TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => General discussion => Topic started by: Don Yee on August 07, 2021, 05:19:47 PM
-
Should the Nikumaroro hypothesis be supported then the Electra likely slid or was carried off the beach/reef into the surf, where it either floated or sunk (and then perhaps "flew" some distance) and was either broken apart and the parts scattered over a large area of arrived largely intact on the bottom.
Given that underwater searches have proven inconclusive, I'm wondering if TIGHAR has ever investigated other similar circumstances for a known aircraft? I'm mostly thinking about WWII aircraft that crashed near shore and were later carried deeper. Given the vast number of planes that crashed in WWII (especially in the Pacific theater) it would seem like there would be some other examples that could shed light on the fate of the Electra.
Also, has any underwater modeling been done to simulate the movement of the plane off shore? It would seem useful to examine tides, water velocity, and underwater topography, to get a hint at a direction and potential resting place for the aircraft. I'm guessing some or all of this had been done but I've not seen anything specific about it.
Thanks,
Don...
-
How straight could it "fly" underwater? Wouldn't a spiral be more likely with any kind of damage to the wing or tail? Or having only one landing gear still attached?
If it floated some distance away then Ballard, or someone else, has a a chance of finding it eventually. The logic being the plane is in a big piece so modern technology can find it. I would like to see data on how long it should take to sink. Both right side up and inverted. And assuming the tail may already be filled before the rest of the plane is in deep water.
If broken up near shore, then the pieces may be covered by coral. From a Tighar bulletin: "The debris field identified by Jeff Glickman is on a moderate slope near the base of a cliff amid apparent coral debris from landslides" I think the evidence is it broke up and pieces are close. Not finding it before could mean its pieces are covered up. Some technology that can detect pieces underneath coral may be needed in that case. Or luck that other landslides may uncover pieces.
I like the "Land and Sank" hypothesis. It describes what happened and the oddity of the sequence in that phrase is why it wasn't found in 1937. Evidence the plane landed being ignored because searchers didn't see it. They couldn't comprehend that it sank after landing.
I think the most similar circumstance is the Monospar Croydon ST-18
-
The evidence that we have, although inconclusive, does seem to point to a breakup on the reef. To my knowledge we have the following data points that suggest the Electra did not just float away:
1. Nessie
2. Wheel seen in the Tatiman Passage
3. Emily Sikuli seeing aircraft parts on the reef
4. 2-2-V-1
5. The dado
6. Numerous pieces of aircraft(?) aluminum
The highest tides during the relevant period do not appear capable of floating the plane (although they may have swung the tail around), except with the help of substantial wave action (I wish I had precise numbers for this assertion - how high would waves have to be to float the Electra - maybe that’s a new project). In any case the Electra almost certainly did not float smoothly away into the ocean on a high but gentle tide. Rather the Electra likely experienced a very rough ride across the reef, banging in the troughs, leaning or tumbling on the crests, with wheels (and later props and wings and other protuberances) getting stuck in fissures or troughs in the coral and likely damaged or torn off.
The Electra was not watertight so - initially partly submerged - she would have taken on water and been quite heavy, if still somewhat buoyant because of the fuel tanks. The added weight, however, would only have made for a rougher ride and more damage.
Because of the shape of waves, objects that are lighter than water get pushed towards the shore. It is only when they get heavy, waterlogged or filled with water that their movement in the surf tends to be away from shore. So it is likely that the Electra was initially pushed farther onto the reef while being damaged enough to eventually lose buoyancy and be dragged toward the reef edge, and eventually into deeper water.
This scenario (if true) inevitably concludes with substantial damage to the airframe in the surf at the edge of the reef, with the wreck likely now too heavy to float but lingering, caught in the heavy wave action in the big gulleys and crevasses at the reef edge.
More searching with magnetometers offshore and downslope of the landing site might turn up the wreckage, as suggested by Greg hidden in the coral wrack at the foot of the cliff.
Jon
-
You raise some good points Jon.
One of the things I don't understand is how did the plane break up and not float while also leaving a landing gear behind in an upright position.
I assumed that the wheel was left after the plane floated and the wave movement caused it to sheer off (wheel gets stuck in reef, tide floats the plane and eventually the two separate, leaving the gear behind). If the waves didn't reach a height to do this, and instead the constant buffeting of the wave caused metal fatigue that snapped off the gear it would seem that the plane would have fallen onto the gear (or the friction would have at least bent the gear so it was no longer in the landing position). As this does not appear to be the case (at least for one of the gear assembly) I assumed (again, perhaps wrongly) that the plane and gear separated while the plane was floating (or at least not with the whole weight of the plane on it).
