Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 34   Go Down

Author Topic: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937  (Read 444514 times)

Chris Johnson

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Trying to give a fig but would settle for $100,000
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #150 on: June 28, 2012, 04:36:45 PM »

   This is just one scenario, of what I would think should be very many scenarios, that better answers the question about how the artifacts got to the seven site, than the Amelia Earhart as the castaway of the seven site theory does.
   
   All the artifacts that we have found at the seven site could easily have gotten there without the existence of a  castaway. 
 occam’s razor ?

Tom King made much out of the many clam shells found at the seven site because they had not been opened in the native fashion but in the standard American fashion so Eahart must have been a castaway opening those clam shells. I was born and raised in Chicago and I have no idea of how to open a clam shell, American or otherwise. Amelia was born and raised in Atchison Kansas, just down the street from Chicago, so why would anybody think she knew the standard American way to open a clam? But of all those Coasties, I'll bet that some were from New England so it is much more likely that it was the Coasties that had the traditional Down East Clam Bake at the seven site than Earhart.

gl

GLP

can't lay my hands on the exact reference as i'm between locations but I have recently read about AE digging for and eating oysters/clams the American way!!
« Last Edit: June 28, 2012, 05:01:19 PM by Chris Johnson »
Logged

Jon Romig

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 96
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #151 on: June 28, 2012, 04:57:22 PM »

   This is just one scenario, of what I would think should be very many scenarios, that better answers the question about how the artifacts got to the seven site, than the Amelia Earhart as the castaway of the seven site theory does.
   
   All the artifacts that we have found at the seven site could easily have gotten there without the existence of a  castaway. 
 occam’s razor ?

GLP

cn't lay my hands on the exact reference as i'm between locations but I have recently read about AE digging for and eating oysters/clams the American way!!
Tom King made much out of the many clam shells found at the seven site because they had not been opened in the native fashion but in the standard American fashion so Eahart must have been a castaway opening those clam shells. I was born and raised in Chicago and I have no idea of how to open a clam shell, American or otherwise. Amelia was born and raised in Atchison Kansas, just down the street from Chicago, so why would anybody think she knew the standard American way to open a clam? But of all those Coasties, I'll bet that some were from New England so it is much more likely that it was the Coasties that had the traditional Down East Clam Bake at the seven site than Earhart.

gl

I don't know where I saw it but it was somewhere on this site - that AE learned to open and eat clam on the US East Coast. Having done so myself I can attest to the distinctive way you open a clam on the East Coast (at the hinge, especially Quahogs), consistent with what was found at the Seven site.

The interesting question is: how many other places in the world are clams opened this way? If few or none, that is another piece of evidence.
Jon Romig 3562R
 
Logged

Chris Johnson

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Trying to give a fig but would settle for $100,000
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #152 on: June 28, 2012, 05:00:26 PM »

Thats right  :)
Logged

john a delsing

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Minnesota Johnny D.
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #153 on: June 28, 2012, 06:23:45 PM »

I think I agree with Gary LaPook that probably many 'coasties' were from the New England area and opened clams 'the American way'. If Amelia also knew how to open clams the American way, then I guess that is really overwelling 'evidence', atleast to some. With fish bones at the site, let's see if we can find out if Amelia ever ate a fish, I'm sure none of the coasties or settlers did. To me that would really seal the deal. Shall we say "Mystery Solved?"
The Earth is Full
 
Logged

john a delsing

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Minnesota Johnny D.
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #154 on: June 28, 2012, 10:16:47 PM »

    Since there are still some TIGHAR members that can not, or will not, give up on Amelia not being the seven site castaway, I propose one last trip back to the site where those members can dig to their hearts content. Since Amelia is still loved though out this country, I think we can pay for this one last expedition (till the next one) by taking a page from Ric’s play book and getting a film crew to go with us. Not a Discovery type crew, rather a Hollywood type movie crew. While our boys dig their hearts out, the crew can film, and upon their return, in every neighborhood theater though out this great land, we should have:



NOW PLAYING !

THE  SEVEN  SITE  CASTAWAY of  NIKUMORO

Staring   MADONA  as  the lovable AMELIIA

Fred ‘the nerd’ Noonan played by Gary ‘the nerd’ LaPook
 
Ric G. as Commissioner  Gallagher of the PISS core


Casting of which Tighar members will play the Nukuoro Crabs roles is being handled by Andrew as he screens your latest forum posts
The Earth is Full
 
« Last Edit: September 06, 2012, 08:48:46 PM by john a delsing »
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #155 on: June 28, 2012, 10:49:00 PM »

No wonder you weren't any more accurate. Look at all that turning you did. LOL

Sounds like you haven't completely lost your touch.
Ya, I was getting dizzy.

gl
Logged

Andrew M McKenna

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 682
  • Here I am during the Maid of Harlech Survey.
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #156 on: June 29, 2012, 03:14:50 AM »

Since the discussion about eating clams is getting pretty far off topic, I've posted my response in the Castaway Survival thread found here
http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,601.0.html

Andrew
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #157 on: June 30, 2012, 04:03:51 AM »

Gary, here is, for your edification, a link to the latest version of the LAND SEARCH AND RESCUE ADDENDUM to the National Search and Rescue Supplement to the International Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue Manual, Version 1.0, November 2011.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg534/nsarc/Land_SAR_Addendum/Published_Land%20SAR%20Addendum%20(1118111)%20-%20Bookmark.pdf
Thanks for the link and I will read it with much expectation later today! The prior links you posted only took me to the 2001 version and claimed that that was still the current version and the other link went only to the 2005 CAP document. I have spent a lot of time with the maritime search provisions of the 1986 National SAR Manual that does use the "sweep width" method of figuring POD which does make sense. I am interested to see if in the 2011 manual it manages to apply that concept to inland searches as this deals with the problem, that I pointed out on many occasions, that the prior inland search guidance did not deal with the issue of the type of object being sought, a person, a plane, a car...( I wish you had posted this link yesterday so that I would not have had to read through that other 200 page document :P

gl

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You got me again! I feel like Charlie Brown and Woody is Lucy holding the football.

