Print

[Walter Runck]

You've been reading Fred Goerner's book.  There's no such thing as a "Wasp Senior." The P&W R1430 was known as the "Wasp."  The Model 10A Electra carried the smaller R985 which was dubbed the "Wasp Junior" but nobody ever referred to the big engine as a "Wasp Senior." All Model 10Es were built with P&W R1430 S3H1 Wasp engines and NR16020 was wearing the same engines it was built with when it disappeared.

Guilty as charged.  Read it, enjoyed the background and travelogue, but came away unconvinced.   I get tickled by kooks that won't accept a simple, non-conspiritorial explanation for something and just can't resist tweaking them on occasion.  I should learn how to use the little smiley faces so they know when I'm putting tongue in cheek.    OK, I tried.  The middle one is supposed to be an eye-roller, but that one doesn't seem to work.  Maybe a wink instead  .  There, that's better.

Next up, the Longs' book.  Since they put their conclusion up front, has anyone checked the bottom of the Pacific Ocean for the Electra?  Oughtta be right there!  

[Thom Boughton]

The question is,
Did the wheel go into the groove during the landing, resulting in the scenario you describe?
Or did the plane land safely higher up on the reef and later get washed into the groove?

The question indeed!  Alas, in either case we have here a wonderful illustration of the fallacies of Armchair Hypothesy (or more precisely it's latter-day cousin Keyboard Hypothesy).

You see, I was of the notion that Nessie was closer in to the beach.  Yes, I have seen the B&W of Nessie, but I am also aware that perspective in older photographs can be quite misleading.  I guess it was the footage in the Discovery Special of the area which fooled me. I would have thought the water level even at low tide would be much deeper if very far from the high-water line.

Obviously, my attempt was to tie all of the (probably) known facts into one nice neat bundle and bow. But perhaps I make the same mistake as others in attempting to attribute FN's injuries to the actual act of Arrival while leaving AE et. al. relatively unscathed (still think my ground loop scenario yet takes the day on that, though probably by some different unknown mechanism. Multi-engine taildraggers are twitchy animals even under the best of conditions.)

Although, as terribly bad luck seems to have been the order of that day, it could just as easily have been that we landed safe and sound and rolled to a stop.  But when we dropped out of the doorway we landed on slippery reef and fell whilst hitting our head on the doorway going down.

...or something even sillier. 

Oh well....I guess Occam now stands alone.  Was a nice story if nothing else, I guess.

You've been reading Fred Goerner's book.  There's no such thing as a "Wasp Senior." The P&W R1430 was known as the "Wasp."  The Model 10A Electra carried the smaller R985 which was dubbed the "Wasp Junior" but nobody ever referred to the big engine as a "Wasp Senior." All Model 10Es were built with P&W R1430 S3H1 Wasp engines and NR16020 was wearing the same engines it was built with when it disappeared.

Wasp Anythings are terribly noisy beasts, though.  I guess I had always just assumed the acts of recharging batteries and making transmissions necessarily had to be separate in order to get the clearest possible transmission.  Yet another of several arguments that we were relatively high on the beach, at least for awhile.






....TB

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

Next up, the Longs' book.  Since they put their conclusion up front, has anyone checked the bottom of the Pacific Ocean for the Electra?  Oughtta be right there!  

The Waitt Institute for Discovery has.

[Walter Runck]

Personally, if I'm trying to contact someone to save my life on a radio in the middle of nowhere, I'd prefer to do it without a radial running a few feet away

From the AE Hypothesis:

"On the evening of July 2nd, the radio station on the island of Nauru (which had heard Earhart’s inflight transmissions the night before) hears “Fairly strong signals, speech not intelligible, no hum of plane in background, but voice similar to that emitted from plane in flight last night.” (Telegram dated 3 July 1937 addressed to Secratary of State, Washington reporting transmission heard on Nauru.)"

Inconclusive, but it seems like trying to coordinate tides and transmission times, while it might be supportive, would also be inconclusive.

On another thought, if the Electra wasn't stuck at the end of the landing runout, is the terrain such that they would have been able to taxi up to the beach?  If yes, it seems odd they would have left it out in the sea.  If no, the choice would have been to try a takeoff or leave it out there and wait.

[Ric Gillespie]

On another thought, if the Electra wasn't stuck at the end of the landing runout, is the terrain such that they would have been able to taxi up to the beach?  If yes, it seems odd they would have left it out in the sea.  If no, the choice would have been to try a takeoff or leave it out there and wait.