Although I'm not advocating that the entire plane floated away wholesale, I do find it hard to understand how if the plane broke up on or near the reef how more of it didn't float back to shore. I understand a lot has happened in the time since the event, and that pieces may have floated into shore then back out to sea or were buried, but as of now there appears to only be one piece of aluminum identified from a plane containing many hundreds of square feet of material.
-
Good discussion. The next issue of TIGHAR Tracks as currently planned, will feature three articles/papers:
• What happened to the Plane?
• What Happened to Fred?
• Lost In Translation (a discussion of cultural factors that influence the credibility and accuracy of the several accounts we have of airplane wreckage seen at Nikumaroro)
To answer a few of the questions raised by Don, Jon and Greg:
Don - "I'm wondering if TIGHAR has ever investigated other similar circumstances for a known aircraft?"
As Greg pointed out, we have one example of a plane being landed on a reef. See Better Than Average Luck (https://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/64_ReefLanding/64_ReefLanding.htm)
Whether that plane was ultimately washed off the reef is not clear.
During WWII planes did land or crash on reefs but they didn't last long. I'm aware of no occasion when an aircraft landed on a reef was washed off, and floated away to sink in deep water.
Jon - "..the Electra likely experienced a very rough ride across the reef, banging in the troughs, leaning or tumbling on the crests, with wheels (and later props and wings and other protuberances) getting stuck in fissures or troughs in the coral and likely damaged or torn off."
The landing gear in the Bevington Photo is wrecked. The fork has pulled out of the oleo strut and the worm gear has cut through the tire. The brake line may be the only thing holding the whole mess together. The scenario that makes the most sense to me is that waves big enough to float the plane surge across the reef, lifting the plane and setting it downward enough to collapse the gear. The plane, now on its belly on the reef gets pushed around and the gear comes apart and separates from the airframe in much the same way as it did in the Luke Field accident. At some point the wrecked gear assembly gets jammed in one of the grooves in the reef edge.
I'm not convinced that the "debris field" Jeff Glickman saw in the ROV video is not just coral, but there is far more evidence to support the hypothesis that the plane broke up close to the reef edge than there is to support the "floated away" theory.
Don - " I do find it hard to understand how if the plane broke up on or near the reef how more of it didn't float back to shore."
But much of it did float back to shore.
Jon cites:
"1. Nessie
2. Wheel seen in the Tatiman Passage
3. Emily Sikuli seeing aircraft parts on the reef
4. 2-2-V-1
5. The dado
6. Numerous pieces of aircraft(?) aluminum"
And there's more than that. I have a pretty good idea exactly what Emily saw.
-
Thanks Ric. This is great info.
I do wonder about the engines. What's the hypothesis there? I can see them being more or less where they fell, perhaps locked into coral close to the beach. Otherwise I'm assuming they took a long tumble down the underwater mountain and it's up to and ROV to find them.
Don...
-
My thought is that initially as the tide came in the tail would have filled with water. There are waves on top of any incoming tide. As the tide came in more, the fuselage fuel tanks would have enough buoyancy to attempt to float the tail wheel off the reef at the top of each wave. But this can't happen as the tail and horz stabilizer are filled - a big heavy sea anchor. With each successive wave there is a negative bending load on the rear of the fuselage at the top of each wave, followed by a positive bending load at the trough. After a few dozen waves, the fuselage snaps - somewhere aft of the main tanks. The electra may have already been stressed here. Tighar already has some evidence of a rough landing at Miami resulting in the need to remove the window and cover with new skin - an attempt to strengthen the fuselage?
After this initial breaking of the fuselage, subsequent breakup is somewhat a guess. Waves hitting the end of the broken fuselage could have pressurized the cabin and popped-out cockpit windows, which might explain 2-3-V-2 (curved pexiglas). But, if just the tail section remained later in the reef area it could explain what later colonists found, reused, and the later individual stories Tighar documented. 2-2-V-1 being possibly the window patch, may have been freed by this event or have remained with the tail to eventually end up on the island. The fatigued edge of 2-2-V-1 may have been later wave action.
Just some thoughts I've had over time.
