TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => General discussion => Topic started by: Brad Beeching on February 11, 2011, 12:25:11 PM
-
Please excuse what may be a dumb question. Assuming that the Gardner Island theory is correct, and Amelia landed there, what makes folks assume that Fred and/or Amelia (or both) were seriously injured in the landing? If they survived long enough to make campsites I should think that they were in reasonably good condition at least for the first few days or weeks. I will grant you that setting down on a reef is prob'ly a fairly violent affair but wasn't the Electra equiped for rough field environments?
Gums
-
There are a few suggestions of injury in Betty's Notebook (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Notebook/notebook.html). Noonan appears to be irrational and Betty says she had the impression that he had sustained a head injury, although there is nothing in her transcript that makes specific reference to a head injury. Some other shortwave listeners reported references to Noonan being injured.
At one point in Betty's transcript Earhart seems to be in pain and and a word that Betty recorded as "uncle" may have been "ankle" - but that's pure speculation.
In short, the evidence for injuries is pretty thin. On the other hand, speaking from experience, it's not hard to get banged up when negotiating the reef/island interface. The reef surface close to shore is deeply pitted and often viciously jagged and a type of algae grows on parts of the reef that make it, as we say, "slicker'n snot."
-
Betty's log and her comments make for a haunting read. Ric, where can I find your impressions and conclusions of your interviews with Betty? I dont know where to find them. Im sure you do not have the time to repeat what you think about Betty's log every time some newbe comes on board!
Gums
ps. I just followed the trail to Ric's book. Is "Finding Amelia" still available? I have a feeling that will go a long way to answering alot of my questions... and saving electrons in the process...
-
Is "Finding Amelia" still available? I have a feeling that will go a long way to answering alot of my questions... and saving electrons in the process...
Yes, Finding Amelia is still available. You can get it in soft cover from Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Amelia-Story-Earhart-Disappearance/dp/1591143187/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297468027&sr=8-1) for a paltry $12.89 but you won't get the data DVD that comes with the hardcover edition. The hardcover edition is now out of print but Amazon still has some for $20.06. You can get the hardcover edition signed and dated by the author at the on-line TIGHAR Store (http://tighar.org/store/index.php?route=product/product&path=46&product_id=64) for $100 and we'll throw in a TIGHAR membership ($55 value). No charge for the satisfaction of knowing you're part of this historic effort.
-
Betty's log and her comments make for a haunting read. Ric, where can I find your impressions and conclusions of your interviews with Betty? I don't know where to find them. I'm sure you do not have the time to repeat what you think about Betty's log every time some newbie comes on board!
How to Search tighar.org. (http://tighar.org/news/help/82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg)
Search results from tighar.org for "Betty's Notebook." (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=009580785602718212762%3Anmcmqnbv5de&ie=UTF-8&q=%22betty%27s+notebook%22&sa=Search&siteurl=www-open-opensocial.googleusercontent.com%2Fgadgets%2Fifr%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252Fcoop%252Fapi%252F009580785602718212762%252Fcse%252Fnmcmqnbv5de%252Fgadget%26container%3Dopen%26view%3Dhome%26lang%3Dall%26country%3DALL%26debug%3D0%26nocache%3D0%26sanitize%3D0%26v%3D91a41f18313ccc7e%26source%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ftighar.org%252Fnews%252Fhelp%252F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg%26parent%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ftighar.org%252Fnews%252Fhelp%252F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg%26libs%3Dcore%253Acore.io%253Arpc%23st%3D%2525st%2525%26rpctoken%3D880977774)
ps. I just followed the trail to Ric's book. Is "Finding Amelia" still available? I have a feeling that will go a long way to answering a lot of my questions... and saving electrons in the process...
Signed and dated hardcopy from TIGHAR. (http://tighar.org/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=64)
From Amazon.com. (http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Amelia-Story-Earhart-Disappearance/dp/1591143187/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297468809&sr=8-1)
-
I am assuming A & F actually landed on Gardner. Then my real interest begins. I have commented previously that Betty's message might be consistent with Fred having sunstroke and/or dehydration. Nobody gave me any input on that on the forum. I speculate that they didn't survive long, 4-5 days maybe. I could certainly be very wrong about that. I plan to see for myself what a castaway could do to survive on an island like Gardner. I have to learn about coconuts, digging for water, puddles in trees, food sources, etc. I intend to go there, probably in 2012 with that NZ boat that was mentioned on forum. Has anybody had any experience with them? They want a CASH deposit, not credit card, makes me a little cautious. I haven't heard of any TIGHAR members eager to do this trip. Are there any? I might like to make this a big trip, visiting also Easter Island (I have been there) also Nan Madol, maybe Tarawa.
-
There's another aspect to the question of whether or not Noonan was somehow incapacitated. With almanacs and a sextant and/or octant Noonan should have been able to come up with an accurate lat/long for the island on the first night. With any kind of decent chart he should be able to get the name of the island. And yet, in none of the post-loss messages that have intelligible content are there coordinates for Gardner or anything that sounds like Gardner.
-
I intend to go there, probably in 2012 with that NZ boat that was mentioned on forum. Has anybody had any experience with them?
Last year Pacific Expeditions advertised and booked a similar excursion with a different boat, the Southern Cross. They were scheduled to arrive at Nikumaroro while we were there. They failed to obtain a PIPA permit and we were asked by PIPA to prevent them from landing if they showed up. We issued flintlock pistols and cutlasses to the team but Southern Cross never arrived. When we got back to Samoa the ship was there, reportedly with "engine trouble." I have corresponded with PIPA about the Pacific Expedition's advertised plans to do two trips to the Phoenix Group this year. They report that, this time, they seem to be complying with the regs.
In a one or two day visit you're not going to learn anything meaningful about how a castaway might survive.
-
In reading "Finding Amelia" that was a big question to me, that is, if they were that chatty, why couldn't they just say there is a wrecked freighter on the beach right near where we are sitting? Or maybe they did and no one heard. In the far fetched department, could it be that the Norwich City's name had become obliterated so that only showed the N and they Y? Like N....... ...Y? So that maybe they assumed that was the ship's real complete marking?
-
Yes, Ric, exactly, a one or two day trip will teach me very little. But it will be more than I can learn from my armchair. That is why I hesitate to sign up with Pacific Expeditions. Especially CASH deposit. I am interested in the Pacific Islands in general, so I would be open to corresponding with like minded people. I can spend considerable time on the islands, I am retired, but it doesn't seem like Pacific Exped is interested in catering to anybody who would want to study the Phoenix Islands in more depth. I don't understand why they are offering the Phoenix Islands to begin with. Unless they hope to sign up people curious about the Gardner hypotheses. Another mystery. In addition to my skin diving training I will soon practice the use of cutlasses and flintlock pistols.
-
Wouldn't it be likely that if Fred was injured on landing that Amelia would then be left to search the island for help and water/resources therefore leaving Fred to maintain radio watch? If Fred couldn't move to explore but was able to talk then he is the likely candidate to man the only link they have remaining to the outside world.
Amelia would have taken a few days to explore the island and likely by the fourth day would now realize the mess they were in and be with Fred again trying to raise someone on the radio. Also assuming that his condition deteriorates over the next few days as his injuries, thirst, heat exhaustion and hunger start to take their toll, he is in bad shape by the time Betty hears the messages now being put out by Fred and the returned Amelia.
If both were fit on landing then I could see them taking turns to search the island with one exploring and one manning the radio. This would allow one to rest and conserve energy while the other explored. However the messages don't talk about hearing both castaways equally during the first days. They do mention Amelias voice at night I believe, but isn't this when she likely returned to the Electra to discuss their predicament with Fred and too rest.
All conjecture but I can't see both exploring and no one manning the radio. An injured Fred is the logical choice to remain by the radio and this tends to fit into the radio messages that it was mostly a man responding during the day. Wouldn't this also mean Fred would have suffered unimaginably if left inside the Electra aluminum skinned body during the day with the sun beating down on it? Little or no water with the baking heat would just compound the severity of the injuries. He would/could go downhill fast.
On a slightly different point.... I'm assuming the Electra engines were electric start equipped and not hand cranked. Did the engines have a separate starter battery or did they use the same batteries as the radio? If using the same battery then there is a danger of running the battery too low to restart the engine. Would Fred know how to start an engine if Amelia was off exploring? If no then would she do this herself meaning she had to stay close to the aircraft? Lastly, what type of landing could the Electra have where it stayed on it's wheels but Fred was still seriously injured? I'm not sure where the answers to those questions lead anyone but they all are tied to the first four days when radio messages were reportedly heard.
-
Did the engines have a separate starter battery or did they use the same batteries as the radio?
There were two batteries but we don't know whether Earhart used one as a dedicated engine start battery.
Would Fred know how to start an engine if Amelia was off exploring?
Dunno
Lastly, what type of landing could the Electra have where it stayed on it's wheels but Fred was still seriously injured?
Any abrupt stop could throw him forward and without a shoulder restraint he might easily strike his head on the instrument panel.
-
I did get a funny look from the helmsman when I said, "If that other boat shows up lay me alongside at pistol shot."
-
Thanks Ric
Would that abrupt stop pitching Fred forward with just a lap belt apply to Amelia as well or would holding the control yoke give her the ability to avoid the same pitch forward? Would the energy in such a "crash" not tend to pitch the plane forward onto it's nose thereby damaging the props? Especially when landing on the coral. It's reported that the coral is smooth enough to land on but then what would cause the plane to pitch Fred into the instruments? You have seen this area first hand Ric and being an aviator would have a more expert opinion on this but it's puzzling to me that the aircraft could land in such a manner as to seriously injure Fred but also stay on it's wheels in good enough shape to run it's one engine to recharge the batteries. BTW. It would make sense that since the aircraft had two batteries that AE would now use them wisely by dedicating one to radio, even if she had not previously done so as routine practice. I would hope she had her wits about her for this type of survival thinking.
-
Would an eye patch and parrot complete the picture?
-
Would Fred not be taking sightings and marking his charts feverishly as they flew "on the line" towards Gardner? Why would he not know it was Gardner while in the air and discussing landing there with AE?
Would the discussion upon sighting land not be something like " there's land over there Fred. What island is that?". (Probably a little more excited/relieved than that.) Why do we assume he would wait until they were landed first before trying to figure it out?
The logic used in flying south on the line was that there were more islands available if they got into trouble so they were looking for these islands and hoping to find them. Not stumbling around the Pacific not knowing where they were. That is " IF" all the logic used in why they flew towards Gardner is correct.
So this still begs the question why no radio messages have any reference to Gardner. So many questions and no answers. Frustrating
-
I think we need to remember when we start asking questions like "why didn't A or F mention coordinates or the name of the island? etc..., that any evidence of heard radio signals from them (weeding out the hoaxes of course) represent only a very small fraction of those actually sent. Have there been any estimates as to how much radio air time they could have had before fuel and batteries would have expired? Best/worst case scenerio of course.
BTW - Just finished Tom Neale's book. What a great (and fast) read. Very evocative too.
-
I did get a funny look from the helmsman when I said, "If that other boat shows up lay me alongside at pistol shot."
Wow, when Peter Benchley wrote about The Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Island_(1979_novel)), I thought he was making it all up!
-
There's another aspect to the question of whether or not Noonan was somehow incapacitated. With almanacs and a sextant and/or octant Noonan should have been able to come up with an accurate lat/long for the island on the first night. With any kind of decent chart he should be able to get the name of the island. And yet, in none of the post-loss messages that have intelligible content are there coordinates for Gardner or anything that sounds like Gardner.
Absolutely. In keeping with what we know about Noonan and his reputation as a navigator, one of the first things he would have done is attempt to establish their location and then tried to communicate that information in those radio messages. The fact that there were no coordinates nor anything that sounds like Gardner might indicate that the mans voice was not Noonans.
-
This brings me back to my earlier point. Why would Noonan wait until he landed to determine his position? As an expert aviation navigator wouldn't he know his position on his charts and know the name of the island before they landed?
He and AE are desperately searching for somewhere to put the Electra down but he would already know they were headed for the Phoenix islands when they headed south "on the line north and south". This means he should have known it before the landing and the suspected injury. Were the charts of the day accurate and complete? I can only suspect the charts were incomplete (no names of islands) or Gardner shown in the wrong place. Perhaps his injury made him forget where he was. Particularly a head injury. But I'm sure he would have told AE where they were when land was sighted (in the air and before he received his injury) and she could have passed it on.
Of course by this time they were dangerously low on fuel and perhaps were so relieved to find land that they didn't care but that doesn't feel like how this would go down.
-
Ric,
In the number of times you hav e been on Niku have you observed any prop stikes on the reaf?
Ted Campbell
-
Thanks to Chris' link I looked up PIPA and this led me to more cursory investigation. I found that Hull Island, perhaps the nearest to Gardner, was a very active island through the first 60 years of the 20th century. Apparently there was a successful copra operation there for quite a while. While it seems that it was uninhabited in early 1937, and the population there earlier nearly starved when they weren't supplied, mostly there were people there. Why wouldn't a boat show up at Gardner once in a while to pick the few coconuts? Wouldn't they have then stayed a while to process the coconuts? What about fishermen? Some group recently harvested sea cucumbers on one of the Phoenix Islands. What about cutting down the last of the valuable trees on Gardner? Maybe there really were signs of recent habitation the Navy flyers saw. But constructed by men and maybe women who camped there to harvest something. Perhaps there was one or more men there when A & E allegedly crashed. Who can say definitely there was no one there? Maybe people who weren't authorized? Was Fred so seriously injured he couldn't function? It doesn't sound like Amelia was an ace navigator, so she wouldn't likely take a position reading. I read Pancho Barnes' opinions tonight and they are illuminating. She thought highly of Fred, but was critical of Amelia's skills. Fred needn't have been injured in the plane landing, many things could have happened to him, in the surf, perhaps? Trying to reach the shipwreck? Perhaps I have an overactive imagination.
