TIGHAR

Amelia Earhart Search Forum => General discussion => Topic started by: Ric Gillespie on September 15, 2015, 05:00:03 PM

Title: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 15, 2015, 05:00:03 PM
For the new book project we need photos of c/n 1055 after the aircraft was completed but before it was delivered to Earhart.  On July 19, 1936 Lockheed Aircraft Corporation registered the aircraft in the Experimental category "for factory test work." 
I know I've seen at least one photo of the aircraft with the X registration but we don't have a copy. I think it was published in an old issue of Air Classics magazine.

The airplane was delivered to Earhart in Las Vegas on July 24, her 39th birthday, and that raises a question.  Why Las Vegas? 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on September 15, 2015, 07:04:07 PM
What happens in Vegas......................no, that's not it.  It would seem an odd place to pick up a new aircraft in 1936.  Las Vegas certainly wasn't the city it is now back then.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 15, 2015, 07:09:47 PM
I wonder if there was a tax advantage to taking delivery in Nevada.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on September 15, 2015, 07:24:28 PM
It could be, but you'd think if there were taxes to be paid it would be wherever it was normally hangared.  Had to be a reason.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Friend Weller on September 15, 2015, 07:59:30 PM
Celebratory dinner at the Peppermill Restaurant??  Oh wait, they'd have to wait another 36 years.....!!   ;D
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 15, 2015, 08:22:19 PM
It could be, but you'd think if there were taxes to be paid it would be wherever it was normally hangared.  Had to be a reason

 I live in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has a sales tax.  Delaware has no sales tax. If I buy something and arrange to have it shipped to an address in Delaware the seller does not have to charge me sales tax. I don't know if that would be true for an airplane being delivered to Nevada in 1936 but, as you say, there had to be a reason.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on September 15, 2015, 08:27:41 PM
Just found a paper online that said Nevada didn't get a general sales tax until 1955.  What was AE's state of residence at the time?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ricker H Jones on September 15, 2015, 08:30:55 PM
From July 1935 to June 1943 the California sales tax was 3%.  Nevada had no sales tax until 1955.  That sounds like something that a buyer would take advantage of, and I'm wondering where the aircraft was titled. (1) (https://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/taxrateshist.htm)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on September 15, 2015, 09:01:54 PM
Three percent of whatever the Electra cost in 1936 would be substantial, and I get the impression her budget was pretty tight at the time.  Rick, you may be on to something here.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ted G Campbell on September 15, 2015, 09:34:47 PM
All,
What part did Purdue U. play in this, vis-a-vis the "Flying Laboratory"?
Ted Campbell
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 16, 2015, 09:20:32 AM
What part did Purdue U. play in this, vis-a-vis the "Flying Laboratory"?

In 1935 Purdue set up a research foundation.  Wealthy Purdue alumni donated money (tax deductible) to the foundation.  The money was given to Earhart for the purpose of buying an airplane that was to be used as a flying laboratory and perhaps a flight around the world. For legal liability reasons the university kept it an arm's-length relationship. The airplane was titled to Amelia, not Purdue.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Randy Conrad on September 19, 2015, 09:24:32 PM
Are you in need of these documents Ric?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 20, 2015, 12:14:40 PM
Are you in need of these documents Ric?

Yes, I'd like to have copies of those.  Where did you find them?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 20, 2015, 12:37:03 PM
The letter is especially interesting.  Apparently Mantz accepted delivery in Vegas and then flew the airplane back to Burbank.  I wonder when AE first flew the airplane alone? It was a big step up from her Vega - empty weight almost three times heavier, twin-engines, constant speed props, retractable landing gear.  Did the Vega have flaps?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on September 20, 2015, 02:28:36 PM
Interesting letter.

Paul L. Briand, Jr's book Daughter of the Sky - The Story of Amelia Earhart, 1960 tells a story of AE going out to Burbank "inspect the new Lockhed for the first time, examining the plane closely; she walked the 55-foot span of the wings, climbed into the cockpit, worked the controls, and started the engines."  This makes sense as she and GP were living in Rye, CA, or North Hollywood according to Susan Butler in her biography of AE,East to the Dawn, 1997.  Either place (same place?) is apparently close to Burbank.  Butler says she "took possession of the Electra on her thirty-ninth birthday, July 24, 1936" but doesn't give a location.  Mantz was living in "Toluca Lake in North Hollywood at the time.  AE stayed there twice, once for approximately a month, once for a few days, before she and George rented a house for themselves." (Butler).  They eventually bought their own house there.

These are the only two AE biography's I have on hand.  If anyone has others it might be interesting to check them and see what they say.  Neither give any indication of why Mantz may have been in Las Vegas or why he would have been the one to take delivery.  Maybe there was some strange rule that only someone certified/qualified to pilot an Electra could legally take delivery.  Perhaps AE wanted a Lockheed pilot to make the initial 'shakedown/test' flight since she'd never flown one before and Mantz (and AE?) flew it back to Burbank as her first lesson in the Electra.  Maybe she flew from Burbank to Las Vegas as a passenger.

More mystery.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 20, 2015, 05:02:36 PM
This makes sense as she and GP were living in Rye, CA, or North Hollywood according to Susan Butler in her biography of AE,East to the Dawn, 1997.  Either place (same place?) is apparently close to Burbank.

"Rye" is Putnam's house in Rye , NY which had suffered a fire.  AE and GP were living in their new house in North Hollywood.

In Elgin Long's book (p.58) he says:
"Earhart took her first flight in the new Electra with Lockheed's chief test pilot on July 21. Three days later, on her thirty-ninth birthday, she took delivery of the $80,000 "flying laboratory."  She and Mantz both took instruction flights with the chief pilot to become proficient in flying the twin-engine plane."

As a source he cites a July 22, 1936  LA Times article "Amelia hops in new ship."  It would be nice to find that article.

Lockheed's chief test pilot was "Babe" Headle.  It's interesting to note that Mantz also needed instruction.  Mantz was an experienced stunt pilot but this was probably his firs twin and the first retractable he had flown.  It's still not clear who flew the plane home from Las Vegas but it was apparently Mantz who handled the paperwork.  The Las Vegas thing almost has to be for tax purposes.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on September 20, 2015, 05:24:35 PM
The 'Rye' reference came from the Briand book.  I'm beginning to suspect a lot of what's in there.  There's only a generalized bibliography and no footnotes.

Butler's book is much better.

I can just picture the three of them flying to Las Vegas, signing the paperwork and flying right back.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Karen Hoy on September 20, 2015, 06:11:38 PM
As a source he cites a July 22, 1936  LA Times article "Amelia hops in new ship."  It would be nice to find that article.

I just found it in the Los Angeles Times archive from Proquest.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 20, 2015, 06:39:15 PM
I just found it in the Los Angeles Times archive from Proquest.

Thanks Karen. Very interesting.  Lots of interesting stuff there.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Lloyd on September 20, 2015, 08:48:40 PM
As a source he cites a July 22, 1936  LA Times article "Amelia hops in new ship."  It would be nice to find that article.

I just found it in the Los Angeles Times archive from Proquest.
Her comments under the paragraph titled, SIMPLIFYING OF DIALS,  "I propose to study the reaction to the vast array of flying instruments, having in mind possible changes to improve the possible case of piloting by these dials" is truly indicative of her mind set and visualization of instrument flying and the concept of cross check which all came into play on the Lae to Howland leg where monitoring those fuel usage instruments and setting was critical.

It is apparent that she was naive and not prepared for the vast undertaking that she wanted to accomplish.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Friend Weller on September 21, 2015, 07:34:26 AM
The letter is especially interesting.  Apparently Mantz accepted delivery in Vegas and then flew the airplane back to Burbank.  I wonder when AE first flew the airplane alone?

