Print

[Ric Gillespie]

This is common lingo still today, especially in the military. Air Force and Navy operators will often refer to an aircraft and it's tail number as something like "ship twelve," for example.

Thanks Jeff.  Come to think of it, in our Army aviation battalion I recall that we might refer to a "20 ship formation" of Hueys but I don't think we would say, "The ship is out on the ramp." 

Here's another post-loss message phrase that has puzzled me.  The phrase "We can't bail out" occurs in [url]Betty's Notebook[/url=http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Notebook/notebook.html].
Did the speaker mean "We can't evacuate" or "We can't remove water"?

First question:  When did the emergency evacuation of an aircraft by parachute become known as "bailing out"?  Parachutes were not in common use until after WWI except by some German pilots and by observers in tethered observation balloons.  Whatever term the German pilots used it wasn't "bail out." Did a British or American observer "bail out" of a balloon that was on fire?  Or was that a term that came along later?  Certainly by WWII the term was in common use but was it part of the aviation lexicon in 1937? 

The verb "bail" derives from the Middle French "baille" and Middle English "bayle" meaning a bucket. To bail is to scoop up water to remove it, usually from a boat.  Presumably the evolution of the phrase "bail out" to mean the emergency evacuation of an aircraft is a metaphorical comparison of a person leaping out of an aircraft to water being flung out of a boat.

But what is the meaning of the phrase in Betty's Notebook? Let's look at the context. The phrase occurs on the third of five pages of transcriptions and is part of an exchange between AE and FN about water.
"Where are you" (AE according to Betty's later recollection)
"Waters knee deep - let me out" (FN according to Betty's later recollection)
"Where are you going (AE according to Betty's later recollection)
"We can't bail out" (Betty was not sure which one said this)
"See" (Betty recalled that AE was saying the water is coming up like she could see water rising)
"Yes" (FN?)
"Amelia - yes" (presumably FN)

It seems to me that "We can't bail out" must mean "We can't evacuate the aircraft."  If the water inside the aircraft was "knee deep" and subject to being "bailed out" the transmitter would be submerged and inoperative.  If the phrase "bail out" had not yet entered the aviation lexicon that would call into question the authenticity of Betty's Notebook. Can we find the phrase in 1920s or 1930s sources?

Noonan clearly wants to exit the aircraft ("let me out") and AE seems to be trying to convince him that the water on the reef is too deep to permit a safe evacuation. However, TIGHAR's calculation of the water level on the reef at the aircraft's presumed location at the presumed time of Betty's reception on July 5 indicates that the reef was essentially dry, not "knee deep." In the attached graphic Betty's reception is the hashed block on the right.  In fact, at no time over the entire post-loss message period was the water level on the reef "knee deep" at the time of day when Betty heard transmissions.
 
If my interpretation of "We can't bail out" is correct, the airplane must have moved during high tide in the early morning hours of July 5 from its previous position on the reef, closer to the edge and subject to deeper water levels. That would be consistent with Betty's impression that the aircraft was "shifting", thus contributing to the level of anxiety.  Such a shift would call into question the credibility of the few otherwise credible post-loss messages heard on July 6 and 7. It may be that Betty heard the last transmission from the aircraft.

[Jerry Germann]

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/bale-out-bail-out.html

1925 , this term was used;......accourding to this source

another source; ....http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bail, mentions 1930's usage by pilots

[Ric Gillespie]

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/bale-out-bail-out.html

1925 , this term was used;......accourding to this source

another source; ....http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bail, mentions 1930's usage by pilots

Bingo!  Good work Jerry!
"The earliest reference I can find to the naming of the jump from an aircraft is from the USA, in a September 1925 edition of The Oakland Tribune:

The pilot who has to ‘bail out’ hurriedly from a crippled or burning plane."

[jgf1944]

Here's another post-loss message phrase that has puzzled me.  The phrase "We can't bail out" occurs in [url]Betty's Notebook[/url=http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Notebook/notebook.html].
Did the speaker mean "We can't evacuate" or "We can't remove water"?

