Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:17:07 EDT From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Int'l sextant arson It is definitely good, sound research! Remember too that to replicate the results, you need to have the same conditions, i.e., angle of the sun (Lat/long/season) to get the same solar ray intensity. Anyone in the southern hemisphere have a sextant and a paper can label to try it with? Of course, if you get a fire started with same at a more northerly position, the Niku fire scenario would seem to be a cakewalk!--Remember only YOU can prevent forest fires!--Gene Dangelo :) ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:19:55 EDT From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Noonan - dehydration Point well taken! Amebic dysentery would do it pretty fast! Heck, the possibility of contaminants is so very high, even without injury, one wouldn't last REAL long. Then again, what are the odds that only one of them would be contaminated? We can only speculate, I suppose at this point. I do appreciate your taking the time to comment! Sorry, my syntax was not the best. I didn't mean that Fred may have been drinking ON the island. I was intending to suggest that he didn't drink AT ALL!! I suggested that someone with an alcohol problem may have already had enough ethanol in his system PRIOR to the distress to have dehydrated him to some extent, and thus hasten his demise. The fact that the evidence suggested that he may have survived her, in my mind, tended to discount him having an alcohol problem, perhaps. Of course, if your friend was dying by your side, or even if a stranger was dying by your side, only the shallowest of individuals would go off and drink, even if a case of booze washed ashore at that moment, I would think!--I Hope I cleared this up !--Gene Dangelo ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:30:35 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Noonan - Mary Bea and the boat >Then she said "Maybe she met Harry (Ireland) on the boat, I don't >remember too well, it was a long time ago" In Don's original email with her, she said they (Fred/Mary) met on a boat and she used to go visit them in Santa Barbara. I think she is definitely confusing Ireland with Fred. Fred and Mary never lived in SB before his disappearances. They had an Oakland residence and Mary Bea's Oakland business. Mary did go to SB in 1937 according to the 1978 obit in the SB paper, obviously after July. Blue skies, jham #2128 ************************************************************** From Ric Okay. That makes sense. *************************************************************** From Jackie To all Mary met Harry on the boat returning from Honolulu about April time on the Matson liner the Lurline. 1938 Jackie ************************************************************** From Ric Ta da! A case of too many husbands and too many boats. What's the source on this Jackie? ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:11:06 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Bones speculation OK, I'll take a stab at a scenario. I've been thinking about all this, and drifting toward the same speculation as Vern's. Suppose you're right, Ric, and what AE and FN do is circumnavigate the island after whatever happens to the Electra happens. For any of a zillion reasons, Fred's weakening, and he dies next to the fire at Aukaraime. Amelia's been carting her extra shoes along because, as you say, she really needs them, but upon finding Fred gone, or perhaps when he's just in extremis, she gets wrought up and heads out in a desparate search of the last piece of the island they haven't looked at, hoping to find SOMETHING to save herself, and perhaps him. She leaves her extra shoes in the process. Or, as you've speculated, the shoes get scorched in the fire; perhaps she can't wear them, or one of them, any more. So her shoes, or one of them, winds up on Aukaraime, and her body winds up elsewhere. There: unsubstantiated hypothesis #1,723.5(a). LTM TK ************************************************************** From Ric Okay. To my mind #1,723.5 (a); Fred ain't dead yet, works better than #1,723.5 (b); Fred's dead when AE pushes on. If he's already dead she might be too weak to bury him but why doesn't she take the box and bottle along with her? If, on the other hand, he is merely too weak or sick to continue we have the classic situation that we've all seen in a hundred movies. She has made him as comfortable as she can. He has the last of the emergency rations, some birds and a turtle, a little fire, and a bottle of water. She takes the other survival gear they salvaged from the plane (a canteen, a knife, whatever) and continues on in the hope of finding a source of water, a convenience store, something. She intends to come back for him, but never does. Which, of course, raises the obvious question - what became of Amelia? Was her body ever found? Or is there another similar site somewhere in Tekibeia district? Try this one. After the debacle of Gallagher's adventure with the bones, and his subsequent death, what would the locals have done if they later came upon more bones? From the time of Gallagher's death in September '41 until Laxton's re-organizational visit in 1949, there is no resident British administrator on the island. As a matter of fact, from Sept. '41 until November of 1942 there is no record of any official visit to the island. (Officialdom is a bit pre-occupied with the Japanese onslaught elsewhere in the Pacific.) There's a big hole in the island's history between Gallagher's death and the coming of the Yanks in 1944. Makes you wonder. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:19:25 EDT From: J B Mill Subject: personnel unfitness Perhaps when Amelia communicated "personnel unfitness" she confused the spelling of personal and it was she who was a bit under the weather................ ************************************************************** From Ric Possible, I suppose, but AE was nothing if not literate. She could pull an obscure quote from Hamlet out of her head and begin a telegram about being eager to get away from Lae with the phrase "Denmark's a prison." She was a well-educated woman who was as much writer and poet as she was pilot. I'd be hesitant to accuse her of a simple spelling error. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:27:19 EDT From: Bill Leary Subject: Bones - speculation Ric wrote: > As Ross Perot used to say, "I'm all ears." Describe, if you would, a scenario > where one person moves on but leaves his or her shoes behind. This is an > island where white folks really, really need their shoes. I can think of two reasons someone might discard their shoes. 1. The shoes were damaged in some way that made the functionally useless 2. The wearers feet had swollen (sprained ankle?) and they found the shoes no longer fit. I'm talking general reasons here. If we assume these are Amelia and Freds shoes, then you might add the additional factor of being very tired (from thirst, from injury, from illness, etc.) and getting perhaps a bit punchy and just not bothering to put them back on after taking them off for some reason. Here, however, I'm assuming that the "jungle" could be walked upon without shoes even if the beach / reef couldn't be. - Bill *************************************************************** From Ric Your suggested scenarios are certainly possible, as is Tom King's suggestion that it was a spare pair that got damaged by being left too close to the fire to dry. But you'd have to be pretty punchy to forget to put on your shoes, even if you planned to stay in the bush. The only place I'd consider going barefoot on Niku would be out on the sand beach, and then you'd fry your feet. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:31:34 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: Noonan frailties Fred and possible human frailties. He served in the Carribbean, flew to South America, flew to the Far East, visited El Paso/Juarez often. What is the common demonimator? Heroin or opiates. Just a thought. Ron D. 2126 *************************************************************** From Ric Jeeeesh. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:35:11 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Fish bone I certainly didn't mean to discourage anyone from getting the fish bone identified if it's not a big hassle. I can't imagine what it would tell us, but as you've pointed out elsewhere, we really never can be sure..... LTM TKing *************************************************************** From Ric Aaarrgh! Okay, Andrew, I think you said you had a possible source of help on this. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:43:27 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: No Land Club Offensive Well, let's see if I can respond to Mike's inoffensive comments: Mike says: Tom, the point we are trying to make relates to economics. How much time was spent cutting through 100 feet of scavola? Answer: It depended on the nastiness of the scaevola. It could take anywhere from a couple of minutes in the light stuff we referred to as Level 3, to an hour or more in Level 8. But in Level 8 you don't just "cut through;" you wind up climbing over, falling through, getting wrapped up in, etc. etc.. Pretty discouraging, particularly since you also can't see anything, and could cut right past an Electra and never notice it. If videos of us fighting through the stuff make you tired, I'm real sorry, but you can always fast- forward. Mike asks: How much labor? Answer: Same as above. It depends. Mike asks: And how much of the lagoon could you have covered and why didn't you? Answer: Here again, it depends -- in this case on what you mean by "covered." We've "covered" the whole lagoon in terms of reviewing airphotos. We've "covered" only about two percent in terms of really intensive survey. We've "covered" some percentage in between in terms of looking, dragging less-than- fully effective mags, poking metal detectors at coral heads to make sure they weren't coral-encrusted engines, and the like. So? Why didn't we cover it more, in more detail? We didn't have the time and technology. And? Mike says/asks: In 1989 TIGHAR declared the plane wasn't on land, yet less than 5% of the lagoon is searched??? Answer: Uhh -- and the question is? We did enough study of the island in '89 to pretty well convince ourselves that the plane "wasn't on land" to the extent that means sitting there, fat, dumb and happy, waiting to be found. That doesn't mean big pieces aren't on land; they may very well be, and little pieces are even more likely, to say nothing of the little pieces already found that are very likely to be from the plane. So what does this have to do with how much of the lagoon we searched? Mike asks: Help us understand. Answer: I'd be happy to try, if I understood what it is you don't understand. Maybe I'm just demented from all that bashing about in the scaevola, but I don't understand what you're getting at. Mike says/asks: Lets say TIGHAR goes back to Niku for 20 days with 20 folks in 1999. (Is that an average trip?) Answer: No, it's about 6 people and 6 days long, but we're shooting for more time in '99 and wouldn't be averse to more people if there were a way to fit 'em in. Mike asks: Can you search the western part of the lagoon, reef flat, and dig the anecdotal sites in that time frame? Answer: As usual, it depends, and every time we go one of our major concerns is how much we can do in the time we've got. Juggling the logistics becomes a big item, and there are always things we can't predict -- both opportunities that result from unexpected discoveries, and things that screw up the schedule like storms and greater heat than expected and denser Scaevola than expected and equipment failures and on and on and on. It also depends, once again, on what you mean by "search," and "dig." There are lots of ways to search, and you can do it at a variety of levels of intensity. There are a number of ways to dig. Every choice of method involves trade-offs, both in terms of time required and discovery potential. Generally (though not absolutely), the faster your search, the more cursory it is and the more likely you are to miss something. Generally (though not absolutely), the cruder your excavation methods, the more likely you are to miss or even destroy something. We might be able to "dig" Aukaraime from one end to another in a few hours if (a) we were sure where the ends are and (b) we did it with a D-6 Cat, but we'd likely lose a bit of data or two. We could do it in a week if we knew (a) and for (b) we lined 20 people up and had them sling dirt with flat-bladed shovels for ten hours a day, but we'd likely lose almost as much data as we would with the Cat, and probably a person or two as well. We could take ten years at it with camel's hair brushes. Fieldwork is all about making decisions like this -- balancing your data needs with your feasible methods. So the answer to your question is something on the order of: "Yes, at some as yet unspecified level of detail and reliability, if conditions cooperate." Mike says: We noted on your TV program that the scholarly pace of archaeology is abandoned when the team runs out of time and you did not get as much done as you planned. Unfortunately, "lousy economics" overrules "good science" most of the time. Answer: Are you saying that we just didn't budget properly, and therefore ran out of time and therefore abandoned "good science?" There's not much I can say to such a statement of opinion; you're obviously free to hold it, and you obviously will. But let me offer a couple of observations. Re. "lousy economics:" Science hasn't yet entirely cured cancer, or AIDS, or even herpes, in substantial part because of "lousy economics." We keep being distracted by doing silly stuff like fighting wars, and drugs, and taking care of the elderly, and educating our children. In just the same way, we haven't found Amelia and Fred in part because we haven't had unlimited resources to throw at the problem; everybody has other things they need to spend their money on. If this is lousy economics, so be it. As for "good science," I think there are lots of ways to do that, at many different levels of intensity and along many pathways. And archeology is not necessarily done at a "scholarly pace," if by that you mean "slow." My dissertation research involved excavating three cemeteries using a bulldozer. It wasn't my preferred way of doing it, but since the Corps of Engineers was about to take them out with much bigger machines and a whole lot less control, it was what I had to do. Given the kinds of phenomena I was dealing with and the research questions I was asking, I was able to control my machines, and my crew, and the resulting data enough to make some kind of contribution to understanding prehistoric social organization in California. Was this good science? I think so. I formulated a hypothesis and tested it, using methods that were practical in view of the conditions under which I was working. Everyone who does any kind of research makes the same kinds of choices, and the fact that we make them doesn't make our science somehow impure. When we went to Niku the first time, we had some expectations about the place, and about what we could do, that turned out not to be correct. We abandoned certain search techniques in the lagoon, and stopped beating our brains out trying to hack transects through the Scaevola, because we observed that these activities weren't likely to produce a return commensurate with the investment we were putting into them. Maybe that's