for her search until a judge declared AE dead 18 months after she disappeared. Didn't the 7 year rule apply for missing persons back then?
b. What was his job during WWII ?
c. Did he ever try to write anything about AE after she was lost ?

( I suggest that you read Mary Lovell's 1989 book The Sound of Wings.)

Daryll
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:29:14 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: technological advacements

But, what about that drifting aircraft carrier?

Clyde
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:31:54 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

Skeet Gifford wrote:

> Air Force Manual 51-43, Air Navigation for Pilots, dated
> January, 1952, was my "bible" in training. It refers to the
> procedure as "Dead Reckoning." Thanks, Tom, for the derivation.

Wow. Even the USAF has it that way. Probably Ric is right that at this point "Dead Reckoning" has become so much part of the vocabulary that it is considered accurate, even by USAF senior navigators. You know, I think my father has that AF Manual on the shelf too, I wonder which way he remembers it.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:35:13 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: technological advances

Clyde Miller wrote:

> Could we have some facts please on the drifting aircraft carrier?  This
> sounds like unsubstantiated urban rumor.

Go to http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks and search for "Yorktown".  Starting with Volume 19, issue 88 (near the end of the search results) you'll find 11 entries.

> I'm sure the problem involved ghosts and not an NT server.

Not an NT server, an NT workstation. And not (as someone else said) an aircraft carrier, but a missile cruiser.

Quoting a bit from the first article:

The Navy's Smart Ship technology is being considered a success, because it has resulted in reduced manpower, workloads, maintenance and costs for sailors aboard the Aegis missile cruiser USS Yorktown. However, in September 1997, the Yorktown suffered a systems failure during maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, VA., apparently as a result of the failure to prevent a divide by zero in a Windows NT application. The zero seems to have been an erroneous data item that was manually entered. Atlantic Fleet officials said the ship was dead in the water for about 2 hours and 45 minutes. A previous loss of propulsion occurred on 2 May 1997, also due to software. Other system collapses are also indicated. [Source: Gregory Slabodkin, Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water, Government Computer News, 13 Jul 1998, PGN Stark Abstracting from http://www.gcn.com/gcn/1998/July13/cov2.htm

End quotation

> Were they anywhere near the bermuda triangle?

Nope.

> And if true aren't we now part of a conspiracy that is putting in a public
> forum, TOP SECRET information concerning the primary steering
> mechanisms for our most powerful ships capable of surviving a war,
> but not an NT server breakdown?

Not one of the "most powerful" ships, and the server didn't break down.  One of the later articles mentions that the actual problem was that the entry of a zero at one console crashed the shipboard LAN and took down not just steering, but the entire propulsion plant.

Poor programming, in my opinion, to not handle an incorrect input in a competent manner.  However, what I find even more worrysome is that this tells us that crashing the on-board net will stop the ship.  Since they're using commercial hardware (the articles outline this) it would seem that the EM pulse from even a very small nuke anywhere near this ship would stop it dead.  Yow!

    - Bill
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:38:02 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Technological advances

Ric wrote:

> (I can guarantee that all of the women on the forum are imagining a bunch of
> six year old boys out in back of the garage saying, "Oh yeah?  Mine's
> bigger.")

You don't have to be female to make that observation.

Bill   #2229

*****************************************************************

From Ric

And so, it is to be hoped, endeth this off-topic line of discussion (he said hopefully).
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:43:14 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Relationships

Ric says:  I see no point in gossiping about Amelia's relationships.

Hear, hear (or there, there, or whatever).  How is it conceivably going to bring us any closer to solving this thing, to speculate about how Amelia and Fred got along.  Seems to me like a waste of time to speculate about all this. If we had Ken Starr's budget, maybe....

Spin the prop
Tom King
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:45:51 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Technological advances (sorry off-topic)

Dave Kelly wrote:

> Safety has not improved.

Wrong. It has, look at the numbers. And the reason why airlines are primary point of the discussion has to do with the number of flights they do -- US Airways does just about 950,000 flights a year (T/Os to Landings). Now add in United, American, Delta, KLM, Lufthansa.... Just how many GA flights a year are there anyway?

> Another example?  The MD-88 at Detroit that took off with the
> flaps positioned incorrectly. The airplane stalled right at
> rotation, and the hapless crew was mystified as to the problem.

I think you are talking about Northwest 242. That was a 727, wasn't it? The crew started off the flight by missing their taxi instructions, heading the wrong way on the ground, having to turn around, and get a progressive from Ground. Then they were order to do a Position and Hold for awhile during which they discussed the future of the airline and then current labor-management problems. Somehow, they forgot to set the flaps.

Once released and cleared, while on the roll, the auto-throttles didn't engage, which was a correct system response to having no flaps set, but the captain focused on this instead as the system problem and manually overrode the auto-throttles.

They rotated, well past V1, couldn't get airborne, finally pulled it off the ground at the end of the runway and, on the verge of a stall -- they almost made it, actually -- then they wallowed over the low buildings off the departure end of the runway for some few hundred yards before the wing clipped a light post, the plane stalled, and rolled inverted before crashing into the ground down into a sunken roadway. Everyone died, except for a one year baby girl -- and that was called the "miracle" of the flight.

As far as automation goes, this was an older airplane, without all that new-fangled computer stuff. It was plain and simple pilot/crew error. The pilots hand flew the entire emergency. Given the fact that both pilots had a strong reputation as among the most concientious and responsible, by-the-book types, this is one of those ones that really makes you stop for a second and think. Those guys were absolute professionals, on the top of the game, top marks throughout, best training, best records, well-known to be very very good and yet... they still bought the farm.

That's why so many pilots like reading NTSB reports. At first you think, just how stupid do you have to be to do that, then you read the guy at 20,000 hours in type and you think, ok, what the hell? Then you realize, that could have been me after all....

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:50:22 EST
From:         Ken Feder
Subject:      Re: Aviation Remote Viewing

In the last couple of days, someone (sorry, I trashed the e-mail) claimed that magician/nonsense-debunker James Randi is "on the run" concerning his "$10,000" offer to anyone who can prove a paranormal event or phenomenon like, f'rinstance, remote viewing.

Randi on the run? That's a good one.  The James Randi Educational Foundation is thriving, debunking silliness wherever it finds it.  And the "$10,000" award? Try $1 million (it hasn't been $10,000 for a long time). And there have been lots of takers. All losers.

Remote viewing experiments have been plagued by poor design, worse statistics, post-hoc rationalizations, and lots of opportunity for fudging.

But hey, Ric; maybe you could dowse for Amelia....

Ken Feder

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Pat and I met Jim years ago.  He truly is the Amazing Randi.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:47:06 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Aviation remote viewing

>No kidding.  Remote sensing of assignations?!!!  There's been quite enough
>of that in Washington already.

Assignations?? We gonna kill somebody?!!

*************************

No, no, Tom, calm down. They have all already committed [political] suicide....

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:52:50 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Aviation Remote Viewing

I'd just LOVE to scientifically prove spontaneous human combustion, but the very thought of it really burns me up!

And while we're thinking in terms of the south pacific, let's not forget that memorable song from the musical "South Pacific," namely, "There Is Nothing Like Ed Dames..."

    Had enough?

Best regards,
Gene Dangelo   :)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:49:25 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

Tom Van Hare wrote:

>I know Ric is quoting from someone else's source here, but the fact is,
>the proper term is NOT NOT "Dead Reckoning", but rather "Ded Reckoning"
>which is short for "deductive reckoning".

I remember the story this way. The term was "deducted reckoning", which was abbreviated to "de'd" reckoning.

Right? Tell me I'm right, just once.

Tom #2179

**************************

Documentation, gentlemen, documentation......

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:58:01 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: English 101 (longish, but challenging)

> Taken in context, the erasure of the word drifting and the substitution of the
> word circling is highly suspect.  I realize that this makes me a conspiracy
> theorist, but I submit that the available contemporaneous documents suggest
> that there was indeed a conspiracy perpetrated by Warner Thompson to alter the
> record in such a way as to preserve himself from blame.

To my mind, limited though it is, the replacement of the word would most likely have been done by the captain of the Itasca, since the radio man probably would not have second guessed himself about the phrasing and taken it on himself to make a change.  As to the right or wrong of it, my work involves extensive phone work and listening to people with a good phone, but lots of background noises and accents, it never ceases to surprise me what I have written down at first blush versus what I finally end up with.  I verify every address through zip code combined with a map that lists every street by zip code and even then, I frequently have to call the person back or search for their name in the phone book to confirm either their address, phone number or correct spelling of their last name.  I concur that "listening" makes the most sense, but in this undertaking, were they making sense?
Love to mnemonics,
Dave Bush
2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:02:51 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Gallagher's Plaque

Tom?  Ric?  We would be interested to know the text that was on the plaque on the monument at Gallagher's grave.  I presume the original plaque came up missing somewhere along the way.  Or has it just deteriorated?

In any case, replacing it at first opportunity seems a very right thing to do.  I'm curious about what may be in mind for a replacement that will be durable and can be securely attached.  I believe the monument is of "cement" (concrete).  How is that standing up to the elements?

And this is another good reason to try to find living members of Gallagher's family.  They should know that Gerald Bernard Gallagher is not forgotten and that his resting place on that lonely, little island is marked for any who may venture there to see...  And to think about for a moment.

Incidently, I've found a contact in Malvern, Worcester, England.  We'll see if we can pick up Miss. Clancy's trail from Clanmere on Graham Road.  And/or from whatever records may be available in Malvern and Worcester.

*******************

Tom, do we have this text? (Ric is writing and I am trying not to disturb him....)

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:05:31 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

You guys realize, I presume, that "dead" (or "ded") reckoning has been around for a lot longer than airplanes have.  It's no wonder if the USAF and other winged types use the "dead" form; it had already become ingrained in the language of navigation long before there was a USAF, or a US, for that matter.

TKing
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:04:46 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: English 101 (longish, but challenging)

I understand that the change was from "drifting" to "circling," but the argument you've been having is between "listening" and "circling."  This is all becoming too drifty and circular for me; I think I'll stop listening and just head off down the line.

Love to Noonan
TK
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:12:40 EST
From:         Jim Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

On my shelf is the September 54 Revision of AF Manual 51-40 Air Navigation Vol. 1 & 2 and it refers only to "dead reckoning."  I never knew until I read Tom's posting that it was originally "ded. reckoning" but it figures . . .  he's  always been one step ahead of me since the day he was born.  Dead rather than ded. has a certain cautionary value, though:  While on an 8-hour low level weather recon mission in the soup at 1500 feet over the Yellow Sea in a Douglas B-26 (A-26 in WW2 and in Viet Nam) one of our crews dead reckoned their way into a 5000 foot mountain on the island of Cheju-Do, 80 miles off course.  And I once dead reckoned my way over the Shantung Peninsula of Red China on a similar mission in the soup.  We had no navigational equipment other than a primitive Loran which usually was inoperative. Finally we learned to use the radar altimeter to drop down to as low as 50 feet at which point we could see the water, estimate wind direction and speed from the waves, add 15 degrees and 5 knots (determined by experience) and climb back to 1500 feet and be real navigators again.

Jim Van Hare
********************

ObAmelia..... sounds rather like something that would happen with great regularity on any pre-GPS long-distance flight. Did not Lindbergh report doing something of the kind over the North Atlantic?--although, if memory serves, that was more to keep himself awake through sheer terror.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:20:16 EST
From:         Amanda Dunham
Subject:      Re: Remote viewing & English 101

I just hate it when I make a joke and it falls flat!  There's a BIIIIG difference between these two:

"assassination" - arrange to do someone in
(Lincoln/Booth, McKinley/?, Kennedy/Oswald)

"assignation" - arrange to do someone
(Jefferson/Sally, Kennedy/Marilyn, Clinton/Monica)

So here's the joke again: "Remote sensing of assignations?!!!  There's been quite enough of that in Washington already."

Now laugh, dammit.  ;-p  :-)

Amanda

PS: As long as we're so far off topic, who assassinated McKinley anyway? My memory fails me at the moment...

****************************************************************
From Ric

I turn my back for one lousy day and see what happens?  It was hilarious when you posted it the first time, but Pat hadn't seen Scott Zaden's original posting so she didn't know that he had gotten the word wrong.

We're just not appreciated Amanda.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:23:07 EST
From:         Dave Leuter
Subject:      Re: technological advances

I agree with Clyde.  As a veteran of 16 yrs in the defense electronics business (RCA, GE Aerospace, Lockheed Martin) I know that the customers prime concerns are reliability and redundancy.  Therefore they very rarely design in the "latest cutting edge" technology until it has been around awhile and is mature enough to have demonstrated its reliability.  And as for redundancy I have worked on radio communications systems where there were always 3 routes to the desired mode of operation; direct computer control, running to the individual rack and pushing buttons, and lastly opening the drawers of that rack and flipping manual switches.

 I would love to see the aircraft carrier that puts ALL of its steering system control in ONE PC based computer without any backup systems!  I imagine that the designing engineer has long been fired!

Dave Leuter
PS might be 2 cents worth, but hard to tell

*****************************************************************
From Ric

We now return to our regularly scheduled topic.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:23:40 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Gallagher's Plaque

Yes, we have the text, and before the last trip I priced having the plaque replicated at a place here in Maryland, in bronze.  It ran about $700, which was a bit steep for me at the time, plus they couldn't get it done before we had to be emplaned for Fiji.  Replacing it is definitely something we want to do.

As you (Pat) know, the concrete monument is holding up pretty well, though the last time we were there was a LARGE coco crab hole under its head-end. I don't know what happened to the original plaque, but I have a vague recollection that Ric had some kind of story about it.  I've toyed with the idea of how to attach a new one, but not very much; figured there'd be others who'd be able to work this out when the time comes.

TKing

****************************************************************
From Ric

Your vague recollection is that I have a vague recollection that the original plaque is in protective custody at the Fiji Museum or some such place.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:44:24 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: technological advances

>We now return to our regularly scheduled topic.

THANK YOU!!!!
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:47:07 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Last word on tech. advances

The story is somewhat complicated.  This was an experiment in reduced manning, with increased automation.  It was not Windows NT that was the problem; rather some technician entered zero for a valve reading that was supposed to be left blank.  That caused a divide by zero fault, and NT crashed.  People have argued that it was NT's fault, but it clearly was a training and application fault.  The ship was not in danger, as it was under manual control as a backup.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:53:55 EST
From:         John Larrabee
Subject:      Assignations

Amanda writes:

> PS: As long as we're so far off topic, who assassinated McKinley anyway?
> My memory fails me at the moment...

Leon Czolgosz (pronounced Shoal-gosh), Polish immigrant and disgruntled Detroit auto worker who blamed McKinley for the plight of the working class. He shot Big Bill at the Pan American Exposition in Buffalo in 1901.

Did somebody say off-topic?  I'll take "Assignations" for $800, Alex...

John Larrabee
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:55:56 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

From Tom Robison

> I remember the story this way. The term was "deducted reckoning"
> which was abbreviated to "de'd" reckoning.
> Right? Tell me I'm right, just once.

Well, no the picture gets even more cloudy. I just came across another source that states that it actually stands for "Deduced Reckoning".

This will take some more research. Clearly, though, we've finally come to the obvious back on-topic conclusion to this discussion. The whole flight plan started to come unravelled when Fred Noonan was unable to convince Amelia Earhart that it was "ded" and not "dead"....

... my apologies to Mother,

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 10:46:30 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      another mystery

In trying to assess how many hours AE may have had in her Electra at various times during its short one-year career, I have come upon what appears to be a discrepancy in the official record and I'd like some input from those with more knowledge and experience in such matters.

Here's the problem.  The airplane was officially inspected four times (according to existing records).

7/19/36  - Lockheed's application for registration number X16020 so that it could test fly the airplane prior to delivery which took place on 7/24/36. At this time the airplane is recorded as having zero time on both airframe and engines.

8/7/36  -  Earhart's application for registration number R16020.  At this time the airplane is recorded as having 20 hours on both airframe and engines. (Authorization for the addition of the "N" was received on 9/21/36)

11/27/36 - It's not clear why this inspection was necessary but it approves the fuel and radio configuration in the Restricted category. At this time the airplane is recorded as having 74:00 hours "Total aircraft flight time" and 82:42 "Total engine time" and 82:42 "Total propeller time."  It would appear, therefore, that between the previous inspection and this inspection, the airplane had been flown for 54 hours and that there had been an additional 8 hours and 42 minutes of non-flying engine testing.

Oddly, there is no record of an inspection prior to the March 1937 world flight attempt in spite of the fact that extensive modifications were made to the airplane in February in preparation for that flight (replacement of radios, installation of a navigator's station, addition of windows to the cabin, etc.)  The next, and last, inspection of the airplane is made upon completion of the the repairs necessitated by the wreck in Hawaii on March 20.

5/19/37 -  At this time the airplane is recorded as having 181:17 hours "Total aircraft flight time" and 182:42 "Total engine time" and 182:42 "Total propeller time." It would seem, therefore, that between the inspection in November and the completion of repairs in May the airplane had been flown a total of 107:17, but the engines had only been run exactly 100 hours.  That's a pretty good trick unless somebody has been doing a whole lot of gliding with both engines shut down.

Although both props were severely damaged in the Luke Field crash, there is no indication in the repair records or inspection report that either engine was replaced or overhauled.  The engine serial numbers remain identical to those in the original inspection done prior to the airplane's delivery in July 1936. Likewise, the prop hubs were not changed but the report does confirm that new blades were installed.

So what's going on here?  It looks like somebody is ballparking engine time rather than checking the logs.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 13 Feb 1999 10:49:05 EST
From:         Bill Zorn
Subject:      Re: Electra drawing

oops, well I should temper my criticism of the drawing a bit.

I thought that someone had volunteered via the forum last year to do a set of drawings on the Electra, and believed that this drawing was part of  that.

I wish I could volunteeer to work on a drawing package, but to do so now would be unrealistic. Too many tons in the air at work.

Check is in the mail

wiliam h zorn
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 14 Feb 1999 08:43:59 EST
From:         Mike Ruiz
Subject:      Found a TIGHAR Plane

Found a TIGHAR plane at a flea market today. It is metal, with one prop in front, wing on top. What is it?  How much did TIGHAR sell these for? When did TIGHAR sell these?  What is the significance of this aircraft? How many were made?

Any questions I forgot?

Love to Lambrecht,

The No Land Club*

***************************************************************

From Ric

>Any questions I forgot?

I don't think so.  What you saw was a die-cast metal replica of a Lockheed Vega manufactured by the Eastwood Company which sells all manner of memorabilia as "collectors' items."  Several years ago they came to us with an offer to give us a couple bucks royalty on the sale of Vegas bearing the TIGHAR logo (you'll also find die-cast airplanes painted up for Texaco, Coca Cola, and probably Kentucky Fried Chicken). Thinking that the Vegas were pretty cool, and being pretty broke, we agreed.

As I recall they produced 10,000 of the things and sold them all for something like $24.95 a pop.  TIGHAR cleared a couple of grand on the deal.  We also sold them to TIGHAR members and stenciled the person's membership number on the wing preceded by "NR."  Now THAT was cool.  Today I guess the generic TIGHAR Vegas really are collectors' items (if you're a collector).

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 14 Feb 1999 08:49:04 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

I wrote:

>> I remember the story this way. The term was "deducted reckoning"
>> which was abbreviated to "de'd" reckoning.

Then Tom Van Hare wrote:

>Well, now the picture gets even more cloudy. I just came across another
>source that states that it actually stands for "Deduced Reckoning".

And once he said that, I realized that "deduced" is the correct word, and not that abomination I wrote.

Tom #2179

****************************************************************

From Ric

He didn't correct you for fear of being accused of character assignation......(one would hope).
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 14 Feb 1999 10:42:58 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Draft Mounted

The draft of Chapter 1 "Amelia Earhart" of the 8th edition of The Earhart Project - An Historical Investigation (aka "the project book" or "the 8th edition") can now be found on the TIGHAR website at

http://www.tighar.org/Projects/eighthed.html

You'll also find a related table entitled "Earhart's Aircraft, Accomplishments, & Accidents" at

http://www.tighar.org/Projects/accomp.html

You can not find these documents by going through the home page because it is intentionally not linked to the rest of the website.  The purpose here is to solicit the gentle counsel of this learned forum, not invite the rampant scourgings of the great unwashed.  (If you transcribe the urls rather than just cut and paste, remember to capitalize that "P" or it won't work.)

Previous editions of the project book have not included a biographical treatment - so this chapter is entirely new.  The published version will include photos.  Because the purpose of the project book is to report on the progress of TIGHAR's investigation rather than describe the life of Amelia Earhart, the scope of this new chapter is limited to aspects of Earhart's life which have a direct bearing on the investigation.

You'll find that the Electra and the first and second world flight attempts are briefly described in the context of a discussion of Earhart's piloting experience.  Don't worry.  Later chapters will cover the airplane and the flights in far greater detail.

In addition to typos or grammatical problems, I particularly want to hear about any errors of fact or areas where more (or less) explanation is needed.  I've chosen not to footnote this section (because there would be more numbers than words) and have instead provided a list of the principal sources from which the information is derived.

Morituri te salutant.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 15 Feb 1999 08:50:56 EST
From:         Randy Jacobson
Subject:      Re: Draft Mounted

The paragraph in 1931 re the autogiro seems ambiguous and confusing: why decide to fly transcontinental when another person had already done so? Doesn't the NASM have the weight for the Vega they display?  I am surprised that that figure is not readily available. Cheers.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 15 Feb 1999 18:33:39 EST
From:         Alan Faye
Subject:      Re: Draft Mounted

Regarding the Pitcairn PCA-2  (excerpt below)

Accidents
June 1931  Takeoff accident Abilene, TX. No injuries, totaled aircraft, letter of reprimand from Department of Commerce.

July 1931  Landing accident Camden, NJ. No injuries, minor damage.

September 1931  Landing accident Detroit , MI. No injuries, totaled aircraft.

Question: How can one "total" an aircraft in June 1931 and fly it again in July 1931?

Doesn't "totaled" mean totally destroyed?  Did I miss something?

Cheers,  Alan

***************************************************************

From Ric

I should have been clearer.  When AE totaled the machine in Texas, Pitcairn replaced it with another one so that she could complete the trip back to the east coast.  Her July accident was in yet another autogiro. I'll amend the section to clear up the confusion.  Thanks

****************************************************************
From Hugh Graham

From Randy Jacobson:

>  Doesn't the NASM have the weight for the Vega they display?  I am surprised
>  that that figure is not readily available.
>  Cheers.

According to Kermit Weeks at www.fantasyofflight.com/weekscollect, only 3 Lockheed Vegas exist from the 198 built, 2 at the NASA museum in D.C. and his.  The 2 in D.C. are the Winnie Mae and Amelia's that she flew the Atlantic in.

But Amelia's Vega is in fact the composite of  2 Vegas, because she pranged her trans-Atlantic Vega so badly later at Norfolk in Sept/30, that a second Vega wreck was used for parts, according to Kermit.

After looking at Ric's list of aircraft Amelia owned at www.tighar.org/ Projects/accomp.html, it would appear that the Vega 5-NC7952-c/n 22 which she flew the Atlantic in, and the Vega Special 5C-NR965Y-c/n171 are now one and the same Vega sitting at NASA in Washington. What does it weigh?  Probably close to the 2,492 lbs. quoted for the former.

 BTW, Weeks'  Vega is constructor's number 72, rebuilt to match the Winnie Mae, with a P&W R1340 of 600 h.p. (sounds familiar) and has a gross weight of 4500 lbs.  Did Wiley Post really fly something like that to 55,000 feet as he claimed?     LTM, HAG 2201.

*****************************************************************
From Ric

>it would appear that the Vega 5-NC7952-c/n 22 which she flew the Atlantic
>in, and the Vega Special 5C-NR965Y-c/n171 are now one and the same Vega
>sitting at NASA in Washington.

Nope.  You didn't read the text.  As a result of the accident in Norfolk on Sept. 25, 1930, the fuselage of NC7952  (c/n 22) was replaced with the fuselage of Vega c/n 68.  Just before flying the Atlantic in 1932, AE hung a new 450 hp engine on the airplane.  When she later sold the transatlantic airplane to the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia, she kept the almost-new engine which she then hung on her new Vega NR965Y.  The Franklin Institute subsequently gave NC7952 to the Smithsonian.

The airplane now in the Smithsonian is the transatlantic airplane (a composite of c/n 22 & 68) minus the correct engine.  NR965Y burned up on the ground in Memphis TN on August 8, 1943.