I went to this document recommended by Lucy, er I mean Woody, expecting to see some new information on "sweep width" to apply to searches on land that Woody implied had replaced the POD tables I have been relying on. This new document is dated 2011 and incorporates the search science advocated in the prior 2001 document that Lucy tricked me into reading. They had 10 years to develop the "sweep width" tables to incorporate in this new manual, and, guess what, NO such tables are found in the new, 278 page,  manual. So in spite of it saying that the "sweep width is the most important factor" it provides no such data for a searcher to use in planning and evaluating a search on land.


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!

The 1986 manual I have been referring to does have such tables for marine searches (I am attaching one of them for illustration) and there needs to be such tables for inland searches but none are provided. So there is still no better guidance than the POD tables that I rely on as still found in the 2005 CAP manual which show a high probability that Earhart would have been spotted IF she had been on Gardner. It is possible that such "sweep width" tables will show an even higher probability that they would have been spotted and not the other way around. I'm still waiting for someone to point me to a definitive official manual that says otherwise.

gl
« Last Edit: July 08, 2012, 12:40:38 AM by Gary LaPook »
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #158 on: June 30, 2012, 07:28:00 AM »

Gary, I too was a little disappointed with what was in the new manual since it does little, if anything, to settle our disagreements. HOWEVER I don't recall saying anything about the document having any new POD tables or about anything else contained therein. I only recall making it available to you.
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
« Last Edit: June 30, 2012, 08:03:55 AM by C.W. Herndon »
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #159 on: June 30, 2012, 11:29:06 AM »

Gary, I too was a little disappointed with what was in the new manual since it does little, if anything, to settle our disagreements. HOWEVER I don't recall saying anything about the document having any new POD tables or about anything else contained therein. I only recall making it available to you.
Right. If you dangle a worm on a hook in front of a fish, it's not you fault if the fish bites on it  :D

gl
« Last Edit: June 30, 2012, 11:34:25 AM by Gary LaPook »
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #160 on: June 30, 2012, 11:44:18 AM »

At least you haven't lost your sense of humor.

Someone has to try to keep you challenged. That's hard to do.

I love that "Lucy" thing.
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #161 on: July 01, 2012, 04:22:59 AM »



Another purpose for the flight was to take some celestial observations. I chose the day so that the sun and moon would be properly placed to allow getting a fix, unfortunately I didn't allow for the sun being so high, 79°, and the cabin roof prevented getting any sun shots. I did take two observations of the moon, one each with the MA-2 and the A-7 bubble octants. I took ten shots with the A-7 and the average altitude was 17°54' which produced an intercept (error) of 5.7 NM away from my GPS position. I did a two minute average with the MA-2 and the altitude was 20° 00' which produced an intercept (error) of 6.4 NM away from the actual GPS at the time the observation was taken. (This is labeled as "toward" since it was toward the direction of the moon.)

I'm pretty happy with these results because keeping the plane in steady flight is critical for accuracy and I was flying solo without an autopilot so I had to put the plane on heading, level the wings, line up the moon in the octant for a few seconds, check to see if the wings were still level and straighten them up back on heading if necessary, observe the moon for a few more seconds, repeat... plus there is always the problem using the moon when it is not full since you have to estimate where the center of the moon should be and place that in the center of the octant's bubble.

So 6 NM accuracy with all those impediments which is within the expected 7 NM uncertainty of bubble octant observations taken in flight was quite satisfying.

See the attached plots. The red line is the track of the plane as recorded by my GPS

gl

Here is a link to a youtube video of my using the MA-2 to shoot the moon. It was taken with a video camera that is mounted on my headset.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5t73yUvVCrg&feature=youtu.be

gl
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #162 on: July 01, 2012, 08:02:42 AM »

Good video Gary. Being both pilot and navigator at the same time has to be tough. Reminds me of the old "one armed paper hanger" quote.

Was the Skycatcher domestic or Chinese?
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #163 on: July 02, 2012, 03:24:17 AM »

Good video Gary. Being both pilot and navigator at the same time has to be tough. Reminds me of the old "one armed paper hanger" quote.

Was the Skycatcher domestic or Chinese?
Another link, this time to using a Pioneer octant, the same kind that Noonan had.

gl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEW2mzsygbs&feature=youtu.be
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: FAQ: Colorado / Lambrecht Search, 9 July 1937
« Reply #164 on: July 02, 2012, 07:56:03 AM »

Good video Gary. Being both pilot and navigator at the same time has to be tough. Reminds me of the old "one armed paper hanger" quote.

Was the Skycatcher domestic or Chinese?
Another link, this time to using a Pioneer octant, the same kind that Noonan had.

gl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEW2mzsygbs&feature=youtu.be

Doesn't show what you were doing nearly so well as the other.

You didn't answer my question about the Skycatcher. I was really curious about whether the Chinese had corrected their problems yet.
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 34   Go Up
 

Copyright 2021 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP