TIGHAR

Amelia Earhart Search Forum => Alternatives to the Niku Hypothesis => Topic started by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on February 11, 2012, 10:21:45 AM

Title: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on February 11, 2012, 10:21:45 AM
"Mid-South Man Searches for Amelia Earhart's Plane": (http://germantown.wmctv.com/news/news/69376-mid-south-man-searches-amelia-earharts-plane)

New Nauticos expedition heading out this spring.

Nice hardware--autonomous sonar subs ("Remotely Operated" seems to conflict with "Autonomous").
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 11, 2012, 11:36:00 AM
Looks like my old buddy Dave Jourdan (Nauticos) has found himself another sponsor.  More power to him.  I wish him a safe voyage but what he's looking for ain't where he's looking.  ;D

It's encouraging to see that sponsors are out there.  We just need to find one for ourselves.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 11, 2012, 11:56:14 AM

Ric
Maybe the Nauticos guys have been minitoring the ROV video thread on here and will give the Gardner reef a "look see" while they are out there in their sub.  I think it's called a "scoop".   I hope not.

Thanks for all the hard work  you guys did and are continuing to do.
Sometimes this Forum is better than a Clive Cussler Novel, Truth is indeed stranger than Fiction.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 11, 2012, 12:01:48 PM
Maybe the Nauticos guys have been minitoring the ROV video thread on here and will give the Gardner reef a "look see" while they are out there in their sub.  I think it's called a "scoop".   I hope not.

I won't be losing any sleep worrying about it.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 11, 2012, 12:14:47 PM

Ric
Maybe a cooperative effort?
Ask them to take a swing along the Reef with their sub and share what they see, or don't see?

Hey, the worst they might say is No Way?, the best is Sure.?
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 11, 2012, 04:51:46 PM
Ask them to take a swing along the Reef with their sub and share what they see, or don't see?

I'm guessing, but knowing the level of technology they need to search to 18,000 feet and the kind of ship it takes to deploy that kind of technology, they'll be spending somewhere in the neighborhood of at least $75,000 per day. Nikumaroro is ballpark 400 nautical miles from where they'll be working.  The technology they'll be using will be appropriate for searching the relatively flat ocean bottom up around Howland.  The reef slope at Niku is an entirely different environment.

Besides, they are as much convinced that they are right as we are convinced that we are right.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Randy Reid on February 11, 2012, 07:39:44 PM
My take on this is: This is a good thing.

If Nauticos doesn't find the Electra it eliminates some of the (landing?) area from speculation and will give more credibility to the TIGHAR hypo. The big plus in this scenerio is it doesn't cost TIGHAR anything and narrows down the search area.

If Nauticos finds the Electra in the "Long hypo",  the TIGHAR hypo is wrong. C'est la vie.
There will be a lot of "I told you so's". Then we can move on to another mystery. Maybe the "white bird".

Randy
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 12, 2012, 08:48:47 AM
My take on this is: This is a good thing.

I agree.

If Nauticos doesn't find the Electra it eliminates some of the (landing?) area from speculation and will give more credibility to the TIGHAR hypo. The big plus in this scenerio is it doesn't cost TIGHAR anything and narrows down the search area.

Not in any significant sense. The Pacific is a big place.

If Nauticos finds the Electra in the "Long hypo",  the TIGHAR hypo is wrong. C'est la vie.
There will be a lot of "I told you so's".

Undoubtedly - but there would still be the question, Who was the castaway of Gardner Island?

Then we can move on to another mystery. Maybe the "white bird".

I very much want to resume that search.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 12, 2012, 09:40:36 AM
And then of course that would leave the question of 'whose plane is the one TIGHAR found' then?
Jeff
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Randy Reid on February 12, 2012, 11:24:47 AM
JVH,

if you are talking about the "airplane" in the ROV stills thread. I am not convinced there is an airplane there. Some of pieces, wire or rope in the stills look a lot like debris found all over the ocean.
Somewhere in the Ameliapedia, there is a picture of the Norwich survival site. If, and I stress if, this junk was thrown off the island either by humans or natural forces, guess where it is going to end up. And this is just a tiny bit of what must have came off the Norwich wreck and from other occupants of the island.
I am hoping like everybody else that some day we will know what happened to Earhart and Noonan, but until somebody can show me something that actually looks like an aircraft part I am going to remain skeptical.