-
I have long thought the bright objects in the 1953 aerial recon photographs of the reef flat on the north side of the lagoon entrance are the possible remains of the outboard wing sections, the horizontal stabilizer and/or the twin vertical stabilizers/rudders. (See Tighar Tracks Volume 35, Number 2, page 7). These flat surfaces would likely have not remained attached to the main fuselage for very long as wave action shoved the aircraft around on the reef and they then migrated south over time. I don't think its known if the colonists salvaged these pieces or if the continued either into the lagoon or went across the lagoon entrance in the same direction as 2-2-V-1, towards the landing channel. There are stories of aluminum pieces being seen/recovered on the shore of the lagoon across from the entrance.
-
My thought is that initially as the tide came in the tail would have filled with water. There are waves on top of any incoming tide. As the tide came in more, the fuselage fuel tanks would have enough buoyancy to attempt to float the tail wheel off the reef at the top of each wave. ...After a few dozen waves, the fuselage snaps - somewhere aft of the main tanks.
If this happened I wonder if Fred was left in the plane, and that's why no evidence of him has surfaced (skeleton, clothing, personal effects). If he was delirious with injury/thirst he would be difficult to extract (especially if Amelia was experiencing malnutrition or injuries by then).
-
Same thing could have happened if he was able to exit and collapsed on the way to the beach and the surf took him.
-
Perhaps the inhabitants were responsible for some of the dismantling - above shore or in shallow water?
L
-
In one of the radio broadcasts it was interpreted that Amelia was having difficulties with Fred, either due to his injuries, dehydration, or both. I could see a scenario where she was unable to remove him from the plane, either due to his having passed out and her physically unable to carry him, or his resisting her attempts to remove him. I could see her returning to the plane each day to send out broadcasts and him becoming more and more incapacitated until her succumbed and was eventually carried off when the plane broke up.
I'm more skeptical of him dying in the surf and being carried off by the waves. Why? I think he died before her. If so, it would be logical for her to scavenge him for any useful items (his belt, shoes, cloths). As none of those items has thus far been found we may assume none of Fred's items were at the camp site. Several items which could be attributed to her have been found (shoe, zipper tab, etc.) but as far as I know nothing that could be solely attributed to Fred. I know I'm speculating here and probably letting the movie Castaway inform my ideas. I wonder if he was injured in the crash and never left the plane.
-
If I'm remembering correctly, one of the credible radio messages was interpreted as Fred saying the "water's coming in", and him scrambling to get out. AE saying, "watch the battery" and then complaining about her ankle.
(See Tighar Tracks Volume 34, #2, August 2018, right hand column page 28, "Injuries" and page 29, right hand column under "Rising Water, Rising Anxiety".)
-
From what I can see of the items found at the Seven Site, they very well all could have been contained in her cosmetic bag. I have found 1930's cosmetic bags, with talon zippers, made from beads and silk or rayon type of material, on ebay.
Small Talon Zipper - from cosmetic bag
Small bit of unknown fabric - also from cosmetic bag
Bead - from cosmetic bag
Compact and mirror
Pharmacy bottle
etc
This tells me that perhaps they lost the electra very quickly, possibly with Fred onboard. Maybe she had just her cosmetic bag, jack knife, and the clothes on her back.
It is also possible that the loss of the electra and the landing gear breaking off was from Fred attempting to take off again. He loses the gear, hitting a rut at high speed, then spins out into the surf off the ledge and into bolivia. Probably no way for him to even swim back to shore safely.
-
He [Fred] loses the gear, hitting a rut at high speed, then spins out into the surf off the ledge and into bolivia.
I love it. Just like Butch and Sundance, except instead of spinning off a ledge into bolivia like Fred, Butch and Sundance jumped off a ledge in Bolivia. At least they did in the movie.
Even more coincidental, Butch was rumored to have lived, returned to the U.S., lived under an assumed identity (not Irene Bolam) and died in Spokane in 1937 (of all years!) (https://www.heraldnet.com/news/did-butch-cassidy-survive-and-retire-in-spokane/) or maybe as late as 1941 in Utah (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-01-14-me-24474-story.html).
-
I was searching for scientific surveys of Seringapatam Reef to see if they mentioned seeing any wreckage of the Croydon. One article mentioned what could be another similar circumstance of a plane “landing” or “ditching” on a shallow water reef. This one at Cartier Island. The plane was a Beaufighter, a twin engine multi-role plane used in WWII.
The article mentioned a plane landing on an island.
https://parksaustralia.gov.au/marine/pub/scientific-publications/archive/cartier-plan.pdf
“During the Second World War a RAAF Beaufighter sustained damage
during a conflict and landed on Cartier Island. Following the rescue
of the crew, the wreck was strafed by other aircraft and set alight.