I'll ask Mantz's grandson if he knows anything about the Vegas delivery...
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Greg Daspit on September 21, 2015, 11:09:57 AM
I just found it in the Los Angeles Times archive from Proquest.

Thanks Karen. Very interesting.  Lots of interesting stuff there.
Special equipment listed "Wind de-icers" in the article.
Did 16020 have wing de-icers?

Clarence L “Kelly” Johnson had an anti icing patent (https://www.google.com/patents/US2320870) filed in 1940. (A ducted system that might not be apparent from external view)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on September 22, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
Looking at the rubber goods on the electra, it seems Lockheed wasn't tied into an exclusive contract with one supplier.
The airwheels were Goodyear , and it appears the boots or protectors for the tail were Goodrich.  Was this standard equipment or was it a special option?

Photos by Purdue
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 22, 2015, 05:28:58 PM
The airwheels were Goodyear , and it appears the boots or protectors for the tail were Goodrich.  Was this standard equipment or was it a special option?

The rubber leading edge protectors are not listed as standard times of the 10E so they were probably an option.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 02, 2015, 10:56:05 AM
All,
What part did Purdue U. play in this, vis-a-vis the "Flying Laboratory"?
Ted Campbell
What part did Purdue U. play in this, vis-a-vis the "Flying Laboratory"?

In 1935 Purdue set up a research foundation.  Wealthy Purdue alumni donated money (tax deductible) to the foundation.  The money was given to Earhart for the purpose of buying an airplane that was to be used as a flying laboratory and perhaps a flight around the world. For legal liability reasons the university kept it an arm's-length relationship. The airplane was titled to Amelia, not Purdue.

Ted Here is an Article;

http://www4.lib.purdue.edu/archon/?p=creators/creator&id=17

It breaks it down somewhat as to who the major contributors were,.....I see Goodyear and Goodrich are listed as donors, whether by cash/ equipment or both.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 02, 2015, 11:06:53 AM
Ted Here is an Article;

Jerry, please cite the source for that article.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 02, 2015, 11:43:33 AM
Ric,

I am searching through my computer history to find that particular article,...my above post is modified with a link to a similar version. Will provide link when I find it....sorry about that.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 02, 2015, 12:16:23 PM
I am searching through my computer history to find that particular article,...my above post is modified with a link to a similar version. Will provide link when I find it....sorry about that.

Thanks Jerry.  It appears that the article was written by someone at Purdue as an "historical note" to the university's collection of Earhart papers. It raises some interesting questions.  Supposedly, the money for a "flying laboratory" was donated in 1935 and the purpose was "to enable the development of scientific and engineering data of vital importance to the aviation industry."  But what Earhart had in mind was "to conduct studies on how long-distance flying affected pilots."  There is no mention of a 'round-the-world flight.  Did Earhart come up with that idea only after the money for a "flying laboratory" was raised or was that always the plan and Putnam's sales job on Purdue was just a way for her to get her hands on a suitable airplane?
 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 02, 2015, 02:22:46 PM
Ok , I finally found it;

http://www.delcampe.net/page/item/id,156545897,var,Amelia-Earhart-in-1937-Debris-Purdue-University-yearbook-excellant-condition,language,E.html

Enlarged text;

AMELIA EARHART AT PURDUE UNIVERSITY
In 1934, Purdue University President Edward C. Elliott heard Amelia Earhart speak at a luncheon and was so impressed with her talk that he asked if she would visit Purdue and give a lecture for the women students. Earhart spoke at a banquet at Purdue on October 17, 1934, and discussed “Activities for Women After College.” After several talks with President Elliott, a contract was negotiated in 1935, stating that Amelia Earhart would be employed by Purdue University as a visiting faculty member at a salary of $2,000 per year. From the autumn of 1935 until her disappearance in July 1937, Earhart served as Consultant in the Department for the Study of Careers for Women and Technical Advisor in the Department of Aeronautics (part of the School of Mechanical Engineering) for Purdue University. Earhart was attracted to Purdue because at the time it was the only university in the United States with its own fully equipped airport. She was also impressed that practical mechanical and engineering training was available without discouragement to the women students on campus. At Purdue, Amelia lectured, conducted conferences with Purdue faculty and students, and initiated studies on new career opportunities for women. Perhaps most importantly, she served as an example of a successful modern woman for the female students at Purdue. While working at Purdue, Amelia stayed in South Hall (now called Duhme Hall), a women’s residence hall on campus. South Hall students vied with each other to sit at Amelia’s table in the dining room for meals. Buttermilk became an overnight favorite beverage on campus because it was Amelia’s choice. The coeds were not supposed to sit with their elbows on the table, and Amelia, being somewhat informal, would usually eat with both elbows on the table, her chin cupped in her hands. When the students asked why they couldn’t sit with their elbows on the table, the standard reply was “As soon as you fly the Atlantic, you may!” Amelia’s husband, George Palmer Putnam, first put the idea of a “flying laboratory” airplane for research into President Elliott’s mind. Elliott thought about it for a while, until the autumn of 1935, when at a dinner party at his home, Amelia outlined her dreams for women and aviation, which seemed very similar to Elliott’s own ideals. Amelia also spoke of her desire to conduct studies on how long-distance flying affected pilots physically and mentally. Before the evening was over, fellow guest David Ross offered to donate $50,000 as a gift toward the cost of providing a machine suitable for the flying laboratory. Further donations totaling $30,000 in cash and equipment were received from J. K. Lilly (of the Eli Lilly drug company), Vincent Bendix, and manufacturers Western Electric, Goodrich, and Goodyear. The $80,000 formed the basis of “The Amelia Earhart Fund for Aeronautical Research.” The primary objective was to develop scientific and engineering data of vital importance to the aviation industry. The Earhart Fund financed Amelia’s “flying laboratory,” in the form of a new Lockheed Electra airplane specially outfitted for her at the Lockheed factory. It was delivered to Amelia in 1936, and it was in this plane that she disappeared during her world flight attempt in 1937. In 1940, George Palmer Putnam donated Amelia Earhart’s papers, photographs, medals, and a few personal belongings to Purdue University. In 2002, Putnam’s granddaughter, Sally Putnam Chapman, donated an additional group of Amelia Earhart personal papers to Purdue. These included personal letters, poems, and Amelia’s famous pre-marital agreement. The Purdue University Libraries Special Collections now owns the largest, most comprehensive collection of materials relating to Amelia Earhart in the world.

I am unsure if this information is somewhere in a later date debris yearbook, the seller's description using solely his/her research mixed along with information taken from other sources,or written by someone from Purdue.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ted G Campbell on October 02, 2015, 07:26:00 PM
Ric,

Have you ever thought of putting together a seminar on TIGHAR’s AE’s search efforts involving the original supporters of the original round the world endeavor?

Suppose you were able to get Purdue Univ. to host the event and invite Bendix, Western Electric, Goodrich, Goodyear, Pratt and Whitney, Lockheed, et al and associated aviation organizations e.g. AOPA, NBAA, ASTM, etc.  The purpose of which would be the last fund raiser to complete the “Round the World Flight” begun X years ago by conducting the final search.

I would think there are enough people on the forum that would volunteer their time with current/past associations with some of the aviation related companies to pull something like this together.

For example, I had a great deal of association with the ASTM, IATA, ATA, NBAA, FAA, etc. while I was Texaco’s International Aviation Sales World Wide Manager of Aviation Operations.  I worked on the TWA 800 task force, worked with the FAA in finding/developing a replacement for leaded aviation gasoline, work on industry standards for aviation fuel quality control standards, I hold various patents for aircraft refueling safety standards, etc. – it might take some time to reawake some of these associations but I would be happy to try.