Taxiing any closer to the beach was out of the question.  The reef surface beginning about 150 feet shoreward from the reef edge is jagged and deeply pitted.  No point in taking off without more fuel even if you've figured out where you are.  No choice but to call for help and hope that somebody hears you.

[Thom Boughton]

I think Occam would however approve of Ric's approach - 'door number 1' is always preferable, if it's the right door. 

Well, the scenario described above was my own concoction based upon what we (think) we know.  It was meant as a means of tying all such factors into one nice neat bundle.  However, it was also predicated on 'Nessie' being moderately close to the beach....which, apparently, it's not.  A bad assumption on my part.

Therefore, as such, the lot of it is crap. 

I still submit that it's a sucker bet they landed someplace on that section of reef (Nessie to Norwich).  From the photographs it is by far the best, if not only, game in town.  But the rest is crap.

Even so, there clearly is only a narrow band of reef upon which the Electra could have come to a stop.  Too far out (as Nessie seems to be) and it doesn't last long enough to make all of the post-loss radio transmissions before being swept away (which indeed disproves my little story).  Too close in....and it stays there almost forever (possibly even until today) and thereby would have been observed by Lambrecht & Co. during their flyover six days hence. But, as we all know, it had been swept away by that time.

All of which is not to say that it couldn't have happened the way I described.  It's all still quite plausible...only occuring at some position closer to the beach.  However, without any wreckage sightings other than 'Nessie'.....the story moves from being conjecture to mere pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

So, although Occam favours simplicity in theory above all else....he also tends to favour known facts.  SWAGs need not apply.

As before, an interesting mental exercise....but worth little else.


Oh well!




....TB

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

But, as we all know, it had been swept away by that time.

Claiming that we all "know" this may be a little strong.

IF the Niku hypothesis is true, THEN the airplane must have gone into deep water sooner or later--otherwise, it would have been found by someone in the years since 1937. 

To put it in other words, a corollary of the Niku hypothesis is that the plane must have ended up in the deep.

[Thom Boughton]

But, as we all know, it had been swept away by that time.

Claiming that we all "know" this may be a little strong.

This is true.  And perhaps an expedient (if not precise) choice of words. 

However, I should think that one must at some point decide which items they believe compleatly...and which they do not. For if you don't believe in anything, then you might as well stay home and look for the Electra at Disneyworld.  The art is to not over-step in what you believe unquestionably.

As I have said elsewhere in the past, I have come late to this party. For a very long time I was a fence-sitter on the matter of the Niku theory....and for quite some time (x being equal to years) prior to that I even scoffed at the notion in total.  I have never even been particularly enamoured with AE herself, what keeps me in the game is the mystery and the puzzle.

Although I admit to being quick to toss about possible scenarios (such as this last one), none are meant as 'this is definitely what happened.' (would hope I wouldn't be so silly as to say that, anyway)  More the intent is to throw out ideas in hopes that others might add or subtract from them.  In either event, I do so based on experience gathered from an entire career spent with the FAA and a number of years of professional flying prior (including a certain amount of formal training in celestial nav).

What is my personal baseline at present?  After spending a great amount of time thinking it was all just fanciful at best, the more I examine the bits and pieces of other supporting evidence (period navigational charts, post-loss transmissions, island-found items, etc)....I have crossed the line, fell off the fence, however you wish to say it.  I personally believe the Niku Theory in one form or other to be almost necessarily correct. And as you've said....in for a penny in for a pound.  Once you subscribe to that general theory, there is no getting away from the swept away phase which would come at some later point. 

Furthermore, based only upon available more recent photographs (which admittedly may therefore be misleading), unless there has been a radical change in the island shorelines I would be TERRIBLY surprised if they landed on any other location on the island.  If I was over that island near low tide and looking for long, wide, smooth, and dry....that section of beach Norwich-to-Nessie (excepting the lagoon inlet) just screams at you.  While other sections do not appear impossible, neither do they appear as good.  And I certainly would not pick any other section just to lessen my walk to an observed pond of unknown drinkability.  No...if I'm overhead looking to get down with the least amount of fuel spent and injury sustained, I would do exactly as I describe above for all the same reasons ...hopefully forgoing the ground loop of course. 




....TB