-
Sorry, I am replying to myself again. I saw on the Luke Field inventory many tools. If a propeller was badly bent could they have removed it themselves? Wouldn't that save a lot of gas if they ran the engine without the propeller blades? Or would it have run that way? It must have been an air cooled engine. (Shows how much I know or don't know.)
On a different subject, Pancho Barnes believed Amelia never did learn how to adjust mixture for maximum range, and she was of the opinion that Amelia simply ran out of gas long before Howland. The part where she says the Air Force men heard her on the radio actually crashing seems unlikely. But why would she make that up?
-
You may be exactly right, but I thought I saw wrenches for hubs or something like that. I don't feel like finding and reading the inventory again right now. Why would they carry such obviously heavy tools if they were incapable of using them? Maybe for when they had to make a landing at a primitive field where there were no tools but there were mechanics? That doesn't make a lot of sense either. So I am trying to get an opinion from somebody more knowledgeable than me. That would be almost everyone.
-
A speculative thought......since we're all good at that! ;D
What do we feel the likelihood is of Fred becoming incapacitated to one degree or another while in flight? Dysentery or some sort of tropical fever or disease that may have come upon him after taking to the air from Lae. Something that might have slowly sapped his strength/abilities - not so much at first allowing our intrepid flyers to arrive "safely" on Gardener but worsening upon landing; exacerbated by the conditions on Niku resulting in the symptoms we have found some evidence of (disorientation, heatstroke, etc.). Thoughts?
-
Was Fred more likely to be in the co pilot seat for landing or in the back at his navigator position? I believe I read somewhere it wasn't easy to move around the aircraft due to the bulk of the extra fuel tanks.
Was there equipment around the nav position that he could have injured his head on? Would the seat be forward facing?
I'm still struggling with how he can be hurt so seriously in a landing where the aircraft could still start and run an engine for battery charging.
-
A speculative thought......since we're all good at that! ;D
What do we feel the likelihood is of Fred becoming incapacitated to one degree or another while in flight? Dysentery or some sort of tropical fever or disease that may have come upon him after taking to the air from Lae. Something that might have slowly sapped his strength/abilities - not so much at first allowing our intrepid flyers to arrive "safely" on Gardener but worsening upon landing; exacerbated by the conditions on Niku resulting in the symptoms we have found some evidence of (disorientation, heatstroke, etc.). Thoughts?
That's an interesting thought. I believe the reason it's suspected that Fred is injured is from Betty's notes and other reports from radio messages. I believe it was the Larabee report that said AE reported Fred was seriously hurt and AE had a few minor injuries. I'm not sure how Betty thought Fred was hurt.
By end of day four it's possible Fred was simply suffering from lack of water in that environment and not injured from the landing at all. From what I read about Gardner it's not the most hospitable place. I'm also guessing that Fred would likely have insisted that AE drink the bulk of whatever water they had. Those were more chivalrous years.
-
Yes, perhaps. I've done a lot of air travel for my adventure travel/trekking trips and I have experienced sickness coming over me on the plane more than once, but I think I would be capable of saying on a radio I was stranded on an island with a big shipwreck in front of me. Of course he could have contracted something like that which did in Gallagher. I never have heard what he died of.
I was also thinking about Amelia's calculation of her plane's range. Had she ever flown such a long leg before? Somehow, I don't think so. If I were her, and it was feasible, I would have taken the plane to 10,000 ft. and flown at a steady airspeed to see how long it would fly before the engine started to cough. Of course I would do it near an available airfield so I could quickly land. I would not depend on what the Lockheed salesman said in the airplane showroom. Then I would sight Nauru on the fatal flight and see what my groundspeed was so far. If I found that I didn't have enough hours to make it to Howland I would have the option of changing my plans. Or I would have Fred take a position to give me a general idea of how far I had flown. If I had to drive my Chevy on a -40 F night in Alaska and the gas stations were far apart, I think I would try out first going a steady 60 mph in a more populated area in similar conditions to see just how many miles the car was capable of. Especially if my life were going to depend on it. Of course we all know Amelia was deficient in the preparation department and she may also have been flying very inefficiently due to her poor skills, so I'm just kicking a dead horse again.
-
I've commented here in the past that I didn't believe they survived long. Days. I've still probably gotta' believe that. I think the take-home message from Ric has always been survival could have been for possibly months. Don't know how I can see that. At what point have you survived long enough that you've then figured it out and you'll survive on into the future like Tom Neale?
IMHO Survival time was most dependent on finding water. Now if the inventory of when she wrecked in HI is any indication they had some fluids with them such as tomato juice, etc. That would buy them/her enough time to explore at least their immediate area. If they/she found the cache left behind by the Norwich City crew which I tend to believe that they/she did due to them finding the corks with chains when they found the bones. Too much of a coincidence in my mind that they find an artifact that exactly describes what was used in them days to plug the fill hole on wooden casks. Without water then your ascertation of days would be spot on, but with water located now the whole equation changes. The questions then becomes how much water was there? Did the castaway(s) develop some type to system to augment the supply with rainwater? It appears that they/she may have tried to distill seawater with the melted glass found in some of the fire features. That would indicate to me that perhaps they/she were running low on water. In my minds eye I can see survivability of weeks perhaps even a month.
There is one thing that does puzzle me though, Looking at the location of the 7 site I would think that they/she would have reached that site eventually by traversing the island in a clockwise route around the NW end and then SE to the end of the island that they would have approached from as I would assume that a normal person would think that a search party would approach from the same direction. Then there is the site where the shoe fragments were found on the opposite shore. If they/she found the water source left behind by Norwich City crew why would you wander miles away from it?
LTM,
Don
-
Looking at the location of the 7 site I would think that they/she would have reached that site eventually by traversing the island in a clockwise route around the NW end and then SE to the end of the island that they would have approached from as I would assume that a normal person would think that a search party would approach from the same direction.
Just to clarify that thought. I would assume as they flew over or around the island to come in for a landing I would think that they would notice that the NW shore of the island does not have the inlets from the lagoon to the sea and would be easier to traverse. Although, I could be wrong there but Ric or one of the other people who have been to Niku could clarify this. When the tide is out are the inlets to the lagoon dry so as you can walk across them "easily"? They would've at least known the shape of the island as they viewed it from the air and would think that the place you are emergency landing/crashing at would be indelibily imprinted on your brain and you attempt the easiest route to do any exploring. Unfortunately, questions as to the route taken and why will probably never be known until Ric finds that secret cache buried by AE which includes a day-to-day diairy of her stay as a castaway. :o
-
Don Asks "When the tide is out are the inlets to the lagoon dry so as you can walk across them "easily"?"
