TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => General discussion => Topic started by: Ric Gillespie on July 25, 2019, 08:07:11 AM
-
On July 23, 2019, National Geographic announced that Bob Ballard, finder of the Titanic, will try to find the Earhart aircraft at Nikumaroro.
Prior to TIGHAR's 2012 expedition, Dr. Ballard described his views on the search for the Earhart plane and wished TIGHAR “fair winds, a following sea, and a little luck” (https://youtu.be/67qlnUXBdrQ). We sincerely wish him the same.
TIGHAR will not be officially participating in the expedition but we have reached an agreement with National Geographic for TIGHAR's assistance in the production of the two-hour television special “Expedition Amelia.” All news about the expedition will come from National Geographic. We will, of course, keep TIGHAR members informed about our continuing Earhart research.
NOTE: This topic was originally posted on July 24 but mysteriously disappeared overnight. A similar notice on the TIGHAR homepage also disappeared. We're investigating.
-
Mystery solved. Nothing nefarious. Webmaster Marty Moleski was doing maintenance on the website at the same time we were putting up new information. When Marty finished, the website re-booted to the way it was before we put up the Ballard info.
All fixed now.
-
Ric, is any member of TIGHAR going on Ballard's expedition?
-
The National Geographic announcement was a good article (the show preview was a little over dramatic). Do we know how long Ballard will search? I may have missed that but don't recall seeing that information in the article.
-
Ric, is any member of TIGHAR going on Ballard's expedition?
The land team is mostly made up of TIGHAR expedition veterans but they're participating as private citizen volunteers, not as TIGHAR representatives.
-
I'm posting a link to the MV Nautilus that Ric put up in the thread for the search for the Samoa Clipper. Although the search has ended, the link is still live and still being periodically updated.
Who knows, maybe it will be active during the search for the Electra, even though Nat'l Geo will likely kill it so as to control the news until their October program.
Keep it handy on your desktop!
https://nautiluslive.org/
-
The National Geographic announcement was a good article (the show preview was a little over dramatic). Do we know how long Ballard will search? I may have missed that but don't recall seeing that information in the article.
As part of our agreement with Nat Geo, I can't talk about Ballard's plans. The PR contact at Nat Geo is Molly Mulrain, email Molly.mulrain@natgeo.com. Phone 610-202-6782
-
I'm posting a link to the MV Nautilus that Ric put up in the thread for the search for the Samoa Clipper. Although the search has ended, the link is still live and still being periodically updated.
Who knows, maybe it will be active during the search for the Electra, even though Nat'l Geo will likely kill it so as to control the news until their October program.
Keep it handy on your desktop!
https://nautiluslive.org/
According to a brief CNN article, the Nautilus link above will be active during the search for the Electra. Another, longer article by the Washington Post states that the expedition will last 3 weeks and that National Geographic will announce any significant findings prior to the airing of the special.
See that article here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/07/24/this-explorer-found-titanic-his-new-mission-solve-amelia-earharts-disappearance/?utm_term=.b59bb4a15c7f (https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/07/24/this-explorer-found-titanic-his-new-mission-solve-amelia-earharts-disappearance/?utm_term=.b59bb4a15c7f)
-
Unfortunately for us, it looks as if there will be no live feed during the search.
https://nautiluslive.org/blog/2019/07/24/ev-nautilus-joins-expedition-solve-mystery-amelia-earhart%E2%80%99s-disappearance
They say MV Nautilus will be a "closed set" during the search.
-
Ric, is any member of TIGHAR going on Ballard's expedition?
The land team is mostly made up of TIGHAR expedition veterans but they're participating as private citizen volunteers, not as TIGHAR representatives.
Credit should be given where credit is due in regards to any significant discoveries during this expedition. Ballard and NG are standing on the shoulders of giants when using TIGHAR's immense collection of Niku research results since 1989, when Ric started this adventure.
Good luck to all involved. Hopefully they find the 'smoking gun' needed for the general public's approval, but more importantly, that they return safely.
-
TIGHAR is getting quite a bit of credit for our past research, and I think that NG and Ballard are quite aware of the history and are trying to give credit where credit is due. For example, take a look at this interview with Allison Fundis, the Director of Operations aboard the R/V Nautilus:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p8bs48pjrNiwZuv8jj2C3whlplsb0Iz5/view
While TIGHAR may not be directly participating in this expedition, TIGHAR is supporting it by making our previous research available. The goal is to enhance the chances that something diagnostic will be found.
Fingers Crossed!
Andrew
-
I agree Andrew and credit is nice but doesn't tell the Tighar story of the last 30 years. Ric has said, "The story of TIGHAR’s investigation is an epic of Homeric proportions, full of failure and triumph, heartache and jubilation". I hope this is an integral part of the October show.
I do wish NG would reconsider their decision to "close the set" and not live stream the ROV search. I understand that their decision is likely based on not wanting to spill the beans too early in order to attract a larger viewing audience in October. I would argue that the people most likely to watch the live stream are the numerous Tighar members who have donated their time, money and expertise, yourself included, who would also tune in to the program to see how well - or poorly - Tighar is portrayed. There are probably not many people other than Tighar members and perhaps a few proponents of the other theories, who would be willing to sit in front of their monitor for hours hoping to see (or not see) any bits and pieces that may appear.
I'd argue the live stream, with any off-the-cuff narration that may occur about Tighar, Ric, the expeditions to Niku, other evidence and theories, and artifacts found and analyzed as they "mow the lawn" would only whet the appetite of any casual viewers and make them even more likely to tune-in in October to learn about the whole story. NG has already said they'll report any important news (finding of aircraft parts?) directly from the expedition, so it is not like putting a live stream up is giving anything away.
My opinion anyway.
-
All,
It is obvious that TIGHAR and its membership are delighted that National Geographic (NG) and Bob Ballard are in the planning stages of launching a search off Niku in hopes of finding A.E.’s plane.
However, I am a little concerned about the way the search and documentation thereof has been presented here on the Forum i.e. no live feed to the TIGHAR members, no TIGHAR representation aboard the search vessels, etc.
We all know that NG is not taking this project on as a solely public service venture i.e. what about future revenue to NG from sponsors, etc.
It seems to me that NG should JOIN TIGHAR in this search in a manner resembling a “joint venture”; For example:
- accommodate a TIGHAR executive/representative in joining the voyage
- accommodate the TIGHAR representative in communicating with
his/her members during the search
- providing a copy of the final NG presentation to all, then registered,
TIGHAR members
in return for the data, artifacts, research and analysis of the hypothesis formulated over the past 30 years.
The reason I have proposed the above is because I believe each TIGHAR member, past and present, have contributed to NG’s interest in this project. These contributions take on many forms e.g. monetary, research in libraries, local newspapers, government archives, etc.
I believe one could almost declare all of these contributions as a “copy right “to the information NG has received and processed in their decision to pursue their search.
In closing, I am grateful and excited in seeing what NG comes up with from this search; but, at the same time I believe TIGHAR’s executives/membership/donators/ etc. deserve a presence in this endeavor.
Seek the Legend’s truth and let AE and FN smile down once again on their attempt to change aeronautical’s and its accomplishments.
Ted Campbell
-
This is exciting news and a big surprise.
Their expedition is already underway and is surveying several regions. The Nikumaroro area is scheduled for August 7 to August 25 . That’s next week so they are past planning stages.
Here is the link to the Nautilus tech
https://nautiluslive.org/tech
The ROVs
Hercules:
A 4,000 meter depth ROV with manipulator arms
Imaging tech:
One high-definition video channel on fiber optic, four standard definition video channels on coax.
Lighting •Two Deep Sea Power & Light Matrix-3 LED lamps, 20,000 lumens, forward mounted
•Six to twelve Deep Sea Power & Light Sphere LED lamps, 6,000 lumens, mounting configurable
•SCALING | Two green Deep Sea Power & Light Micro Sea-Lasers, mounted 10 cm (3.94 inches) apart, HD camera only
Argus- A 6,000 meter depth towsled-style ROV that can work in tandem with Argus
Do they need to secure the ship the same as other expeditions with the Hercules capable of working in tandem with the Argus?
What lessons learned were passed along from the 2012 expedition? For example securing the ship to the Norwich propeller shaft and sharing videos of possible interest (2012 possible debris field).
Questions for the technical experts:
Is their High def camera capable of a live feed to ship? It says it is on fiber optic so I assume yes?
For comparison what amount of lumens were available on the ROV used in the 2012 expedition?
