Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:40:02 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Another eyewitness From Ric One of the things I love about this job is that the most amazing people sometimes just call on the phone out of the blue. Usually it's somebody from the bank asking about the overdue payment but once in a while it's a guy like Gerald V. Berger of Seattle who called yesterday morning to tell me that he wanted to make some corrections to the book he had just read called "Amelia Earhart - The Mystery Solved." I explained that I had not written the book but Mr. Berger, who is 83, said that was okay. His son had found our website on the internet and so he had called me. He also wanted to know if I would like to have some photos he had taken of Amelia Earhart's airplane when it was wrecked on Ford island. I said, " Sure, you mean at Luke Field?" "Well, that's what the Army called it. We shared the runway with them. To us it was Fleet Air Base, Ford Island." "So you were in the Navy?" "Yup, aircraft mechanic with VJ6. I also drove the crash truck. We had the only crash truck on the field." "Did you drive the crash truck that morning - the morning she wrecked the airplane?" "Sure did. Saw the whole thing. We were following down the runway behind her just in case. Looked to me like she tried to pull if off too soon and it settled back down crooked. The right wing dipped, then the right gear folded and that was it." "So you were on the scene right away." "First one there. I ran up on the right wing and leaned across to get the hatch open. Had an awful time. There was this loop antenna and you had to turn it to get it out of the way before you could open the hatch. About that time two Army guys got up on the left wing and we got the hatch open. That's when we saw she was unconscious." "Unconscious?" "Yeah, that's where the guy who wrote the book has it wrong." (On page 101 the Longs say: "With deliberate calm Earhart shut off the ignition and master switches and opened the overhead hatch. She stood up on the pilot's seat with her head and shoulders out of the cockpit. The fire truck was right behind her. She watched as it pulled up on the left of the plane.") "Are you sure she was unconscious? What did she look like?" "She was slumped over sort of down to the right. I guess Newman (sic) must have reached over and released the hatch. He was fine but she was real groggy. We got her up and out of there and standing on the wing and she came around. (The Longs say: "Lieutenant Arnold and Chris Holmes arrived at the plane just as Earhart exited from the cockpit. Chris helped her as she came down off the left wing. amelia asked, "What happened?") Newman was pretty uptight about his charts and insisted on getting them out of the airplane. We were all worried because there was gas all over the ground and puddling up where the hot bottom cylinders had dug gouges in the macadam and a bunch of sailors were wanting to come help and they were smoking." "How many people were in the plane?" "Amelia and Newman were up front and there was another fella in the back. They had a bunch of extra fuel tanks in the cabin and he was back behind them. I don't think I talked to him at all. I had a little Brownie camera - servicemen weren't supposed to have cameras in those days, but I did anyway - and I started snapping pictures. Later that day I took the film in to town to have it developed. When I went back to pick it up I found out that the guy who owned the store had sold one of my photos to the newspaper. I was real mad so he gave me $20." The Army's official report on the crash contains the following description: "The fire truck had followed along the side of the mat during the take-off and reached the scene within a few seconds as did the observers nearest the crash. There was no fire. Miss Earhart and her crew emerged unhurt." The official report also contains several witness statements including: Major Phillips Melville, Operations Officer, Luke Field "The Luke Field crash truck had followed the the airplane on the take-off and was on the scene immediately. The persons nearest the scene reached it within a few seconds. The undersigned leaped into an automobile and hurried to the scene, arriving first as Miss Earhart and her crew emerged unhurt." 1st Lieutenant Donald D. Arnold, Air Corps, Depot Engineering Officer, Luke Field "I grabbed Mr. Chris Holmes by the arm and together we sped to the scene of the crash in my car. Mrs. Putnam was standing upright in the cockpit but Mr. Noonan and Mr. Manning had not yet alighted. Mr. Holmes proceeded to assist Mrs. Putnam and the crowd formed immediately." Fred D. Wood, Civilian Employee, Hawaiian Air Depot "By the time the airplane had stopped doing the ground loop, the Luke Field fire department was at the plane prepared to put out any possible fire. The mechanics from the Hawaiian Air Depot who were standing along the edge of the landing mat ran across the run-way to the plane with fighters. Mr. Mantz with a fire fighter accompanied these mechanics. Miss Earhart was standing up in the cockpit soon after the plane had stopped turning, and a short time after that, crawled out of the cockpit and went to the rear cabin door." This is a classic conflicting eyewitness situation, even among the people who provided written statements at the time. Gerald Berger - like Leo Bellarts, Frank Stewart, and Harry Balfour - had some first-hand involvement with an event which was to become legendary. The story each of them tells includes a dramatic element that is unsupported by the written record. Gerald and I talked for quite a while. He told me that a couple of years later he was assigned to the seaplane tender USS Pelican. The ship had a Grumman J2-F "Duck" on the fantail which they swung out and plopped into the water with a crane. They were sent way down to South Pacific to take aerial photos of a whole bunch of islands. I said, "Yeah, you were supporting the USS Bushnell's survey." "Yes!! How did you know that? I have photos of the Bushnell." "Oh, we've tried to study up on things that happened in that area. Did you take any photos of the islands yourself?" "Sure. Lots." "From the air?" "No. I was the mechanic. I generally didn't ride in the plane except for maintenance tests." "Do you remember any of the islands you visited?" "Sure. I remember that when we stopped at Hull Island about 20 men went ashore in the launch and spread out and did a search." "A search for what?" "For her plane of course. Didn't find anything though." "So you guys were still thinking about Earhart?" "Oh yeah. A lot of people were sure that she had made it to one of those islands." "Do you remember visiting Gardner? "Sure. I think I have a picture of it. I'll send you a copy." "Thanks. I'd love to see it. We have a copy of the aerial photo mosaic the Duck took that day. That was April 30, 1939. Do you remember if anybody went ashore there?" "I think so, but I'm not sure." (The Pelican's deck log does not indicate that anyone went ashore but Jack Petro, the foreman on Gardner, and a few of the workers did visit the ship for a few hours.) Although Mr. Berger's recollections contain no great revelations, it's always a privilege and a little bit spooky to speak with someone who "was there." I did not tape our conversation and the reconstruction of our conversation related above is a paraphrase done from notes I took as we were speaking. The information and the tone are accurately conveyed if not necessarilly that exact words. There was much more to the conversation. I've reproduced only the parts that are relevant to our investigation. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:53:00 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: AE Program On my local public TV station, in the SF Bay Area, there will be a program about AE (Monday, Mar. 20, 10pm) as part of women's history month. The enticement says, "The Final Hours: Amelia Earhart's Last Flight - this new exploration of the life of the great aviatrix takes viewers on a journey around the world in a vintage Lockheed Electra, recreating Earhart's final flight in 1937. The Final Hours uses Earhart's diaries and log books to tell the story of her life and to track her last flight in her own words. Aviation experts also try to shed light on what may have happened during her ill-fated final flight." blue skies, -jerry *************************************************************************** From Ric That's a new one to me. Just got a call yestereday from a Canadian production company doing an Earhart documentary. Maybe it's time for the Earhart Channel - all Amelia - all the time. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:01:07 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Chain letter chain letter >From Ric >Live and learn. Got sucked in by the "help the kids" thing. E-mail address harvesters use chain letters to to collect good address for sale to advertisers. They usually employ tactics such as "my 8 year old daughter has cancer and wants to get her story out to the whole world...." Frank Westlake ************************************************************************** From William Webster-Garman Help the children", it's an old scam. Of course we want to help children, and appealing to that instinct is one way that fraudsters, politicians, and others are able to peddle so many bad ideas to so many people. william 2243 ************************************************************************* From Vern Ric, Sorry about getting you suckered into the chain letter thing! At least it was for real. I checked for a web page and found this. They did have the picture up. I didn't actually do the chain letter thing by just forwarding to everyone I knew but simply posted the content. Let each be guided by his own paranoia. Be assured I'll not go off-topic again. Well... no further off than one more "PAA according to Grooch" posting. It WILL contain the words, "Amelia Earhart" and "Fred Noonan." ************************************************************* From Ric I think we should help the children by making sure everyone knows about the dangers of email chain letters. Please forward this email to everyone you know. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:12:28 EST From: Christian D. Subject: Re: Journey of the schooner Yankee > April 4, 1940 Yankee arrives Canton Island from Honolulu with 20 passengers > and crew (telegram from "Fleming" to Acting Sec. High commision. > > May 10, 1940 A handwritten (and hard to read) letter to the High Commission > from "H.B.M. Agency and Consulate, Tonga" describes the Yankee as having a > crew of 14 plus passengers and gives it's progress to date as "Panama, > Ecuador, Galpagos, Easter, Pitcairn, Mangaina(?), Tahiti, Hawaii, Canton, > Pago Pago, Tonga" Does this mean she left Tonga on May 10th??? > September 14, 1940 report to High Commission from Resident Commissioner, > G&EIC gives the following movements: > > May 13, 1940 Arrived Funafuti from Tokelau Group > May 14, 1940 Arrived Vaitupu This does not jiive too well... Did the Yankee go BACK to Tokelau from Tonga, and then on to Funafuti??? Gardner would then be on the way to Funafuti,,, Also, if Yankee was to briefly hover outside Gardner (no anchorage), say to drop supplies, it may not be deemed to be listed as a "real" port of call... Just found a few indirect references to the Johnson's. Seven 18-month-long round-the-world trips, over 10 years. Basically as a charter boat. The last 4 trips on the 96-foot brigantine "Yankee", beginning in 1948. The other boat was the Schooner "Yankee", for the first 3 trips. Sorry, no other details. As this was a tourist business, they didn't have MUCH time to spare on sideline ventures... If someone can check libraries, I have 2 book references: "Yankee's Wander World" -Johnson, Irving & Electa -Norton "Yankee's People and Places" -Johnson, Irving &Electa, and Edes, Lydia -Norton. Cheers Christian D. *************************************************************************** From Ric It's not clear when Yankee left Tonga but there's no way she could travel to Funafuti from Tonga in three days without a warp drive. Gardner is not what I would call on the way from the Tokelaus to Funafuti and I can't imagine why Yankee would be dropping supplies there. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:24:48 EST From: Christian D. Subject: Re: Artifacts at the "7" > Gallagher's people evidently expected to spend enough time at the site to > justify setting up a water catching/storage facility, but they did no > coconut planting there. Was it just for the search for other artifacts > associated with the castaway? > > The roll of tar paper is odd. It's of a type intended primarily for roofing What I think is very odd is that there is a WHOLE roll, and no scraps laying around. If tar paper had indeed been USED, the collapsed/rotten shelter would still have pieces of tar scattered around. Was tar paper used on the main building at the village? Any tar paper scraps found there? Kind of looks like this was a project which was not fully inplemented. > Other things about what was found there and what wasn't are puzzling. > - six coconut shell drinking cups at the tank suggest at least six workers, > but only one discarded food can? > - why only a few scraps of copper screening? Are we talking electronic type screen, or like mosquito screen? We have to remember that when the Gilbertese departed for good in 1963, they must have salvaged as much as possible... I can attest that nowadays, on Kanton, when a bureaucrat's tour of duty is over, they leave with as much "stuff" they can salvage as possible. Except for the most heavy items of course... Whatever can be found now is likely only a SMALL part of what was there in the forties... > - whose button? Gallagher's? A worker's? Or is it from the castaway? > - where's the rest of the plate? May be the piece was used as a scraper??? > - a plate? Who eats off a plate? The guy who ate the food in the can? > - why a tank AND a barrel presumably to collect water for such a small > operation? Speaking of artifacts: is there any Coke and other soda bottles anywhere on Niku? LOTS of them on Kanton! Including some remote spots obviously used for picnics. I found quite a few in the shallow lagoon water. Of course on Kanton, they may date from the sixties US operations. But then I found a "bottle dump" on the N ocean shore at Palmyra, just a small distance from some concrete work on a beach -some officers club? I know operations on Palmyra continued after the war, but not very long... If someone could confirm that WW-II troops had Coca Cola in 1941, but there is no bottle at all at the 7-site, then it would be likely that we have a purely non-US site... Anybody knows??? Christiand D. ************************************************************************** From Ric Yes, we've seen Coke bottles on Niku, including down at the Loran station. Also in the village. Nowhere else. The little "nickel" bottles. Almost certainly wartime. No bottles of any kind at the "7" site, and now that you mention it, that's pretty odd. We see lots of bottles in the village and at the "european House" site on Nutiran. Beer bottles, liquor bottles (no Benedictine bottles though). The screen is fine mesh copper anti-bug screening, now green in color. I agree that the unused roll of tar paper suggests an aborted project of some kind. I'm not sure that we've ever seen similar material up in the village but I know that we have seen sheet asbestos such as we found at the site and, of course, there are steel tanks in the village virtually identical to the one at the "7". I think that it is very possible that once the project (whatever it was) was abandoned, the easily transportable material was salvaged. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:28:48 EST From: Dick Pingrey Subject: The around the World solo balloon flight attempt I can't let this go without making an explanation. The around the world balloon is a gas balloon with a propane heater. The heater is used to MAINTAIN the helium temperature from day to night temperature variations. It is also used to ADJUST the helium temperature and thus the expanded volume of the helium. This allows the pilots to select, change or maintain the desired altitude where the needed winds for both speed and direction are to be found. This has never been explained in the media and improperly the balloons are identified as hot air balloons over and over again. They are really a special class combination balloons. Dick Pingrey 0908C Who has a few hundred of hours flying balloons. *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Dick. Admittedly off-topic, but interesting. The only amusing aspect of the tragic Alaska Airlines crash was watching the media try to explain what "trim" is. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:41:37 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Artifacts at the "7" We know there was really heavy weather on Niku between the time Gallagher was instructed to make an intensive search and the time he put the bones aboard Nimanoa. I wonder if the "house" might have been built in preparation for overnight stays because it was (or was expected to be) too rough to return to the village across the lagoon. I also wonder (sheer, untestable speculation) if after the loss of the inverting eyepiece Gallagher decided he'd search the site by himself, and just camp out there for awhile to do so. LTM TK ************************************************************************** From Ric An anecdote recently told to me by Kay Kepler, a botanist who has spent a lot of time in Kiribati, may be somewhat apropos to the issue of "inverting eyepiece" and possibly other artifacts. A while back a crew widening a road on Tarawa knocked down a very old coconut palm and up with the roots came a bunch of human bones. A couple of local young men ran over and collected them along with a set of American dog tags belonging to a young Marine named Dennis Gilmore who had died in the 1943 assault. The proper authorities were notified and eventually a team came out from Hawaii to collect the bones. They also insisted upon having the dog tags which were still in the possession of the young men who collected up the bones. The young men were very disappointed to lose their souvenir and there was much sympathy in the local community that it was unfair to take the tags away from them. There was no magic or superstition associated with the tags. They were just a cool memento of something really interesting that happened. For what it's worth.... LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:47:02 EST From: Clyde Miller Subject: Re: Another eyewitness I would have to think one of the best parts of doing research like this is meeting and talking with people just like this. And one of the great things about this forum is that we didn't have to wait weeks or months to get the details, if at all. The call came, Ric takes notes, Ric translates notes, and in less than 24 hours we all get to share a truly exciting piece of history that we can now chew on. We never know which conversation will lead to the final solution, or which one will trigger yet another train, but what wonderful technology we can apply to do research. Thanks TIGHAR. Your'e Greeeaat! Clyde Miller (who just loves this tech stuff) ************************************************************************** From Ric I haven't had the privilege of talking to the folks who were there as much as, say, Elgen Long who got into the game much earlier and had the travel benefits of an airline pilot - but I treasure experiences like trading Niku stories with Eric Bevington. Gotta tell you this one. Sitting in Eric's living room in the south of England in 1991 and talking about how difficult a place Gardner can be to get around on, I mentioned how annoying it is to get your boots wet crossing the lagoon passages. Bevington said, "No, no, no. You're doing it wrong. You have the boys carry you across." LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:00:39 EST From: John Raspanti Subject: Re: Another eyewitness Fascinating Ric..now i have a favor to ask. Could you give me your opinion of ' Witness To The Execution', i'm reading it now. I'm curious about the witnesses, they don't seem to have anything to gain by lying to Brennan. No money was offered..( that i'm aware of). Also the 'Thomas Devine' book...interesting...but do you belive it's 'all' fiction? Thanks, John *************************************************************************** From Ric I don't believe it's all fiction, nor do I think the witnesses were lying to Brennan or that Devine was intentionally spreading falsehoods. Malicious intent is by no means a prerequisite of bad information. People mean well but they remember things wrong. We all do it. Some memories are absolutely accurate, other aren't. The problem is that there is no way to tell which are which. That's why historians rely upon contemporaneous written records, photographs, and artifacts. Unfortunately there are none of those things to support the various and mutually contradictory Japanese capture stories. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 11:32:37 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: "Happy Trails" by AE and FN? Another thought -- what about the apparent pathways from the "European style house" (sic) to the "cruciform" in the airphotos of Nutiran? ************************************************************************** From Ric Good thought. I've reviewed those photos and, although an on-the-ground inspection showed the "European style house" to have been a Gilbertese style structure and the cruciform object seen in the old photos proved to be a cruciform bunch of bushes, the apparent trails in the photos are still quite obviously trails and look a whole lot like what we see in the 1938 photo of the "7" site. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 11:45:16 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Gerald Berger reports What a coup! Getting copies of Gerald Berger's photos will be a real treat. Now I know why we pay you The Big Bucks! :-) The fact all of the written reports from that era omit any references to AE's injury does not surprise me, and it offers a clear example of the differences in public and medical attitudes of the '30s compared to today's. In Gerald's account, AE apparently suffered a mild concussion and was unconscious for only a very short time. The fact she recovered so quickly and there was no visible evidence (??) of trauma, led her rescuers to assume she was "unhurt," so there was nothing to report. Today such an event would dictate the pilot and crew spend the night at a local hospital for observation and evaluation. The fact AE was knocked out would also cause concern among her doctors. With recent discoveries of the real damage concussions can cause (ask '49ers quarterback Steve Young for starters), this minor accident would today be a good reason for a major physical exam. And if the FAA got the info . . . well, just ask Bob Hoover what happens when the FAA starts bumbling around your medical records. (Don't get me started on that!!) Ric, nice catch on the Berger data! I know it fell into your lap, but don't ignore the importance of good luck (See also the Tarawa papers!) As my poker playing buds tell me, "I'd rather be lucky than good!" TIGHAR, its staff, and members are both!! LTM, who is afraid of wetting herself at this point Dennis O. McGee #0149CE *************************************************************************** From Ric We seem to have all kinds of luck. Some of it's even the good kind. It's interesting that Berger read Long's book but ended up calling us. The reason is simple. We're on the web and he's not. As much as I enjoyed talking with Mr. Berger, I would not be quick to accept that AE was in fact unconscious or that she hit her head. In fact, Berger never said that she had hit her head. To belabor a point, Berger's information is anecdotal and contradicts, in some respects, contemporaneous written accounts. Unless one of his photos turns out to show AE passed out in the cockpit or with a big lump on her forehead, the rules of the game say that we have to stick with the hard evidence. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 11:53:26 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Yankee logs It appears that if someone wanted to locate the deck logs of the Yankee they would probably find them at the Mystic Seaport museum. -------------- "Mystic Seaport is home to the Irving M. Johnson Archive, a rich collection documenting one of America's first sail education programs. The Archive holds over 50,000 feet of film in 100 rolls; 5,300 slides; 2,300+ negatives, more than 1,100 photographs; numerous scrapbooks dated between 1932 and 1991; the YANKEE logs and account books for all the world voyages; an oral history interview with the Johnsons, and countless other letters, postcards, articles, journals, and other manupscript pieces." The above reference also has pictures of living (at the time) crew members. -------------- Biographical Resume [Irving McClure Johnson] "Their first vessel, the schooner YANKEE, made the voyage three times and was sold in 1941 prior to WWII." -------------- A line drawing of the Yankee -------------- Books and other documentation of/by the Johnsons: -------------- Unrelated - Picture of an octant: ************************************************************************* From Ric My goodness! The next question is whether it's worth chasing. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 12:39:55 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Bevington Interview re "human activity" The major clues to AE/FN's presence on NIKU (aside from the LOP and radio signal stuff) between 2 Jul 37 and 13 Oct 37 came from the contemporaneous reports of Lt. Lambrecht and Cadet Officer Eric Bevington,Maude's assistant. The other significant clues were discovered much later-1940 to 1991. *Lt Lambrecht says he saw signs of "recent habitation" on 7 Jul 37 as he buzzed over Niku but didn't identify the location or what the signs were. *Cadet Bevington, in your interview of him in 1991, says he saw evidence of "recent human activity" on Aukaraime [ where the shoe parts were found]. Lambrecht's report must stand on its own,but did Bevington provide additional details concerning his observation of "human activity",i.e., artifacts,campfires,shelters,or whatever. H e surely must have recalled more! Did he describe how thoroughly he and Prof Maude explored the Island or any other activity that might have flushed out AE. Was that expedition aware of the possibility of Earhart's crash in the Phoenix Is? Lastly, apparently there is no documented history or reports of organized "human" activity on Niku, say from 1936 to July 1937,other than the turtle hunters,castaways or yachters;or maybe nearby Islanders? LTM,Ron Bright (I need this for a little presentation) ************************************************************************** From Ric First it would be good to get the facts straight. - Lambrecht's over-flight was on July 9, not July 7. - The most important Bevington evidence comes from the diary he kept at the time (a contemporaneous written source), not his anecdotal recollections in 1991. - Maude was not a Professor at the time. He was a civil servant Lands Commissioner for the Gilbert & Ellice Islands Colony. The evidence in Bevington's diary is contained in one passage: "In the afternoon (of October 14) we got a canoe and Maude came in it, his lumbago being better, and I took him to all the points of special note I had visited the day before. It was a deluxe way of doing it, in a canoe gliding across the lagoon with natives paddling. We found many interesting things including signs of previous habitation." When we visited Bevington in 1991 we asked him to mark on a map of Niku where it was that the "signs of previous habitation" were seen. We were careful to ask him to do this before we said anything about what we had found or where we had found it. He thought for a moment and put a question mark on Aukeraime just east of Bauareke Passage (we have this on videotape and we have the marked map). When we asked if he could elaborate on the diary entry he said, "It wasn't much. It looked like someone had bivouaced for the night." Later in the interview he recalled "low walls or mounds." Maude did not apparently keep a diary but he also recently claimed to remember a "mound" of debris which he took at the time to be a relic of the Arundel plantings in 1892. I don't agree with your final statement: <> I'd say, there is no documented history or reports of any human activity on Niku in the years immediately prior to 1938 except for a brief visit by HMS Leith in February 1937 and the confirmed presence of a castaway whose remains were found in 1940. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 12:41:16 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: The around the World solo balloon flight attempt I know what "trim" is, and it is a function of my belt size. Unfortunately, mine is not called that... LTM, who still uses whale bone corsets to maintain her "trim" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 12:45:24 EST From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Another eyewitness What surprised me about the eyewitness account was that it was Noonan in the copilots seat, and not Manning. Having not paid too much attention to that detail in other books, I always thought that Manning would be sitting there. Perhaps that is the reason why he jumped ship after the crash: he was relegated to the proverbial "back seat". *************************************************************************** From Ric That surprised me too, but let's remember that Berger saying that it was "Newman" in the right seat doesn't make it so. Maybe his photos will provide more info. They were supposedly taken within just a few minutes of the crash. Most of the photos I've seen of the wreck were taken after the props and cowlings had been removed. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 12:53:33 EST From: Chris Kennedy Subject: Re: Gerald Berger reports My hope is that perhaps Berger's photos will include the interior of the Electra. As I appreciate it, we have no photos/diagrams of the interior of the plane as configured for the round the world trip (hence the difficulty of positively identifying the origin of the dado artifact). If, somehow, Berger was able to get a picture of the interior of the plane, this would be a major step forward in research, generally, concerning the flight. --Chris Kennedy *************************************************************************** From Ric Unfortunately, any photo taken at Luke Field is, by definition, prior to the work at Burbank where the interior had to be torn out to effect the repairs. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:52:01 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Another eyewitness Was Manning a pilot? If not, and since Noonan was, maybe that's why Fred was up front for the takeoff. ltm jon 2266 ************************************************************************* From Ric Both Manning and Noonan were licensed pilots. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:56:43 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Yankee logs For what it's worth, a friend of ours (long-ago grad school mate of my wife's) used to work at Mystic, and last time I heard still did. I imagine we could facilitate access, if needed. TK ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:55:44 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: Yankee logs >From Ric >My goodness! The next question is whether it's worth chasing. I think it would be worth it if someone in this forum currently lives near the Mystic Seaport. I visited Mystic Seaport when I was 12 or 13 (1970?) and my memory is that it was very interesting, exciting, and educational. The Yankee may not have visited Gardner (but they may have!) but they may have sailed by it and taken some photos, and the Norwich City is certainly an obvious photographic target. If the Yankee was ostensibly looking for Earhart they may have been familiar with the theory that she may have landed at Gardner. There was(?) no boat landing or anchorage at Gardner so they may have sailed around it and didn't feel that it qualified as a visit. "100 rolls; 5,300 slides; 2,300+ negatives, more than 1,100 photographs" is a lot to sift through, but the logs will probably indicate whether such sifting is necessary. Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric Mystic Seaport is indeed a wonderful place to visit if anyone is looking for an excuse. You are correct that Gardner did not have a boat landing and it's reef was known to be one of the most dangerous in the region. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:28:07 EST From: Margot Still Subject: Re: Gerald Berger reports For a change, I agree with the head TIGHAR. I too, am leary to say AE was knocked unconscious. Her recovery was much too quick with no side effects noted (dizziness, inability to walk without assistance, blurred vision, etc.). I am more apt to say she had the wind knocked out of her. Having been involved in a car accident where I was driving a small snappy sports car that was crunched between two large trucks, I impacted with the windshield twice. I was not knocked unconscious, but did have the breath knocked out of me and clear across the street. I suspect the same happened to AE, except she got her plane fixed, and my snappy sports car was totaled. The report did make for great reading. (The phone report, not my accident report.) LTM (who also drives snappy red sports cars) MStill 2332 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:34:44 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Another eyewitness I was also surprised by the possibility Fred was up front instead of Manning. I remembered that Noonan had been quoted about the accident so I checked the newspaper accounts from the Oakland Tribune. One article from March 21 is an "eyewitness account" which FN gave United Press. Fred is quoted as saying, "I was sitting in the back of the plane among my navigating instruments." QED blue skies, -jerry ************************************************************************** From Ric There you go. The Anecdote Dog bites again. When you think about it - Berger had never met Noonan or Manning. Whoever was in the right seat probably did not introduce himself when the hatch was opened. All Berger knows is that there's a guy there. In later years, all the press about a man with Earhart is about Noonan. Ergo, the man becomes Noonan (Newman). ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:37:24 EST From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: Re: Bevington Interview re "human activity" Re: mounds referenced by Maude and Bevington. Far fetched thought - could "mounds" be a grave? blue skies, -jerry *************************************************************************** From Ric Yeah. We've wondered about that. No way to know at this point. Could also be a candy bar. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:44:28 EST From: Vern Klein Subject: PAA according to Grooch This is the last one. There is mention of Amelia Earhart early on and Fred Noonan comes on the scene in the latter portion. These books are fascinating reading. It's a shame they are so difficult to get hold of. I have "Winged Highway" now but it doesn't deal with the Pacific routes. It's pre-PAA and Fred Noonan. It starts with Grooch learning to fly in the Navy during WWI. It's truely amazing what the North Haven Expedition accomplished in a very short time. The ship was chartered for four months. It would cost a lot of bucks is they did not get it back on time. Stations had to be constructed on Midway, Wake and Guam. They did it all and got the ship back on time. Reflecting on some of the challenges many different people involved had confronted and overcome, Grooch remembered from some time: "I once heard Mrs. Hoover say, at a dinner given for Amelia Earhart, that 'in America there is only one aristocracy -- the aristocracy of achievment.'" Yes, she could say that. She was seeing the first wave of what would later be called "The Greatest Generation." Getting back on the time line: The North Haven Expedition is only as far as Midway in April of 1935. "On the morning of April 16 we received a radio message from Alameda which read as follows: 'The Pan American Clipper will depart Alameda at 3:50 PM today for Honolulu, crew Musick, Sullivan, Noonan, Canaday, Wright, Jarbo.' For the rest of that day and night the radio office was the center of interest at Midway." The radio operator tuned in on the Clipper as soon as she left Alameda and posted every message she sent or received on the bulletin board. Every half hour Musick sent a position report to Alameda which included his altitude, course and a short weather report. One of the messages received at Midway: 'The Clipper radio operator called Alameda and said, 'Standby to give us a Bearing.' Then he pressed down his key and sent a continuous signal while Alameda's diredtion-finder station tuned on him. Then we heard Alameda answer, 'You bear from us two hundred fifty-two degrees.'" "We heard her talking to several ships along the course. Once we heard her say to a ship, 'Can see your lights through a breask in the clouds. What is your position?' The ship answered with her position and the Clipper said, 'Thanks.' Musick told Alameda that he was averaging one hundred and thirty-six miles per hour, which meant that he was flying well throttled down to save gasoline." Halfway across, Honolulu took over the job of giving the plane its bearings. "Early the next morning we heard the Clipper tell Honolulu that the aerial escort (Army and Navy planes) had found her and joined up. Then we heard her say she was circling over Honolulu. She was scheduled to arrive at Honolulu at 8:00 AM. Five minutes before eight we got the landing signal from her operator. We were happy that the first big jump had gone off so smoothly. Later that day the Honolulu operator told us that the arrival of the Clipper was being celebrated all over town, and warned us to stand by for Musick's broadcast. We tuned in on the broadcast and heard Musick say that the flight was made possible by the joint efforts of the entire aviation industry, and offer tribute to the brave pilots of earlier days who had been lost at sea en route to Honolulu. We went back to our work" A week later they listened again as the Clipper bucked headwinds across the Pacific, arriving some minutes late. "Alameda radioed us a day later that the nest flight of the Clipper would be from Alameda to Midway as soon as the latter station was ready. The news caused us to redouble our efforts to speed up the construction program." Setting up the radio direction-finder at Midway. "... The radio operator at Midway tunes his tuning dial until he picks up the incoming signal accurately. He reads off the bearing or direction from his dial and sends that information to the ship or the plane, so that it may know the exact course to steer for Midway. (Grooch is clearly out of his element here. No mention of a goniometer! ) There frequently are errors present in direction-finders. The Process of determining these errors is called calibration. The North Haven headed out to a point about five miles from the station and slowly steamed in a circle, keeping the station in the center. At intervals she sent a radio signal which the Midway operator would tune in and mark on the dial. Simultaneously one of our engineers ashore took the exact bearing of the ship through his surveyor's transit, from a tower just over the radio station. The engineer's results were accurate. When compared with the bearings obtained by the direction-finder, the errors were easily obtained and would be allowed for on all future bearings." The Midway station was self-sufficient and they sailed for Wake on May 1st. Each Island presented its own set of problems but with a lot of hard work and ingenuity they got it all done and on time. The Pan American Clipper had made it to Midway and returned to Alameda. Next would be a flight all the way to Wake Island. Musick was testing the China Clipper at Baltimore. It was expected to be ready for service by November. The Pan American Clipper is making daily training flights to improve the technique of flight crews. Daily navigation problems were prepared which... "... required the plane to fly several hundred miles to sea on a given course. At the end of this leg of the flight, instructions were radioed to the plane to intercept a ship two hundred miles away. The ship's position, course and speed were given to the plane. The plane crew had to plot the ship's position on the chart, and lay a course to intercept her. After the ship was found the plane was instructed to return on a zig-zag course to Alameda. Fifty miles out the hood was pulled down in the cockpit. The last leg was flown on instruments entirely. Several junior officers were assigned to each flight. Their work was supervised by the navigation instructor, Fred Noonan. In flight, Noonan directed them as to the proper use of navigation instruments. Later he corrected their paper work and pointed out mistakes. All of us realized that while the radio direction-finder was a great aid it was nor infallible, and our navigators must be able to find their way without it if necessary." To Wake Island "... Every half hour they radioed their position reports to Alameda via Midway. We plotted their positions on the chart. They invariably showed the plane to be exactly on course. In the Clipper, Noonan 'shot the sun' every hour; his fixes agreed with the direction-finder bearings. Sullivan and Tilton hit Wake Island 'on the nose.' Sullivan and Tilton then flew the Pan American Clipper to Guam via Honolulu, Midway and Wake without incident. The stage was set for the inaugural flight of the China Clipper." The China Clipper to Honolulu, Midway, Wake, Guam and on to Manila. Departure time was drawing near. The crew of the Clipper filed aboard over a narrow catwalk leading to the front hatch. In navy-blue uniforms and jaunty white caps they were a smart-looking lot. Sullivan lead the way aboard. He was assigned as first officer for the flight. Sully had flown the Pacific so often he could recognize some of the waves as old friends. Fred Noonan, the navigator, came next. Fred had been a navigator in the old square-riggers. The crew maintained that he could 'shoot the sun' standing on his head." Then came four others and finally... "Last to step aboard was Captain Ed Musick. Forty-one years of age, he has been flying for twenty-two years. Conservative to a degree, he has never had a serious accident. There is no pilot anywhere as well qualified to command this flight." The plane passed under the Goden Gate Bridge and lifted into the air. "Night came on and the stars peeped out. Noonan reported that he felt more at ease now, because he could get a more accurate fix from the stars than from the sun." Headed for tiny, little Wake Island, they were in heavy cloud plunging through at one hundred and fifty miles per hour, flying blind by instrument. "In such weather Wake Island would not be visible five miles away. The navigator must depend on dead reckoning and radio bearings. But the Clipper crew was not worried, They knew that as they neared Wake Island the bearings would change rapidly unless they were on the true course. They had a small direction-finder on the plane with which they took bearings on Wake Island for a double check. Fifty miles from Wake, Musick dropped down under the clouds, five hundred feet above the sea. The bearings held true and Wake Island popped out of the sea, two miles ahead." And on to Manila... "The first United States air mail was soon delivered to the Philippine Post Office -- forty-five thousand letters. Newspapermen besieged the Clipper's crew and demanded the story of the flight. Musick told them that the flight was 'without incident.' That was poor material for a newspaper story. The reporters wanted headline stuff: 'Clipper lost in fog battles way through..." Etc., Etc. The book ends with the Log of the China Clipper for November 22, 1935, Westbound and December 2, Eastbound on the return to San Francisco, arriving on Dec. 6th. The log shows arrival and departure time at each station along the way, LTM (who also says, "wheeew." just from reading all this!) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:46:41 EST From: Dustymiss Subject: Re: AE Program Having seen an advance copy of this program airing on the 20th, that Jerry speaks of, (a perk of working for the International Women's Air and Space Museum) there are some interesting reasons to watch it. The production values are quite beautiful. They have some great shots of Howland. They do a great job showing the audience the beauty Amelia found in flying and adventuring and capturing her love for it. And there is a somewhat new (but not earthshaking) twist on why Amelia disappeared. To say any more about that would spoil it. Be aware for those who are not Linda Finch fans, there is a lot of footage and information about Linda's flight and the similarities between it and Amelia's. Cheerio - Dustymiss ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 11:54:01 EST From: Dustymiss Subject: Re: Another eyewitness For what it's worth - Why and what people recall of differant events is fascinating. Sometimes it is not bad recollections of first hand accounts that lead to erroneous statements by eyewitnesses - sometimes it is wrong assumptions made at the time one is witnessing an event - I would suspect that when they opened the hatch, Amelia might well have been slumped over. But what Mr. Berger mistook for unconsciousness may well have been Amelia trying to deal with her emotional disbelief over what just happend, coupled by her composing herself to face Mantz, the Army and Navy, reporters and the entire world that was waiting to ask their endless questions the moment she emerged from the plane. It is documented fact that before Amelia would go onstage to give a lecture, she would be asked to be left alone so that she could have a moment or so to compose herself before going out in front of a crowd (I have read that in two places - it will take me some time to find the sources but I will, if you wish.) What Mr. Berger saw may well have been her preparing herself emotionally for the deluge of questions and problems that were about to befall her. Plus, this accident happened so quickly and was so unexpected that what Mr. Berger saw as Amelia being "groggy" was not necessarily from being knocked out, but from the state of mind and emotion that can often come after something traumatically unexpected happens - in other words she may not have been recovering from being unconscious, but from shock. The part of his story that fascinates me the most is Mr. Berger's interpretation of why the accident occurred in the first place - I am sure others have had this interpretation, but reading this description, it is the first time that what happened that day has actually made sense to me - that "she tried to pull it off too soon", landed crooked on one wheel, blew the tire and ground looped. Because he was in the chase truck, he saw the accident from a unique angle, to which other observers were not privy. Am I totally crazy? Or is this a possible scenario? Was this the first time Amelia ever crashed on take off? Was this the first time she piloted the plane, taking off alone (without Mantz' help) with such a heavy load of fuel? After all, Amelia said "Indeed, so easily was the plane moving down the runway that I thought the take-off was actually over" "There was not the slightest indication of anything abnormal." Then she says "Witnesses say the tire blew. However, studying the tracks carefully, I believe that may not have been the primary cause of the accident. Possibly the landing gear's right shock absorber, as it lengthened, might have given way" She knew that they came down hard when Mantz landed the plane in Hawaii and this may have been her way out of taking the blame for herself, by intimating that the blame might have been Paul's. It also explains why, even before the plane came to a complete stop on the mat, she knew she had to go again. She was far too proud to end this flight on a mistake of her own making. It could also be why Elgen Long said that Amelia was so sure there was nothing mechanically wrong with the plane on the second attempt. Perhaps, it even played a factor in her reversing her course, so she could do a bunch of light fuel take offs before having to do another heavy fuel one. LTM - Who adores speculating on events in other peoples lives. ************************************************************************** From Ric AE may also have merely been leaning down to shut off the fuel selector. The Army board of inquiry found that "after a run of approximately 1,200 feet the airplane crashed on the landing mat due to the collapse of the landing gear as a result of an uncontrolled ground loop....(L)ack of factual evidence makes it impossible to establish the reason for the ground loop." Amelia's other accidents all occurred during landings. This was almost certainly the first time she had attempted a takeoff alone at such a heavy weight. It's also worth noting that the aircraft's CG was probably much farther aft on this takeoff than on subsequent heavy takeoffs if only because there was more weight back in the cabin behind the tanks (Noonan and the trailing wire antenna rig). Berger may be correct or Mantz's later criticism that she "jockeyed" the throttles may be why she lost it. In either case, there seems to be little doubt that the cause of the ground loop was poor piloting technique rather than any mechanical failure. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 12:06:35 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Turtle soup and bones >From Margot Still > >For a change, I agree with the head TIGHAR. I too, am leary to say AE was >knocked unconscious. Her recovery was much too > quick with no side effects noted (dizziness, inability to walk without >assistance, blurred vision, etc.). I am more apt to say she had the wind >knocked out of her. Well, have you ever been in a wreck and just leaned over the steering wheel for a couple of minutes to get your composure back? I think that is a more likely scenario, but again, pure unadulterated speculation. Ric: I passed on your last remark regarding my comment about turtle soup and Stephen King's likelihood of making a "story" out of it. Your comment was about it being truly "in bad taste." I wasn't sure if you were carrying on the reparte' or telling me to "buzz off". But, since you published it, I felt that you were continuing the thread, so to speak. Personally, I have never tasted turtle soup, but it can't be any worse than some soups I've had. Also, I am sure that if the turtle hunters had done anything to the castaway that the bones they found would have had marks indicating an attack, since knives, machetes, etc leave marks on the bones. Incidentally, would the bones have deteriorated completely by now? I have heard that bones dissolve over time, but again, not being knowledgable in forensics, I am speculating in the dark. LTM - who doesn't like being in the soup, Blue Skies, Dave Bush #2200 *************************************************************************** From Ric You're right Dave. If I thought it was really in too bad taste to post I wouldn't have posted it. I also agree that we can discount any notion that the mythical turtle hunters committed a mythical crime. We have ample evidence that buried bones survive quite well on Niku. It's harder to say about unburied bones. The only ones we know of are the bird bones found at the "7" site. If they're the same ones seen by the Coasties in 1944 (and there's no reason to think that the site has been "active" since then), they had survived quite nicely when we saw them 52 years later in 1996. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 12:08:53 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: PAA according to Grooch I think some of the text in here answers a lot of questions and speculation we had re Noonan's navigation on the trip.. Just what I wanted to read some months ago.. RossD ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 12:19:30 EST From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Berger's recollections <> If it was there, I am sure that Photek could find the bruise in photos of AE taken after the wipe out, maybe those photos need to be reexamined from this perspective. There may be more evidence than we think. LTM (who wants to know, but agrees that the answer won't solve the Niku mystery) Andrew McKenna 1045 *************************************************************************** From Ric There are some very good newsreel shots of AE and company aboard the SS Malolo as they departed for home later that day. No sign of a bruise or lump on her forehead. Again, Berger did not think that her groggy condition was due to a blow. He did have an explanation which he specifically said he "would not like to see in print" and I have respected his wishes. Suffice to say that his explanation lacks corroboration and is not terribly credible. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:00:08 EST From: Margot Still Subject: You never know... While in the library this morning doing some research I picked up a book titled Great Mysteries of the Twentieth Century by Tim Healy. I can't resist smorgasbords titles. Of course, there was a two page spread on AE. Get a load of this quote: "In 1992 an expedition to the South Pacific unearthed what were taken for historic remains: a size 9 shoe and a fragment of aircraft that was supposedly part of Amelia's Lockheed Electra. However, the shoe size was not a match for Earheart (his spelling, I swear), or her navigator-and another theory crashed." On the timeline at the end of this enlightened passage another notation was made: "1992-South Pacific expedition falsely builds up hope that Earheart's plane has been found." Thankfully, TIGHAR was not identified with this horrific piece of journalism (and spelling). LTM, MStill 2332 ************************************************************************** From Ric Gosh, if it's in a book it must be true. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:05:20 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Yankee/Capt Johnson's letter Maybe this has been reported but in Goldstein and Dillion's new book,"Amelia", they report that Paul Mantz received a letter from Capt Irving Johnson of the world cruise yacht "Yankee" in 1940; Capt Johnson claimed he talked with a missionary and other nativies of unknown reliability and concluded that "it was believed that the Earhart plane had flown eastward high up over the island of Tabiteuea" (all in italics from the original letter). Mantz check his chart and confirmed that Amelia's course took her over the Gilbert Island of Tabiteuea as the Electra had "been right on course" enroute to Howland. Perhaps the "Yankee" had more than a passing interest in Amelia and the yacht was not too far away in the Gilberts. Wasn't someone in the forum attempting to get the Yankee log or any diaries from Capt Johnson? Probably doesn' make any difference,except to confirm course, but Amelia was in fact headed towards Howland-just got lost as she was closer. ************************************************************************** From Ric I thought we had been talking about this. Yes, Johnson claimed to have talked to people on Tabituea as you describe. A recent forum posting detailed some of Yankee's itinerary and she was in the Gilberts in 1940. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:43:42 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Bevington's Desription/Written and Recollection From Ron Bright Ric, Cadet Bevington's description in his diary entry of 14 Oct 37 of "signs of previous habitation",vague as it was, was certainly not refined during your interview of him in 199l when he added that it looked like someone had "bivouaced for the night".(sic) He may have been pretty old and just couldn''t recall the evidence suggesting an overnight camp site. However I think some inferences can be made. (1) Sounds like they found the site paddling from the lagoon side and probably not too far away (what with Maude's lumbago) (2) a bivouac for a night description doesn't seem to conjure up a castaway's camp site that was maintained for survival; for instance if AE/FN had been there for 3 1/2 months I would think a lot of artifacts would be in and around that site. It's described as a one night stand!!! (3)If Bevington had found survival gear,aircraft parts,flashlights,bottles, surely he would have noted them in his Oct 14 diary entry. What I meant in my twisted syntax was if there were ancedotal stories of turtle hunters,yachters,other passer by ships, that cruised the south pacific in the 30s they may have landed for a short time on Niku prior to 1938,in addition to the brief visit by HMS Leith in Feb 37. In 1929 the Norwich City plowed into Niku. Reading Maude's history "Of Islands and Men", there does not appear ,as you say, any documented history of people on NIKU from 1930s to 1938,when colonization was begun.