A real result would be an identifiable part of the aircraft , a sign on paper or wood "FN & AE were here" , inventory of A/c , etc. There are possibly clues considered abundant , but one good artifact would be sufficient and form evidence from itself , independent of journalistic description . It is true that deep sea investigations acquired no results so far , but the probability that they will once be succesful is by far greater than finding anything , entire aircraft or other hard evidence , on Nikumaroro . Mr. Noonan , from 950 galls gas for 2,750 mls , accounted for 10 1/2 % reserve ex the weather forecast given , arriving @ 1,050 galls for the journey ; add 50 galls special avgas and with 1,100 galls the tanks except one were full , no further storage volume was available . The 10.5% depends on the s.c. wind regression factor which averaged 0.905 for the actual flight , its reciprocal giving 1.105 . In report 487 no remark is found about continuous headwinds asking for 13% more propeller thrust , factor 1.13 , giving (1.13)^3 x 100% = 144% more chemical energy demand , this probably is the flaw of report 487 concerning the ferry range , there given 4,000 mls plus , but for actual flight circumstances about 2,750 mls . These figures are from serious recomputations by professional methods , so : don´t kill the messenger .