In layman’s terms what is the difference in Sonar Tech being used compared to the sonar used in the 2012 TIGHAR expedition?
-
@ Ted Campbell:
Well said, sir. Very well said!
-
Thank you Bill, where is Ric on this issue?
Ted
-
Thank you Bill, where is Ric on this issue?
I'm limited in what I can say by our agreement with National Geographic - but I'll remind you that this is not my first rodeo.
-
Can anyone point me to the maps of the ROV dives? Thanks!
The new TIGHAR Tracks will include an article titled "The Search So Far" - an overview and summary of all the underwater searching we've done at Niku to date. Included is a map showing all the sonar targets identified in 2012 and the tracks of all the ROV dives.
The PDF TIGHAR Tracks should go out on Tuesday. The print version will follow a few days later.
-
In layman’s terms what is the difference in Sonar Tech being used compared to the sonar used in the 2012 TIGHAR expedition?
Based on publicly available information, the technology Nautilus uses has advantages and disadvantages compared to what we used in 2012.
• Nautilus's hull-mounted multi-beam sonar is better than KOK's, but I can't quantify how much better. Multi-beam is useful for mapping the undersea topography (bathymetry) but its usefulness in searching for objects is a function of its resolution. KOK's multi-beam did not have sufficient resolution to see something as small as even an intact Electra.
• The best tool for spotting targets is side-scan sonar but the steepness of the reef slope at Niku makes towed-array side-scan difficult. Flying the "fish" parallel to the slope results in a fore-shortened image on the reef side while the ocean side sees only water. In 2012 we used side-scan mounted on an AUV (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle) to fly up and down, rather than across the slope. The AUV couldn't go deeper than 1,500 meters. We still had all kinds of problems but the area got covered. Nautilus uses towed-array side-scan sonar deployed from an ROV. Their ROVs can go much deeper than ours could. In theory, they'll have less capability than we had on the steep slope down to 1,500 meters but good capability at greater depths where the slope moderate.
• ROVs (Remote Operated Vehicles tethered to the ship) with HD cameras are a good way to investigate sonar targets. In 2012 we used a fairly nimble medium-sized ROV but we still had to be super careful to avoid fouling the tether on the steep reef slope. The Norwich City wreckage at about 300 meters is an especially bad neighborhood. Our ROV could only go to about 800 meters. Nautilus' ROVs can go to 4,000 and 6,000 meters respectively but they are much larger and might have a more difficult time on the shallower steep slope.
Bottom line: Nautilus might have trouble looking where we've already looked but they can look deeper than we could.
-
Thank you Ric (and Pat) for putting up with your own members. That too is a significant achievement.
The credit goes to all the members of TIGHAR who support us with talent, hard work, and hard cash.
You can't lead a cavalry charge if you don't have a horse.
And I guess "thanks" go to the guys who first came to you and said "Hey . . ."
Indeed. Sadly, Tom Willi and Tom Gannon are both gone now.
-
Ric,
Good summary/comparison of the ROV & sonar capability for the water search.
What can you tell us about the land archaeology?
Thanks.
-
What can you tell us about the land archaeology?
Not much. They've said they're going try again to find bones at the Seven Site using forensic dogs.
-
I hope the Ballard team is prepared to put some of their focus on the sides of the reef. I still think the evidence is there. Good luck to all of them!
Agreed. Especially focus on the first 200-300ft deep shelf below the Bevington Object. I hope they have good luck with the equipment and search.
This is one of the better articles I've seen.
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/true-stories/new-evidence-that-could-solve-the-mystery-of-famed-aviator-amelia-earharts-fate/news-story/0be4bf5ebb043851c98b88896c9afe58
-
Good article, but the guy in the white shirt wasn't Fred Noonan. ???
Karen Hoy 2610ER
-
Good article, but the guy in the white shirt wasn't Fred Noonan. ???
Lots of other problems with that article.
-
Thanks Leon. That's what I ment, let's share the information.
Re your other point concerning TIGHAR's open info. what does "All Rights Reserved" mean on TIGHAR's publications?
Ted
-
From John Gubata via email:
I tried to register but at login I receive an error message stating the my email address must first be validated.
I just wanted to pass on to the members this screenshot taken on August 9th at 1 am EST from the https://www.vesselfinder.com/ (https://www.vesselfinder.com/) website which is showing the location of the E/V Nautilus at Nikumaroro.
It's been hard to get current information on Dr. Ballard's expedition to Nikumaroro Island but it is possible to track the Nautilus' AIS beacon. I've been following the ship since it's departure from Apia, American Samoa on Tuesday/Wednesday to it's present location off Nikumaroro where it arrived within the last 8 hours.
Well.....guess what?
Although the stated itinerary called first for a mapping survey of the island's surrounding area, the ship has dropped anchor at the precise location where TIGHAR believes Earhart's aircraft landed and was subsequently washed away down slope.
Wasting no time. The blue dot may be a ROV.
I hope the other forum followers will find this as exciting as I do.
Many thanks to Rick and all the other TIGHAR members for this remarkable journey of deductive reasoning and hard core research.
-
Well done, John Gubata!
Welcome aboard.
-
Hi Marty:
Thanks for the tip on tracking the AIS beacons of the ships.
Today I noticed that the Nautilus moved down into the vicinity of the landing channel, and then later in the day moved back up to the vicinity of the Norwich City. I'm wondering if what's going on is that in the morning they are supporting mapping tasks with the autonomous surface vehicle (ASV) and aerial drones, and then later in the day they shift to ROV work, which can continue throughout the night. Lather rinse and repeat every day.
The last time I checked the site you linked, there was a second ship there. Perhaps the ship with the land team has arrived?
-
Hi Marty:
Now that I went back and re-read your post from early this morning, you noted a second AIS contact then as well. That's a bit puzzling to me. With the two-ROV stack that Nautilus uses (Argus and Hercules), nothing stays on the surface. Perhaps their ASV has an AIS transponder, but why would it have been deployed when you posted, which was still nighttime at Niku? Interesting.
-
I'm puzzled by what the icons represent on the map too. If you change the map setting from Standard to Navionics at the upper right you can see(as of the past few hours) the red triangle and blue dot are on the reef flat, SE of the Norwich City wreck. If that position is accurate, I think it's too shallow to be the Nautilus. The red triangle also labels as "yacht/ sailing vessel" and the blue dot labels as "other type/ auxiliary" when you pass the cursor over it. There is another icon for an unknown ship that's been about 62 NM W/SW for a while.
-
I believe the blue dot represents the satellite position.
Rick
-
I don't know any more than you guys about what Nautilus doing, but I can't make sense of the AIS positions for the arrow head and the blue dot as of 10:00am Eastern time today.
The attached overlay of a satellite image on the "standard map" shows the arrow head close in to the reef edge just off Tatiman Passage. That can't be Nautilus. Waaay too close to the reef. The blue dot could be Nautilus but it's way south of our primary search area west of the Bevington Object location (Bev).
A similar overlay of the AIS "navionics" map shows the arrow head up on the reef flat and the blue dot virtually at the reef edge.
-
Hi Marty:
Thanks for the tip on tracking the AIS beacons of the ships.
I'm not the source. I was just forwarding the post from email.
I don't know whether our correspondent has signed up with TIGHAR so that he can post in his own name ...
-
I don't know whether our correspondent has signed up with TIGHAR so that he can post in his own name ...
Not yet.
-
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-174.539/centery:-4.664/zoom:15
This site has at least one ship in a place that makes sense. Maybe the other is a small boat for land team operations?
-
Maybe the other is a small boat for land team operations?
The land team is on a separate ship due to arrive late tomorrow.
-
Question:
In all of the news and media reports about this search, I have yet to see a reference to Kiribati approval and/or a representative aboard the vessel, which every TIGHAR trip had to have. I would hope NG and company would do so, but it does seem to be politically insensitive to not mention the governing and sanctioning body for the trip. Or...did I miss something entirely?
-
Or...did I miss something entirely?
No, you didn't miss anything. None of the press reports I've seen mention that Ballard and National Geographic had to get a permit from the government of Kiribati or that Kiribati required that they have an official letter of approval from TIGHAR before the permit was granted. There is a Kiribati representative aboard Nautilus.
-
On the Marine Traffic site the magenta icon listed as “Pleasure craft” might be the ROV going into or coming out of the water, maybe the ROV or a skiff helping it in and out? Because it does not get location updates for long periods. It stays on the map in its last known location though.
The cyan colored icon labeled “Tugs & Special Craft” gets updated pretty regular so must be the Nautilus. Plus if you check Nautilus by name it has the same color and ship type label. Only searching it that way gave very outdated update on location.
-
A Nat Geo online article posted within the last hour (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/exclusive-inside-the-search-for-amelia-earharts-airplane/ar-AAFHs67) provides insight into the multiple vessel symbology:
Paragraph 18, below the photo of AE and FN, and an advert . . . "Once the Nautilus arrived at the island, a routine quickly developed: Send out the ASV (essentially a robot boat) to map the terrain near the surf.”
-
A NYT article just posted provides a good overview of the search and credits Ric and TIGHAR for Niku hypothesis - cool pictures too - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/12/science/amelia-earhart-search-robert-ballard.html
-
A Nat Geo online article posted within the last hour (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/exclusive-inside-the-search-for-amelia-earharts-airplane/ar-AAFHs67) provides insight into the multiple vessel symbology:
The good news is, he’s searching visually with the ROVs, not relying on side-scan like they did when looking for the Samoan Clipper. They can only do towed-array side-scan which doesn’t work on the steep slope. They’ve already found one thing - a metal tube that turned out to be part of some kind of “oceanographic equipment”. (I wonder if it’s the sonar fish Oceaneering lost during our 1991 expedition.) They’ll probably come across the fishing nets and wine bottles we’ve seen. Keep an eye out for banjos.
-
University of New Hampshire article posted today profiles the autonomous surface vessel (ASV) - https://www.unh.edu/unhtoday/news/release/2019/08/13/unh-technology-helps-map-way-solve-mystery-pilot-amelia-earhart
-
Interesting plots of the search on https://twitter.com/LabratSR
-
Interesting plots of the search on https://twitter.com/LabratSR
Thanks for posting this. It would be interesting to see the plot from the last few hours.
-
Ric,
If N.G. finds something are we going to be informed or do we have to wait until Oct. to get the info?
-
Man who found Titanic wreck may present on Earhart in Atchison
https://www.newspressnow.com/news/local_news/man-who-found-titanic-wreck-may-present-on-earhart-in/article_51fdaf04-c047-11e9-871f-3b3a0ccf9890.html
“The spokeswoman for (U.S. Senator) Moran said that significant developments relating to the expedition are expected before Sept. 3, at which point exact time and location information will be announced by Moran’s office.”
That sounds somewhat encouraging.
Godspeed, Exploration Vessel Nautilus and Motor Vessel Taka. We’ll be glad to have you back. Regardless of outcome, we know you will bring the world new knowledge about the environments of Nikumaroro under the sea and on land that will be of great benefit to those who study the ecology of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, and to those who share your love of exploration and discovery. All explorers everywhere feel a great pride in your discoveries, and TIGHARs all over the world will feel a special pride in what together we have done to help make them possible.
Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078ECR
-
Ric,
If N.G. finds something are we going to be informed or do we have to wait until Oct. to get the info?
From a practical standpoint, if they find something significant there is no way they could keep a lid on it until October. Too many people would know about it.
-
“The spokeswoman for (U.S. Senator) Moran said that significant developments relating to the expedition are expected before Sept. 3, at which point exact time and location information will be announced by Moran’s office.”
That sounds somewhat encouraging.
Don't read too much into it. The headline of the article is "Man who found Titanic wreck may present on Earhart in Atchison".
If he does it will probably be via video link. By Sept. 3rd they'll know whether anything "significant" was found. If nothing related to Earhart turns up they'll stress the importance of the data they collected. National Geographic has already said,
"Amelia Earhart had planned to use her Electra to test the latest in aviation equipment—even nicknaming it the “Flying Laboratory.” By the end of this expedition to find the pilot and her plane, the Nautilus’s equipment will be tested to the limits, and the small island of Nikumaroro will be thoroughly mapped. Whether her fate is discovered or not, maybe Earhart would be satisfied with that result."
-
https://twitter.com/LabratSR
This twitter account posted a more up to date plot. Yesterday the Nautilus seemed to spend about 3 hours in one small area, about .6 NM west of the Bevington Object, then it searched east/ uphill from that spot, then started what looks like a mow-the lawn-pattern to the SW of the area they spent so much time.
-
Anything coming out of Senator Jerry Morans office will be mostly true to the fact. Plus, knowing the man all these years has its good points. Jerry and his family attended our church in Hays for many years. If there is one senator that I can put my trust in it would be him! I truly believe that whatever is found this organization will continue to flourish and shine, and everyone else will share in this celebration. As for you Ric Gillepsie...you are an honest man wanting to bring only those things that are true and valuable. If Bob Ballard does find anything...it will be because of the initiative someone took to look at a map after dinner. As a homegrown Kansas boy....its been fun watching this unfold....something tells me in the coming days that you might be wanting to finish that book. I truly believe we are in the right place....its just finding her that is the hardest part of this story. My best to Bob Ballard and his team for believing in RIC, and to you Tighars for sticking around this long on this incredible journey!
-
Yesterday the Nautilus seemed to spend about 3 hours in one small area, about .6 NM west of the Bevington Object, then it searched east/ uphill from that spot, then started what looks like a mow-the lawn-pattern to the SW of the area they spent so much time.
It seems safe to infer that they found nothing of interest in the small area west of the Bevington Object. My thoughts are these:
The available evidence suggests the plane sustained considerable damage in the surf close to the reef edge but if the fuel tanks were not compromised we’ve calculated it could remain afloat for as much as 18 minutes. Based on prevailing currents and winds, the most likely direction of drift would be southwestward from the Bevington Object location. A rate of 2 knots seems generous. That puts the plane sinking roughly one third of a nautical mile (ballpark 600 meters) from where it started, enough to put it a bit beyond Norwich City in water 4 or 5 hundred meters deep. We spent very little time in that area in 2012. If it was me, I’d look at the reef slope south of the shipwreck.
Nightmare scenario: The plane floated southwest and sank where the stern of Norwich City landed when it broke off in January 1939. The plane is now buried under a few tons of ship wreckage.
-
From the NY Times article:
"As Dr. Ballard squinted at the blur, Mr. Campbell handed him a second, digitally enhanced image. Mr. Campbell said the smudge was landing gear from a Lockheed Model 10-E Electra."
Later in the same article:
"Mr. Campbell shared the photo with experts at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, who used classified technology to enhance the picture."
Did Dr. Ballard see an enhanced classified image of the photo that is different from the image that either TIGHAR or the public have seen?
-
Did Dr Ballard see an enhanced classified version of the photo that is different from the version that either TIGHAR or the public have seen?
No. I met at the State Dept. with the three guys who did the analysis. When I asked them why they would not give us a written report or allow me to talk about their findings they said, "We did this as a favor to Kurt (Campbell). If the people we really work for knew we were spending time on stuff like this we'd catch hell." I figured they were probably CIA or NSA. I didn't know until I read the NYT article that they worked for the Pentagon.
Nobody "enhanced" the photo. Enhancing adds information. What Glickman did was bring out all the information that is there. What the Pentagon guys did was verify that he did it right and then compared what they saw to photos of Electra landing gear (the old worm gear version). They told me, "We see what your guy sees."
Campbell told Secretary Clinton about it and she saw a political opportunity. In Feb. 2012 they offered to hold a big press event at the State Dept. to announce that TIGHAR was going to launch a hi-tech expedition to find the plane. The catch was, we had to do the expedition that year, not in 2013 as we had planned. In 2013 we would have been able to use the UofH manned submersibles but in 2012 the subs were torn apart for inspection and servicing, so we had to settle for contracting with Phoenix International who wanted to use side-scan deployed from an AUV. The pressure to go in 2012 was because Clinton knew she would step down as Sec. State after the election regardless of who won and they wanted the Earhart discovery to happen on her watch. Campbell made big promises about helping with the fundraising, so we agreed. They needed cover in case we didn't find anything, so they brought in Ballard to review and endorse our evidence and plan.
After the press event, the promised help with fundraising did not materialize and Phoenix had all kinds of trouble with the AUV. We didn't find anything and ended the $2 million expedition $400,000 in debt. Live and learn.
-
Nightmare scenario: The plane floated southwest and sank where the stern of Norwich City landed when it broke off in January 1939. The plane is now buried under a few tons of ship wreckage.
Looking at previous ROV plots last night I noticed a sonar image of that area that appeared to show a big land slide (not sure if that is the right term) likely caused by the stern falling that could have buried it too.