The main inlet to the lagoon by the old village is never fully dry. At high tide it can get chest deep or deeper in places, and the current runs pretty strong between high and low tides. At low tide, there are still areas that can be about 4 ft deep, so definitely a body of water that can be crossed, although not necessarily without a shark induced adventure. If you haven't seen Mark Smith's video of crossing the channel, check it out
Mark's Shark Encounter (http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1632911582952&oid=224536440657&comments&set=t.1017453922&type=1)
As for Baureke passage, it is much more shallow, and sometimes entirely dry. In 2001, it was completely dry, but was again open to the lagoon in both 2007 and 2010, and easily crossed.
From the shipwreck clockwise around to the 7 site on the beach would probably only take a couple of hours. The presumption is that after the USS Colorado's search planes flew off, eventually AE / FN would have begun to explore the rest of the island. Water would definitely be a problem. Down by the 7 site is where turtles nest, and I would think turtle eggs might be a good source of both protein and moisture.
Andrew
-
I know it's late in the threads, but trust me, Amelia knew how to adjust the mixture on those engines. But, at 1,000 feet, she would have been full rich and eating the gas. And I would imagine she stayed low trying to find Howland....and later anywhere to set the Electra down. Climbing would have used more fuel...so I don't imagine that happened. Again, speculation. But she (any pilot) knows how to adjust the mixture for max performance. Even before EGT guages, you can do it by RPM's fairly easy.
-
A speculative thought......since we're all good at that! ;D
What do we feel the likelihood is of Fred becoming incapacitated to one degree or another while in ...
That's an interesting thought. I believe the reason it's suspected that Fred is injured is from Betty's notes and other reports from radio messages. I believe it was the Larabee report .....
have you got a link?
Hi Chris. I got the name wrong on the report. It is Mabel Duncklee's letter to Ric that reports AE reporting on the radio that she was on an uncharted island and that Fred was seriously hurt. I hope I am posting the link correctly. http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Letters/Duncklee.pdf
-
That link worked. It takes you to a 5 page PDF of Mabel Duncklees letters to TIGHAR.
Page three has the most pertinent details. She says she hears AE on her home radio saying the aircraft had been landed half on land and half in water on an uncharted island and Fred was seriously injured and she was also injured.
If this letter is to be believed then those details alone would match the TIGHAR theory. The comment that the island is uncharted would explain the lack of an island name in any radio messages. This letter also says a lat- long position was given but no action was taken and the position, although written down at the time, was lost over the years. How much credibility do these letters have?
-
How much credibility do these letters have?
Mable Dunklee (previous married name Larremore) wrote to me very early in the project (1990), ten years before we learned about Betty's Notebook and long before we had developed any detailed information about the post-loss radio signals. She was 84 years old at the time and had a difficult time getting our mailing address or phone number, but she persisted. Her first letter arrived certified mail / return receipt. I subsequently talked to her on the phone. There is, of course, no way to know the accuracy of her recollections but I can attest to her absolute sincerity. Like Betty, she was haunted by what she believed she knew and terribly frustrated that no one had ever really listened to what she had to tell.
-
Don Asks "When the tide is out are the inlets to the lagoon dry so as you can walk across them "easily"?"
The main inlet to the lagoon by the old village is never fully dry. At high tide it can get chest deep or deeper in places, and the current runs pretty strong between high and low tides. At low tide, there are still areas that can be about 4 ft deep, so definitely a body of water that can be crossed, although not necessarily without a shark induced adventure.
Thanx Andrew. Precisely why I asked the question. Would speculate (that nasty word again), that they had some inkling of the basic geography of the island from the flyover, specifically the lack of inlets to the sea on the NW shore. Would think that it would uninviting enough to attempt to cross the main passage that anyone unfamiliar with that particular feature would go the other way around the island to explore. That would put the stay at the fire feature where the shoes were found likely, AFTER a brief stay at the 7 site. It never made sense to me before as a temporary bivouac site on the way to the 7 site which although it was never stated I assumed that was what it was.
Why this matters is because if there are injuries on either of our intrepid crew I see them doing what is necessary to survive but taking the easiest route available to accomplish it especially if injured. I can better quantify it in my mind as, they strolled for a couple of hours and came upon the 7 site then to cross all the inlets, camp for the nite, and then continue up around the southen end of the island and then continued north to the 7 site.
LTM,
Don
-
Don Asks "When the tide is out are the inlets to the lagoon dry so as you can walk across them "easily"?"
The main inlet to the lagoon by the old village is never fully dry. At high tide it can get chest deep or deeper in places, and the current runs pretty strong between high and low tides. At low tide, there are still areas that can be about 4 ft deep, so definitely a body of water that can be crossed, although not necessarily without a shark induced adventure. If you haven't seen Mark Smith's video of crossing the channel, check it out
Mark's Shark Encounter (http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1632911582952&oid=224536440657&comments&set=t.1017453922&type=1)
As for Baureke passage, it is much more shallow, and sometimes entirely dry. In 2001, it was completely dry, but was again open to the lagoon in both 2007 and 2010, and easily crossed.
Sea levels globally are now about 15 cm higher than in 1937. It also depends on whether an area is rising or falling geologically, but islands in that area are known to be gradually flooding. The Baureke passage would likely have been completely dry at low tide in 1937.
-
How much credibility do these letters have?
Mable Dunklee (previous married name Larremore) wrote to me very early in the project (1990), ten years before .......
Thanks very much Ric. Your knowledge and experience inn these matters helps considerably for us newcomers. Mabel's story comes across as sincere and I can't help but wonder what the recorded Lat Long would have pointed to. If she was making it up then it was a pretty detailed tale that happens to fit the TIGHAR theory pretty closely. Hard to make that stuff up unless you had an idea of what TIGHAR was thinking. When you received her letter had TIGHAR published a theory? Could this perhaps have helped the witness (Mabel) reconstruct the way she wanted.
Since this was 10 years before Betty's notes could Mabel's letters have conditioned Betty's recollections?
What I'm getting at is this. Do we have two people who are not connected coming up with similar stories, years apart, or is this the power of suggestion working on people seeking some attention? Can it be shown that they reported their recollections independently of each other or are we still having some doubts about authenticity?
-
When you received her letter had TIGHAR published a theory? Could this perhaps have helped the witness (Mabel) reconstruct the way she wanted.
It was 1990. We had received some newspaper publicity about our 1989 expedition. Our general theory that the flight had reached Gardner Island was , of course, described in the press coverage.
Since this was 10 years before Betty's notes could Mabel's letters have conditioned Betty's recollections?
No. Betty knew nothing about Mable when we interviewed her in 2000.
Do we have two people who are not connected coming up with similar stories, years apart,
Not two people. At least six people - Mable Larremore, Thelma Lovelace, Dana Randolph, Nina Paxton, Mrs. Crabb, Betty Klenck.
Can it be shown that they reported their recollections independently of each other or are we still having some doubts about authenticity?
They're definitely all independent of each other and all are credible with the possible exception of Nina Paxton. She's a tough case. Over the years her story got more and more elaborate and far fetched.
-
Thanks again Ric.
