TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => General discussion => Topic started by: richie conroy on October 10, 2013, 03:04:20 PM
-
TIGHAR
5 hours ago
BREAKING NEWS
ANNOUNCING
The Plan for Niku VIII
What will it take to find whatever remains of the Earhart Electra? After more than a year of data analysis and operations review we believe we have the answer.
This is what Niku VIII will look like:
Dates: Thirty day expedition, mid-August to mid-September 2014. Exact dates to be determined.
Vessel: University of Hawaii oceanographic research ship Ka’Imikai-O-Kanaloa (aka KOK), the same ship we used for the 2012 Niku VII expedition.
Search Technology: Hawaiian Undersea Research Laboratory (HURL) Pisces IV and Pisces V manned submersibles, each carrying a pilot and two TIGHAR observers. Each sub is also equipped with High Definition video and still cameras, Standard Definition video with time, depth, heading, and altitude off the bottom data displayed, mechanical arms and recovery baskets.
Search Operations: A detailed “eyeball” and photographic examination of the entire mile-long underwater search area down to a depth of 1,000 meters, possibly deeper. “Live” searching by three people aboard each sub looking at wide vistas illuminated by powerful lights is far superior to searching by looking remotely via the toilet-paper tube view provided by a video camera on an ROV. With both subs in the water every day, the entire search area can be systematically covered in 7 to 10 days.
The plan for Niku VIII is built on the hard data gathered and the hard lessons learned during Niku VI and Niku VII. In the days and weeks to come we’ll be putting out detailed information and answering questions about all aspects of the search in TIGHARNews and on the TIGHAR website and Facebook page. As always, our ability to do this work depends entirely upon your contributions, large and small.
There is also more on the subs on Tighar's Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/pages/TIGHAR/224536440657
-
These are exciting and well-reasoned planning elements that to this distant observer do indeed appear to factor in the hard-won learnings of previous expeditions. I do hope there will contractually-binding safeguards and service and performance levels delineated for the vendors. But I'm guessing Ric and the Board have that covered...
Congratulations! This really is exciting.
-
Not disagreeing with the new plans but would it not be cheaper to use a smaller vessel, ROV and team to look at the area below the Bevington Object and Richies anomaly?
I'm not in on the planning.
This is a W.A.G.: The point of the manned subs is that if they see something interesting, they can grapple it right away. The idea of mapping things well enough to come back to them later seems not to have worked out so well in practice as it seems it ought to have in theory.
Having said that, I doubt very much that it is going to be fun "mowing the lawn" in those vehicles. More power to those who volunteer for this assignment!
-
Not disagreeing with the new plans but would it not be cheaper to use a smaller vessel, ROV and team to look at the area below the Bevington Object and Richies anomaly?
I'm not in on the planning.
This is a W.A.G.: The point of the manned subs is that if they see something interesting, they can grapple it right away.
But Marty, the ROV used in 2012 was able to grapple things in real time: Wolfgang was so adept that he was able to use the grapple to latch on to the AUV stuck in the cave, then pull it out and release it to surface.
I think a bigger drawback to the ROV, as opposed to eyes on sight, is the reliance on the Standard Definition camera to produce images good enough to make decisions. If the High Definition could be made available to the ROV operator in real time, as I believe is technically possible, then the ROV should be able to perform just as adequately. YMMV.
-
Some informtion on Pisces IV and V (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisces-class_deep_submergence_vehicle)
How does the lighting compare to the ROVs? How much more can the sub lighting allow the occupants to see ? how much wider view?
-
Didn't TIGHAR look at manned submersibles once before for a Niku expedition. Have a vague recollection of seeing something on the website many years ago?
In 2009 I looked at the DeepFlight Super Falcon, as part of early planning for the 2010 Niku expedition. The sub would have been good for covering broad areas of the reef slope, potentially the entire circumference of the island, down to a depth of 400-500'. It was decided at the time that it was more valuable to explore the limited area north of the Norwich City, down as deep as we possibly could. This led to bringing an ROV with us in 2010, for searching down to ~300 meters.
-
Not disagreeing with the new plans but would it not be cheaper to use a smaller vessel, ROV and team to look at the area below the Bevington Object and Richies anomaly?
Cheaper, yes, but our objective is to conduct a thorough search of the entire area. Previous experience has demonstrated that ROVs and cameras are NOT the way to accomplish that goal.
-
Some informtion on Pisces IV and V (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisces-class_deep_submergence_vehicle)
How does the lighting compare to the ROVs? How much more can the sub lighting allow the occupants to see ? how much wider view?
Much better lighting, Much wider view. No comparison. We'll be publishing specifics about the systems and the search plan.
-
Am I right in thinking the cost would be in the region of $4 Million?
Less than that.
Is that possible in just under a year to generate that income?
You can generate that kind of sponsorship in a few days. All you need is the right sponsor. The trick is finding the right sponsor.
-
In 2009 I looked at the DeepFlight Super Falcon, as part of early planning for the 2010 Niku expedition.
The trouble with all of the submersibles that "fly" underwater is that you can't hover to examine an odd looking feature. The Pisces subs are kick-butt, industrial strength submersibles and HURL has extensive experience in finding man-made objects in steep coral reef environments like Niku. These are the guys who can do the job. I would have preferred to use them last year except one of the subs was in for inspection and overhaul and they never operate solo.
-
Ric, I know you are aware of the snow-like plankton material that falls and settles on the slopes of the atoll. You will recall that the ROV, when it came close to the surface in both 2010 and 2012, stirred up a minor blizzard with the propulsion fans.
How are the submersibles able to cope with this problem? Enough stirred up and you will be flying in "instrument meteorological conditions" (IMC) with no reference to the terrain. For the ROV, this is an acceptable risk. For a vehicle with two or three humans aboard, I fear that some danger lurks for their safety.
Furthermore, even if you see a target worth retrieving, approaching the target in such conditions may make it impossible to grasp and retrieve the object. Have you seen demo videos that convince you that this is no obstacle?
-
Ric, I know you are aware of the snow-like plankton material that falls and settles on the slopes of the atoll. You will recall that the ROV, when it came close to the surface in both 2010 and 2012, stirred up a minor blizzard with the propulsion fans.
How are the submersibles able to cope with this problem? Enough stirred up and you will be flying in "instrument meteorological conditions" (IMC) with no reference to the terrain. For the ROV, this is an acceptable risk. For a vehicle with two or three humans aboard, I fear that some danger lurks for their safety.
Furthermore, even if you see a target worth retrieving, approaching the target in such conditions may make it impossible to grasp and retrieve the object. Have you seen demo videos that convince you that this is no obstacle?
It's an interesting point and I can think of a couple of reasons why it shouldn't be a problem, but I'll bring it up with the folks at HURL and let everyone know what they say.
-
Ric, I know you are aware of the snow-like plankton material that falls and settles on the slopes of the atoll. You will recall that the ROV, when it came close to the surface in both 2010 and 2012, stirred up a minor blizzard with the propulsion fans.
How are the submersibles able to cope with this problem? Enough stirred up and you will be flying in "instrument meteorological conditions" (IMC) with no reference to the terrain. For the ROV, this is an acceptable risk. For a vehicle with two or three humans aboard, I fear that some danger lurks for their safety.
Furthermore, even if you see a target worth retrieving, approaching the target in such conditions may make it impossible to grasp and retrieve the object. Have you seen demo videos that convince you that this is no obstacle?
Wouldn't better lighting mean higher flying so the jets are farther away. Plus no cable to cause avalanches
-
Wouldn't better lighting mean higher flying so the jets are farther away. Plus no cable to cause avalanches
But Greg, if you want to get near enough to retrieve an object, the jets will also be near. The claws have arms that are only so long.
Avalanches, BTW, were not particularly a problem for the ROV, at least in 2012. Wolfgang was always able to maneuver so as to keep the tether behind him and out of the way. The tether did get caught in some tree-like growths when he was trying to free the AUV, but that was an unusual mission for his ROV.
-
Ric
I agree with Tim on this, Will a rov be deployed to site of anomaly or other priorities first and if of interest, only then the submersible would be deployed
I read a bit on these subs and one is kept above water in case of problems and when there is no danger to people inside sub on de cent, would the second sub be deployed
On the last expedition when underwater mapping was done the fish still found more snags than man made targets
-
Avalanches, BTW, were not particularly a problem for the ROV, at least in 2012. Wolfgang was always able to maneuver so as to keep the tether behind him and out of the way.
LOL! I guess you weren't around the time we set off a landslide and a tumbling coral boulder got hung up on the tether and started dragging the whole rig to Davey Jones locker. Scared us sh-tless.
-
Will a rov be deployed to site of anomaly or other priorities first and if of interest, only then the submersible would be deployed
There's currently no plan to bring an ROV.
-
Avalanches, BTW, were not particularly a problem for the ROV, at least in 2012. Wolfgang was always able to maneuver so as to keep the tether behind him and out of the way.
LOL! I guess you weren't around the time we set off a landslide and a tumbling coral boulder got hung up on the tether and started dragging the whole rig to Davey Jones locker. Scared us sh-tless.
I thought that was during the AUV rescue mission. You were the only one close enough to see Wolfgang's sweaty palms!