Some remains of the aircraft are still found on Cartier Island.”
This site mentions the plane “ditched” in shallow water with half the plane above water. At that depth this could be similar to a higher tide condition at Gardner
https://pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/beaufighter/A19-156.html
“At 1:30pm this Beaufighter ditched at 1:30pm at roughly Lat 12° 30' S Long 123° 33' E off Cartier Island with the upper half of the aircraft above the water line. Both crew survived the landing unhurt.”
This site has some interesting details
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=265807
“A19-156 was hit by Japanese 20mm anti-aircraft gun in a raid on Semoa Island, losing starboard engine, and forced landed on Cartier Reef/Island”, “The crew set up the rear gun on a coconut stump for defense.”
After the crew was rescued by a Catalina the plane was destroyed by a covering Beaufighter
Wikipedia mentions “The remains of an RAAF Beaufighter can also be seen at low tide.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartier_Island
It would be interesting to see what the remains are after having been strafed, set alight and its remains being on a shallow reef this long
-
There was airplane wreckage AND a coconut stump on Cartier Island? I'm not sure how we will ever be able to tell the difference.
-
Well, that sent me down a rabbit hole of reading about Australian shipwrecks!
Thinking about the possibility they might have thought they could fly out of there led to speculation on how that could be accomplished and whether even in their wildest dreams they could think that was possible. After imagining this I don't see it as a practical possibility even if they had been found on the first day.
The airplane would have to be intact enough to fly, and have enough fuel to get to another landing place where more fuel was available. If they didn't have enough left, more would need to be brought to the airplane. They would need to know a destination to fly to and direction to fly to it.
If they had been found sooner, the finders could have told them their position and the nearest place to refuel. They do not need to have full tanks, only enough to get to a place where more fuel is available. And where would that be? There is plenty of fuel at Howland if they could get there. Was there anyplace closer? Getting fuel to the island, safely ashore and into the airplane would be the next challenges.
I've had the thought that perhaps they remembered that the Norwich City crew were rescued only four days after the shipwreck (their distress call having been heard and other ships sent to their rescue), and that a small boat was successfully used to bring them off. I do not mean that they (A and F) knew in advance where they were going (as has sometimes been speculated) but that maybe seeing the shipwreck brought it back to mind, though apparently not including the name of the island, as no known credible transcripts includes the island's name, but one includes what may be the ship's name. The wreck and rescue were international news at the time and were reported in American newspapers. This might raise their hopes.
This is of course entirely speculative and unsupported by any evidence. It is just a thought experiment to think of how the intact airplane could have been saved.
The question has been raised whether they didn't unload the airplane because it looked intact enough to fly out. Based on descriptions of walking on the reef, I imagined them trying to carry things ashore and it seems that difficulty might have been reason enough not to do so. Then when it did go, they would have only what they had on them or could grab on the way out.
And then where were they during those few days they were transmitting? Did they make a shore camp and go back and forth, or stay in the airplane the whole time? There's the same issue of walking back and forth on the reef flat, but there's also the heat inside the airplane and its precarious position.
Of course if you really want to speculate, imagine USS Lexington arriving in time for the Electra to be flown off the island and landed on her deck. But that really is fantasy.
LTM,
Don
-
From a similar circumstance perspective, the Croydon crew considered taking off from the reef but their broken tail wheel shot that idea down.
The only reason I can see AE or FN taking off is in a desperate attempt to get altitude. To be seen, see or get a better signal for a short time.
From the lighting study of the Bevington photo I did in Autocad, the oleo strut if still attached to the worm gear would have to be in the tire. I can’t see the plane flying off with that happening.
In the Luke Field crash the oleo strut came off with the worm gear still attached to it. (I have an interpretation that the Debris Field video may show the oleo strut is still in the tire. With a bit of hydraulic line attached to it similar to the Luke Field crash.)
The timing of the credible radio signals suggest they went to shore during the day.
If anything valuable was taken ashore and left there, or elsewhere, it could have been salvaged by villagers and taken with them when they left. Or possibly washed away in a storm,or deteriorated away over time.
Edit: I wonder if an analysis of radio signals, where just a man's voice was heard(if that occurred) might indicate if Fred stayed in the plane during the day?
What you take to shore seems purely survival based. For the Beaufighter crew it was a machine gun.