It's hard to believe with all the available evidence that TIGHAR is still trying to prove their theory. With all the physical evidence collected from the island, the years of gathering statements from witnesses, the experiments to prove theories and all the other experiments that disprove some of TIGHAR's theories, why hasn't the mystery been deemed as solved? Who will determine that it has been officially solved? The Government? Some global body? Public opinion? The media? ( please not them). TIGHAR itself?
-
I think you could probably apply physics, use many variables, use a simulator or a crash test dummy to see the injuries that could possibly of occurred. Noonan was probably strapped in, the reason I say that is that he'd experienced a crash during the first
round the world flight, thats assuming he learnt from that experience. Don't forget if that is part of the landing gear lodged in Bevington's photo, then there would have been a very sudden hault to the plane, the passangers would have been catapulted
forward.
-
It's hard to believe with all the available evidence that TIGHAR is still trying to prove their theory. With all the physical evidence collected from the island, the years of gathering statements from witnesses, the experiments to prove theories and all the other experiments that disprove some of TIGHAR's theories, why hasn't the mystery been deemed as solved?
Unfortunately, although all the evidence is of the age and type of what one would expect AE would use, the evidence is not AE specific. Without DNA or some other smoking gun there is no way to say without a shadow of a doubt that it was left there by her. Now finding the Electra, that would be a different story.
LTM,
Don
-
It's hard to believe with all the available evidence that TIGHAR is still trying to prove their theory. With all the physical evidence collected from the island, the years of gathering statements from witnesses, the experiments to prove theories and all the other experiments that disprove some of TIGHAR's theories, why hasn't the mystery been deemed as solved? Who will determine that it has been officially solved? The Government? Some global body? Public opinion? The media? ( please not them). TIGHAR itself?
Unfortunately, although all the evidence is of the age and type of what one would expect AE would use, the evidence is not AE specific. Without DNA or some other smoking gun there is no way to say without a shadow of a doubt that it was left there by her. Now finding the Electra, that would be a different story.
All of the evidence presented thus far is circumstantial and although it is cumulative and suggestive, it does not rise to the level of clear and convincing evidence that would establish a definite nexus to the airplane or crew. Direct evidence must be produced to fully convince the court of public opinion that the TIGHAR theory is valid. Direct evidence would be identifiable parts of the Electra or remains of the crew and would support the assertion without any inference.
If this case were in a court of law seeking a declaratory judgment to validate the TIGHAR theory, a very good argument could be constructed with the available circumstantial evidence, likewise, strong arguments could be made against that circumstantial evidence and a neutral and detached judge might rule in favor or not in favor of TIGHAR, however, to convince the general public and the press, the search must continue until direct or prima facia evidence is found that establishes beyond doubt that the Electra and crew came to earth on Gardner Island. That may or may not be possible.
-
Thanks again Ric.
It's hard to believe with all the available evidence that TIGHAR is still trying to prove their theory. With all the physical evidence collected from the island, the years of gathering statements from witnesses, the experiments to prove theories and all the other experiments that disprove some of TIGHAR's theories, why hasn't the mystery been deemed as solved? Who will determine that it has been officially solved? The Government? Some global body? Public opinion? The media? ( please not them). TIGHAR itself?
I don't think you're going to get a court hearing on this and they always kick rational thinkers out of the jury pool anyway, so perhaps we could adopt the following standard to determine whether it has been solved:
People stop thinking up other theories. People stop spending time and money looking in other places.
The signal that it's over may not be a thunderclap, but rather a silence.
Until then, just enjoy being part of the chase!
-
Thanks again Ric.
It's hard to believe with all the available ........ Who will determine that it has been officially solved? The Government? Some global body? Public opinion? The media? ( please not them). TIGHAR itself?
I don't think you're going to get a court hearing on this and they always kick rational thinkers out of the jury pool anyway, so perhaps we could adopt the following standard to determine whether it has been solved:
People stop thinking up other theories. People stop spending time and money looking in other places.
The signal that it's over may not be a thunderclap, but rather a silence.
Until then, just enjoy being part of the chase!
Walter.... What a great answer!
-
The signal that it's over may not be a thunderclap, but rather a silence.
Not with a bang, but a whimper? Perhaps .... but I'm going for the thunderclap.
-
Not with a bang, but a whimper? Perhaps .... but I'm going for the thunderclap.
I'm shocked, shocked!
Actually, I'm looking forward to a real big bang.
-
Thinking about the restraints, not shoulder but waste only and automobile accidents would a waste only restraint not allow AE to have a chest impact with the steering column (not the correct term) or yoke? and thus not suffer more traumatic injuries?
I don't know about automobile accidents, but in aviation accidents the pilot - who is holding the yoke - is often able to use it to brace him/herself.
-
An after thought but if AE was able to brace herself, could FN have also done something?
Fred would probably be in the copilot seat. There is some evidence that the yoke on the right side had been removed, possibly to give him more room.
-
As an accident reconstrutionist I can tell you that the problem in auto accidents, especially pre-shoulder restraint days, was that the steering wheel spokes would fold back during the collision, allowing the driver's chest to contact the steering wheel hub, resulting in a flail chest injury if not a complete impalement on the steering shaft. These shafts used to be a one-piece rod from the wheel to the gearbox. They now use a collapsible joint to alleviate this. Even so, it is still common to find the rim of the wheel distorted and pushed down toward the dash, even in crashes where the driver was restrained and the airbag deployed. There is an incredible amount of energy that is dissipated during a collision. I imagine that in the confined space of the Electra cockpit there were any number of hard points that could have caused injury to our duo, especially if restrained only by lap belts. AE probably would fair better having the yoke to brace herself and at least reduce her impact with the panel. Poor Fred would probably be folded over at the waist, possibly injuring his back, breaking an arm/wrist, and contacting the panel with his head. I've never seen the inside of an Electra cockpit and don't know how tall Fred was, but the opportunity for injury is definately there and higher for him than for AE.
-
I've never seen the inside of an Electra cockpit and don't know how tall Fred was, but the opportunity for injury is definately there and higher for him than for AE.
I agree. An Electra cockpit, like the cockpits of many aircraft of that era, was more cramped than we're accustomed to today. Windshields in particular were smaller and much closer to the cockpit crew than is common today. Fred was just over six feet tall.
The circumstances of the landing are, of course, unknown but if there was a sudden deceleration it was not sufficient to pitch the aircraft up on its nose or bend the props. The most likely scenario, if there was an accident at all, would seem to be for a wheel to hit to a depression that caused the plane to groundloop - maybe collapsing a gear leg, maybe not. The right hand wheel hitting a hole would cause the aircraft to rotate violently clockwise around the right hand gear leg, throwing the occupants forward and to the left. Conversely, the left wheel hitting a hole would cause a counter-clockwise rotation, throwing the occupants forward and to the right. In that scenario, Earhart would probably be okay but Fred could hit his head on the cockpit side windows or posts. A left hand gear collapse would probably leave the right hand, generator-equipped engine operable. Speculation, but a counterclockwise groundloop and left hand gear collapse appears to be consistent with suggestions of a Noonan head injury and Earhart's ability to run the right hand engine to recharge the batteries.