-
Ric
Are you in the first sub to descend to Tighar Target 1 ?
-
O Well
It's 05:10 AM 1 hour and 50 mins till i have to go to work :'(
Hope you all have a nice day :)
-
Are you in the first sub to descend to Tighar Target 1 ?
What is TIGHAR Target 1? We'll probably begin by checking out the two sites where there is some indication that there might be something of interest - the anomaly that you first pointed out and the possible landing gear debris field that Jeff Glickman spotted. I would expect to be aboard one of the subs on those dives. If neither of those sites pan out we'll begin a methodical search designed to thoroughly cover the entire designated search area.
-
Nice article on DiscoveryNews.com (http://news.discovery.com/history/us-history/amelia-earhart-plane-search-to-resume-next-year-131011.htm)
-
Has there been any thought about placing some permanent survey markers? Such markers would help to improve the precision of locating any particular feature. As I understand the past methods, they recorded location relative to KOK, which in turn used GPS. The other method used was to identify locations relative to existing geophysical features, which have the unfortunate habit of changing between expeditions. I don't know if the submersibles and ROV's or KOK could use the kind that drill-rigs use, but even having something like a couple passive corner reflectors for sonar would seem to be worthwhile, especially for future expeditions that wanted to investigate specific locations.
Then again, are the current methods adequate?
-
This Youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7fgQgwsEMQ&list=PL1mtdjDVOoOocZln8N_OcUeWAqtgrDCSy) will give you some idea of what the subs are like. The video is mostly about launching the subs from a submersible barge called an LRT, but for Niku VIII we'll be launching from KOK which was designed to transport, launch and recover the subs for long-range missions.
I've known Terry Kerby for several years. Great guy and a good friend. We spent some time together in Hawaii just prior to the 2012 expedition and I had a chance to get a close look at the subs. Terry will be our chief pilot. He's tremendously enthusiastic about the prospects for Niku VIII.
-
Has there been any thought about placing some permanent survey markers?
Any kind of permanent marker would have to be anchored into the reef and that's a big no-no. If we find anything we'll be able to reliably establish its GPS coordinates.
The other method used was to identify locations relative to existing geophysical features, which have the unfortunate habit of changing between expeditions.
Geophysical features change between expeditions? I'm not aware of any evidence for short-term major changes to the underwater landscape.
-
I have an answer from Terry Kerby to the question of whether easily-disturbed talus will be a problem:
"We have worked in areas with fine silt and no current to carry it away and it can lead to long waits for the visibility to clear. The advantage we have with the subs versus an ROV is that we can get perfectly neutral with our hard ballast system and maneuver in close to look at an object and just use soft ballast to lift off without having to use the thrusters. An ROV's thrusters have to be going all the time to prevent it from floating away. We have also done fisheries survey dives where we had to put out a bait station and back away 3 meters and turn off the lights and do a 30 min observation. We found that by raising and lowering the collecting basket we could make the sub "walk" backwards to get our 3 meter distance so we wouldn't have to use the thrusters to move back and stir up the bottom and blow our bait station away."
There's usually a current at Niku that carries disturbed talus away fairly quickly.
-
I'm satisfied. Thank you for checking. Please be safe.
-
Some interesting history comes with these two submersibles...
"During training cruises in 2002, Pisces IV and its sister Pisces V found a Japanese midget submarine outside Pearl Harbor that had been detected on the morning of the attack on the harbor in 1941. Associate director of the Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory, John Wiltshire, said the discovery was "probably the most significant archaeological find in the Pacific". At the time of its discovery, on 28 August 2002, the search for the sub had been ongoing for 61 years. Analysis of the wreck shows that it was brought down by a shell from the USS Ward that breached the sub's conning tower, confirming that the United States fired the first shot in its war with Japan"
-
Wreckage of ‘Carnauba’, a 1930s vintage Sikorsky S-38 aircraft, a beloved icon of SC Johnson's early history, was found on July 5, 2000, in seawater off of an Indonesian island of West Irian Jaya. The company decided to recover this aircraft from seawater, conserve it, and display it in its museum, as part of their rich heritage.
"Aircrafts which have been under water for several years may develop a layer of calcareous deposit on the surface. This layer can sometimes be very tough to remove. Using a metal bristle brush can sometimes help to chip off these deposits. If the use of brush does not help to clean up all the deposits then one may use a pneumatic scribe to chip off the deposits. Ultrasonic cleaning is also used to achieve the same purpose."
With a little luck there may be glimpse of something recognisable without having to rely solely on shape and the word 'possibly' but, with 3 sets of eyes up close, in real time and with manipulator arms simply turning something over may indeed reveal something very interesting.
-
Wreckage of ‘Carnauba’, a 1930s vintage Sikorsky S-38 aircraft, a beloved icon of SC Johnson's early history, was found on July 5, 2000, in seawater off of an Indonesian island of West Irian Jaya. The company decided to recover this aircraft from seawater, conserve it, and display it in its museum, as part of their rich heritage.
I'm familiar with "Carnauba." It's still where it was found. The Sikorsky S-38 is not at all analogous to a Lockheed 10 in materials or construction.
-
Wreckage of ‘Carnauba’, a 1930s vintage Sikorsky S-38 aircraft, a beloved icon of SC Johnson's early history, was found on July 5, 2000, in seawater off of an Indonesian island of West Irian Jaya. The company decided to recover this aircraft from seawater, conserve it, and display it in its museum, as part of their rich heritage.
I'm familiar with "Carnauba." It's still where it was found. The Sikorsky S-38 is not at all analogous to a Lockheed 10 in materials or construction.
They have settled for simply parts of it being displayed, the majority of it is still where it was located, in the sea.
construction? agreed hardly any.
Materials? surprisingly a lot...
"From the early 1930's onward, virtually all American all-metal aircraft - civilian and military - were skinned with the same alloy. Back then it was known as 24ST ALCLAD. Today it's called 2024 ALCLAD - a sheet of alloy with excellent strength properties sandwiched between thin layers of pure aluminum for corrosion protection."
COMPARISON OF MODERN & OLD SYSTEMS OF ALUMINUM ALLOY DESIGNATION
In the old system, alloy composition was indicated by a one- or two-digit number followed by the letter “S” to indicate that it was a wrought alloy, i.e., an alloy that could be shaped by rolling, drawing or forging. Any variation in the basic composition was indicated by a letter preceding the numerical alloy designation. For example, A17S was a modification of the basic alloy 17S. In modern terminology these two alloys are designated 2117S and 2017S, respectively. Temper was designated by a second letter: “O” for soft (annealed), “H”for strain hardness of non heat-treatable alloys, and “T”for hardness of heat-treatable alloys. Degree of hardness of non heat-treatable alloys was indicated by a fraction preceding the letter “H”. For example, 3S1/4H would be quarter-hard 3S alloy.
The following Table gives examples of the old and modern designations of some common aluminum alloys.
Modern system Old System
1100 2S
3003 3S
3003-0 3S0
2014 14S
2017 17S
2117 A17S
2018 18S
2218 B18S
2024T 24ST
5052 52S
7075T6 75ST6
-
Richie, I noticed the Liverpool connection...
Sonar image anomaly
Richie
Yellow submarine
-
They have settled for simply parts of it being displayed, the majority of it is still where it was located, in the sea.
Should this be TIGHARS approach?
I guess it depends on if anything is actually found and its condition Chris, any ideas?
-
If I may be so bold, how do we know that human remains are not in the plane, should it be found relatively intact?
And as such, it would be considered a gravesite like the Titanic and be left as it is found.
Thanks,
--Chuck
-
If I may be so bold, how do we know that human remains are not in the plane, should it be found relatively intact?
There were human remains aboard the Hunley because it was a sealed environment. As far as I know, there have been no human remains found on or near the Titanic. I think any underwater archaeologist would tell what our underwater archaeologist has told us - there is no way that human remains can survive 76 years in an open underwater tropical environment. If anyone can find a documented example of such survival I'd love to see it.
-
...there is no way that human remains can survive 76 years in an open underwater tropical environment. If anyone can find a documented example of such survival I'd love to see it.
Here's one (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fsciencetech%2Farticle-1305929%2FAncient-skeleton-prehistoric-child-removed-Mexican-underwater-cave.html&ei=N-taUp73L7DXiAK-koHoCA&usg=AFQjCNGQOpDQwZPotQjlRtJuVe4rdbs79Q).
Here's another (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=14&cad=rja&ved=0CE8QFjADOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.victory1744.org%2Fdocuments%2FOMEPaper11-HumanRemainsfoundonVictory.pdf&ei=OO1aUoG6B6zWiAL93YEw&usg=AFQjCNHDYP66B_w0EG9Bv1YICEVuH_3uUw) (though not tropical).
-
OK Not trolling but define open environment if you will. If part of the electra is found sealed through say crumpling then it could hold remains that have been protected.
By "open environment" I mean not sealed off from the environment - marine growth, sea creatures, bacteria, etc. It's hard to imagine how crumping would accomplish that.
In another post I mentioned watching the French Diver Jacques Cousteau doing a film in the pacific that showed remains, found a link to a write up here it was Truk Lagoon.