sorry for thread drift,
Randy
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 12, 2012, 11:49:32 AM
For the record, I haven't seen anything in ROV footage that is identifiable as an airplane part.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 12, 2012, 12:24:08 PM
I would dearly like to show you an airplane in the condition of the one in picture 1. Intact and resting serenely on the flat sandy bottom of the ocean, within reach of divers. In fact I can show you hundreds of plane wrecks in these conditions, you would recognise every one a s a plane.
That's not the case at Niku. The scenario is the landing on the reef and the subsequent destruction of the plane starting at the reef line and continuing over a number of years as reported by the Gilbertese settlers. Then being washed down the side of a volcanic outcrop bit by bit down to depths of 300 metres and more. The only way to recognise it as a plane is from tiny bits and pieces and/or coral/sediment covered outlines. See picture 2, you won't recognise it as an airplane but, it used to be parts from an airplane. Now cover it in sediment and coral and leave it for 75 years.
In really bad air crash investigations, 700 mph dives into ground, there's very little to be seen that you could describe as an airplane. Just a lot of aluminium in a small area where it shouldn't be is the usual diagnosis.
IMHO we are looking at airplane wreckage, in a lot of bits (not ditch and sink) it's been through a meat grinder, deteriorated and covered in sediment and coral, it's been there a long time. Time and money will tell.
(http://)
Jeff
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Randy Reid on February 12, 2012, 02:04:55 PM
JVH,

I wasn't going to reply, but I need to get my post count up so Marty will give me another star ;D.

I am not sure I could identify a torn piece of aluminum as an aircraft part, but I could give it a pretty good guess as I worked on aircraft structure for about 10 years. I also worked on a repair group where part of the job was to evaluate whether there was enough of the airplane left to salvage. Granted this was not on submerged aircraft.

Randy
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Monty Fowler on February 12, 2012, 04:14:03 PM
Heck, maybe Nauticos will up the "barrel" count by 3 or 4 ... how many 55-gallon drums were tossed over the side of ships in that part of the ocean, over the decades. The Waite search only found one. I know, my bad.

LTM, who would rather count sheep than barrels,

Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 14, 2012, 06:25:12 PM
JVH,

if you are talking about the "airplane" in the ROV stills thread. I am not convinced there is an airplane there. Some of pieces, wire or rope in the stills look a lot like debris found all over the ocean.
Somewhere in the Ameliapedia, there is a picture of the Norwich survival site. If, and I stress if, this junk was thrown off the island either by humans or natural forces, guess where it is going to end up. And this is just a tiny bit of what must have came off the Norwich wreck and from other occupants of the island.
I am hoping like everybody else that some day we will know what happened to Earhart and Noonan, but until somebody can show me something that actually looks like an aircraft part I am going to remain skeptical.

sorry for thread drift,
Randy
Ignore the wire and rope, that could be from anything. Although how it got underneath the 'aircraft' wreckage remains a mystery. If any of this stuff came from the norwich city I will be amazed, a shipyard that is so technically advanced to be using riveted aluminium structures in 1911 how cool is that. If they made ships using that technology they wouldn't even make it out of the dockyard.
Jeff ;)
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on February 17, 2012, 09:52:46 PM
"Mid-South Man Searches for Amelia Earhart's Plane": (http://germantown.wmctv.com/news/news/69376-mid-south-man-searches-amelia-earharts-plane)

New Nauticos expedition heading out this spring.


OOOPS!

From Ric: "Dave Jourdan says the announcement of Nauticos' impending return to the Pacific is a mistake.  No new sponsor.  No expedition this spring. Just a case of a reporter misunderstanding what one of his people said in an interview. Dave says the article is an 'unfortunate nuisance.' That's probably an understatement."
 
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 17, 2012, 10:51:08 PM
"Mid-South Man Searches for Amelia Earhart's Plane": (http://germantown.wmctv.com/news/news/69376-mid-south-man-searches-amelia-earharts-plane)

New Nauticos expedition heading out this spring.


OOOPS!

From Ric: "Dave Jourdan says the announcement of Nauticos' impending return to the Pacific is a mistake.  No new sponsor.  No expedition this spring. Just a case of a reporter misunderstanding what one of his people said in an interview. Dave says the article is an 'unfortunate nuisance.' That's probably an understatement."