-
Looking at previous ROV plots last night I noticed a sonar image of that area that appeared to show a big land slide (not sure if that is the right term) likely caused by the stern falling that could have buried it too.
Yep.
-
Nice to see Jeff Glickman getting some local attention. :)
https://www.kuow.org/stories/photo-sleuthing-by-seattle-man-backs-up-new-amelia-earhart-search
And a rather long article from a few days ago:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/193213-finding-amelia-earhart-how-modern-forensics-finally-plotted-a-course-to-gardner-island
-
Note an interesting six-hour return to the area west of the Bevington Object, from approximately 2000Z on 14 Aug until 0200Z on 15 Aug. The expedition initially searched west of the Bevington Object on the 13th; the eastern portion in the morning, and the deeper, western portion in the evening. A day later, on the evening of the 14th, they returned to the area and searched a very specific track from east to west over the period of six hours. After this six hour search they transited out of the area, went into what appears to be a holding pattern for the better part of a day. Since then they've circled the island, and today "mowed the lawn" on the deeper reef slope, southwest of the Bevington Object, west of the Norwich City.
Just hazarding a guess, but it could be that they have located something of interest west of the Bevington Object, but have determined it prudent to get the search completed before moving into a recovery phase.
A screen print of just the six hour search track, 14 Aug 2000Z - 15 Aug 0200Z is attached. I omitted Nautilus' track before and after; including the "mow the lawn" searches that occurred on the 13th. The track segment in grey is a period where there was no geo position reporting for greater than an hour.
BTW, I'm using the "Big Ocean Data" free trial period. Very interesting tool once you get the hang of the user interface. Amazing that the average person can get their hands on shipping tracks, air tracks, etc. these days(!)
-
Posting "Big Ocean Data" screen prints of E/V Nautilus' track, 13-16 August, one day at a time. Summary of observation as follows:
13 August - On station close to shore west of the Bevington Object location at 0530Z, "Mow the lawn" east to west until 2000Z, transit to the north side of the island
-
14 August - Cruise the north side of the island, return to search west of the Bevington Object at approximately 2000. The grey track segment west of Bevington Object indicates that there was no geo position reporting on the track from 2019Z - 2142Z (1 hour 23 minutes).
-
15 August - continue east-to-west search west of the Bevington Object location until 0200Z (this short west northwest search track occupied two hours), then transit south into what appears to be a "pork chop"-shaped holding pattern (the four hour track, generally north to south, at the eastern end of the "pork chop" appears to be a drift, and not a search). Around 2200Z, at the top of the "pork chop", begin a transit to the north side of the island.
-
16 August - Continue slow clockwise transit around the island, arriving on station in deep water west of the Bevington Object location at approximately 1000Z. Conducted search west of Bevington Object location through the remainder of 16 August. Note - the short west-east track segment indicated in grey (due to no geo position reporting for over an hour) occupied an hour and twenty minutes, 13:49Z - 15:10Z
-
And finally, 17 August. Finish search west of Bevington Object location sometime between 0000Z and 0200Z (missing geo location reporting data). Transition to "mow the lawn" deep water search west of Norwich City, beginning the track at 0525Z; apparently completing at 1730Z. Nautilus transited to the southeastern end of the island, and as of 0000Z 18 Aug was headed northwest, perhaps to deeper water west of the Bevington Object location, TBD.
Sorry about so many posts in a row - hoping this is as interesting to you as it is to me. . . :-[
-
John, Thanks for posting the plots!
All interesting. In the last one they seem to take path on a straight line from the SE corner to a point miles out and stopped there. Maybe investigating a sonar suspect?
-
Great job John Balderston. I was about to sign up for the Marine Traffic free trial. No need now.
Also there is some great monitoring going on at https://twitter.com/LabratSR.
Including this last screen shot showing the Nautilus reducing it's search ladder.
(http://)
During the earlier closer search, I believe they have covered the area southwest of the Norwich City that Ric mentioned (postulating the a/c may have floated for about 18 minutes before submerging). The ship is currently working it's way back towards the island from much further out. However, they are reducing the southern extent of their search. Maybe due to the landslides seen by TIGHAR on the previous expeditions. I hope they are not bypassing an important area.
-
I'm not sure but they appear to be back at Friday’s point of interest .6 NM roughly West of BO. Twice today.
Once there briefly after coming directly from SE Corner of the big grid search, and now back again.
Any chance to get a new plot?
-
Here is a plot of the past six days (plus 33 minutes into today GMT). To Greg's point, the Nautilus has revisited a location west of the Bevington Object location three times in the past three days, and spent considerable time there. Each time the speed was indicating less than 1/2 knot, which I'm supposing means they had ROVs in the water. About an hour and a half ago they departed on a north northeast heading, still making headway at less than 1/2 kt. For about the past 30 minutes they have been at the position indicated.
It's really interesting to watch this team of professionals at work with their serious equipment, and try to imagine what is going on. . .
-
New post on Nat'l Geo site:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/colossal-crabs-hold-clue-amelia-earhart-fate/
Probably more than you want to know about coconut crabs ;D One picture from the 7 site.
-
New post on Nat'l Geo site:
They should have let me proof read it.
-
Couldn't wait to get home and have a look at what the expedition did today. For the past 24 hours appears they conducted a fresh search to the west northwest of the island, north of the area already searched. At the end of the 24-hour period, transited on a southerly heading past BO location and Norwich City (if ~ 1 knot is a transit; might be with ROVs deployed???). No geo position update; biting nails a bit to see if they turn north. Sure would like this team to positively identify AIRPLANE bits on the reef . . .
-
Hey John...think this vessel software is really neat. Have a question though with the latest map photo. With the trail route back and forth as shown. Is that Nautilus doing that or Ben? Let me know? Plus how far from the island would this routing be?
-
Hi Randy, the Nautilus ran that N-S "mow the lawn" pattern on 18-19 Aug (GMT). ASV "Ben" has been used close to shore; however hasn't shown a track since early on the 18th.
I haven't found a software function for measuring distance. However, eyeballing on my plot with lat/long displayed, the easternmost edge of the pattern is at 174 deg 34 minutes. The west coast of the island is at about 174 deg 32 minutes, 45 seconds (about 1 1/4 minutes of longitude apart.) Not going nuts with the trig, that close to the equator a minute of longitude is a bit less than a mile. So I'd WAG that the eastern edge of the pattern is about a mile west of Niku.
-
John and others, I appreciate that you are posting the tracks and also links to news and updates.
My computer didn't like the tracking software, and I haven't had much time to search for articles, so thank you.
The tracks do certainly lead to some interesting speculation as to what the researchers are seeing...........
-
Did anyone ever identify where the foliage in the cook photo was located underwater?
No, not with any precision. The general consensus was that it was north of the Bevington Object location but not around the NW tip.
-
E/V Nautilus is heading home.
Nothing in the media....yet.
I think we're all holding our breath in hope.
(http://)
-
Is Nautilus leaving early?
Nautilus' departure appears to be on plan. Referring to any of the "Big Ocean Data" screen prints over the last five days with the Nautilus data table in the upper left corner, the table gives the next destination is Apia, Western Samoa, ETA 23 August, 2000Z.
I haven't had any luck trying to interpret what was going on out there. The expedition combed the area immediately west of the Bevington Object location, coming back several times, and kept on searching. The search covered nearly the entire western slope descending through 2000 meters, several miles off shore. Does this mean they didn't find anything and kept on searching until time was up, coming up empty? Or did they search of the entire area as planned, finding items of interest along the way? And what of the land team? Very interesting. Here's hoping. . .
-
Hello All,
The article on the nautiluslive.org website has the following:
Ballard has assembled a group of Earhart experts, scientists and technicians for the month-long journey that departs from Samoa to a remote Pacific atoll called Nikumaroro in the Republic of Kiribati from August 7-25, 2019.
However, BigOceanData has been showing an ETA 23/08/2019 Apia, Samoa for the Nautilus since it arrived.
Also, nautiluslive.org site stated that live dive coverage resumes August 25th. So everything appears to be on schedule.
Of concern to me is the fact that the last screen shot appears to show the Nautilus conducting routine oceanography operations (following the bottom of the undersea ridge) rather than making a bee line straight back to Apia.
I probably should not read anything into it, but wouldn't there be a bit more urgency if there was a Pratt & Whitney R-1340 Wasp S3H1 engine on the deck?