LTM,
Ric

****************************************************************

From Jon Watson

I'm just a little perplexed by the chronology of AE's license.  The info from the book says the license was issued in May, 1930 and shows her age as 31 - but the math doesn't seem to work - unless I'm counting wrong her age should have been listed as 32.  Maybe the app was submitted prior to her birthday in 1929, and a bureaucrat forgot to adjust. 
LTM,
jon 2266

***************************************************************

From Ric

You're right.  The math doesn't work.  The license,  a photocopy of which is reproduced in "Amelia My Courageous Sister" by Carol Osborne and Muriel Morrissey (Osborne Press, 1987) was issued May 1, 1930.  Earhart was born July 24, 1897.  On May 1, 1930 she was therefore 32 and hadn't been 31 since the previous July.

Kind of makes you wonder about the rest of the information on the license, and it's the only "official" record we have of her adult height.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:34:49 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

Tom King wrote:

> You guys realize, I presume, that "dead" (or "ded") reckoning has been around
> for a lot longer than airplanes have.  It's no wonder if the USAF and other
> winged types use the "dead" form; it had already become ingrained in the
> language of navigation long before there was a USAF, or a US, for that matter.

Then why do we say something or someone is "dead on" or its "dead ahead" or "dead right?"  Word and phrase origins are tons of fun and studying it helps me get a load off my mind.  Its a weighty problem, but we all have our bears to cross, so to speak.  If it were up to me, though, my bumper sticker would say "They must be visualizing their turn signals working, cause they sure aren't usin' 'em".  But, I've been stuck on bumper stickers for a long time. Only I put 'em on the rear window, doesn't mess up the paint that way, and easier to remove, just bust out the glass and put in a new one!

Love to all,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:19:53 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Earhart's performance

I just finished reviewing the TIGHAR recap of AE's performance over the last 16 years of her life, and my immediate reaction was, "Who licensed this person to fly?"

Ye gads, man, she had 11 (ELEVEN!) accidents or "events" with the aircraft she owned from 1921-37, and this does not include loosing the Electra 10E in July, 1937.  Some of the stuff was minor, but a lot of it wasn't. There is even a reprimand from the CAA (?) tucked into the file!  Granted, certain hazards of the era (poor airfields, fuel contamination, lack of nav aids etc.) may have been contributing factors, but pranging a half dozen aircraft in nine years (1928-37) is a pretty dismal record.  I know my FBO wouldn't rent to her!

Most of the events appeared to be landing mishaps (" . . .pilot in command failed to maintain control of the aircraft after touchdown ..."), some of which could have been caused by poorly maintained airfields, I assumed.  Only two, apparently, were due to mechanical failure, specifically the engine, which speaks well for the reliability of engines even at this early point in aviation.

I noticed also a general correlation between the number of accidents and the complexity (In this case "complexity" is near-synonymous with engine power, as generally the more powerful the engine the more complex [cowl flaps, constant speed propeller, retractable landing gear, etc.] is the airplane.) of the aircraft, the more complex the aircraft, the more accidents.

All of which raises two observations: first, it appears her flying skills -- or at least her landing skills -- left a lot to be desired; and last, is her record "average" for the pilots of her era or was she just a victim of bad luck?

LTM, who always lands on concrete
Dennis O. McGee, #0149

****************************************************************

From Ric

Amelia's atrocious landings were, apparently, legendary.  Scott Berg's new (and excellent) biography of Lindbergh includes what may be the only joke that the dour hero ever told - "I hear that Amelia Earhart made a good landing - - once."  Whether she had more wrecks than the average 1930s pilot is a difficult question to answer.  The average pilot probably wouldn't get the chance to have that many accidents because they wouldn't be able to afford to keep flying.

****************************************************************
From Jerry Hamilton

Some minor comments based on Oakland Tribune news accounts:

- AE arrived in Oakland March 10 for the around the world first attempt. The 3/11 Trib says, "Late yesterday the big twin-motored Lockheed Electra appeared out of a leaden sky east of the airport, circled the field once with but a hint of its tremendous speed and then settled to a perfect landing." Question is, who was flying? Paper further reports that, "With her on her trip from Burbank were her husband George Palmer Putnam, Bo McKnelly a mechanic, and C. D. Remmlein a representative of the Bendix Company, manufacturers of the radio range finding equipment..."

- On March 11 she took an hour IFR check ride (the paper said she had not previously passed one) with R. D. Bedinger, Bureau Of Air Commerce inspector. It further said that new Dept. Commerce regs required all pilots on ocean flights to be "blind" flying qualified. ( Between blind flying and dead reckoning I guess they had it made)

- On the May 20 test hop to Oakland before the second attempt, the paper reports that AE arrived late in the day, refueled, and returned to Burbank. It says she was accompanied by Mantz and no mention was made of Noonan, Putnam, or Mckneely being on the flight. However, the paper did say Putnam "...who was here on the last take off will not be present to see Miss Earhart hop again over the Pacific. He was forced to go to New York on business." Sounds like GP had already gone East by then.

blue skies, -jerry

****************************************************************

From Ric

Here's what happened:

Tuesday, 5/19/37
Repairs are completed and NR16020 gets inspected and signed off at Lockheed Burbank.

Wednesday, 5/20/37
AE and Mantz make a "test hop" to Oakland and pick up the specially stamped envelopes to be carried on the world flight.  They return home to Burbank. That evening, Mantz leaves for St. Louis to participate in an aerobatic competition.  He has no idea that the flight from Oakland was the start of the second world flight attempt.

Thursday, 5/21/37
AE and Noonan load up the Electra (we have photos) and, with McKneely and GP, take off for Tucson.  Mantz was furious when he later learned that AE was in Miami announcing that the world flight had already begun.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:34:09 EST
From:         Duncan
Subject:      Fiji Bone Search

This  is  from  today's  "The  Australian"  newspaper  here in Sydney.  Why weren't we told? :-)

Duncan

***** START QUOTATION

Earhart search
From AP

16feb99

A HUNT is about to begin in musty corners of Fiji's medical department buildings for the bones of missing US aviator Amelia Earhart.

The government has authorised a search of storerooms in the Fiji Medical School and Suva's central hospital for her remains, which might have been found in 1940, packed in boxes and forgotten. Earhart vanished in 1937 while attempting a round-the-world record.

***** END QUOTATION
****************************************************************

From Ric

I'm almost as surprised as you are.  We've been corresponding with the museum in Fiji and had, with their cooperation, worked up a little press release about the bones.  None of us expected a big media response, much less an all-out search on our behalf.  This is great.  Let's hope something turns up.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:03:34 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

Dave Bush wrote:

> Then why do we say something or someone is "dead on" or its
> "dead ahead" or "dead right?"  Word and phrase origins are tons
> of fun and studying it helps me get a load off my mind.

OK, since we have another etymologist here, I'll write what I have found in my researches.

First, I was wrong. It is important to note that the term actually is "dead reckoning" after all, or more properly, "deade reckoning". Therefore, I apologize to those erudiate and sympathetic etymologists among the crowd here and confirm that the source that I read long ago that quotes it as being "ded reckoning" and not "dead" was incorrect.

So, to complete the picture, into maritime history....

The term is actually first recorded as "deade reckoning" and it dates from around the year 1580 where it was first quoted into the tome, "A regiment for the sea." There is no definition and it would appear that the term is written as if it is generally to be understood by those familiar with navigation and the sea.

So, in my opinion, this just about puts the wraps on this one and we can get back on topic and see if somewhere, under one of these rocks, Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan will actually be found.

Thomas Van Hare
*****************************************************************
From Rick Nigh

And here I was afraid I would only be a lurker on the forum.  However you have strayed into my area of expertise.  As a ten year Navy veteran Quartermaster (SS), with one circumnavigation under my belt, may I throw in my two cents worth.  Ric, you said you wanted documentation for the derivation of the term Dead Reckoning.

Duttons Navigation and Piloting,  13th ed, pp.193.

"The term is derived from deduced or ded. reckoning, the process by which a ship's position was deduced or computed trigonometrically, in relation to a known point of departure."

The original method of Ded reckoning was labor and time intensive, hardly the thing you'd want to do while circling, (drifting?).

Rick Nigh

****************************************************************
From Ric

This is really neat (neate?).  It looks like somebody invented a new derivation for the term and lots of official sources bought into it.  If it was deade reckoning in 1580 then dead reckoning it is.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:06:14 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      AE Age

I was going through the 8th edition draft and was struck be Amelia's birth date. I wonder if she made it to forty.

blue skies, -jerry

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Betcha she did, but not much more.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:40:09 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Gallagher's plaque

Thinking of the tools and effort required to mount the plaque on the existing concrete monument with anchor-bolts or some such...

One might think of a free-standing arrangement of some kind to be placed right next to the monument.  The plaque has a support structure of some sort and you set it in the ground.  You need only a shovel and a bag, or two, of "sacrete."  Maybe that crab has already done some of the digging for you.

Re:  The plaque itself...  How much text is there?

****************************************************************

From Ric

My concern about any replacement plaque is that Niku is a really remote place that is visited from time to time by god-knows-who.  There is nothing to stop anyone from walking off with anything that looks like an interesting souvenir.

The original text was:
********************************
In affectionate memory of
GERALD BERNHARD GALLAGHER, M.A.
Officer in Charge of the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme
who died on Gardner Island, where he would have wished to die, on the
27th September, 1941, aged 29 years.
--
His selfless devotion to duty and unsparing work on behalf of
the natives of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands
were an inspiration to all who knew him, and to his labours is largely due
the successful colonization of the
PHOENIX ISLANDS

**************************************
It is tempting to add,
"Nothing beside remains. ..."

(The Earhart Forum Literacy Prize goes to the first subscriber who can complete that phrase.)

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:43:11 EST
From:         Andrew McKenna
Subject:      Dead/deade/ded

Tom King wrote:

> You guys realize, I presume, that "dead" (or "ded") reckoning has been around
> for a lot longer than airplanes have.  It's no wonder if the USAF and other
> winged types use the "dead" form; it had already become ingrained in the
> language of navigation long before there was a USAF, or a US, for that matter.

The Oxford English Dictionary makes no mention of Deductive or deduced reckoning, but does make mention of Dead Reckoning being a nautical term that has been in use at least as far back as 1868.

As soon as I find my magnifying glass I may be able to find out more, but I cannot read the rest of the tiny print!!!!

A McKenna 1045

****************************************************************

From Ric

I think we've now beaten this one to deathe.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:11:41 EST
From:         Suzanne
Subject:      Re: Fiji Bone Search

I saw this brief article in today's 2/17 San Jose Mercury News.

Headline "Do boxes contain Earhart's Bones?"

"A hunt is about to begin in musty corners of Fiji's medical department buildings for the bones of missing American aviator Amelia Earhart.

The government on Tuesday said it had authorized a search of storerooms in the Fiji Medical School and Suva's central hospital for remains of the pioneer aviator that might haven been found in 1940 but were packed in boxes and forgotten.

Earhart vanished in 1937 while attempting to become the first woman to fly around the world. Most authorities believe that she and her navigator Fred Noonan, lost their bearings, ran out of fuel and crashed into the Pacific while flying between Papua New Guinea and Hawaii.

Some experts think the two were captures by the Japanese as spies and executed."

From Mercury News wire services

Ric, too bad the service failed to mention those experts who are the cause of the search for her bones in Fiji and their (our) theory.

LTM,
Suzanne T. #2184

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Ah well, we're not looking for glory, we're looking for bones.

****************************************************************

From Dennis McGee

Deep down I don't share your enthusiasm about letting "the government" search the Fife Medical School and Suva Central Hospital storerooms for AE's bones.

Governments have longer institutional memories than their human servants, and there are often reputations at stake in efforts such as TIGHAR's.  Searching for and finding the truth is not often in the best interests of everyone, especially if the reputation of a long-dead friend, comrade, lover, subordinate, or whatever may be damaged.  The whole AE/FN flight/disappearance/search is shot through with (in hindsight, of course) tons of self-serving, butt-protecting ineptitude and incompetence that there still may be people "out there" (Someone please stop me before I sound like Sactodave . . .!) that feel a need to protect someone.

Can't TIGHAR offer to send a representative -- a local member? an Aussie member?  --  to accompany the government search?

Just because I work for a government doesn't mean I always trust it.
******************************************************************

From Ric

The dangers you mention always exist. Fortunately, we have an excellent relationship with the Fiji Museum and, at least for this initial stage of the search, they are our on-site representatives.  If this blast of publicity doesn't turn up something, we do plan to send a team to Fiji later this spring.

=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:16:17 EST
From:         John Warren
Subject:      Final flight and bones

-Hello, just joined the mailing list after receiving e-mail news report about the search for Earharts bones in Fiji. At the time of the last flight we, small boy and my parents lived in Samarang, Java, where dad was HBM Vice Consul, something to do with intelligence and a director of the largest trading companies in the Far East. Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan stopped over and had dinner with my parents. I had dinner with my babu (nurse). In a letter to my grandmother in BC my mother wrote " after dinner Maurice asked me to keep the servants away and had a long discussion with Miss Earhart and Mr. Noonan. She is very nice and it was a thrill meeting them. Maurice would not say what they talked about." As he later met with a 'gentleman from England and the head of the Australian navy to discuss the probable timetable of the Japanese attempt to take the oilfields in the Netherland East Indies and probable attack on Pearl Harbour. I have read that they never landed in Java.

John Warren
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:20:46 EST
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Fiji bone search

The current research in Fiji was described by someone from the Fiji Museum in an interview on Radio Australia's "Pacific Beat" programme - I heard it this morning (17th Feb) here in the UK (0710 UT) and it will have gone out across the Pacific in two or three editions. A brief news item from Radio Australia was also quoted by BBC TV"s "Ceefax" teletext service yesterday.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:23:01 EST
From:         Terri
Subject:      Re: Fiji bone search

I think its sort of funny that all of a sudden the government gets involved in the seach for the bones - are they trying to steal your thunder? you announced awhile ago you were planning the next expedition to search for /about these bones.

Terri

************************

We've been working with the medical school and government people there for months to achieve their involvement, and the press release they put out was with our cooperation and enthusiastic support..... they really are trying to help.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:27:46 EST
From:         Chuck Boyle
Subject:      Re: Fiji bone search

A very similar article, "Earhart search moves to Fiji storage rooms", was in the Wilmington, DE Morning News Journal this morning February 17, 1999 on page two, section A.

Lee (Chuck) Boyle   2060

*************************

Ooooops..... that's our local paper....which we never read. We get the Philadelphia Inquirer, and it wasn't in that.

The News Journal always puts in anything about us, they are pretty good guys.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:32:22 EST
From:         Dick Evans
Subject:      Re: Chronometers

Did I not read someplace that Noonan sat at a table in the back part of the plane. That he and Earhart had to enter thru different openings.  And that their normal way of communicating over all the noise was thru some sort of Rube Goldberg arrangement using a fishing rod. Or was I drinking out of the wrong bottle.

Dick Evans

******************

Yes, you did read that. It wasn't you drinking out of the wrong bottle, it's the people who wrote that stuff.

Apparently the fishing rod thingy did exist, but was a legacy from when Manning was going to be doing the navigating, as was the table. All indications from film, photo, and Earhart's writings are that Noonan rode up front, and got in and out of the plane through the cockpit hatch, just like AE did.

Pat
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:34:02 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

Ric wrote:

>Amelia's atrocious landings were, apparently, legendary.  Scott Berg's new
>(and excellent) biography of Lindbergh includes what may be the only joke that
>the dour hero ever told - "I hear that Amelia Earhart made a good landing - -
>once."

I hate to bring up the old bromide here, but you know what they say... Any landing you walk away from is a good one... Never having been a pilot, though, it is easy for me to say that.

Tom #2179
********************

Actually, pilots say that too...............

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:15:26 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Dinner in Java

I'd like to comment on John Warren's interesting posting about his parents' dinner with Amelia.

This had to have occurred during the time the aircraft was at either Bandoeng or Surabaya.  AE and FN arrived at Bandoeng from Singapore on Monday, June 21. After some maintenance work on the airplane they left for Surabaya on Thursday, the 24th, but because the problems were not all resolved they returned to Bandoeng the next day (Friday, the 25th) and then went to Surabaya again on the 26th, from whence they continued on to Koepang on the 27th, Darwin on the 28th, and Lae on the 29th.

As for a later meeting her parents had with "gentleman from England and the head of the Australian navy to discuss the probable timetable of the Japanese attempt to take the oilfields in the Netherland East Indies and probable attack on Pearl Harbour. " I have a hard time believing that such a conversation took place as early as 1937.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:18:53 EST
From:         Hugh Graham
Subject:      Re: Fiji Bone Search

The Toronto Globe & Mail of Feb 17/99 had a quarter page picture of Amelia and the story of the bone search and gave TIGHAR credits. It also told of Amelia's nursing of WW1 veterans in a Toronto hospital at the height of the flu epidemic in 1919.  Very gutsy.

This is an international newspaper with bureaus all over the world and is often compared to the NY Times.   LTM, HAG.

****************************************************************

From Ric

But probably not by the New York Times.

The Globe and Mail piece would have been better if the reporter had managed to connect with me before his deadline.  He tried, but I was out.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:20:38 EST
From:         Frank Comito
Subject:      Re: Fiji bone search

There was also a story on this topic on the Discovery Channel Online web page on 2/16 in which Ric and Tighar were mentioned.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:26:59 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Fwd: Gallagher's plaque

I helped place a stone monument on the old Oregon Trail not long ago.  The monument had a bronze plaque attached.  The Monument maker used a special epoxy to attach the bronze to the stone.  The monument was where it could be vandalized and I asked if some one might not simply remove the plaque from the stone.  I was told that it was next to impossible to get the plaque free from the stone with the epoxy that was used.  You might contact a local monument maker and ask about the epoxy that is used for this type of application.  There were no bolts holding the plaque to the stone, just epoxy.

Dick Pingrey 0908C

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Hmmm.  Epoxy huh?  We'll have to look into that.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:03:41 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

Everyone goes through a slump period in their flying careers. One week, your kissing the runway soft as silk, the next, your arrivals are registering on the Richter Scale. It's not without some irony that Mr. Lindberg had his share of firm touchdowns, and just plain catastrophic accidents, too! (Including a mid-air collision) "But for the grace of God goeth I" should be the silent creed of all aviators.

****************************************************************

From Ric

Baloney.  I spent 12 years as an aviation underwriter/risk manager/accident investigator.  There is such a thing as a good pilot and there is such a thing as a bad pilot.  Earhart was someplace between the two extremes but she was closer to the bad end than the good end.  And yes, Lindbergh (that's Lindbergh, not Lindberg) had a hairy start to his career, I am aware of no accident he was involved in from 1927 onward.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:56:05 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Fiji Bone Search

I want to clear any confusion there may be about what is happening in Fiji.

On February 9 the Fiji Museum put out a press release which was a cooperative effort by me, Tom King and the staff at the museum.  Local response in Fiji was immediate and intense, resulting in an Associated Press wire story (reproduced below) by the AP rep in Fiji without input from here.  This is the story that was picked up by various American and British media, complete with the usual inaccuracies.
***************************************************************
Tuesday February 16 12:48 PM ET
Search Resumes for Earhart Bones


By ROBERT KEITH-REID Associated Press Writer

SUVA, Fiji (AP) - A hunt is about to begin in musty corners of Fiji's medical department buildings for the bones of missing American aviator Amelia Earhart.

The government on Tuesday said it had authorized a search of storerooms in the Fiji Medical School and Suva's central hospital for remains of the pioneer aviator that might have been found in 1940 but were packed in boxes and forgotten.

Earhart vanished in 1937 while attempting to become the first woman to fly around the world. Most authorities believe she and her navigator, Fred Noonan, lost their bearings, ran out of fuel and crashed into the Pacific while flying between Papua New Guinea and Hawaii.

Some experts think the two were captured by the Japanese as spies and executed.

The U.S. Navy conducted an elaborate search and picked up signals suggesting Earhart's plane went down somewhere in the region of the Gilbert Islands in the central Pacific.

In 1940, a Fiji naval officer, Stanley Brown, was sent on a reconnaissance mission to uninhabited Nikumaroro, a desolate Gilbert atoll about 1,000 miles north of Suva, and reported accounts of finding the bones of two people of possible European origin.

The bones were sent to British headquarters in Tarawa, where a physician concluded they belonged to a man. The bones were ordered crated for storage, but the crate vanished.

Richard Gillespie, director of the International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, a nonprofit organization that has searched for evidence of Earhart reported in December.

Other experts who examined the records said the skeleton was that of a white female of northern European background, about 5 feet 7 inches tall.

The Fiji Museum said there are records of two wooden boxes arriving in about 1940 and possibly containing the bones of the missing fliers.

The aircraft recovery group has made several expeditions to Nikumaroro in the past five years and recovered fragments of metal sheeting. Tests indicated the metal could have been from the aircraft flown by Earhart.
****************************************************************

The bit about Stan Brown is interesting and was not part of our press release. We met Mr. Brown in Fiji in 1989.  He told us at that time that he had been a seaman aboard the HMFS "Viti", the ship that returned the ailing Gerald Gallagher to Gardner Island in September 1941.  Mr. Brown said that he had "held the lantern over Gallagher as Dr. Macpherson operated on him" in an unsuccessful attempt to save the young man's life.  He said nothing about bones.  We'll be interested to learn more about his new recollections. 

At this point we're not sure just how much searching is actually going on in Fiji or by whom, but we do know that we have the interest and cooperation of
the government and that the museum staff is monitoring the activity there. Should anything turn up, the first priority will be to secure it and notify us.

Let's keep our fingers crossed.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:58:21 EST
From:         Dan Postellon
Subject:      Re: Gallagher's plaque

I've heard of the epoxy trick too.  People are now stealing art and grave markers from tombs in New Orleans, among other places.  I would use the rule that anything that can be stolen, will be stolen (even on Nikumaroro).  One way to avoid theft is to make a monument that is heavy (or otherwise difficult to move) and of low intrinsic value.  This is one of the reasons that tombstones are big and made of low value materials like stone.  I would bolt the plaque in, and use the epoxy too, maybe on the bolt threads.  If someone got the bolts out and still couldn't get the plaque off, maybe they would give up.       Dan  Tighar 2263
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 18 Feb 1999 14:29:55 EST
From:         
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

Bravo, Ric! Well said.

Roberta Woods #2218

Dave Kelly wrote:

> Everyone goes through a slump period in their flying careers. One week,
> your kissing the runway soft as silk, the next, your arrivals are
> registering on the Richter Scale. It's not without some irony that Mr.
> Lindberg had his share of firm touchdowns, and just plain catastrophic
> accidents, too! (Including a mid-air collision) "But for the grace of
> God goeth I" should be the silent creed of all aviators.
>
> ****************************************************************
>
> From Ric
>
> Baloney.  I spent 12 years as an aviation underwriter/risk manager/accident
> investigator.  There is such a thing as a good pilot and there is such a thing
> as a bad pilot.  Earhart was someplace between the two extremes but she was
> closer to the bad end than the good end.  And yes, Lindbergh (that's
> Lindbergh, not Lindberg) had a hairy start to his career, I am aware of no
> accident he was involved in from 1927 onward.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:08:24 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Flight English 101

So, to complete the picture, into maritime history....

1) Did they have trigonometry in 1580?

2) You said in another communique that you thought this topic was dead (deade) - Are you trying to imply that "Dead (ded) reckoning" is a dead horse?

Love to manure,
Dave Bush
#2200
************************

1) Yes. Spherical trigonometry was developed in ancient Greece, and plane trig was developed in the 15th century in Europe in response to navigational needs.

2) Also yes.......

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:09:56 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: Gallagher's Plaque

Is there any reason we can't put a curse on the person who might steal the
plaque?

******************

None that I know of, and frankly I think it's a good idea. We got any good curse-casters out there?

P
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:10:03 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Earhart's Performance

>I hate to bring up the old bromide here, but you know what they say...
>Any landing you walk away from is a good one...
>Never having been a pilot, though, it is easy for me to say that.
>
>Tom #2179
>********************
>
>Actually, pilots say that too...............
>
>P

We like to say any landing that we walk away from and doesn't have any sparks is a good one.

Love to mattresses,
Dave Bush
#2200
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:22:11 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

Well, I normally pride myself on good landings, but there is one airport, now closed, that I could never seem to make a decent landing on unless the wind was directly down the runway.  The runway was narrow and had trees down both sides causing some pretty rough air when the wind was more than 10 knots from either side.  But some people are not as concerned about pretty landings as they are about just getting it on the ground safely.  And how many times did Lindbergh see Amelia land in person?  Again, I want to see first hand accounts, not anecdote, or else we'll have Fred drinking while Amelia makes bad landings. Do we have any extemporaneous accounts by actual onlookers documenting Amelia's poor performance?  Or are we just passing along more gossip?