Well I guess that means the TIGHAR ROV expedition this year is the only one going on in that neck of the woods.  Any dates set yet Marty? 
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 18, 2012, 06:30:46 AM
Well I guess that means the TIGHAR ROV expedition this year is the only one going on in that neck of the woods.  Any dates set yet Marty?

Change of plans.  No expedition this year unless somebody with a whole lot of money steps forward real soon. 
The focus this year will be to spread the word and find the sponsorship for a thorough search of the reef slope off the west end of the island.
See new topic - Earhart Search 75 (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,605.0.html)
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on February 18, 2012, 06:54:59 AM
Well I guess that means the TIGHAR ROV expedition this year is the only one going on in that neck of the woods.  Any dates set yet Marty?

The big TIGHAR event this year is the symposium on the first weekend in June, near DC (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,605.0.html).

The next proposed Niku expedition is for 2013.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 18, 2012, 10:30:29 AM

Let's not get carried away with the life cycle of some small island reef in the boondocks of the Pacific.  Let's keep our eyes on the prize (so to speak), the airplane and its recovery.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 18, 2012, 11:23:17 AM
Harry.  I think if TIGHAR had unlimited funds then both ROV and land searches should be done. The evidence gathered to date is all from land based archaeological investigation. None from any underwater searches. Jeff is making a case that if your going to the island anyway to do an ROV search then why not land an archaeology group as well.   It's not quite as simple as let's hoist a boat over the side, land and go for a walk but if you're sending a team many thousands of miles with a support ship then why not continue the land search too. Yes it's all about money and what TIGHAR can afford. But slow results (land) so far have beat fast results (ROV). And ROV costs more.  Ideally wouldn't you want to do both?
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 18, 2012, 11:47:03 AM

IRV
Unlimited funds, yes then full speed ahead on all fronts, limited funds,find the plane and ya don't need to know the life cycle of the reef to do that.   ROV with the capability of grappling something, bringing it up, looking at it, analyzing it, etc.  Asking  is it man-made>  Is it aircraft in origin, is it from an electra, etc  Go back down and get another likely piece and repeat steps, etc
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 20, 2012, 08:08:30 AM
Guys---we have it all wrong. It isnt about aircraft wreckage, or archeological digs. Its about money---alot of it. Money to continue the research, to fund another expedition, and to have the necessary things inplace for a sufficient amount of time to come to a conclusion. With  funding so hard to find, there may only be 1 more chance. 'Make it count"
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Dan Swift on February 20, 2012, 08:38:18 AM
Skepticism is fine.  But wrong place for debri from Norwich City.  But is directly under "Nessie" and where there was an eye witness of aircraft wreckage...prior to WWII. 
It is not that items can be confirmed as A/C parts, but there are things that should not be there that are consistent to A/C parts.  Shapes that are not natural.  So, hopefully funds will become available to allow a further investigation into what these things are.  One piece that could only come from the Electra and case closed....mystery solved.  Can't wait for that day. 
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 20, 2012, 06:53:16 PM
None of this options is cheap - but the cost of getting Tom King's crew on the island probably pales to that of the needed ROV effort, considering that it is somewhat embeddable with the necessary logistics.

Couple corrections.  The is no "Tom King's crew" and no "Ric Gillespie's team." There is a core group of TIGHAR members who have experience on the island but the selected teams always included qualified first-timers.  I select the teams and lead the expeditions.  Tom has directed the archaeology on several of the trips.  He won't be returning to the island for health reasons. Fortunately we have other experienced degreed archaeologists.
Embedding a ground team with a deep water search expedition is problematical.  We will probably do each as an autonomous operation.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 21, 2012, 07:42:59 AM
I'm sorry to hear of Dr. King's difficulty and hope things improve.

Apparently they have.  Tom assures me that he feels he will be able to return to the island when we go back for more terrestrial archaeology.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 21, 2012, 05:26:35 PM
Ric---If I can be really bold----what $$$$$ figure do you think it might take to embarq the necessary equipment and support teams to Niku? If you would rather wait until the symposium, I understand.
Tom
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 21, 2012, 06:26:43 PM
Ric---If I can be really bold----what $$$$$ figure do you think it might take to embarq the necessary equipment and support teams to Niku? If you would rather wait until the symposium, I understand.