I really think TIGHAR is at the point of a real “Hail Mary” event if we want to solve this puzzle.

Ted Campbell
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 03, 2015, 07:22:38 AM
Suppose you were able to get Purdue Univ. to host the event and invite Bendix, Western Electric, Goodrich, Goodyear, Pratt and Whitney, Lockheed, et al and associated aviation organizations e.g. AOPA, NBAA, ASTM, etc.  The purpose of which would be the last fund raiser to complete the “Round the World Flight” begun X years ago by conducting the final search.

You dream big Ted. Nothing wrong with that.   To get Purdue to do something like that I'd have to be the reincarnation of George Putnam. 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 06, 2015, 06:42:28 PM
Finding several  R 16020 photos out there,...

http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/earhart/id/3606/rec/126

However; the X designation seems elusive.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ted G Campbell on October 06, 2015, 07:29:11 PM
Ric,

"Suppose you were able to get Purdue Univ. to host the event and invite Bendix, Western Electric, Goodrich, Goodyear, Pratt and Whitney, Lockheed, et al and associated aviation organizations e.g. AOPA, NBAA, ASTM, etc.  The purpose of which would be the last fund raiser to complete the “Round the World Flight” begun X years ago by conducting the final search."

"You dream big Ted. Nothing wrong with that.   To get Purdue to do something like that I'd have to be the reincarnation of George Putnam."
 
I find it hard to believe that Purdue would suggest such a thing!  When did you last propose such a meeting and what was their explicate response?

Ted Campbell
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 07, 2015, 05:33:14 AM
When did you last propose such a meeting and what was their explicate response?

I have never proposed such a meeting nor would I presume to. For Purdue to host such a meeting would be an implicit endorsement of the Niku hypothesis.  Can you imagine the reaction of Purdue students and alumni who are advocates of Crashed & sank or Japanese Capture?  The university has wisely not taken sides in the controversy surrounding Earhart's fate.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 08, 2015, 11:10:16 AM
Okay, I think I have this sorted out and it's pretty interesting.  There seems to be one photograph of the airplane wearing X16020. It appeared years ago in the Letters section of an aviation magazine, I think it was Air Classics.  All I have is a crumby photocopy of a clipping.  See below.  The letter writer found the photo puzzling.
A newspaper clipper reproduced in Carol Osborne and Muriel Morrissey's book "Amelia My Courageous Sister" (attached) solves the mystery. The photo was taken at Alameda on August 3, 1936.
Through the documents, letters, photos, and clippings we have (so far) I've been able to assemble the following chronology.

Sunday, July 19, 1936
Lockheed completes the airplane and has it inspected. Lockheed applies for and is granted registration as X16020 but the airplane is apparently marked NR16020.

Tuesday, July 21, 1936
Earhart’s makes her first flight in the aircraft.  Lockheed test pilot Elmer McLeod is at the controls.
The press is invited and she poses for photos.  The aircraft is marked NR16020.

Earhart gives Lockheed a letter authorizing Paul Mantz to take delivery of the airplane on her behalf in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Friday, July 24, 1936
Lockheed conveys ownership of the Electra to Amelia Earhart in Las Vegas, Nevada (presumably via Mantz) for $10. (???)  A Nevada Notary notarizes the transaction. The document gives the airplane's registration number as NR16020 but the NR is written-over by hand with X.  No way to tell when the correction was made.

Monday, July 27, 1936
Lockheed notifies the Bureau of Air Commerce that Serial No. 1055 has been sold to Amelia Earhart and encloses an application for re-assignment of license number NR16020 "as executed by Miss Earhart." The application applies for registration in the Restricted category but many of the questions on the form are not answered and it says that NR16020 is the registration displayed on the aircraft.  The application is not granted.  The application is incomplete and the aircraft has not been approved for international flight so it cannot carry the N designation. 

Sunday, August 2, 1936
Earhart and McLeod fly the Electra to Mills Field, San Francisco. Until a new application can be submitted the airplane must carry the only registration number that has been approved, X16020.

Monday, August 3, 1936
Earhart and McLeod fly the Electra across the bay to Alameda to see Elmer Dimity’s big parachute and fog dispeller. This is apparently the only time the plane is photographed while displaying the X16020 registration.

Thursday, August 6, 1936
Earhart submits a new application. The registration displayed on the aircraft is listed as simply 16020.

Friday, August 7, 1936
The application is still not right and is stamped VOID. Corrections are made and the application is re-submitted There is a handwritten notation “see corrected application” and another in a different hand “OK 12 mos” with initials.   The application is approved.  Registration number is R16020.

   
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 08, 2015, 11:13:00 AM
Here's a larger version of the article.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 13, 2015, 02:13:11 PM
I noted photo credit given to Burl Burlingame ..looking up info on him , it seems he is a historian at the pacific aviation museum, his number is listed as; 1-808-695-2231. I wonder if he could be of any more help in acquiring a good X photo?

http://www.pacificaviationmuseum.org/aboutus/contact
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 14, 2015, 01:33:21 PM
Mr Dimity , the parachute manufacturer sells autographed envelope at auction;

 http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/13/arts/auctions.html
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Daniel R. Brown on October 16, 2015, 02:17:40 PM
Jerry, I agree that is a tantalizing lead but he couldn't possibly have been the photographer. I was unable to find any other photo credit for a Burl Burlingame in any California newspaper of the era in the on-line newspaper archives.

Dan Brown, #2408
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 16, 2015, 02:24:09 PM
Jerry, I agree that is a tantalizing lead but he couldn't possibly have been the photographer. I was unable to find any other photo credit for a Burl Burlingame in any California newspaper of the era in the on-line newspaper archives.

Dan Brown, #2408
I don't know the date of this article, ....I was thinking more on the lines of copyright owner.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Daniel R. Brown on October 16, 2015, 02:36:04 PM
Looks like a second photographer kneeling in the lower right corner of the photo, but I couldn't find other photos of the event in the on-line archives either. Still, a tantalizing lead.

Dan Brown, #2408
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on October 17, 2015, 11:23:38 AM
Interesting site;   http://dmairfield.com/people/mcleod_ed/  ....I don't know if it has been referenced here before....log book of Mcleod, and details about testing the Earhart Electra.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 17, 2015, 12:36:55 PM
Interesting site;   http://dmairfield.com/people/mcleod_ed/  ....I don't know if it has been referenced here before....log book of Mcleod, and details about testing the Earhart Electra.

Nice find!  Lots of new information there about the first days of X16020. 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on October 17, 2015, 03:35:00 PM
Interesting stuff.

Ric - Based upon the log book entries, it looks like you need to update your timeline, unless McLeod decided not to log the flights you mention on August 2 & 3.  Maybe he was only logging flights where he was PIC.

Andrew
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 17, 2015, 04:51:58 PM
Interesting stuff.

Ric - Based upon the log book entries, it looks like you need to update your timeline, unless McLeod decided not to log the flights you mention on August 2 & 3.  Maybe he was only logging flights where he was PIC.

Yes.  There's a lot going on there.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 18, 2015, 12:00:16 PM
Here's my new chronology based on the new information from Macleod's logbook.

Sunday, July 19, 1936
Lockheed completes the airplane and has it inspected. Lockheed applies for and is granted registration as X16020.

Monday, July 20, 1936
Lockheed test pilot Elmer McLeod makes the first flight in X16020. His logbook entry reads “First Test. A & E [Airframe and Engine], Lockheed to Lockheed.”  The duration of the flight is 1 hour 50 minutes covering 280 miles for an average speed of 153 mph.