Love to mechanics,
Dave Bush
#2200

****************************************************************

From Ric

Several of Amelia's landings were caught on newsreel film.  I've just reviewed three - one in the Pitcairn autogiro, one in her last Vega, and one in NR16020.  The autogiro landing is exciting and clearly a screw up.  Both the Vega and Electra landings are what you'd call okay but not great.  In the Vega, she drops it in and bounces.  In the Electra she tries for a three-point but lands on the mains, the tailwheel coming down eventually.

*****************************************************************

From Hugh Graham

>  There is such a thing as a good pilot and there is such a thing
>  as a bad pilot.

And then there is Bob Hoover, eh.   LTM, HAG 2201.
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Yes, and there is such a thing as a gifted pilot.  Hoover certainly qualified for that category.

****************************************************************
From Dave Kelly

Lindberg suffered no accidents after the TransAtlantic flight, but he did get embarrassingly off course on a trip to Mexico City, and arrived much later than expected. Flying magazine published an article years ago on landing slumps. I wouldn't classify the subject as "baloney" Pilots, golfers, and glass blowers all get into a bad rut occassionally.

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Like consistently misspelling Lindbergh?

******************************************************************
From Herman De Wulf 

He is known to bail out when flying in fog, didn't he ?

*****************************************************************
   From Ric

On September 16 and on November 3, 1926 while flying airmail Lindbergh abandoned the aircraft (a DH-4 in each case) when unforecast weather made it impossible to land.

*****************************************************************
From GRWDOG

Bobby Jones was noted for his explosive temperament in his younger years but that does not distract from his place as one of the greatest golfers to ever play the game. Unless you are a pilot yourself... How can you address this issue?

******************************************************************
From Ric

What on Earth does Bobby Jones temper have to do with anything?  We're talking about safety records, not personalities.  Many great pilots had, and have, regrettable personalities.

As for my own flying experience, we just went through that a couple of weeks ago.  In brief, I hold Commercial/Instrument/Multi and have something over 4,000 hours PIC.  I also made my living for 12 years assessing this very issue for the aviation insurance industry.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:35:53 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Website improvements

General Notice -

We've just completed a rather extensive overhaul of the Earhart Project and TIGHAR Tracks portions of the TIGHAR website at www.tighar.org.  If we've succeeded in our efforts, you'll now find it much easier to find information and articles on aspects of the Earhart puzzle which interest you.

We've also added maps and photos of Nikumaroro and a few pics of AE, Fred and the airplane.

Enjoy.

Love to mother,

Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:36:06 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Curse for Gallagher's plaque

What good is a curse if there isn't a story attached to it? Okay, so it's not "War and Peace," but then "War and Peace" is a Russian curse, not Polynesian.

Curse of the Gallagher Plaque

This plaque replaces a similar commemorative plate installed at this site in 19xx.  When installed the 19xx plate was blessed by a Polynesian Spiritual Leader who also invoked a curse asking the ancient demons of Polynesia to punish any person that would disturb this site. Translated, the curse read:

        May you and your existing spawn be forever childless;
        Your eyes will turn to stone and your heart to sand.
        Prosperity will forever rest beyond the horizon;
        And creatures of the sea will flee your nets.

        The village of your elders will perish in a fire of righteousness;
        And its chief will bow before all to beg for forgiveness.
        You have disgraced your tribe and they will cast you out.
        This is the future for he that violates this blessed place.

        The original plaque was removed by anonymous thieves c.19xx, and ended up in the hands of a multi-millionaire scrap metal dealer in Washington, DC, who melted it down and sold the metals for about $45. The unsuspecting merchant brought upon himself a life of misery and woe.

None of the man's four sons or three daughters has been able to produce a grandchild for him, and he developed glaucoma and cancer of the eyes in the 1980s.  Blind and embittered over his condition, his business failed and he was forced to live in an abandoned car and eat at the local soup kitchen.  During this time his parents, who lived in California, lost their home in the Great Fires of 1996, and he has seen his Mayor recently bow before the public in abject humiliation and removed from office.  The ultimate disgrace was when his bothers and sisters, tired of his constant whining, disowned him thus forcing him to rely on welfare and handouts for survival.

The Spiritual Leader's curse came true for this Washington junk dealer; dare anyone tempt the demons of Polynesia?

****************************************************************

From Ric

You need a hobby.

=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:39:14 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

Ric wrote:

> On September 16 and on November 3, 1926 while flying airmail
> Lindbergh abandoned the aircraft (a DH-4 in each case) when
> unforecast weather made it impossible to land.

On the night of September 16th, 1926, running low on fuel, he descended through the fog toward the ground. When he was quite low, he fired off his one and only flare to illuminate the ground. Instead of a suitable landing spot, he saw houses. He was directly over town (he did not set fire to anyone's house with the flare).

Pulling up back into the mists, he decided to climb above the clouds. A few minutes later, his engine sputtered and quit -- there wasn't enough gas in the tank to feed the engine while the plane was nose high (the gas had sloshed back away from the fuel line).

The options were few -- he could either deadstick it through the fog into the ground and probably be injured (or killed) or he could jump. He elected to jump, pulling his ripcord right away.

As he descended, swaying in the chute, he suddenly heard the engine restart on his airplane. Without a pilot, the change in balance had brought the plane to nose over, causing the little remaining gas in the tank to enter the engine. The airspeed was enough to turn the prop and, pop, it caught.

As his eyes strained through the fog, he heard it circling slowly around. Slowly the volume grew and he knew it was coming back his way. Then suddenly it soared into view, barely missing him as he dangled helplessly in the chute before disappearing back into the cloud heading away and around again.

Lindbergh tried everything to dump air out of the chute and steer it away as he listened to it again circling back toward him. The second pass was also close and right on the altitude yet again. The quirky fates must have decided to match their rates of descent.

Finally, he hit the ground after four close calls with his De Havilland 4 circling back again and again. The plane struck nearby and in the morning Lindbergh retrieved the mail and took it to a nearby post office for ground delivery.

A month later, he suffered another such crash, though this time he remembered to turn off the fuel flow to the engine before jumping. It wasn't long thereafter that he quit flying the mail and started preparations for his flight to Paris. It wasn't long before the first press person asked him if he thought that such a flight was risky. You have to wonder if after flying the mail this question must have seemed humorous to him.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:56:50 EST
From:         Jerry Hamilton
Subject:      AE Pilot Skills

Not that I'm sure it matters much (after all she got most of the way around the world without boring a hole in the ground), but in the interest of historical documentation, here is what Clarence "Kelly" Johnson has to say. And he flew with her in the right seat.

"Also, it has been implied that Amelia may have been a poor pilot. She was a good one when I knew her. She was very sensible, very studious, and paid attention to what she was told. In person, Amelia was kind, gentle, quiet in speech and manner. She was the "Lady Lindy" she was called. I have always had a great admiration for Amelia Earhart as a lady and as a pilot." (from, "More than my share of it all")

Blue skies, -jerry
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 20 Feb 1999 14:00:22 EST
From:         Jim Tweedle
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

A good landing is one which one can walk away from.

A great landing is one in which the aircraft can actually be used again.

Jim
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 20 Feb 1999 14:03:26 EST
From:         Jack
Subject:      Re: Website improvements

Just reviewed the updated Web Site and the photo's are great. The Pix of Niku is beautiful. The best landing strip appears to be along the north end where the Norwich is. I was unable to bring up the Jungle photo.

****************************************************************

From Ric

Actually, the smoothest area on the reef flat is down off Aukaraime district on the south side, but you can't tell that from the photo.

Anybody else having trouble viewing the photos?
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 20 Feb 1999 14:06:57 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

>From Ric

>Yes, and there is such a thing as a gifted pilot.  Hoover certainly qualified
>for that category.

Gifted is not the word. To see Bob Hoover perform at an airshow is a religious experience. After the first few minutes your camera hangs from its strap and you stand there with your mouth open, dumbstruck. There is no superlative in the English language that can adequately describe what that man can do with an airplane.

Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Fair warning.  This thread is now terminally off-topic.  No more postings about great piloting ability (unless they're references to mine).
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 21 Feb 1999 09:26:30 EST
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      AE accidents

I would like to offer a comment on AE being a bad pilot. All aircraft were taildraggers in her days. Nosewheels only came along around 1939. Taildraggers have their center of gravity behind the main landing gear and are therefore harder to control on the ground than today's planes with nosewheel steering. Taxiing was the difficult part of the flying, especially in crosswind. It took experience because one steered the plane like a boat, using the rudder. If that didn't help one could apply differential braking. That is if you had any brakes. Brakes too only came with the Thirties. Taxiing accidents were common.Taking off airplanes pick up speed rapidly. As the tail raises the rudder becomes increasingly active with increasing speed. After landing, when the tail settles, the rudder becomes less active as speed drops. With taildraggers the trick was (and is) always to land into the wind. But with today's surfaced runways that is rather unusual because the wind doesn't care about your runway. Therefore one has to be a good pilot not to bend anything when landing a taildragger in a crosswind. That, I believe, might have been AE's problem a number of times. Rolling over a bumpy field might send an aircraft one way or the other and if one didn't have immediate control, e.g. through differential braking, one could bend the plane if it tilted and the wing hit the ground. One more detail : rudders also used to be smaller than on today's planes. I do not pretend to be a good pilot but I can say that I learned flying in a taildragger and I have never regretted it. I never bent an airplane either. The secret is that you don't fly a taildragger if the wind component exceeds the plane's limits. If it does, get a nosewheeler. In those days however they had no choice. If they did fly occasionally an airplane got bent. Poor rich AE was fortunate in having the money to keep buying planes. How much did she pay for the Lockheed 10E by the way ?
****************************************************************

From Ric

Around $80,000.  The money was donated to a special aeronautical research fund at Purdue University by wealthy alumni.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 21 Feb 1999 09:37:43 EST
From:         Cam Warren
Subject:      Re: AE Pilot Skills

> "Also, it has been implied that Amelia may have been a poor pilot. She was
> a good one when I knew her. She was very sensible, very studious, and paid
> attention to what she was told. In person, Amelia was kind, gentle, quiet
> in speech and manner. She was the "Lady Lindy" she was called. I have
> always had a great admiration for Amelia Earhart as a lady and as a pilot."
> (from, "More than my share of it all")

To which Ric will reply "but that's only anecdotal evidence and therefore meaningless"

Cam Warren

***************************************************************

From Ric

The record speaks for itself.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 21 Feb 1999 09:53:09 EST
From:         Dick Pingrey
Subject:      Landings

I think it goes any landing you can taxi off the runway is a good landing and any landing that you can walk away from is a successful landing. Additionally, you can tell if the landing is a gear up landing by the amount of power required to taxi to the ramp.  I have only needed extra power to get to the ramp one time.  Why is it that every one you ever knew shows up to watch on a day like that.

Dick Pingrey 0908C

*****************************************************************

From Ric

It seems like there is a saying for everything in aviation (or maybe there's a saying for everything - period).

For gear-up landings it's:

There are only two kinds of pilots.  Thems that have, and thems that are gonna.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 21 Feb 1999 11:35:40 EST
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Just a thought

I'm new to the forum, so apologies if this has already been dissected at length over the years.It struck me while trying to get up to speed via the web site that if AE and FN did reach Nikumaroro and died there - and the rigour of TIGHAR's approach to the evidence convinces me they did - they may well have reached a point of realization that they weren't likely to be rescued and that,to put it bluntly, the most anyone would ever find would be bones, and that maybe not for very many years. Particularly so if (horrible thought) they starved and one died before the other.

In these circumstances, the natural instinct would be to leave some written evidence, say carved on a piece of aluminium. Yet no such evidence was found even as early as 1940, when Gerald Gallagher suspected he knew whose remains had been found - but allowances must be made for him being restricted to the forensic techniques available at that time, in that place and bearing in mind his other duties. This suggests to me that no one since him has looked in precisely the right place,  that "his" camp fire site was not the one examined by subsequent expeditions, and that modern techniques applied to the right bivouac site when found might even now yield evidence of AE and FN left deliberately by them.

I await a stern rebuke for wild theorizing and/or deficient logic. Keep up the etc etc

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Jeez, are we that bad?  Don't be put off by all the blood and stray body parts laying around in this arena.  It's really a very friendly place.  It's purely coincidence that our acronym is pronounced "tiger."

Yes, we've speculated some (quite a bit really) about the issues you raise, but it's certainly worth going over it again.  Let's review what facts we have. In September 1940, Gallagher found what appeared to be a campsite.  There were

- the partial skeleton of a person who was probably female
- pieces of shoe sole judged to be from both a woman's shoe and a man's shoe
- a sextant box
- at least two small corks with brass chains attached
- the remains of a fire
- the remains of dead birds and a turtle

Earlier that year, probably April, laborers had found a skull and a Benedictine body near the same location.  At some point - we don't know when - somebody found what may have been part of the sextant (inverting eyepiece?) but it was allegedly thrown away by the finder.

In 1991 we found a heel and pieces of an American woman's shoe sole, and the heel from a different (possibly man's) shoe in the same general part of the island where tradition held that the bones had been found.  The woman's shoe dates from the mid-1930s and appears to be the same style and size as was worn by Earhart on her final flight.  The location generally fits Gallagher's description of the campsite, but so do a couple of other places on the island.

In 1997 we found the remains of a campfire in the same spot where the shoe parts had been found in 1991.  However, analysis of a fragment of a paper label found in the charcoal dates the fire to not earlier than the 1970s.

In October 1937, two British colonial officers came upon "signs of previous habitation" in this same general area.  Just what they saw is hard to ascertain, although both men are still living.  One recalls that "it looked like someone had bivouacked for the night" while the other remembers "a low mound" taken to be debris from 19th century coconut planters.  Whatever they saw, it clearly did not include human remains.

There is also an anecdotal account of another skeleton being found by the early colonists which was thought to be associated with the shipwreck on the northwest end of the island.

So what sort of speculative scenario might explain all of the available facts? There may be many, but here's my stab at it.

A man and a woman are marooned on the island by some means that does not leave a ship or lifeboat on the beach.  They survive long enough to move inland and establish at least a rudimentary campsite and kill some birds and a turtle. Conditions are too harsh and both eventually die, but logically, one dies before the other.  Because it seems likely that the survivor would at least try to bury the one who died first, and because the body found at the campsite was probably the female, we might conclude that the man died first.  We might also speculate that the low mound seen in October 1937 was the man's grave or that the bones found later near the shipwreck were the man's.

That one or the other would leave some written record doesn't seem outlandish. The question would be the durability of the medium upon which the message was written  Paper would go away very quickly in that environment unless protected in a sunproof, waterproof, ratproof, bugproof container of some kind.

It may be that the shoe parts found by TIGHAR in 1991 are from the same pair that Gallagher found in 1940 (one shoe from each pair being found by Irish and the other two shoes being found by us) but it is also clear that the 1970s campfire we found was not the same one found by Gallagher.  In any event, it seems obvious that the original site of Gallagher's discovery has not yet been identified. (For one thing, he didn't find the shoes that we found.)  This suggests that the shoes were scattered just as many of the bones were scattered.  Gallagher attributed this scattering, and the damage to the remaining bones, to coconut crabs.  However, recent research has shed some doubt on whether Birgus latro really does that sort of thing.  My personal suspicion is that dogs brought by the first settlers in 1939 found the site and did most of the damage before the place was discovered a year or more later.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 21 Feb 1999 11:50:26 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Curse for Gallagher's plaque

Dennis McGee wrote:

>>Curse of the Gallagher Plaque
>> ((..omitted..))
>
>From Ric
>
>You need a hobby.

Sounds to me like he's got one.

    - Bill #2229
*****************************************************************

From Ric

Don't we all.

Okay guys.  You asked for it.  The following is the real thing.  This is a translation of Nei Manganibuka's Chant as given to me two years ago by Risasi Finikaso on Funafuti.  Risasi was born on Nikumaroro and was officially declared by the village elders to be the honorary grandaughter of Nei Manganibuka, the island's guardian spirit.

To my knowledge it has never before been published.  I also have it in the original Gilbertese (Tungaru) but I ain't about to turn that loose into the world.

Blow strong winds
Rain fall
Lightning, lightning
Coming with thunder
Roaring her footsteps
Her traveling
From her abode in Niurabu
That is Nei Manganibuka
Stronger, stronger
Welcome to you lady
Over there, over there
There is your enemy.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 10:32:35 EST
From:         Bob Perry
Subject:      Post-crash radio contact

What is TIGHAR'S current conclusion on (a) the validity and (b) the content of AE's/FN's post-crash radio transmission?  One is struck by AE's awesome lack of skill in radio communications pre-crash (if I were in that desperate situation, I would not be hung up on hour and half hour, etc, contacts).  So post-crash, who knows?  Almost any words, if credible, (other than "changing frequencies" jibberish) would be very meaningful. Were I they, my first words would be that I am down on an unknown island, then state my/our condition, etc.

Bob
TIGHAR no. 2021
*****************************************************************

From Ric

The post-loss radio transmissions can not be considered to be conclusive evidence of anything because there is no way to tell for sure whether any of them was genuine.  That said, some of the alleged messages fit remarkably well with the theory that the aircraft was landed and survived intact for a time at Nikumaroro. If some of the messages were genuine it would also seem reasonable to assume that not all of the messages were heard and so it may well be that Earhart and/or Noonan was doing just as you suggest - sending whatever information was available to them which might aid the searchers.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 10:56:59 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Just a thought

(Note: For newcomers, Tom is the Senior Archaeologist for the Earhart Project.)

Concurring entirely with Ric's analysis, I think it's interesting to speculate about where someone would tuck something away if one were trying to leave a message for the future.  It's devilishly hard to get into someone else's brain on this kind of thing, though, and I have trouble thinking of anyplace on Niku where I'd feel I could stash something with a reasonable hope of its survival -- other than to bury it in the ground in something like a nice dry bottle. Which promptly opens up virtually the whole island as a potential hiding place.  But there's no use hiding something for someone to find, if you don't leave something to guide future discoverers to its location.  So one would expect a cairn or something, and there's no evidence of this unless you interpret the Maude/Bevington story of piles of sand or heaps of debris to be such.  Which could be, but if so, our searches haven't turned them up.  Which all leads, I guess, to a sort of shoulder-shrugging conclusion: "Good idea, but what can we do with it?"

Tom King
***************************************************************
From AK315

Yippeee... I was wondering if anyone ever goes back and explains stuff for the newer folk that might have already been covered. I guess you just have to ask.
Thanks. Oh, and Ric... you're pretty funny!

****************************************************************
From Ric

It's how I compensate for my intellectual shortcomings.

****************************************************************
From Tom Robison

Ric wrote to Phil Tanner:

>Jeez, are we that bad?  Don't be put off by all the blood and stray body parts
>laying around in this arena.  It's really a very friendly place.  It's purely
>coincidence that our acronym is pronounced "tiger."

Phil, your message smacks of intuitive thought and considerable knowledge of the subject. How dare you address us hyenas in such a manner? You'll not last long on this list...

;>)

Tom #2179
*****************************************************************

From Ric

Back in your cage Robison!

****************************************************************

From Simon Ellwood

Phil Tanner wrote:-

>In these circumstances, the natural instinct would be to leave some
>written evidence, say carved on a piece of aluminum. Yet no such
>evidence was found even as early as 1940, when Gerald Gallagher suspected
>he knew whose remains had been found

Yes - I agree that if you're marooned on an island, getting weaker and know that if you're not rescued soon you'll die, then it's natural to want to leave a message of some sort. However, this assumes a long, drawn-out ordeal. If you've been surviving for some time reasonably well with hope of eventual rescue still good, but then you're suddenly afflicted with no foresight that your end is "imminent", then I think a message would be much less likely.

I can't help remembering the recent comments of one of the British visitors to the island at the time (Ric - was it Bevington ?) - to the effect that he couldn't understand how anyone could starve to death on Niku because of the abundance of coconuts trees etc.

In view of the above two points, I think I favor the poisonous fish scenario discussed of the forum some time ago. Apparently, in the waters of that part of the world there are fish which are edible at some times of the year, but poisonous at other times. Perhaps Amelia and Fred survived for sometime (maybe on a combination of coconuts, crabs and these fish), but then succumbed to the fish, which they had previously felt safe to eat.

Of course, this is speculation and we'll probably never know.

One interesting point for the anthropologists and people in the medical know :-  If we find the bones originally discovered by Gallagher, - just how much information about cause of death can be gleaned from them ?

****************************************************************

From Ric

Good question.  Being neither an anthropologist nor medically in the know, I would guess that poisoning that would kill as quickly as toxic fish wouldn't have time to show up in the bones.

*****************************************************************
From Don Neumann

It does seem strange that a woman who was such a prolific letter writer (to her mother & sister) & who was often found to express her innermost thoughts in poetry, did not leave some written evidence of her sojourn on Niku island, even a scratched message of some kind on a piece of aluminum from the plane (assuming any part of the plane was salvaged at that time).

Unfortunately, none of the physical evidence recovered to date provides any real clue as to the physical condition of the crew upon their arrival on the island, whether they were injured during the landing or just how long they were able to endure the rigors of the scorching heat or lack of water before expiring.

Whatever their circumstances were upon arrival, the first priority was to find some way of surviving their ordeal, not to sit down & memorialize their odyssey by scratching messages on pieces of salvage from the plane or coconut shells. 

The energy expended in pursuit of their survival efforts, undoubtedly left them too exhausted to even think about leaving any permanent messages to mark such efforts.

Don Neumann
***************************************************************

From Ric

On the other hand, there are plenty of examples of people in similar circumstances leaving behind diaries of their ordeal.  As Tom King says, the logical possibility of a written record doesn't affect our search in any way, but you can be sure that we'll be keeping an eye out.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:04:49 EST
From:         Bob Sherman
Subject:      Re: AE accidents

Herman De Wulf wrote:

***You forgot about the ailerons; the key to x-winds. Learning to fly a 'tail dragger' (the name did not even come into existance untill the tricycle gear) was no big deal.  Tens of thousands of us soloed a tail dragger in 8 hrs. & many of those went on to 2000 hp. t.d's with only 250 hrs. total time.  or on to 2 & 4 eng. t.d.'s  with the same 250 hrs. without accident.  We also learned to drive with three foot pedals & two levers (gas & spark) then transitioned to first the floor 3-speed, then the wheel shift lever...

Some planes are less forgiving than others and some folks accept challenges, and/or get themselves into planes or situations beyond their capability.  I think that is a more likely explanation   RC 941
****************************************************************

From Ric

This is getting pretty off-topic but I can't resist noting that when I learned to fly in 1965 airplanes with tailwheels were said to have "conventional gear."  The horrible term "taildragger" came along sometime later.

I didn't learn to drive with three foot pedals.  I learned to drive with two sets of reins and a foot lever for the brake (and I'm a mere child of 51).
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:09:23 EST
From:         Barbara Scolaro
Subject:      I'm new

I'm new to the list. My name is Barbara and my interest in Amelia Earhart came because my grandfather took photographs of her. Which I have copies of. And a letter from her husband, George Putnam. I also have a autographed photo of her. And started collecting her memobrilia *sp?*. I'm not sure when or where any of the pictures were taken. Maybe, Cleveland air races were part of it. My grandfather was press photographer for the Cleveland Press and his presspass was signed by Elliot Ness, circa 1932. I'm hoping to learn more about her on this list and meeting others who enjoy her to.

Barbara

***************************************************************

From Ric

That's memorabilia.  Elliot Ness?  Cool.  Could you describe some of the the photos of AE?  And what is the letter from GP about?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:18:18 EST
From:         Alan Faye
Subject:      Another approach? (Psychic search)

I am also new to this TIGHAR group.  So if this has already been covered, my apologies.

This is all from memory - - - off the top of my head.

REMOTE VIEWING  anyone heard of this?

From the book "Psychic Warrior"  (author? hmmmmm... forget) comes the story of the so-called "remote viewing" wherein one example was the ability of the psychic warrior to locate a downed (helicopter) air crew in Costa Rica. True story.  Happened a few years back.

The Russians have been using remote viewing for years and the American intelligence organizations have followed suit.  One gentleman, THE Psychic Warrior, had exceptional talent that was exploited.  A very painful, demanding process, where "targets" are selected. The remote viewer goes into a mental state that allows him to find information on the target, including location and events leading up to the target's situation.

If this makes any sense, I'll dig up the references.  There are a few retired remote viewers' names mentioned in the book.

Already looked at?  Let me know.