an example of lousy economics overwhelming good science but I think that to have insisted on keeping doing things that weren't doing us any good would have been simply stupid. Does this help at all, Mike? LTM Tom King ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:44:42 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Noonan - booze Re. Jackie's: "Some years ago I researched another notorious alleged 'drunk' Kim Philby and the similarities are striking." Ah ha! So Fred was really a Soviet spy! The plot thickens. Doethn't it? LTM TK ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:52:04 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Radios: Cables & Connectors Vern has reviewed a paper (prepared by a TIGHAR member highly experienced in avionics) describing the radio situation aboard the Earhart Electra vis a vis the coax cable found on Niku in 1996. He offers the following comments: ------------------------------- A first pass through the radio documentation looking for a place for the cable and connectors (TIGHAR Artifact 2-3-V-1) found at the site of the village on Nikumaroro (Circa 1940). In summary, no place for it was found. I had hoped to find a coaxial cable with connectors such as the Howard P. Jones, series 101, used between the Bendix RDF loop and a loop coupler unit mounted somewhere near the loop installation. The photographs (page 4-29 & page 4-33) do indicate a coaxial type cable but it is not like the cable found by TIGHAR. This cable appears to be considerably larger in diameter and is described, in the documentation (page 4-34), as an "... ARMORED CABLE (BREEZE)... " The term "breeze" is not familiar to me in this context. I think the original picture will probably show that the cable has an exterior metalic braid although this is not clear in the photocopy. The connectors would be appropriat for an armored cable of this diameter and would not be Jones series 101 connectors. Clearly, the author of the documentation had been looking at some of the same journals I have been perusing (text on page 4-29, from Aero Digest) and seeing some of the same photographs of Bendix and Western Electric equipment. The pictures included show the same kind of antenna connections on receivers and on transmitters that I've seen in the journals from the 1930s -- a simple "binding post" type connection. It is stated, on page 4-3, that a coaxial cable connector might be provided on a transmitter as a factory modification. As also stated, we see no indication of such a connector in any photograph we have seen. I have seen none in the journals of the 1930s. I wonder if, at that time, coaxial cable was considered a viable option at all? I think it would have been only if cable with polyethylene dielectric was available, And then only if a single transmitting frequency was to be used. Matching a transmitter to a multiband antenna is very tricky. When the antenna is not an optimal length for any frequency to be used, it's all the worse. It's always a compromise on both frequencies resulting in power being dissipated in the transmission line. Even today, coaxial cable is avoided in multi-frequency antenna systems. In essence, if you are going to use coaxial cable, even good coax, for transmitting any appreciable power, everything in the system has to be almost perfectly tuned. Otherwise the cable will not take the power that did not get radiated but showed up as heat in the dielectric of the cable. In conclusion, I have to concede that I can find no place for the TIGHAR cable in the radio installations in Amelia Earhart's Electra. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:01:51 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: Interesting bits Interview in El Paso paper 3Jul37 with Lewis Upshaw : '"field representative with Lockheed Airplane Co.......Upshaw in El Paso in connection with the opening of Continental Airlines, worked as a mechanic on Mrs. Putnam's plane - a Lockheed Electra- just before her flight. Familiar with the structure of the famous flyer's plane, Upshaw said the plane would remain afloat if she landed with the landing gear up. 'Otherwise, the landing gear would have thrown the ship over on its back and both she and Noonan would have drowned', he said. 'No one but an expert flyer could land one of the fast Lockheeds on the water- and then the water would have to be smooth. If she was forced down, it is doubtful she and Noonan are alive'." Also, Fred's divorce was granted on March 17 - he apparently did make a second trip to ELP to finalize the divorce but haven't nailed the date yet. re Amelia; E.P. Herald-Post, 5Jul37: {Col. Thomas Boles, superint. of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, stood on the brink of the "bottomless pit" in his underground fairyland and wondered if he will keep his promise to Amelia Earhart. The pit was to be the noted flyer's next adventure. On her last trip to the caverns Miss Earhart extracted a promise from Col. Boles that she would be the first person to explore the subterranean dungeon. } The remainder of the article describes the unexplored portions of the caverns. Was she tired of flying and was looking for other adventures? Ron D. 2126 *************************************************************** From Ric Good stuff. Upshaw is right. Gear down ditchings almost always flip the airplane. The divorce was granted the same day Fred took off for Hawaii with AE, et al. Wonder if he knew? I wonder when he had time to go back to El Paso? AE seems to have been something of a thrill-seeker. She once wanted to try deep-sea diving (hard-hat) but got frightened and wouldn't go through with it. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:53:05 EDT From: Sandy Campbell Subject: Noonan - dehydration > The castaway(s) of Gardner island had sufficient energy to get to Aukaraime > from somewhere else on the island, kill birds and a turtle, build a campfire, > etc. That does not, to me, sound like someone pagued by dysentery or the DTs. I wasn't there. I don't know.. But from what I can gather, I personally find it quite difficult to see Fred as a raging alcoholic, nor to see Amelia embarking on a lengthy flight with a case of dysentery. In any case, the survival instinct is a powerful force... Sandy *************************************************************** From Ric I agree with you Sandy but I think we need to recognize that "raging alcoholic" does not necessarily describe everyone who struggles with an addiction to alcohol. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:54:56 EDT From: Sandy Campbell Subject: Re: The British Connection > Of course, the book is un-indexed and un-footnoted, so unless you're ready to > double-check everything yourself, the only way to deal with Donahue is to not > believe any of it. Yes.., And good fiction always sells copy. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:56:37 EDT From: Don Jordan Subject: Noonan research Rose sounded very confused this time when I talked to her. She almost sounded sick. But the first time we spoke, she was lively and chipper. I think she might be confusing the husbands! So much information has come out about FN in the last few months. I will let you know as soon as I can about my project. About May 15th, I hope!!!!! Don Jordan ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:01:05 EDT From: Dick Strippel Subject: Radios >Do we have everything it's possible to get >from Western Electric and Bendix on radio gear that MIGHT have been on the >Electra? Of course, I'm wishing for information on connectors used, etc. >I'm sure I can dig up information UNFORTUNATELY --NO. I'M TRYING TO DETERMINE WHERE BENDIX ARCHIVES MIGHT BE LOCATED ANY HELP WILL BE APPRECIATED. OTHERWISDE VISIT OLD BOOKSHOPS TO SEE WHAT THEY HAVE ON AVRAD. I'VE BEEN PLEASANTLY SURPRISED. SEE MY READING LIST AND BIBLIO. I'LL E-MAIL A COPY IF YOU'RE REALLY INTERESTED AND NOT JUST UNWILLING TO LOOK FOR YOURSELF!!!!!!!! *************************************************************** From Ric Dick's getting better. He made almost to the end without getting nasty. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:03:55 EDT From: Dick Strippel Subject: Re: Canton Engine Logic NOBODY WANTS TO HEAR ABOUT THE B-25 THAT CRACKED UP ON T/O AT CANTON DURING THE "UNPLEASANTNESS" -- DICK ************************************************************** From Ric I'm happy to hear about it. I just haven't seen any documentation that it happened and I don't understand what difference it makes if it did. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:31:25 EDT From: Clyde Miller Subject: Foliage clearing This is probably addressed more for Tom King as resident Archeologist. What additional methods of foliage clearing are considered in a dig such as Niku? Is the concept of a Slow controlled burn possible or acceptable as a technique given the environment and what you are looking for? Is it too brutal a technique? (The Little Big horn Battlefield fire a few years ago yielded tremendous archeological finds after clearing the prairie). Are any chemical options acceptable? Are you carrying a small chain saw? Would a major clearing of the bush buy you anything? (and now let me go off the deep end....can animals (i.e. dogs) detect things such as graves or decomposed bodies, bones etc. several decades old? (I won't even speculate on having one of the navy dolphins check out the lagoon) Just curious? Clyde Miller *************************************************************** From Ric I can offer some comments on this subject. I, for one, would not be eager to get a brush fire going on that island even if it were archaeologically advisable (which it ain't) or approved by the Kiribati authorities (I shudder to think). Agent Orange is also not an option. A chain saw with a short bar has proven to be a rather effective weapon for clearing trails through the worst of the Scaevola, but that's road building, not archaeology. For searching, nothing is less invasive than bare hands aided by a sharp machete. You're forced to go slowly and look closely at what you're clearing. Of course, it's also hard work with the constant danger of laceration. (Right Tom?) ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:34:14 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: When Mary met Harry The SF Chronicle June 24 1938. Jackie ************************************************************** From Ric Thanks. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:37:22 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: Canton B-25 crash I'd like to hear about it. Jackie Ferrari ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:39:38 EDT From: Jim Tierney Subject: Re; reply to No Land Club Offensive I dont know or care what Mike thinks but your explanation certainly gave me a much better picture of what is done and how and why. You guys really work your asses off. There cant be too much prancing around and singing--"Finding Amelia". Thanks for the good word pictures. Jim Tierney ========================================================= Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:45:46 EDT From: Amanda Dunham Subject: About Scaevola jbmill wrote: >Perhaps when Amelia communicated "personnel unfitness" she confused the >spelling of personal and it was she who was a bit under the >weather................ >************************************************************** >From Ric >Possible, I suppose, but AE was nothing if not literate. She could pull an >obscure quote from Hamlet out of her head and begin a telegram about being >eager to get away from Lae with the phrase "Denmark's a prison." She was a >well-educated woman who was as much writer and poet as she was pilot. I'd be >hesitant to accuse her of a simple spelling error. Absolutely! Another interpretation of that message is that by "personnel" she meant some member of the ground crew. My humble opinion is that "personnel unfitness" wasn't anything serious - Amelia would have been more specific if it had been. (Just out of curiosity, having never sent a telegram, how many people were involved in transmission? Was there a typist at both sending and receiving able to add their own mistakes to your composition?) And what is scavola or scaevola??? Niether is in my dictionary. Sounds itchy and contagious! :-) Please keep in mind that for some of us, knowledge of desert island environments extends only as far as seven castaways and the S.S. Minnow. Feel free to explain, Professor. LOVE TO MOTHER STOP Amanda ************************************************************* From Ric Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale, A tale of fateful trip.... The complete text of the message sent from Lae at 0630 on June 30 is as follows: RADIO MISUNDERSTANDING AND PERSONNEL UNFITNESS PROBABLY WILL HOLD ONE DAY HAVE ASKED BLACK FOR FORECAST FOR TOMORROW YOU CHECK METEOROLOGIST ON JOB AS FN MUST HAVE STAR SIGHTS STOP ARRANGE CREDIT IF TRIBUNE WISHES MORE STORY My understanding is that you gave the operator your handwritten message and he sent it out in morse code. At the receiving end the message was typed out for the recipient. (We have a copy of the original Western Union form for this message.) Anybody out there know for sure? We're talking Territory of New Guinea here, circa 1937. Scaevola is the Latin name for a plant the Gilbertese call Te Mao (note the use of the definite article Te). We often refer to it by other names which have a distinct Oedipal tone. Its broad, bright green leaves are quite attractive and the gently curving, broomstick-thickness stalks upon which they grow are soft, pithy, and easily cut for the first foot or so below the leaves. But then the stalk grows progressively tougher, and the profusion of stalks more tangled and snakelike until, at ground level they are like iron bars. A stand of Scaevola presents an impenetrable wall of intertwined stalks, at once resilient and resistant, a petrified Gorgon's head, too thick to crawl under or even see through, and yet not strong enough to climb upon without breaking through and hanging up like a fly in a spiders web. And you thought you wanted to know. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 09:41:37 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Personal/Personnel The Personnel Unfitness telegram we have is the one received at Oakland, CA by Western Union. Based upon my non-quantitative evaluation of Navy and commercial messages from 1935 - 1939, many mispellings can arise from the telegraph operators who relay the messages, typically at least one misspelling per 100 telegrams (from originator to receiver sets). While we cannot determine how many radiomen handled this message, previous messages and indications suggest at least four between Lae and Oakland. I would suspect, but cannot prove, that a good hunch might be that personal got translated to personnel. This is a good example of the kinds of minor historical mysteries that can never be solved with certainty. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:02:18 EDT From: Mike Ruiz Subject: Maybe Land Club Tom/John: Thanks for the details. The descriptions both of you responded with are very informative. I have a much better understanding of what you are up against. Hopefully, the photographic evidence can help target your efforts. It seems possible based on your descriptions that the aircraft still could be on the island. I noted somewhere Oceaneering had the resolution to pick up an intact aircraft, but not one broken up. Is that correct? Did TIGHAR issue any press releases upon discovery of the Gallagher telegrams? Any press coverage of that, they are a very important find. I also keep reading about Ballard at Midway. Ric, you mentioned Ballard once but I forgot what you said. What about National Geographic sponsorship? LTM, Mike **************************************************************** From Ric We issued a press release about the Gallagher telegrams but nobody picked up on it. Basic media problem. What is and is not regarded as newsworthy depends primarily upon what else happens to be going on in the world at the moment. Ballard seems to be making quite a career out of finding stuff that was never lost. We have a much tougher job. National Geo is well aware of our project and, over the years, we've had a number of discussions with them about sponsorship. It comes down to this. We're not willing to sell what they want to buy for a price they're willing to pay. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:05:18 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Mary B and husbands I tracked down the engagement announcements (thanks to Jackie) for Mary Beatrice Noonan and Harry B Ireland in the SF Bay area. Articles in the Oakland Tribune (6/23/38) and SF Chronicle (6/24) - the Chron was always a few days behind a lot of the AE/FN news because they flew out of, and stayed/lived, in Oakland. The scenario goes like this. Bea filed for executorship of the estate on June 10, 1938. It was granted on June 20 after a Superior Court hearing that same day. She was living in Santa Barbara at the time. Her attorney was in Oakland. Three days later, the Trib announced her engagement. Bea had recently sold her beauty salon and Ireland was in Oakland making final plans for the wedding which was to take place "very soon". Ireland was a "wealthy" widower living in Santa Barbara, retired for 12 years from a Philadelphia stock broker business (given the times, he must have been damn good). They met on the liner Lurline returning from Honolulu "some months ago". Separately, a SF Chron article from March 30, 1937 about the Fred/Mary Bea marriage (thanks to Jackie again) states that, "Noonan met Mrs. Martinelli in Oakland while he was employed on the Pan American Airways' trans-pacific service." Blue skies, jham #2128 ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:07:58 EDT From: Bill Subject: Bones- speculation Ric wrote; > Your suggested scenarios are certainly possible, as is Tom King's >suggestion that it was a spare pair that got damaged by being left too close >to the fire to dry. > > But you'd have to be pretty punchy to forget to put on your shoes, even if > you planned to stay in the bush. The only place I'd consider going barefoot > on Niku would be out on the sand beach, and then you'd fry your feet. Actually, I was more thinking of a person or persons who were just going to "take a look over there" and didn't make it back or got "there" and decided it wasn't worth the effort to go back for them. - Bill ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:09:54 EDT From: Craig Fuller Subject: Canton Engine Logic To: Dick Strippel I would be interested to know the date of the B-25 crash on Canton (if you know it) but I agree with Ric in that it makes no difference. Even if it can be proved that an aircraft with a single row radial crashed on Canton all that it would mean is that when TIGHAR digs up a single row radial engine at Canton it may or may not be the one that Bruce brought back. If the serial numbers on the engine match Earhart's then it is probably the one that Bruce brought to Canton (or Earhart crashed on Canton and no one ever noticed). If the serial number does not match Earhart's then the engine dug up might be from the single row radial aircraft that crashed on Canton (which none are known of) or it could be the one that Bruce brought there. Which would put TIGHAR in the dilemma to keep digging or give up on Bruce's engine. The fact that we know where Bruce's engine is buried should minimize the chance of coming across the wrong engine if by chance any others are buried there. Bruce: Do you recall ever seeing any twin row radials in the junk yard when you were at Canton? Craig Fuller Aviation Archaeological Investigation & Research ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:15:54 EDT From: Don Jordan Subject: unfitness There is a lot of conversation about the message of "unfitness". I know there are days when I just don't want to get out of bed and go to work. Not sick...just don't feel like it. Maybe that is what the message is referring to. However, did either Amelia or Fred had any long term illnesses like headaches or toothaches, or bad back that might explain the message? Don Jordan (#2109) ************************************************************* From Ric AE had a history of sinus trouble, but there's no reference to that being a problem during the world flight. Seems most likley to me that whether it was personnel or personal unfitness, she was simply referring to the fact they had been pushing hard for several days and wanted to rest for a day or so before tackling the most difficult leg of the entire trip. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:27:25 EDT From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Amelia's kids Speaking of interesting bits, I feel compelled to tell the group that this week at one of the two elementary schools at which I am a music teacher, I discovered no less than three different students of grades three through six,each reading a different book about the life and accomplishments of none other than Amelia Earhart! While this may seem trivial, I thought that you might be as delighted as I was to discover that today's young people are still profoundly interested in this person, who vanished before even their parents (and some of their grandparents) were born! Given all the "Titanic" hype these days, I found this to be a notable, and refreshing, change. Your work will obviously continue to be appreciated by the adults of the future!--Thanks for your indulgence,--Gene Dangelo :) ************************************************************** From Ric Middle-schoolers are Amelia's most ardent supporters. Hardly a week goes by that we don't receive a request to help with a school project. The next issue of TIGHAR Tracks will contain a selection of delightful letters and poems from kids who are enthralled with Earhart and the mystery. On May 29th I'm doing "An Evening With Amelia Earhart" for a middle-school in southeastern Pennsylvania (no, I'm not going in drag). Mrs. Norris' fourth-grade class dreamed up the idea as a fund-raiser for The Earhart Project and asked if I'd come. Eat your heart out Leonardo. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:00:13 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Campfire site(s)? Gallagher says, "Bones were found on South East corner of island..." (TIGHAR Tracks, Sept. 30, 1997, Page 24). Page 27 map indicates location of the spot where TIGHAR found the shoes and campfire -- Sort of the South West side of the island not far from Baurareke Passage. Can you clarify? *************************************************************** From Ric Yes. The big question is whether Gallagher's site is the same as TIGHAR's site. Let's look at all the clues. Gallagher describes the location several ways. He says, as you note, that it was "on South East corner of island"(telegram 17 October 1940). In his December 27, 1940 letter to the Secertary of the Western Pacific High Commission he describes the site as "on the South Eastern shore of Gardner Island." He also says that the intial discovery was made by "workers" (telegram 23 september 1940) but that "this part of island is not yet cleared" (telegram 17 October 1940). From this description it seems clear that the site is somewhere along the southeastern shore in an area that was being cleared in 1940. Aerial photography taken June 20,1941 clearly shows an area just east of Bauareke Passage which appears freshly cleared. Aerial photography taken April 30, 1939 shows the same area untouched. No further clearing was done in Aukaraime district until the Coast Guard went at the extreme southeastern tip with bulldozers in July of 1944. In short, the ONLY place on the island that fits Gallagher's description is the area just east of Bauareke Passage. But what about the specific spot? Gallagher says that it is "about 100 feet above ordinary high water springs." (He is referring here to the the high "spring" tides that sometimes flood the lagoon shore. His point is that this stuff did not wash ashore.) The place where TIGHAR found the shoes and campfire fits that description. Confirmation that the bones were discovered near the lagoon shore is found in Gallagher's comment (letter of 27 December 1940) that the coffin in which he placed the bones was built "from a local wood known as 'kanawa' and the tree was, until a year ago, growing on the edge of the lagoon, not very far from where the deceased was found." Given that the generalities and specifics of the location described by Galagher fit the place where TIGHAR found some of the same features he found (woman's shoe parts and campfire), I feel pretty comfortable in concluding that we have the same place. Ric ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:17:24 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: foliage clearing Right, Ric. I don't know if you (Ric) were around the evening several of us (including some of the ecology experts on Nai'a's crew) speculated about burning the island, but we did, and there was general agreement that it would probably be healthy for the ecosystem, but damaging in the short run and nobody was about to propose it formally. There'd certainly be a lot of death and destruction, and nobody had the stomach for that. Moreover, there'd be damage to perishable objects -- not only those relevant to AE (if any) but to the remains of the village, which is a pretty neat historic archeological site in its own right. Of course, a slow prescribed burn of Aukaraime is another matter -- much more acceptable on environmental and archeological grounds -- but I'd still be concerned about what we'd lose that we might want to find. If nothing else, it would make it difficult to find any additional evidence of the campfire, or other such features. I'm also not sure whether it would do much good. What litters the ground are leaves, coconut fronds, and coconuts. The leaves would burn off pretty well, but the fronds are quite dense at their bases; they burn well in a campfire, but I doubt if they'd burn away completely in a pass-over kind of burn. Coconut husks have more or less the same kind of characteristics. And, of course, we'd then have ash and charred stuff to worry about -- no easier to pick up than the leaves and fronds. Oddly enough (must be psychic, Clyde), I was thinking last night about bone- sniffing dogs or other critters, and came to the conclusion that it might be worth at least asking about. I can't imagine an animal with a nose keen enough to tell a 60-year-old bone from coral and coco fronds, but I don't know beans about the subject. Any animal-tracker experts out there? I wonder if we could train crabs. Probably not. I'd love to find some faster way to clear the foliage -- both on Aukaraime where the problem is to see the ground, and elsewhere where it's just to get through -- but hands, machetes and chainsaws thus far remain the weapons of choice. Though I would remind you, Ric, of Gary Quigg's lament, to the tune of "If I Only Had a Brain:" "As I crawl around the island, It's not that I'm not smilin' I've learned to love the pain. I just can't help but wonder, Of all the things we've strewn asunder, Why we didn't bring a rake. LTM TK *************************************************************** From Ric Yeah. Sure would be a shame to burn up that diary AE was keeping. We actually looked into the bone-sniffing dog thing a few years ago. We had used search dogs in Maine looking for the possible remains of Nungesser and Coli. Didn't find any bones but the dogs were a hoot to work with. The consensus among the dog people was that the environment on the island would be so foreign to the dogs that there was no telling what they'd do. There was also some concern about the effects of a long sea voyage on poochs who were not sea-dogs (heck, we KNOW what the effects are on people who are not sea- dogs). Trained crabs, however, are worth a thought. I remember Tonga (our Kiribati rep) walking a big ol' coconut crab on a leash along the beach. We could at least tell the TV film crew that we had bone-sniffing crabs. Ric ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:25:41 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: reply to No Land Club Offensive Thanks, Jim. Actually we really do have a good deal of time for singing, but it's mostly in the evenings when everybody's sick to death of bashing about in the jungle or bouncing off coral heads in the lagoon. And the lyrics come unbidden to the brain, probably the result of oxygen deprivation or something. LTM TKing ========================================================= Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:28:22 EDT From: JB Mill Subject: Re: Amelia's kids As an active member of a local Zonta International Club who gives thousands in scholarships in her name every year (Amelia was a current member when she left on her last flight), I am also aware of the interest of kids and it's wonderful to hear how interested they continue to be....it's great that TIGHAR is helping with this. We purchased the "mock-up" of the Electra created by CNN (for the movie with Diane Keaton) and it is in a local Air Museum. We are working (providing funding) with the museum to expand on the exhibit to the point where it will be "interactive" allowing kids to sit in the cockpit and hear the messages from the Itasca, etc........thanks Ric for the reminder that she was an extremely literate individual.... ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:23:38 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: Unfitness Fred had supposedly cracked four front teeth during a fall in a hotel bathroom in Hawaii and was receiving dental treatment for that.Unsubstantiated. One of the Amelia biographies I think. Jackie ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:25:10 EDT From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Mary B and husbands Wow! Seems like Mary Bea moved pretty fast! The thing that puzzles me, and this may be an idiosyncrasy of the estate laws of that state, but, doesn't someone have to be missing for a seven-year period before they can be declared legally dead? In Pennsylvania, at least, that was the case in 1937. The reason that I know this is that my late great-uncle's wife vanished (deserted the family) in December, 1937, and my uncle was not allowed to remarry until 1944, after the seven-year period, at which time the spouse was declared "legally dead." (Amazingly, after the declaration, she turned up in another state with a different husband!) But anyway, I was curious. Perhaps any J.D.'s in forum could help me out on that one!