Tuesday, July 21, 1936
Earhart’s makes her first flight in the aircraft.  Lockheed test pilot Elmer McLeod is at the controls. His logbook entry reads “Test – Lockheed.” The duration of the flight is 2 hours 10 minutes covering 400 miles for an average speed of 154 mph.  The flight includes 6 takeoffs and landings. Clearly an instructional flight.
The press is invited and she poses for photos.  The aircraft is marked NR16020 apparently for the press but McLeod logs the flight as X16020.

Earhart gives Lockheed a letter authorizing Paul Mantz to take delivery of the airplane on her behalf in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Wednesday, July 22, 1936
McLeod logs “Test – Lockheed” in X16020. The duration of the flight is 1 hour 30 minutes covering 210 miles for an average speed of 140 mph. There are four takeoffs and landings. This is probably more dual instruction for either Earhart or Mantz.

Thursday, July 23, 1936
McLeod logs another “Test – Lockheed” in X16020.  The duration of the flight is 50 minutes covering 150 miles for an average speed of 181 mph. There are two takeoffs and landings.

Friday, July 24, 1936
McLeod delivers X16020. His logbook entry reads “Del. to Las Vegas, Nev.”  The duration of the flight is 1 hour 20 minutes covering 280 miles for an average speed of 210 mph.  The flight includes 2 takeoffs and landings.
In Las Vegas, Lockheed conveys ownership of the Electra to Amelia Earhart presumably via Mantz for $10.  A Nevada Notary notarizes the transaction. The document gives the airplane's registration number as NR16020 but the NR is written-over by hand with X.  There is no way to tell when the correction was made.
McLeod does not log a return trip.  Lockheed and Mantz are both based in Burbank.  It seems likely that Mantz rode with McLeod and, after going through the formalities of delivery, flew the aircraft home as Pilot In Command.

Saturday, July 25, 1936
McLeod logs another test flight in X16020. The airplane no longer belongs to Lockheed so McLeod’s log book entry reads “Test – Burbank to Burbank.” The duration of the flight is 1 hour 5 minutes covering 200 miles for an average speed of 185 mph.  The flight includes 3 takeoffs and landings. This is probably more dual instruction.

Monday, July 27, 1936
Lockheed notifies the Bureau of Air Commerce that Serial No. 1055 has been sold to Amelia Earhart and encloses an application for re-assignment of license number NR16020 "as executed by Miss Earhart." The application applies for registration in the Restricted category but many of the questions on the form are not answered and it says that NR16020 is the registration displayed on the aircraft.  The application is not granted.  The application is incomplete and the aircraft has not been approved for international flight so it cannot carry the N designation. 

Sunday, August 2, 1936
According to a newspaper article, Earhart and McLeod make a 1 hour and 55 minute flight to Mills Field, San Francisco but there is no such flight in McLeod’s log book. Apparently Earhart is Pilot In Command. Until a new application can be submitted the airplane must carry the only registration number that has been approved, X16020.

According to McLeod’s log book, that same day he makes an hour and a half test flight in CFAZY, Model 10A c/n1063 built for Canadian Airlines. Apparently he made that flight earlier in the day.

Monday, August 3, 1936
Earhart and McLeod fly the Electra across the bay to Alameda to see Elmer Dimity’s big parachute and fog dispeller. This is apparently the only time the plane is photographed while displaying the X16020 registration.  They return to Burbank that afternoon.  It was a busy day for McLeod. He then delivered CFAZY to Las Vegas and brought it back to Burbank.  Apparently the Las Vegas delivery was a standard sales tax dodge.

Wednesday, August 5, 1936
McLeod makes a 1 hour flight logged as “Test Burbank.” The flight covers 180 miles for an average speed of 180 mph and includes 3 landing and takeoffs. McLeod logs the airplane as NR16020 even though Earhart’s application for registration in the Restricted category has not been approved.


Thursday, August 6, 1936
Earhart submits a new application. The registration displayed on the aircraft is listed as simply 16020.
 

Friday, August 7, 1936
The application is still not right and is stamped VOID. Corrections are made and the application is re-submitted There is a handwritten notation “see corrected application” and another in a different hand “OK 12 mos” with initials.   The application is approved.  Registration number is R16020.
McLeod’s log book records a flight “To S. F. airport 4 A. & E.” The duration of the flight is 2 hours covering 350 miles for an average speed of 175 mph. There are two takeoffs and landings.

Saturday, August 8, 1936
McLeod logs a 15 minute “Test Burbank” in NR16020 although no return from San Francisco is logged.  Apparently someone else was PIC for the return flight.

Sunday August 9, 1936
McLeod logs 1 hour and 15 minute “Test Burbank” covering 200 miles for an average speed of 160 mph. There are 3 landing and takeoffs.

Speculation:
I see indications of a maintenance problem. The flight to San Francisco is not another instructional fight because McLeod is PIC and the purpose of the flight is “A&E.” Earhart probably rides along and is PIC for the return flight.  The Lockheed shop works on the problem and McLeod’s 15 minute flight on Saturday is a check to see if the problem is fixed.  McLeod is PIC for the test flight on Sunday so apparently there is still a problem and there is apparently some urgency because he is working on Sunday.
   
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: John Ousterhout on October 26, 2015, 10:06:28 AM
Is the whereabouts known of Paul Mantz' logbook from that time?  I found an old ebay auction of one of his logbooks from the 1950's, so at least one of his later logbooks is still in existence.  Wouldn't it be nice if his earlier ones were too?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 26, 2015, 10:43:27 AM
Wouldn't it be nice if his earlier ones were too?

Indeed it would.  The EAA Library in Oshkosh has some of Mantz's papers including some references to Earhart.  I looked through the collection briefly a few years ago but I don't recall seeing a logbook. 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on November 06, 2015, 02:47:14 PM
http://mustangnews.net/amelia-earhart/

Some time back, I believe there was some discussion concerning the horizontal bar across the cabin window and it's removal...this article seems to imply Lockheed 10s were delivered with that bar installed. This article provides some electra details, along with debate concerning timeline, airplane Earhart arrived in, and purpose of the visit.

Snip from article;

The picture with Earhart and the plane shows a horizontal bar in the rectangular window of the back of the plane, which Keezer said is an indicator of what sort of plane she was flying at the time of the trip.

“When they delivered every Lockheed Electra Model 10, each had some type of stiffener or bar to secure each window,” Keezer said.

The bar in the back window suggested the plane was an Electra.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 07, 2015, 07:13:36 AM
Some time back, I believe there was some discussion concerning the horizontal bar across the cabin window and it's removal...this article seems to imply Lockheed 10s were delivered with that bar installed.

The article is wrong. 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Hal Banks on January 01, 2016, 06:56:34 AM
Ric, I see two dates listed on the photo's reverse side;  "Aug 3" and "8-4-36". Where are you getting the September 3 date?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 01, 2016, 07:16:20 AM
Ric, I see two dates listed on the photo's reverse side;  "Aug 3" and "8-4-36". Where are you getting the September 3 date?

Thanks Hal.  My bad.  Typo. The date of the photo is August 3, not September 3.

The 8-4-36 date seems to be the date of distribution of the photo to AP bureaus in various cities.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Hal Banks on January 01, 2016, 07:21:36 AM
Thought that was the case.  This will be a very interesting book when you've finished.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 01, 2016, 07:22:15 AM
Here's the posting again with the correct date.
***************************************
TIGHAR member Larry Inman has assembled an incredible collection of Earhart photos, documents and memorabilia from which he has produced an exhibit called "Remember Amelia."  He hopes to have it displayed at museums.  I've helped him where I could and he has been kind enough to give me a copy of his collection.  One of the most valuable things about his photo collection is that he has gone to great pains to track down the most original print of each photo and had copied not only the front but also the back of the print which often contains information for publishers.