Hoping they're just a bunch of cool headed explorers.(http://)
-
My guess:
It seemed like they were filling holes in the main search area before the left.
Even if they found a large piece they would still be doing a search for the rest after.
I don't think they would recover anything big but I suspect they did pick something up for closer investigation. Two days ago they spent a long time on the north end, then it seemed like the signal for an ROV popped up and then they left that area. No ASV ran up and down the coast line then. It may have been the ROV surfacing for a short time.
The two most interesting things to me:
1. The time spent on the north end of the island and the plots at that location not looking like the typical mow the lawn pattern for almost a whole day. Like they found something of interest and searched around it for more. I wonder if that area might catch a lot of ocean debris deflected by the currents hitting the east side.
2. The repeated returns to an area west of the Bevington object after they already spent a lot of time there.
All these events could simply be just to look at something interesting that turned out to be NC debris.
In any event they did a lot of work!
Also,
Wondering if they may do a quick re-visit of something on the way back up to Baker and Howland. Is Ballard leaving after the Niku portion of the expedition?
-
The Nautilus track at the northern end of the island at the end of the search is pretty interesting. When viewed in the context of the Nautilus track for the whole expedition, it appears that they were just extending their search area northward in relatively shallow water. This is a pretty decent idea. IIRC, this final search area is north of the area we covered with the ROV in 2010, so they were in unexplored territory, and you never know when you just might stumble across something. If indeed the Electra floated off of the reef flat, it's a reasonable hypothesis that it moved laterally with the current into that area.
I do, however, have a somewhat more horrifying thought. In the 2001 expedition to Niku, the dive team picked up a number of odds and ends and brought them back to the ship (the Naia) for further examination. Mostly these were various bits of brass machinery from the Norwich City that had survived and were relatively corrosion-free. Nothing ended up being from an Electra. One intriguing piece, however, was a chunk of an intake manifold from a B-24 or PB4Y-1 that had been hacked off of a wreck with a machete. Andrew McKenna found it in the beach of the Tatiman Passage, across from the old village site, partially sticking out of the sand. It was probably from a wreck at Kanton Island and brought to Niku by colonists moving between the islands.
Anyway, if my fuzzy mind remembers this correctly, when we were preparing the ship to start heading home, I inquired as to where the tray was with the pieces we had brought back to the ship. I was told that a Naia crewmember had just dumped them in the ocean while cleaning up the ship. As you can guess by now, we were anchored at the time off the north end of the island, around the area where the Nautilus was searching at the end of their expedition.
Did the Nautilus run across that intake manifold, and, lacking any context, decide to search the area for other man-made objects? I guess we'll find out in October.
-
Search crew shares personal theories on Amelia Earhart
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/amelia-earhart-reflection/
-
Search crew shares personal theories on Amelia Earhart
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/amelia-earhart-reflection/
Intelligent comments by McKenna and Clauss.
-
Just a quick question? Does anyone know where and when I can see the NG programme in the UK?
-
See latest from National Geographic....
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/tantalizing-clue-marks-end-amelia-earhart-expedition/ (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/tantalizing-clue-marks-end-amelia-earhart-expedition/)
I'll let everyone read it and form/post your own opinions.
-
It was pleasant to read an article that seems to have the facts straight, and gives TIGHAR lots of credit (with links to TIGHAR web pages). I imagine that if they had found anything they already knew to be conclusive, they would have announced it immediately. They may have material to analyze that may prove informative when proper assessment has been completed. I do wonder what the bits that were described were.
"Ballard doesn’t plan on returning to Nikumaroro unless the land team finds definitive evidence that Earhart and Noonan perished there. Yet he already knows where he’d search if he did go back to the island: Beaches further south where it’s flat enough to land and the underwater topography is much smoother—perfect for sonar, he says."
That sounds like he is considering the landing might have been made farther south so the airplane might be there. But if the Bevington Object is landing gear, the airplane had to be in that spot when the gear was torn off. The airplane being anywhere else (unless natural forces could move it there) seems to require dismissing the Bevington Object as Electra wreckage. Betty's Notebook suggests they got close enough to the Norwich City to identify it -- either landing near it, or exploring after landing. It looks to me that the B.O. would be close enough.
Then there's this kicker at the end:
"An expedition land team led by National Geographic Society archaeologist Fredrik Hiebert may have found fragments of the skull in the Te Umwanibong Museum and Cultural Centre in Tarawa, Kiribati.
According to Erin Kimmerle, a forensic anthropologist at the University of South Florida, the skull belonged to an adult female. “We don’t know if it’s her or not but all lines of evidence point to the 1940 bones being in this museum,” she says. They’ll know more when the skull has been reconstructed and its DNA tested, which should happen in the next few months."
It would be ironic if true, given how much work TIGHAR put into looking for the bones. I have read through past material on the bones searches and don't see any reference to this museum. I do see that in the 1999 Bones Search I Report it is suggested that the bones might have been returned to Kiribati, but no indication that this was followed up (and I know that I might have missed something in all the reading material). My first thought was that these bones would already have been looked at in the bones collections checked during the searches and dismissed as not THE bones. My second thought is the condition of the skull suggests it's not THE skull. The skull found in 1940 was missing some parts but, as I understand it, was essentially in one piece. The skull in the museum is broken -- indeed the picture with the article shows what appear to be parts of several skulls. While it is possible to imagine how it might get broken ("careful, Igor!"), there could be other skulls -- drowned Norwich City crewmen washed up on shore or out of graves, villagers who died and were buried there -- that might have been found on Niku since 1940, that are not the one we are looking for. The significance of the find in 1940 was that it was found first; it was in the wrong place to be a Norwich City victim, had died in the open and remained unburied, predated any colonist burials, and that there wasn't anyone other than Earhart and Noonan known to be missing in that place and time. Hence the British conclusion, once they thought they had ruled out Amelia, that it was an unknown castaway; their capacity to believe in the existence of such a person being greater than ours today. Fortunately DNA, if there is enough in good condition, could prove conclusive. Wouldn't that be nice.
LTM,
Don
-
Don White noted:
“Yet he (Bob Ballard) already knows where he’d search if he did go back to the island: Beaches further south where it’s flat enough to land and the underwater topography is much smoother—perfect for sonar, he says." Don also notes: “That sounds like he is considering the landing might have been made farther south so the airplane might be there.”
Dr. Ballard’s remarks concur with my theory, if you didn’t see it first time around please take a look at “My 281 Theory” which I posted in late Sept, 2017 and which Marty relegated from the then current Discussion Page into the backwoods of the Celestial Choir section and probably missed by many.
The number 281 was first noted in a fragmented message on 3105 kHz in badly-sent code heard by three operators at U.S. Navy Radio Wailupe on Monday, July 5 1937.
The message was "281 north Howland call KHAQQ beyond north don’t hold with us much longer above water shut off." Commander Thompson (Itasca) interpreted the message to mean that the plane was afloat 281 miles north of Howland, but when he went to that location there was no plane.
If Amelia or Fred took a sighting after landing on Gardner and the latitude they found themselves to have landed at was S4* 41’ 00” this converts precisely to 281 Nautical Miles SOUTH of the equator. This line of latitude goes through the beach adjacent to the ‘seven site’ enters the lagoon and then runs straight through the southern beaches where I theorise they may have landed, incidentally coinciding with Dr. Ballard’s most recent thoughts on where “he’d search if he did go back to the island”
Ric commented on my theory back in Oct 2017 regarding the ‘281 Transmission’ and my suggestion Earhart and Noonan landed somewhere along that line of latitude as follows:
RIC - “We have judged the message to be credible so it was probably sent from Gardner It is true that the equator is 281 nautical miles north of a line of latitude that passes through the Seven Site.”
RIC - “It is also true that, after arrival, Noonan should have easily been able to determine their latitude if he was not too injured.”
(MY NOTE, if he was incapacitated I think Amelia would have had a go at obtaining a sighting under the desperate circumstances, perhaps with his verbal guidance)
RIC - “The reef on the north arm of the atoll near the Seven Site is not suitable for landing and would not leave the plane intact enough to send distress calls.”
(MY NOTE, maybe not... but just maybe... it would be a short walk to the 7 site)
RIC - “The reef on the south side on the same line of latitude is "landable," but we have no evidence that the landing was made there.”