     Funny you mention the "We can't bail out" words from Betty's Notebook. Just yesterday I dusted off a content analysis a colleague and I conducted on the notebook in May anticipatory to writing a TIGHAR paper, which I am outlining, on "a behavioral/psychological treatment of Betty's Notebook." This is the immediate context for the sentence:
           FN speaks:  waters knee deep ‒
                               let me out*
           AE speaks:   where are you going.
           AE speaks    we can’t bail out. See.
Toward understanding what may have been the psychological context of this exchange, I assume that FN was not in his right mind; indeed, pretty much a loose canon at this point of the post-loss period; for example, you may recall Betty's recollection of FN physically struggling with AE over possession of the microphone. My currrent thought, and things may change as my analyses continue, is that in answer to AE question, "Where are you going?", he may have answered--response not in the record because of erratic signal or Betty missed writing it--something about getting a parachute and bailing out. And yes, that sounds crazy, which is my point: I think that FN's mind was well off center at this point, to include the possibiliity of him hallucinating and having delusional thoughts; remember, Ric, your astute observation in Finding Amelia that FN was mimicking a 1930s broadcast newsman with, "Take it away Howland." If that is what he was doing, then it would be symptomatic of a delusion.   
     AE's next words, "We can't bail out. See," seem to make sense relative to the apparent get-a-parachute declaration by Fred. I presume the "See" is AE giving FN a reality check by pointing out the aircraft's sea level altitude!
     Of course my tenative intrepretation of "We can't bail out" leads to the oft asked question about FN: if he was behaving so abnormally, what had happened to make him that way? Well, that project is somewhere between the back and front burners on my "to do" stove. (By way of a trailer, I have an idea about what happened to FN that no one has yet come up with.) Guthrie

[Jerry Germann]

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/bale-out-bail-out.html

1925 , this term was used;......accourding to this source

another source; ....http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bail, mentions 1930's usage by pilots

This source http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-bai2.htm  sites this term was used in a 1929 issue of the same paper, rather than 1925 ( conflicting, but both well precede our date of interest) ....and adds another incident , whereby, departing from the plane was described as bailing out...1932.

[Ric Gillespie]

Of course my tenative intrepretation of "We can't bail out" leads to the oft asked question about FN: if he was behaving so abnormally, what had happened to make him that way?

Betty was under the impression that he had suffered a head injury.  On Page Two of her transcriptions she recalled for TIGHAR that Fred "complained of his head" but there is nothing in her original transcript that supports that interpretation other the than Fred's obviously irrational behavior.  A head injury is one explanation but we need to ask if there is anything to support an alternative hypothesis. How well could fifteen year-old Betty distinguish between trauma-induced dementia and plain old inebriation?  Was Fred drunk? 

For that answer I would suggest that we look at AE's responses to Fred's behavior.  If Fred was injured I would expect AE to be as sympathetic and nurturing as her own distress would permit.  If Fred was just drunk on his ass I would expect her to be critical and admonishing. Take a look at the exchanges in Betty's Notebook and let me know what you think.

[Friend Weller]

For that answer I would suggest that we look at AE's responses to Fred's behavior.  If Fred was injured I would expect AE to be as sympathetic and nurturing as her own distress would permit.  If Fred was just drunk on his ass I would expect her to be critical and admonishing. Take a look at the exchanges in Betty's Notebook and let me know what you think.

After reviewing Betty's notes, I visualize a person who is struggling to maintain composure while working with someone who is incapacitated for one reason or another.  I don't see a preponderance of sympathy or disgust but kind of a mixture of both along with tones of having to deal with a grave situation.  Her comments of "here put your ear to it" and "come here just a moment " seem to be more of a calming, nurturing nature while "where are you going" or "what did you tell me to do" appear they could be said in a tone of frustration.  Then there are the comments of "help us quick", "send us help ", and "Oh, if they could hear me" which seem to have the emotion noted by J.G. Ford as being said in desperation.  "Will you help me" and "are you so scared" have a sound of encouragement or challenging someone to "pull it together" to save their lives.