Thanks. That surprises me. Obviously, if we were to find human remains either on land or in the water we would follow the appropriate protocols - as we have in the past.
-
Here are some great photos from Truk.
http://www.lovethesepics.com/2011/06/wreck-diving-the-mysterious-ghost-fleet-of-truk-lagoon-33-pics/
Glenn
-
Here are some great photos from Truk.
Note the lack of coral growth on the aircraft aluminum, versus the heavy growth on steel structures.
-
Yes,the aluminum is still bright and fairly clean after 70+ years.Hopefully this will aid in finding something on the next expedition with the use of submarines and bright lights.
Glenn
-
My pleasure Chris..It also gives you an idea of what an aluminum aircraft may look like in an underwater Pacific environment after 70 years.
I just don't know what affect marine growth has on something aluminum at certain depths,as the Truk photos are in fairly shallow water compared to where we think the Electra is.
-
Costeau filmed Truk in 1969 (http://www.pacificwrecks.com/reviews/cousteau.html)
Images of skulls may have been only 25 years old at the time they were filmed and may have been uncovered just before being filmed.
Some of those old images are still posted today and are still images of a 25 year old skull.
-
I just don't know what affect marine growth has on something aluminum at certain depths,as the Truk photos are in fairly shallow water compared to where we think the Electra is.
Given the lack of (life sustaining/growth promoting) sunlight in the depths where the Electra wreckage is presumed to lie, I would expect the affect is negligible.
-
Dr Tom King has in the past expressed his concerns regarding what may be left of the Electra...
"Why I Don’t Think We’ll Find the Airplane – And Why I Don’t Think It Matters"
http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/why-i-dont-think-well-find-airplane-and.html (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/why-i-dont-think-well-find-airplane-and.html)
-
Given the lack of (life sustaining/growth promoting) sunlight in the depths where the Electra wreckage is presumed to lie, I would expect the affect is negligible.
I guess that depends upon what depth the Electra wreckage is presumed to lie and whether whatever is left includes aluminum. We have a number of possible pieces of debris at a fairly broad range of depths:
• The Cook Object at about 18 meters (60 feet). Lots of light and marine growth
• Glickman's landing gear debris field at about 61 meters (200 feet). Still plenty of ambient light and marine growth at that depth.
• Richie's anomaly at about 187 meters (613 feet). Very little sunlight penetrates to that depth and new coral growth is minimal. If the anomaly is aluminum aircraft wreckage I would expect it to be largely free of coral or plant growth.
At 250 meters (820 feet) and below, it's a cold, dead, dark world with a constant light "snowfall" of talus from above that covers some, but by no means all surfaces, with a light dusting. If pieces of aircraft wreckage ended up that deep I would expect them to look much like the Norwich City wreckage that is at a similar depth, easily recognizable against the natural background except I would expect the aluminum to be largely free of growth. The idea that pieces of aircraft wreckage would be so encrusted and coated as to only hint at the shape of the underlying object is, as far as I know, contrary to anything we see in the Norwich City debris field.
It is also possible, and there is some reason to believe, that the aircraft broke up in relatively shallow water and most, if not all, of the sheet aluminum was carried away to be later washed up, salvaged, and used up by the locals, or widely scattered southward "downstream" by natural forces. That's what TIGHAR member Howard Alldred theorized. Howard was a geological engineer from New Zealand with extensive knowledge of coral atolls. He was an EPAC member and was on the 2003 Niku VP expedition. Tragically, Howard later died of a brain tumor. It was Howard's scenario that prompted TIGHAR's own senior archaeologist to argue strongly against us even trying to find the plane.
If Howard's scenario was correct, the surviving wreckage may be analogous to what we saw in Idaho last summer during the Field School (http://tighar.org/Projects/Histpres/courses/ID2013/2013Idaho.html?route=product/product&product_id=107). In that case a Lockheed Electra was forcibly disassembled (by colliding with a mountain) and the aluminum structure subsequently removed (by fire and human salvagers), leaving behind only the heavy steel components - landing gear pieces and engine parts. If that's all that is still there we have our work cut out for us but, even so, I think the subs can do the job.
-
Here's some 24ST ALCLAD as it was called then or, 2024 ALCLAD as it is called now after 75 years submerged in sea water. Not all samples in the picture are aluminium but, they are all from an aircraft wreck. There are parts from the piston cylinders and some aircraft skin, steel rods and, aluminium instrument panel segment etc..
"The seven samples had been immersed in seawater for approximately 70 years and had a thick layer of calcareous material and barnacles attached to the surface. The calcareous deposits were very brittle, but strongly adhered to the surface. Barnacles attach themselves to surfaces by a cementitious secretion of insoluble polyphenolic protein complex, which acts as an excellent underwater adhesive. The combination of calcareous deposits and barnacle glue was difficult to remove and had to be subjected to a shearing force in order to disrupt the bond with the metal surface. A pneumatic scribe was used to dislodge the cementitious layers. Shear forces cause the thick layers to loosen their grip on the metal surface. The thick layer can then be chipped off easily."
The samples were recovered, restored and preserved and then photographed. Recognise anything that resembles aircraft? Neither do I. The rest of the wreckage is still submerged in seawater, only the engines and landing gear give you a clue as to what it used to be.
75 years actual.
-
only the engines and landing gear give you a clue as to what it used to be.
Yep. That may be what we're up against. The degree to which 24ST corrodes underwater seems to be highly variable with location. In general, the closer to civilization the site is, the greater the corrosion. May have something to do with pollution in the seawater.
-
Ric Says
• Glickman's landing gear debris field at about 61 meters (200 feet). Still plenty of ambient light and marine growth at that depth.
I think that is an overly optimistic assessment.
From Wikipedia
<<<<<<<
With increasing depth underwater, sunlight is absorbed, and the amount of visible light diminishes. Because absorption is greater for long wavelengths (red end of the visible spectrum) than for short wavelengths (blue end of the visible spectrum), the colour spectrum is rapidly altered with increasing depth. White objects at the surface appear bluish underwater, and red objects appear dark, even black. Although light penetration will be less if water is turbid, in the very clear water of the open ocean less than 25% of the surface light reaches a depth of 10 m (33 feet). At 100 m (330 ft) the light present from the sun is normally about 0.5% of that at the surface.
The euphotic depth is the depth at which light intensity falls to 1% of the value at the surface. This depth is dependent upon water clarity, being only a few metres underwater in a turbid estuary, but may reach up to 200 metres in the open ocean. At the euphotic depth, plants (such as phytoplankton) have no net energy gain from photosynthesis and thus cannot grow.
>>>>>
I also found this description that matches pretty well
<<<<<<<
At 300 ft (90 m), most of even the blue light (the most penetrating) has been absorbed, while below 650 ft (200 m), the only light comes from bioluminescent organisms, which produce their own light.
http://oceana.org/es/explore/marine-science/light-and-sound
>>>>>>
I would not expect much marine growth on an object that landed at 200 ft given the minimal amount of light down there. I haven't been able to find a formula, but clearly the light attenuates at an exponential rate.
Andrew
-
Whatever wreckage is down there started at the surface and progressively, over a number of decades, made its way to where it is today? So it has been subject to various levels of light penetration and marine growth over the decades?
-
Well, something's down there, and it must be found and explored.
Let's cross our fingers this is it!
-
Whatever wreckage is down there started at the surface and progressively, over a number of decades, made its way to where it is today? So it has been subject to various levels of light penetration and marine growth over the decades?
Maybe. Of maybe it's right where it came rest in 1937. How would we know?
-
Whatever wreckage is down there started at the surface and progressively, over a number of decades, made its way to where it is today? So it has been subject to various levels of light penetration and marine growth over the decades?
Maybe. Of maybe it's right where it came rest in 1937. How would we know?
We wouldn't know. If it is where it came to rest in 1937 then it will have saved itself 75 years of damage getting to where it is now and, could quite possibly be in better shape than we could hope for. Fingers crossed its like the lagoon wrecks we see so much of, although the side of a seamount looks a little more hostile. Be great if it is recognisable but, so far nothing has shown up as such on video, images or sonar.
-
Be great if it is recognisable but, so far nothing has shown up as such on video, images or sonar.
True, but remember that the area covered by ROV video - 2010 and 2012 combined - is a tiny fraction of the logical search area and the side-scan sonar was demonstrated to be capable of totally missing objects much larger than a fully intact Electra.
-
Agreed, much experience of high tech gizmos not doing as specified and, you can't beat the good old eyes on approach to getting things done.
Example:
Bowman is the name of the tactical communications system used by the British Armed Forces.
The Bowman C4I system consists of a range of HF radio, VHF radio and UHF radio sets designed to provide secure integrated voice, data services to dismounted soldiers, individual vehicles and command HQs up to Division level.
Which when translated in the field became...
When Bowman was first introduced into service, the system was said to contain many faults to the extent that troops dubbed Bowman "Better Off With Map And Nokia".
They'll get it to work someday, in the meantime the carrier pigeons jobs are still safe ;)
-
Sure i posted on this a few minutes ago ?
quote: True, but remember that the area covered by ROV video - 2010 and 2012 combined - is a tiny fraction of the logical search area and the side-scan sonar was demonstrated to be capable of totally missing objects much larger than a fully intact Electra
Ric
Why did neither the 2010 or 2012 search Rov go straight to logical search area ?.