(MY NOTE - lack of evidence does not mean that it did not happen though)
It does not now seem likely to me that the E/V Nautilus expedition found anything associated with the Electra off the so called Bevington Object position, in the form of the aircraft centre section or either of its engines, landing gear etc. I concede that time will tell if they have any other anomalies to report after they analyse the considerable amount of data they surely collected! A fresh note of optimism if the museum skull pieces turn out to be either AE’s or Freds! Hopefully they will have something, fingers crossed, be real nice to put this baby to bed!
If you do read my 281 Theory, located in the Celestial Choir section, you will see how I arrived at that theoretical conclusion, based on the relationship between NM and degrees of latitude.
Dave Williams
27th August, 2019
-
"An expedition land team led by National Geographic Society archaeologist Fredrik Hiebert may have found fragments of the skull in the Te Umwanibong Museum and Cultural Centre in Tarawa, Kiribati.
According to Erin Kimmerle, a forensic anthropologist at the University of South Florida, the skull belonged to an adult female. “We don’t know if it’s her or not but all lines of evidence point to the 1940 bones being in this museum,” she says.
I'm interested to know what the lines of evidence pointing this museum were.
-
I wonder if they thought to look for or ask about the wooden box that was built to transport the bones back to Tarawa. Seems to me, if they have the skull they should have the rest of the bones also. And the various other items Gallagher reported finding, (shoe parts, corks and chains, etc.).
Also, I believe/think I remember that both Gallagher and Hoodless(?) reported skull was intact. Why is it apparently in so many pieces now?
-
This was a fine effort by the Nautilus crew and expedition team. A lot of area was searched.
But this quote bothers me because I believe it to be inaccurate and harmful to the search effort.
“We visually examined 100 percent of the island down to 750 meters [2,400 feet] and did not see evidence of the plane,” says Ballard”
Besides the lack of Plots on the East and South sides, how far apart were the plots of the Nautilus on the big mow-the-lawn search they did on the west side? 100 yards? What is the effective visual field of view of the ROV?
It would help to see the tracks of the actual ROV, not the Nautilus. Show the plots of the ROV and give a width to the line that equals the width of the field of view. Then look for holes.
Also I would like to have seen some mention of doubts about possible landslides covering it up or that something might have been simply missed in the first viewing. edit: I do believe that debris gets channeled to chutes. Plane debris may have been channeled into these chutes as early as within 20 years. And there could be 62 more years of coral debris channeled on top of them. In my opinion there seemed to be too much confidence about everything. Before and after the search.
It would help to see their footage of the same area as the 2012 Debris Field footage (200’ depth). If only to see how much that area changed. Changes in coral life, or evidence of landslides, etc.
Also wondering same things as Matt and Bill regarding the skull. What is the paper trail for the bones being in a museum Tarawa ?
-
Yeah, I also wonder what those lines of evidence about the skull are -- and how their forensic anthropologist knows it is of an adult female. Well, as I said, DNA analysis might help. If we got really lucky, there might be a close match to an Earhart or Noonan relative (as far as I recall from my reading, there are no positively identified DNA samples from Amelia or Fred themselves, but relatives have contributed theirs). Next best would be at least determining if it was someone of European descent, or not. However, they need to get a good sample. DNA degrades over time, and from heat and other environmental conditions. Remember the finger bone that was found, and the difficulty of determining even what species it was from. And even so -- there aren't labels on chromosomes saying "European" or something like that -- it's all based on comparing to other samples of known origin. That's why the testing companies want to amass big databases, to have that consensus. This strikes me as subject to a circular-argument fallacy about what ethnic origin the DNA actually indicates.
As for the landing site -- I do remember reading about the 281 theory and I went back and read it again while writing this -- it seems to have been dealt with at the time that it's possible that was what they were reporting -- though it seems an odd way to report a position -- but that their accuracy would not be sufficient to pinpoint a specific location on the island. It's also occurred to me that Fred would have not only had to be physically able to take a sight and calculate it, and have a sextant with which to sight, but also have what was needed to reduce his sight into a position. This gets back to the question of what they removed from the airplane -- though if Fred were able, attempting to find their location is likely a high priority. Indications seem to be that they were not able to get a good position and had no idea of the name of the island (hence using the shipwreck as a clue for listeners).
Ballard saying he would go back to that section further south along the beach because it's easy to search seems a bit like that old joke about the guy looking for his lost keys under the street lamp instead of in the dark place where he dropped them.
Well -- we don't know for sure where the airplane landed nor where it went after it landed -- it is (or was) wherever it is (or was). We do have indications of a possible location. If it is ever found, then we might work out how it got to wherever it got to -- for now, we are still trying to figure out where it got to, including theories about how, pointing to a possible where. This is also like looking for lost keys. When I misplace my keys, I retrace my steps and use my memory to help narrow down where they are. But in this case we are figuratively looking for someone else's lost keys, without the owner's help, and with some question as to whether they are still there to find. This is more like not being sure whether something I've misplaced is in my living space, or in my garage, or dropped in the street, or I got rid of it and forgot I didn't still own it (this has actually happened). Then when I do find it (it was usually put in a different place from where I would normally put it) it seems obvious that it would be where it in fact was.
And the thing about having searched 100% of some area -- there are still 100% of a lot of other areas not yet searched. Maybe further examination of the video will turn up something, though TIGHAR knows how that can go with ephemeral clues and things that look like other things. What Ballard said is they searched 100% of a given area and did not see evidence of the plane. He did not say that it is not there, only that they did not see it. We don't know if this is because there is nothing to see in that location, or it simply hasn't been seen yet. As Ric said once, this is harder than finding a big shipwreck that you know exists and have some idea of where it is. This is more like looking for bits of shredded documents that may have been thrown into a dumpster that may have been emptied since then, and may not even be the right dumpster.
Anyway, I do think at least a bit more is known than was a month ago.
LTM,
Don
-
After resupplying in Samoa the E/V Nautilus is now half way to Howland and Bakers Island.
According to this article, Dr. Ballard has remained on board for the next expedition to Howland and Bakers Islands, Johnston Atoll and then finally on to Hawaii.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/297292-amelia-earhart-expedition-ends-with-potential-clues-but-no-answers
The ship will soon need to take on a northwest heading. I wonder if Dr. Ballard might consider one quick last shot at Nikumaroro's south beach area.
He mentioned the desire to explore it in the lastest NatGeo article and in the last paragraph of the above article:
Ballard, meanwhile, is heading to Howland and Baker Islands — Howland was Earhart’s original destination — to map the undersea areas around both of them. He has no plans to return to the Earhart search but knows where he’d look if he did: the southern part of the island, where there are beaches and a potential campsite that may have been associated with the castaways.
He must realize that it is very unlikely that he will ever get another opportunity to return to Nikumaroro in the next few years to explore that area of the island. While in the next few hours he will cruising right past it! If he is indeed still on board the Nautilus, one would think this thought is gnawing at him.
Let's hope he is the risk taker everyone says he is.
We will see the answer to this question with the next few hours.
(http://)
-
Here is the full VesselFinder map:
Here is a BigOceanData map:
(http://)
-
The E/V Nautilus is heading north to Kanton Island and passed well east of Nikumaroro.
There was a tweet somewhere that mentioned dropping off supplies to Kanton before heading on to Howland.
Also, it appears Dr. Ballard left ship at Apia. He is not listed as a leader or team member for the Howland and Bakers Island expedition.
https://nautiluslive.org/cruise/na114
We will have to wait for the next big thing:
All lines of evidence point to the 1940 bones (including Skull fragments) at the Te Umwanibong Museum?
Based on all the research TIGHAR has done in the past this all seems a bit fishy.
Again, let's hope that maybe they got lucky.
In response to Don White's Igor skull fragment hypothesis. What hump?
-
Yeah, I also wonder what those lines of evidence about the skull are -- and how their forensic anthropologist knows it is of an adult female. Well, as I said, DNA analysis might help. If we got really lucky, there might be a close match to an Earhart or Noonan relative (as far as I recall from my reading, there are no positively identified DNA samples from Amelia or Fred themselves, but relatives have contributed theirs).
I've watched enough episodes of Bones and CSI to have learned that male and female skull can be differentiated by thicker overall bones and prominent brow ridges ( also see this page https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/forensic-facial-reconstruction/0/steps/25656) , it seems an experienced anthropologist could make a good guess based even on a partial skull, adult is probably based just on size and how much the skull sutures have closed ( https://allthingsaafs.com/2013/09/10/quick-tips-how-to-estimate-the-chronological-age-of-a-human-skeleton-cranial-suture-closure-method/) . I don't believe any relatives of Fred have ever been identified so DNA id of any part of him would be difficult
-
Remember that Fred lost his two upper front teeth in an auto accident before the flight. He had a bridge made/installed. If the skull is male and has two natural upper front teeth, it's not Fred.
