Post-loss Radio Messages--Overview: Difference between revisions
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
=== Battery Life === | === Battery Life === | ||
"Both batteries were rated at 85 ampere-hours. If both were at full charge on arrival at Niku -- a reasonable assumption -- there would have been enough charge for about 90 minutes of transmission time. The total transmission time required for all of the credible post-loss signals is 451 minutes."<ref>[[Brandenburg]] to EPAC, 1 April 2009. The careful reader will understand that the evaluation of post-loss messages continues and that, therefore, the total number of minutes to be accounted will vary with the estimate of credibility as the study continues.</ref> | "Both batteries were rated at 85 ampere-hours. If both were at full charge on arrival at Niku -- a reasonable assumption -- there would have been enough charge for about 90 minutes of transmission time. The total transmission time required for all of the credible post-loss signals is 451 minutes."<ref>[[Brandenburg]] to EPAC, 1 April 2009. The careful reader will understand that the evaluation of post-loss messages continues and that, therefore, the total number of minutes to be accounted will vary with the estimate of credibility as the study continues.</ref> | ||
== Names in the news == | |||
=== Los Angeles hoaxers === | |||
* Walter McMenamy | |||
* Karl Pierson | |||
"Two ham operators in Los Angeles - Walter McMenamy and Karl Pierson - were responsible for a great many of the first reports of post-loss signals but the pattern of what they said they heard is completely at odds with what was being heard in the search area and all the information they claimed to have gotten from Earhart could have been had by simply monitoring Coast Guard radio traffic. McMenamy and Pierson were almost certainly perpetrating a hoax - perhaps with the best of intentions (i.e. to encourage a large Navy search) or perhaps just to puff their own reputations as hot-shot radio experts, or some of both - who knows? The point is that the patterns of what they reported hearing - the times, the frequencies, the content - sticks out like a sore thumb when viewed in the context of the other reports."<ref>[[Gillespie]], [http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/forum/Forum_Archives/200411.txt Forum, 1 Nov 2004].</ref> | |||
* Howard Coons | |||
* Ernest Henderson | |||
* W. E. Tippin | |||
== References == | |||
<references /> | |||
== Related material == | == Related material == | ||
Revision as of 19:08, 30 June 2010

A complete exposition and analysis of all reported radio contacts with the lost aircraft is to be found in Finding Amelia, by Ric Gillespie; the book contains a wealth of primary sources in a research library on a companion DVD.
- Betty’s Notebook. Notes taken by a teen-age girl in July of 1937 while listening to a short-wave radio.
- Dorothea Garsia Diary, Nauru, 1934-1938.
- The Pan American Airways Memos describe the efforts Pan Am made to take bearings on signals apparently coming from the downed aircraft.
Technical considerations

- Harmony and Power: Could Betty Have Heard Earhart on a Harmonic?
- Radio Direction Finder Analysis.
- The Radio Riddle.
- Post-Loss Signal Statistics with Tide Information.
- Post Loss Radio Signals (October 2000).
- WE-13C Transmitter Harmonic Power Output.
Battery Life
"Both batteries were rated at 85 ampere-hours. If both were at full charge on arrival at Niku -- a reasonable assumption -- there would have been enough charge for about 90 minutes of transmission time. The total transmission time required for all of the credible post-loss signals is 451 minutes."[1]
Names in the news
Los Angeles hoaxers
- Walter McMenamy
- Karl Pierson
"Two ham operators in Los Angeles - Walter McMenamy and Karl Pierson - were responsible for a great many of the first reports of post-loss signals but the pattern of what they said they heard is completely at odds with what was being heard in the search area and all the information they claimed to have gotten from Earhart could have been had by simply monitoring Coast Guard radio traffic. McMenamy and Pierson were almost certainly perpetrating a hoax - perhaps with the best of intentions (i.e. to encourage a large Navy search) or perhaps just to puff their own reputations as hot-shot radio experts, or some of both - who knows? The point is that the patterns of what they reported hearing - the times, the frequencies, the content - sticks out like a sore thumb when viewed in the context of the other reports."[2]
- Howard Coons
- Ernest Henderson
- W. E. Tippin
References
- ↑ Brandenburg to EPAC, 1 April 2009. The careful reader will understand that the evaluation of post-loss messages continues and that, therefore, the total number of minutes to be accounted will vary with the estimate of credibility as the study continues.
- ↑ Gillespie, Forum, 1 Nov 2004.
Related material
- Finding Amelia--a book by Ric Gillespie based on an analysis of all available post-loss radio messages.