-
All,
1. Where would FN have been sitting in the aircraft? At least for one flight I remember the navigator being seated in the aft cabin --- aft of the cabin fuel tanks. The reference, as I recall, mentioned notes being passed to AE across the top of the fuel tanks. Would he have been in the aft cabin? If so this would have increased the likelihood that FN would have been injured and/or trapped as the result of a hard landing?
2. Was it possible to move from the co-pilot's seat to the navigator's table in the aft fuselage? If so what kind of contortions would have been required?
3. Is there any known tendency for the Electra's fuselage to fail at a certain place as the result of hard/off-field landing? Some aircraft have structural weaknesses that seem to show up during hard landings. The B-24 had such a weakness. The fuselage would fail immediately at or just aft of the cockpit during a during a hard landing. Landings, that exhibited such, quite frequently injured or killed the flight crew. Did such a weakness exist in the Model 10E fuselage?
4. What type of personal restraints would have been installed? Were only seat belts installed or were fiive-point harnesses? What about in the navigator's seat? There is a wealth of accounts where pilot's head struck the instrument panel (or, for fighter pilots, the gun sight) when the cotton webbing of the seat belt or harness broke during a hard landing or ditching.
5. Do the drawings exist that were used to modify the interior cabin of the Electra? I'm thinking specifically those that installed the navigator's table, the seat and the fuel tanks. If available they could help us understand whether or not these structures could be expected to remain intact after a hard landing.
These questions have been nagging me for a while. If FN was seated it the aft cabin, displaced/damaged fuel tanks, chart table or seat would have increased the likelihood of entrapment and /or injury. Likewise, if he was seated in the co-pilot's seat having the fuel tanks break free would have been equally problematic. For a modern crash investigation all of these I would come under investigation. I would appreciate any information on these questions.
Jay
-
1. Where would FN have been sitting in the aircraft? At least for one flight I remember the navigator being seated in the aft cabin --- aft of the cabin fuel tanks. The reference, as I recall, mentioned notes being passed to AE across the top of the fuel tanks. Would he have been in the aft cabin? If so this would have increased the likelihood that FN would have been injured and/or trapped as the result of a hard landing?
We need a FAQ for this, if it doesn't exist already. I don't have the energy to compose one today.
Please distinguish carefully between the first and second round-the world attempts. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Earhart_Project#Background_Information)
In the first, the navigator had to work from the navigator's station in the back because there was a four-person crew from California to Hawaii and a three-person crew on the failed takeoff from Lae (http://tighar.org/wiki/Disaster_at_Luke_Field). The airframe was repaired and reconfigured (http://tighar.org/wiki/Lockheed_Electra_10E_Special_-_NR16020#Windows_come_and_go) for the second attempt by Earhart and Noonan alone.
From the Forum Archives: (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Forum/Forum_Archives/199805.txt)
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 09:25:44 EDT
From: Barbara Wiley
Subject: Noonan in cockpit
There was no room in the cockpit for Noonan. His area was in the back of the fuselage situated behind extra fuel tanks having been installed for greater fuel capacity. The "fishing pole" message system, whereby Noonan and AE communicated with written notes was necessary due to the limited space in the Electra.
When you say, "Noonan....'most of the time in the cockpit'...", I do not understand?
**************************************************************
From Ric
The idea that Noonan rode only in the back and communicated via the "fishing pole" system is myth.
There are numerous references in Last Flight to Fred being in the cockpit. For example: In the "Dakar" chapter, " (A)s we munched (peanuts) Fred and I might have been in the bleachers of a ball-game back home, instead of in the cockpit of a plane spanning remote deserts."
Sequential photos taken of AE and FN boarding the plane in San Juan, exiting the plane in Lae, and film of boarding the plane for the last takeoff in Lae, all show them both using the forward hatch. Fred always climbs in first and exits after AE.
2. Was it possible to move from the co-pilot's seat to the navigator's table in the aft fuselage? If so what kind of contortions would have been required?
Yes, it was possible. Going from front to back was necessary to access the toilet. There was an autopilot on board, but I doubt that AE would have left the front cockpit empty while taking a break to answer nature's call. [Yes, I'm speculating; no, I don't have any evidence to back up this speculation.] Noonan held a pilot's license (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Noonan.html). Even though he was not certified to fly the Electra solo, it seems reasonable to me that he would have monitored the flight while AE was in the lav or otherwise taking a break in the back of the plane.
5. Do the drawings exist that were used to modify the interior cabin of the Electra? I'm thinking specifically those that installed the navigator's table, the seat and the fuel tanks. If available they could help us understand whether or not these structures could be expected to remain intact after a hard landing.
The Harney drawings (http://tighar.org/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=51) are your best point-of-departure for answering questions like that. I don't have a set yet and doubt that I could read them very intelligently even if I did. Once you've examined them, then you could ask about his sources ...
-
Speaking of the failed takeoff in Hawaii, that didn't seem to injure anybody on the plane, and looking at the picture at Luke Field, it appears the landing gear was broken on both sides. As for Fred hitting his head, there would be no reason for the plane to come to an abrupt stop, if the landing gear was broken I assume the plane would slide, and the reef has been described as being nice and smooth, perhaps better than some landing fields. I still don't know how badly you would have to damage a propeller before the engine wouldn't run. Obviously, (so I say) if the propeller shaft was bent that would be bad, but couldn't the engine run with bent blades? I am hoping an aircraft mechanic will magically appear on the forum to answer my engine questions.
-
Here I go, replying to myself again. Rereading Ric's last post, he raises the possibility of "holes" in the reef. I thought I was assured in some prior exchange on this forum, that the reef was a wonderful place to land, no obstacles at all. So my question is, did anybody see any rough spots on the reef or cracks or holes that would possibly interfere with a nice landing?
-
... looking at the picture at Luke Field ...
Please insert the image in your post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,128.0.html) or provide a link to the page that has the image. (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,127.0.html)
-
... I thought I was assured in some prior exchange on this forum, that the reef was a wonderful place to land, no obstacles at all. ...
Please find the prior exchange and tell us where it is. Then we will be able to evaluate:
- What you said.
- What your respondent said.
- Your current interpretation of what was said.
How do I find my own posts? (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,342.0.html)
How do I find the link (URL) for a particular post? (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,382.msg3986.html#msg3986)
How do I insert links into posts? (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,127.0.html)
-
if the landing gear was broken I assume the plane would slide,
But you wouldn't be able to send radio distress calls for several days.
and the reef has been described as being nice and smooth, perhaps better than some landing fields.
It's good but it's not perfect.
I still don't know how badly you would have to damage a propeller before the engine wouldn't run. Obviously, (so I say) if the propeller shaft was bent that would be bad, but couldn't the engine run with bent blades? I am hoping an aircraft mechanic will magically appear on the forum to answer my engine questions.