Amelia had some kind of sinus surgery in 1935 "June, sinus op due to sinus pain, pleuritis, bedridden 10 days." I think a small bone was removed from the nasal passage to allow drainage.
-
That's what I get for not watching much TV, that I didn't know the differences between male and female skulls.
I do remember now that I read in this forum (that I have been working my way through past threads of, I only have 42 pages to go) that no one has located any relatives of Fred.
I'm not surprised that males have thicker brow ridges. I mean some of us get called Neandertals (usually by those of thinner brow ridges).
If my Igor hypothesis of how the skulls got broken is correct, the skull belongs to -- Abby Normal!
LTM
Don
-
How could the skull have got to the Te Umwanibong Museum and Cultural Centre in Tarawa, Kiribati? According to this page (http://maa.cam.ac.uk/maa/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Te-Umwanibong-culture-and-development-in-Kiribati.-Heritage-Matters-Report2-1.pdf) that museum was not established until the mid 70s. While I suppose the med school could have donated random bones I note that there is mention on that page of a call for artifacts for the new museum in the late seventies. Could Dr Verrier , who it was suggested coveted the kanawa box the bones were shipped in, and who had large collection of native materials have donated them to museum at that point , perhaps including the bones with the box? He died in 1981. Just speculation but it is curious that they may have ended up there.
-
Hey Matt...after reading your post, I went looking for Dr. Lindsey Verrier and found this. Hoping it might help somehow! Also, in reply to your comment Matt, in most cases most libraries will tag and catalog stuff that is brought into them. It makes more sense to do this!
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/pambu/reels/manuscripts/pmb1153.pdf
-
It does seem to me that -- in our eagerness to know more NOW -- we are speculating about things that are bound to be revealed in time. If (according to NatGeo) there are "lines of evidence" that "point to the 1940 bones being in this museum," they'll have to make that evidence public to support that claim; likewise with any forensic reconstruction or DNA test results from the bones they have found. Patience is a virtue.
I recall from reading through the Bones Search reports and forum discussions from before I joined TIGHAR (in my reading through past topics) that it was suggested for a BONES III search, if it were to be done, to look into the possibility of the bones being returned to Kiribati. It's entirely imaginable that they were. It appears this museum had not been checked in any TIGHAR search at that time.
Also I recall that it was remarked upon that, given the British colonial officials' passion for documenting absolutely everything, the absence of documentation of the bones' final disposition (burial, destruction, storage) suggested that there might be more records to be found. Perhaps the lines of evidence are those.
One can but hope.
LTM,
Don
-
Bones Searches I-III are described in some detail on the wiki:
https://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_found_on_Nikumaro (https://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_found_on_Nikumaroro)
Bones IV was pretty remarkable. The team had help from an American diplomat and were given a lot of access to different locations. So, for example, they searched the air-raid shelters under one of the hospitals.
-
I'll look again -- when I was reading through, I didn't find there had actually been a Bones III and IV.
And I see there's no link to Bones IV on the wiki page. The Bones III report mentions the assistance of the American diplomat.
However, it seems most effort was put into searching in Fiji, as the last place the bones were known to have been, thus the likeliest place to look.
Was any search ever conducted for them (the actual bones) in Tarawa in case they had been returned there? I see a reference to a Tarawa file that led to the discovery of the Bones File, but the link no longer works; neither does the one for the Bones Chronology.
LTM,
Don
-
I'll look again -- when I was reading through, I didn't find there had actually been a Bones III and IV.
Bones III is the last link on the bones page:
https://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_found_on_Nikumaroro (https://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_found_on_Nikumaroro)
I haven't composed a Bones IV page yet.
However, it seems most effort was put into searching in Fiji, as the last place the bones were known to have been, thus the likeliest place to look.
Right. For Bones III, we had a legend about Dr. Murphy that was our top priority. He was in Fiji, so we went to Fiji. After investigating that, we turned to other lines of investigation, which, in turn, led me to Auckland, where I read the actual Suva bones file with great interest.
Was any search ever conducted for them (the actual bones) in Tarawa in case they had been returned there? I see a reference to a Tarawa file that led to the discovery of the Bones File, but the link no longer works; neither does the one for the Bones Chronology.
These links work for me:
https://www.tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/13_1/tarawa.html (https://www.tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/13_1/tarawa.html)
https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Bones_Chronology.html (https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Bones_Chronology.html)
I don't know why they didn't work for you.
-
Marty, was there anything in the Bones IV research that pointed toward Te Umwanibong Museum?
-
Marty, was there anything in the Bones IV research that pointed toward Te Umwanibong Museum?
I must apologize!
I was on Bones II.
Bones III was 2011.
There hasn't been a TIGHAR Bones IV.
Sorry about that!
In any event, this is the first I've heard about any Tarawa bones.
-
Marty, 943
Your links worked the first time. The links that didn't work were on the bottom of the pages themselves leading to further reading. I recall from older posts that changes to the site have disabled some links within articles, unless these have been updated.
I see that Ric addressed some of what we have been discussing in this thread in his most recent email, which happened to go out as I was traveling to celebrate my mother's 90th birthday (August 31), so I didn't see it until yesterday.
LTM,
Don
-
Interesting reading this after learning the sextant box is from the Bushnell survey:
"the second package is the sextant box found in the immediate locality and contains all the other pieces of evidence which were found in the proximity of the body"
The description of where the sextant box was found is different than what they found and put in it. The box was in the "immediate locality" versus the rest found in the "proximity of the body".
-
Interesting reading this after learning the sextant box is from the Bushnell survey:
"the second package is the sextant box found in the immediate locality and contains all the other pieces of evidence which were found in the proximity of the body"
The description of where the sextant box was found is different than what they found and put in it. The box was in the "immediate locality" versus the rest found in the "proximity of the body".
That would answer the question of how the survey party failed to notice an unburied body on the ground. They might not have been close enough to it.
Possibly the box had already been moved from where the Bushnell party left it, by the time Gallagher learned of its existence. We will probably never know the answers. A plausible story -- for the little it's worth -- is that the box was set down while the sextant was in use; perhaps the surveyors moved some distance from it while working, then by the time it was remembered, they were unable to find it, and it remained there until found by one of Gallagher's workers, who might have been the one to use it as a receptacle. Perhaps it was handed over by said worker after Gallagher began showing interest in objects at the site.
LTM,
Don
-
Has anyone seen a listing for the National Geographic special yet? I want to make sure I record it and don't miss it!
-
Joy, at the end of this article
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/tantalizing-clue-marks-end-amelia-earhart-expedition/
in the video caption an air date of of October 20 for the special is listed.
-
I've heard that the Nat Geo special will air Oct 20 at 8pm Eastern time, but I don't have any other details than that right now. They are feverishly working on it to get it to final state by the end of this month.
Andrew
-
Matt, Andrew, thanks for the info. I will continue to keep an eye on the listings.
-
The Nat Geo Show is now listed to air on Oct 22 at 7:30 pm, presumably EDT.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/tv/expedition-amelia/
Looking at the web address, I wonder if that is in Australia
amck
-
Looking at the web address, I wonder if that is in Australia
Yes, that's Australia. In the U.S. the show will air at 8pm on Sunday, October 20.
-
The Nat Geo Show is now listed to air on Oct 22 at 7:30 pm, presumably EDT.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/tv/expedition-amelia/
Looking at the web address, I wonder if that is in Australia
amck
Hopefully he got a second opinion on the aluminum and the other piece.
-
Hopefully he got a second opinion on the aluminum and the other piece.
Hopefully.
-
Ballard said he did a 100% of the island down to a certain depth and the target area to another depth. But what about the lagoon? Anecdotal evidence of plane parts washing up in the lagoon ("wing" was mentioned by a native) may indicate that the lagoon has some lighter parts of the aircraft hidden beneath the silt. If you believe in the landing wheel and the patch then you have to believe in the possibility that other light aircraft parts made their way into the lagoon. Whether a suitable means of "dragging" the lagoon can be found that the Kiribati government agrees with can be found. Towing divers on boards and looking for parts after eighty-two years of silt buildup (despite the water in and out) might not be enough. Looking forward to Oct 20th or 22nd & Nat'l Geo special and hopefully some good underwater views of the wreckage from the ship, etc.