Just asking out of curiosity really ?
-
Why did neither the 2010 or 2012 search Rov go straight to logical search area ?.
They did, but in 2010 the long (300 meter) tether failed after just a few dives and subsequent dives were limited to 150 meters untlil the last week when a new long cable arrived, but then the cable for the navigation system got fouled in the ship's propeller so there was no record of exactly where the ROV was during its dives. The infamous "wire & rope" video was shot without the benefit of nav info so we only know where the ROV was in a general sense.
In 2012 we started in the logical search area but soon got sidetracked chasing "promising" targets that turned up in the sidescan data collected by the AUV. Between checking out sidescan targets and rescuing the SUV we reurned to "mowing the lawn" in the logical search area, but we ran out of time before we had covered any more than a small fraction.
-
[... but we ran out of time before we had covered any more than a small fraction.
And some of the time crunch, if I remember correctly, was due to mechanical/operational issues with the high-tech search wizzardry. Nikumaroro is a harsh taskmaster, and likes to deliver its lessons in a brutally direct fashion. I'm glad to see we're going to try and raise the money for a 30-day expedition - things are going to go wrong, just as sure as we're breathing, and that gives us somewhat of a cushion to search the maximum possible underwater area.
77 years is long enough to wait. Amelia and Fred deserve that.
LTM, who will be sending another check soon,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Ric,
Would you give us an idea of the amount of contributions each of us would need to pledge to make the next year program a go.
Ted Campbell
-
It would be grand if the sea search mission of Niku VIII could be matched with a land search mission. You have addressed this before, pointing out that there is limited space aboard the KOK, and the KOK is not designed as a shore-support vessel. Yet a land party could work with a fraction of the hardware of the sea party, and could be funded by an incremental amount. If a second vessel was necessary for the land party, it would not have to have the sophistication of the KOK. Circumstances might develop where a second vessel might have a role to play in the sea search. AE and FN had days to roam around the island, looking for sustenance, in between radio broadcasts. Other castaways have tried to somehow leave a record of their plight. Especially since they spent days flinging their distress calls to an unhearing world, AE and FN may have wanted to leave a testament to their fate. Who knows what might be in plain sight in the deep bush of Niku? Having a land mission would also be a way to cover our bets for the limited targets of the sea search. From your archaeology field courses, I bet you would have a pool of qualified volunteers.
Scott Mitchell
TIGHAR #3292
-
sea and land search link (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Niku8/niku8plan.html)
-
Ah. Thanks, Greg. / Scott
-
I'm glad we're going to look for the postulated Camp Zero, and I am as always hopeful that Amelia's watch or Fred's Arrow pen will be found right out in the open, but ... we have to remember that the west side of the island, where Camp Zero would most likely have been located, is also the direction that the powerful storms come slamming into the island from, and on a relatively regular basis.
Previous Niku expeditions have found evidence of ocean overwash hundreds of feet back into the brush, and much of the original village area has been either rearranged or basically cleaned off of light surface deposits. The former landing channel marker, a fairly substantial construction, has been completely removed.
But - we might get lucky. I'm more than willing to settle for that.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Ric, make it easy on yourself.
-
I'm glad we're going to look for the postulated Camp Zero, and I am as always hopeful that Amelia's watch or Fred's Arrow pen will be found right out in the open, but ... we have to remember that the west side of the island, where Camp Zero would most likely have been located, is also the direction that the powerful storms come slamming into the island from, and on a relatively regular basis.
Previous Niku expeditions have found evidence of ocean overwash hundreds of feet back into the brush, and much of the original village area has been either rearranged or basically cleaned off of light surface deposits. The former landing channel marker, a fairly substantial construction, has been completely removed.
But - we might get lucky. I'm more than willing to settle for that.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Good point. I noticed the saltwater incursions noted by TIGHAR on some aerials. Maybe storms could help though. It would be nice to get lucky and find aircraft wreckage washed up or uncovered when looking for camp zero. I'll settle for TIGHAR having a safe search, good equipment and just not having bad luck. The 2012 Dive 3 picked up the Glickman Debris field right off the bat, right in an area where it should be. Looking forward to a better look of that area in 2014
-
Hi Ric
Sure I have asked u that question before so my apologies.
Will you's be heading straight for Tighar Target 1\Sonar anomaly or will the 2012 debris field be first on list ?
Also would it be possible to setup a live feed of video getting sent up to ships monitors ? May also bring allot more people and donation to expedition funds
-
I like the idea of a live video feed, even though I would undoubtely get motion sick just watching it. I can see where it would have the potential to generate a LOT of extra excitement/enthusiasm/funds/etc. What gives me pause are two factors: 1) Logistics, and 2) Costs.
I'm not up on global communications, but I do know that any kind of satellite communication or live feed would be expensive. If it comes down to a live feed or more days of bottom time for the mini-subs, I vote for more bottom time. If TIGHAR can snag another sponsorship from something like the Discovery Channel, then there would be the issue of them having "first rights" to the Any Idiot Artifact when it's found. Selling those rights could raise a good chunk of the needed cash.
There is also the fine line between serious exploration and cheesy reality TV-type programming. I think we want to avoid the latter, no matter how many new donors it might snag.
LTM, who cut the TV cable awhile ago,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Will you's be heading straight for Tighar Target 1\Sonar anomaly or will the 2012 debris field be first on list ?
We's be heading straight for the banjo! Seriously, with two subs in the water we should be able to check both the possible debris field and the anomaly on the first day.
Also would it be possible to setup a live feed of video getting sent up to ships monitors ? May also bring allot more people and donation to expedition funds
The subs have no connection to the surface so video imagery will only be available after they are recovered aboard ship. A live video feed is not in the cards.
-
Call off the next expedition, I found her….
-
Call off the next expedition, I found her….
Yeah, that's about about what I would expect her to look like after 76 years.
-
OUCH! Glad that wasn't a picture of me!
-
My goodness, she's "ossified"!
-
And I hadn't even read about these subs when I took this pic of their home in Hawaii!
(http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g255/BobM_album/Hawaii2055_zps69c6f724.jpg) (http://s58.photobucket.com/user/BobM_album/media/Hawaii2055_zps69c6f724.jpg.html)
-
Pisces submersibles help find WWII Japanese sub (http://news.msn.com/offbeat/world-war-ii-era-japanese-submarine-found-off-hawaii-coast).
Another article here (http://manoa.hawaii.edu/news/article.php?aId=6166)
YouTube video showing initial sighting (example of lighting at 2,300 feet) here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmjmPHNYXO8)
-
YouTube video showing initial sighting (example of lighting at 2,300 feet) here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmjmPHNYXO8)
I dream of coming upon the Electra wreckage like that.
-
YouTube video showing initial sighting (example of lighting at 2,300 feet) here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmjmPHNYXO8)
I dream of coming upon the Electra wreckage like that.
That is a fine dream.
-
MARS IS FOUND IN SEAFLOOR SURVEY AROUND JAPANESE MINI-SUBMARINE NOAA and Partners Survey "Flying Boat" Crash Sites.
(Not the red planet)
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2004/s2354.htm (http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2004/s2354.htm)
Image courtesy of NOAA/HURL
-
I dream of coming upon the Electra wreckage like that.
Dream to your heart's content, Ric.
The fact is that you have already identified evidence of the Electra. Remember this item you tagged in 2012 ("What is this object?")? It is, I believe, a pushrod to a valve in a Wasp cylinder. There are plenty more examples in the vicinity (see second attachment).
NR16020 survives in thousands of pieces. Most of them are scattered in a very small area. Get used to it, my friend.
-
Hi Tim,
In your opinion, what is the likelyhood of the ( detached) external engine parts, ( pushrod and tube) to become closely lined up with the believed to be exposed internal parts, (valve and spring),... considering the force it would require to demolish the cylinder jug to resemble your cutaway picture?
-
The fact is that you have already identified evidence of the Electra.
No I haven't. I expressed curiosity about a curiously shaped object. I did not identify anything.
It is, I believe, a pushrod to a valve in a Wasp cylinder. There are plenty more examples in the vicinity (see second attachment).
I think it's probably a spine from some form of marine growth. I agree that there are plenty more in the vicinity.
NR16020 survives in thousands of pieces. Most of them are scattered in a very small area. Get used to it, my friend.
I think it is entirely possible that only some heavy components of the aircraft have survived underwater in the dynamic reef environment. I don't doubt that they are hard to find because I'm quite sure we haven't found any yet. And BTW, friends don't sue friends.
-
Oh, what sort of marine growth did you have in mind? Certainly not the backbone of a red snapper, would you think? (Although there does appear one a minute later in the video).
And BTW, friends don't sue friends.
You seem to take it personally. Please don't.
-
The HURL team seems to be grindingly methodical, which is why they find things. Not unlike TIGHAR. They also seem to be commendably cautious in making sure that what they think they see is actually what they do see. Again, not unlike TIGHAR.
LTM, who thinks Niku VIII is going to be the one,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
You seem to take it personally. Please don't.