Aloha from Hawaii,  Alan
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Already looked at.  (I'm trying to be nice.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:26:54 EST
From:         Herman De Wulf
Subject:      TECHNOLOGY

I only recently joined the forum, so please forgive me if I am suggesting something obvious. But now you know where to look, has anyone thought of adding ground penetrating radar to the equipment of the 1999 expedition ? It might save an awful lot of time COMBING the limited number of sites earmarked for investigation. It would dramatically reduce the time needed to find the aircraft engine at Canton Island.

I am not an archaeologist nor a historian but reading about all the findings since 1937 on what was known to be a "deserted island", I wonder how much more proof is needed to establish that Amelia Earhart and Red Noonan did make a landing on Gardner Island in their Lockheed 10E in 1937 before they ran out of gas.

There were the Pan Am ground stations' QDRs overlappoing on the island, indicating the Lockheed's radio equipment must have been operational after the had supposedly run out of gas. There was the sightings of "recent human habitation" on the uninhabited Gardner island from the air by naval fliers who paid little attentio to it since they were actually looking for an airplane. There were the 1940 Galagher findings of a campsite, of partial skeletons, of shoe soles, of a sextant box, of corks, of a... Benedictine bottle and part of a sextant of a type know to be used by FN. And all that on a deserted island ! In 1991 convincing proof was found : a heel and pieces of an American woman's shoe sole and the heel of what probably was a man's shoe. It has been established that the woman's shoe dates from the mid-1930s and to be of the same style and size as was worn by Earhart on her final flight !

Whether all these artifacts were found at a site fitting the Gallaghar description is in my opinion rather irrelevant. Let nature do its work and even uninhabited islands will change in 60 years, let alone islands where a later settlement leaves its mark. If there is still something to be found, it will be buried.

So why not take GPR with you and find it. Even with it there will be enough digging left to be  done. I wish I could be there.

Herman

*****************************************************************

From Ric

We may well decide to try GPR as part of the Niku IIII search in 2000, but it's not as simple as it sounds.  To effectively use GPR you need to get a good even contact with the ground and that means clearing away the vegetation. Short of using napalm, that means a tremendous amount of work on Niku.

You wonder how much more proof is needed to establish that Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan did make a landing on Gardner Island  It will take airplane parts with serial numbers and/or bones that are DNA matched.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:57:00 EST
From:         Don Jordan
Subject:      Shoe parts.

I read every posting to this Forum, but rarely post a comment.  I would like to post one now and make a comment about the shoe parts found in 1940.  Perhaps it's insignificant, but I have wondered for a long time about the condition of the shoe parts found.  Of course you can't answer my questions on this subject because nobody knows.  I want to comment anyway.

When the Bismarck was found there was a debris field full of perfectly intact boots.  They had not rotted away or been eaten. Something about the tanning I think.  With the Titanic, there was a suit case, shoes and other leather products found in very good condition.

Many years after the Custer battle at the Little Big Horn there were boots found and photographed laying on top of the ground.  A little worse for wear maybe, but intact.  Some of them had been cut up to use the leather for other things, but the soles were left on the battlefield for many years.    During a dig in 1984, the complete sole of a boot was found intact at the site.

My question is, if shoes and boots can stand all that abuse, what in the world could reduce a shoe to nothing more than heel fragments in just three years on an uninhabited island?

*****************************************************************
From Ric

You raise a very valid point that has also bothered me.

First, let's be clear about what was said to have been found in 1940. Gallagher talks about finding part of a sole which he says appears to be about a size 10 and is from a woman's "stoutish walking shoe or heavy sandal." Later, a doctor in Fiji says that the shoe parts are from a man's shoe and a woman's shoe.  There is no mention of a heel, nor is there any mention of whether the sole parts were leather or rubber.

The sole parts and heels we found in 1991 were rubber.  We do have a good (although unintentional) test of how well leather survives on the island.  In 1991 I mistakenly left a pair of leather gloves on the ground, palms down,  at the shoe site.  In 1997 they looked perfectly intact until we picked them up. The undersides (the palms) had completely rotted, or been eaten, away in the six years they had lain there.

It does seem, therefore, that simple deterioration does not explain why the castaways' shoes were reduced to just parts of the sole.  Either the shoes had been there much, much longer than three years or some other factor came into play which greatly hastened their breakdown.  We do have evidence of another factor at the site in the absence of significant portions of the skeleton.

This brings me back to my dog theory.  I can just see ol' Duke thinking that shoes, complete with feet, make for great chewing.  No foot bones were found at the site.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 12:03:27 EST
From:         Kelly Maddox
Subject:      Leaving a message

As per the idea that AE or FN might have left some message as to their fate...

The immediate idea (for what it's worth) that came to my mind (and other's, I'm sure) would be to carve a message in one of those big hardwood trees that used to grow on the island.  The trees that were subsequently cut down in 1939-40 my men who didn't speak, let alone read English.

Where are those tree huggers when you need them?

Kelly Maddox

****************************************************************

From Ric

Good point.  For what it's worth, there's a tree (we don't know how old) about, oh, I'd say 40 meters from where the shoe parts were found which has a number of Gilbertese names carved into it.  (The Gilbertese love to carve their names into stuff.)  So far we've been unable to find anyone who knows any of the names.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 12:16:43 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: Curse for Gallagher's plaque

(Note: Clyde first suggested a curse. Dennis McGee came up with one that involved economic and reproductive misfortune.  I then invoked the island's terrifying guardian spirit Nei Manganibuka.)

Actually I was thinking of something along the lines of a skin rash.

Clyde Miller

****************************************************************

From Ric

Now THAT is funny.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 12:23:48 EST
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: TECHNOLOGY

WHAT MIGHT BE MORE PRODUCTIVE COULD BE VIEWING SATELLITE PHOTOS OF TARGET LOCATIONS. ANOTHER CLUE THAT RIC WON'T GIVE ME CREDIT FOR!!!!
--DICK

*****************************************************************

From Ric

If you'll check the forum archives you'll find that we beat that subject to death last summer.  Bottom line - no coverage and not enough resolution to do us any good if there was coverage.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 22 Feb 1999 12:29:31 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Another approach? (Psychic search)

>If this makes any sense, I'll dig up the references.  There are a few
>retired remote viewers' names mentioned in the book.
>
>Already looked at?  Let me know.
>
>Aloha from Hawaii,  Alan
>*****************************************************************
>From Ric
>
>Already looked at.  (I'm trying to be nice.)

Oh, come on Ric, tell the guy the truth.  Thru remote viewing, he can buy time shares for the Brooklyn bridge and some excellent water front property in Florida.  Also, he and Shirley Mclain (?) can go to Mars together for the annual festival there.

Love to monitor,
Dave Bush
#2200
******************************************************************
From Ric

Now, now - I'm sure he meant well.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:36:02 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: TECHNOLOGY

Wait!  Remember that satellite image from mars that appeared to be a face, what if AE/FN actually studied remote viewing and placed that there to show us the way.  They could be there on mars waiting for us to find them!  Wow! What a concept.  Somebody call Shirley McLain (?) and tell her to go there and look for them.

I'm sorry about the remote viewing remarks.  I realize from personal experience that somehow things can be transmitted psychically (?), but still doubt our ability (at this stage) to control that, and actual documented results are negligible at best.

Love to memory!

Dave Bush
#2200

***************************************************************
From Ric

I remain unconvinced that any kind of psychic ability exists.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:55:00 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Shoe parts

Three points.  1)  Custer battle field is far north, very cold, inactive ground most of the year.  2) Bismark & Titanic very deep in ocean, again, very cold, few organisms likely to eat much.  3) Dogs love shoes, don't know why, but seem to have a strong attraction.  Given bones with meat on them too, must be very attractive to them.

Love to mom,
Dave Bush

*****************************************************************
From Ric

All agreed.  Therefore.......?

*****************************************************************

From Amanda Dunham

Ric wrote:

>This brings me back to my dog theory.  I can just see ol' Duke thinking that
>shoes, complete with feet, make for great chewing.  No foot bones were found
>at the site.

Assuming a basic similarity in the way ol' Duke worries a bone, and the way my tabby cat worries a bone, wouldn't that show up on the rubber shoe parts you found?  Hershey has valiantly fought and killed lots of weird objects, and little kitty fang marks are usually pretty obvious on the vanquished. True, most of Hershey's victims haven't had a shoe's wear and then years in the weather...

Do we know what breed(s) of dogs were brought to Niku?  Large vs. small jaws & teeth?

Love to Mother,
Amanda
****************************************************************
From Ric

Good thought, but the sole fragments and heel really don't show anything that might be a chew mark.  Then again, they're quite hard rubber.

The only photo we have of dogs on Niku is one showing the Coast Guard guys and their two mascots who, I assume, were island residents before the Coasties got there.  (Calling Dick Evans!  Is that right Dick?  Where did the dogs come from?)

The dogs are black or dark brown and white (like a Beagle) but have more of a Jack Russel Terrier look and are about that size.  Easily held in the crook of a man's elbow.  Probably 20 pounds max.  The photo was taken some time in late 1944 or early 1945.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:19:22 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Questions

Here are a couple of questions that have invaded my tiny little mind while reading the last several dozen forum e-mails.

1) With all the talk of AE's poor landings history, is it possible that it was she who made the hard landing in Hawaii and not Paul Mantz? As he had been previously instructing her to fly the L10E, why would he not take the chance to continue his instructing on that landing? If so, that brings the next question: Why would Mantz be blamed for the hard landing (that supposedly led to her loss of control on the next mornings' takeoff)? My guess is so that AE would not jeopardize her around the world flight.

***** From Ric

What hard landing?  Who says the landing at Wheeler was a hard landing?  The Army accident report on the Luke Field wreck meticulously details the aircraft's arrival in Hawaii and all of the events up to the accident. There is no mention of a hard landing and there is certainly no suggestion that the accident was caused by any mechanical problem or damage to the airplane.  The Army board of inquiry found that the accident was caused by the collapse of the landing gear which was, in turn, caused by an "uncontrolled groundloop." The board found that there was insufficient evidence to determine the cause of the groundloop.

*********

2) Would the finding of a significant piece of a written note on Niku by AE/FN be enough of a "smoking gun" for the critics who doubt the Niku theory?

*******From Ric

Don't ask me.  Ask them.  In the absence of other conclusive physical evidence, the authenticity of any such note would be severely questioned by me - let alone them.

*******************

3) Any comment on the article in the Feb. issue of Air Classics entitled "An Amelia Update" by Rollin Reineck?

***************From Ric

Anybody who reads Air Classics gets what they deserve.

*************

4) With all the talk about "remote viewers", I'd like to know what a "remote viewer" is?

*********From Ric

It's nothing more than crystal ball gazing without the crystal ball.  You sit and try imagine what a place you've never been to looks like and then try to describe what's there. You "view" it "remotely."  It's pseudoscience for people who believe that because their TV remote lets them change channels without leaving the couch - hey - anything is possible.

********************

LTM,
Gary Moline
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:37:21 EST
From:         Alan Faye
Subject:      Re: Another approach? (Psychic search)

>Also, he and Shirley Mclain (?) can go to Mars together for the
>annual festival there.
>Love to monitor,
>Dave Bush
>#2200
>*****************************************************************
>From Ric
>
>Now, now - I'm sure he meant well.

I don't mind flames.  Been there and know that some folks have to say nasty things.  It was meant as a possible way to search and I still believe it works.  So there, you have it!
A

*************************************************************
From Ric

Sorry about that.  If we seem to be a rough bunch at times it's only because we have a rough job to do.  We're trying to wade through 60 some-odd years worth of myth and misconception to get at the truth.  If we make one mistake along the way we won't find the physical proof that will solve the case.

The remoteness of the location makes for a hideously expensive investigation and we rely entirely upon charitable contributions.  That forces us to be very discriminating about the methodologies to which we devote time and money. Psychic searching has never been shown to work.  It has, in fact, been quite reliably shown to NOT work.  That will not, of course, prevent some people from believing that it works.  (After all, most newspapers in this country still carry horoscopes for crying out loud.)

Believe in all the magic that makes you feel good - and we'll get on with our work.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:46:31 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Why Niku IIII?

Curiosity compels me to ask, why "Niku IIII" rather than "Niku IV" ?

Bill

**************************************************************

From Ric

Just an artsy marketing ploy.  The logo for the Niku IIII expedition has the IIII rendered like the slash marks of a tiger's claw.  To make matters worse, we've already been to the island four times.  There was Niku I in 1989, Niku II in 1991, and  in the middle of hyping Niku III we found that we needed to make a short recon trip.  We had already spent a lot of money on promotional material for the next big search which we were calling Niku III, so we decided to call the short recon trip in 1996 Niku IIIP (for Preliminary).  Hence, Niku III in 1997 was actually our 4th trip to the island.  Confusing, isn't it?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:42:07 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Just a thought

>From Ric
>
>Back in your cage Robison!

Snarl! gnash! hiss!

(I don't know how to make the hyena sound, so I'll just be a tiger.)

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:46:14 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Last words

>From Ric
>
>On the other hand, there are plenty of examples of people in similar
>circumstances leaving behind diaries of their ordeal.

Sorry to slip off-topic again, Ric, but the above reminds me of the diaries left behind by the crew of the "Lady Be Good"... a truly tragic tale.

Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Not so off-topic.  How were the Lady Be Good diaries preserved?  How were they found?  Granted - the Libyan desert is a far cry from Niku but it might be useful to know.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:56:59 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: TECHNOLOGY

>From Ric
>
>I remain unconvinced that any kind of psychic ability exists.

I Knew you'd say that!
Clyde
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:01:33 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Air Classics

Ric said:

>Anybody who reads Air Classics gets what they deserve.

The truth is I buy Air Classics for the same reason I used to buy Playboy -- the pictures!

I did respond to Col. Reineck's "editorial" (it certainly was not objective reporting!) and I'll be happy to share that response with the forum later (I want to make sure they received it, first; I don't want to impinge on their journalistic integrity.  God knows how embarrassed I'd be if Air Classics read it here first!).

LTM, who cautions against smart-alecks
Dennis McGee #0149
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Journalistic integrity?  Air Comics?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:10:50 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Curse for Gallagher's plaque

(referring to Clyde's suggestion of a skin rash)

Like you, and so many others on the forum who spent quality time in wet, tropical parts of the world long ago, my recollection is that this could be a particularly heinous curse...

Love to mother,
jon  2266
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:13:11 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Shoe parts

Actually, there were plenty of organisms; at least as relates to the Titanic's resting place.  They devoured the wooden decks and structures of the ship, and if you glance through Ballard's book, one photo of boots in the debris field were obviously being worn when they got to the bottom, but the body (including bones) is long since gone.  The leather goods were protected by the tanning process from being eaten, and I think protected by the cold and relatively consistent conditions from other factors which might cause them to deteriorate.  When I first saw pictures of the shoe parts, what went through my mind was how old boots and shoes looked which were discarded in trash heaps in the woods near where I lived while I was growing up (Delaware).  Left above ground, the stitching went, and the leather (exposed to weathering) dried out, deteriorated and warped.
Ltm,
jon  2266
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:23:05 EST
From:         Vickie Raney
Subject:      Re: TECHNOLOGY

> From Ric
>
> I remain unconvinced that any kind of psychic ability exists.

Wait a minute.  Let me try this remote viewing thing.

I see a man.  A man sitting at a computer in his underwear, perusing through tons of e-mail and deciphering which are important for the masses to read.

Ric, am I close?

Vickie
Indiana :-)

(so sorry, just couldn't resist)
****************************************************************

From Ric

You're gonna get me in a lot of trouble.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:29:06 EST
From:         David Dunsmore
Subject:      EA & FN as spies???

I've only been on this forum for a few weeks now, so forgive me if this has been done to death already, but I was just wondering what TIGHAR's official position is on the speculation that they were secretly spying on the Japanese for the U.S. government, using an extensively modified and souped-up 10E.  (...or is the mere suggestion of such an idea about as credible as Fred's drinking problem - the one that only began in 1966!)

Love To Many (...many obsessed Earhart buffs, that is!)
David Dunsmore

****************************************************************

From Ric

You guessed it.

Here's another mystery.  Although Earhart was widely known as AE (her initials) during the last few years of her life, many people now get it backward and refer to her as EA (as you did above).  Why is that?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:04:03 EST
From:         Bob Sherman
Subject:      LADY BE GOOD

> How were the Lady Be Good diaries preserved.  How were they
> found?  .... it might be useful to know.

The plane was found intact some years later by a small commercial party (oil or something) crossing that part of the desert. I heard (no proof) that they followed the crew's 'walk-away' tracks until they merged with a caravan's trail.

The problem was an incorrect solution of the 180d. ambiguity of their bearing on the Bengazi ndb. The aircraft was found intact.  Both the items left by the crew members & the plane's equip. was perfectly preserved.  It was said (no proof) that a bat. was conn to the ships elect. system & the radios worked perfectly.

Believe they found a discarded chute along their tracks .. it too was ok. Seems to me that the wind over the many years (more than 10 anyway) would have drifted sand over all tracks.

RC 941

****************************************************************

From Ric

Got that - but what about the diaries?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:43:53 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Hard Landing, Etc

Your response to my question about a possible hard landing at Wheeler field sounds as if you have never heard of the theory. While I can't state the date, time, location, sources, etc about how I came to have heard about a possible hard landing that was credited to Paul Mantz and then was mentioned as a possible cause of the collapse of the landing gear, the theory is still out there. Just because it is not mentioned in the Army report about the arrival of the aircraft, nor in the probable cause of the accident doesn't mean there was no hard landing. Just because there is no certified, credible, recorded and government approved acknowledgment of post crash radio messages by AE/FN from Niku doesn't mean that they did not happen. Agree?

You bust peoples chops about being Off-Topic and yet we spend endless time talking (and still are!) about CRYSTAL BALLS GAZING?? Talk about Off-Topic!!

Yes, I enjoy reading Air Classics and many other magazines and I pretty much enjoy what I deserve and I read them with a grain of salt. I guess the same can be said about the Forum.

On this forum I enjoy talking about the facts associated with any and all  aspects of AE/FN, the L-10E, the flight, the preparation, the weather, the search, TIGHAR expeditions and on and on. I also enjoy talking about theories concerning AE and the flight and I usually enjoy the peripheral subjects as well. I always enjoy the humor!

LTM
Gary Moline
*****************************************************************
From Ric

No, I'd never heard of the hard landing theory but I'm sure that, as you say, it's out there right along with a lot other speculative and totally unsubstantiated bunk.  Heck, a couple of retired mechanics built a whole book around the theory that a prop problem caused the accident.  Just for the sake of argument, how was a hard landing supposed to have caused a groundloop?  The skid and scrape marks on runway made it clear that the gear collapsed as a result of the groundloop, not before or during the loss of control

Let me explain what I have against Air Comics.  Its not just their frequent factual errors or fascist editorial policies.  The First Amendment protects that.  My gripe is with their complete lack of ethics.

Back in 1984 (just pre-TIGHAR) I naively sent them a letter describing my intention to conduct a search in Maine for the lost French flight that nearly beat Lindbergh across the Atlantic.  It was a rather standard query letter any writer might send to a magazine to solicit their interest in hiring him to write an article.  I got no reply.  About four months later my letter appeared virtually verbatim in Air Classics edited just enough allow it to be run as an article.  They even used my title for the search - "Project Midnight Ghost",  but deleted any mention of my name and, of course, there was no byline.  I was furious and tried repeatedly to phone the editor and publisher at Challenge Publications.  No luck.  No one was ever in and no one would return my calls. I wrote letters demanding payment or at least some explanation.  Nothing.

In talking to other authors I soon learned that this is standard procedure at Challenge Publications.  It's so bad that a group of aviation writers once considered filing a class action lawsuit, but decided just to boycott Challenge instead.  (You'll notice that nobody you ever heard of ever writes for Air Comics.)  Still, there are plenty of unsuspecting aviation enthusiasts who still get snookered.  A friend of mine in Newfoundland wanted to write an article about a B-36 crash and inquired as to whether the magazine would buy it.  "Sure, sure.  Send it in.  Be sure to include lots of photos."  He did. They ran the article, stiffed him for the money, and kept his photos.  These people are unprincipled predators.  Sometimes they print pretty pictures of airplanes.  To me, that's not enough reason to give them money for what they do.

A few years ago I engaged in a lengthy letter-to-the-editor war about the Earhart case with conspiracy buff Rollin Reineck.  It was a lot of fun, in part because Reineck is such an easy target - but the editor couldn't stand it and had to inject himself into the fray, editing my letters and adding his own comments in the middle of my letters.  I refused to continue.  Every few months they still allow Reineck to rant about Amelia and insult me.  It's rather flattering really.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:48:55 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Lady Be Good

Here's some info on the crash related artifacts found from the "Lady Be Good". The "Lady Be Good" was a B-24 bomber that was returning from a mission in April, 1943. Coming back at night from Italy, the plane overshot its base on the North coast of Libya. Thinking that they were still over the Med with fuel running out, the crew bailed out. In fact, the plane was some 440 miles inland and over the desert. The plane and her crew were declared lost in action and nothing was heard from her for 16 years until an oil company DC-3 spotted the wreckage on the ground. A ground search found the aircraft amazingly intact. Water and even a thermos of coffee were still aboard, but no crew. In 1960, a well drilling team stumbled upon the skeletal remains of five of the crewmen. They were nearly 100 miles from the B-24! Dog tags, an inscribed wedding ring and other personal effects confirmed the identity of the missing fliers. Found with the remains of Lt. Toner, the co-pilot, was a small diary that helped to unravel the mystery. Toner's diary tells about several of the crew pressing on to find help. Their remains were later found and another diary was found in the pocket of the mummified remains of T/Sgt Ripslinger, the flight engineer. The last body was found some 115 miles from the bail out point. Eight of the crewmen survived in the desert for 9 days on very little food and HALF of one canteen of water between them. Two capfuls a day!

The skeletons and personal gear that was found ranged from dry bones to a damp uniform part. Some skeletons were found intact and other were somewhat scattered. One pair of boots was found with feet and legs still attached. Lots of items such as jackets, rings, flashlights, canteens, pocket knife, parachute fabric etc were found with the skeletons.

The two most obvious differences with the idea of artifacts from the B-24 and the ones that we are most interested in are 1) The natural environments of the two places and 2) the differences in time (16 years versus at least 54 years) before discovery. Both environments are terribly brutal in their own way, but I think it shows that both man and man-made artifacts are usually pretty tough.

If any one is interested in learning more about the fascinating story of the "Lady Be Good," I highly recommend you pick up a copy of "Lady's Men" by Mario Martinez. It describes in detail about the survival of the crew but it does not say "how" the diaries remained in such good condition. You will not be able to put this book down.

LTM,
Gary Moline

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Gary.  That's good information.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:52:07 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: Last words

Yes, and Captain Scott of the Antarctic kept a diary right up to the bitter end, found on his frozen body in his parka. It happens!

Gene Dangelo #2211

*****************************************************************

From Ric

But we rarely find frozen bodies on Niku.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 21:02:48 EST
From:         Gene Dangelo
Subject:      Re: TECHNOLOGY

I, on the other hand, am convinced from an experiential standpoint that some kinds of psychic abilities do exist. However, I don't believe that they have occurred with enough regularity and consistency as yet to have enabled quantification by scientific method. In addition, far too many charlatans and opportunistic money-seekers have contaminated the field to readily enable serious funding of such studies, though it can and does occur in academic settings with enough money and guts to fund them.

Even now, I can foresee that Ric would like us to get back on topic.....

Have a good day, all!
Gene Dangelo  #2211

****************************************************************

From Ric

You must be like....psychic.
***************************************************************

From Randy Jacobson

That's funny: I had a remote vision that Ric would say that!

***************************************************************

From Ric

Anybody else wanna do this joke?

*************************************************************

From Dick Strippel

WHO CARES! IT'S JUST FUN!

***************************************************************

From Ric

Attaboy Dick.

***************************************************************

From Tom Van Hare

Hey, we did a feature story on the Mars Face last year -- it was even nominated for Cool Site of the Year. Somehow, we missed the AE-Mars connection though -- I think we would have put that under the category of "Not So Scientific Links" at the end.

Bottom line, ain't no psychic link that I've ever seen. Don't believe it one bit. I always say, if those folks were so good, they'd visualize themselves a few lottery ticket wins from time to time, which would be a good thing as it would keep the pay-TV schedule open for others with more interesting things to say.

Thomas Van Hare
*****************************************************************

From Dick Strippel (again)

<< I remain unconvinced that any kind of psychic ability exists.>>

MAKES BOUT AS MUCH SENSE AS NIKU 4

***********************************************************
From Ric

Let's let Dick have the last word on this subject.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 21:06:20 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Re: Why Niku IIII?

