But this whole plane superstucture hanging around just underwater, in perhaps 10-20 feet of water, visible at certain times and tides is far fetched to me and doesn't fit with the near vertical drop off once past the breakers that has been described by visitors.
I don't know what visitors you've been listening to but there is definitely an area of shallow water sloping down to depths of 60 feet or so before the first cliff drops off.
I have been listening to you.
I have never visited, so I like 99% of others rely on Tighar for the description of everything to do with the island. Unfortunately in visualizing and also in descriptions the areas sometimes change drastically depending on which small section is being mapped and how the charts are drawn. The Wiki description honestly is confusing as it goes back and forth describing windward and leeward sides, when windward and leeward can change. Is Windward around the Norwich or is that considered leeward? At one point the Wiki reference seems to include the Norwich side as the leeward side. When in other references it states from March to November is the "westerlies", so the Norwich side would be the windward side. It might be easier to describe it by landmarks or compass points.
The general description I have gathered is the south(leeward side) has a shelf (or shelves) and a spur and groove section on the site seven section, variously called the Northeast, but also the southeast side. The one common description from Tighar is that the area around the Norwich was drastically steeper and contained few ledges to hold a wrecked craft. Yes there is water from one foot to 1000 feet, but is the area around the Bevington photo shallow enough AND with a low enough slope to hold wreckage and also to play peek a boo depending on the time of day and weather?
From the Wiki reference-
"Beyond the reef edge is the steep drop-off zone. The average gradient of the upper submarine slope down into the abyss is about 40º"This indicates a very steep slope which would have a hard time holding a relatively light aircraft. If the wreckage is assumed to be in 20 feet of water(is that the current theory?), then what is the slope there? If it's in 50 feet of water what is the slope there? Are there wide enough ledges with low enough slope to withstand tidal action and storms in that particular section of reef. The Wiki reference material doesn't seem to indicate that at all.
Like a lot of folks just trying to grasp the simple verbal description of what side a lambrecht photo was taken, there seems to be much confusion(by myself first in line), as to what this dynamic reef looks like underwater, and I suspect a lot has to do with where on the atoll the measurement is taken. You go 50 meters around the circumference and it seems to change.
The one thing that does seem clear is there is a much steeper slope, sometimes referred to "almost vertical" by yourself, on the Norwich side along with reef undercutting. We have descriptions of ships not being able to anchor around the Norwich because of the depth and slope and having to tie off to the Norwich.
Why couldn't they anchor if there is a 60 foot deep wide stable flat that can hold an airplane? In my opinion, No Anchorage means there are no flats like you now describe in the Bevington area.
This doesn't sound like a wide, low slope 30-60 deep flat in that particular 200 meter wide area around the Norwich. At least not with a slope in 20ft-50ft range where a plane could hide out and re-appear. Obviously if it's too shallow a relatively larger aircraft will be visible, and if too deep it will never appear to the islanders. Like the 3 little bears, this peek a boo theory has to be just right, with just the right slope and just the right depth, and relatively protected from violent storms.
I just don't see a plane hanging up in a 3 little bear area, not near the Norwich. It seems too dynamic, steep, and violent.
I will say while the color sonar maps are great, if they were marked in depth and slope it would give a much better understanding to non visitors and casual readers trying to grasp the full scope of the island.
I wish there were better marked maps and graphs, Graphs like the following are hard to interpret and very simplistic, which makes much ambiguity whether talking about tidal datums or areas plane wreckage could be hidden.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/TidalStudy/reefflat.htmlSo from the graphs and descriptions provided, a high slope, steep dropoff, no anchorage, it would seem the wreckage would have to be in the perfect spot, on the perfect little ledge, just sitting there for years for Emily to spot it, and that to me seems unlikely.
I think it went deep and went deep fast if the wash off the reef theory happened anywhere on the Norwich side of the Island.