You name me as an individual in the suit and the original complaint included a RICO charge that could have put me in jail - and you say "don't take it personally". Amazing.
-
It is, I believe, a pushrod to a valve in a Wasp cylinder. There are plenty more examples in the vicinity (see second attachment).
I think it's probably a spine from some form of marine growth. I agree that there are plenty more in the vicinity.
If these "marine growths" are so ubiquitous, and not just confined to the Site #1, perhaps you would be so kind as to find one, or several, on the "Dive 14" video and reference the time-stamp.
-
Tim,
You state.... " It is , I believe ,a pushrod to a valve in a wasp cylinder" If this piece were a mechanical part , I would be more inclined to believe it to be the pushrod tube , instead of the pushrod itself...however; on none of the engines I have researched, does it appear that the pushrod and or pushrod tubes taper the way this object seems to do, rather they are of consistent diameter from top to bottom .....I agree with Ric , it tapers like a spine or root.
-
Jerry, good observation.
But does it taper, or is it just flattened and twisted in order to accommodate the hole in the tappet that rides up and down on the cam?
Also, would you allow that 76 years under salt water at 985 feet might allow for some degradation in the dimensions of a metal component?
-
Tim,
I don't have access to high res photos, so it is difficult for me to see much fine detail. I don't really understand your statement regarding the pushrod tube having to be twisted , flattened, or bent to align with the tappet hole. If you have a bent pushrod and /or pushrod housing tube you have problems....most likely a sticky or stuck exhaust valve. Looking at the wasp radial, the pushrods/housings appear to be at a slant from the crankcase to the cylinder jug,.... ( only natural with this engine design), accually they are relatively straight ( as the hands of a clock pointing to whatever time it may be) ...in addition the ball on the ends of the pushrod could accomodate for any slight angle, with no bending of the rod or it's housing. I am unfamiliar as to the material this pushrod housing is made from, however I can't imagine it would be a very heavy guage, thus one might expect bending and flattening,and twisting, considering the force required to separate it from it's position (crankcase to cylinder jug). And yes, degradation.
Viewing your second attachment, You note what you believe to be housing, next to the valve, ....oh, if there were only cylinder cooling fins visible on that chunk of whatever it is.
-
Viewing your second attachment, You note what you believe to be housing, next to the valve, ....oh, if there were only cylinder cooling fins visible on that chunk of whatever it is.
Jerry, you must have whispered into Santa's ear.
Upon further examination of that second attachment, I believe there to be cooling fins apparent in the upper left hand corner, as shown in the enlargement attached to this post, within the green rectangle. Also, if I am not mistaken, there appears to be an intact valve casing just above those fins, with its own pushrod casing descending to the right in a "south-southeasterly" direction. Also, for comparison, a picture of an actual Wasp valve casing.
In the minutes before this frame, there are many other appearances of largely intact valve casings, some with pushrods still attached and some not. I shall await receiving the High Definition footage of this part of the dive, however, before commenting further. The 16 minute HD run that I already have ends just before the ROV takes its trip downhill.
-
Viewing your second attachment, You note what you believe to be housing, next to the valve, ....oh, if there were only cylinder cooling fins visible on that chunk of whatever it is.
Jerry, you must have whispered into Santa's ear.
Upon further examination of that second attachment, I believe there to be cooling fins apparent in the upper left hand corner, as shown in the enlargement attached to this post, within the green rectangle. Also, if I am not mistaken, there appears to be an intact valve casing just above those fins, with its own pushrod casing descending to the right in a "south-southeasterly" direction. Also, for comparison, a picture of an actual Wasp valve casing.
In the minutes before this frame, there are many other appearances of largely intact valve casings, some with pushrods still attached and some not. I shall await receiving the High Definition footage of this part of the dive, however, before commenting further. The 16 minute HD run that I already have ends just before the ROV takes its trip downhill.
Peeked in for a breath of fresh air... and got a whiff of the tomb -
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh! It ain't in the photos guys... if so, trust me - Ric would've been dancing a jig and releasing a great book and rolling in movie rights, etc., etc. by now...
Still got to go FIND it (choose yer own search if this one don't suit ye) -
No offense, but -
You seem to take it personally. Please don't.
You name me as an individual in the suit and the original complaint included a RICO charge that could have put me in jail - and you say "don't take it personally". Amazing.
It's been out of mind until this fresh reminder - y'know there's something to that, Tim - not to pry, I mean I guess it's public knowledge anyway...
But to quote a famous individual who went from brawler to awed spectator in my time, "can't we just all be friends?"
Agree, disagree - but would you have really felt it to be impersonal if you'd seen Ric carted off to the federal pen for a RICO violation??? Sorry, but just had to ask that.
-
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh! It ain't in the photos guys... if so, trust me - Ric would've been dancing a jig and releasing a great book and rolling in movie rights, etc., etc. by now...
Unfortunately, Jeff, that train has already left the station.
-
Jeff,
I haven't been swayed either way yet, however; I do think it fair to ourselves and others to keep an open mind.
Mr Mellon believes in what he sees, others likewise, Niku VIII may well resolve many issues.
Tim,
Without higher quality images, I am unable to see the items or the details you decribe. I do think,.... if one were to find a weak point in the cylinder jug , it might be the rocker arm/valve body/ intake port area. Where in relationship to the anomoly is site #1?
-
Where in relationship to the anomoly is site #1?
All around. These Standard Definition video captures are from the first 2012 ROV dive. The rope was found here and the Site is listed first in the Research Bulletin #65 (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/65_DebrisFieldAnalysis/65_DebrisFieldAnalysis.html). The debris field extends from ~975 feet down to ~1010 feet.
-
Don't take the law suit personally!!
Let's see:
Named personally in the law suit.
Trying to wreck Tighar financially, an organization Ric has devoted decades of his life to.
Heck, I as a member am even took it personally!
-
Just an observation. The words Listen and Silent have the same letters in them. Coincidence? I think not.
Regardless, I've sent in a check for Niku VIII, doing what I can, when I can. I encourage other TIGHARs to do the same in a year-end blitz, which you can write off on your taxes (woot!).
LTM, who thinks VIII will be the lucky number,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Just an observation. The words Listen and Silent have the same letters in them. Coincidence? I think not.
So Monty, how does this relate to "Tinsel" or "Inlets"?
-
Viewing your second attachment, You note what you believe to be housing, next to the valve, ....oh, if there were only cylinder cooling fins visible on that chunk of whatever it is.
Jerry, you must have whispered into Santa's ear.
Upon further examination of that second attachment, I believe there to be cooling fins apparent in the upper left hand corner, as shown in the enlargement attached to this post, within the green rectangle. Also, if I am not mistaken, there appears to be an intact valve casing just above those fins, with its own pushrod casing descending to the right in a "south-southeasterly" direction. Also, for comparison, a picture of an actual Wasp valve casing.
In the minutes before this frame, there are many other appearances of largely intact valve casings, some with pushrods still attached and some not. I shall await receiving the High Definition footage of this part of the dive, however, before commenting further. The 16 minute HD run that I already have ends just before the ROV takes its trip downhill.
In February 1942 a Brewster Buffalo, a US Marine Corps fighter plane (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/us/02fighter.html?_r=0) of the time, crash landed in 10 feet of water near the runway on Midway Atoll. The wreckage was recently discovered and an under water video (http://vimeo.com/66180790) made at the site. There are some excellent pictures of aircraft parts that have been in the water almost as long as AE's Electra. You can look at the video and form your own opinion about what might be left of AE's aircraft at Niku.
-
Just an observation. The words Listen and Silent have the same letters in them. Coincidence? I think not.
So Monty, how does this relate to "Tinsel" or "Inlets"?
A quick internet search revealed the relationship:
(http://newthoughtfamilies.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/tinselinlets1.jpg)
Now that it's settled, should we get back on topic, niku VIII plan?
-
Listen at the inlets for the silence of the tinsel.
(Old Buddhist saying. Very profound.)
-
C.W. Says
"There are some excellent pictures of aircraft parts that have been in the water almost as long as AE's Electra. You can look at the video and form your own opinion about what might be left of AE's aircraft at Niku."
10 ft deep is a very dynamic place to be, either in or out of the lagoon. What you see left of the Buffalo reflects 70 years of dynamics at 10' working on the machine. Not much of it left.
Personally, I don't think the electra ended up resting in 10 ft of water, I think it ended up in deeper water where the forces of nature are significantly reduced, and I'm hopeful that we're going to find much larger pieces of the aircraft in much deeper water. I don't subscribe to the "ground up into little pieces" solution.
Hopefully, the next trip out there will prove me right.
Andrew
-
Some aircraft wreckage brought up from the bottom around Midway Island. Suspected to be B-29 remains? Note the condition of the Alclad, pitted and full of erosion/corrosion holes. Benign flat sea floor location.
-
Interesting narrative of a dive onto a B-26 wreck that has some similarities in what you would expect and, what they actually find...