> From Ric
>
> Just an artsy marketing ploy.  The logo for the Niku IIII expedition has
> the IIII rendered like the slash marks of a tiger's claw.

Ah, very clever.  I suppose Niku five will be four slashes up/down and one across at an angle?

> ...so we decided to call the short recon trip in 1996 Niku IIIP (for
> Preliminary). Hence, Niku III in 1997 was actually our 4th trip to the
> island. Confusing, isn't it?

Not really.  Having lived with over 20 years of people creating model numbers for computers, components and systems, it actually seems quite reasonable.  At least it has some roots in reality.

    - Bill

***************************************************************

From Ric

Actually, for Niku 5 we were thinking maybe something rendered in cuneiform.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 21:12:21 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Shoe parts

Ric wrote:

> Good thought, but the sole fragments and heel really don't
> show anything that might be a chew mark.  Then again, they're
> quite hard rubber.

As I am sure every dog owner will attest here, you should not underestimate the strength of their jaws, particularly if they are chewing something tasty over time. My pup, Chutney, admittedly a little larger than a beagle (Rhodesian Ridgeback, they hunt lions for a living), can break up and destroy in about an hour one of those "Nyalabones" -- and those are something like a nuclear-hardened plastic-like substance that would make a great warclub in Indonesia. Chutney is pretty much over shoes at this point, being four years old -- and yes, she used to chew the rubber off the bottom without difficulty. If they were found by dogs, I have little doubt that there would have been teeth marks on the shoe soles found on the Expedition.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 23 Feb 1999 21:09:58 EST
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: Curse for Gallagher's plaque

Isn't there a shot to immunize one from Gallagher's plaGue????

**************************************************************

From Ric

Good one Dick.  I like the shift from invective to wit.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:39:05 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Last words

Ric wrote:

> Not so off-topic.  How were the Lady Be Good diaries preserved.
> How were they found?  Granted - the Libyan desert is a far cry
> from Niku but it might be useful to know.

OK, who is doing the psychic thing out there now?

We've just finished a feature story about the Lady Be Good tragedy, which should publish in a few days. We've got quite an extensive photo collection as well as extensive quotes from the diaries, pictures of the crew members, the complete history of the mission and how they were found, etc.

Give me a moment if I have time tomorrow and I'll forward the complete data to the group here, including how the plane and crew were found -- alternatively, you could wait a few days and see the full illustrated piece.

This basic information answers the most critical question posed by Ric.... The completely dry heat of the Libyan desert preserved a lot of material, some of it almost perfectly -- the radios still worked on the wrecked plane, the guns still fired, etc., all of this 16 years after the crash. What items were in shadow or wrapped, like one of the bodies twisted within a parachute, were still actually wet and mostly there, despite the dry environment. Bacteria cannot much live in this temperature regime, so the bodies didn't really decompose as much as they were baked off and "sanded down" to just bones by the sun and wind. Water from one of the canteens was found not to be stagnant, in fact perfectly drinkable and sterile. Paper doesn't degrade in 120 degree temperatures, so the diaries (there were two found) were well-preserved and gave sad testimony to the crew's final days. Temperatures also plummet at night down to the low 40s.

The results observed in this harsh environment were incredible. A few miles away, the search teams found a mummified bedouin and camel who died there years before.

And, by the way, one of the bodies is still lost somewhere in the dunes -- despite extensive search, it was never found.

One of the interesting outcomes of the Lady Be Good recovery was what we, the United States, learned much from the wreck about longterm preservation of aircraft through desert storage. Many of these lessons were applied at Davis-Monthan AFB.

Returning to AE and FN, none of the Libyan desert-like conditions are present on Nikumaroro, which is instead rather a hot, humid, tropical environment teeming with life. Whoever died there on the island, and somebody did, was probably devoured in a few days. What little remained quickly rotted under the assault of billions of bacteria. Even items of clothing and leather from the shoes, etc., may well have rotted away or been carried off by critters, winds, water, whatever. Any papers, logs, etc., would not have survived rain storms, winds, typhoons, etc., at least not repeatedly over 55 plus years. My view on this is that the only "diary" items that might have survived would have to have been carved into aluminum to survive to the present day. Nonetheless, if the final resting place is found and/or the bones are recovered, there will still be much to learn from the evidence, both with tradition archaology techniques and through forensic sciences. Their last words on the island, however, were carried off with the winds.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:49:55 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Ric wrote:

> The post-loss radio transmissions can not be considered to
> be conclusive evidence of anything because there is no way to
> tell for sure whether any of them was genuine. That said, some
> of the alleged messages fit remarkably well with the theory
> that the aircraft was landed and survived intact for a time at
> Nikumaroro....

Are the transcripts of those heard available anywhere with dates and times? Very interested in reading those, whether or not they are fakes.

Thomas Van Hare
*****************************************************************

From Ric

All told, there were something like 300 alleged post-loss transmissions.  Some were certainly fakes.  Others may have been misunderstood messages from searchers.  But a number are really intriguing. This is a HUGE subject and one that received a great deal of attention in 1937.  There were even carefully organized attempts to communicate with the lost aircraft via broadcasts by the KGMB, the most powerful commercial station in Hawaii.  The results of those experiments were inconclusive but seemed to indicate that the airplane was on land.

The whole catalog of purported messages has never been pulled together in a single chronology.  The best tool for such a project would be the complete list of official government radio messages associated with the Earhart flight and disappearance as assembled by Randy Jacobson and available on CD (along with a lot of other original source data) from TIGHAR for a measly hundred bucks.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:52:49 EST
From:         Don Jordan
Subject:      Re: LADY BE GOOD

FYI.  I just visited with Craig Fuller last Sunday.  He has some of the best pictures I've ever seen of the Lady Be Good.  He may even have the crash report.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:55:16 EST
From:         Mike Cord
Subject:      Re: LADY BE GOOD

Here is a Web Site about the Lady Be Good, doesn't mention the Diaries though. http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/history/wwii/lbg.htm

Mike Cord
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:56:52 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Lady Be Good

I can't remember for sure, but the diaries of the crew may be on display, with several other artifacts of the "Lady Be Good", at the Air Force Museum in Dayton.

LTM,

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:59:46 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Lady Be Good

>Not so off-topic.  How were the Lady Be Good diaries preserved.  How were they
>found?  Granted - the Libyan desert is a far cry from Niku but it might be
>useful to know.

The desert saved them... hot, very very dry, no human or animal or insect intervention. I'll have to look back at the books, but if I recall correctly, one diary was found intentionally buried, and another was found on a body. Surely Tom Van Hare knows the details better than I.

The only book I have is "Lady Be Good", the 1962 work by McClendon. There is a newer one that won't come to mind right now. I'll check Amazon tomorrow and see what they've got.

Ric, it occurs to me that you might be interested in the book "A Missing Plane" by Susan Sheehan. It's about the recovery of a B-24 from the jungles of New Guinea.

Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks.  I'm familar with Sheehan's book.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:27:04 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: TECHNOLOGY

>I see a man.  A man sitting at a computer in his underwear, perusing
>through tons of e-mail and deciphering which are important for the masses
>to read.

That vision is almost enough to make me unsubscribe...

Now if we could conjure up a vision of Pat in her underwear... whoops, I keep forgetting this is a family forum...

Tom #2179
******************************************************************

From Ric

Are we missing a fund raising opportunity here?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:39:51 EST
From:         J. Mika Ackerman
Subject:      Ric on TV

Brand new to the forum.  Kudos to all you hard-core Earhart researchers.

Just a note to let those of you who get the "Lifetime" cable channel that Ric's on TV at this very moment -- an "Unsolved Mysteries" all about Amelia.  I'm not vouching for the quality of the show, but it's cool to see the footage of some of TIGHAR's expeditions, etc.  Not to mention Ric!

Best,
J. Mika Ackerman

**************************************************************

From Ric

There's no business like show business.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:35:56 EST
From:         AE Faye
Subject:      Re: Psychic searching

That's OK, they didn't believe Einstein either.

**************************************************************

From Ric

On the other hand, there are some subtle differences between Albert Einstein and the likes of Ed Dames, Shirley McLain, and Dionne Warwick.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:50:26 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: LADY BE GOOD

NDBs are not "ambiguous"  A/N "Aural-Null" ranges were notorious for that characteristic. Because the signal of an A/N transmitter was a continuous dahh-dit for one side of the course (N), or dit dahh for the other (A), it was possible for the crews to have flown in the opposite direction of an intended course until the signal weakened which, depending on atmospheric conditions,  could occur many miles away from the station.  There was no "pointer" to the station as with the ADF receiver.

****************************************************************

From Ric

Fair warning.  This is the last posting I'm going to put up about Lady Be Good that does not specifically reference the diaries with pertinent new information.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:57:17 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Why Niku IIII?

>From Ric
>
>Actually, for Niku 5 we were thinking maybe something rendered in cuneiform.

Oh, Ye of little faith... Niku IIII is going to find all the answers, right? There won't be any need for Niku 5, right?

RIGHT?

Say "RIGHT!", Ric.

LTM,
Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Innocent child - the only way Niku IIII could find ALL the answers would be if it found something that explained away all the other evidence on and about Niku which seems now to point toward Amelia.  If conclusively identifiable airplane wreckage or DNA match-able bones are found which prove that Niku is, indeed, the place where Earhart and Noonan met their fate, that will be the beginning, not the end, of the real effort to discover what actually happened.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:59:57 EST
From:         Russ Matthews
Subject:      Re: Hard Landing, Etc

For what it's worth...the first I ever heard the "hard landing" allegation was in the recent History Channel documentary, "Mysteries of Amelia Earhart." They offered nothing to substantiate the claim.

LTM,
Russ

****************************************************************

From Ric

Yeah, but it was on telebision.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:09:55 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Last Lady Be Good Posting

This was a BIG story -- at least in my mind -- back when it was found in 1960(?).

The plane was found by an oil exploration crew and was in "near" complete condition.  The pilot had set the plane on autopilot after they realized their mistake and the crew bailed out and let the airplane go on by itself.  The plane glided to a landing after the crew left and was intact expect the fuselage had broken in half just aft of the wings.

If I remember correctly (and I probably don't), the bodies of only seven of the nine crew members were found, and they were in two different groups.  While searching for the crew after the plane was discovered (in 1960?), standard international rescue markers were found -- an pile of rocks and a parachute (?) pointing northward.  I believe the diaries were found on the bodies, which were found several months (years?) after the Lady be Good was discovered.

There was no Air Corps search-and-rescue effort for the Lady be Good because it was assumed she was lost during a "normal" combat mission.

Even with the passage of all these years, the LBG story is still a fascinating tale and a good case study in accident investigation and search-and-rescue techniques.

P.S.  The coffee in one of the thermos (undamaged!) was still drinkable after 15-plus years on the dessert floor!

P.P.S.  Rod Serling (?) did a Twilight Zone-type show based on the LBG where the crew's ghosts were doomed to remain with the aircraft even after it crashed.  When the aircraft was found the bodies were also found and the rescue crew buried all of them -- and the crew departed the show -- except for the tail gunner who was trapped beneath the airplane and his body was never discovered.  Thus, he had to remain with the aircraft -- alone -- for eternity, or until his body is discovered and he is given a proper burial.  Neat stuff, huh.

LTM
Dennis McGee #0149
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:15:24 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Very Last of the LBG

Thanks to Tom Van Hare for the detailed data on the LBG.  I'm looking forward to BOTH the stuff he'll send to the forum and buying the magazine ( . . .and Tom, I'll even subscribe, but only if YOU personally call and ask!).

My question is:  What happened to the plane and all the equipment after it was found?  Is it in a museum or did the "cutters" get it like so much other stuff from the Libyan desert?

****************************************************************

From Ric

Selected artifacts are in the USAFM collection (see URL in earlier posting). As far as I know the rest of the wreck is still there. (And no, there will be no TIGHAR recovery expedition to the Libyan desert.  Muamar and I don't get along at all.)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 11:42:37 EST
From:         Scott Zaden
Subject:      Re: Back on topic

> Even now, I can foresee that Ric would like us to get back on topic.....

That's where you'll find me. Domagogic idiosyncracies aside we have the ability to go to the plane. You once issued a challenge but it was a little too showman for me. I am a historical researcher using a military developed capability under strict protocols to resolve historical mysteries. My interest is the analysis of data and resolution of any descrepancies with subsequent findings of historical fact. Reverse engineering. I start with the answers and work backward. And you are correct -  the plane is not in the Gilberts. With 10 targets completed I have learned to gently smile at ridicule, whereas other are deeply effected by it. RV has nothing to do with hotlines nor could those people work in that in environment. Also, it is not my place to ask anyone to believe in anything.

At this point I thought I would give people a little more of the report. Raw data is never allowed but I am aware I can risk it. Here you will see the viewer does not know what to make of the fuel tanks. Since I had no coordianates, we had to use a process referred to as entropy from Lae. If you are politically adverse to the anaylisis of findings from a data process - don't read it. All this information was recorded last year and pertains to the targeted area. From the report:

"There are what appear to be three planes on the ground. Two of them are larger than a third. Two of these planes are twin engine, and the third has three engines. The plane with three engines is generally a passenger carrying aircraft, which is rigged out to carry a minimum of twelve people and light cargo. The second larger plane is also rigged for some passengers or cargo. It has what appears to be some kind of folding webbed or woven seats along both sides half way down the aisle, and a large double door at the rear for loading great amounts of cargo.

"The third plane is a twin engine, smaller, and has no room for cargo or people. It appears to have additional fuel tanks in its cargo area and so it either used for carrying fuel from port to port, or the transfer of some other chemical besides fuel in fuel like tanks.  I get a sense that the smaller plane and the larger double-side door plane are probably tail draggers, and the triple engine plane is not. It seems to sit upright more squarely with the ground and has kind of a unique tail wheel of some kind."

It is after take off that things get interesting.

LTM,
Scott Zaden
***************************************************************

From Ric

Entropy this.

I offered you a challenge that would provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate that your "military developed capability" is something other than hot-line charlatanism repackaged in pseudo-scientific jargon.  You turned it down not because it is "too showman" but because you know that you can't do it. What kind of gobbeldy-gook is "reverse engineering" and  "start(ing) with the answers and work(ing) backward"  anyway? And what do you mean that you have "completed" 10 targets?  Name ONE thing that you have found that can be verified by an independent source. It's good that you've learned to smile at ridicule because this stuff is laughable. (And there is no such word as "domagogic."  I suspect you mean demagogic.)

Your stunt of trying to vaguely describe what might be a scene on the airfield at Lae is a transparent attempt to manufacture credibility and is exactly the stuff that psychic readers and advisors pull all the time.  If being "politically adverse (do you mean averse?)to the anaylisis (sic) of findings from a data process" is the same as being unwilling to check your brain at the door, then yes, I'm politically averse to the exploitation of ignorance that you stand for.

We're working hard to develop an educational program for kids built around the scientific methodologies and critical thinking we've used in the Earhart Project.  Your kind of magical thinking cloaked in technobabble is exactly the sort of nonsense we're trying to teach kids to watch out for.

If you won't accept my challenge, at least heed this warning.  Wherever your
imaginings lead you to envision the resting place of the Earhart airplane - pick someplace other than Nikumaroro.  The old psychic trick of shadowing a legitimate investigation and later claiming a "success" won't work this time. IF we're right, and IF we find the airplane on Niku, and IF you try to claim any role in TIGHAR's investigation - I'll hang you out to dry, and that's a promise.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:13:49 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Financial question

I was just looking over the TIGHAR web site and especially the L-10E model section and wondered about something.

It seemed from the way I read the model section that money received from the model sales go specifically to the Earhart Project part of TIGHAR.  Do you actually keep separate books?  That is, Earhart Search = X dollars, Operation Sepulcher = Y dollars, General TIGHAR = Z dollars and so on?

This is not a complaint or an objection, I'm just curious.

    - Bill #2229

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Happy to answer.  While we don't maintain separate bank accounts for different categories, we do keep close track of what funds get spent on what.  Any contribution that comes in specifically earmarked for a particular project or use gets used only for that purpose.  General contributions like new memberships, renewals, etc. get spent wherever the need is greatest.

These days, of course, the vast majority of our time is being spent on the Earhart Project and so most of our operating expenses are assignable to that project.  To specifically answer your question, yes, money from Electra model sales goes only to support the Earhart Project.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:19:53 EST
From:         Dick Strippel
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Contact implies a two-way conversation.  If you mean Nauru's last reception- then it proves our heroine went into the drink moments after.

 --Dick

***************************************************************

From Ric

There was never any two-way conversation with Earhart by anybody during the Lae/Howland flight.  By your logic I guess that means that she drowned in a bathtub in Lae.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:23:25 EST
From:         Simon Ellwood
Subject:      Re Back on topic

Ric wrote:-

>IF we're right, and IF we find the airplane on Niku, and IF you
>try to claim any role in TIGHAR's investigation - I'll hang you out to dry,
>and that's a promise.

Owch !

The Tighar roars !! ;-)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:32:14 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      Re: Hard Landing, Etc

I think that I heard the hard landing theory on the 2 hr History Channel special. But I remember that supposedly Paul Mantz took the blame for it. Who knows, a weakened landing gear might not be able to put up with a ground loop. Why did she ground loop in the first place? Did it have to do with her technique of using differential power on crosswind take offs rather that using rudder?

I knew that I could open an old sore with the "Air Comics" business! I don't blame you for your feelings! I'll be sure to take that into consider that when subscription renewal time comes around. How's this for an idea? All forum and Tighar members with subscriptions to any Challenge Publications, cancel immediately and donate the money towards Niku IIII !!

LTM,
Gary Moline
****************************************************************

From Ric

A stroke of genius.  Maybe they could return all their back issues rolled up and packaged with a jar of Vaseline.

Mantz certainly didn't shoulder any blame for the Luke Field wreck when he talked to his biographer Don Dwiggins ("Hollywood Pilot", Doubleday, 1967), He blamed AE's throttle-jockeying on takeoff, a dangerous practice which he had often warned her about.  As he put it "She didn't listen to Papa."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:39:21 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Please refresh my memory.  Is it true that the radios on the Electra would only operate when one of the engines was running?  If so, and given that at least some of the post-loss messages were real, then the plane had to have been relatively intact, and on land.
LTM,
jon

******************************************************************

From Ric

It's not quite that simple.  The radios worked off the battery which was recharged via a generator on the starboard engine.  Transmitting drains down a battery very quickly and, because the supposed post-loss messages were heard over a period of several days, the battery would have to be periodically recharged.  That meant operating the starboard engine,which in turn would mean that at least the right hand main gear leg had to be extended and the propeller and engine be in operating condition.  That means a relatively intact airplane on land or at least on a tidal reef.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:44:26 EST
From:         Jon Watson
Subject:      Re: Hard Landing, Etc

There's an old saying:  "Art mimics life".  There's a more recent saying:  "Art mimics life, life mimics 'telebision'.
ltm
jon

****************************************************************

From Ric

Yup.  We're all caught in a big circle.  To what extent do we play out roles from novels, old movies, and TV shows that helped form our personalities in our youth and which were, in turn, based on real people who were themselves influenced by art.  It's a continuum.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:13:43 EST
From:         Phil Tanner
Subject:      Scuba

Continuing my effort to get up to speed - I read at the website that the thinking at one time was (still is?) that any substantial wreckage might well have been pushed into the lagoon, as all natural forces would tend inwards. Has TIGHAR attempted to dive the lagoon - is it safe, planned or excluded on grounds of being too far from medical assistance? (I could well imagine the ocean side would be suicidal.) And is there a definitive book on the case from its very beginnings from the TIGHAR viewpoint? What kicked the whole thing off in the late 80s or whenever?

***************************************************************
From Ric

Wreckage in the lagoon is a possibility.  It's a tough environment to search visually due to very poor visibility.  In 1997 we searched approximately 2 percent of the lagoon bottom with negative results using both remote sensing and visual techniques.  Future lagoon underwater operations will be focused on particular suspected areas.

A visual underwater survey of the edge of the atoll's surrounding reef was conducted by divers during our 1989 expedition, again with negative results. In 1991 we hired Oceaneering International to do a sidescan sonar survey of the ocean surrounding the island.  Once more, no luck.  I hasten to add that just because none of these searches found anything doesn't necessarily mean that nothing is there.  It's awfully easy to miss stuff - even big stuff. After the scuba and sidescan searches were over we learned that the coast guard had lost a D6 Caterpillar bulldozer off the reef edge in 1944.  Neither the divers in 1989 nor the sonar in 1991 saw it.

You'll find more detail in the Previous Expeditions section of the website.

The Earhart Project began in 1988 when two TIGHAR members, Tom Gannon and Tom Willi, made us aware of the navigational logic which indicates that Gardner Island is the most logical place for the flight to have ended.  Since then, the closer we've looked the more we have found.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:35:27 EST
From:         Matt Mondro
Subject:      Forum problems

Ric, when i recieve forum mail i usually get two related notes, one a header that tells me the topic then another one that has the body of the note, (ie: out of ten e-mails only five are real notes the others are just a subject header that is empty and i delete). Is this how its supposed to happen? it just gets annoying having to always surf through and delete all those empty notes. It doubles my inbox!

--
Matt Mondro

*****************************************************************
From Ric

No, that is not how it's supposed to work.  The problem is in the interface between your service provider and program that distributes the forum email. You need to contact your provider and describe the difficulty.  The forum uses a list-serve system by L-Soft called Ease-Home.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 14:42:21 EST
From:         Bill Carter
Subject:      Re: Back on topic

To reinforce Ric's point, I will repeat here what I have said in the past. There is no room for remote viewing or the use of any other "psychic" process in the search for AE.  End of story.  If there was ANY legitimacy to RV, the military would exploit the ability, control who and how the technique is developed, and probably classify the entire project.  The fact is, RV was studied extensively for years and the government concluded that the process referred to as RV is NOT a reliable method of collecting information.  This is another way of saying - It's not real and or doesn't work.  This talk about strict protocols and military training is nonsense and cannot replace legitimate research.  No one in their right mind would choose RV over combing the beaches of Niku with a metal detector.  I hope that this email and the many others posted on the forum are cited as proof that as of 2-23-99 RV hasn't provided ANY useful information in the search for AE. Ric, you should seriously consider taking legal action against anyone who, after the fact, claims that RV assisted TIGHAR in locating AE.

LTM
Bill Carter
Attorney

****************************************************************

From Ric

I was thinking more in terms of a skin rash.

****************************************************************
From Dave Bush

RIGHT ON, RIC - SIC 'EM BOY!

LTM,
Dave Bush
#2200

***************************************************************
From Ric

You make me sound like a Rhodesian Ridgeback.

**************************************************************
From George Kastner

Whatever we're paying you, Ric, it ain't enough.
Mini Tanks to You
G. Kastner #862C

**************************************************************
From Ric

Thanks.  I agree.

**************************************************************
From Mark

To Ric

Goode show, olde chap!!!!!

Not deade yet,
Mark
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:38:40 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      The Curse of the Lady Be Good

I've just learned that one of the diaries included this final entry:

"...and with my last breath I declare that whosoever shall make any inquiry about this diary shall never be free of off-topic postings about the Lady Be Good."

***************************************************************

From Dave Bush

I don't know about actual artifacts, but the Lone Star Flight Museum in Galveston, Texas has an excellent exhibit on this aircraft.

LTM,
Dave Bush
#2200
*****************************************************************
From Gene Dangelo

Actually, I believe that it was "Night Gallery" in the early 70's, rather than "Twilight Zone," in which that episode took place. I remember watching it as a teenager when I was about 15, which would've been about 1970 or '71. Excellent episode, too. Serling was the best at what he did!(He did both series mentioned above.) Ric's right--there's no business like show business----at least, no business I know!

Have a great day!
Gene Dangelo  #2211   :)

****************************************************************

(In all fairness, Craig Fuller did not send this in as a posting but I may as well include it.)

From the British publication "After the Battle" (sorry don't have the date on my photocopy). In 1994 the Antiquities Department of ? (Libya?) recovered the remains and brought them to Tobruk to be displayed at the proposed International Military Museum there.

Craig Fuller
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:40:04 EST
From:         Kelly Maddox
Subject:      On-topic LBG posting

To be even more specific about the environment in which a "Lady Be Good"diary was found:

It was not left in the open air.  Some of the crew had died in a shelter that they had made using a small tarp. (shelter half, or parachute, I can't remember exactly)  The tarp had collapsed, covering them, and then sand had built up on top of that, holding it down over the bodies and equipment  The diaries may also have been inside a knapsack type item, but that it unclear in the article that I read several years ago.