Larry's photos are a tremendous help in researching "The Earhart Electra - From Drawing Board to Disappearance."  For example, Larry has a copy of the photo that appeared in the old Air Classics article including a notation on the reverse that confirms that it was taken in San Francisco on August 3, 1936.  This is the only known photo of the aircraft wearing the X16020 registration.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on January 23, 2016, 09:57:21 PM
Was wondering if the timeline concerning the cowl/leading wing edge paint scheme has been determined? I have noted several R version photos with the engine cowling/wing paint scheme and several R version photos lacking that detail. ( Bendix Throphy Race only???)

http://www.earlyaviators.com/ebehr3.htm

http://photoblog.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/06/14/6859283-new-yorks-historic-floyd-bennett-field-to-become-nations-largest-urban-campground

http://theoldmotor.com/?p=132887
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 24, 2016, 10:08:15 AM
Was wondering if the timeline concerning the cowl/leading wing edge paint scheme has been determined? I have noted several R version photos with the engine cowling/wing paint scheme and several R version photos lacking that detail. ( Bendix Throphy Race only???)

The registration NR16020 was put on the wings and tail for a photo op soon after the airplane was delivered but the "N", signifying approval for international flight was not legitimate at that time and was removed. The airplane was marked R16020 from August 1936 until January 26, 1937. The red/orange markings on the wings and tail seem to have been applied around that same time.
The painted cowlings only appear around the time of the Bendix Trophy Race in early September 1936.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on January 24, 2016, 03:36:40 PM
Wonder the procedure to remove all that bling, and return it to polished surfaces?

http://rmyauctions.com/1936-amelia-earhart,-inspects-her-plane-to-enter--lot2580.aspx
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 24, 2016, 03:48:18 PM
Wonder the procedure to remove all that bling, and return it to polished surfaces?

All it takes is stripper. I wish we knew the colors.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on January 31, 2016, 01:45:48 PM
NV? 16020?
Is this NR 16020?

http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/special_ms223_photographs/293/
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 31, 2016, 02:12:43 PM
Is this NR 16020?

Yes.  This photo must have been taken just before or just after the airplane was delivered to AE.  It was erroneously marked NR16020 for a photo shoot and soon had the N removed.  The N (signifying approval for international flight) was approved on September 21, 1936 but the airplane remained marked R16020 until January 26, 1937.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on January 31, 2016, 03:31:02 PM
You have probably already researched this, ......do you have the timeline concerning the appearance and disappearance of this light?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 31, 2016, 03:49:42 PM
You have probably already researched this, ......do you have the timeline concerning the appearance and disappearance of this light?

That "light" is the faired loop antenna for the Hooven/Bendix Radio Compass that was installed in October 1936 and removed in early March 1937. I've actually been trying to date that particular photo.  When did AE get that Cord automobile?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 31, 2016, 07:19:42 PM
That "light" is the faired loop antenna for the Hooven/Bendix Radio Compass that was installed in October 1936 and removed in early March 1937. I've actually been trying to date that particular photo.  When did AE get that Cord automobile?


A caption for that photo reads: "Amelia Earhart with her Electra 10E, NR16020, at Lockheed Aircraft Company, Burbank, California, December 1936. Earhart’s automobile is a light blue 1936 Cord 810 convertible. (The Autry National Center Museum, Automobile Club of Southern California Archives)"

Source: "This Day in Aviation." (http://www.thisdayinaviation.com/amelia-earharts-lockheed-electra-10e-special-nr16020/)

Also in "The Autry Museum" (https://theautry.org/collections/aviation-development-in-southern-california-4) website, copyright 2011.

"The picture was included in a web exhibition (http://theautry.org/collections/aviation-development-in-southern-california-4) on Southern California's long and special relationship with aviation at the Autry National Center website."
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Patrick Dickson on February 01, 2016, 06:45:20 AM
there may be some clues to when Amelia acquired the Cord here;    http://acdclub.org/forums/21/1475 (http://acdclub.org/forums/21/1475)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ricker H Jones on February 01, 2016, 08:09:37 AM
You're right.  It looks like the information is available from the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles which shows Amelia as the original owner of her Cord.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 01, 2016, 09:21:38 AM
A caption for that photo reads: "Amelia Earhart with her Electra 10E, NR16020, at Lockheed Aircraft Company, Burbank, California, December 1936.

Thanks Marty. Assuming that the December 1936 date is correct, this photo shows that at that time the various window modifications had not been made. The barred cabin windows are still present and the window in the cabin door had not been installed. Presumably the large lavatory window on the starboard side was done at the same time as the other window changes but we can't be sure of that. 
The next datable photo we have was taken on February 8, 1937 by which time the airplane had new cabin windows and a window in the door.  Earhart was about to depart Burbank for the east coast where she would announce her world flight at the Barclay Hotel in New York on February 12.
So, with a date for this photo we have good reason to beleive that the cabin windows were replaced between December 1936 and early February 1937. The spec for the cabin windows changed on 1-15-37.

Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 08, 2016, 09:08:29 AM
Today we're launching our first Forum Membership Drive.  Like nonprofit public radio and television, this Forum is freely accessible to everyone and free from advertising, pop-ups, and other commercial distractions. And like our counterparts in the broadcast world, our ability to provide this service depends upon funding generating by tax-deductible membership in the parent nonprofit organization. Borrowing a page from the NPR playbook, we'll periodically take a time-out from our usual "programming" to ask for your support.

There are currently 1,296 people registered to this Forum.  Only a small percentage are members of TIGHAR.  If you use and enjoy this Forum we're asking, not requiring, you to join TIGHAR. Our goal for this our first Forum Membership Drive is 50 new TIGHAR members.  Until we reach that goal I'll be responding only to questions and comments posted by currently paid-up members of TIGHAR, so please include your member number (as most of you do anyway) at the end of your post.

The sooner we reach our goal, the sooner we can get back to regular Forum action.

You can join TIGHAR or renew your membership HERE or send a check to:

TIGHAR
2366 Hickory Hill Road
Oxford, PA  19363

Or, if you prefer, you can phone me with your credit card information at 610-467-1937.  I'll be honored to take your call.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 17, 2016, 10:15:50 AM
http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/earhart/id/2611/rec/418
 
The content of this memo; along with locations mentioned and notably the X designation ..10"?...2' 15" ?... does anyone know what these numbers are describing?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on February 17, 2016, 10:22:04 AM
Flight time?

Could be a note to herself as a reminder to catch-up her logbook.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 17, 2016, 10:34:13 AM
Nice piece of history anyway. You are probably right about the numbers Bill, any idea who wrote the memo?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on February 17, 2016, 10:54:11 AM
I'm betting it's AE's handwriting.  Looking for her letter to Mrs Roosevelt requesting her help, so we can compare handwriting from a known sample.  (Just saw it posted recently--be darned if I can find it now!)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 17, 2016, 10:55:34 AM
Here's my new chronology based on the new information from Macleod's logbook.



Sunday, August 2, 1936
According to a newspaper article, Earhart and McLeod make a 1 hour and 55 minute flight to Mills Field, San Francisco but there is no such flight in McLeod’s log book. Apparently Earhart is Pilot In Command. Until a new application can be submitted the airplane must carry the only registration number that has been approved, X16020.

According to McLeod’s log book, that same day he makes an hour and a half test flight in CFAZY, Model 10A c/n1063 built for Canadian Airlines. Apparently he made that flight earlier in the day.

Monday, August 3, 1936
Earhart and McLeod fly the Electra across the bay to Alameda to see Elmer Dimity’s big parachute and fog dispeller. This is apparently the only time the plane is photographed while displaying the X16020 registration.  They return to Burbank that afternoon.  It was a busy day for McLeod. He then delivered CFAZY to Las Vegas and brought it back to Burbank.  Apparently the Las Vegas delivery was a standard sales tax dodge.