B-26 Bomber
Type:
WW2 Plane wreck dive (scattered pieces)
Access:
Dive mooring at end, underwater buoy at beginning
Position:
Underwater start marker at 17° 39.910'S, 177° 14.946'E
Surface end marker at 17° 40.0'S, 177° 15.0'E
Depths:
75-30' (23-9m)
Date:
March, 2005
Visibility:
50' (15m)
Dive shop:
Yes, at Beachcomber or Treasure Islands
Snorkeling:
Yes, on the reef near the end marker
Features:
Old plane wreck from World War II
"The Allies built the Nadi airport during World War II so they could bomb Japanese positions in the Pacific Theater. The B-26 was a medium-range bomber with a pair of 2,000 horsepower radial engines. It carried an upper turret, waist, & nose gunners, and a crew of 6-7. The B-26 was made famous by Jimmy Doolittle as the first Allied bomber to attack Tokyo (that raid left from an aircraft carrier and was essentially a suicide/propaganda mission, as little damage was inflicted, none of the planes had enough fuel to land after making their bombing run, and many of the crew did not survive). The planes from Nadi apparently bombed Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands, 1,100 miles to the NW. We were told that the wrecked plane was one that ran out of fuel before it could return home.
Chris and I actually did this dive twice as we missed the second half the first time. The start location is somewhat secret (which is why we took our GPS to get an accurate fix). In fact, the dive mooring is actually about 6' (2m) underwater! The idea seems to be to go in at the "start" marker but to have your surface support person tie the dinghy back at the end marker (which is well marked on the surface).
The plane is scattered over quite a large area. Since visibility is often limited, the dive operators have connected bits of the plane together with a string on the bottom. What they didn't tell us the first time is that the string ends at the second engine but continues again about 20' (6m) off to the right. On our first dive we just continued on straight and never found the rest of the plane.
At the start-mooring, we splashed into 75' (23m) and started following the string at the bottom. We soon came to the nose-wheel, which is one of the more recognizable parts of the plane, followed by bits of the wing and/or tail. Then we found 2 big blobs of what we first thought were coral heads, but closer inspection showed them to be the huge radial engines, surprisingly close together. We found more bits of the wings and fuselage, but they weren't very recognizable.
The end of the dive gets to some big coral formations, which we (surprisingly) found more interesting than random hunks of old plane. The corals were bright and vibrant, with lots of fish. Since the coral climbed fairly close to the surface, we could easily make a pair of safety stops and still have interesting things to look at.
I have highlighted the parts of the narrative that appear significant. I don't necessarily agree with the statement that the Doolitle mission was "essentially a suicide/propaganda mission", I would suggest that it was more of a declaration of intent IMHO
Here's the image of the nose wheel, tyre deflated but still recognisable as a wheel underneath the marine growth.
-
Let's be historically accurate, folks.
The Doolittle raid was conducted entirely with Mitchell B-25 aircraft, not the Martin B-26. Review the movie "30 Seconds Over Tokyo".
-
Interesting narrative of a dive onto a B-26 wreck that has some similarities in what you would expect and, what they actually find…
It's not a B-26. It's probably a B-25. The listed location is 7.8 nm off Lautoka on Viti Levu, the largest of the Fiji Islands. I know the area well. We staged out of Lautoka aboard Nai'a on at least one of our expeditions. The nautical environment is nothing like Nikumaroro.
The wreckage described sounds typical of WWII aircraft that crashed in relatively shallow tropical waters. We have good underwater video of a B-25 that hit the water hard in Jaluit lagoon in the Marshalls. Same sort of thing. Lots of scattered pieces, some coral encrusted, but readily recognizable as airplane debris.
-
Ric, how do you know that what they observed was not a B-26? Is the wheel unique? Their error was only supposing that Dolittle flew the B-26, which has nothing to do with this wreck.
-
Ric, how do you know that what they observed was not a B-26?
Medium bomber operations in the Pacific Theater were almost uniquely B-25s but I see that in 1942 the 38th Bomb Group operated Marauders out of New Caledonia and Fiji in raids against the Solomons - so it could be a B-26.
The wheel in the photo has six spokes. The photos I've found of B-25 and B-26 nose wheels show eight spokes - so we can't tell what it is from the wheel. Maybe it's something else entirely. It wouldn't be the first time local lore misidentified a wreck.
-
Interesting narrative of a dive onto a B-26 wreck that has some similarities in what you would expect and, what they actually find…
It's not a B-26. It's probably a B-25. The listed location is 7.8 nm off Lautoka on Viti Levu, the largest of the Fiji Islands. I know the area well. We staged out of Lautoka aboard Nai'a on at least one of our expeditions. The nautical environment is nothing like Nikumaroro.
The wreckage described sounds typical of WWII aircraft that crashed in relatively shallow tropical waters. We have good underwater video of a B-25 that hit the water hard in Jaluit lagoon in the Marshalls. Same sort of thing. Lots of scattered pieces, some coral encrusted, but readily recognizable as airplane debris.
Yes, lagoon wrecks do seem to hold up well, Truk etc... shame AE didn't put the Electra into the lagoon on Gardner, it would have saved an awful lot of hassle ;)
-
It could very well be a B-26 martin Marauder judging by the number of wheel spokes. However, as Ric pointed out their use in the Pacific theatre was very limited. Still, they should have known that the Doolittle raid used B-25 Mitchells.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_B-26_Pacific.html (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_B-26_Pacific.html)
-
Is a B-26 even capable of operating from a carrier?
-
Is a B-26 even capable of operating from a carrier?
Not of that time, but then the B-25 technically wasn't either. That said, Vref speeds, etc. for the B-26 were probably much higher than those of the B-25. Land based entirely so far as I know.
-
Vref speeds, etc. for the B-26 were probably much higher than those of the B-25.
Indeed. Especially the early short-wing version. A very hot ship with a bad (albeit undeserved) reputation as a "widow-maker."
-
I believe it was Seversky himself who in WWII went out and demonstrated the airplane in the East (CBI theatre I'm told) to put confidence in the crews who were being retrained to respect 'the numbers' in the B-26 after a number of accidents. I'm told that just before he closed the hatch behind himself (climbing in) that he tossed his prosthetic leg out onto the ground and proceeded to do a breathtaking demonstration of controllability - rolls and such - on one engine (and obviously with one leg). Point was "respect the numbers and the airplane is safe" (like any winged beast).
-
Initially the Marauder was one of the candidates for the Doolittle raid but was rejected due to
"questionable takeoff characteristics from a carrier deck" which begs the question, did they try a few tests?
Possible aircraft candidate:
Requirements for the aircraft for a cruising range of 2,400 nautical miles(4,400 km) with a 2,000-pound(910 kg) bomb load resulted in the selection of the B-25B Mitchell to carry out the mission.The Martin B-26 Marauder,Douglas B-23 Dragon and Douglas B-18 Bolo were also considered.However,the B-26 had questionable takeoff characteristics from a carrier deck,the B-23's wingspan was nearly 50% greater than the B-25's,reducing the number that could be taken aboard a carrier and posing risks to the ship's superstructure and the B-18,one of the final two types considered by Doolittle, was rejected for the same reason.Although,the B-25 had yet to be tested in combat,subsequent tests with B-25s indicated they could fulfill the mission's requirements.
-
"B-26 bomber" could also refer to the Douglas A-26 (later B-26) Invader .. though I've checked the photos and they seem to sport a nose wheel of the 8 spoked variety as well.
As Ric says, this wouldn't be the first time locale folklore misidentified a wreck. About 20 years ago a group of TIGHARs (including myself) conclusively demonstrated that the "old B-25" resting in the mudflats of San Pablo Bay just short of the runway at Hamilton Field was, in fact, the remains of a rare interwar Martin B-10. People just assumed a twin engine plane of that vintage must be a Mitchell.
I wonder if we're dealing with something similar here. My first thought was maybe Lockheed P-38, which does have a 6 spoked nose wheel, but it would be hard to mistake those 12 cylinder inline Allisons for radial engines.
So the next candidate I'll throw out there is a Northrop P-61 .. a monstrous, twin (radial) engine, twin tail night fighter .. with a 6 spoked nose wheel. Is there any indication of a Black Widow squadron operating in or transiting the area in WWII?
-
Is there any indication of a Black Widow squadron operating in or transiting the area in WWII?
"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro" (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro) has some links in the footnotes that might help answer that question.
-
"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro" (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro) has some links in the footnotes that might help answer that question.
Fiji is not exactly in the vicinity of Nikumaroro. It's about a thousand miles away (I remember every one of them).
-
Here's a video of the dive onto the "B-26 Marauder?", two radial engines, extended nacelles? standard tailplane layout, similar tail plane and wing shape.
http://youtu.be/fkvNwMGsDwU (http://youtu.be/fkvNwMGsDwU)
-
God knows I'm not an expert, but the nose gear structure and the wing structure in that video look a LOT more like a B-25 Mitchell than a B-26 Marauder. I've built both, and that's how it looks to me. Whatever it is, it had to have hit the water pretty hard and fast to come apart like that.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro" (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro) has some links in the footnotes that might help answer that question.
Fiji is not exactly in the vicinity of Nikumaroro. It's about a thousand miles away (I remember every one of them).