-
I imagine the heartbreak for the Croydon crew -- which included its designer -- at having to abandon their only slightly damaged airplane to the elements.
What prompted discussion in this thread of the Electra taking off was a suggestion that Fred doing this alone could account for the loss of the airplane before the Colorado pilots' overflight, and Amelia surviving a while longer on the island.
We don't know when the landing gear was torn off the airplane -- on landing, when the plane was washed away, or in a takeoff attempt. Given the radio signals, I've thought it was probably when the plane was washed away.
The timing of signals doesn't tell us where they were when not transmitting. They transmitted when the water was low enough to allow them to run the engine with the prop clear of the water, for as long as they could before the engine got too hot (its cooling being inadequate while stationary). As the atmospheric phenomenon that allowed their signals to be heard at great distances varies by time of day, this also can account for the timing of reported signals by distant listeners. They might have transmitted whenever the tide allowed, but been unheard by anyone whose report has come to us. Admittedly, it was probably more comfortable at night, if they were ashore during the heat of the day (and the high water).
I keep thinking of descriptions of walking on the reef and imagine them doing that several times daily, in street shoes, and ask myself if they would have just stayed put for those first few days. Then again, they had little food or water, and seeking that might have driven them ashore.
LTM,
Don
-
Edit: I wonder if an analysis of radio signals, where just a man's voice was heard(if that occurred) might indicate if Fred stayed in the plane during the day?
Is there a daily time line of events somewhere, that includes the day and time of each radio transmission, what Amelia was thought to be saying, and the tides? I know about the tide charts with correlations to when the transmission took place, but it would be interesting to know e.g., at what point across time when Fred was heard talking or Amelia mentioning him. From the tide-transmission correlation one can speculate when the plane was taken by the waves, which gives a minimum number of days she at least was alive. Further, has anyone made an estimate for how long she may have survived based on the items found at the camp? If so, you could put these two pieces of information together and determine a time line for the major events (the transmissions, the plane being taken, how long we know Fred to have survived, and finally her survival). I would think you could put some confidence bars around all those times.
-
Yes there is a very complete chronology in TIGHAR's reference material. That was how it was possible to show that the credible transmissions all occurred when the tide was low and that the duration of transmission times matched with how long the engine could be run on the ground (about an hour) before it got too hot (not enough air flow when not flying) and had to be stopped to cool.
LTM
Don
-
Time and Tide analysis.
https://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/2013Vol_29/February_2013/Time_And_Tide.pdf
Post loss Catalog has analysis.
https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/signalcatalog.html
These are the credible signals (Green Identifier) where a voice can be deduced to be a man or woman(“Earhart”). There are other credible signals that identify a voice but are not listed below because it was not clear who was talking.
The intent is to see if there is a window where one of the crew could have been ashore while the other was in the plane.
30555IA July 2 -6:55 PM-Woman’s voice
30800LE July 2 -9:00PM -Woman’s voice
31900PX July 3-8:00AM - Woman’s Voice but it mentions a storm and “we” can’t stay here long
40650HD July 3 7:50PM Woman’s voice
41031PU July 3 -11:31 PM – Man’s voice
41200CC July 4 -1:00 AM -Man’s voice
41215WD July 4-1:15 AM -Man’s voice
41500RH July 4 -4:00AM Woman’s voice (Randolph)
41500CB July 4 4:00AM -Conversation between man and woman(Crabb simultaneous to Randolph)
50638PY July 4 7:38 PM -Man’s voice
50908HD July 4 10:08 PM -Man’s voice
50916CS July 4 10:16-Woman’s voice
51200ME July 5, 1:00 AM-Woman’s voice
51417CV July 5 3:17 AM -Man’s Voice
51700CB July 5 6:00AM-Conversation between man and woman(Crabb)
52130KK July 5 10:30 AM -12:15PM Conversation between man and woman (Klenck)
61400CB July 6 3AM-Conversation between man and woman (Crabb)
71230LC July 7 1:30 AM-Woman’s Voice (Lovelace)
Based only on the signals in the catalog that provided information where you can identify that there is a man or a woman:
There is a possible large window where Earhart was heard and not Fred in the initial 13 hours or even 28 1/2 hours. July 2, 6:55pm to July 3, 8:00 am or even July 3, 11:31PM
There is a possible large window of 8 hours where Fred is heard and not Earhart. July 3 7:50PM to July 4, 4:00am
Then a mix of the two with oddly 3 instances of conversations being overheard between both of them near the end.
-
Thanks Greg. This was exactly what I was looking for.