I'm not an aircraft mechanic but I know a little bit about airplanes. Propellers are finely balanced. Any bend is intolerable and causes catastrophic vibration.
-
As an accident reconstrutionist I can tell you that the problem in auto accidents, especially pre-shoulder restraint days, was that the steering wheel spokes would fold back during the collision, allowing the driver's chest to contact the steering wheel hub, resulting in a flail chest injury if not a complete impalement on the steering shaft. These shafts used to be a one-piece rod from the wheel to the gearbox. They now use a collapsible joint to alleviate this. Even so, it is still common to find the rim of the wheel distorted and pushed down toward the dash, even in crashes where the driver was restrained and the airbag deployed.
There is an incredible amount of energy that is dissipated during a collision.
Agreed. (http://www.slideshare.net/nnamlu/m-r-a-p-i-n-c-i-d-e-n-t) Please ignore the first page of the slideshow. There are multiple inaccuracies in the text, but the pictures are real. The vehicle is a Force Protection Cougar (same base vehicle as UK Mastiff) and was designed to keep people alive during explosions and other impacts. Everyone did walk away from that one, but they were soldiers, not dilettantes.
Concerning the ground loop idea (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,352.msg3971.html#msg3971), do the spurs in the reef run in such a way that the right wheel would have to have skipped over a gap for the left one to be the only one caught? I'm assuming a landing toward the Norwich City with Niku to port and ocean to starboard.
-
Speaking of the failed takeoff in Hawaii, that didn't seem to injure anybody on the plane, and looking at the picture at Luke Field, it appears the landing gear was broken on both sides.
My 2 cents.
No two accidents are the same and the results vary greatly. I can speak from experience of automobile accidents in early (late 60's) era cars equipped with lapbelt only (I know, apples and oranges but to illustrate a point). I had one horrific accident where I hit a tree in a '68 Impala head-on and I would estimate my speed at about 55 at impact and walked away with a little whiplash not another scratch. Had another accident in a '67 Malibu where I hit a guard rail doing about 25 and took out the side window with my head and smashed my mouth all up (16 stitches worth) on the steering wheel. If you would have seen the 2 vehicles and had to guess which accident caused the most injury you would assuredly have picked the Impala which was totaled the Malibu was repaired and driven for another 50K before I sold it.
Same could be said for the landing at Niku and how AE and FN faired during the landing. Short of a hidden diary from the castaway stating the exact sequence of events or recovery of enough of the Electra to determine the extent of the damage, and even then would you be able to tell what damage was done during landing and what was done due to it being smashed against the reef? We are right back at "coulda, shoulda, woulda".
LTM,
Don
-
Anybody that has ever been a teen age driver knows these unpredictable variations. I think I can declare we will never know if Fred was damaged and the plane wasn't or vice versa. Even finding the plane wreckage would not likely answer that question. I just enjoy pondering scenarios that are at least possible, and I have to learn more about aviation to do that. So sometimes my questions may be dumb. Then I can use this knowledge to confuse and bore my friends.
-
Concerning the ground loop idea (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,352.msg3971.html#msg3971), do the spurs in the reef run in such a way that the right wheel would have to have skipped over a gap for the left one to be the only one caught?
The spurs and grooves are irregular but do not occur on the portion of the reef that I would consider smooth and dry enough to be "landable." If the plane did drop a wheel into a groove I think it happened later as a consequence of wave action.
I'm assuming a landing toward the Norwich City with Niku to port and ocean to starboard.
Given the prevailing easterly wind, I think a landing to the north (over the shipwreck) is more likely - but we'll probably never know.
-
So sometimes my questions may be dumb.
Only dumb question is the one not asked...
LTM,
Don
-
I think on this forum I once speculated that the Norwich City was the only shipwreck on the Phoenix Islands, but it seems I was wrong. This article on Hull Island (http://www.janeresture.com/kiribati_phoenix_group/hull.htm) states the "Makoa" was wrecked there in May 1937 and was still visible in 1938. I don't see in Ric's book where Lambrecht the search pilot mentioned this. I don't see any connection to Amelia in this, it's just a curiosity. Maybe the Makoa was just a 50 ft. powerboat. I also see where the trepangers visited for a while. Why couldn't trepangers visit Gardner occasionally? If Hull has sea cucumbers, wouldn't Gardner have them also? Would the trepangers throw up some crude shacks while they were on Gardner? Make "markers" as Lambrecht later said? I'm just questioning the assumption that no one visited Gardner around the time Amelia disappeared.
-
The trepangers are in a different article. This one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orona). Sorry.
-
I also see where the trepangers visited for a while. Why couldn't trepangers visit Gardner occasionally?
I don't know where Wikipedia article got the idea that "The island was briefly reoccupied between 2001 and 2004 by trepangers from the Gilbert Islands supported by a patrol boat of the Kiribati Navy." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orona) That "occupation" was an abortive attempt by the Republic of Kiribati to establish a commercial coconut (copra) operation on Hull (Orona) by recruiting young, unmarried people from Kiribati who would agree to work on Orona for two years. It didn't work out. BTW, there is no Kiribati Navy.
It is, of course, possible that some unknown person or persons visited Gardner around the time Earhart disappeared but if they were Pacific Islanders "trepanging" or hunting turtles or just sight-seeing, they were in violation of a British Colonial Service ban on inter-islnd canoe travel.
-
I also see where the trepangers visited for a while. Why couldn't trepangers visit Gardner occasionally?
I don't know where Wikipedia article got the idea that "The island was briefly reoccupied between 2001 and 2004 by trepangers from the Gilbert Islands supported by a patrol boat of the Kiribati Navy." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orona) That "occupation" was an abortive attempt by the Republic of Kiribati to establish a commercial coconut (copra) operation on Hull (Orona) by recruiting young, unmarried people from Kiribati who would agree to work on Orona for two years. It didn't work out. BTW, there is no Kiribati Navy.
It is, of course, possible that some unknown person or persons visited Gardner around the time Earhart disappeared but if they were Pacific Islanders "trepanging" or hunting turtles or just sight-seeing, they were in violation of a British Colonial Service ban on inter-islnd canoe travel.
The Wikipedia article was updated 13 November 2008 by someone with the Wikipedia ID of "Phinn" to insert that information about the trepangers and the "Kiribati Navy." How surprised I was to discover that the footnote identified the source of the information to be "News from the LinNix in Kiribati," with a link to a URL on TIGHAR's website! Because of the subsequent reorganization of the TIGHAR website, it took a few minutes to track down the new URL for this item (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Forum/Highlights141_160/highlights144.html#7), a Forum entry dated 6/20/01 by a forumite identified as "Christian D." The sentence that "Phinn" latched onto weakly states, "Apparently the patrol boat of the Kiribati Navy supports them." That's how easy it is to establish a "fact" via Wikipedia!
-
they were in violation of a British Colonial Service ban on inter-islnd canoe travel.