Here are the links from the article that might help folks find out about Fiji:
- US Navy and US Marine Corps Bunos (http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_serials/thirdseries4.html)
- USN Overseas Aircraft Loss List (http://www.aviationarchaeology.com/src/USN/LLOct43.htm)
- Aviation Archaeology, "PB4Y USN Aircraft Airframe History List." (http://www.aviationarchaeology.com/src/USN/PB4Y.htm)
- "1944 USAAF Serial Numbers." (http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1944_4.html)
These websites may well have links, in turn, that would point to other helpful resources.
-
God knows I'm not an expert, but the nose gear structure and the wing structure in that video look a LOT more like a B-25 Mitchell than a B-26 Marauder. I've built both, and that's how it looks to me. Whatever it is, it had to have hit the water pretty hard and fast to come apart like that.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Mid-air collision?
http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b-26/41-17590.html (http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b-26/41-17590.html)
Aircraft History
Built by Martin. Assigned to the 38th Bombardment Group, 70th Bombardment Squadron. No known nickname or noseart. Aircraft Number 90.
Mission History
Took off from Nandi Airfield on a local flight for altitude training. Suffered a midair collision with P-39D Airacobra 41-7043 roughly 300 yards south of Itai Island off near Nandi Airfield. The B-26 fell into the sea and no bodies were recovered.
Which matches up with the co-ordinates given for the dive
-
B26 training video ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azfeFkWWDMg
-
B26 training video ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azfeFkWWDMg
Great find Tim, these training videos are a Goldmine of information.
-
Mid-air collision [with a P-39]?
Nicely done, Jeff.
And by following the link about the P-39 on Justin Taylin's "Pacific Wrecks" site, we find it states BOTH aircraft fell into the sea .. so the troublesome, mysterious 6 spoked nose wheel is not from a B-26 after all!
-
[ .. so the troublesome, mysterious 6 spoked nose wheel is not from a B-26 after all!
Well, maybe. The P-39 had a double-fork nose wheel attachment point. Although there is no scale in the diving video, that nose gear still - to me - looks heftier and seems to be a better fit for a B-25, which had a single-fork nosewheel attachment point, as indicated in the video.
But yes - well done on the accident report!
LTM, who tries not to speak with a forked tongue,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Jeff wins. I somehow totally missed his earlier illustrated post about 6 spoked Marauder wheels. The gear wreckage is consistent with the reported type and he's found documented evidence of a wartime B-26 lost at those exact same coordinates. There is no mystery here.
-
As Monty noted the wreckage has come apart quite spectacularly so maybe the mid-air collision played a part in that. I haven't found any info on carrier trials for the B-26 yet...
Initially the Marauder was one of the candidates for the Doolittle raid but was rejected due to
"questionable takeoff characteristics from a carrier deck" which begs the question, did they try a few tests?
The closest was the B-26 Marauder 'Susie-Q' having a go at the Akagi...
"The last of the US Navy TBF torpedo bombers had barely cleared the runway, when Captain Collins led his four B-26 Marauders into the air. There had been no plan for a coordinated attack. Captain Collins only knew that their primary target would be Japanese carriers at the centre of a protective screen of warships and Zero fighters.
First Lieutenant Muri's first impression of the Japanese carrier fleet was the sighting of wisps of smoke on the horizon, and then he was over the destroyer screen and saw the vast array of the First Carrier Striking Force spread across the sea. This was certainly not going to be the easy mission that he had been expecting, and he reached for a cigarette in the can at his feet. He was still fumbling with a match to light it when the Zeros struck viciously at the small formation of Army bombers.
Jim Muri did his best to follow closely as Captain Collins swerved his bomber, first to the left and then to the right, looking for the clearest line of approach to one of the leading carriers. With his concentration focussed on the movements of his commander's B-26, Muri had no time to keep an eye on the B-26 bombers piloted by 1st Lieutenant Herbert C. Mayes and 1st Lieutenant William S. Watson on his left and right wings respectively. Facing a veritable storm of anti-aircraft fire from the Japanese warships, Collins alternately climbed and dropped his B-26 to throw off the aim of the gunners. Muri was still following closely as Collins dived close to sea level in an attempt to frustrate the swarming Zeros. Master story teller Walter Lord (see note below) vividly evokes the situation as Jim Muri piloted his B-26 into the boiling cauldron that was the First Carrier Striking Force:
"Now they were in the middle of the formation; as Muri's co-pilot Lieutenant Pete Moore glanced quickly around, every ship seemed a solid sheet of gunfire. The Japanese gunners would shoot at the water to see where the bullets hit. Using the splashes as tracers, they would "walk" their fire right into the B-26s.
"But they came on anyhow. Collins finally released at 800 yards and zoomed away to the right. Muri came hard behind, with the Zeros flying right into their own fleet's line of fire in a desperate effort to stop him. Bullets smashed the Plexiglas turret; a ricochet clipped Sergeant Gogoj's forehead. Muri shouted to Moore to release the torpedo. But the improvised switch was something that Rube Goldberg might have invented - a trigger, a cable, a plug with innumerable prongs. Moore frantically squeezed the trigger, twisted the plug, still couldn't tell whether the torpedo was gone. "Is it away?" Muri kept shouting. "How the hell do I know?" Moore answered."
They would find out later that the torpedo had indeed been released; but now looming in front of them was the vast bulk of the carrier at which they had been aiming. They would find out later that this carrier was none other than Vice Admiral Nagumo's own flagship Akagi. Walter Lord continues:
"Banking hard, Muri flew straight down the middle of the flight deck. His bombardier Lieutenant Russ Johnson grabbed the nose gun and strafed in all directions. They had a brief, vivid glimpse of white-clad sailors scattering for cover."
As he flew at low level down the length of the great carrier's flight deck, two things impressed themselves very clearly on Jim Muri's memory. First, was the large Japanese battle flag streaming from the mast. The second was the sudden cessation of heavy anti-aircraft fire produced by the need for the Japanese gunners to avoid hitting their own ship."
-
Jeff wins. I somehow totally missed his earlier illustrated post about 6 spoked Marauder wheels. The gear wreckage is consistent with the reported type and he's found documented evidence of a wartime B-26 lost at those exact same coordinates. There is no mystery here.
Just for reference/comparison I thought I would include these pictures of a B-25 & a Jimmy Doolittle stand in.
This is from the "Pacific Aircraft Museum, Pearl Harbor" Ford Island, HI.
-
Great pictures Steve, the plane has been kept in remarkably good condition, top marks for that. A final observation on the wrecks we have discussed. If you see divers in the photos/videos then it's not really a like for like comparison to anything stuck to the side of the Gardner seamount. It's like comparing a walk up mount Everest with a walk in the park, IMHO of course.
-
Great pictures Steve, the plane has been kept in remarkably good condition, top marks for that. A final observation on the wrecks we have discussed. If you see divers in the photos/videos then it's not really a like for like comparison to anything stuck to the side of the Gardner seamount. It's like comparing a walk up mount Everest with a walk in the park, IMHO of course.
After I posted the 2 pictures I found a 3rd one with the tail number,
-
Very informative Bulletin (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/70_HURLSubs/70_HURLOperationalOverview.html) on the underwater search part of Niku VIII.
-
Great bulletin, very informative and exciting stuff. As a younger man I'd of been chomping at the bit to get a chance to ride in one of those, not now - the confined space wouldn't be as easy for me to take for hours on end I'm afraid. Hats off to those who will do that.
-
Hats off to those who will do that.
On each dive we'll have Terry or one of his people flying the sub, a trained TIGHAR observer, and a Sponsor Team Member.
To fund the expedition we need to find major corporate sponsorship or find four people who will pay $500,000 each for the privilege of spending 6 to 8 hours a day in that capsule. People routinely pay more than that for manufactured "adventure" experiences. This is a chance to do something genuine and possibly historic. We just need to connect with the right people.
-
That's about as close to a moon shot as most able donors will be able to find in this world, what a ride.
-
June 6, 2014 press release (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Niku8/June14pressrelease/pressrelease.html) about expanded plans for Niku VIII.
-
June 6, 2014 press release (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Niku8/June14pressrelease/pressrelease.html) about expanded plans for Niku VIII.
Yes. This is huge.
-
Oh boy, Ric plan the time on site carefully competing objectives can chew up time and $.
-
It is appropriate , the search for the lost "Flying Laboratory" will do some real science
-
Ric,
Have we reached our "awareness" objective i.e. $19.00 per member?
Ted
-
Ric,
Reading between the lines of your recent announcement of your plans to expand the scope of Niku VIII ... You have not been able to raise a large sum of money to pay for the expedition. No individual or corporate sponsor has come forward with a promise to fund the expedition. HURL needs a firm commitment of serious money by July 1 or the expedition probably cannot happen in September 2014. Is that about correct?
Jeff P.
-
Reading between the lines of your recent announcement of your plans to expand the scope of Niku VIII ... You have not been able to raise a large sum of money to pay for the expedition. No individual or corporate sponsor has come forward with a promise to fund the expedition. HURL needs a firm commitment of serious money by July 1 or the expedition probably cannot happen in September 2014. Is that about correct?
That is about correct. We're hoping that by expanding the scope of the mission it will open up more potential sources of funding. It also has the benefit of being the Right Thing To Do.
-
Ric
A great opportunity to collaborate.