Kelly Maddox
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:44:44 EST
From:         Dave Porter
Subject:      environmental conditions vs. wreck preservation

I'm a first time caller...( those among you with those so called "latent psychic abilities" will no doubt note that this will not be the last time you hear from me)

My membership form will be in the mail shortly, and I look forward to being a TIGHAR member.

The LBG postings and related discussion of environmental conditions in the Libyan desert vs those on Niku, and effects of said environments on aircraft wreckage jogged my memory.

Somewhere at home I have a newspaper clipping from the early 1990's regarding the discovery and partial salvage of a wrecked Northrop P-61 Black Widow somewhere in the South Pacific.  New Guinea, or somewhere in that neighborhood, if memory serves.  Anyway, my point was that the article said that the wreck was in remarkably good condition for having been in the jungle for nearly 50 years.  Engine oil was still good, as was water in a canteen.  The guns were in such good shape that they were removed (along with recovered human remains) so that they wouldn't fall into the hands of bad guys.  Obviously, jungle is a less harsh environment than saltwater lagoon, but if the famous 10E was on Niku in '37, some of it should still be there today.  If so, you guys certainly deserve to be the ones to find it.  Good Luck.

Dave Porter

****************************************************************

From Ric

Thanks Dave.  We know that the environment on Niku is very kind to aluminum. If the Electra was once there and the Japanese, aliens, or Scott Zaden haven't taken it away, it's still there.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:57:30 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Ric wrote:

> ...over a period of several days, the battery would have to
> be periodically recharged.  That meant operating the starboard
> engine, which in turn would mean that at least the right hand
> main gear leg had to be extended and the propeller and engine be
> in operating condition.  That means a relatively intact airplane
> on land or at least on a tidal reef.

So, Ric, if I was to imagine the scene (I say as a leading question), it would be a bit different, and more like this....

The plane crash lands either on the beach or on the reef. The survivor(s) remove the radio and battery, then cart it inland away from the surf (electricity and water don't mix well). There, they set up the radio to transmit -- their last hope at being saved. The transmit a few messages, but the battery runs down and they also realize that their antenna isn't right.

Now, in order to get the battery recharged, they return to the plane and laboriously remove the right engine and then slowly move it up the beach to the safer location selected for the radio. There, they set up the engine on some kind of rigged up stand constructed of trees and pieces of aluminum removed from the aircraft. With this done, they return to the plane, they siphon off what little gas remains, again using pieces of the plane's tanks or skin to set up a fuel tank. Now, they start up and run the engine, bent prop and all, at low rpms to recharge the battery, while conserving the last of the precious fuel.

They broadcast some more, calling for help, but hear no response. Ultimately, all their efforts are in vain and they die some time later, perhaps days, perhaps weeks.

Now, it comes to pass that some 60 years later, an intrepid group of real life explorers, dedicated archaeologists and quiet adventurers set out to solve the mystery of their disappearance once and for all.

Among their finds....

1. An untraced photograph of a crashed Electra -- strangely, the right engine is inexplicably missing.

2. The photo also shows that pieces were perhaps cut from the aluminum in strips.

3. They also hear word of an engine found strangely on the same island, but nowhere near an aircraft wreck site.

4. They also find bits of aluminum from an aircraft of that era, shoe parts, etc.....

What you might just find on the next journey:
A) A crashed Electra missing the right engine
B) A site not so distant where the remains of an aircraft radio will be uncovered.
C) Bits of wire and such from the jury-rigged contraption.

All of this is simply conjecture. That it fits together is perhaps half the fault of the way the human imagination works, putting things into some sort of order to best understand events, and half the fault of some awfully bizarre coincidences.

And Ric, you CAN comment on my notes and even tell me to shut up from time to time.

Thomas Van Hare
****************************************************************

From Ric

Forgive me if you intended the above scenario as a joke, but just in case you didn't:

1. The transmitter/receiver/dynamotor/battery/antenna system was integral to the airframe and could not be dismounted and operated by any one who did not have really expert knowledge of radio - which, I think we can all agree - does not describe either of our heros.

2. Two people dismounting a 1,000 pound engine, transporting it, and mounting it on a jury rigged stand that was strong enough to support a running R1340 sounds like a sequel to Flight of the Phoenix and is about as believable.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 16:02:04 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Aviation roles?

Ric said:

>To what extent do we play out roles from novels, old movies,
>and TV shows that helped form our personalities in our youth

I wanna be Bogart.  Ric can be Sydney Greenstreet.  Any volunteers for Peter Lorrie?

LTM, who is stage-struck
Dennis McGee #0149

****************************************************************

From Ric

Need I remind you of the name of the Bogart character?
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 19:53:52 EST
From:         Stephanie
Subject:      Re: EA & FN as spies???

>Here's another mystery.  Although Earhart was widely known as AE (her
>initials) during the last few years of her life, many people now get it
>backward and refer to her as EA (as you did above).  Why is that?

"Fonetics", Ric.  "Emelia Airheart". You already knew that.

***************************************************************

From Ric

There's no foolin' ol' Steph.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 19:50:18 EST
From:         Mike
Subject:      Shoe deterioration

In regard to the deterioration of shoes in a tropical setting. I recall reading, or perhaps hearing from an old vet, that the boots of the Marines on tropical islands during the war did not hold up well. Sorry, I just cannot recall the source though it could have been  "Guadalcanal" by Edwin P. Hoyt. At any rate, it seems that with constant use in the wet environment they fell apart in a matter of a couple of weeks to a couple of months. Considering the environment this might be true. Now, I am sure that the rate of deterioration for a, relatively, static pair of shoes on the ground would be much less. Yet, in a year or two all the non-organic material might degrade to almost nothing. Perhaps there are some vets out there who saw service in the Pacific that could provide some insight.

Psychics remote viewing. The lack of critical thinking skills being demonstrated by these people really scares me. Our schools must really be in bad shape.

******************************************************************
From Ric

Niku is not a wet environment per se.  In fact, it's dryness is it's biggest problem. Not at all like the real tropical jungles of the Solomons or New Guinea.  However, getting around on Niku often involves getting your feet wet in the lagoon or out on the reef, and you don't want to do that barefoot. Niku is hard on shoes.  No doubt about it.  I've never been able to get more than one expedition out of a pair of boots.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:00:26 EST
From:         Stephanie
Subject:      Re: Shoe parts

I disagree here, Thomas.  I have a Rottie (Athena,80#) and Mom has two Shelties (minature collie-like dogs, about 20-25#).  I have noticed that  while Athena will shred anything, (and I do mean anything, includinghard plastic, wood, and once even metal fencing) Mom's two dogs, while they do chew the bones she gives them, do not devour them like Athena will in a few minutes.  Even after weeks sometimes, she will find bones that she gave them lying about. They also do not tend to chew plastic, and I have never seen them destroy anything that was not a toy of theirs.  Of course, a lot of this stuff has to do with personality and  training (in fairness to Athena, she IS still a puppy, and Mom's dogs have a few years on her).  Anyway, I think Ric's theory of dogs has  merit.  If the dogs were small ones like in the picture, here's some(gruesome) speculation:

Fido finds the remains (still wearing the shoes) and decides that the foot would be a tasty snack.  He begins to work at it.  The upper shoe parts, softer and also covering up Fido's snack, would of course be demolished.  Any scraps left would probably have rotted away after Fido's tender care.  But why would Fido bother with the sole when he already has what he wants by chewing the upper shoe?  What he's got is much more interesting than a hard, unpalatable rubber sole..... I think this theory fits a small dog better than a large one because there are no teeth marks on the sole.  A smaller dog, with smaller jaws, could conceivably chew the shoe and leave the sole with no teeth marks.  Much less likely with a larger dog....

******************************************************************

From Ric

Somewhere somebody has got to have done a thesis for a masters in law enforcement forensics entitled something like:

Distribution Patterns of Human Remains Scavenged by Domestic Canines (see index of plots by breed). 
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:07:30 EST
From:         Bob Lee
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Is the engine in the photo of the unknown plane on the correct side to match with the scenario of recharging the batteries.

Regards
Bob Lee

****************************************************************
From Ric

The engine that is missing in the Wreck Photo is the right hand (starboard) engine.  That is supposedly the one that had the generator for recharging the battery.  However, I don't that it matters.  The radio signals and the recharging happened (if they happened) in the first 2.5 days.  If the Wreck Photo indeed shows NR16020 on Nikumaroro I think it shows the wreckage that was flung up into the shoreline vegetation by the surf.  The loss of the engine would have occurred during that event, or at least that's the image that appeared to me the other day formed by crackers floating in a bowl of tomato soup.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:23:27 EST
From:         Frederick Galea
Subject:      LBG strikes again

I believe that there is an extensive article in AFTER THE BATTLE magazine of a few years back.  The local authorities have/or should collect it for their museum.

Regards,
Frederick Galea
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:27:36 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Myths on TV

Ric wrote:

>Yup. We're all caught in a big circle. To what extent do we play out
>roles from novels, old movies, and TV shows that helped form our
>personalities in our youth and which were, in turn, based on real people
>who were themselves influenced by art? It's a continuum.

There is an even bigger question to resolve, how do we counter the volumes of misinformation & myth being displayed as factual accounts of the Earhart/Noonan saga?

These TV "documentories" are viewed by far greater numbers of people than would ever read the numerous "conspiracy novels" & these TV programs are generally given "high marks",  by the viewing public,  for accurately portraying "factual" accounts of real life events.

Even those programs based upon the TIGHAR expeditions, tended to overhype the more dramatic elements of the investigation & downplay the more tedious, painstaking, time consuming efforts expended in pursuit of a legitimate, archeologically objective search for the real evidence which will ultimately determine the final outcome of the Earhart/Noonan "Final Flight".

Seems to me  the overall emphasis on the truely educational aspects of this continuing search is the best way to overcome the sensationalism that seems to greet any new discovery revealed & will probably be the only lasting legacy resulting from this investigation, long after the public's appetite is satisfied with the announcement: "Earhart Mystery Solved"!

Don Neumann

 ****************************************************************
From Ric

Or I could just put on my leather jacket and fedora and go after them with my bullwhip.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:34:06 EST
From:         Bill Leary
Subject:      Ground loop?

I thought I understood this, but reading several messages mentioning "ground loop" I'm not so sure any more.

Just what does "ground loop" mean?

    - Bill

****************************************************************
From Ric

"Ground loop" is the traditional aviation term to describe what happens when an airplane equipped with a tailwheel expresses its inherent instability on the ground by swapping ends - the tail whipping around and the airplane suddenly facing backwards.  At low speeds this merely results in embarrassment for the pilot.  At higher speeds, such as on takeoff and landing, the result if usually collapsed landing gear and even a cartwheel.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:35:59 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Why Niku IIII?

Bill Leary wrote:

> Ah, very clever.  I suppose Niku five will be four slashes up/down
> and one across at an angle?

And Niku 10 can be both paws scratching -- very clever indeed....

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:38:19 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Earhart's performance

Jim Tweedle wrote:

> A good landing is one which one can walk away from.

Since we all strive to be historically accurate and correct in this forum, I feel that I should set the record straight on this one. The complete and accurate quote is:

"Any landing you can walk away from is a good one!"
    The source was Gerald R. Massie, a USAAF combat cameraman
    who was one of the survivors of a crash landing in a B-17
    after a particularly difficult mission over Germany in 1944.

Thomas Van Hare
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:02:19 EST
From:         Blake Herling
Subject:      10-E model photos

Just a quick question.... A while back it was stated on the forum that the original casting of the 10-E model had arrived & would be photographed & posted to the web site. Did that ever happen? I cant find it anywhere! Also thanks for the pictures & maps of Niku, its nice to be able to see what the Earhart project is up against, & how the island is laid out. (South Pacific maps available on the web leave alot to be desired. Unless of course Niku truley is a shapeless black ink spot.)

LTM (love to models)

Blake Herling

*************************************************************
From Ric

Just go to the home page and click on the Electra Model link.  When that page comes up you'll see a prominently displayed link that says "Click here for photos of the Model Prototype"
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:04:48 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: The Curse of the Lady Be Good

Referencing the Twilight Zone or Night Gallery.....

The most memorable production of the story was a movie called "Sole Survivor"  (sole being the very loose connection to the shoe issues at Niku) starring William Shatner as the "Sole Survivor".

Clyde

*****************************************************************

From Ric

It's nice to see that we're finally back on-topic.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:08:37 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

>2. Two people dismounting a 1,000 pound engine, transporting it, and mounting
>it on a jury rigged stand that was strong enough to support a running R1340
>sounds like a sequel to Flight of the Phoenix and is about as believable.

Also, where are they going to get the tools?  I don't think a monkey wrench and a hacksaw by themselves would be enough to accomplish all this unless one were very mechanical minded (did they even have a tool kit with any wrenches big enough to work on that engine?).  Me, ehh, well, I could do it with enough basic tools, but it would take a lot more than a monkey wrench and a hacksaw. My Boy Scout knife doesn't even have enough tools to do the job.  I've done more with less, but to the two intrepid heros in question, I don't think so. Also, they probably didn't have any rope and that would be a definite requirement to move that engine.  And yes, I have moved that amount of weight without block and tackle, but I had some darn good rope and plenty of it.  Any guess as to how long it would take to weave enough coconut husks to make an adequate rope for this job?  No, the scenario doesn't work, but it would make a good book and movie.  Hollywood won't buy the truth, but we could sell them a heck of a scenario where they actually land on Gardner/Niku, rebuild the crashed plane, make more fuel out of coconut milk, fly the thing to the Solomons where they are captured by the Japs.  Big bucks - Harrison Ford as Noonan and maybe Jeana Elfman as AE!

Love to movies,
Dave Bush
#2200
****************************************************************

From Ric

I'm sure Tom was just pulling our leg with that scenario.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:32:49 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Ground loop?

Just what does "ground loop" mean?

That's when your hoola hoop stops...

Tom #2179
*****************************************************************
From Ric

Kastner was right.  I don't get paid enough for this.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:35:23 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: The Curse of the Lady Be Good

Ric is gonna spin right up with all this off-topic stuff, but I gotta answer the following...

>From Gene Dangelo
>
>Actually, I believe that it was "Night Gallery" in the early 70's,
>rather than "Twilight Zone," in which that episode took place. I
>remember watching it as a teenager when I was about 15, which would've
>been about 1970 or '71. Excellent episode, too. Serling was the best at
>what he did!(He did both series mentioned above.) Ric's right--there's
>no business like show business----at least, no business I know!

I don't know about TV shows, but the scenario that was described, of the dead crew being recovered (and their ghosts talking to each other) and the one crewman trapped under the tail was from a movie, entitled "Sole Survivor". I can't remember who all was in it, but Richard Basehart was the star. He was the "sole survivor" of the crash, allegedly went to get help, and never returned. He then was recalled to the scene to help with the investigation after the wreckage was found. I forget what the ghosts did to him, if anything. It was an interesting movie, I'd like to see it again.

Tom #2179
****************************************************************
From Ric

...and again, and again, and again.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:39:02 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Myths on TV

>From Ric
>
>Or I could just put on my leather jacket and fedora and go after them with my
>bullwhip.

There's a thought... but for me, whenever I encounter someone who obviously is not "up to speed" on the AE story, I simply refer them to the gospel according to Ric at www.tighar.org.

What better source is there?

Tom #2179
***************************************************************
From Ric

Make that the gospel according to TIGHAR.  I'm just the master of ceremonies.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:44:44 EST
From:         Dave Bush
Subject:      Re: Myths on TV

> Or I could just put on my leather jacket and fedora and go after them with my
> bullwhip.

"Go ahead, make my day!"

Love to masochists,
Dave Bush
#2200 (too, too, oh, oh)

****************************************************************
From Ric

Uh -  whatever Dave.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:57:15 EST
From:         Flatlander
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

>The engine that is missing in the Wreck Photo is the right hand (starboard)
> engine.

That's correct unless the negative is reversed and then the left engine is
missing.

****************************************************************

From Ric

Excellent observation Watson!  But note that the pitch of the surviving propeller is correct, thereby indicating that the photo has not been reversed, unless of course the airplane is British (which it does not seem to be because the rest of the wreck resembles no known British type).   Ergo, it would seem safe to conclude that the photo is not reversed and it is indeed the starboard engine which is missing.

I am, however, disturbed by indentations in the foreground of the photo which appear to be the footprints of a gigantic hound.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:28:57 EST
From:         Tom Van Hare
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Ric wrote:

> 1. The transmitter/receiver/dynamotor/battery/antenna system was
> integral to the airframe and could not be dismounted....

Here is the crux of the problem I am trying to address. I cannot figure out how they could have possibly used the radio, at least not for days on end, unless the plane was on the beach, parked, gear down. Like you said, you cannot get it out of the airplane. Put the plane down in the water at the edge of the reef and you cannot use it. Put it on the ground gear up and you might be able to use it once or twice (what is the strength of the battery anyway?). And since an aerial search of the island didn't spot an airplane on the beach -- I cannot imagine crash landing anywhere but the beach anyway: foliage and trees, beach, water, you choose -- and that means that there isn't much likelihood that it was there. I can tell you from personal experience that planes are easy to spot on beaches, they stand out.

> 2. Two people dismounting a 1,000 pound engine, transporting it,
> and mounting it on a jury rigged stand that was strong enough to
> support a running R1340 sounds like a sequel to Flight of the
> Phoenix and is about as believable.

I'm not trying to be in the movie business. I am just wondering how else to make it happen? Of course, the engine could run pointing skyward from the ground, so it isn't quite a test stand we're talking about. And this seems no more far fetched than somehow lifting the entire plane and dropping the gear leg so they could run an engine as you earlier mentioned.

So what is the scenario? How are they broadcasting on the radio if all of this is impossible? With 300+ messages, most, if not all are fakes -- of that, we can be sure. A handful are intriguing, particularly those that are triangulated on the Phoenix Islands. If nobody can come up with a plausible "how did they transmit" story, then it would seem to point to all of them being fakes.

No matter how I look at it, I cannot make the story close enough to reality to be convincing; and looking it over again, I agree -- it makes a good movie plot. We could perhaps get Harrison Ford to play Fred Noonan, make it a blockbuster and use a portion of the proceeds to fund an expedition to solve the mystery once and for all (actually, I may be on to something here -- this all sounds like a Spielberg movie.

Apologies to Mother,

Thomas Van Hare

****************************************************************

From Ric

Okay, I see where're you're coming from.  The problem is, you're thinking of the reef surrounding the island as the sort of jagged coral structure we all normally think of when somebody says "reef."  It ain't like that.  The fringing reef at Nikumaroro is a broad, flat expanse of coral that is level and smooth enough in places to ride a bicycle on.  At low tide it's dry as a bone and the island looks like it's surrounded by a giant parking lot.  At high tide there is about 4.5 feet of water standing on the reef-flat (as it's called).

Anytime at or near low tide it would be perfectly possible to land a Lockheed (nice big, fat tires) on the dry reef-flat and roll to a stop virtually undamaged.  You could operate the radios and run an engine to recharge the battery to your heart's content.  At high tide, the water would come up to about the cabin door (with the airplane in the three-point attitude) but would not flood any of the radio gear.  You couldn't run an engine because the prop would hit the water, so you'd have to wait for the tide to recede before recharging the battery.

This would all work great so long as the sea was calm and the rise and fall of the tide involved just a calm rise and fall of the water level on the reef- flat.  But if the sea kicks up at all or a swell develops (no need for a big storm), then you get a big surf rolling across the reef-flat at high tide and it's bye-bye birdie.  The waves would play havoc with an airplane on the reef and could quickly reduce it to scattered wreckage that was invisible from the air if the search was conducted at high tide (as the photo taken during the July 9th search verifies).

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 19:11:36 EST
From:         Dennis McGee
Subject:      Earhart myths

Don Neumann wrote:

>Even those programs based upon the TIGHAR expeditions, tended to
>overhype the more dramatic elements of the investigation & downplay the
>more tedious, painstaking, time consuming efforts expended in pursuit of
>a legitimate, archeologically objective search for the real evidence
>which will ultimately determine the final outcome of the Earhart/Noonan
>"Final Flight".

Hype is in the eye of reader -- or the pen of the author, depending upon your view.  I'm sure most TIGHARs share Don's concern over the false stories surrounding AE/FN's flight.  And a good lesson on how these things get started and spread around is this forum's recent discussion of the Lady Be Good.

Several forum members (myself included) volunteered their own version and recollections of the LBG episode.  Some of the that material was factual, most of it (mine included) was at best incomplete, and at times flat out wrong.

The TIGHAR forum's treatment of the LBG story was certainly not malicious nor did it appear anyone was pushing their own agenda.  It was simply a bunch of people with a common interest swapping recollections of an event that happened in 1943 and was "reported" in 1958-60.

Were some of our comments "hype." Yeah, I think so.  Coffee still drinkable after 15 years! . . . modern-day mummies in the Libyan desert! . . . time capsule discovered! . . . diaries describe painful demise of aircrew . . .etc. etc. It's all there, and a bunch of us contributed to it. Fortunately there is a source people can go to and find out the story behind the "hype" -- all of which was true, by the way.

As a reformed journalist, I am particularly pained by inaccuracy and sloppy investigation.  I ease my fears, though, by trying to determine the author's intent.  Is he/she deliberately misleading or it an error of laziness?  Perhaps I am too kind hearted, but sadly I believe most of the bad information on AE/FN came out of laziness, not malice.

Ric has lectured (and that is the proper and correct word, here!) anyone who will listen on avoiding the pitfalls of unsubstantiated "facts."

As for the news media concentrating on the more dramatic elements of the story -- who can blame them.  I am not interested in a 12-hour documentary of Ric, Pat and other TIGHARs sifting sand, sweating, cursing, digging, changing socks, eating Oreos, killing mosquitoes etc.  Archeology, like combat, is hours of boredom punctuated by minutes of sheer ecstasy (terror, in the case of combat).  The essence of story telling is The Set-up, The Chase, The End.

TIGHAR's job is not to change everyone's mind.  It's job is to collect and present the facts as they emerge from the mists of 60-plus years of history.  And like the LBG story, once the full story of AE/FN's final flight is known TIGHAR can create a detailed and documented resource for those interested enough to take the time to look for it.

LTM, who is titillated by hype
Dennis McGee #0149
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 19:25:57 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: The Curse of the Lady Be Good

The only Twilight Zone episode that could even allude to be a story about the LBG is "King 9 Will Not Return."  During the 1960-61 season. The episode involves a bomber captain who is haunted by his crewmen. Sole survivor came out in 1969 with Shatner And Basehart as stars.  The two storylines have obviously been jumbled by time, space and memory.  (I do the same with AE or EA).  The question of the day is, one of the ghosts in Sole Survivor had a baseball glove that they played ball with for all those years.  What condition was the leather glove in under Libyan desert conditions and was it a left or right hand glove? (actually that's two questions)
***************************************************************

From: Mike Malik

What happened is that Richard Basehart was the Navigator, and wound up getting the plane lost. He panicked and bailed out deserting the rest of the crew, of which Patrick Wayne {John Wayne's son} was the pilot. The ghosts of the crew passed the time of day playing baseball. Everytime they tried to walk away from the wreck, they couldn't. After the plane was discovered, Vince Edwards was the officer in charge of the investigation, and Richard Basehart showed up because it was his plane. When the ghosts discovered Basehart was alive {They thought he died when everyone bailed out} they began to haunt him and finally he confessed that he deserted the rest of the crew and left them to die. As each body was discovered, the ghost would then disappear.

Like you said, a good movie. I wouldn't mind seeing it again myself HINT _ William Shatner wasn't in the movie, nor was it a Rod Sterling Night Gallery. It was just an early Made for TV Movie.
***************************************************************
From Tim Heck

A more accurate reference to LBG was an episode of TZ, entitled King's Nine Will Not Return.   It involves a pilot who was sick on the day that his plane went out and was lost.  He is having flashbacks to the mission he was not on, and the episode ends with a newspaper stating the discovery of King's Nine, lost in the desert since the war.  The B-25 that was used as King's Nine still exsists, and was last in the hands of Kermit Weeks.

Tim

****************************************************************
From Ric

I worry about you guys.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:42:28 EST
From:         Clyde Miller
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

I'm sorry did I wander onto the Baker Street Irregulars Forum? The "planes" afoot Watson!

Clyde

****************************************************************
From Ric

Elementary.
****************************************************************
From Dennis McGee

All of this talk of post-crash messages raises the obvious (to me, anyway) question: Has anyone demonstrated that it was possible. That is, are there batteries and radios surviving today that would be comparable to those on the 10E?

