Was Nauru light 56 METERS?
It so daunting to face you Gatling-gunners on this forum; well this is my theory!
Fred was a professional in seamanship (ocean masters license, any tonnage, any waters) and navigation (head of PAA/PanAm navigation).
1) Whilst he, like any navigator, would wish to utilize any and every useable source to potentially enhance mid-course accuracy, he would be fully wise to the uncertainties of identifying another vessel, be it the Ontario or Myrtlebank. Without such absolutely positive identification he would not alter course regardless of the information.
2) He knew Nauru/Pleasant* was one reliable source; islands don’t move. He obviously did not know Nauru specifics hence his requesting a report inclusive of light height; very professional. He had no grounds to challenge the height of 5600ft, did he? There are over 1500 peaks in the world over 5000ft, some 200 of which are in the western pacific, and an even greater percentage along west USA, and throughout the Pacific ocean**. Most of the pacific islands are sea-volcanoes rising steeply for thousands of feet, Nauru would have fitted that bill. He didn’t know otherwise.
3) Equally nobody else who handled the Nauru telegraphed report could have challenged its contents or the information would have been corrected. Had Fred been alerted to its flawed integrity he would have immediately requested a further and confirming report, and informed AE ‘no departure’ until he had this vital information.
4) He would have been adamant they could not possibly undertake 2500miles to a dot-island without mid-course evaluation of head & cross winds. Nauru fitted this bill perfectly, with a light visible over 100miles (at altitude), affording an excellent 100 to 200mile baseline to evaluate the wind. Even with positive identification Ontario and Myrtlebank lights would not.
5) The Nauru report likely originated with the one multi-roled weather reporter - radio operator. A islander intimate with the recent German occupation which ended 1919. The Germans lived and married on the island. They would have introduced metrication, and specifically not imperial measurements! With two or more prior generations having been educated in metric, metric would be the norm. The subsequent and very-distant imperial treaty ‘owners’ of Nauru would not have changed the system, they would not have even bothered about Nauru; they had far too much else to attend to after WWI.
6) During German ownership they likely upgraded, possibly founded, the light. With the airstrip & port on the south/west end of the island, Yaren district, a good navigational light was essential, and a simple ‘sea-level’ beacon for shipping on the north end. Quite understandable for the light to have been situated on the south end near the top of the 200ft hill above the airstrip. Not to be confused with the present day tall (TV/communication?) mast further west which serves the populace.
7) The Yaren light would probably have been on a short mast above the radio station at 56METERS, circa 187ft, above sea level. Not 5600ft, not 560ft. 560ft was a previously speculative, and subsequently unsubstantiated, suggestion on this forum. Why would Nauru want a light on a massive 360ft high mast? A light just above the highest point of the island circa 200ft would be visible all-round at distance; and if they did have such a light it would preclude the need for the small beacon light on the north coast.
To Morse transmit 56m he would send the ‘5’ and ‘6’ in normal Morse then dash dash for M. However as this was included in a weather/position report the door was wide open for the receiving operator, not expecting an M, to take the dash dash as the then common operators’ abbreviation of a ‘long-dash’ ‘long-dash’ for subsequent/trailing zeros. Hence he misinterpreted this as 5600.
9) After receipt and before dissemination to their prestigious customer Earhart, someone attempting to be prudent checked the message for clarity. Possibly a routine procedure, as some of the operators may well have not been proficient in English spelling and a superior/overseer checked all important messages. So someone who knew the ‘world-standing’ of Earhart and knowing the vagaries & potential ‘inefficiencies’ of the laid-back lifestyle of so many Pacific populations at that time, very wisely, and routinely, checked and embellished the message. This may sound strange to many readers in this over-educated present-day but 77 years ago in very hot climates, with slow life-tempo and semi- or uneducated populations life was very different. Obviously to him 5600 could only have been feet (no other unit works) and so the message was seemingly-rightfully, and with the best intentions, enhanced! To Fred the message would have appeared definitive (. . . until he subsequently discovered the position error!).
10) Fred’s course would unquestionably have been planned to use Nauru light. Why would he have asked for such specific light-height information otherwise? Ontario & Myrtlebank were not pivotal, purely supplementary.
11) Next time I plan to submit regarding the huge navigational error that 5600ft Nauru light could have introduced to an unsuspecting Fred. Possibly ending up way south of Howland not well north!
12) That’s all TIGHAR . . . I’ll turn my PC off now to duck the Gatling onslaught! The above is meant with most sincere intentions and NOT in any way to decry any other contributors input. It’s is NOT an attack on anybody. I HAVE read a lot on TIGHAR and intend to be accurate . . . some failure is inevitable, my apologies. Roger
* surprisingly Nauru/Pleasant does not appear as a 'Category' heading in the TIGHAR database/index.
**
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-prominent_peak