 
Aug 2nd,
The memo seems to conflict with flight time in the newspaper article,.... 1 Hour 55 minutes , compared to the memo's time of 2 Hours 15 minutes.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on February 18, 2016, 10:37:35 AM
I found this website while looking for some information on Paul Mantz.  It gives a good snapshot of the scope and scale of the airport operations during the time AE was there.  There are even a few pictures but none of NR16020.

http://wesclark.com/burbank/batchelor.html

Do we know where AE kept the aircraft while she was there?  Was she given or did she rent hanger space from Lockheed?  From Mantz?  Bo McKneeley would have needed tools and ramp equipment to do maintenance.  Where did he get them and what, if any, records may have been kept?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 18, 2016, 10:41:29 AM
Do we know where AE kept the aircraft while she was there?

All indications are that she kept the airplane with Paul Mantz Air Service.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 20, 2016, 10:46:48 PM
I'm not sure if these questions are in the correct thread, they may be better suited for research needed,....I tried to research these for myself here first, but if they have been covered here before, I just didn't find the correct site. It was mentioned that the Earhart Electra was the only example found thus far that had bars across the rear windows. In noting changes that occured to the Electra over it's short life,.... I was curious as to the lettering that appears aft of the door in this Purdue Files Image. So,.....Where, What, Why,??? are my questions,if this is the Earhart Electra?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 21, 2016, 07:43:52 AM
I was curious as to the lettering that appears aft of the door in this Purdue Files Image. So,.....Where, What, Why,??? are my questions,if this is the Earhart Electra?

Well that's a strange one!  Yes, it's definitely c/n 1055.  You can see not only the barred windows but also one of the fueling ports on the side of the fuselage. But why the big "E", or is it a "B"?  Those guys seem to be about to board the plane carrying charts.  What is AE carrying in her hand?

What's the Purdue code for this photo?  I couldn't find it in the Purdue e-archives site.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bruce Thomas on February 21, 2016, 08:22:17 AM
So,.....Where, What, Why,??? are my questions,if this is the Earhart Electra?

Try as I might, I haven't found a photo of NR16020 with its registration written large aft of the cabin door. So I, too, wonder if that's a picture of Earhart's Electra. Maybe Amelia was just inspecting someone else's Electra. That initial letter looks like an "E" to me. Could she be seen visiting an aircraft registered in Spain (EC) or Ireland (EI)?

I did find a photo in the Purdue collection (http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/earhart/id/910/rec/111) where Amelia is sitting in the cabin doorway of a Guinea Airways' Lockheed Electra, and that one does have its registration written aft of the cabin door ... but the straight horizontal lines in Jerry's photo don't seem to match the registration of the Guinea Airways Electra.

(http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/utils/getthumbnail/collection/earhart/id/910)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 21, 2016, 08:30:03 AM
So I, too, wonder if that's a picture of Earhart's Electra.

Bars in the windows.  Fueling port on the fuselage.  It's definitely Earhart's ship during the time it was marked R16020.
I'd love to see a larger copy of the photo.  Who are those guys?  Does that big letter have something to do with the Bendix race? 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 21, 2016, 08:36:12 AM
Wait a minute.  Could that be Helen Richey carrying the charts?  This looks like flash photography taken at night.  Earhart and Richey started the Bendix race in the wee hours of Sept. 4.  Could this be them boarding the airplane for the start of the race?
Big letters or numbers on the side of a vehicle (car, boat or plane) is usually for identification in a race.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 21, 2016, 08:44:30 AM
Here is the link to that photo in the Purdue Files, sorry ,should have included it in my original post ;
http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/earhart/id/279/rec/718
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 21, 2016, 09:02:58 AM
Wait a minute.  Could that be Helen Richey carrying the charts?  This looks like flash photography taken at night.  Earhart and Richey started the Bendix race in the wee hours of Sept. 4.  Could this be them boarding the airplane for the start of the race?
Big letters or numbers on the side of a vehicle (car, boat or plane) is usually for identification in a race.

I bet that is Helen Richey,....here is another;  http://explorepahistory.com/displayimage.php?imgId=1-2-13BB
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 21, 2016, 09:09:25 AM
Yeah, that's Helen and the bottle AE is carrying seems to be "Collyrium," an eye medication with an eye-cup built into the stopper.  There's a bottle in the Luke Field inventory, Item 67 (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Luke_Field.html).
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on February 21, 2016, 10:02:49 AM
. . . and the gentleman in the middle is probably Bo Mckneeley.

Here's the other picture.  Best shot of Bo yet.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bruce Thomas on February 21, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
Wait a minute.  Could that be Helen Richey carrying the charts?  This looks like flash photography taken at night.  Earhart and Richey started the Bendix race in the wee hours of Sept. 4.  Could this be them boarding the airplane for the start of the race?
Big letters or numbers on the side of a vehicle (car, boat or plane) is usually for identification in a race.

I bet that is Helen Richey,....here is another;  http://explorepahistory.com/displayimage.php?imgId=1-2-13BB

"Helen Richey ... with Amelia Earhart, before their transatlantic flight in the Bendix Trophy race, 1936."

Transatlantic. Transcontinental. Transsubstantiation. Transsomethingorother. Transwhatever.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Greg Daspit on February 21, 2016, 06:28:37 PM
Reverse image of Bo Mckneely (http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/rights-managed/U381190ACME/airplane-mechanic-bo-mckneely-in-cockpit), cabin door and lavatory door
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 23, 2016, 12:32:50 PM
Reverse image of Bo Mckneely (http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/rights-managed/U381190ACME/airplane-mechanic-bo-mckneely-in-cockpit), cabin door and lavatory door

Here's the photo right-way-'round.  I'd love to know when this was taken.  The window is in the door so it's after January 1937. It's before Miami because the special supports for the "bug-catching" pole are not there yet (they were supposedly added in Miami).  Is that Fred visible through the window?  If so, then it's after March 12 when Noonan first comes on the scene.  There are what appear to be maps and charts sitting on the auxiliary battery so it looks like they're getting ready to go somewhere. But there is no navigator's table visible.  Could this be the departure for Miami on May 21?   If so it would confirm my suspicion that the navigator's table was not reinstalled when the plane was repaired.

Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on February 23, 2016, 01:46:59 PM
What is the thing right in front of his knee?

Sextant box?  probably too small for a Brandis, but...


Andrew
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 23, 2016, 02:00:47 PM
What is the thing right in front of his knee?

Sextant box?  probably too small for a Brandis, but...

Way too small for any kind of sextant box.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Matt Revington on February 23, 2016, 02:11:38 PM
I'm curious about the riveted aluminum behind Mckneely, it's hard to judge the angle but shouldn't that be the back of the other door.  I don't remember aluminum riveted to the inside of the frame in other photos.  If this is non standard installation it could be another candidate for the source of 2-2-V-1
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 23, 2016, 02:15:23 PM
I'm curious about the riveted aluminum behind Mckneely, it's hard to judge the angle but shouldn't that be the back of the other door.  I don't remember aluminum riveted to the inside of the frame in other photos.  If this is non standard installation it could be another candidate for the source of 2-2-V-1

I think that's the back of the open lavatory door.  Standard structure, and the rivet pattern is nothing like 2-2-V-1.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 24, 2016, 10:16:46 AM
http://www.airrace.com/1936NAR.htm

Earhart's race number seems to have been number 20 ....was this painted on aft of the cabin door after the large E ....or just her last two digits in 16020???
Thaden had a 62 painted on the side of her fuselage..but her plane registration number doesn't include those two digits it seems.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 24, 2016, 10:27:30 AM
Earhart's race number seems to have been number 20 ....was this painted on aft of the cabin door after the large E ....or just her last two digits in 16020???
Thaden had a 62 painted on the side of her fuselage..but her plane registration number doesn't include those two digits it seems.