We (TIGHAR and its bottomless pit of money) could try to recreate the "post-crash radio messages" scenario.  Ask our resident radio historian to hook up the things and a) try to transmit, b) confirm the battery life, c) test various antennae (or lack of) configurations, d) see if anyone receives the signal (ask for post card).  (The location of the transmitter, season, time of day, weather etc. would certainly affect the signal propagation, but at least we would know that it was possible.)

Comments? (Be gentle, this is my first time and I'm real serious about this.)

LTM, who can't remember her first time
Dennis McGee #0149
*****************************************************************

From Ric

That AE and FN could have sent messages from an intact airplane is sort of a no brainer.  We know that the transmitter was working fine at least up until the last message received by Itasca at 0843 local on July 2nd.  At that time AE said she was changing frequencies and that's the last Itasca heard. The question we have asked ourselves is - How likely is it that Earhart and Noonan were able to RECEIVE signals while on the ground/reef/whatever at Niku? This was actually the subject of an experiment carried out by team member Kenton Spading during the Niku III expedition.  Maybe Kenton would like to summarize his findings for the forum?

****************************************************************

From Phil Tanner

Ric says:

>The fringing reef at Nikumaroro is a broad, flat expanse of
coral... At low tide ... the island looks like it's surrounded by a giant
>parking lot... The waves would play havoc with an airplane on the reef and
>could quickly reduce it to scattered wreckage that was invisible from the
>air if the search was conducted at high tide (as the photo taken during the
>July 9th search verifies.)

As usual, apologies if this is old hat (fedora) but if it is known at what time the July 9th search plane overflew Nikumaroro and observed a high tide, does this make it possible to calculate the state of the tide seven days earlier at the time the plane was mostly likely to have arrived thereabouts, and thus how hospitable the island would have looked?

Haven't had my brain stretched so much for years. I'm just about to send off for TIGHAR membership so I'll take the liberty of signing off...

... love to mother!

****************************************************************

From Ric

That has been, and still is, an issue of great debate.  I am extremely leery of any declaration of the precise tidal state on that island at a given moment 62 years ago.  If you're off just six hours you're 100 percent wrong.  The photo taken on July 9 would seem to be a place to start, and yet even that is a bone of contention.  Was the photo taken soon after the search flight's arrival at Gardner? - or as they departed Gardner some unkown number of minutes later? - or was it taken as the flight came back by Gardner on its return to the ship as mush as an hour later?  See what I mean?

****************************************************************

From Tom Van Hare

Ric wrote:

> The radio signals and the recharging happened (if they happened)
> in the first 2.5 days.  If the Wreck Photo indeed shows NR16020
> on Nikumaroro I think it shows the wreckage that was flung up into
> the shoreline vegetation by the surf.  The loss of the engine would
> have occurred during that event....

Ric, I still have a lot of trouble with that image -- the plane being tossed up in the violence of the surf, its engine being ripped from of its mountings and somehow turning up on the beach some distance away, and yet somehow the nose of the airplane remains conveniently in place for the photo. It takes a lot to get an engine off a plane -- I don't underestimate the power of Mother Nature and the surf, but it just looks too selective.

Thomas Van Hare

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Mother Nature is not selective but she is random as all get out.  Stories from storms of some things being destroyed while others are left undamaged are legion.  I'm certainly not saying that such and such DID happen but I do think it would be a mistake to say that it COULDN'T happen.

*****************************************************************
From Ned Johnston

I like the scenario. Now who has the tide tables for Gardner Island, July 2, 1937? Would it have been "at or near low tide" around the time that AE and Fred presumably arrived at the island?

****************************************************************

From Ric

See above

****************************************************************

From Jon Watson

Has anyone looked up, or figured out what the status of the tide would have been at Niku the morning of the disappearance?  Whoops, maybe I should ask:  'Ric, what was the status of the tide at Niku that morning?' - as I'm sure you've already checked it out.  The description you give of the tidal flat does create a much more believable picture of how they could have landed "off shore", and as such some of the prior discussions have become more logical.  I had always envisioned the plane landing on a beach or crashlanding in water.  By the way, the pictures of the island clarified a lot too, and look really good.

ltm,
jon 2266
****************************************************************

From Ric

All you great minds think alike.

*****************************************************************

From Mike

A thought just struck me. We have a fair idea where Amelia and Fred were, timewise, all the way up to Howland. I have forgotten the finer details of when exactly the last confirmed/genuine radio transmissions were exchanged, but I think we all agree that they were pretty close to Howland at that time. If one allowed them a bit of search-time before they set course in the general direction of Niku, we should be able to estimate, roughly, when they would have reached Niku. Then, if we could figure when it was low tide at Niku on that day, we should be able to estimate when their landing took place. It's a long time since I wrote my pilot's exams, but they would only have had one "low-tide" within their remaining fuel envelope, not so? I am sure there must be some sort of tide-table which could nail the time of that low tide down. If it turns out that the tides weren't right at all for their estimated time of arrival, then they were in for a wet touchdown! What do you think of that Ric?

Regards
Mike

*****************************************************************

From Ric

I think I could have saved everybody a lot of trouble if I had addressed this in my original posting.

*****************************************************************
From Bill Leary

I can't see them taking down an engine, moving it, working out a fuel delivery system, removing the radios and all that.

Would it be possible, however, to dismount the propeller, or even just the blades, thus allowing the engine to spin even if the aircraft was sitting on it's belly in the jungle?

    - Bill

*****************************************************************
From Ric

First - getting the prop off without special tools would be almost impossible. Second - getting the engine to start without the flywheel effect of the prop would be even closer to impossible. Third - if they somehow did get it going the engine would quickly tear itself to pieces.

****************************************************************

From Gary Moline

Considering the possibility of post crash radio messages, I know that you feel that the right engine would have to have been operable in order to charge the battery (or is it batteries?) in order to transmit. After a 20 hour flight, that battery must have been charged to the max and if so, with efficient transmissions, how long would the battery have lasted on it's own?

Briefly, can you explain the radio transmissions to Howland versus then flying on down to Niku without any more transmissions? Would she look and call out for Howland and then divert several hundred miles without any further transmissions? Logic would say that she should have been transmitting right to the end, wouldn't she?

LTM,
Gary Moline

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Best guess - 15 to 30 minutes of transmitting would pull a battery down to zilch.

Itasca stopped hearing KHAQQ when AE switched from 3105 to 6210 kcs. Logically, the reason they stopped hearing her had something to do with that change.  We looked at the skip characteristics of 6210 and found that if the airplane was between 40 and 120 nm from Howland at that time it is very likely that transmissions would not be heard.

****************************************************************

From Alan Caldwell

Ric, I see no reason they could not have landed safely if the tide was out. I guess my question is given the probable time of reaching the reef WAS the tide out.

My second question is why couldn't the radio be removed? It was put in so why could it not come out? I realize it needed battery power which in turn needed the engine generator to recharge. This maybe a moot question as I see no reason to remove it unless there was not going to be a way of saving the plane. Then they might want to remove it to use as long as the battery lasts.

Al

****************************************************************

From Ric

The "radio" consisted of
1. a generator on the right engine
2. a dynamotor under the pilot's seat
3. a receiver under the co-pilot's seat
4. possibly another receiver in the cabin
5. a transmitter in the rear cabin
6. a main battery in a well under the center section
7. an auxiliary battery in the rear cabin
8. a dorsal V antenna
9. a ventral wire antenna
10. a veritable rat's nest of cable and wiring connecting all of these components.

Get the picture?

***************************************************************

From Mike Dallas

>  The waves would play havoc with an airplane on the reef
>and could quickly reduce it to scattered wreckage that was invisible from the
>air if the search was conducted at high tide (as the photo taken during the
>July 9th search verifies).

Could this photo be posted on the net so we could examine it? Perhaps in a jpg format so it would easier to examine with something besides the web browser.

Mike Dallas

***************************************************************

From Ric

I'll see what I can do.

****************************************************************

From Cam Warren

> The loss of the
> engine would have occurred during that event, or at least that's the image
> that appeared to me the other day formed by crackers floating in a bowl of
> tomato soup.

Aha!! The truth of the "scientific methodology" revealed!  Maybe if you switched to CHICKEN soup, the REAL resting place of AE's Electra would be revealed!

Cam Warren

***************************************************************

From Ric

I guess every Holmes has his Lestrade.

***************************************************************
From Bob Lee

1.  Since some of the radio transmissions were triangulated by Pan Am from Wake, Midway and Honolulu does it not follow that at someone on or near Gardner was transmitting.  Or is it possilbe someone was trying to fake transmissions from Gardner, and even if they were, why would they fake it from Gardner instead of near Howland.

2.  Was your reference to hound tracks in the Wreck photo a joke or were you serious.

Regards

****************************************************************

From Ric

1.  It's important to note that there was no true triangulation on any of the post-loss signals.  Bearings were taken on different signals by different stations.  Several of these separate bearings cross near Gardner. On no occasion did two or more stations take bearings on the same signal.  As for faked signals, there was nobody out there.  The closest radio to Gardner was on Hull, about 140 nm to the east.  A Brit named John William Jones was there overseeing some Tokelau islanders who were planting coconut trees for an Australian company, except Jonesy's radio was busted at the time of the Earhart disappearance.  Back in June there had been a total eclipse of the sun and he had tried to use it to get the Tokelaus to work on Sunday, saying that he would call God on his radio tell him to snuff out the sun if they wouldn't do as he told them.  The Tokelaus called his bluff and, sure enough, the sun started to go out.  They solved the problem by beating the crap out of his radio.

My point here is that we really have a great deal of detailed information about what was and was not going on in the area in 1937 and there was nobody out there capturing anybody or sending bogus radio signals.

2.  Sorry about the reference to the "footprints of a gigantic hound."  It's a line from The Hound of the Baskervilles.  I forgot that we had been speculating about dogs on the island.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:46:33 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Technical Remote Viewing

I'd better try to sneak this in before Ric declares it totally off-topic, off-limits, and verboten. <Grin>  Just posting it for the amazement of all!

As mentioned earlier, when curiously searching for something written about the government involvement in Remote Viewing research, I found virtually nothing. There was one book, "Psysic Warrior" that was a factual account of one persons involvement.  Quite a gifted remote viewer.  The most amazing thing about the book is that libraries put it in the non-fiction section!  There's a message here for all who would seek to learn from books that were written for profit.

Now, the part I think may be interesting...  Searching various data bases, I found a set of video cassettes (five of them) of instruction in "Technical Remote Viewing," by PsiTech.  To my definite surprise, these cassettes were in a library just across the state line from me!  I was curious about how in the world any library would have such cassettes available to check out.  It turned out that someone had donated the cassettes to them!

So, I have been through the whole course in Technical Remote Viewing, as taught by Ed Dames (Major, retired??) himself!  Obviously, I can now find the airplane and anything else anyone can think of.  And I can view anything at any time in the past or in the future.  We can have the whole story just for the viewing!

Yes, I "viewed" all five of the cassettes.  Perhaps one of the most interesting parts is at the end when Ed Dames goes through a complete Remote Viewing session.  Wouldn't you know, it would be a well chosen "target?" His target was the Holy Grail!!

Wishing to leave no stone unturned in the effort to find the airplane... Can anyone suggest a good do-it-yourself book on reading chicken entrails?

******************************************************************

From Ric

Our man Vern always comes through.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:50:06 EST
From:         Amanda Dunham
Subject:      Shoe parts & dogs

Stephanie's scenario makes sense.  But as a cat owner, and not a dog owner, I'm wondering about something:  do dogs share their trophies with their owners the way cats do?

For those of you who don't own cats, a feline will bring you a nice dead gift as a way of showing off & showing affection.  I had a large Siamese who used to bring me huge roof rats, because I was his girl and nothing was too good for me.

Anyway, do dogs do that sort of thing?

Do we know when the dogs arrived on the island?  With Gallagher's party maybe?  Could it have been that Fido ran up to greet his master with this really cool present and that's what started Gallagher's search?

Come, Watson, the game's afoot!  Oh, come on, you knew someone would say it sooner or later.

This is turning into the Stephen King version of Cinderella.

Love to Mother & Cujo,
Amanda Dunham

**************************************************************

From Ric

But a whole lot funnier.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:01:53 EST
From:         John Rayfield
Subject:      Randomness of Nature

>Mother Nature is not selective but she is random as all get out.  Stories from
>storms of some things being destroyed while others are left undamaged are
>legion.  I'm certainly not saying that such and such DID happen but I do think
>it would be a mistake to say that it COULDN'T happen.

I once saw the remains of a two story house, in Topeka KS, that had been hit by a tornado (a VERY bad one).  Two sides of the house were completely gone (the two sides butting up against one corner), so that the house looked like an 'open' doll house.  The house was damage bad enough that there was NO way that anyone would have ever been able to get up the stairs to the second floor.  There was a bathroom on the second floor, which was now 'open' on two sides plus the roof (the roof of the house was totally gone, as well). In that bathroom (or, I should say, what was left of that bathroom) was a towel, still hanging on a towel rack, hanging there as if someone had just hung it up in the last few minutes.  That tornado had destroyed the house, but had left that towel hanging perfectly on that rack, as if nothing had happened.

The 'elements' of weather can do almost anything.....

   John Rayfield, Jr.

****************************************************************
From Tom Robison

Mother Nature may not have written Murphy's law, but she certainly validated it...
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:05:38 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

But why does a gear leg have to be standing to operate the engine? Assume for a moment the prop is bent up to the point where it clears the surface even with the gear collapsed... or, stretching it a little further, could our intrepid duo  have just enough tools and/or wherewithal to remove the prop before running the engine? Does a radial engine have to have a prop attached to run safely? Does it matter that the bottom cylinder may be buried 6 inches in sand? Won't it run anyway, if for short periods? (yes, I know, a radial without a prop will overheat fairly quickly, but surely AE knew that! ... didn't she?)

Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

No way, for the reasons stated in earlier posting.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:25:55 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: Earhart myths

Dennis McGee wrote:

>As for the news media concentrating on the more dramatic
>elements of the story -- who can blame them.  I am not interested in a
>12-hour documentary of Ric, Pat and other TIGHARs sifting sand,
>sweating, cursing, digging, changing socks, eating Oreos, killing
>mosquitoes etc.

I am! I can't wait for "Niku: The mini-series".

Seriously, Ric, I think there would be a market for a 2-hour-or-so video of the next expedition... Not for TV, necessarily, but for sale to those of us who REALLY WISH we could be with you on Niku.

Show us what you really do, including the boredom, the heat, the flies, the coral, the dogs... show us what a kanawa tree really looks like... show us a real coconut crab as he is about to remove your kneecap. Show us what you are seeing and why you are looking at it. Show us how difficult it really is to do what you are trying to do. Give some feel for what you went through, the hardships, the agony, and yes, the ecstacy if something new is found.

Not only would it be interesting to us armchair tigers, it might be educational to a whole new crop of neo-archaeologists.

The documentary of last fall or whenever it was, on ABC, only touched on what you determined folks do. Fill in the blanks for us!

Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

Well, until we get the Niku Channel up and running (All Niku, all the time) I think I can suggest some activities that will give you a feel for what a typical expedition is like.

1.  Sit in an uncomfortable chair that is about 30 percent too small for 11 hours straight (simulating the flight to Fiji).
2.  Take something that will make you feel nauseated and sit around for five days (simulating the voyage to Niku).
3.  Spend the next two weeks carrying heavy, awkward objects over difficult terrain in either intense heat or pouring rain - sometimes both.  Hack down all those wild rose bushes out back that your wife has been after you to about, all the while carefully keeping an eye out for the ring she lost three years ago (simulating work on the island). Don't find it, but remember to take lots of photographs and keep meticulous notes.
4.  Repeat step 2.
5.  Repeat step 1.
6.  Spend the next six months trying to figure out why the ring wasn't where you thought it would be and explaining to the international press why you're quite sure that it really is there somewhere.

Such is the stuff of legend.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:29:35 EST
From:         Tom Robison
Subject:      Re: The Curse of the Lady Be Good

>From Ric
>
>I worry about you guys.

You spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to some God-forsaken island that few people ever heard of to look for a media-star who disappeared 62 years ago, who may, just may be at the bottom of the ocean, and YOU worry about US?

Tom #2179

*****************************************************************

From Ric

You have a point.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:49:26 EST
From:         Roger Kelley
Subject:      Re: Post-crash radio contact

Oops, I think I missed something.  Copy you said that photos were taken on July 9?  Were these photos taken by the Navy search planes July 9, 1937?  First I've heard about them.

Come on now, ya gotta tell us more about them.  Like, how many and what did they depict.

Roger Kelley #2112

***************************************************************

From Ric

There is just one photo.  It was taken from about (I'm guessing)1,200 feet and shows Gardner Island from the east end looking westward down the lagoon. Somebody has hand-drawn a North arrow which points due West. (This is how we know that it's a Navy photo.)  The quality of the photo is poor and on the reverse of the original print we found in a New Zealand archive is written "USN; July 9, 1937; pilot".  There were, of course, three pilots aloft that day - John Lambrecht, Bill Short and Orin Fox.  Each had an observer in the back seat.  We don't know who took the picture.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:56:04 EST
From:         Dave Kelly
Subject:      Re: Earhart myths

TIGHAR's job, as you put it, is to create evidence.  In the context of "archeology" the proponents of TIGHAR's theory are trying to prove that the airplane crashed at Nikku. Whether or not they prove this remains to be seen, but it is still a theory.  Hype will always be a part of high visibilty attempts at world records, such as the Earhart flight. When the airplane did not arrive at Howland,  the hype continued. Like belly buttons, everyone has an opinion. In the case of AE, opinions, theories, will be formed indefinitely until they are found.

*****************************************************************
From Ric

I sure hope that we don't "create evidence."  We have, however, established conclusively that Lindbergh didn't crash at Niku.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 27 Feb 1999 10:00:28 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      To change a light bulb

Q: How many Earhart Forum subscribers does it take to change a light bulb?

A:  175

Here's the breakdown:

1 - to change the light bulb and to post to the forum that the light bulb has been changed;

14  - to offer theories as to the cause of the original bulb's failure;

7 - to demand documentation as to the make, model and wattage of the burned out bulb;

4 - to post doctoral dissertations on the electrical properties of tungsten filaments in light bulbs;

23 - to describe other incidents in which light bulbs are known to have failed and been replaced;

16 - to correct the factual errors in the descriptions of other known failure/replacements;

18 - to offer famous sayings, cliches and one-liners about changing light bulbs;

3 - to comment upon how brave it was for someone to climb way up there to change the bulb:

16 - to discuss the philosophical implications of the renewal of light;

6 - to point out that the new bulb was purchased with other people's money and question the motives of turning the light on in the first place;

4 - to suggest that the orginal bulb did not burn out at all but that the Japanese caused a power blackout which was then covered up by the U.S. government;

3 - to point out that if we would only accept militarily tested technical remote viewing techiques we wouldn't need no stinkin' lightbulbs;

16 - to debate the plot and casting of the 1962 Porchlight Zone episode entitled "The Naked Bulb" ;

12 - to suggest satellite imagery as a substitute for conventional light bulbs;

7- to reminisce about candles.

25 - to protest that all references to light bulbs are off-topic.

(Thank you to subscriber Joseph Bachus for the joke from which this posting was shamelessly stolen)

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:56:46 EST
From:         Don Neumann
Subject:      Post Crash/Radio Contact

>The Tokelaus called his bluff and, sure enough, the sun started to go out.
>They solved the problem by beating the crap out of his radio.

......where did he get that story????

Incidentally, if we assume that A.E. was able to make a successful, wheels down, landing on the reef flat at Niku, would it not also seem likely that an "old salt" such as F.N. would have recommended that A.E. taxi the plane as close to the "true" shoreline as possible, to avoid the inevitable consequences of an incoming tide & wave wash over the flat? (Or would the high tide at  Niku have inundated the tree line area as well as the flat?)

Don Neumann

*****************************************************************

From Ric

The story about Jonesy comes from Eric Bevington's very entertaining memoir "The Things We Do For England ...If Only England Knew".  The fact of the radio on Hull being out of commission at the time of the Earhart disappearance is confirmed in contemporaneous records and, in fact, when a floatplane from the Colorado landed in Hull lagoon it was the first news Jones had of Earhart's flight and loss.

Taxiing up close to the shore would seem to be an obvious precaution for AE and FN to take.  The problem is that while portions of the outer reef flat are smooth enough to permit a safe landing, the area within about 50 yards of the shoreline tends to be deeper and much more jagged.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 09:05:54 EST
From:         Dustoff
Subject:      Dog Bones

Please forgive the grisly nature of this post.  This may be best just kept off-forum,  but it is a subject we've speculated on for some time.  So, hoping it's helpful, and with apologies, here it is...

http://www.msnbc.com/local/king/167650.asp

***************************************************************

From Ric

Nah.  One of our many mottoes is "We don't baby 'em!"

I have to hand it to you. It is an interesting piece.

Dogs do bring stuff home.  Recently some dogs in our area came across a deer carcass and a skull and spinal column showed up in the owner's front yard.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 09:29:08 EST
From:         Rick Nigh
Subject:      Tides at Niku

The Tides at Niku should be easy to work out with an accuracy of about Five minutes.  Tides are not just a random event , subject to chaos theory.  There is a direct correlation to the position and phase of the Moon.  The Lunar phase affects the height of the tide.  Higher at new and full, lower at first and fourth quarters.  the position and phase of the Moon can be easily obtained from a Nautical or Air Almanac from 1937. Now comes the tricky part.  The exact time of high or low tide will lag behind the Moons position.  The amount is variable with any particular location, but consistent at that location.  Local sailing directions may help.  Observations taken  at the Island itself will also help.  Perhaps during Niku IIII.

Our Tide Tables were printed up a year in advance.  I can't remember them being off by any noticeable amount.  I would be happy to help, I have none of the necessary reference pubs at home.  BTW.  Has anyone checked to see if Howland or Niku was actually at there charted position?  When we entered the harbor at Diego Garcia ( A well known coaling stop since the turn of the century.)  There was a note on the chart to the effect that "the islands in the Chagos group may be as much as 2.5 miles from where we think they are."

LTM  (Love to Moons)
Rick Nigh
****************************************************************
From Ric

So tides are caused by the Moon?  Son of a gun.

Although it may not seem that way from what you read here, we did not just recently fall off the turnip truck.  This "tides at Niku" question has been fought out and debated with the help of NOAA and the Office of Naval Research.

Look - the accurate prediction (or hindcasting) of tides depends upon having an accurate database of information about what tides at that particular location have done in the past.  That's what we don't have for Niku.  The closest place for which we have good tidal records is Canton Island which is 200 miles away.

Tidal prediction for places where there is no good tidal history available is notoriously difficult.  Just read what happened at Tarawa in 1943.  People who thought it was easy made smug predictions about the tidal depth on the reef at the planned assault time.  When the Higgins Boats went in they ran hard aground way out at the reef edge and the Marines had to wade the several hundred yards to the beach, chest deep in water and Japanese automatic weapons fire.

As far as the accurate position of Howland is concerned, it seems to be pretty well nailed down now but in 1937 there were half a dozen versions of where the place was supposed to be - but all within about 5 nm of each other.  Whether Earhart and Noonan had accurate coordinates for the island is a matter of some debate, but even if they didn't it was at most a contributing factor in the disappearance, not the "key to the mystery" that some have claimed it to be.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 09:53:40 EST
From:         Norest
Subject:      Re: The Curse of the Lady Be Good

Richard Basehart bailed out and was saved.

*****************************************************************
From Ted OstrowskiMy first time in the Forum. Just had been catching up reading collection of Forum discussions and came across 'The Lady'.  I have been addicted to this story for years and have just made a contact online with Howard Swonger (hswonger@email.msn.com).  He told me that the Lady Be Good Story is on URL at http://www.2ndarmoredhellonwheels.com.  A book you can look into is titled Lady Be Good by Dennis E. McClendon under Aero Publishers. Years ago, TV's Twentieth Century with Walter Cronkite did a piece on her too.
Ted Ostrowski

***************************************************************
From Ric

Yes Ted, the Earhart forum has quite unintentionally stumbled upon an addiction which apparently afflicts thousands.  It's almost as bad as the Earhart Epidemic, except even more puzzling because there is no mystery.

***************************************************************
More From Ted Ostrowski

Found my copy of "Lady Be Good" by McClendon and did a quick scan. On page 96 is a photo of two of the pages to Sgt. Ripslinger's diary and a photo of a perfectly preserved silk "escape" map. 