I have a co-worker whose 20-something-year-old son, though he can function, will never be able to live away from home unless some kind young woman were to marry him knowing full well that she would have a challenging lifetime with a mentally-challenged spouse (he's a real lovable character at times).  I have heard her speak to her son in similar tones of encouragement, disappointment, and nurture.  Of course, we are reading from a transcription and so we don't have a full understanding of the intention behind the words.  If Amelia were having to deal with an adult who was slipping in and out of coherence, we might also hear varying levels of the emotions of encouragement, disappointment, and nurturing - all the while trying to keep the engine running, operating the radio, keeping her own level of panic in check as (it may seem) the Electra is shifting precariously.  I think I can read/hear that in Betty's words.

Gripping human drama....

[Jerry Germann]

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Notebook/notebook.html

If Betty's notebook is proven  .....The line that may, in my opinion, have expressed a bit of criticism toward FN by AE ...is one that seems to follow an expression of pain ...that being;  are you so scared,...or possibly both lines were meant as one phrase, oh , oh, ouch, are you so scared! For me, the insertion of the word so, seems to change the meaning of it ,for me, from a question to a statement. Much depends on how it was stated by Earhart.

[Jerry Germann]

Amelia things are   
here I come - oh   
let me out of here   in here he complained of his head

Concerning ,this line, was he starting to feel dizzy?, and near the point of nausea,..caused by what?
 
In either scenario; injured or inebriated, I see a huge challange for Amelia, .....assisting or ordering Fred across the slippery reef and aboard into the Electra....whatever the case may be. Amelia must have thought it worth the effort to bring him along, however; from what little it seems he offered it seemed another mis-calculation.
If Fred were inebriated, I can see how many of the words used by Amelia,could be viewed as being critical .....put your ear to it, come here just a moment, where are you going, what did you tell me to do?...all seem like commands or questions that demand an answer. When both were being heard, such as in they were both saying NY. NY ....do you suppose fred was mimicking her?
If Injured, ...As Friend stated,and I agree with his reasoning,.... that the same words "come here just a moment", sound calming....but, are the actions louder than words?  In the injured scenario,....Leaving an injured Fred in the comfort of the shade,and proceeding to the plane by oneself, along with any pertinent information Fred may have relayed to you, ....seems a better option. I sense a lack of compassion in that scenario, whereby an injured Fred would have navigate the reef, climb into the electra,(treading high water), then endure 3 hours of intense heat ,before finally exiting the plane , along with Amelia's continued protests not to do so,...and after doing so, recieves a few explicitives from Amelia.
With all that said, maybe Fred was inebriated.

[Monty Fowler]

With all that said, maybe Fred was inebriated.

One thing to consider with that scenario - it would probably only work if Fred had hidden a bottle or two of something on board. It would almost have to be hidden because Amelia was such a fanatic about the aircraft's weight, especially on the Lae to Howland leg.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 EC

[Ric Gillespie]

One thing to consider with that scenario - it would probably only work if Fred had hidden a bottle or two of something on board. It would almost have to be hidden because Amelia was such a fanatic about the aircraft's weight, especially on the Lae to Howland leg.

In weighing the chances that Fred's apparent irrational behavior was alcohol-induced we're not starting from zero. Three facts bear on that possibility:
•  Whether he was fired or quit, there is no doubt that Fred had a drinking problem at the time he parted company with Pan Am in late 1936/early 1937.  His drinking was probably behind the failure of his first marriage and may have been the cause of a couple of car accidents. His association with AE and his marriage to Mary Bea were an attempt to put his life back together. 
• A Benedictine bottle was found by the work party that found the skull on Gardner. 
• Among the bottles found by TIGHAR at the Seven Site was a pre-war (prior to 1940) 12 oz. American export-style beer bottle.  The bottle was one of two that had once stood in a fire presumably for the purpose of boiling water for drinking. The second bottle was a 3 oz green bottle, probably liniment.