Good question.  So far no other photos of the Electra taken during the race have turned up.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 24, 2016, 10:53:44 AM
And bottom of starboard wing;
Finish line photo,  http://www.womeninaerospacehistory.com/tag/vincent-bendix/
Looking for a starting line up , found 1937, but no 1936 thus far.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 24, 2016, 11:05:39 AM
Ditto for "Mr Mulligan";  http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/Howard-Mulligan.html
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 25, 2016, 03:00:22 PM
Reverse image of Bo Mckneely (http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/rights-managed/U381190ACME/airplane-mechanic-bo-mckneely-in-cockpit), cabin door and lavatory door

Here's the photo right-way-'round.  I'd love to know when this was taken.  The window is in the door so it's after January 1937. It's before Miami because the special supports for the "bug-catching" pole are not there yet (they were supposedly added in Miami).  Is that Fred visible through the window?  If so, then it's after March 12 when Noonan first comes on the scene.  There are what appear to be maps and charts sitting on the auxiliary battery so it looks like they're getting ready to go somewhere. But there is no navigator's table visible.  Could this be the departure for Miami on May 21?   If so it would confirm my suspicion that the navigator's table was not reinstalled when the plane was repaired.

Missing navigation instrument and mounting platform in the photo with Bo, so that may help date it;
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 25, 2016, 03:04:09 PM
Andrew,
I can't say this is the same box that is at the left knee of Bo, but it appears similar in size
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Bill Mangus on February 25, 2016, 03:06:18 PM
Jerry, that's a nice bit of analysis in your #94.  If you can identify the photographer it might be possible to pin it down more precisely (and see if there are any others).
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 25, 2016, 03:20:55 PM
Missing navigation instrument and mounting platform in the photo with Bo, so that may help date it;

That's the pelorus.  It was installed by the time this photo was taken (probably late February/early March).  The photo of Bo in the cabin may have been taken at the time of the November trip to New York.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 25, 2016, 05:57:26 PM
Oh well, in addition to the dating issue, we probably solved two other questions in one fell swoop as well,..One That ain't Fred in the window, and Two that ain't Fred's sextent or otherwise box.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 25, 2016, 06:53:41 PM
Pardon if this image has been posted and discussed here before, but it is one of my favorites,  I believe it is an image that all of us here hope to see one day ( or similar), and wanted to share it with those who may not have come across it before. One more try.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 26, 2016, 08:57:42 AM
Missing navigation instrument and mounting platform in the photo with Bo, so that may help date it;

That's the pelorus.  It was installed by the time this photo was taken (probably late February/early March).  The photo of Bo in the cabin may have been taken at the time of the November trip to New York.
Oh well, in addition to the dating issue, we probably solved two other questions in one fell swoop as well,..One That ain't Fred in the window, and Two that ain't Fred's sextent or otherwise box.
Then again......the cabin door window is already installed, so that dates the photo post January 1937...so between the windows being added and before the Pelorus was installed.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 09:16:42 AM
Then again......the cabin window door is installed,so that dates the photo post January 1937...so between the windows being added and before the Pelorus was installed.

You're right, so it's not the departure for New York in November  '36, but those maps on the aux. battery sure seem to suggest that they're getting ready to go somewhere. Could this be the departure for Newark on February 8? 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 09:49:49 AM
Could this be the departure for Newark on February 8?

This photo was taken while AE was on the east coast in February.  The pelorus is not yet installed.  The hypothesis that the photo of Bo in the cabin dates from the trip in February looks pretty good.  Bo was on that trip.  What it not clear to me is exactly when Manning joined the team.  I think that AE, GP and McKneely left Burbank on February 8 and arrived in Newark on February 11.  Manning meets them in New York and rides back to California with them arriving in Burbank February 19.  At this time the special windows (door and lavatory) are present but the "navigator's station" (table, pelorus, instruments beside window) is not.  Manning supervises its construction after he arrives in California.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 10:12:16 AM
This is an interesting photo.  Manning, Mantz, and AE.  That's Bo up on the wing in that same leather jacket he's wearing in the cabin photo. It seems like it must have been taken on February 19 when AE, GP, Manning, and McKneely arrived back in Burbank. I think that's Union Air Terminal in the background.  The only thing that makes me question the date/location is the way they are dressed.  Is the weather too chilly for this to be LA in February?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 26, 2016, 10:12:36 AM
Will keep looking for articles about when Manning joined the crew,....since the windows were installed in January....it has been my understanding that the large lavatory window was installed at Manning's request,..so would his involvement be prior January 1937? Would he have had any input as to it's size, via phone, telegraph, etc , not being there in person while the electra was being modified?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 10:29:39 AM
Will keep looking for articles about when Manning joined the crew,....since the windows were installed in January....it has been my understanding that the large lavatory window was installed at Manning's request,..so would his involvement be prior January 1937? Would he have had any input as to it's size, via phone, telegraph, etc , not being there in person while the electra was being modified?

Yeah, I wonder about that too.  There are two questions. 
1.  When was Manning selected to be the navigator for the world flight?
2.  When did he physically join the team in California?

Earhart's decision to bring along a navigator for at least the Pacific portion of the world flight seems to date from her abandonment of her original Hawaii to Tokyo route in favor of Hawaii to Howland to New Guinea.  She only settled on Manning after being turned down by Brad Washburn and her friend Paul Collins (Butler, East to the Dawn, page 366) but it's not clear when those conversations took place.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Friend Weller on February 26, 2016, 10:44:49 AM
...The only thing that makes me question the date/location is the way they are dressed.  Is the weather too chilly for this to be LA in February?

Having "grown up" (a relative term ;D) in L.A., they look appropriately dressed for a clear day in February.  It doesn't look like a typical calm Valley frosty morning and with the wind in the photo (see AE's scarf), it doesn't appear as if it was going to be an overly cold day, perhaps only breezy.   I suppose we could look at the Union Terminal weather records (if they are available online) to verify if mornings in February of '37 were temperate enough for suits with vests but I'm thinking AE's long coat may have been put away before noon.

Friend
TIGHAR 3086V
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Russ Matthews on February 26, 2016, 12:20:37 PM
If this website is correct, the mean temperature that day was 59 °F (low of 50 °F and high of 69 °F). Warm for NJ, but chilly by LA standards.

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KCQT/1937/2/19/DailyHistory.html?req_city=&req_state=&req_statename=&reqdb.zip=&reqdb.magic=&reqdb.wmo=&MR=1 (http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KCQT/1937/2/19/DailyHistory.html?req_city=&req_state=&req_statename=&reqdb.zip=&reqdb.magic=&reqdb.wmo=&MR=1)

The suits, coat, and sweater vests feel appropriate for the more stylish 1930s .. and especially if they have just been flying a non-pressurized airplane several thousand feet up.

An archival copy of the LA Times would likely contain the weather forecast for the day as well.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Daniel R. Brown on February 26, 2016, 12:45:09 PM
From multiple newspaper articles:

2/18/37 delayed in Cleveland by weather (AE, GP, Bo and Manning).
2/19 in St. Louis.
2/20 forced down in Blackwell, Oklahoma by dust storm. AE arrested for speeding in prank arranged by GP.
2/21 arrived in Burbank.

Dan Brown, #2408
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Daniel R. Brown on February 26, 2016, 01:13:34 PM
First mention in the on-line newspaper archives of Manning as navigator for world flight is 1/25/37.