A typical three-weeks on site land expedition costs about $500,000.
We figure that a conclusive deep water search will run about 3 million.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 21, 2012, 07:42:17 PM
Ok Ric---now that we know---it gives us a target to shoot for.
I ----we---appreciate it.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 21, 2012, 07:52:52 PM
I guess the level of circumstantial evidence hasn't been reached yet to convince some technology company to donate their services and equipment for the search. Imagine what "We found Amelia Earhart" as part of your business presentation could do for your corporate image. Maybe it's just the tough economy holding back possible benfactors. They'll be the ones wishing they had taken the chance when the mystery is solved and they weren't a part of it. It may take longer without major support, but the mystery will be solved. LTM- who always loved a good mystery- John
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 22, 2012, 05:24:54 AM
John--I think a big part of it is the logistical costs of getting support equipment to the middle of the Pacific. There are several corporations that build submirsibles, for example, that would LOVE to that this expedition on their resume'. But, in these times, they too are having to cut cost, including the front loading of expenses dealing with going to Nikumaroro.
BUT---the light at the end of the tunnel is, if we can show that there is a 'possiblility' tha the Electra is there, and show that there 'wasnt' any documented crashes on Niku, that certainly narrows the probability.
Seems to me that Discovery is putting their resources in reality TV now. Truckers driving on dangerous roads, etc. Well wehn TIGHAR DISCOVERS the Electra, they will certainly wish they were onboard.
Tom
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Dan Swift on February 22, 2012, 10:07:00 AM
One reason why I wonder why Bob Ballard doesn't want to be involved.  Resources and equipment already in place.  Probably a 'control' thing.  He would have to share the results, if successful, with Tighar.  Actually he would have to "play second fiddle".  May not be in his makeup. 
Or, he just may not be interested....or believe in the Tighar hypothesis.  Although, I thought I had read where he had stated something positive on that.  May have been my imagination.   
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 22, 2012, 12:08:30 PM
I had borught up Bobs name ina thread last year to Ric. Yep----is a sticky subject. Too bab too, because he has the resources, and the support of Nat Geo, and others. He knows of the logistics in the Pacific, due to his finding the remain of PT109.
Actually that might have been easier than finding the Electra. It was in a channel, not an encrused reef. Maybe the challange is too great??? Not for Tighar.
Tom
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Monty Fowler on February 22, 2012, 01:51:31 PM
Personalities ... cats ... small cages ... territories ...

And that's all I've got to say about that.

LTM, who doesn't "mark" anything,

Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 22, 2012, 07:47:44 PM
Can you say Ric how much has been raised to date for the next expedition?  I know it's cheesy but the old charity "thermometer" gives a great visual.  Perhaps if members know the position and goal it may help.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 23, 2012, 02:42:28 PM
Can you say Ric how much has been raised to date for the next expedition?  I know it's cheesy but the old charity "thermometer" gives a great visual.  Perhaps if members know the position and goal it may help.
That's a good idea Irv. Seeing progress encourages progress.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 28, 2012, 07:05:52 PM
If you'll look at Finding the Plane (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/niku7.html) on the TIGHAR website you'll see a fuel gauge that shows the current status of fund raising for the expedition.  We've raised roughly $1.5 million of the $2 million we need.  Another $500,000 to go.  We'll make it if everyone chips in what they can.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on July 08, 2012, 11:11:05 AM
Jon Thompson from Nauticos criticizes TIGHAR in an interview on WREG, Channel 3, Memphis (http://wreg.com/2012/07/06/jon-thompsons-search-for-amelia-earhart/).  He's planning an expedition for spring of 2013.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Bruce Thomas on July 08, 2012, 01:34:15 PM
Jon Thompson from Nauticos criticizes TIGHAR in an interview on WREG, Channel 3, Memphis (http://wreg.com/2012/07/06/jon-thompsons-search-for-amelia-earhart/).  He's planning an expedition for spring of 2013.
Oh, my!  How painful to watch.  Government money being wasted on Niku VII?  2-2-V-1 is from a Jap Zero?  AE was totally out of gas?  And I'm not the only one who's watched the clip ... the latest comment is signed by someone ready to blast TIGHAR -- a former Forumite.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Chris Johnson on July 08, 2012, 01:43:15 PM
Think Harry Van A may be a litle bitter about his treatment but looks like he still reads the forum (see latest debate ref Bettys note book)
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Dave Potratz on July 09, 2012, 01:09:03 PM

Shows once again how Eeeeeeeeasy it is to criticize, especially when one proceeds from inaccurately portrayed information about their "straw-man" rival.   They dismiss as "speculation" anything that contradicts their own "speculation".  It tends to say more about the naysayer than the naysayee.