Will it change the make up of the expedition team? I'm wondering if folks from Conservation Intl, or the NEAQ will now likely be aboard.
Andrew
-
Will it change the make up of the expedition team?
Probably not. We have four berths we had reserved for Sponsor Team members. If we can find funding from supporters of climate change research those berths will be available for scientists.
-
Please spreads the attached PDF around, especially to publications, websites and blogs concerned with climate change and ocean science.
Thanks
-
Oh boy, Ric plan the time on site carefully competing objectives can chew up time and $.
Not to be a naysayer, but that does sound like a tough balance. That's all I'm gonna say 'bout that...
-
Oh boy, Ric plan the time on site carefully competing objectives can chew up time and $.
Not to be a naysayer, but that does sound like a tough balance. That's all I'm gonna say 'bout that...
There are no "competing objectives" other than the need to occasionally stop to take samples. The ocean scientists and the wreckage seekers have the same objective - take a close look at what is down there.
We have long wanted to do a joint expedition with the New England Aquarium reef researchers but there was never enough overlap in our respective agendas. We always needed weeks at Niku and they needed to visit several islands in the Phoenix Group. This time we're both focused on getting a good look at the same location - the deep water off the west end of Niku.
-
If I "take my membership up a notch" this year, will some of that money go to Niku VIII? Or is it more helpful to keep my current membership level and make a donation directly to Niku VIII? Sorry if I missed the answer to this somewhere on the website (I did try to look)....
-
If I "take my membership up a notch" this year, will some of that money go to Niku VIII?
Yes, almost all of it - and by taking your membership up a notch you get the benefits and recognition that go along with it.
-
It's not a lot, but the check will be in the mail shortly!
-
The expanded plan for Niku VIII is indeed huge. The very well-explained press release convinces me that it may very well be the "Right Thing To Do" as Ric has stated. Will have my limited funds in by the end of the week!
-
Live on CSPAN2 at this moment, Anote Tong, President of Kiribati, is speaking on "Ocean Conservation & Climate Change," at a conference called "Our Ocean" that is sponsored by the State Department. Seated behind him is Secretary of State John Kerry.
More info (http://ourocean2014.state.gov/) available from the Department of State website.
-
Unless something fortuitous and unexpected happens in the next week or so, there will be no Niku VIII this year. The TIGHAR membership has responded heroically to our 1937 Fund but our appeals for the major funding we must have in order to make a commitment to the University of Hawaii by June 30 have fallen on deaf ears. We've had to postpone expeditions before and Niku VIII will happen, whether it's this year or next year. Our original intent, in fact was to shoot for 2015 but when NOAA pulled the funding for the Pisces subs it created a crisis. With the subs slated for deactivation, it was "Use the subs this year or not at all." At the moment, it's looking like it will be not at all. That would be a real shame, not just because the Pisces submersibles are the only way to do a thorough search of the reef slope for airplane wreckage, but because the subs are the only effective way to do ocean science research on the steep carbonate seamounts of the Central Pacific.
The following quote from Stanford University professor Rob Dunbar, a leading authority on Pacific seamounts, says it all:
“At the moment, manned submersibles remain the only credible tool for use in a variety of different subsea environments, some of which are not only unique to the Pacific, but also ubiquitous. My greatest knowledge of the deep sea in the Pacific involves the pedestals of islands and seamounts. Because of the interaction of low pH seawater in the Pacific O2 minimum zone with the carbonate caps present on many if not most seamounts and island flanks, the most common bathymetric features just below 150 meters are vertical walls that extend for many 100’s of meters. These walls contain very unusual communities of deep sea corals and sponges that in turn support great invertebrate and vertebrate biodiversity and biomass. They are, simply put, keystone communities of the deep ocean. Because these vertical walls are located very close to the modern reefs, ROV’s cannot be deployed. We know this from a number of attempts to do so, including some in the last year. Entanglement hazards also abound. This is one example of an unacceptable environment for ROV operations; others include just about any steep slope setting, complex submarine volcanic terrain, and the vicinity of ship wrecks (that are entanglement hazards). Conversely, we know from years of experience that all of these environments are well suited for HOV [Human Operated Vehicles] work."
We certainly found that to be true at Niku in 2012. The sad thing is that the paucity of funding for the manned submersibles in the scientific community appears to be driven by politics rather than science.
TIGHAR will continue to search for a sponsor who will donate the $1.2 million needed to cover the charter of the ship and subs. Perhaps a benefactor will step forward before the University of Hawaii pulls the plug - which they must do soon. They desperately want to save the subs but the program is out of money. The TIGHAR charter is the only hope for keeping the subs in service.
If Niku VIII has to be postponed we'll regroup, rethink, and continue the search as we always have.
-
Hello, all, For what it's worth.....I sincerely hope that a 'miracle' occurs prior to the end of June date.
I'm quite 'up' in years and 'was really looking forward to the Niku hypothesis to be proven, this year.
It seems strange and frustrating that 'some' organizations/individuals are not willing to unite (financially) regarding
this effort and it's ironic that our govt., with it's lavish spending and waste is not willing to rally! Are there any (as yet)
untapped resources who are willing to listen and strongly consider sufficient funding to salvage the 2014 effort?
Yes, I'm a gambling man and I'd be willing to offer 10 - 1 odds that Nessie, 22V1 and various radio receptions equal
A.E. landing on Niku and perishing there.
-
Well ... this is certainly a bitter pill, but we don't have to swallow it just yet. Niku VII occurred because of a on-in-a-thousand miracle. I still have hope for Niku VIII by the end of this month.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
-
Has the Banjo maker been asked to be a sponsor? ;)
-
Glad to read the good news on the stay of execution until Sept 15.
-
I know all have thought of this but, why not refocus the trip on some other Niku evidence like looking for camp 0?
-
I know all have thought of this but, why not refocus the trip on some other Niku evidence like looking for camp 0?
There is lots to do on land - expand the dig at the Seven Site, look for any signs of Camp Zero - and if we're unable to pit together an underwater search for airplane wreckage that's the logical alternative, but it couldn't happen this year. A land expedition needs a completely different ship and support systems than an underwater search and suitable ships are in short supply. They usually have to be booked at least a year in advance.
-
Just for educational purposes, when you are in Hawaii can you just get on a boat and go anywhere from Hawaii on the water. Meaning you know how when you fly out of the country you have to deal with customs. My question is, when you get on a boat in Hawaii do you have to mess around with US customs? When you arrive in Hawaii on a boat do they search your belongings and passport before you are aloud to set foot on the ground?
-
I also wanted to say that you really go the extra mile being Tighar's Executive Director, you always are answering questions on here personally and that says a lot about how you do business. Just doing that give Tighar so much credibility in my book. I do see exactly how the media dupes this organization on the news. They always take one little thing out of context and blow it up you you know they were told over and over that whatever the expedition's might turn up new evidence or lead to new clues. Key words maybe, might, could , and possibly.
I have seen the media do this so many times to Tighar, and it really frustrates me especially when you dedicate time to talk to anyone out there who has questions. I can't donate much but I usually send some cash for each expedition. I've sent more in the past but now I am going through a divorce so funds are short but I will make sure you get something from me. When I was a teenager a girlfriend of mine fell in the rocky mountains to her death by accident. If you Google the name Jessica Hoffert the old newspaper article comes up if you dig long enough. Point is when I read this article after the accident the Rocky-mountain news made me out to be the bad guy when I was actually the hero of the whole thing. The way the twisted the story did me no justice. So just so you know they do it to us little people too. I do think that people who follow this more than the average person are getting a clue to this.
-
Ric,
With out a lot of hype how far are we from funding the 2014 expedition?
Ted Campbell
-
Ric,
With out a lot of hype how far are we from funding the 2014 expedition?
Ted Campbell
No hype.
$1.2 million.
-
Ric,
Re my question of how far we have to go $ wise on the 2014 project, do we have a funding source, such as a bank, etc., that we could use to augment the finance of the project? What are their terms?
If we were to find the aircraft what do you expect the return on investment would be; re press coverage, video, book residuals, Hollywood film residuals, etc? i.e. $ 1,000 investment vs. X $ return?
Let’s put this thing into an investment opportunity, albeit there is a real risk of failure. I am sure this seems unseemly but what we are trying to accomplish is proving a hypothesis based upon the on-ground findings, anecdotal recollections, recent down reef explorations and other information that has been retrieved at a cost of multi millions of dollars.
This could be considered a real crap shot, but on the other hand it could be a real significant return on investment for those who may have contributed. Plus what a great feeling it would be if the program was successful and the mystery solved and you were part of the final search.
If you need someone to handle the financials of this method of financing I have a couple of companies that I do business with in mind. I can ask them if this is a viable way of going forward and with your involvement we can sort out the details.
Let me know if this something that you would like to pursue.
Ted Campbell
-
Read it here - latest news (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Niku8/July8/cliffhangers.html) is that TIGHAR has a nice 'stay of execution' on the sailing date for Niku VIII.
Just as the radio seemed quiet and the trip seemed to be slipping over the edge of the reef... ;)
-
Let’s put this thing into an investment opportunity,
As a 501 c3 nonprofit we can't do that.