-
We did a side-scan sonar survey of the lagoon in 2010. The lagoon has lots of junk in it but no recognizable airplane debris shapes turned up. It's possible or even likely that some of the hits are airplane debris, but investigating the hundreds of targets is logistically impossible. As soon as you disturb the silt, visibility goes to zero and there is no way Kiribati would ever permit dragging the lagoon.
-
Rick, dragging of the lagoon would be a laborious and major task and as you say unlikely to be approved by the Kiribati government. So have you considered another modern, non invasive alternative? I know you did a sidescan in 2010 but how about Lidar? Would the underwater (Bathymetric) version of Lidar give a different perspective view to the sidescan and a better chance of identifying those possible aircraft parts you mentioned ? I understand the Lidar penetration of the silt on the seabed/lagoon floor can be a few cm to 1 metre depending on the operating frequency chosen.
I looked at current Bathymetric Lidar capability (courtesy of google) and it appears there are many options available either to rent or buy. I have seen a figure as low as $7500 to purchase a Lidar set. Lidar can be operated from Aerial or Water borne drones, the latter being the better option I think in the Niku case
There are many companies I see on google offering their wares and services and to be clear I have absolutely no connection with the following company but I do think what they offer might be useful to ‘search the lagoon’ in a very short time period next time TIGHAR is on Niku. ;)
Dave Williams
HÉLICÉO Bathymetric Drone with Lidar, Echosounder and Sonar Sidescan Capability, helps in monitoring ports, marinas, sea areas, rivers, creeks, lakes and ponds or lagoons.
Precision: Thanks to the different sensor choices we offer (echo sounder, 16 or 32 beams LiDAR, multiparameter probe, SONAR Side Scan), you can acquire mesh data from just a few centimeters up to a meter.
Video Link showing drone in use, in the water of a lagoon:
https://youtu.be/ianN3zbgaFk
Link to company website for comprehensive versatility & capability information: http://www.heliceo.com/en/produits-pour-geometres/superbathy-bathymetric-drone/
-
Thanks Dave. This looks really interesting. I did not realize there was a bathymetric version of LIDAR that could look through silt. Using it to search the lagoon at Niku is a possibility, but it might also be the perfect tool for searching the Gull Pond in Newfoundland. We'll discuss it at the upcoming TIGHAR board meeting.
-
LIDAR depends upon water clarity to probe below the sea surface, and works best in clear waters. It does not, however, penetrate the sea floor or silty bottoms. If the water itself contains enough particulate matter, light scattering increases rapidly and the return signal rapidly becomes incoherent and less light returns back to the sensor.
I was a program manager for the Navy developing various LIDAR systems for mine-hunting purposes. It is an excellent high resolution system in clear to very clear waters, and works best with a smooth sea surface. It is a topographic sensor, not one to penetrate the sea floor at all.
-
Thanks Randy. The clarity of the water in the lagoon seems to vary. Coast Guard veterans remember the water being clear. We've always found it to be extremely cloudy with silt stirred up from the bottom. Likewise with the water in the pond in Newfoundland, although there the consistency of the bottom silt is denser - more like oatmeal.
-
Can anyone tell me when and if the programme will be shown in the UK?
-
Can anyone tell me when and if the programme will be shown in the UK?
I'm sure it will be shown in the UK and my best guess is that it will be with a day or two of the American premiere.
-
You can find the schedule online at the National Geographic UK site. Looks like it will air October 26. Here's the link I found:
https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/video/tv/expedition-amelia (https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/video/tv/expedition-amelia)
-
Saw the trailer for tonight's feature by Bob Ballard. Thank you Andrew McKenna for showing this on Facebook. After watching the trailer..Im truly convinced and hopeful that Bob will show alot of our work over the many years. I give him two thumbs up for making Kansas Proud. Very classy! I think whatever he has found and what we have....may finalize this story...or bring this closer to an end. He was right.. it wasn't pretty for Amelia and Fred. The temperature and conditions must have been horrid and most likely led to their death. I'll agree with many that Fred didn't live long with major injuries suffered and suffering from possible concussion from landing. Anyway, tonight show will give us all a pat on the back and say well done. Yeah I believe we still have much to learn and know and to find....but after all young boys and girls have been searching for her for 80 years until they themselves are swallowed by darkness of death. Why Amelia Earhart?? Many people question that? Anyway, I believe she possessed the true human spirit to try things once and take it to a new level. I hope many of you have gained a true sense of appreciation as I have with organization and RIC Gillepsie for many years...and the friendships developed along the way. Also...I have two questions for mbps any of you...In the trailer she tells Itasca she is flying at a 1000 feet and be clearly heard...Is this because of cloud cover. Does cloud cover have an influence on radio transmissions if there was not any cloud cover? Also, in the last minute of the trailer Amelia plane is taking off...is it me RIC or Andrew...but does the back door appear to have damage? Anyway...cant wait till this evening...It will be interesting!!!
-
Okay....now I know I'm not hallucinating on this...But why is it in Bob Ballards two videos that he has a window in the door, and the other there is not. Is there something else we don't know?
-
The door had its window installed in January 1937 (https://tighar.org/wiki/Lockheed_Electra_10E_Special_-_NR16020). It seems that of the two clips shown, one was before then and the other was after January 1937.
-
RIC I'm sorry if I didn't word that email I sent you in regards to the Electra. I was trying to say that after Amelia landed per say....and the plane eventually slid off the reef....would the wasp motors break away themselves from all of the weight or would they stay attached to the wing and landing gear. I saw the 6300 pound weight of the electra empty and having a hard time adapting to the idea that it floated. Maybe without the wasp motors...but not the whole plane. Ya looked good in the documentary...and made us Tighars proud of You! Ballard was right...that plane has to be there...but where....so now what do we do?
-
From what I remember of the program, Ballard discussed how the Electra might have “flown” under water for a distance. He then extended his search to about a mile from the island. I know gliding under water has been discussed here before, but has anyone come up with a good number for how far the Electra could have gone as it descended? Glide ratio in the air has mostly to do with drag, but I think buoyancy would have a lot to do with it in water. At some point. If the buoyancy of the Electra was only slightly negative, it might have “flown” under water for a much greater distance.
-
Glide ratio in the air has mostly to do with drag, but I think buoyancy would have a lot to do with it in water. At some point. If the buoyancy of the Electra was only slightly negative, it might have “flown” under water for a much greater distance.
Flight is a delicate thing. For an airplane to glide - whether in air or water or whiskey - it must be intact and properly trimmed. Remove or bend the wings or control surfaces or do anything to disturb the aircraft's center of gravity versus center of lift, and the airplane flies like a dropped tool box.
See for yourself with any 69-cent balsa wood toy glider.
The chance the Electra went into the ocean capable of flight, after sustaining enough damage to remove a main landing gear assembly, is virtually nil.
-
Ballard used the term "kiting" to describe how the Titanic traveled horizontally as well as vertically on its way to the bottom, which in part could explain the difference between its last reported position on the surface and where it is now (the other part being the accuracy of the surface position). Kiting might be a better term for the Electra under water than gliding. It seems to me that an airplane -- in the air-- that was unable to maintain flight but retained enough of its flight surfaces might travel some way horizontally as well as vertically before hitting the ground. An airplane that suffered a sufficiently catastrophic in-flight breakup just falls straight down. This is Ric's area of expertise (aircraft accident investigation) and he may have some data on the trajectory of damaged aircraft on their way to the ground.
Another consideration, though, is that this airplane (the Electra after it washes off the reef) was not in air, which offers little resistance to falling solid objects that have little surface area (thus, for example, when Galileo dropped two different-sized cannon balls from the Campanile de Pisa, the difference in air resistance did not materially affect the observation that they fell at the same speed), but in water. Displacement (what floats your boat) means even massive objects in water behave differently when submerged (their apparent weight is reduced by an amount equal to the weight of the water they displace), and water offers more resistance than does air to objects moving through it, such that they may not fall straight down. This of course is affected by the density of the object (two cannon balls dropped in water might not fall at different rates), and whether the water is still or in motion (how much force it can apply to the object). Moving water has enough force to push big pieces of iron from the Norwich City a considerable distance horizontally.
The Electra, in order to be able to fly, was a lot less dense than iron -- in total, of course -- certain parts by themselves were more dense -- so depending on how much was still in one piece, perhaps it could travel some way, even if it was no longer airworthy, and even if it was no longer what we would consider buoyant.
Just inviting some discussion.
LTM,
Don