I would call on (without much hope) that these rather ebullient naysayers of the TIGHAR Hypothesis will be as forthcoming and enthusiastic in their apologies IF/when TIGHAR were to locate the Electra.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on July 09, 2012, 01:17:02 PM
Dave
The good thing about being a critic is that you don't have to come up with anything better than the people you criticize. Indeed, In most cases you don't have to come up with anything at all!
 ;)
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Vahe Demirjian on December 28, 2012, 12:19:42 PM
David jourdan's next expedition to howland island is planned for spring 2013..... he better not go ahead with the expedition because the four previous expeditions to howland (which were focused on the west coast of howland island) failed to find nr16020, so it would be uneconomical for nauticos to look around howland island again, because, as stressed by tighar, the electra would have had to burn fuel fast enough to crash into the sea and sink, which is highly unlikely because AE didn't report mechanical problems with her plane.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Jerry Germann on January 28, 2017, 12:07:26 PM
Jon Thompson from Nauticos criticizes TIGHAR in an interview on WREG, Channel 3, Memphis (http://wreg.com/2012/07/06/jon-thompsons-search-for-amelia-earhart/).  He's planning an expedition for spring of 2013.

Looks like more deep water searches are upcoming soon;

http://m.wmctv.com/wmctv/db_381569/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=uAfQhiwT

http://nauticos.com/

Whatever the outcome , they should help eliminate many more miles of ocean bottom.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 28, 2017, 12:13:58 PM
Huh?  That link is to the MacPherson thread.  Where is there anything about another Nauticos search?
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Daniel R. Brown on January 30, 2017, 01:20:29 PM
Here:

http://nauticos.com/amelia-earhart-search/

"In late February a team from Nauticos with stratospheric explorer Alan Eustace and aviation pioneer Elgen Long will depart Honolulu for the vicinity of Howland Island, 1,600 miles to the southwest, to complete the deep sea search for Amelia Earhart’s lost Lockheed Electra. Adding to the work conducted during prior expeditions in 2002 and 2006, the team plans to complete a sonar survey of about 1,800 square miles of seafloor, an area believed to contain the aircraft. The expedition will use autonomous underwater technology to image the ocean floor nearly 18,000 feet below."

Dan Brown, #2408
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 30, 2017, 01:36:37 PM
Thanks Dan. 
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 11, 2017, 07:03:35 AM
For those who don't follow the TIGHAR Facebook page, interest in the current Nauticos search prompted me to offer what I hope is an unbiased explanation of the Crashed & Sank Theory.  I've reproduced it here and invite your comments.

UNDERSTANDING CRASHED & SANK

Some followers of the TIGHAR Facebook page have a hard time understanding why anyone would spend millions of dollars searching for the Earhart Electra in the deep ocean near Howland Island. Others feel that an expedition so well-funded must be well-researched.

The rationale behind the current Eustace Earhart Discovery Expedition is illustrated, but not well-explained, on the Nauticos Expedition Portal website. Although we don’t agree with it, TIGHAR is familiar with the reasoning behind the Crashed & Sank Theory in general and the current deep sea search in specific. As a service to our Facebook followers we offer this recap of the reasoning behind the search.

Crashed & Sank is based upon the assumption that the Earhart Electra ran out of fuel shortly after the last in-flight radio transmission heard by the Coast Guard cutter Itasca. In her last transmission she described where she was (“We are on the line 157 337”) and what she was doing (“Running on line north and south.”) She also said she would repeat the message on her other frequency but no further in-flight transmissions were heard. Adherents to Crashed & Sank insist that nothing further was heard because, at that moment, the engines quit from fuel exhaustion and Earhart was too busy or too upset to announce that she was going down. To explain why the Electra ran out of fuel several hours before it should have, Crashed & Sank makes assumptions about imprudent fuel management and speculative equipment failures based upon selective interpretations of Earhart's ambiguous position reports.