P. 159 3a perfectly preserved diary, the property of Lt. Robert Toner, was found in the sand.

2  Exploring the sand in the vicinity of the bodies  came up with  a sweater, canteen, a flight cap, a pair of leather gloves, a leather billfold containing an Egyptian banknote, the "escape" map, and several pair of shoes that the crew apparently took off  to relieve swollen feet - p. 158. No indication as to where Sgt. Ripslinger1s diary was exactly found. Oh, I was wrong - it was not Twentieth Century with Walter Cronkite, but Armstrong Circle Theatre that presented the TV story.  Walter would have done a better job.

OFF TOPIC: I believe there were two "lost bomber" TV episodes out there, and I believe Robert Cummings acted in one of them.

Hey Ric, maybe TIGHAR could make some money running an LBG forum!

:-)

Ted

*****************************************************************
From Ric

I'm beginning to think that it would be more popular than the Earhart Forum.

****************************************************************
From Bill Leary

Mike Malik wrote:

> What happened is that Richard Basehart was the Navigator, and wound up
> ((..omitted..))
> Like you said, a good movie. I wouldn't mind seeing it again myself

Me either.  Spooky movie.

> HINT _ William Shatner wasn't in the movie, nor was it a Rod Sterling Night

Yeah, he was.

"Sole Survivor" made for TV in 1969
Directed by Paul Stanley (I)
Writing credits Guerdon Trueblood (I)
Cast:
    Vince Edwards as Major Michael Devlin
    Richard Basehart as Brigadier General Russell Hamner
    William Shatner as Lieutenant Colonel Josef Gronke

Source "The Internet Movie Database"

    - Bill

***************************************************************

From Ric

Right now you're probably asking yourself, "Why does Ric keep posting this totally off-topic LBG stuff when he is much tougher on other off-topic threads"

Answer:

1. Because so many forum members seem genuinely interested and, after all, it is a lost (or rather, formerly-lost) airplane.
2.  The postings, while off-topic, are not stupid.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:16:31 EST
From:         Randy
Subject:      "Battery Power"

I've been reading the forum everyday and it seems like it gets exciting by the minute.  I have several new questions though!

1. Which isn't a question, but an answer to the battery question someone asked earlier in a post.  I work in a battery-manufacturing plant here in Hays, Ks.  I've been making batteries for years and I've had the unique opportunity of watching them fail and being charged and recharged.  As for the explanation that how much "juice" was left in the battery or batteries for the radio after the crash; has to be carefully looked at all aspects.

       A.  How big were the batteries and how many!
       B.  What were the conditions of the batteries after the crash?
           Were they cracked, acid leaking, and etc.
       C.  Were they exposed to excessive amounts of heat or salt water!
           "Remember salt water corrodes after a period of hours or minutes.
            As to my knowledge anyway!)
       D.  In order to recharge a battery or batteries you have to have a
           means of recharging process.  In all cases, that plane has to be
           running like a car does in the winter.  It's not the cold that
           kills a battery, its the heat.

2.  In years past of doing all kinds of capacity tests on batteries and seeing them going thru a discharge process, we've been finding that most batteries will last anywhere between 3-4 hours tops; with a maximum of 5 hours.  Like I said, considering the conditions though.  If that plane took a direct hit on the reef, but survived somehow and the radio and batteries let's say were kind of mangled.  It's possible that they could have gotten off something with what they had left in the batterries.  So it is possible. But, once those batteries are dead and you have know other alternative source of power to keep them going, then your're S.O.L.  But, remember, if you guys say that the weather is the way it is on NIKU, then I know for sure that those batteries wouldn't last for long.  Especially, as long as they were going.  Too, has anyone did any research on what kind of preliminary checks they did each time she left certain airstrips.  You know the basic routines you normally would do when you fill up your car with gas!  If one of those batteries was bad, it may cause the plane havoac later.  Remember, you still have to battery power to get you places.  You can't get to work with a dead battery if you know what I mean.  Such is the case with Amelia! Did her batteries give out on her and Fred up in the air.  Did she have enough fuel anyway! As to what people and her were saying!  Batteries can do funny things when it comes to gauges and such.  A fluctuating battery can cause alot of havoac as I have found out with my job.  They can do funny things.  Especially, with the heat.  Too, how much flying time had she been doing since she left the last airstrip and what were the temperatures of the plane.  Was it hot or cold!  Batteries, can swell if they're put under a lot of stressful conditions.

Anyway, Ric I hope this may shed some light and it may open another door as to what happened to her and Fred.  Also, is it possible to do some kind of archeological search on the reef without tearing it up.  I have this crazy idea in my head, but it may work.  If Ameilia's plane is where you might think it is in the reef; is it possible that somehow a archeolical group could block off say a portion of the reef for archeological purposes and pump the salt water out of the confined area and see if you can actually find anything.  You wouldn't have to do the whole thing. just a little to protect the reef.  Just maybe, you might find something! Anyway, I hope this may or may not have been an asset to you!  Talk to you later!  When's the next expedition?

Randy

***************************************************************

From Ric

As far as we know, NR16020 had two Exide Type 6-FHM-13-1 (85 ampere-hour) electrical storage batteries.  The main battery was in a well beneath the centersection and the aux battery was in the aft cabin.

Discussions of how much damage may have been caused in a "crash", like discussions about "post-crash radio contact", make the assumption that there was  a crash.  If any of the post-LOSS radio messages are genuine, it is far more likely that there was no crash.  A no-crash scenario is also supported by the discovery of bones at a castaway's campsite, suggesting a safe arrival at the island.

Let me be clear about this.  It is TIGHAR's working hypothesis that NR16020 was landed safely at Nikumaroro and later destroyed by wave or surf action. We don't think there was a crash.

As for battery failure being the cause of Earhart's inflight radio problems, I think that that is highly unlikely.  We know that her transmitter was working just fine, at least up to the time Itasca stopped hearing her.  During most of the flight the aircraft was at about 10,000 feet where the temperature was quite cool.  And the airplane had two batteries.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:21:07 EST
From:         Jim Tierney
Subject:      Re: To change a light bulb

Thats cute---I like it!!!!!!!
Jim Tierney
****************************************************************
From Tom Robison

>Q: How many Earhart Forum subscribers does it take to change a light bulb?
>
>A:  175

Ric, I suggest that a few more than 175 are necessary. What about the folks (at least two that I know of) who have to post the results of the light bulb replacement, and all the analyses of same, to the web site?

Tom #2179
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:24:03 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Shoe deterioration

Having been away from the forum for awhile, and now trying to deal with the 193 messages that were waiting upon my return, I want to comment BRIEFLY on shoes and diaries and preservation.

Re. Diaries on Niku and in the Libyan Desert -- don't forget that it was in an environment similar to the latter that the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, and millenia-old papryrus fragments are pretty common even in surface contexts in the Egyptian desert.  A dry environment is real good for paper preservation; a real wet environment isn't, unless it's ENTIRELY wet, i.e. anaerobic.

Re. shoes -- I hadn't thought of it before, but in 1978, doing World War II archeology in Chuuk (Truk), my crew and I found a pair of Japanese military boots associated with a rice bowl and drinking cup, next to a series of bomb holes on what had been an extensive Japanese AA facility.  We speculated that the poor devil had been eating lunch when he was literally blown out of his boots, but I imagine it's more likely he was just cooling his feet when the bombs hit, and he ran.  Anyhow, the boots were in pretty good shape -- cracked and stiff, but the uppers were certainly mostly there, after 34 years.  The climate in Chuuk is comparable to Niku's.  There are lots of dogs.  There aren't nearly as many crabs.  Another variable might be the condition of the shoe before its owner expired -- the quality of its materials and what sort of abuse it had been subjected to.  Looks like we need more experimental data.
Tom King
Earhart Project Archeologist
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:27:54 EST
From:         Ted Whitmore
Subject:      WAG data & SWAG DATA

Ric, you certainly have a great capacity to deal with WAG (WILD ASS GUESS) data and SWAG (SCIENTIFIC WILD ASS GUESS) and are to be congratulated on your ability to minimize temper tantrums.

Thanks and best wishes to you and Pat,

Ted Whitmore  # 2169   <\\\><

***************************************************************

from ric

Thanks Ted.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:38:26 EST
From:         David Dunsmore
Subject:      Post crash engine running without a prop...

At the risk of flogging this post-crash-radio-transmissions possibility to death, I would like to challenge you on your assertion that the engine could not possibly be run without the prop in place.  You seem so certain that this is so, yet I'm not convinced, and here's why:

1.  You mentioned the 'flywheel effect' of the prop, and while I see what you mean about it's inertia helping to keep the engine turning over up until it fires, let's not forget that the starter motor had to overcome the static inertia of the prop in the first place just to get the engine to turn over at all, on top of the resistance offered by the compression of each cylinder on their respective 'squeeze' strokes.  At my last flying job, company policy was to start the engines by first using the electric starter to crank them over for about 4 seconds while holding the mixture control in the idle-cutoff position.  (The idea was to promote long engine life and minimize engine wear during the vulnerable cold starting phase by preventing the engine from firing while stirring the oil around at low RPM, since this is a critical time when there is not yet any oil between the moving metal surfaces.)  After this initial cranking, we'd release the starter, set the mixture to full rich, give the throttle two quick shoves to full and back in order to get the accelerator pump to squirt fuel into the carb, and then upon cranking the engine over a second time it would always fire right up!!  My point is that there could not have been any 'flywheel effect', since the engine fired up and ran just as the starter was starting to overcome the prop's static inertia, thereby making the prop more of a burden than an asset (let alone a necessity) to getting the engine to start.  Incidentally, for all you pilots out there, this starting technique worked great in temperatures right down to five degrees below freezing, and all the time I worked at that company I never once used the primer - those throttle shoves never failed.  Also, by jetting the fuel into the induction system it lessened the changes of a fire during start-up, since the fuel would be burned as it went through the cylinders and not potentially blown raw out of the exhaust system, as can happen with a conventionally primed engine that does not fire immediately.  This slightly higher than normal usage of the starter motors didn't hurt them either, since, let's face it, they're designed for it.  This, at least by my thinking, proves that the Electra's starter would have been more than capable of starting to crank (and continuing to crank) the engine (sans prop) until it fired.  In short, the propeller plays no part in starting an aircraft engine, since it is only the starter which does the cranking.  The are only two ways I can imagine that a prop could assist in starting (or restarting) an engine -
A) if a windmilling prop was employed turn over a failed engine in flight, and
B) if somebody was trying to lose an arm by crazy old-fashioned hand cranking, although this would not even have been an option for our heroes with regards to the big radial engine in question.

2.  You also said that the engine would 'tear itself to bits', but frankly I see no reason for this to be so.  If you're implying that the lack of aerodynamic resistance would cause it to overspeed and thus disintegrate, then I see no reason why the application of a closed throttle would be insufficient to maintain adequate control over engine RPM (assuming the linkages hadn't been damaged in the landing).  Of course if the air intake was sucking in sand or coral while the engine ran, then naturally there would be damage equivalent to sandblasting the engine's vital parts from the inside out.

3.  Those old radial-engine-powered Sikorski Seahorse helicopters didn't have any flywheel that I'm aware of, yet they managed to start and run their engines quite nicely (soon followed of course by engaging the rotor clutch and running the blades up to speed).  Come to think of it, don't all cars, trucks, and pretty much all other internal-combustion-engined machines start up just fine with their engines disengaged from any other big chunks of spinning metal?

As one earlier person in the forum quite correctly pointed out, the temperature issue is a big one, since the engine would surely overheat in a short time without the 'fan' keeping it cool, and this would inevitably be aggravated by the already high ambient temperature of the island (as compared to a more temperate climate in which a 'cold' engine would take a few minutes of idling just to get up to minimum run-up temperatures). The obvious way to avoid an overheated situation would be for the person in the cockpit (presumably AE) to simply keep a sharp eye on the cylinder heat temperature gauge (can you offer any insight as to whether they did in fact have a CHT instrument on board?) and then simply shut the engine down as soon as it reached the top of the green arc.  After a cooling-down period, they could repeat the cycle as often as needed while the fuel held out, at least in theory.

I'll grant you this though: the odds of them manually removing the prop by  themselves on that island are next to nil. ...and then there is still the matter of the battery needing to be thoroughly recharged after each start because of the strain that cranking an engine would place upon it, never mind the power that our marooned celebrities were possibly hoping to tap off for the radio system.

I'm not trying to suggest that I think it is likely that they ran the Electra's right engine on Niku, just that I feel it may have been possible if the prop had already come off during the landing, yet leaving the engine and associated systems in an intact condition.

One more thing: No, Ric, I've never actually tried to start an aircraft engine without a prop installed, but then again I've never tried to start my car while the wheels were removed either!!

Love To Mother (...in this case MY Mother, since only she could love a child who likes to argue at such lengths as I do!!)

David  :-)

David R. Dunsmore
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

P.S. Are there any licensed aeronautical mechanics out there who would care to enlighten the rest of us on these matters?

*****************************************************************

From Ric

If a prop is not necessary, why do engine shops always employ a "test club" prop when running an engine on a test stand?  I agree that its time to solicit the opinions of people who actually know what they're talking about on this subject.  There's nothing worse than a couple of pilots debating what works and why.  As they used to say (and probably still do) in the aviation insurance business "Dumb Pilot is a redundancy."
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:46:41 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      Time and Tide....

Ric wrote:

>That has been, and still is, an issue of great debate.  I am extremely leery
>of any declaration of the precise tidal state on that island at a given moment
>62 years ago.  If you're off just six hours you're 100 percent wrong.

Actually, it's 6 hours and about 12 minutes to be 100 percent wrong. <Grin> I mention that because it makes some of the following times work better.

I have the Tide Tables for a few locations in the South Pacific for 1937. These are the tables published by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Coast and Geodetic Survey.

The post significant data for our purpose is that for Apia, Samoa Islands. Apia is something less than 100 miles almost due south of Nikumaroro.  In fact, it's very nearly on Fred's advanced LoP extended southward on beyond Niku.

On July 2, 1937, high-tide occurred at 1:57 PM local time at Apia.  If the tide was up at that time at Apia, it's pretty certain it was up in the Phoenix Islands at essentially the same time.  Low tide was at 8:15 AM, while they were still hunting for Howland Island, and again at 8:24 PM.

I think this suggests that Amelia probably put the Electra down on the beach rather than on the reef flat.

****************************************************************
From Ric

Apia is "something less than 100 miles almost due south of Nikumaroro?"  What map are you looking at?  Try more like 560 nm.  That much change in latitude can have a significant effect on tidal states at a given time.  For example, high tide this evening at Atlantic City, NJ will be at 6:20 p.m.  About 560 nm further south at Wilmington, NC hight tide will be at 8:35 p.m.  And those are at latitudes well above the equator. Everybody wants to make this simple, and it ain't.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:48:40 EST
From:         Vern Klein
Subject:      A good omen?

It doesn't further our effort but it may be cause to be optimistic.  And maybe posting this will actually further my education!

I've already had one response to my shotgun approach to trying to find something else that can be tied to those tantalizing numbers on those two sextant boxes.  The item is an "azimuth circle" in a wood box.  The number C474 is burned into the wood.  This results from a posting on eBay's "wanted" board.  I'll continue to post there from time to time.

I've seen photos of azimuth circles but I'm not sure what they are or how they are used.  They seem to typically be about 10 inches in diameter, graduated in degrees, may have a magnifier to read the graduated circle, and may have fold-up sights like those on your boy-scout compass.  I can imagine that it might be fitted over a ship's compass to be used in similar fashion.

Does anyone know exactly what these things are and how they are used?

I've just started getting a few flyers mailed out to museums, dealers, etc. in hopes of finding something with the right sort of numbers on it.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:57:25 EST
From:         Gary Moline
Subject:      AE on TV

You might want to let everyone know that the History Channel will be showing the two hour special on AE on Mon. March 1st from 8pm-10pm. This is a repeat of the show that aired last Nov-Dec but I'm sure that the a lot of the forum folks (especially the new ones!) will want to watch or tape it. I'm sure that it will raise a lot of new questions and interest into the mystery. Care to put out a preemptive discussion of the show so that the folks will be better informed prior to watching it? That might hold down the questions.

LTM,
Gary Moline

*****************************************************************

From Ric

They're gonna show that thing again?  Okay, you're probably right .  A pre-emptive strike will probably help.  I'll have to look at it again and refresh my memory.  It might be fun to give everybody a crib sheet they could print out and tick off the errors as they watch the show.  Nasty, but amusing.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 12:31:52 EST
From:         Tom King
Subject:      Re: Shoe parts & dogs

Amanda asks...

> Do we know when the dogs arrived on the island?  With Gallagher's party
> maybe?

We don't know.  I'd speculate that they did NOT come with the first work party (the guys who came with Gallagher), but that they arrived with the families that followed a few months later.  But that's only speculation.

> Could it have been that Fido ran up to greet his master with this
> really cool present and that's what started Gallagher's search?

Entirely possible, but don't forget it wasn't Gallagher who caused the bones to be found.  The Gilbertese work party found the skull, and somebody later told Gallagher, who directed the search for the other parts.

This could give new meaning to the agony of defeat.

Love to Mutts
Tom King

****************************************************************

From Ric

Let's get the chronology straight.

December 20, 1938 - Maude and Gallagher drop off the first 10 man work party. Probably no dogs.

April 28, 1938 - Maude returns with 13 women and children, the families of the original work party.  The family dogs too?  Maybe.

June 17, 1939 - Another batch of settlers (sixteen men, sixteen women, eleven boys and fifteen girls) arrives and some of the original group leave.  Total island population is now 58 of whom 14 are men fit for labor.  Gallagher is living on Sydney.  No white administrator is living on Gardner.  Native Magistrate Teng Koata is in charge of the settlement.  Are their dogs on the island by this time?  No way to know for sure but it seems quite likely.  No more settlers arrive before the bones are found.

April 1940 - Based upon Gallagher's later correspondence it seems that the skull and possibly the Benedictine bottle are found around this time.  The skull is buried by the laborers who found it.

September 1940 - Gallagher arrives to take up residence and hears about the skull and the bottle.  He mounts a search and finds the rest of the bones and artifacts in time to send his first notification to headquarters on September 23rd.

If dogs arrived with either the families of the original workers in April '39 or with the next group of settlers in June of '39, they had as much as year to find and scatter the remains of the castaway before the first discovery was made.

LTM,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:46:54 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      History Channel Crib Sheet

Supposedly the History Channel will rebroadcast their 2 hour documentary "The Mysteries of Amelia Earhart " tomorrow (Monday March 1st) evening at 9 p.m. Eastern, 8 p.m. Central time.  For those who don't have something better to do, here's a brief crib sheet.

General Cautions
Remember - this is television.  It is not history.  It is entertainment.  The priority of the people who made it was to tell a good story that viewers would stay tuned to and not surf over to professional wrestling.

The images shown, in most cases, DO NOT depict the events being described in the narration.  None of the many scenes which are used to depict the 1937 aerial search show even the correct type of aircraft. Scenes and stills from Earhart's life are hopelessly mixed up.  For example, as the narrator describes Earhart's first cross-country flight in 1928 (which was made in a tiny Avro Avian) we're shown newsreel footage of her in her huge 450 hp Lockheed Vega in 1935.

Specific Errors

Errors of fact abound in this show, but a few are worthy of special comment.

- Earhart was not a personal friend of Franklin Roosevelt.  She knew and liked Eleanor and had met the President.  There is also no evidence that FDR was involved in any way with the decision of the U.S. Navy to assist in the search.

- The Electra did not have a cruising speed of over 200 mph.  The 10E had a maximum speed of 215 mph but an airplane's maximum speed is almost never used. Earhart's normal cruising speed was 150 mph.

- Fred Noonan's alleged drinking problem is entirely without foundation and is one of the most unfortunate aspects of the mythology that has grown up around the Earhart disappearance.

- There was no hard landing by Mantz in Hawaii.  I have no idea where that one came from.  Credit the History Channel with a brand new Earhart Myth.

- No morse code radio was left behind in Miami.  In fact, the show's description of all technical issues surrounding the flight is woefully dumbed-down and grossly inaccurate.

-  The famous incident on the coast of Africa where AE supposedly ignores Fred's advice, turns the wrong way, and lands at the wrong airport didn't happen that way at all. It seems to have been invented posthumously by the editors of Last Flight.  The original maps and notes from the flight suggest that they hit the African coast a little south of course, Dakar was obscured in very bad haze, it was getting late in the day, and they made a wise decision to divert to St. Louis.

-  Noonan was not having trouble with any of his instruments in Lae.  Heavy radio traffic was keeping him from getting an accurate time check for his chronometer.

-  The show claims that the skies were clear over Howland and the closest clouds were 20 miles away.  That is not true.  The Itasca's deck log and weather observations on Howland describe a layer of scattered cloud around 2,000 feet.

- The show's representation of the political situation in the Pacific is just plain wrong.

- The parade of conspiracy theorists needs no comment.

- There is one particularly stupid allegation that, during repairs, Earhart's engines were replaced with the more powerful engines of the Lockheed Model 12. The 12 used the 450 hp P&W R985.  Earhart's engines were 550 hp P&W R1340s.

- Crouch, "The people I find most impressive are not professional historians but pilots who have done a lot of flying over the Pacific."  Says it all.

- Elgen Long somehow forgets to mention that the Chater Report was found because of TIGHAR.

- Crouch, "We have a list of serial numbers of everything on that airplane." He's talking through his hat.  The engine's and props had serial numbers and the airframe itself had a constructor's number.  That's about it.

- The show ends with an implication that technology exists which could efficiently search the ocean floor for Earhart's airplane.  It doesn't.

The show has some good shots Russ Matthews took on Niku in '89 but, for the most part, wrestling is better.

Love to mother,
Ric
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:01:31 EST
From:         David
Subject:      Post crash engine running without a prop...

Ric wrote:

> If a prop is not necessary, why do engine shops always employ a "test club"
> prop when running an engine on a test stand?

You raise a valid point here, but my guess would be that they try to test the engines under a load, since an engine is only worth having if it can do work, and merely being able to idle under it's own power isn't good enough.  The other purpose of having a "club" might be to smooth out the engine's running, since adding mass to the moving parts would prevent momentary accelerations and decelerations in RPM between the power strokes.  That said, I still don't see why either a prop or a club would be needed just to get the engine going.

> I agree that its time to solicit the opinions of people who actually know
> what they're talking about on this subject.

True enough, let's get some expert input...

> There's nothing worse than a couple of pilots debating what works and why.
> As they used to say (and probably still do) in the aviation insurance
> business "Dumb Pilot is a redundancy."

It makes you wonder how we ever find the time to actually fly an aircraft, considering that we spend so much time 'hangar flying'!

Love to Mechanics (...if they can answer our questions.)

David  :-)
******************************************************************

From John Clauss

I hate to say it , but you don't have a clue as to how an internal combustion engine works.  All of these engines require a 'flywheel', whether it be a massive crank, a conventional flywheel or a prop. Combustion in a cylinder is a violent process and requires a flywheel to absorb the energy, provide the rotational mass and inertia to allow the crank to turn until the next cylinder fires and on and on.  A  PW 1340 has an extremely light crank considering that  it displaces 1340 cubic inches. The only way that one will run and not destroy itself is with a prop or 'flywheel'  attached.

I am not sure why we are having this discussion.  If an engine was run to charge the batteries then it was the right one, almost completely intact on the airframe with decent ground clearance.  There aren't really any other reasonable options.

Just to stir things up:  There are several of us on the team that believe the Electra may have been landed intact, was able to taxi freely and may even have been able to take off again.  There is an area just east of Bauareke Passage that is open enough to easily land a plane.  It is oriented so that a landing would be directly into the prevailing winds. This site is more overgrown today than in 1937, but would still be adequate as a landing strip.  Where was the plane when the searchers overflew the island?  Parked up under the trees in the shade, they weren't expecting and aerial search.  Once Fred figured out where they were why not take off and fly to Howland?  Not enough fuel.  Then what happened?  There are numerous possible scenarios.  For the purpose of the investigation we must focus on what is there now, a substantially broken up airframe that is scattered around certain areas of the island.

LTM
John Clauss 142 EC
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:55:19 EST
From:         Ric Gillespie
Subject:      Document of the Week

We've just instituted a new feature on the TIGHAR website we're calling "Document of the Week."  Every week we'll mount a new primary source document related to the Warhart disappearance.  This week's document is the Chater Report, the eight page letter written by Guinea Airways manager Eric Chater describing Earhart's stay in Lae and her departure on July 2nd.

You'll find the link on the Earhart Project page.

LTM,
Ric