Dan Brown, #2408
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 26, 2016, 01:20:31 PM
Looks like they did a lot of experimenting with object placement near that window in short order, once Manning was on the scene;
Navigator bench installed,three gauges down to one, and lines fastened to navigators table ( crude table by the way)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 01:22:54 PM
Looks like they did a lot of experimenting with object placement near that window in short order, once Manning was on the scene;
Navigator bench installed,three gauges down to one, and lines fastened to navigators table ( crude table by the way)

Or was it one gauge up to three?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 26, 2016, 01:36:39 PM
Not sure.....looks like holes in the plywood navigators table where maybe the chronometers were once placed in the three gauge image ( but it is a guess)... the door in the antenna weight photo , it doesn't look lined by fabric ( which is odd because in the Bo photo the door looks lined) , so maybe the three gauge is earlier due to lack of liner, but I can't see the door in the one gauge shot either??
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 01:44:32 PM
The one-gauge photo was taken prior to the removal of the Hooven Radio Compass (the base of the Hooven loop is visible on the ceiling in the background). My guess would be that the tend would be toward more instruments, not fewer.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on February 26, 2016, 01:52:55 PM
I think I can see the holes in the plywood where the chronometers were once placed in the three gauge view, and agree more is better when it comes to gauges to read and inform,the three gauge image is most likely later....the lack of the door liner in that image( if that is what I am seeing) is puzzling.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2016, 02:21:09 PM
From multiple newspaper articles:

2/18/37 delayed in Cleveland by weather (AE, GP, Bo and Manning).
2/19 in St. Louis.
2/20 forced down in Blackwell, Oklahoma by dust storm. AE arrested for speeding in prank arranged by GP.
2/21 arrived in Burbank.


Hmmmm
Elgen Long (page 60) has them departing Newark for Cleveland on 2/17 in the afternoon and took off early the next morning(no citation).
He has them landing in Blackwell, OK on 2/18 (page 61) due to a prop that wouldn't change pitch. "They were able to take off from Blackwell the next morning, Friday February 19, for the approximately 8-hour flight to Burbank."  The source he cites is Blackwell Sunday Times, February 21, 1937 page 1.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 10, 2016, 09:56:31 AM
These appear to be the first photos of the completed, or at least airworthy, airplane.  They were taken on July 21, 1936, two days after the airplane was inspected by the Bureau of Air Commerce and three days before the airplane was officially delivered to Earhart. See Master Timeline (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EWWg4KlVwc0s07Fv6MLoiWORRe-pAJI1ZPBpQ_raux0/edit#) for 21 July 1936)   The curious thing is the registration number NR16020. At this time the aircraft was authorized only as X16020.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Daniel R. Brown on March 11, 2016, 07:49:09 PM
Re delivery to Las Vegas, it's interesting that Lockheed test pilot Elmer C. McLeod also delivered two other new Electra 10s, CF-AZY and CF-BAF destined for Canada, to Las Vegas just a few days after he had done the same for X16020. Source: Elmer C. McLeod flight log book #4, 1935 to 1937, page 10 (dmairfie.ipower.com).

Dan Brown, #2408
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 12, 2016, 06:38:47 AM
Re delivery to Las Vegas, it's interesting that Lockheed test pilot Elmer C. McLeod also delivered two other new Electra 10s, CF-AZY and CF-BAF destined for Canada, to Las Vegas just a few days after he had done the same for X16020.

Las Vegas delivery seems to have been SOP for Lockheed.  Gotta be a sales tax thing.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Harbert William Davenport on March 12, 2016, 01:00:06 PM
The Lockheed purchase order form dated March 20 1936, that Ric attached to his "4,500 miles" post, has a pre-printed line, "California State Sales Tax."  I'd say that confirms Ric's conclusion that there was a Cal sales tax in force at the time, one which was being avoided by the Las Vegas deliveries.  (So far I've not found what the 1936 Calif. sales tax rate was.)
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 12, 2016, 01:04:04 PM
The Lockheed purchase order form dated March 20 1936, that Ric attached to his "4,500 miles" post, has a pre-printed line, "California State Sales Tax."

Nice catch!  Note that the California State Sales Tax line is blank.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on March 13, 2016, 08:52:50 PM
It would be interesting to see if this fellow ( T P Wright) mentioned anything about airplane taxes and means used to reduce or avoid paying them, in this February 1936 study. I don't have access to the entire report. Pages 122-128, only page 122 is open to viewing without an account.

http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/pdf/10.2514/8.155
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on March 16, 2016, 11:21:59 AM
Re delivery to Las Vegas, it's interesting that Lockheed test pilot Elmer C. McLeod also delivered two other new Electra 10s, CF-AZY and CF-BAF destined for Canada, to Las Vegas just a few days after he had done the same for X16020.

Las Vegas delivery seems to have been SOP for Lockheed.  Gotta be a sales tax thing.

It seems GP was very concerned about taxes at or just before the Electra's delivery,....this letter was dated just prior to the plane being delivered in Las Vegas ;
http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/epurdue/id/294/rec/2631

I wasn't able to find the letter with the lawyers council and recommendations.....possibly the Nevada delivery was mentioned as a cost saving measure.
 
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2016, 11:54:49 AM
As I read Putnam's letter, his concern is not about sales tax on the airplane.  The money for the purchase of the plane is coming from the Purdue Research Fund.  He wants it to be clear that "the gifts to Miss Earhart are outright and without obligation of performance on her part."  In other words, Purdue is not hiring Amelia to do anything.  She is not a contractor.  She is merely accepting gifts.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on March 16, 2016, 01:14:01 PM
He mentions that they dropped the idea of corporate owned...rather, put the title in Earhart's name  , and is he concerned about gift taxes levied by the government against Amelia?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2016, 01:49:11 PM
He mentions that they dropped the idea of corporate owned...rather, put the title in Earhart's name  , and is he concerned about gift taxes levied by the government against Amelia?

We need a 1930s tax accountant.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2016, 05:26:57 PM
We need a 1930s tax accountant.

Wikipedia will do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_tax_in_the_United_States

Putnam's original plan was to form a corporation that would use Purdue's money to buy and operate the airplane, but that would create a tax liability.  Congress had passed the first Gift Tax in 1932 but it only applied to gifts greater than $50,000.  The amount due upon delivery of the airplane was $34,000.  If Purdue made the money an outright gift Amelia would not have to declare it as income.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Albert Durrell on March 16, 2016, 05:46:06 PM
Actually, it's the donor that would have to pay the tax.  Still that way today, I believe.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2016, 06:32:41 PM
Actually, it's the donor that would have to pay the tax.  Still that way today, I believe.

But as a gift it would still not be taxable income to Eahart, right?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Albert Durrell on March 17, 2016, 05:49:41 AM
Right, Earhart would not have to report it.
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Jerry Germann on December 06, 2016, 08:08:47 AM
Was wondering on the progress of the new book, and is there anything more we can be searching for to help complete the research. Do you have a best estimate when the book might be on store shelves, or the Tighar site?
Title: Re: X16020
Post by: Ric Gillespie on December 06, 2016, 08:53:53 AM
Was wondering on the progress of the new book, and is there anything more we can be searching for to help complete the research. Do you have a best estimate when the book might be on store shelves, or the Tighar site?

The writing is going more slowly than I had hoped.  The problem is finding time and time is a function of money.  Contributions to the Literary Guild have dropped off.  I've had to devote my time to fundraising and organizing the change in plans for Niku IX.  Also, believe it or not, we're making progress on a re-evaluation of the castaway.  We've decided to do three papers for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.  I'm writing a paper on the history of the discovery of a castaway's skeleton, Dr. Jantz is writing a paper on the bone measurements, and Tom King is writing a paper on the archaeology of the castaway camp (aka the Seven Site).  Huge project and very important - but time consuming.