There are, of course, other possible explanations for no further transmissions being heard, but if you make the assumption that the plane went down very shortly after the last transmission, the question becomes where was the plane at that moment? To answer that question, Nauticos relies on something called “RENAV,” a reconstruction of the plane’s navigation based on assumptions about Noonan’s navigation and the reported strength of Earhart’s transmissions heard by Itasca. Beginning at 2:45AM local time that morning, Itasca periodically heard radio calls from Earhart. The loudness and clarity of the calls indicated how far away the plane was. Radio operators in those days rated receptions on a 1 to 5 scale, Strength 5 being the maximum. As the plane drew closer the signals got stronger. There was no meter aboard Itasca to measure the strength of receptions. The assignment of a strength number to a particular reception was a judgment call by the individual operator. On the morning of July 2, the only strength numbers recorded in the Radio Log were for the last receptions when she was closest to Howland. At that time Itasca was hearing her at Strength 5. Later, after the search had failed, strength values were assigned to her earlier transmissions based on the radio operators’ recollections.

In reconstructing the aircraft’s navigation the Eaustace/Nauticos expedition uses the recollected strength estimates for the earlier transmissions and draws conclusions about the aircraft’s distance from Howland at those times. They also make the assumption that Noonan intentionally offset his approach to Howland to the north.

The map on the Nauticos Expedition Portal website shows the plane’s theoretical course changes as it tried to find Howland, ending in presumed fuel exhaustion and a crash at sea in the area they are searching.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 11, 2017, 07:13:05 AM
"Understanding Crashed & Sank" has, so far, been read by over 16,000 people, some of whom had good questions.  I responded with a couple of explanatory postings.

A REASONED DISCUSSION OF CRASHED & SANK – PART ONE

Too often, comparisons of the various theories about the fate of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan amount to little more than “sound and fury signifying nothing.” We at TIGHAR believe – perhaps naively – that reasoned discussion is the only avenue to an informed evaluation of the proposed possibilities.

In a comment to “Understanding Crashed & Sank,” TIGHAR Facebook follower Jeff Schulze cites what he considers to be two “pluses” in favor of the Crashed & Sank theory. They are good points that are frequently misunderstood. I’ll address the first one here and the second one in a subsequent posting. My purpose is not to argue but to present clear distinctions between documented facts and selective interpretation.

Jeff feels there is “High statistical probability of crashing and sinking. This is based on: "gas is running low" within a couple hundred miles of howland (from Amelia's radio transmissions and opinion of Itasca's radio operator), the shear ocean vs. land surface area, poor visibility, being fatigued, possibly disgruntled at each other, and flying at only 1,000 feet of altitude.”

Let’s look at each of these points.

• Did Earhart really say “gas is running low”? That depends on whom you believe. The only real-time sources for what Amelia said are the two Radio Logs of USCG Itasca and, unfortunately, they do not agree. As Earhart was approaching Howland, two radio operators were on duty aboard Itasca, Radioman 3rd Class William Galten and Radioman 3rd Class Thomas O’Hare. Each sat in front of a telegraph key, a microphone, a typewriter, and a clock. They usually listened for signals using headphones but receptions could also be broadcast over a loudspeaker. They typed what they sent and what they heard into the log noting the time of each entry.
That morning, both operators were listening on Earhart’s “nighttime” frequency, 3105 kHz, and her transmissions were being broadcast over the radio room loud speaker.
At 07:40, O’Hare logged, “Earhart on now. Says running out of gas. Only ½ hour
left. Can’t hear us at all.”
At 07:42 Galten logged, “KHAQQ calling Itasca . We must be on you but cannot see you. But gas is running low. Been unable to reach you by radio. We are flying at 1000 feet.”
Both operators were clearly reporting the same transmission heard over the loudspeaker. The two-minute time discrepancy is unexplained but it could be that their clocks weren’t synchronized. Note that Galten directly quotes what he heard Earhart say while O’Hare paraphrases what he understood her to mean. Earhart was still transmitting an hour later and said nothing about running out of gas at that time, so O’Hare’s version of the message would seem to be less credible. His reference to “½ hour” may be transposed from her 06:45 transmission in which she said “Please take bearing on us and report in half hour.”