Did the trepangers use canoes? Does that mean if you had a big sailboat and you weren't an islander you could in effect do what you pleased? How did the British patrol these Phoenix islands in those days?
While I'm at it, (asking whimsical, irrelevant questions) why did someone blast another channel through the reef on Niku in 1963 as the recent maps on this forum indicate?
-
... why did someone blast another channel through the reef on Niku in 1963 as the recent maps on this forum indicate?
Cf. "The landing channel." (http://tighar.org/wiki/The_landing_channel) I don't think we have contemporaneous accounts of the creation of the landing channel. People speculate that the British created it to make the evacuation of the island easier.
-
People speculate that the British created it to make the evacuation of the island easier.
I was puzzled before, now I am puzzled on a new, higher level. Is it possible the channel was there long before 1963 and no one was interested in the least? That someone in recent decades opined that possibility (blasted in 1963) and that somehow became "fact"? If it was always there, even before J. T. Arundel, that would be another mystery. Speaking of which, according to Wikipedia, that company was never profitable in general, so to picture Hull Island as a bonanza for the investors is probably a misconception. Even in 1937. So the reason why they left Niku alone may not be as clear cut as the general assumption about dryness is, I think. Yes, I know, it's hard to connect the channel "issue" with Amelia.
For what it's worth, I found a new book, "Islanders" by Nicholas Thomas, that gives some background of the intrigue and chaos of the Pacific Islands in the 19th century. It sheds no light on Amelia's plight, though. Just good background reading.
-
... Is it possible the channel was there long before 1963 and no one was interested in the least?
It was not there when the surveys were done in the 1930s. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Category:Surveys)
That someone in recent decades opined that possibility (blasted in 1963) and that somehow became "fact"?
That the channel has been blasted out is a demonstrable fact. The exact date and motivation for the blasting is what is uncertain. TIGHAR has never said that it knows with certainty the agents, date, and motivation of the excavation.
If it was always there, even before J. T. Arundel, that would be another mystery.
Arundel began work in the Phoenix group in 1881.
(http://tighar.org/wiki/John_T._Arundel) The channel did not exist then or in the 1930s.
Speaking of which, according to Wikipedia, that company was never profitable in general, so to picture Hull Island as a bonanza for the investors is probably a misconception.
I'm not conscious of the profitability of Arundel's operations being part of the Niku Hypothesis (http://tighar.org/wiki/Niku_hypothesis). Reading between the lines, the fact that the coconut plantations on Niku were abandoned by the 1930s suggests that it was not a profitable operation.
So the reason why they left Niku alone may not be as clear cut as the general assumption about dryness is, I think.
We that the colony was abandoned in 1963 because of a long drought (http://tighar.org/wiki/Ethnohistory_of_Nikumaroro):
During the same period, however, a lengthy and destructive drought caused the belief to grow among the Phoenix colonists that the colony was a failure. Knudson describes the course of events from the perspective of the Manra colonists:
"It appears that this lengthy (drought) crisis prompted the unimane of Sydney Island to request the government to move them elsewhere. The request was not a unanimous one. There was considerable discussion of the matter, with some of the elders agreeing and some disagreeing. The young men appear not to have been in favor of moving. Those I talked to in the Solomons said they enjoyed the dry climate and felt that there was always sufficient food.
As the drought continued the elders gradually came to agree among themselves that the island was not permanently habitable. Finally in the early 1950s they sent a deputation to Tarawa. Convinced that Sydney Island had been the hardest hit by the droughts, and that there was little chance that conditions there could be much improved, the officers of the central administration determined to move the islanders elsewhere" (Knudson).
By the mid-1950s, relocation of the Manra colonists to the Solomons had begun, and by the early 1960s Orona and Nikumaroro were abandoned as well. The name Nikumaroro survives today as that of a village on Waghena Island in the Solomons, inhabited by ex-colonists and their descendants.
We know that the geography of the island does not provide long-lasting fresh water wells.
From the old Forum: (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Forum/Forum_Archives/199809.txt)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 09:19:57 EDT
From: Ted Whitmore
Subject: Ground water on land adjacent to salt water
Ground water (fresh water you can dig for) on lands near salt water, especially islands surrounded by salt water, as Niku, is dependent upon rain water falling on the land. The water soaking into the soil will hold a head pressure purely by the weight of the water contained in the soil and will hold back salt water intrusion below. This water can be obtained by wells dug or driven into the soil deep enough to get to the water but too deep you may be back into salt water.
Florida is a good example of this phenomenon; rain falling on the sand ridge that basically forms the backbone of the peninsula of the state, pushes outward and keeps the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico from intruding into the underground aquifers or water system. In the past 50 years or so the increased demand for water due to our mushrooming population, especially in the coastal areas, has depleted the available fresh water, and the pressure thereof, in the coastal areas, forcing well drilling further and further inland to obtain non-saline water. This is a very serious problem the state is facing.
The higher an island is above sea level and the better the water holding capacity of the soil, the better the chances for a good fresh water well.
Niku doesn't have any of these good qualities. The elevation above sea level at the highest point is probably less than 6 meters (my guesstimate) giving little chance for much head pressure from rainwater. The soil is about as porous as you can find, mostly broken-up coral, overlaying a coral reef substructure that undoubtedly has many salt water channels in it. Thus the report that the best water found by the natives and/or Europeans was saline almost to the point of being undrinkable.
All of the vegetation on Niku, as well as other areas of the world immediately adjacent to salt water, must have salt water/salt spray tolerance to grow there. Coconuts will grow very well so close to salt water they can't possibly have their roots in much of anything but saltwater. Scaveola (Scaveola frutescens), according to Bob Brown's Forum Email of 9/7, "-- is used widely as an ornamental in the south Florida area and paricularly along the beaches where salt resistance is important."
The thought that the Niku castaway might have had trouble finding enough fresh water does not seem like a huge stretch of the imagination.
-
Thanks, Marty. I know some of my topics are irrelevant to the Niku Hypotheses, but I am curious about the Pacific Islands in general. I just get a better picture in my mind of what the possibilities might have been if and when Amelia and Fred arrived there.
-
Did the trepangers use canoes?
There weren't any trepangers.
Does that mean if you had a big sailboat and you weren't an islander you could in effect do what you pleased?
Yes, and the comings and goings of the big sailboats in that part of the Pacific ( I can name for you if you like) were well recorded.
How did the British patrol these Phoenix islands in those days?
Nobody patrolled the Phoenix Islands.
While I'm at it, (asking whimsical, irrelevant questions) why did someone blast another channel through the reef on Niku in 1963 as the recent maps on this forum indicate?
We've never found a record of exactly who did it but because it was done at the time the colony was abandoned we presume that it was done to facilitate the evacuation. Getting anything heavy off the island without a blasted channel would be extremely dangerous.
-
I finally remembered where I got my ideas about stray boats landing on uninhabited islands in the Pacific. Without the authorities having any knowledge of these visits. Palmyra Island (http://www.strangemag.com/palmyra.html)