How did the Benedictine and beer bottles get to the castaway campsite?  They had to have been brought there by the castaway. (The site is too far inland for wash-ups.)  Where did the castaway get the bottles?  Beach combing?    Possibly.  Or they could have been aboard the plane.

We need volunteers for an experiment.  Drink a 750ML bottle of Benedictine with a 12 oz beer chaser and have a friend record your behavior.

[Jerry Germann]

Is it possible that a duo cause/condition existed to explain fred's words and actions.....Maybe both injury and alcohol contributed. July 2nd , Larremore message, mentions a head injury......Is there a possibility that Fred had a celebratory bottle of Liquor aboard during the entire flight, to be enjoyed upon completion,with wife and friends at home? If at Gardner and in the condition that Fred seems to have been, would Amelia let him indulge a least bit,( But, what she felt was not to the point of intoxication) ...an act of compassion,...to ease the pain.... considering? In this instance, ( Betty timeline) maybe Fred convienced Amelia he was fit to give it a go, and Amelia probably not wanting to go to the plane by herself, agreed......but upon arrival,....things didn't turn out so well.

[Diane James]

I guess since I'm not an alcoholic I don't understand the thought processes of someone who is.  Still, It's hard for me to get my head around that someone who is in a desperate survival situation would deliberately dull their senses.  Perhaps as a pain killer, for physical pain?  Psychological pain?  Fear control?  Or, I suppose, if you are in fact an alcoholic, just because you're an alcoholic. What a terribly tragic disease.

Benedictine is a very sweet, sugary tasting cognac-like liquor. If I were to deliberately set out to get drunk, it would be pretty close to the bottom of my list for that purpose. I suspect the cloying sweetness (which is pleasant in a sip but would be gagging in quantity), would make me sick before it made me drunk. If Fred were secreting a bottle of alcohol on board, and frankly it's hard to believe that would have escaped Amelia's attention, wouldn't he more likely have chosen something more palatable in quantity?  On the other hand, I understand Benedictine may have been higher than 80 proof in some cases. While Fred's drinking seems to have been established, have we any information that he was a Benedictine fan?

While he might have gotten away hiding a bottle or three, in the confines of a cockpit Fred couldn't possibly have hidden alcohol on his breath. Would Amelia have tolerated that? The abusive use of alcohol appears to me to have been more common among non-alcoholic adults in those days than it seems to be today. Might she have tolerated a little alcohol?  Man, I sure wouldn't have tolerated it in any on-duty crew in my airplane!  But the public perception of negativity involving having "just having a drink or two" may have been more tolerant in those days, as it seems to me that routine daily consumption of alcohol was a more common part of broader American society than it is today. Anybody concur or disagree on that point?

Beer bottles seem to make even less sense to me for Fred to have carried. They are physically large for the amount of alcohol they yield. Maybe it was "just beer" and so less threatening to Amelia?

Oh, to have the cockpit voice recorder tapes!  There was of course not a CVR in the Electra, and if there had been it would be as gone now as the rest of the airplane, but wouldn't it be a fun fantasy to be able to hear those conversations?

[jgf1944]

We need volunteers for an experiment.  Drink a 750ML bottle of Benedictine with a 12 oz beer chaser and have a friend record your behavior.

    LOL. Maybe first check for vital signs. "Turn out the lights, the party's over"!

[David Cole]

How did the Benedictine and beer bottles get to the castaway campsite?  They had to have been brought there by the castaway. (The site is too far inland for wash-ups.)  Where did the castaway get the bottles?  Beach combing?    Possibly.  Or they could have been aboard the plane.

Have been a member of the site for quite sometime and have enjoyed reviewing Tighar's research on this mystery.  Never thought I would have anything to add of substance.

But, is it possible that the alcohol was part of the supplies left on the island by the rescuers of the Norwich City crew?