Let’s accept that, at 07:42 (or so), Earhart said “gas is running low.” Like many of Amelia’s in-flight radio reports, it’s not very helpful. How low is “running low”? We’re forced to speculate based on other information. We know that she left New Guinea with 1,100 gallons of gas. We know that, if she followed the fuel management plan designed for her by Lockheed’s Kelly Johnson, she should have had roughly 24 hours of fuel. We know that the flight to Howland was expected to take 18 to 19 hours. We know that a 20% reserve was standard for long distance flights, so 24 hours of fuel for a 19-hour flight is about right. That all makes sense.

Her comment “but gas is running low” was heard 19 hours and 12 minutes into the flight. “We must be on you but cannot see you. ” Her destination has not appeared, she doesn’t know why, she has not been able to contact Itasca, and she is now burning into her reserve. “Gas is running low” seems to me to be a perfectly appropriate comment and does not necessarily imply imminent fuel exhaustion.

• “The shear ocean vs. land surface area.” No doubt about it. Lots of ocean, not much land. If there is no evidence that the plane reached land it seems reasonable to assume it ended up in the water. If there is strong evidence that the plane reached land, the size of the ocean is irrelevant.

• “Poor visibility.” The visibility was not poor. Itasca’s Deck Log records visibility of 20+ miles (the maximum) that morning. It is, however, true that cloud shadows can make islands difficult to make out.

• “Being fatigued, possibly disgruntled at each other.” They were certainly fatigued but I’m aware of no reason to think they were disgruntled at each other.

• “Flying at only 1,000 feet of altitude.” We know from Itasca’s Deck Log that there was a deck of scattered clouds that morning, as there is almost every morning in that part of the Pacific. As any pilot can tell you, if you’re flying above a scattered cloud deck you can’t see landmarks ahead. Flying at 1,000 feet was not a sign of distress or imminent disaster.
Title: Re: Nauticos Search Continues
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 11, 2017, 07:18:21 AM
A Reasoned Discussion - Part One brought this comment for Jeff Schluze.

"Thanks for the information. Again, no arguments from me, just a desire to learn more about the subject from you.
When I said "poor visibility", I was referring to both the scattered cloud cover that you mentioned, as well as them flying at only 1,000 ft. I'm not suggesting that the 1,000 ft. altitude was any sign of distress. Do you know what the ceiling height was that day? I assumed since they were choosing to fly at 1,000 ft, the ceiling must have been low. I know from doing a little flying myself just how little you can see at that low of an altitude.
As far as being disgruntled, do you feel there is any validity to the story (as shown in the movie "Amelia") of Noonan drinking the night before the flight and Amelia being upset about it? Or is that just Hollywood BS?
I'm looking forward to "part two", addressing the lack of radio transmissions in the time period I mentioned.
Thanks for all of your efforts TIGHAR"

To which I replied:

The story about Noonan getting drunk the night before surfaced many years later. It is not mentioned in any of the contemporary accounts of their stay in Lae. Earhart's comment "personnel unfitness" in a telegram to her husband has often been taken out of context to mean that Noonan was drinking. Here's what really happened

Earhart's original plan was to takeoff for Howland Island the day after she arrived in Lae (June 29). Early the next morning she sent a message to Itasca saying she would depart at midday if the weather forecast reached her in time, but a few minutes later she changed her mind. She sent a telegram to her husband saying:
“Radio misunderstanding and personnel unfitness probably will hold one day."
What Earhart meant by “radio misunderstanding” is obvious. During the previous day’s flight from Australia, confusion about frequencies had prevented her from establishing radio contact with Lae. The misunderstandings would have to be sorted out and the radios tested before she could undertake the long and difficult flight to Howland.

Her reference to “personnel unfitness” seems equally clear. Amelia’s wire to her husband was sent at 6:30 AM local time in Lae. The previous day’s eight-hour flight from Australia had capped a week of early mornings and frustrating delays. It is hardly surprising that Earhart and Noonan did not feel up to immediately setting off on a journey that was expected to take a minimum of eighteen hours.

As for the Hilary Swank film, the less we say about that the better. The ghost of Fred Noonan will haunt the author of that screenplay to his grave.