--Many thanks,--Gene Dangelo :) ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:27:33 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Southeast is southeast and... Re. Gallagher's description of the bones site being on the southeast end of the island -- that's troubled me, too, but Ric's point about the land clearing is pretty convincing. I suspect that it's a matter of perspective. We're used to looking at Niku on a map; in this context Aukaraime is a good distance from the SE end. But Gallagher was used to looking at it on the ground and from the water, and to thinking about it largely in terms of its coconut potential. It isn't far east of Aukaraime that the place becomes pretty much a wasteland of sun-blasted coral, and quite narrow to boot -- no place for coconuts. I'd guess (as usual, ONLY a guess) that Gallagher was thinking of the island more or less like New Yorkers think of the United States, only in his case there was no California on the other end. In any event, the real geographic southeast end of the island is where the Coast Guard did its thing, so if there had been anything there (a) one might expect them to have seen it (or might not), and (b) it's certainly not there any more. If I had to guess at probabilities, I'd give Aukaraime at least a 75% chance of being Gallagher's bone site. That and a buck fifty will buy you a short coffee around here. Tom King ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:29:17 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: Re; Amelia's kids Thanks for that very heartening story. Ive often wondered just how interested people are over there. At a school I teach in from time to time I sometimes mention Amelia. The only kid I ever come across who had ever heard of her was a Treckie who had seen the Voyager episode and who remarked about that 'funny guy' waving the bottle about. The adults are not much better. I have yet to meet anyone who has heard of Fred Noonan. As far as female aviators go they are more familiar with Amy Johnson. Jackie ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:31:24 EDT From: Russ Matthews Subject: Re: Amelia's kids This past December I spoke to a group of Third and Fourth graders at an all girls school in NYC. Their undisguised enthusiasm and insightful questions were a very pleasant surprise. I have also spoken to a number of "grown-up" organizations, including the Los Angeles Chapter of Zonta, but the kids make it seem more meaningful somehow. As we have seen from this Forum, a major goal of the Earhart Project is education. I know that many other expedition members have made themselves available for talks around the country. Interesting about the "mock-up" from the TNT film. I saw the Beech 18 they used for the flight scenes and what was left of the one that stood in for the Luke Field crash. Which museum has the interior set? An interactive exhibit sounds promising, though I suppose to make it truly accurate the kids wouldn't be able to hear anything from the Itasca at all. LTM Russ ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:43:31 EDT From: Don Neumann Subject: Re: Amelia's kids One of the things that has "wondered" me, why hasn't one of the national/international women's groups ever sought to sponsor research into the "search for Amelia"? If ever there was a role model (though somewhat conservative by today's standards) for modern day feminists, Amelia Earhart was that person, truly a "renaissance woman", if ever there was anyone who could occupy that role! Perhaps the reason she still occupies the interest of so many people is the very mystery surrounding her disappearance over sixty years ago & of course that one very beguiling photograph (the one with the Mona Lisa smile) , which seems to be saying: "find me if you can"! ************************************************************* From Ric Public opinion seems quite divided on the question of what to do about the Earhart disappearance. Some feel that the "mystery" gets in the way of truly appreciating Amelia's contibution to ...(pick your agenda). Others feel that the puzzle is the appeal and should be left unsolved. Still others feel that all of us who wonder what happened to Amelia Earhart should get a life. ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:46:14 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: Amateur radio operators Amongst the many ham operator reports, real or hoax, do you recall one from a W.E. Tippin? Ron D. 2126 *************************************************************** From Ric Doesn't ring a bell. ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:04:23 EDT From: Roger Kelley Subject: Re: Amelia's kids Would it be possible to tape your presentation of "An evening with Amelia Earhart?" Come to think about it, does TIGHAR offer a library from which we can purchase various items such as tapes, writings, etc, etc about Amelia and her history? Thanks, Roger Kelley #2112 **************************************************************** From Ric I don't know if they're planning to videotape it, but it should be no problem. Our biggest problem with producing and marketing a library of printed, audio and video materials has been one of economics. We have tons of information, but reproducing and editing and packaging it in a marketable format is so expensive that we would have to charge an exorbitant price that too few would be able or willing to pay. Hope, however, is on the horizon. Plans are now in the works with a major corporation to digitize this mountain of information (official reports, documents, letters, photos, film, etc.) for the production of an Amelia Earhart Research CD-ROM. The same information would also be available piece-meal via TIGHAR's website. By removing the costs of printing and handling and mailing, we will be able to make all this information available at very little cost. We're quite excited about this. We should have more details for everyone soon. Ric ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:05:42 EDT From: John Clauss Subject: Canton Engine Logic There have been number of crashes on Canton. These are reasonable given the volume of traffic that went through there during and after WWII. They also have little bearing on Bruce's engine. His engine should be readily identifiable and if it is from AE's 10E, then that should be able to be confirmed by serial numbered parts. We do pay attention to reports of other planes that went down on the island. So far we know of a PBY, a Connie and now possibly a B-25. I am sure there are a number of others. John Clauss ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:08:28 EDT From: John Clauss Subject: Maybe Land Club, sidescan sonar Sidescan sonar is an interesting and productive technology. If you have the appropriate equipment you must be willing to spend whatever time it takes to search an area at a high enough resolution to get results. Oceaneering had the equipment to identify objects smaller than an intact plane. In order to do this you have to run the fish much closer to the bottom, which scans a smaller area, and run tighter transects. Then when there are possible hits, they must be investigated with divers or an ROV (remotely operated vehicle). Searching a reef that slopes down at about a sixty degree angle is another touchy operation. The closer you run to the bottom the higher the chance that the fish (scanning device) will impact the bottom and be lost. As it was we hit bottom a couple times and lost one fish (@ $6,000 a copy). This all comes back to the discussion of time and money. If you have the money and the time you can find whatever is there. The fellow that ran the search for us had several months before located the cargo door that blew off the United 747 out of Hawaii. We were only on site for a little over two weeks and as a consequence could only search at a resolution that would identify a pretty much intact airplane. The search was conducted from a depth of 200' to about 2000' around the perimeter of the island. Transects overlapped by half and scanned an area about a hundred yards wide (if memory serves me right). Transects spaced tighter and higher a resolution would have yielded more data and given us a better shot at smaller items. There wasn't the money or time. Hope that answers your question. John Clauss ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:15:26 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Starting fires/ sun angles The sun came out in the middle of the day, and I got a fire started! But it was not with a lens from an eyepiece. I had to use an objective lens. These lenses are from binoculars that had been dropped -- dented and busted up internally, but none of the lenses and prisms were actually broken. I think I paid a dollar at a garage sale. For the fire-starting experiment, I had a chemist's type laboratory stand with clamps to hold lenses and a piece of wood I could position at the focus. Sure beats holding things by hand! I played with it from about 12:30 to 1:30. Since we did the "spring ahead" thing and are now on Funny Time, 1 PM is solar noon. No luck at all with a complete eyepiece. In the mounting, the aperture is about 3/8 inch. The best focus is very close to the lens. A tiny, bright spot but even close to making anything smoke, or produce a scorch mark after 10 minutes. The eyepiece contains three lenses, one in a single plano-convex lens (flat on one side, convex on other). The other two are compound lens made up of two parts cemented together. Out of the mounting, they're each about 5/8" in diameter. The only one that would approach scorching anything was the single lens which has a focal length of about 1-1/2 inches. It would not make a scorch mark on a piece of paper but it would, with time, scorch the wood piece. After a period of about 20 minutes, it produced a black, charred mark about 1/32" wide and 1/8" long as the focused spot moved with the motion of the sun. I could see no smoke. I don't think it would ever start a fire. The objective lens has a focal length of about 8 inches and is 2 inches in diameter. Remember that area increases with the square of the diameter. The wood piece was smoking by the time I had got the lens positioned to produce the most intense spot. It took some patience but I was able to get paper to first char, then actually flame. I repeated it several times. By the time I quit playing with fire, there was a charred hole in the piece of wood about 1/4" in diameter and 3/8" deep. At times there was a glowing spot in the carbonized wood but it could not be sustained long. There was never any tendency to flame. The castaways may have tried to start a fire with an eyepiece, or with lenses from an eyepiece, but I think they would have had little success. They would probably have got around to trying the objective lens and that might have worked. Some thoughts about sun angles: Figuring an angle for starting a fire... My location is essentially at 40 degrees North Latitude. We are about seven weeks away from the Summer Solstice (1st day of Summer) when the sun will be at 23-1/2 degrees North Latitude, apparent position, of course. That's where the Sun will be directly overhead at noon. I'm 16-1/2 degrees further north. it's not yet the solstice, so lets say I'm 20 degrees further north than where the Sun is directly overhead at noon on this date. Niku is at about 5 degrees South Latitude. The castaways arrived in early July, about two weeks past the solstice. For them, it was the winter solstice. The Sun is about as far north as it will be -- early winter for them! The solstice is past, so the Sun is heading back south again. The Sun is something less than 23-1/2 degrees north of the equator. Again, let's say it's 20 degrees north. Niku is 5 degrees south of the equator. So, Niku was 25 degrees further south than where the Sun is directly overhead at noon on that date. I'm 20 degrees north of the Sun, the castaways were 25 degrees south of the Sun. I've not calculated rigorously, but I think we can say the conditions are similar, give or take a few degrees. Unless I've gone badly astray, the angle of the Sun was at least as favorable for me today as it was for the castaways at the time they arrived on Niku. I think it's a meaningful experiment. Yes, it was a lot hotter on NIku but not because the Sun was more nearly overhead at the time. It's hot because the Sun spends a lot more time more nearly overhead than it ever is here at my location. It's the average temperature that kills you on Niku and in the tropics in general. It just never cools off! ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:18:04 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Sextant eyepieces I'm still trying to be sure what an inverting eyepiece is with reference to a sextant. I guess I know, but I still don't know why it would be preferred for aeronautical use. Looking in some of the easier places first and hoping for a nice, simple answer, I went to the encyclopedias again. This time going for older editions. The Britannica of the 40s was no help with regard to inverting eyepieces. So, back to the 11th edition (1911). A librarian once remarked that it had gone downhill ever since that edition. I think he was right. I'm sure there are more entries in the later editions but the content becomes increasingly superficial. I found more information but not a lot more... "Telescopes are of two kinds: The direct for the more ordinary observations; and the inverting for astronomical work, one of the eyepieces of which should be of high magnifying power, not less than 15 diameters." I think the implication may be that it is easier to come by high magnification with the kind of optical arrangement that results in an inverted image. For astronomical work, it doesn't matter much whether the image is inverted or not. I guess the high magnification allows greater precision when superimposing star images in the field of view. From here, I guess I have to got to the books on navigation and plow through a lot of stuff I really didn't want to know that much about looking for references to inverting eyepieces in aeronautical applications! ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:21:23 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Amelia's kids I was talking with my 18-year old son and his girlfriend recently, and the subject of the Amelia search came up. The girl looked puzzled. "But," she asked, "isn't she dead?" "Most likely," I replied. "So..... what's the point in finding her?" The spirit of inquiry runs shallow. LTM TKing ========================================================= Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:35:39 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Starting fires/ sun angles Vern -- Neat experiment. What kind of wood did you use? We 1997 castaways on Niku found that we had no trouble at all getting fires started with the abundant dry wood, palm fronds, coconut husks, etc. Of course there are lots more of the latter now than there were in '37, but still, I don't think tinder would have been a problem. To replicate what they had to work with, you might try dry leaves and twigs. Unless you happen to have a few pieces of Pisonia grandis lying around. Love to Mother Tom King ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 08:48:52 EDT From: Simon Ellwood Subject: Sextant eyepieces Vern wrote....ref:- lenses, telescopes etc. >I think the implication may be that it is easier to come by high >magnification with the kind of optical arrangement that results in an >inverted image. For astronomical work, it doesn't matter much whether the >image is inverted or not. I guess the high magnification allows greater >precision when superimposing star images in the field of view. I seem to remember that - having had a telescope as a kid - that simple 2 lens telescopes naturally produce an inverted image, and that for "normal terrestrial" usage (i.e. peeping toms etc ) you have to add extra lens(es) to produce an image the right way up. These optical conponents (lenses, mirrors etc.) are never 100% effiecient - there's always some light loss in each component and in astronomical telescopes, the quality of the image obviously (using the minimum no. of lenses) has priority over the orientation. To David Kelly "down under".... Do astronomical telescopes produce images the correct way up down under then ??. No correction required :-). From an ignorant pomme. LTM Simon ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 08:58:55 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: amateur radio operator Here's another amateur radio operator to add to the list, if not previously reported. Article from El Paso Times, 7 Jul 37 (Wed.) AE is "on land" somewhere near Howland Island in the South Pacific, according to a carrier wave message received by W.E. Tippin, Upper Valley amateir radio operator, between 8:30 and 8:40 p.m. Tuesday. [note: if I calculate correctly, deduct 7 hrs. from Mountain time to get Gardner time.] Tippin, who operates station W5FSQ, said the Colomba Broadcasting Co. Monday night had sent out a world-wide message, hoping it would be picked up by Miss Earhart. The message told her to send radio carrier wave signals twice to indicate she was on land and three times if she were on water. Tuesday night, Tippin said he distinctly heard the double carrier wave signal flashed at intervals for ten minutes. The frequency of the signals was 3105 KC, the same as that of Miss Earhart. The reason carrier wave signals were designated, Tippin explained, rather than the transmission of voice, was because such signals conserve power. Tippin added that he had his receiving set tuned to the Earhart frequency of 3105 KC and that on that account he attributed the signals he heard to her. Tippin said he heard the Columbia broadcast from Honolulu Monday night on a short wave frequency of 12,000 KC. The messages were being broadcast at the same time from Columbia's New York station, but his reception at the time from Honolulu was better.] Note: this is the morning paper. A short article in the Wed. PM paper, the Herald Post, stated that at about midnight Tuesday "I heard a woman's voice on Miss Earharts frequency. The signals were not strong enough to read. They came a half minute at a time over a period of ten minutes. I have unusually good reception on my station because it is in the upper valley away from electric signs and street cars". Oddly enough, I found Mr. Tippin's son on the first try. He related that he remembered his dad being excited about the event but doesn't think he reported to anyone other than the paper. I asked if he might still have the radio logs and he stated he would ask his sister. The gentleman was quite friendly and appeared to be genuinely interested in helping. Of course, it is prudent to remember that that wackos also existed in 1937 and someone could have been sending false signals on the same freq. Ron D. 2126 *************************************************************** From Ric Tippin's experience was similar to Pan Am's and the Navy's regarding the two-if-on-land, three-if-on-water test. Interesting. ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:00:31 EDT From: Mike Ruiz Subject: Maybe Land Club: sidescan sonar Thanks. Must be tough to experience the disappointment real time. Sailing all that distance, spending the time, money & lugging all that equipment, for (to borrow Ric's expression), zippo. LTM, Mike ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:07:49 EDT From: Don Neumann Subject: The forum and the project In my case the feelings are mixed, however the appeal of the puzzle & the hope that someday, someone will really follow through in completing a thorough investigation of the matter, which up until the foundation of the earhart forum, has never been accomplished. All of the many books & articles I've read, over the years, fall far short of truly examining all of the issues involved & in the final analysis, the authors seem to lose their original interest in the case & draw conclusions (some pretty bizarre) which cannot be supported by the facts they've supposedly developed themselves. The one single factor that sets the "forum" apart from all the others is the sheer, dogged persistence in pursuit of the goal (finding the remains of the plane &/or crew) , inspite of all the popular resistance by press & public alike! ************************************************************** From Ric Just to be clear: The Earhart Search Forum (this email list) was only begun a few months ago as a way of making participation in TIGHAR's Earhart Project more accessible to the public and to encourage membership in TIGHAR. It has become a powerful research tool in its own right but it is founded upon ten years of dedicated scientific investigation by the researchers and expedition team members of TIGHAR. ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:13:03 EDT From: Mike Ruiz Subject: Scaevola growth rate Any idea how quickly scaevola grows? If the plane was parked far enough under a tree to avoid aerial detection by Lambrecht, could scaevola significantly cover the plane (well enough to avoid casual observation) by Dec 38/Jan 39, when traffic picked up on Niku? LTM, Mike ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:15:40 EDT From: Patricia Youn Subject: Amelia's kids I can attest to Amelia's popularity with not only elem ed kids but with college students as well. The interest in my Women's Studies course just mushroomed when I built a segment into the course about A.E. I got so many students, men and women, young and old, that I could not accommodate everyone. She had so many qualities that students like, but they were particularly taken with her quiet demeanor and fascinated with the variety of things she pursued - such as fashion and speaking to college students at Purdue. The class told me about an article in Natl Geo about her last month - some of the pictures in the article were new to me. They also found full page ads in Newsweek and Time that had full page pictures of A.E., one paid for by Apple, the other by TWA. Several of the ads were on the back covers. Anyhow, thanks for this forum. No one has to remind me about checking my e-mail anymore. Patricia L. Young ************************************************************** From Ric >Anyhow, thanks for this forum. No one has to remind me about checking >my e-mail anymore. What higher compliment could there be? Thank you. ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:46:04 EDT From: Bob Sherman Subject: Different Strokes.... For Tom King: >"So..... what's the point in finding her?" >The spirit of inquiry runs shallow. While almost all of us would agree with your observation, we are also decidedly prejudiced. Your son's girl friend was as objective as one can get. She weighed finding the corpse of someone who died 61 years ago with her current situation and her hopes of the future, and failed to find any relevance. Shallow to us, very practical to others. For some, curiosity is an insatiable curse; each solution begets another mystery. It can be a dependency although probably a non toxic one. RC 941 ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:30:25 EDT From: Dick Strippell Subject: Re: Lambrecht Interview I HAVE AN INVENTORY OF MATERIALS AT THE NIMITZ MUS. LOOKS LIKE THE LAMBRECHT THING IS THERE. ALSO LOOK FOR UNPUBLISHED ARTICLE LAMBRECHT WROTE FOR THE BUAER NEWSLETTER --DICK **************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Dick. Good to know that Goerner's interview with Lambrecht should be accessible at the Nimitz Museum. Lambrecht's article in the Bureau of Aeronautics Newsletter is well known to us. ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:40:53 EDT From: Susan Bound Subject: Re: sinus problems Addressing the question of health problems which delayed leaving Lae: Amelia was known to suffer with sinus problems all her life. Most of us forget that there were NO antibiotics in her day. She must have suffered miserably with the changes in altitude, so flying was more than just a PR stunt, but could become a painful problem. Sinus infections don't just infect the sinuses, but also involve the ears, and can cause really bad ear aches as well as excruciating headaches and toothaches. Also she was young enough to have her menses, and may have had plain old fashioned cramps, probably made worse by altitude changes and extended periods of immobility. She may also have had discomfort from either not drinking enough to be well hydrated, and thus avoiding needing to void, and she could have had pain in her back from this and from sitting so long in the pilot's seat. Obviously, Fred could also have had problems caused by the extended periods of travel. When my husband was in the air force, and flew on the B52's, all the men would try to avoid going to the bathroom as long as possible, and urinary retention and gastric discomfort resulted frequently. When did pressurized cabins become generally available for planes? Susie Bound, BSN *************************************************************** From Ric A highly modified Lockheed Electra, the XC-35, did pioneering cabin pressurization work with the Army Air Corps in 1937. Pressurized airliners were not common until after World War II. ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:42:33 EDT From: Bruce Yoho Subject: RadialEngines Engines No I did not see any other radial Engine of any kind at Canton. LTM Bruce ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:44:20 EDT From: David Kelly Subject: Re: Starting fires/ sun angles Tom King wrote: >Vern -- Neat experiment. What kind of wood did you use? We 1997 castaways on >Niku found that we had no trouble at all getting fires started with the >abundant dry wood, palm fronds, coconut husks, etc. Of course there are lots >more of the latter now than there were in '37, but still, I don't think tinder >would have been a problem. To replicate what they had to work with, you might >try dry leaves and twigs. Unless you happen to have a few pieces of Pisonia >grandis lying around. Try cupping dried grass and when it starts to smoke blow on it gently...it is possible...i have done it before using both a magnifying glass or using a couple of sticks and a bow. Burning holes in solid timber is fun...but it wont start a fire. David Kelly ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:46:35 EDT From: Dean Alexander Subject: Re: amateur radio operator If the "carrier wave" signals were genuine how is it that Earhart couldn't hear the Itasca but could hear the request to broadcast a carrier wave? Did she possibly have a different antenna enabling her to pick up this request? Dean A. *************************************************************** From Ric Good question. Ideas anyone? ========================================================= Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 18:51:42 EDT From: Bob Brown Subject: Credibility I continue to be impressed with your objectivity. If anything is a thread throughout this discussion it is your steadiness in holding that course. That has certainly raised the credibility of your efforts to a very high level in my eyes. Bob ************************************************************** From Ric 'Preciate that Bob. Archaeology is a very unforgiving science. You can theorize all day long but sooner or later you have to go look. If you have kidded yourself anywhere along the way, what you're looking for won't be there. We try our darndest not to kid ourselves because when we go to look, we really prefer to find stuff. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 09:31:00 EDT From: Barb Mill Subject: Re: Amelia's kids > Which museum has the interior set? An interactive exhibit > sounds promising, though I suppose to make it truly accurate the kids wouldn't > be able to hear anything from the Itasca at all. The "mock-up" is located in Scotia, NY (5 miles northwest of Schenectady) at The Empire State Aerosciences Museum.....and as far as "truly accurate" goes....no one really knows what was heard in that cockpit.....so we'll do the best we can to make it an educational experience and stay as close to accurate as possible........ And............. >one of the things that has "wondered" me, why hasn't one of the >national/international women's groups ever sought to sponsor research My guess (unsubstantiated, slightly educated opinion) would be that for most of these women's groups the $ they raise go to help improve the lives of the living, therefore to the majority of the members, justifying financial support to "find AE" wouldn't fly.........there are members like myself who join both TIGHAR and the women's groups to do what we can to help because we believe the work they are both doing is educational and valuable.....I too now check my Email regularly because of TIGHAR!!! Barb ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:08:07 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Scaevola growth rate I have no hard data on Scaevola growth rates, and suspect that they vary considerably with moisture, etc. We've noted that the stuff grows back pretty fast in areas we've cut through, but Ric or John Clauss could speak a lot better than I to that than I, since they were on the '91 expedition and could see what had happened since '89. If the plane were parked under a tree, though, there's no particular reason I can think of for Scaevola to grow over it. If it wasn't growing there when the plane was parked, it most likely wasn't adapted to the location, so it would just start to grow. My strong impression is that it comes up when land is cleared, in areas that are not shaded by the high-canopy buka forest. Now, if they drove the plane into a bunch of Scaevola, or, say, through a bunch en route to a shady spot, I'd say it could well have grown up and substantially masked the plane before many people came to the island. The place didn't exactly get overrun in '38-39, though, and there are quite a few things other than Scaevola that could have made it the plane more or less invisible, like being torn up in a storm event, bashed back into the bushes, washed into the lagoon or off the reef, etc. By the way, I want to say that speaking just for me, I appreciate the "No Land Club's" scepticism, and I'd say we're probably all in the "Maybe Land Club." There's no hypothesis yet that really fits all the facts and demi-facts with great efficiency. It's good to have a lot of brains dealing with the matter, from a range of perspectives. LTM TK ************************************************************* From Ric I agree with Tom's feeling that scaevola doesn't just start growing someplace where it hadn't grown before unless something in the environment changes (such as tree cutting or increased rainfall). As for rate of growth, the only thing I have to go on is our own observation. We were there in October of '89 and the vegetation along the shoreline near the landing (where the channel was blasted though the reef) was quite dense and included a good bit of the dreaded Scaevola. In December of 1989 the place got clobbered by a big storm which swept away perhaps a hundred feet of beachfront vegetation. When we returned in September of 1991 the devastation along the shore was impressive. The beach was much broader than it had been before, but also much less sandy. At the treeline, instead of a wall of underbrush there were just a few trees (cocos and pandanus) with huge stacks of broken sticks piled against the trunks on the seaward side, almost as if someone was stacking firewood. A twelve foot high reinforced concrete pyramid which had stood at the treeline and had marked the landing, was simply gone. - cleaned off at its base leaving only a couple of bent strands of rusted re-bar. Out on the beach, the first few sprouts of Scaevola were starting to make a comeback. They were little knee-high bushes, maybe three feet in diameter. It had been about 20 months since the storm. When we returned in 1996 and 1997, the beachfront was again grown up to underbrush, but not as dense as it had been in 1989. However, there had also been more storm activity in the ensuing years. Best guess: I'd say that given an absence of unusual storms or drought, it would take maybe five years for Scaevola to reach a density which would obscure large objects from view. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:10:24 EDT From: David Kelly Subject: Points of view Simon Ellwood asked: >Do astronomical telescopes produce images the correct way up down under >then ??. No correction required :-). From an ignorant pomme. I wouldn't know.....all our maps show Australia on top and the rest of the world below....:) ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:47:36 EDT From: Ken Subject: Post-loss communication Dean Alexander wrote: >If the "carrier wave" signals were genuine how is it that Earhart couldn't >hear the Itasca but could hear the request to broadcast a carrier wave? Did >she possibly have a different antenna enabling her to pick up this request? I would imagine CBS was running more power from a better antenna system then was available on the Itasca. Ken **************************************************************** From Ric It wasn't CBS. It was KGMB out of Honolulu. But, yes, they were a major station. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:54:35 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Island spotting Saw this letter in the May National Geographic re their previous AE article: "In July 1943 when I was coplot of a PV-1 stationed in Hawaii, I was ordered to reconnoiter Baker Island, where an airstrip was to be constructed. We arrived in the vicinity of Baker about the same time in the morning that Amelia would have arrived at Howland Island, which is 50 miles north and about the same size, both being flat islands about a mile in diameter. Our six planes flew search patterns for over an hour with no results, because fleecy clouds cast shadows on the ocean that looked just like islands. I can understand Amelia's problem if she ran into the same cloud formations." (William E. Anderson, Jr. - Pioneer California) Blue skies, jham #2128 ************************************************************* From Ric Whew! We have a saying at TIGHAR, "Stuff is hard to find." Guess that goes for islands too. For what it's worth, the PV-1 (Lockheed Model 18 Ventura) had a cockpit set-up not unlike its grandaddy, the Model 10 Electra. Anderson may have been out of Canton. There was a squadron of PV-1s based there at that time. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:01:58 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Post-loss communication I haven't followed the amateur radio reports stuff well enough to know what is bogus and what is legit. Since the El Paso one was in the Forum, I thought this report might also be considered interesting. Oakland Tribune, July 8, 1937: Great Falls, Montana, July 8 (AP) - Ray Havens Conrad, Mont. creamery worker, reported to the Tribune last night he had picked up radio messages which he believed authentic, locating Amelia Earhart's plane at 173 west longitude and 5 south latitude. About 9:40 pm (PST) Havens said he heard a man's voice give the position and say: "All's well. Position 173 west longitude and 5 south latitude. Okay but help needed. KHAQQ. blue skies, jham #2128 ************************************************************* From Ric Interesting. July 8th is well after the last "credible" transmission on the night of July 4th. However, the position described is only about 100 miles ESE of Niku. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:04:24 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Campfire site(s) I agree, there is a lot to support the belief that the TIGHAR and Gallagher campsites are one and the same. I just keep worrying about the little things that do not fit well. The shoe parts TIGHAR found that Gallagher did not find, the bones that TIGHAR has not found, and Gallagher's "southeast corner." These can all be explained in various ways, still, I wonder. May there be another campsite where there night be a few pieces of bone that Gallagher, the crabs, and the rats did not carry away? And, of course, there must be some other bones somewhere -- maybe the same place, maybe not. We say "Gallagher" when we know it was his workers who made the find and, presumably, it was they who did any further searching. Gallagher reports that an intensive search had been done and nothing more was found. I guess we can believe that. It appears that secrecy had not yet been imposed. I can believe Gallagher's mental picture of the island may have been quite different from the map we look at today. His view of the island and just where he traveled to reach the site might seem distorted to us. We have no detailed knowledge of what happened after Gallagher's last telegram, dated, April 28, 1941. We can theorize anything we please... and it means very little. Maybe they didn't clear the area originally intended. Maybe the natives refused to work anywhere near where those bones were found. Maybe they decided the south side of the island was a better place after all. Then in 1944 the Coast Guard moved in and started construction of the Loran Station -- on that "southeastern corner" of the island. If that is actually the place the bones were found, it matters little now. As Tom King points out, there is nothing to be found there now. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:07:04 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Sonar: Firth of Forth I guess this can qualify as "on topic" since sonar is involved. I'd no more than read John Clauss' discussion of side-looking sonar searching when I chanced to see a television documentary about the searth for sunken treasure in the Firth of Fourth. That's practically in Jackie's backyard, isn't it? They're hunting for all that royal treasure lost when Charles I overloaded the ferry and it went down during a storm. Some of the same problems John spoke of turned up in the program. They've been searching for several years. I'm not sure how old the documentary was. Maybe they've found it by this time. If not, I guess they'll be back at it again this year. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:19:11 EDT From: Pat Subject: Re: sinus problems Was Amelia on medication during the last flight? I believe that I read somewhere that she had some ongoing gastric problems, not just from inhaling fumes. That could possibly in some way account for her low weight. Assuming that she had a not too great appetite anyhow, she would probably not have had an easy time of it on a gosh forsaken island. I believe that these days her sinus problem would have been cured by an outpatient visit for laser treatment. Pat *************************************************************** From Ric I'm aware of no evidence that AE was on any sort of medication during the world flight. From what I've seen, I think that the health aspects of the disappearance have, in recent years, been vastly overblown. There is, however, one physiological consideration that no one has really addressed. The effects on one's hearing after sitting between those two P&Ws for 20 hours should have been considerable and probably did nothing for her ability to hear faint transmissions from the Itasca. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:24:38 EDT From: Dick Strippel Subject: Post-loss signals FOR ANYONE WHO BELIEVES THERE WERE AUTHENTIC POST LOSS RADIO SIGNALS -- HAVE I GOT A BRIDGE FOR YOU!!!! ************************************************************** From Ric That's very productive Dick. Thank you. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:45:26 EDT From: Dick Strippel Subject: Post-loss signals Back on April 8th: >Oak. Trib, Friday July 9, 1937. An interview with Lieut. Johnson, Coast >Guard communications officer, Fort Funston. "We know we picked up signals >from the plane on Friday night, Saturday and Sunday - three days running.... > >This is VERY interesting! I wonder if it can be verified in any way??? IT SURE CAN. FIRST CHECK NEWSPAPERS, THEN READ THOMPSON'S REPORT ************************************************************** From Ric You have to go deeper than that. The newspaer articles were edited from reports sent from the newsmen aboard Itasca. Thompson's report (Radio Transcripts Earhart Flight, 19 July 1937, Commander Warner K. Thompson, commanding officer USCG Itasca) is a compilation edited, added to, and interpreted by the one person who had the most to lose in the wake of the Earhart debacle. The original logs and press dispatches from the Itasca make it very clear that quite a few people on site at the time were convinced that they were hearing transmissions from the lost plane. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:38:50 EDT From: Dick Strippel Subject: Re: Harry Maude You mentioned Harry Maude was skeptical AE/FN were on Gardner. MORE THAN SKEPTICAL -- HE SAID THEY COULDN'T HAVE BEEN! I WAS FORTUNATE TO HAVE ACCESS TO NEXIS FOR SEVERAL YEARS. IT'S GREAT FOR RESEARCHING NEWSPAPERS/MAGAZINES. I have the Maude piece somewhere if I can just get this g.d. computer to RUN PROPERLY ---- DICK *************************************************************** From Ric Maybe I can help you. For those who may not be familiar with his name, Henry "Harry" Maude was, in 1937, Lands Commissioner for the British Gilbert & Ellice Islands Colony. The settlement of three islands (Gardner, Hull and Sydney) of the the previously uninhabited Phoenix Group was his project. Maude went on to become one of the most respected scholars of the people and cultures of the Central Pacific. He is, most fortunately for us, still alive and working from his home in Canberra, Australia. Over the past ten years we have corresponded with him and, just this past December, he was gracious enough to receive a visit from TIGHAR member Catherine "Cat" Holloway. His opinions about the likelihood of AE and FN ever having been on Gardner were all expressed in response to our direct inquiries. What he actually said was this (in a letter to me dated 4 May 1990): "...What baffles me is why Amelia Earhart or her companion should have died. There was plenty of food on the atoll, any amount of fish on the reef and in the lagoon, and coconuts to drink or eat on the ground or in the trees. The succulent leaves of the boi (Portulaca) makes a very nutritious vegetable salad and can be sucked for moisture. The mtea, the ruku, and the wao are also. I beleive, growing wild on the atoll. The water is brackish, but drinkable for a period in an emergency. The climate of Nikumaroro is excellent ... not hot like Enderbury and indeed cooler than some of the Gilberts, where I lived for some 20 years and found the temperature delightful. ...Taking all factors into account it would seem that if Earhart and her companion crash-landed on the Nikumaroro reef, one was killed onlanding and the other too injured to do more than send a few messages before dying." It might be noted that Prof. Maude also felt that it was highly improbable that Gallagher ever found any bones on Nikumaroro and was recently quite astonished to find that abundant documentation exists to confirm that event. Love to mother, Ric ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:38:49 EDT From: Simon Ellwood Subject: Re: Sonar: Firth of Forth Vern wrote:- >They're hunting for all that royal treasure lost when Charles I overloaded >the ferry and it went down during a storm. Some of the same problems John >spoke of turned up in the program. They've been searching for several >years. I'm not sure how old the documentary was. Maybe they've found it by >this time. If not, I guess they'll be back at it again this year. Well Ric, get Oceaneering to ship their side scan sonar out here to us and Jackie and I will find the treasure - no problem, shouldn't take more than an afternoon. Then TIGHAR's mission financing problems will be over for years ! :-) Don't suppose such outstanding insights earn me a place on Niku IIII ?? Didn't think so. :-( Simon ************************************************************* From Ric If we took along everyone with outstanding insights we'd need the QEII. ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:44:03 EDT From: Simon Ellwood Subject: Re: Points of view David Kelly wrote:- >I wouldn't know.....all our maps show Australia on top and the rest of the >world below....:) David - you're a genius !! No wonder AE & FN couldn't find their way to Howland. Setting off from nearby Lae, they obviously had Oz maps with Australia at the top ! Thus, instead of hitting Howland at about 1deg. North, they ended up 1deg South ! - poor old Fred. :-) We should be able to pinpoint exactly where to search the ocean bed. Thanks David. I'll have to remember when I visit my cousin in Tamworth (200m North of Sydney) to go SOUTH and not North from Sydney. ;-) Geeez - I'm real glad you cleared that up, I could have got real lost outback. I'll have to remember to set my GPS to the OzMode coordinate system when I visit. Or else I'll just hold it upside down and let it sort itself out. ;-) For DICK:- Dick, the Caps-Lock key is on the left, about half way down. Simon *************************************************************** From Ric Okay boys...... ========================================================= Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:19:08 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Post-loss Signals: KGMB test RE: reported response to KGMB Honolulu signal sent to AE Sunday night, July 4. The news articles say carrier signals were picked up by Honolulu Coast Guard and a Pan Am station (unnamed). Would there be any way of verifying receipt of the signals by these locations and verifying the "triangulation" that was supposedly done? Also, would there be separate records, not as part of Cmdr. Thompson's report, from Fort Funston CG (which was the local station in SF Bay area from which Putnam was getting his information)? The news accounts in Oakland say this signal response was the last considered to be authentic. I assume it's why they sent both the Colorado, and then the Lexington, to the Phoenix group. blue skies, jham #2128 **************************************************************** From Ric As far as we know, all of the official message traffic has been assembled and databased by Randy Jacobson from archival sources. I'd be surprised if Fort Funston had anything new, but you never know. The whole KGMB thing is quite complex (like everything about the alleged post- loss signals). The following is an excerpt from a Pan American memo dated 10 July 1937. It is addressed to Chief Communications Engineer, Communications, New York from Division Communication Superintendent, Alameda. It is signed by G. W. Angus. "Arriving Mokapu (the Pan Am station on Oahu) Sunday (July 4, 1937), I spent most of Sunday night at the radio station and we set up a watch on 3105 KC at the DF and also at the receiving station. At 7:30 p.m. local Honolulu time, the broadcast station KGMB arranged a special broadcast to the Earhart plane on their broadcast frequency, requesting the plane to transmit four long dashes on 3105 KC if they heard the KGMB broadcast. Immediately after the broadcast, Mr. Ambler (Section Supervisor, Communications, Honolulu) and myself both distinctly heard four dashes on 3105 KC. We are certain of the frequency because the Coast Guard cutter Itasca had previoulsy set their transmitter on this frequency in an effort to contact the plane. Shortly before, we had taken bearings on the Itasca on this frequency, obtaining an approximate bearing of 210 degrees. Upon hearing the four dashes mentioned above we immediately called KGMB by phone and asked them to repeat the test. This was done and immediately after the second test we again heard the same signals except at this time only two dashes were haeard and the second dash trailed off to a weak signal as though the power supply on the transmitter had failed. Nothing was heard thereafter although a continuous watch was maintained on this frequency all night. During the time these dashes were heard, it was possible to observe an approximate bearing of 213 degrees from Mokapu." At least on this signal, no "triangulation" was done. We know of no instance when more than one station took a bearing on the same signal. The 213 bearing from Mokapu falls very close to Gardner Island but the 210 bearing taken earlier on the Itasca falls well south of her position at the time. Ric ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 08:29:41 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: King Charles 's Ship I'd forgotten all about King Charles's boat. There was a film crew where I work a year or so ago doing something about it but I didn't pay much attention. What I do remember is a chap who had something to do with it disappeared and it ended up folk searching for him......... On this note I seem to recall reading recently of a submarine in the Forth too; some naval cover-up apparently. Regards Jackie ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 08:34:40 EDT From: Tom King Subject: How to prove where AE landed Well, I've got it, folks. Back in my misspent youth I worked on digs in various spots in the San Francisco Bay area trying to figure out where the late British navigator Sir Francis Drake careened his ship, the Golden Hinde in 1579 during the first British circumnavigation of the globe. As much rancorous disputation about the subject as there is about the AE disappearance. Now here's a headline from the Santa Rosa, CA, Press Democrat, dated April 21st, headed: "The Final Word on Golden Hind," and subtitled "Feds: Drake did land ship at Drakes Bay." The gist is: "The National Park Service is expected within the next year to bestow National Historic Landmark status on Drakes Cove, just inside Drake's Estero, marking it as the place where Drake sought refuge to repair his ship..." So, there we are. Enough of this research stuff, enough bashing about on lonely islands. Let's just get the Park Service to declare Niku an NHL. Tom King ************************************************************ From Ric While they're at it they could do Area 51 near Roswell. ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 08:58:11 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Chater Report I just learned that the Placer Dome mining company has an interesting section on their website about the Earhart disappearance. They are the good people who came across, in their files, the lost Chater Report from New Guinea. You can check it out at www.placerdome.com/11arch/11a3.html ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:37:42 EDT From: Tom King Subject: The Scottish Connection For Simon and Jackie and anybody else on that side of the water: I don't suppose you'd care to try to track down any descendants or, or papers by, Dr. "Jock" Macpherson, would you? Jock was the medical officer who accompanied Gallagher back to Niku from his leave in Fiji, and operated on him unsuccessfully. He was also the forensics expert at the medical school where Dr. Hoodless examined the bones, so one wonders if his trip to Niku might have had other purposes. Don't know where he was from in GB, but could doubtless find out, and he might well have descendants....... Tom King ************************************************************** From Ric One of Harry Maude's early letters to me indicated that MacPherson's wife lived in Scotland while Jock (aka "Mac") was off serving the King in the far- flung reaches of the Empire. It shouldn't be too hard to find out where he went to school. Edinburgh would be a good guess - well known seat of medical learning. Should that prove to be the case, Auld Reekie is just over the water from where Jackie lives. ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:45:19 EDT From: Tom Cook Subject: Was it survivable? IF the picture of the wrecked model 10 is AE's AND IF the damage was sustained in landing, would it have been survivable for anyone in the cockpit?? 2127 TC *************************************************************** From Ric Moot point. The undamaged left-hand propeller establishes that the airplane, whatever it is, landed successfully. The left gear leg, and probably the right also, is still down. A cartwheeling groundloop on landing would have crushed in the nose. No such damage. The damage that is apparent in the photo (which is, to say the least, extensive) must be the result of a subsequent event. ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:05:08 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Earhart Conference On the weekend of July 11 &12 the Earhart Project expedition team will be meeting in San Francisco to review evidence, coordinate further research and begin planning for the Niku IIII Expedition now slated for the fall of 1999. Although team meetings are traditionally closed to all but the actual participants in the expedition, it has been suggested that we open this one up as an Earhart Project Conference and invite anyone who wants to come. We could invite the presentation of papers from TIGHAR members, forum subscribers, or anyone else who has research to present. The cost would be minimal - whatever it took to cover expenses. We would probably hold it at The Presidio's Golden Gate Club where we held the Earhart Symposium in January. That was a very successful event but it pre-dated the explosion of interest in the project whch the forum has generated. So, to help us decide whether there is sufficient interest to expand this team meeting into a full-blown conference, please drop me a short email if you think you might be interested in attending. This is not a comitment. Thanks. Ric TIGHAR1@aol.com ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:53:16 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: TIGHAR Tracks TIGHAR Tracks Vol. 14, No.1 (TIGHAR's quarterly journal) is now at the printer and should be ready for mailing to TIGHAR members late next week. It will go First Class mail and will include a copy of the Willis & Geiger Outfitters catalog which features a special TIGHAR expedition shirt (Willis & Geiger outfits our expedition teams). The Table of Contents for this issue of TIGHAR Tracks is: The Kanton Mission (a general description of the February expedition to Kanton) The Pilots thought I Was Nuts (Bruce Yoho's account of his 1971 engine recovery) Ate another MRE (Kenton Spading's field notes from the Kanton Mission) The Noonan Project (a review of the recent research regarding Fred Noonan) Back To Square One (an update on the section of aircraft skin found in 1991) The Wreck Photo (a review of the latest forensic work) Pilze fur Jager (the latest Operation Sepulchre investigation) Special Friends Dept. (a collection of letters and poems about AE from kids) Book Review (Operation Bright Light by George J. Veith) TIGHARs At Work (a review of projects being pursued by TIGHARs worldwide) Also included with this issue will be a separate 11 x 17 map of Nikumaroro showing the atoll's various districts and geographical features and the locations where possible Earhart-related evidence has been found or reported. The text portion of the journal will be mounted on the TIGHAR website three days after the physical magazine is mailed to the members. If you're not yet a TIGHAR member and want to be included in this mailing there is still time to join. You'll find a printable membership form on the TIGHAR website at www.tighar.org or you can simply send a note and a check payable to TIGHAR for $45 to: TIGHAR 2812 Fawkes Drive Wilmington, DE 19808 We can also take membership information and a VISA or MasterCard number over the phone. Just call (302) 994-4410. If it's after hours you can even leave the information on our secure voicemail system. We want you to be a TIGHAR member and we'll make as easy for you as we can. Ric ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 16:03:50 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: Auld reekie/Chater/ King Charles I'll write to the Medical faculty at Edinburgh re Jock MacPherson. What dates would we be talking about? Re. the Chater report. I saw the web site of Placer dome a few weeks ago and wrote off to them the other day so I'll keep you posted. King Charles treasure ship is lying off Burntisland. It is supposed to be carrying a solid silver dinner service for 30 people as well as crown jewels etc. A work colleague knows the chap who was wanting to do the salvage and they contacted the Royal Family but they reckoned seemingly didn't want to know! He confirmed that the divers did do side scan sonar and did indeed do several dives around the wreck ostensibly while on defence work for the nearby naval establishment. Jackie *************************************************************** From Ric I'm guessing, but I'd say MacPherson would have been in medical school sometime between 1925 and 1930. I think I have copies of everything Placer has. They were also kind enough to give TIGHAR one of the original "flimsies" (carbons) of the Chater Report. ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 16:08:51 EDT From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Position report The question begs, what exactly is 100 miles ESE of Niku? If the post loss radio were to be authentic, and assuming that Noonan had several days to take fixes, the coordinates should have been accurate. So what is there? AMCK #1045 ************************************************************ From Ric Water. Lots and lots of water. And some fish. Maybe a whale or two. ========================================================= Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 16:18:06 EDT From: Peter Boor Subject: Navigation, Sextants, etc. I'm moved to add a bit of info that I learned in my years as an aerial navigator. A marvelous reference on the subject is the US Navy's Publication H. O. #9, commonly referred to as Bowditch (as in Nathaniel). My copy is a recent version, but the first one that I owned was published in 1938: a gift from a WW#2 soldier stationed in the Pacific, who was curious about how all those natives rafted about the Pacific islands. I loaned the 1938 version to a friend and never saw it again, but if anyone studies it as I did, they will see the connection between nautical and aerial navigation; the latter just beginning to come to the fore prior to WW#2. FN's career would have paralleled the art as described in that old H. O. #9. Sexants. Aerial sextants today use a bubble as a reference: measuring the angle of a celestial body above the horizontal plane as defined by the bubble. As you look through the device, the optics superimposes the bubble and body images together. Center both images on the crosshair and you've got the angle. I'm not sure, but I would guess that bubble sextants came after FN did his thing. Sailors (or flyers) in 1937 would use the sea horizon as the reference plane instead of the bubble, and again, the images are superimposed to the viewer. Here is where the inverting eyepiece would be used: so the view of the horizon would look normal to the observer. Once I flew a > 20 hour mission with a navigator who came to the aircraft very tired and hung over. About six hours into the mission, he was his old self, and performed with his old skill celestially. Unless FN carried his booze with him and nipped constantly, he was most likely able to perform at his best. No, the FN drinking issue ought to be buried along with the spy stuff. Even if true, I can't believe that it affected the outcome. Peter Boor *************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Peter. Actually, bubble octants were in use in the mid-30s. Fred used one on the Pan Am Pacific survey flights and he borrowed one from the Navy for the first Earhart world flight attempt. ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:34:53 EDT From: Ron DAwson Subject: FN'S navigational skills As best i can determine, Fred signed on with Pan Am in 1930 and resigned in 1935. Five years is not very long to become a legendary navigator - so I'm wondering how much correlation is there between nautical navigation and aerial navigation - I assume its nearly the same, i.e. shooting positions, etc. ???? Ron D. 2126 *************************************************************** From Ric Aerial navigation is, in some ways, quite a bit trickier. The view is better, but everything is happening a whole lot faster. I'm curious about your 1935 date for Fred's departure from Pan Am. Other information we have indicates that he was with the company until just a month or so before hooking up with AE in March of 1937. What's your source for1935? ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:37:43 EDT From: Susan Bound Subject: Re: sinus problems There were no effective medicines for sinus that I am aware of prior to W.W.II! All of our antibiotics and most of the other drugs were an outgrowth of research done during and after W.W.II. These days, first antibiotics would be tried. Sinus surgery is looked down on by insurance companies as a quick buck for Doc's The treatment for stomach problems was a Sippy diet...which was milk and cream every hour and an antacid on the half hour (UGH!), and bland (white colored) foods such as cottage cheese and mashed potatoes. We were still using this in the early '70's when I was in training. Medical care has improved dramatically in the years since W.W.II. Most medical care prior to W.W.II was supportive rather than curative in nature. Insulin was discovered in 1928, along with B12. Vitamins were new things, and many of the drugs were still biologicals rather than chemical compounds. *************************************************************** From Ric I recall some reference to AE having sinus surgery at some point. Must have been fun. ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:48:27 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Harry Maude: Survival I had hesitated to comment on survival -- it might not apply to AE and Fred. It has seemed to me that a person with some survival knowledge/skill should be able to survive indefinitely on Niku. Maud makes it sound like they might have managed! They may have roamed all over the island. Of course, if one or both were injured, that might be a different story. Quoting a part of Maud's letter: >"...Taking all factors into account it would seem that if Earhart and her >companion crash-landed on the Nikumaroro reef, one was killed onlanding and >the other too injured to do more than send a few messages before dying." If we were to believe the account of post-landing radio signals, it would appear it was the battery that died, not the AE and Fred. *************************************************************** From Ric Harry's comments about how easy it would be to survive on Niku always sounded to me a bit like T.E. Lawrence talking about how lovely the desert is. A different, and perhaps more relevant, perspective is provided by the staements filed by the survivors of the Norwich City disaster. Like AE and FN, they had no particular training or familiarity with the island environment and found themselves quite unexpectedly marooned. Of 35 men who went into the water, 24 made it to shore. They were on the island five days before help arrived. By the time they were rescued they were very unhappy campers - reduced to drinking rainwater from filthy depressions in the ground, hungry, and frightened of the crabs that, unbeknownst to them, are great eating. They were also under the impression that the island rats were poisonous. ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:58:38 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: QE2 re "if we took everyone with insight, we'd need the QE2". Sometimes in a jest is an idea. Given the present popularity of "theme cruises" (example: the recent cruise to the site of the Titanic), why not get a cruise line to sponsor a 10 or 14 day cruise out of Honolulu at the time of Niku IV, stand off Niku at a respectful distance, guest lecturers etc., company fills the ship, TIGHAR gets a cut to offset cost of expedition. Tapes, publications available on ship. Problem: Splitting TIGHARS personnel resources between cruise and Niku IV. Ron D. 2126 (fire away, Dick, I'm ducking already.) *************************************************************** From Ric I'm not opposed to the idea in principle, but it's hard to imagine that tourists would be content to just stand offshore. They'd want to walk the burning sands where Amelia once trod and maybe get lucky and be the one to find her lost diary, etc. We're a tough bunch but I'm not sure we're strong enough to handle that. ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 08:12:04 EDT From: David Kelly Subject: Re: Earhart Conference If papers are delivered at this conference i would be interested in getting copies. How many members of the forum are down under...is it worth while holding a conference over here? David ************************************************************* From Ric We'll certainly make any papers available. How many forum members in Australia? I'm not sure. Anyone interested in a downunder Earhart conference might email David directly at djkelly@sneaker.net.au ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:35:24 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Cruising I dunno, Ric; I'm kind of intrigued by the cruise ship idea. Maybe some kind of controlled and productive experience ashore could be arranged, plus nightly briefings so cruisers would be the first to get the word..... Tom King ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:37:05 EDT From: Jerry Ellis Subject: Re: Convention down under Perhaps you could request a copy of each paper on a disc in an appropriate format in a word processor or your choice and then post each on the web page. In my field, those interested in a hard copy request it directly from the author. That would make it a lot easier for you. I imagine you have plenty to do as it is. jerry w. -- Jerry W. Ellis Carbohydrates, polymers and Professor of Chemistry Chemical Education Department of Chemistry Eastern Illinois University ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:38:18 EDT From: Don Jordan Subject: Re: California Earhart Conference Ya...I think I would like to attend the conference. It's not far from home. Fill me in on the details. Don (#2109) ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:41:02 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Re: Navigation, Sextants, etc. Re: Posting by Peter Boor: With reference to a nuatical sextant used by flyers... >again, the images are superimposed to the viewer. Here is where the >inverting eyepiece would be used: so the view of the horizon would look >normal to the observer. The reason for the inverting eyepiece still escapes me. Would the flyer not see the sky above and the sea below, just as would the sailor? Why would the flyer wish to invert the image? ========================================================= Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:42:35 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: Aerial navigation The theory is the same - a mixture of dead reckoning,celestial navigation and piloting but using a bubble sextant was in some ways trickier because the bubble oscillated and you had to take an average of say six readings or more. The accuracy was not as good therefore as for a marine sextant. Most of the early aerial navigators were naval officers and they would have taken a marine sextant as well as a bubble sextant. The flying boats especially used a sextant similar to a marine sextant. In some ways aerial navigation is easier because you dont have the correction for the horizon but in later aerial navigation you had to correct for the coriolis effect. I seem to recall Fred left PanAm in early1937, I have it in my mind it was Jan 1st. He started in 1935 in the Pacific division, he was in Miami before that I think. I'm looking into the archives so I'll confirm that ========================================================= Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 08:46:34 EDT From: Peter Boor Subject: Re: Navigation, Sextants, etc. Vern Klein wrote: > The reason for the inverting eyepiece still escapes me. Would the flyer not > see the sky above and the sea below, just as would the sailor? Why would > the flyer wish to invert the image? The flier wouldn't. Unless he/she was using a nautical sextant (like the one in the mysterious box) and was using the sea horizon as his/her reference. At some low altitude, or with corrections for altitude. As I remember, the sailors also make corrections if the sight is made at a distance above the waterline. In the air, we always made two-minute sightings, and averaged, either manually or had the more modern sextants do the averaging. Bubble motion can be minimized by bubble size, and coriolis corrections are made to the sighting, depending on heading and speed. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 08:52:45 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: Re: FN Navigational skills Ric: I think you are probably right about Fred leaving Pan Am early in 1937. I am looking now for the reference which stated he "resigned in 1935". However, if we accept he came to Alameda in 1935 and his El Paso friend , Howard Archer, said he made 18 round trips to the Orient, that surely would have added at least another year to his Pan Am tenure. Have a Safe trip, Ron D. 2126 ========================================================= Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 08:54:05 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Post-landing Sigs: KGMB It may be that none of the radio signals reported to have been heard from AE after they were down are real. However, I think we should not ignore these reports at this point. Remember that 1937 was near a maximum in the 11 year solar activity cycle. If AE did transmit anything, it might have been detectable at very distant locations. The question has been raised as to how AE was able to hear the broadcast from KGMB when she was not able to hear the Itasca. Maybe she did hear the Itasca and didn't know it. She was probably hearing CW signals (code) as she fiddled around with the receiver tuning. Some may have been "skipping" in from distant sources. And one of them may have been the Itasca. Neither she nor Fred could read code, so they wouldn't know. There is also the possibility of "operator error" in working with the radio. We know it's not easy to find a signal with a continuous coverage receiver -- no preset, crystal-controlled frequencies. And AE was expecting (hoping) to hear a voice. But at least part of the time she was listening on a frequency where the Itasca had no voice capability. Relative to possible equipment problems, there is so much uncertainty as to exactly what the radio and antenna arrangements were on the plane that we can only guess. We are not sure whether there were one or two receivers or which of the several antennas were used for what purpose. Assuming an equipment problem, I'll venture one theory... If, as is suspected, an antenna on the underside of the aircraft was lost on takeoff from Lae, that might explain why AE was not able to hear the Itasca. If this was her receiving antenna (possibly the "sense" antenna for direction finding as well), reception would certainly have been impaired. After hours of exposure to engine noise -- and still listening to it -- it would be pretty hard to hear a weak signal. So, what about the post-landing signals? If they finally got the plane down somewhere, possibly on Niku, they would want to see what could be heard on the radio -- their only connection to the rest of the world. Had anyone noticed that they were missing and was anyone looking for them? And they would have noticed that they had lost the underside antenna. If, due to this, or any other sort of mishap on landing, they believed they had a receiving antenna problem, they would have done something about it. A receiving antenna is pretty uncritical and would not have been difficult to rig. Use any wire you can get your hands on, splice if necessary, and attach one end to the binding-post on the receiver, then run it outside any way that's convenient. Run the wire as much in the clear as possible and attach it to the highest thing you can manage. If you have to attach to some part of the aircraft, insulate it. A dry piece of wood would do. In 1937, people were familiar with stringing up long wires for receiving antennas. If they found a broadcast station such as KGMB, they might have stayed on it to see what was being said on newscasts. They might not have been inclined to use the transmitter unless they had reason to believe there might be someone near enough to hear them. This would be especially true if they couldn't run the engine with the generator and had to rely on battery power. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:30:04 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Post-landing Sigs: KGMB Ric will doubtless have more to say in response to your post, Vern, but let me expose my ignorance and ask a stupid question. If you were trying to elevate your antenna, would climbing up and attaching it as high as you could in a tree be what you'd do, or would it be better to string it out into a clear place even if you couldn't get it very high off the ground? Tom King ========================================================= Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:31:48 EDT From: Don Jordan Subject: Lost antenna What is the story of the possible lost antenna? I have heard it several time now but don't know the details. Fill me in. Where does this information come from? Don Jordan (2109) ****************** From Pat: Someone want to help Don out here? :-) Mini tanks. ========================================================= Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:32:42 EDT From: Jackie Ferrari Subject: Noonan-PanAm Fred was still with PanAm in the late October of 1936. He was Navigation Instructor on the Hawaii Clipper the first Trans-Pacific passenger flight from Alameda to Manila. Source: Wings to the Orient. Jackie ========================================================= Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:28:21 EDT From: Mike Ruiz Subject: Re: Cruising The cruise ship idea could be a plus for TIGHAR financially. First consideration should be given to TIGHAR members. Toms idea of a controlled and productive experience on shore is a good one. I would guess minimum cost per person would be fairly high including TIGHAR tax. Then the question is: for all those who say they want to go, will they really decide on Niku vs. Maui when they see the cost? Maybe a forum survey. As for someone finding something, its possible, but not likely. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:31:27 EDT From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Noonan-PanAm Jackie wrote: >Fred was still with PanAm in the late October of 1936. He was >Navigation... The first Manila Clipper flight left November 22, 1935 from Oakland (actually Alameda which is an island a stone's throw from Oakland in the SF Bay). Musik was the pilot. Noonan listed as "navigation officer". Additionally, Noonan and three others were said to be "veterans of all the previous transpacific hops". The papers also say he came to the Pan Am Pacific division (Oakland) in 1935. When he was first announced as a navigator for AE on March 13, 1937 the Oakland Trib said Noonan left Pan Am "a short time ago", although I have yet to find anything more specific. Other sources say he left around the new year. Blue skies, jham #2128 ========================================================= Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:32:17 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: DNA: Amplification: PCR For anyone interested in the amplification (multiplication) of DNA, including mtDNA, by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), there's a readable one-page article in the May issue of Scientific American. It's the very last page. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:34:08 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Post-landing Sigs: KGMB Tom, relative to stringing up an antenna. I'd go for as high as I could get it. You're trying to span as much of an electric field as you can. One side of your circuit is the antenna wire and the other is the aircraft itself (the "ground" terminal of the receiver is connected to it) and, effectively, to the earth. Even if the aircraft is not well connected to the ground (earth), there's enough coupling to the ground (capacitive) that it comes to about the same thing. So, to intercept as much the field as possible, get the antenna as far from the aircraft and the ground as you can. At the frequency involved, being among some foliage wouldn't matter much. ========================================================= Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:35:26 EDT From: Skeet Gifford Subject: Re: Earhart Conference Ric wrote: >On the weekend of July 11 &12 the Earhart Project expedition team will be >meeting in San Francisco to review evidence, coordinate further research and >begin planning for the Niku IIII Expedition now slated for the fall of 1999. > >Although team meetings are traditionally closed to all but the actual >participants in the expedition, it has been suggested that we open this one up >as an Earhart Project Conference and invite anyone who wants to come. I am interested, but would have to adjust my work schedule at Langley. Skeet Gifford ========================================================= Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 11:05:22 EDT From: Vern Klein Subject: Radio: Lost antenna Don... I expect Ric will fill in the gaps in what I know about this when he gets back. It appears there is some movie footage of the takeoff from Lae. Maybe some newsreel footage? The speculation starts with an event observed as the plane is headed down the runway gaining speed to get into the air. This is not what we think of as a runway today -- not even the most "rustic" of today's airstrips. It's just a relatively level strip clear of trees and large bushes, but there is stuff growing there -- Thick tundra grasses, etc. The tail is up and the plane is gaining speed... For just a moment, a large puff of dust, or whatever, appears under and behind the fuselage. It is believed this was the underside antenna, with the rear mast already broken, snagging in the turf and probably ripping away the rest of the antenna. Reverse theorizing... How did the rear mast get broken off? The same