So she lands on 2 July and the last received signal is 7 July (perhaps longer although those signals were of very low probability). A man is heard in many of these including 6 July. There is mention of a broken wing on 9 July however that one had a very low probability.
You could assume (I know about the dangers of this) that they stopped transmitting on the 7th because they could no longer get to the plane. I think then there is too little info to speculate if Fred was carried away with the plane. It is of course frustrating that the stronger signals with higher probabilities mostly don't contain text, just dashes.
5 days does not seem like enough time to succumb to starvation or dehydration although if injured it would certainly leave open that possibility.
Is there any way to determine how long the camp site was in use?
-
Is there any way to determine how long the camp site was in use?
Study of the bones and shells at the Seven site. This is one report:
https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/Faunals/NikuVanalysisfaunals2.html
I believe there is a more detailed one I remember seeing as well but I'm not sure where it is.
-
X View Profile Email Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Amelia's last days
« Reply #11 on: June 27, 2013, 09:41:03 PM »
ReplyQuote
What gets me is that so many psychics said that Amelia was northwest of Howland Island and Putnam put pressure on search operations to look there, and spent his own money looking there:
http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/results.php?CISOOP1=any&CISOFIELD1=CISOSEARCHALL&CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOBOX1=psychic
SCIENCE said that AE was on land, otherwise she couldn't have been sending radio signals, so if GPP had put more effort into searching the Phoenix Islands instead, there could have been a different outcome. I was surprised to read how much time, effort, and faith GPP and AE put in psychics. I believe psychics can have their uses (I can hear you, Jeff Neville!), but to put all your eggs in their baskets is a mistake, IMHO.
So sad.
Matt John Barth, I do find it interesting that Edgar Cayce said that AE died July 21, 1937. Makes you wonder, huh.
Looks like Edgar Cayce thought she lasted until July 21.
SteveG
3911R
-
What gets me is that so many psychics said that Amelia was northwest of Howland Island and Putnam put pressure on search operations to look there, and spent his own money looking there...
I'm reminded of an old joke.
Why do they need to announce meeting for psychics? Shouldn't they all just show up anyway?
-
My cousin had a son who went missing in a freak storm in the Gulf. The Seacor Power accident.
They used science to search for him based on currents. Frustratingly a Psychic got involved too.
Eventually his hard hat was found washed up far away from where they were searching.
Recently there appeared to be evidence of heavy steel Norwich City wreckage washed up on the North end of Nikumaroro. Opposite of prevailing currents.
I think a storm did that. A storm could also be why the plane may not be where you think it should based on prevailing currents.
-
My cousin had a son who went missing in a freak storm in the Gulf. The Seacor Power accident.
They used science to search for him based on currents. Frustratingly a Psychic got involved too.
Eventually his hard hat was found washed up far away from where they were searching.
Recently there appeared to be evidence of heavy steel Norwich City wreckage washed up on the North end of Nikumaroro. Opposite of prevailing currents.
I think a storm did that. A storm could also be why the plane may not be where you think it should based on prevailing currents.
Except there is no evidence (from ship logs of swell, sea states) of any storm near Niku from July 2 to the 9th when the Colorado pilots overflew the island and saw no intact plane. If the plane broke up on the reef flat, it was due to normal and everyday wave/tidal action.
-
Except there is no evidence (from ship logs of swell, sea states) of any storm near Niku from July 2 to the 9th when the Colorado pilots overflew the island and saw no intact plane. If the plane broke up on the reef flat, it was due to normal and everyday wave/tidal action.
One of the radio messages heard mentioned it was getting dark when it should have been daytime there. The only people that could say if there was a squall before the Colorado got there should have been AE and FN.
Regardless of the what the weather may have been then I wasn't suggesting a storm moved the plane off of the reef or spur and groove zone before or during the Navy search. That search occurred when the tide and breaking surf was high enough to hide the plane. I am convinced The Bevington object is the landing gear and I believe Emily saw part of the plane at low tide later. To be more clear on what I meant I am saying that a large section of the plane may have been moved by a storm from the shallow part of the spur and groove it had been in sometime in the months or years after the landing. That the main section may not have gone down the western slope. But that a storm could have moved a large section north like what appears to have happened to some of the Norwich City steel. I think some of the plane did go down the slope, some of it in the lagoon. Based on seeing what appears to be Norwich City steel on the north tip, some of the much lighter plane could have been moved even farther north. This possible storm occurring sometime in 40's or even later.