(I politely referred to Maude as Prof. Harry Maude as he later became associated with the Austrailian National University). Let's keep on diggin' LTM Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:56:10 EST From: Ken Feder Subject: Vaguely on topic CRM (for Cultural Resource Management; this is a magazine published by the National Park Service, focused on historical preservation issues and archaeology) has just distributed its latest issue (Volume 23, No. 2). Its title is American Aviation: The Early Years. It includes a series of articles summarizing the early history of aviation and recent attempts to preserve places (and aircraft) associated with significant accomplishments in early aviation. You can download a copy of the magazine at http://www.cr.nps.gov/crm (I just checked the site and they still have the previous issue up, so you might check back in the next day or two). The magazine also provides the following url for the a downloadable copy of the Park Service's National Register Bulletin titled "Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation Properties: http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr. Ken Feder *************************************************************************** From Ric Along with many others in the aviation historic preservation community, Tom King and I were each independently invited by the Park Service to review the draft bulletin back when it was first contemplated. It turned into a real dogfight and I'm sure there were times when the Park Service regretted ever bringing up the topic. I think the bulletin as published is useful with regard to what might be termed aviation historic real estate (airfields, hangars, light beacons, etc.) but I think it only makes matters more confusing with regard to old airplanes. But that's just my opinion. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 18:59:41 EST From: Ken Feder Subject: Re: Vaguely on topic Ric wrote: > Along with many others in the aviation historic preservation community, Tom > King and I were each independently invited by the Park Service to review the > draft bulletin back when it was first contemplated. It turned into a real > dogfight and I'm sure there were times when the Park Service regretted ever > bringing up the topic. I think the bulletin as published is useful with > regard to what might be termed aviaton historic real estate (airfields, > hangars, light beacons, etc.) but I think it only makes matters more > confusing with regard to old airplanes. But that's just my opinion. Ric: That explains the final pages of the latest CRM written by Patrick Andrus, one of the authors of the aviation bulletin. He makes references to the "issues" some have raised about the bulletin. My head began hurting when he explained why an old plane housed in a modern building that is near a runway at an airport might be eligible for the Register, but an old plane in a museum would not be. Sheesh! I like dealing with archaeological sites. They stay put. Ken Feder *************************************************************************** From Ric Therein lieth the problem. The National Register of Historic Places was designed to help protect historic properties that could not be put in museums (buildings, bridges, battlefields, etc.). It's use was expanded to include "movable objects" that could not be preserved in museums (battleships for example). Then along came locomotives which, although they can be can put in museums, most people don't - so, sure why not, put them on the National Register. Well heck, if you're doing boats and trains, why not do airplanes? (As far as I know nobody has yet put any automobiles on the Register but under the current logic I can't imagine why not.) But an airplane is not a Historic Place. We already have wonderful mechanisms for the protection of historic airplanes - they're called museums. If the airplane is historic it belongs in a museum. Airplanes should not be eligible for inclusion on the National Register - end of story. An airplane crash site might be a historic place but it would have to be the site, not the airplane (or whatever is left of it) that is historic because airplane debris goes away over time and can not be preserved indefinitely in situ. Same concept as a battlefield - this is where it happened and it's worth remembering that even if there is nothing left here from that time. None of this seems very complicated to me but you would not believe the convoluted reasoning and contradictory justifications the Park Service came up with to try to make the National Register work for old airplanes. Naturally, they only succeeded in creating more confusion and pissing a bunch of people off. Your tax dollars at work. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 19:14:19 EST From: Bill Hillier Subject: Re: Berger's recollections Have I missed something. Wouldn't Berger have been one of the first persons interviewed by the board investigating the crash? Do we have a record of his testimony before the board? If the board did have his testimony, and did not mention it in its final draft, it may have had the statements of others which disputed Berger's. LTM who loves to get up early in the morning to see what's new on the Tighar network. ************************************************************************** From Ric Berger says he never was interviewed by anybody and there is no mention of him in the Army report, but then, he was Navy and as he said, "In those days the services just didn't talk to each other." ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 19:25:15 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Bevington's recollections Hey, maybe instead of itinerant turtle hunters, it was that Captain Nemo guy from the Nautilus! What day of the week was 14 Oct 37? Could it have been FRIDAY! It is too bad that the people didn't document more of what they saw, but again, they had other priorities and things on their minds to spend much time ruminating on something like that. If they had only thought about the possible tie to AE, then they might have done more documenting, but then again "Irish" didn't document as much as he might considering he DID make a connection. Again, probably due to the demands of the job and just surviving on such a remote place. LTM - who doesn't document as much as she should, either. Blue Skies, Dave Bush #2200 *************************************************************************** From Ric Bevington said that the Colonial Service officers were all aware that Earhart's husband had but up a $2,000 reward for information about what became of her. That was a fabulous amount of money to them, and yet, there is no mention of any thought of Earhart in Bevington's diary of his trip through the Phoenix Islands just three months after her disappearance. Come to think of it, I suppose the reward could have actually had a negative effect on the senior administrators of the WPHC who may have reacted to Gallagher's initial suggestion that the bones he found might be Earhart's with some suspicion that his suggestion was financially motivated. October 14, 1937 was a Thursday. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 19:30:05 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Another eyewitness Dustymiss wrote > that what Mr. Berger saw as Amelia being "groggy" was not necessarily from > being knocked out, but from the state of mind and emotion that can often come > after something traumatically unexpected happens - in other words she may not > have been recovering from being unconscious, but from shock. This was very close to my own impression after reading all the threads on this one yesterday. My only comment would be that "shock" wouldn't refer to clinical shock, but a need to regain composure: Close the eyes, take a breath, briefly think about what has happened and what comes next, etc. I've seen exactly this sort of behavior after automobile accidents. Yes, she also could have been reaching down to cut off a fuel line or something like that. Whatever she was doing, it does sound like Mr Berger somewhat misinterpreted what he saw. I also agree that any reliance on his identification of "Newman" in the front seat would be dicey. william 2243 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 19:36:50 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Berger's recollections Can somebody explain to me why it matters whether AE was knocked out in the Luke Field accident? TKing ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 09:43:50 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Berger's recollections Tom King wrote > Can somebody explain to me why it matters whether AE was > knocked out in the Luke Field accident? In general, I view this as another worthwhile exercise in effectively dealing with anecdote in an empirical historical investigation. Remember that TIGHAR's stated mission is to educate. The Earhart saga is documented with so much conflicting and distorted information that it's generally a very appropriate subject for the rigorous application of objective and scholarly techniques, both from an educational perspective and for clarifying the historical record. william 2243 *************************************************************************** From Ric I wish I had said that. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 09:58:41 EST From: Subject: Fred's personal effects From Ron Dawson I must confess ignorance on this issue. I recently ran across a 1942 book titled: Women With Wings by Charles Planck. In the chapter devoted to AE, the author relates lightening the plane at Lae and states 'Noonan had a litle tin box for his personal necessities, and they rattled about in that'. Was this box documented by anyone else? I do find inaccuracies in other parts of the book. Smooth Sailing, Ron Dawson 2126 ************************************************************************** From Ric Aaah, Fred's fabled little tin box. The reference comes from Last Flight where AE is talking about final preparations in Lae: "We have even discarded as much personal property as we can decently get along without and henceforth propose to travel lighter than ever before. All Fred has is a small tin case which he picked up in Africa. I notice it still rattles, so it cannot be packed very full." Of course, folklore has attributed the rattling of the case to a bottle of booze. The tin case has even been buried in the sand on Mili Atoll just before they were captured by the Japanese. Too bad it wasn't a sextant box. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:05:18 EST From: Don Jordan Subject: Earhart Web site. Just thought I would let those interested know that I have changed my AE web page. I will be putting up different pictures from time to time. Have a look at; http://www.cyberlynk.com/djordan/ Just go down the main page to the "Amelia Earhart World Flight" page and follow the link. As usual, I invite comments if there are any mistakes. Don J. ************************************************************************** From Ric I have no comment other than to point out the copyright violations. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:06:39 EST From: Barb Norris Subject: Re: Chain Letters There's nothing wrong with "helping kids" as you well know from personal experience, Ric. Probably just better to make it a policy to help them in person, whenever possible, rather then cyberspace. Besides, you get the full benefit of their smiling faces, hugs and adoration when you meet 'em face to face. LTM (who always saw the bright side of things), Barb ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:09:38 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Berger's recollections >>From Tom King > >Can somebody explain to me why it matters whether AE was knocked out in the >Luke Field accident? > >TKing Tom: I see this as an exercise in the very fundamentals of this forum. To get at the truth. Whether AE was unconscious or not is of no IMPORTANCE other than to show the scientific method at which we arrive at the truth. Berger's recollections are valid. Berger's recollections are invalid. Which choice do we go with? What do the original written accounts say? They are at odds with Berger. But Berger was the first on the scene. But can we count on his memory, or even his perception if his recollection is good. Was AE unconscious or just recovering her composure? How long did it take the others to get on the scene - 1, 2, 5 or 10 minutes? I remember in junior high school when I hit my head on the gym floor. It seemed like I was "out" barely a second, if that, but my class mates were yelling for me to get up and whooping insults at me - so how long was I out? I was slow to get up, but within a few seconds I was fine, with no lump, no bruise (blow was to the back of the head under a medium hair length - if memory serves me well) and no wooziness. So was AE unconscious or not. I'm not sure that we can go by the written reports any more than the recollections of the first person on the scene. Since the others were late to the party, they may not have seen what Berger saw. Berger may not have seen what he thought he saw. Berger may not have an accurate memory. He may not remember all of it correctly, but some parts may be accurate. Was it important whether he thought it was Noonan (Newman) up front? As long as it wasn't a pink elephant, I'm not sure it matters as long as his memory AND perception of AE's state are correct. How do we prove OR disprove his recollection. I don't know that we can do either, but at least we can be aware of the limitations of the information from BOTH sources - the contemporaneous written accounts and the anecdotal recollection. Both have flaws, both have strengths. But the process helps us to at least be aware of these relative strengths and weaknesses and to learn to use the scientific method to evaluate the data we have. LTM - who hates bruises Blue Skies, Dave Bush #2200 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:42:24 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Bevington's Recollections and Reward Money That is fascinating stuff about Eric Bevington's awareness, along with the other colonial service officers, that they all knew about Putnam's reward of $2000 when they landed on Niku 3 1/2 months after her disppearance. And in 1937 Putnam and many others speculated about the Phoenix area as a possible crash site. Along with their three day thorough search of the Island from "end to end",says Harry Maude, I would think that the search for Amelia must have been close to the front of their minds! Then, according to Bevington,he finds "signs of previous habitation" on 14 Oct like "someone bivouaced" for the night. Wouldn't it dawn on that poor fellow that some castaway,if not Amelia herself, might be about and make an effort to find the castaway!! $2000 in US dollars would go along way to help in their colonization efforts. And the strange thing is that at night they set up large campfires for crab protection, and the bird noise was "deafening"etc and yet AE/FN didn't see or hear this 21 party expedition; and didn't see the 108 ft schooner tied up directly to the Norwich City. Hmmm. Then circa summer of 1940 Gerald B. Gallagher,a very close associate of Maude's, finds some bones,including a partial skull, during a work party and practically the first thing that comes out of his mouth : "(it)is just possibly that of Amelia Earhart" He must have thought he struck gold until he learned later that the bones were a male and over 45,according to the Hoodless examination.He probably had AE and the Phoenix Is on his mind since 2 Jul 37. Then he goes on and finds a few more artifacts,i.e.,shoes (size 10), etc. It sounds to me that beginning in Oct 1937, Maude,Bevington, Gallagher,et al., were keenly aware of AE and if not specifically looking for evidence of AE,they would have recognised any signs of aircraft wreakage or signs of a survior (,other than that vague reference to "recent habitation"... I think the most interesting aspect of the situation is why didn't AE/FN ,f alive ,see this expedition group during the three days in Oct 1937. Although anything is possible it seems quite likely that AE and FN, if they did crash on the outer reef just north of the Norwich City and made it to the wider island area and were capable of assisting rescue efforts{,for instance, waving at a flying seaplane with a loud motor overhead on 9 Jul 37},and not severely injured in the crash(as some speculate), they were already dead. It seems the only tenable solution; they had to have died early on and their remains and the aircraft remains,if any ,on the island, were washed away, buried,or not in view during Maude and Bevingtons exploration. Particularily,if the catspaw heel and the sole,found in 1996, and the bones,found in 1940, turn out to be,in fact, AEs. The other possibility is,or course, AE didn't make it to Niku. You and the forum have been at this for eleven years and are more knowledgeable re all of the facts,circumstances and probabilities of this scenario. What is your opinion? LTM, Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric Remember that Bevington's later recollection of being aware of the reward doesn't necessarily mean that he and Maude were aware of the reward at the time of their visit in October 1937. Bevington was probably aware of Earhart's disappearance because he was still in England when the news hit (Eric, Gallagher and Wernham all came out on the same ship that left England in mid-July). Whether he yet knew about the reward in October or was aware that the Phoenix Group was a suspect area is impossible to say, but it's clear that he heard about it at some point. There is certainly no indication from his diary or from Maude's writings that Earhart was at all on their minds during their visit to the Phoenix. Maude's thorough search of Gardner from end to end is pure horse manure. Harry didn't even go ashore the first day because his back was killing him. Eric decided to circumnavigate the island with a few of the Gilbertese, thinking that the place was a fraction of its actual size. They didn't even take any water with them. By the time they got down anywhere near the southeast end the hike had become an exercise in survival. No searching was done. Their only desire was to make it back to the west end alive and they walked along the ocean shore where the footing was easiest. On the second day Eric took Harry for the canoe ride described in an earlier posting. The third day was spent digging wells at the west end. It's difficult to impress on anyone who has never been there just how big a place Niku is. Let me just say that it is totally conceivable that someone camped in the bush near the "7" site may not have had the faintest idea that a ship had arrived at the west end more than two miles away or that people had walked up the beach a few hundred yards away. They might, however. see the footprints the next time they went out to the beach. (Can you imagine how you'd feel, having failed to attract the attention of the search planes back in July and now you've missed people who walked up the beach?) My opinion? There may well have been airplane wreckage on the reef north of the Norwich City and castaways living in the bush at the southeast end when Maude and company visited the island in October 1937. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:44:41 EST From: Mexican Bob Subject: Berger's Recollections I used to ride bulls, and have a little insight on being knocked out. More than once I have came to in the dirt wondering "what the heck happened", but I have never been so out of it that I couldn't function. I have had more than one concussion, but never in conjunction with being knocked out. ************************************************************************** From Ric That posting alone is worth all the discussion about Berger's recollections. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:45:42 EST From: Vern Klein Subject: Re: AE Program For Dustymiss or Jerry Please refresh my failed memory and lost e-mail file. Where is the AE Program to be aired? Thanks much! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:47:28 EST From: Phil Tanner Subject: Re: Bevington's recollections >Come to think of it, I suppose the reward could have actually had a >negative effect on the senior administrators of the WPHC who may have >reacted to Gallagher's initial suggestion that the bones he found might >be Earhart's with some suspicion that his suggestion was financially motivated. This is something of a stereotype-driven "would have", but I imagine it would have been thought socially very vulgar for colonial officers to do anything which would suggest they would let themselves be influenced by the offer of a reward, or imply that a colleague would - particularly in US dollars from a US source. Indeed, I would be surprised if they would be allowed to claim it if they did turn up evidence of Earhart and Noonan on their patch, as they were there in the king's service. LTM Phil 2276 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:51:53 EST From: Don Neumann Subject: Booking passage .."There are some very good newsreel shots of AE and company aboard the SS Malolo as they departed for home later that day. No sign of a bruise or lump on her forehead. Again, Berger did not think that her groggy condition was due to a blow. He did have an explanation which he specifically said he "would not like to see in print" and I have respected his wishes. Suffice to say that his explanation lacks corroboration and is not terribly credible"... *********************************************** Could it be that he thought AE & 'Newman' were 'tanked"? Also, I've always been amazed by the fact that AE & her entourage were able to book passage on a ship back to the States, sailing the _same_ day the crash occurred! This lady (or her husband) certainly exhibited a lot of clout, the kind usually reserved for royalty. Don Neumann ************************************************************************** From Ric <> You said it. I didn't. He thought "Newman" was just fine. Was it a big deal to book passage on a ship leaving the same day? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 10:55:44 EST From: Bill Leary Subject: Re: Gerald Berger reports > For a change, I agree with the head TIGHAR. I too, am leary to say > AE was knocked unconscious. That's "leery." I'm "Leary." > Her recovery was much too quick with no side effects noted > (dizziness, inability to walk without assistance, blurred vision, > etc.). I am more apt to say she had the wind knocked out of > her. I've seen people seemingly recover in seconds from being knocked unconscious (myself included). However, it seems to be an exception rather than the rule. I've also been knocked out cold, came to in under a minute, but couldn't walk unassisted for over an hour and showed the other symptoms you mention for several days. - Bill ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:03:58 EST From: Dick Pingrey Subject: Ground loop? I thought one comment by Gerald Berger was very interesting. He gives the cause of the accident as being due to lifting off to early and the settling back down onto the runway with a resulting gear failure (I think this is how it was stated). If this is true the ground loop was caused by the failed landing gear and not the other way around. I can see trying to lift off with a far aft center of gravity causing the nose to pitch up more that expected. In making a speedy correct near stall speed the resulting touch down could be hard enough to cause a landing gear to fail. That would be an easy thing to have happen even for a very experienced pilot. Lets not forget that an airplane with the fuel load weight of the 10E really requires a test pilot and that was what Amelia was under those conditions. Dick Pingrey 908C ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:09:04 EST From: Margot Still Subject: Re: Berger's recollections I might also add, that if I have learned one thing in doing historical research, it is that you never know when the trivial may lead to something important. MStill #2332 ************************************************************************** From Ric Ain't THAT the truth. Trouble is, there just isn't time to chase down all the trivial threads. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:10:01 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Booking passage > Was it a big deal to book passage on a ship leaving the same day? If berths and funds were available? No. william 2243 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:15:37 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Fred's personal effects-The Tin Box Another researcher/author puts the poison pellet in Fred's tin box so that if he were caught on their alleged spy mission he could do what all good intelligence agents do-take the pill (and it was not allegra).I don't know if Amelia carried a purse on that flight with the same type box! ************************************************************************** From Ric Well, I guess we need to keep an eye out for a tin box. (Amelia? Carry a purse?) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:42:25 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Manning Exodus? Maybe someone has commented previously on the reason(s) for the departure of Harry Manning, the radio operator, from the world flight attempt... but, I submit that one reason may be attributable to the botched takeoff at Luke Field. That absolutely has to qualify as an event characterized by rapid, major weight loss and sudden change-of-color of clothing. Perhaps Manning had a premonition as a result? 73 Mike E. the Radio Historian *************************************************************************** From Ric Harry does seem to have developed some good survival instincts. In "The Sound of Wings" May Lovell relates the following third-hand anecdotal explanation of Manning's departure (Mary got it from a transcript of a talk Fred Goener gave at the Smithsonian in 1983 in which he quoted what he said Manning had told him many years after the crash): "Amelia Earhart was something of a prima donna. She gave the impression of being humble and shy; but she really had an ego, and could be tough as nails when the occasion required it. I got very fed up with her bull-headedness several times. that's why she brought Noonan into the picture - in the event I were to give up on the flight. AE herself was not a good navigator; and Noonan was a happy-go-lucky Irishman. He wasn't a 'constant' navigator. I always felt he let things go far too long..." Others have reported that Noonan was hired when it became obvious that Manning may have been a fine nautical navigator but couldn't navigate an airplane out of paper bag. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:43:50 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Berger's recollections OK, thanks; I understand now. TK ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 09:48:37 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Bevington's recollections Phil wrote: <> This post is not a funny as it might sound to anyone unfamiliar with the "colonial" administration. RossD *************************************************************************** From Ric For what it's worth - when I discussed it with Bevington he made a point of saying that $2,000 was more than a Cadet Officer made in a year and so the reward would be a big motivator. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:06:45 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Berger's Recollections I used to ride steers occasionally, and I'd suggest if anyone is that crazy they don't have the matter in their skulls to be concussed. Of course I could stand corrected... RossD ************************************************************************** From Ric I think I'm going to refer this thread to the PBR (Professional Bull Riders) Association. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:08:26 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Bevington's Recollections and Reward Money >And the strange thing is that at night they set up large campfires for crab > protection And we wonder about the crabs scattering bones. Sounds like these things could carry away humans... rd ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:13:20 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Booking passage Don't forget that in those days, "Money" in the US was like "Royalty" in the UK. "Old Money", "New Money"... I wonder which was Putnam? I notice I still have "Putnam Press" published books in my library.. They would be afforded every courtesy and preferential treatment. GP probably knew the owners of the shipping line.... RD *************************************************************************** From Ric Maybe, maybe not - but GP was not "wealthy." He was from a prominent publishing family - G.P. Putnam's Sons - but he was not the G. P. Putnam referred to. This was the Great Depression and George and AE were comfortable but not rich - which made them seem rich. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:12:28 EST From: Bill Moffet Subject: Re. Another eyewitness Just had another look at Roessler & Gomez's "AE-Case Closed?" which I think we all agreed is pretty bad -- but concerning the Luke Field accident they may have found the reason for it. Exerpted from pages 88-90: "If the Army had closely scrutinized the first photos of the Electra as it sat on its belly on the runway just after the crash, they could have noticed that the right-hand propeller (Fig 3-4) was in the incorrect "high pitch" position for takeoff; while the left-hand propeller (Fig 3-5) was in the correct "low pitch" position. This is undeniable factual proof that at the moment of takeoff the left engine and propeller would have been turning over faster and producing more power than the right engine. This difference in pulling power would swing the aircraft toward the right and when Amelia reduced power on the left engine in order to correct for the swing, she went into an uncontrollable left groundloop. Both landing gears collapsed from the heavy side loads." R&G (p.91) say:"Shortly after the crash, AE stated in front of four witnesses that 'the ship pulled to the right as it gained speed on the takeoff roll, I eased off on the left engine and the ship started a long persistent left turn, ending up where it is now' ." I don't have a scanner to copy the photos (even if their copyright would allow) but presume you've got the book, or better yet perhaps Mr. Berger's post-crash pictures will show the props. R&G point to the positions of the counterweights on the prop hubs. Both authors are old-time aircraft mechanics and they go into detail about props, particulary Hamilton constant-speed props. On p. 64 they further say, "Mr. Mantz had stated on arrival (in Hawaii), that for the last six hours of the flight the right hand...propeller had frozen in a position of fixed pitch. Special attention was therefore paid to filling the propellers with fresh lubricant. At about 3:00 P.M., Mr Mantz returned to Wheeler Field and the airplane was placed on the flying line for a test. The self-adjusting pitch mechanism of the right hand propeller still failed to function." The defective propeller was removed for disassembly and inspection, revealing a badly galled condition and blades frozen in the hub due to improper or insufficient lubrication. Both props were removed and sent to Luke Field for reconditioning. (Wonder if Mr. Berger knows about that?) Depot people there worked thru the night and returned them to Wheeler where they were reinstalled on her plane, tested (they worked perfectly) and flight tested by Mantz. Interesting story, but it still doesn't explain why one prop was in high and the other low pitch. We used to do a "run-up" just before we took the active runway in order to catch conditions like this! LTM Bill Moffet 2156 ************************************************************************** From Ric I don't buy it. Roessler and Gomez are saying that on the basis of one photograph they have established the accident's proximate cause that went unnoticed by an Army review board at the time. Yes, the props on the Electra needed maintenance when they arrived in Hawaii. They received the needed attention and were thoroughly checked afterward. As you point out, it has long been standard procedure to cycle the props as part of the pre-takeoff checklist. I don't know whether it was standard procedure in 1937 or not. We have no way of knowing whether AE cycled the props on the morning of March 20th, but given the airplane's recent history it would be pretty foolish not to. Let's say she didn't and that, despite the prop levers both being in the "full increase", "high RPM", "low pitch" position, the right-hand prop was somehow in "high pitch" or "coarse pitch" (as it's sometimes called). She lines up with the runway and advances the throttles to full power, unleashing all 550 ponies on each side. What do you suppose is going to happen - like, right now? In the right hand engine Mr. Motor is telling Mr. Prop, "MOVE! NOW! FAST!" but Mr. Prop is set up to take huge bites of air instead of itty-bitty bites and it creates a classic situation of irresistible force (the push exerted by the combustion in the cylinders) and immovable object (the big bites of air) and, very quickly, something's gotta give - and it ain't gonna be the air. Firewalling an engine with the prop in coarse pitch generally results in various engine components being strewn about in a very loud and disorganized fashion. Also, it seems to me that the assymetrical thrust would become apparent almost immediately, not 1,200 feet down the runway. Perhaps some of our resident forum experts can offer a more learned opinion. I've studied the photograph in the book and, maybe I'm just dense, but I can't for the life of me see what they're talking about. Maybe Berger's photos, which are perhaps the earliest ever taken of the wreck, will shed more light on the subject. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:25:21 EST From: Renaud Dudon Subject: Wreck photo First, i would like to congratulate TIGHAR staff and members for all the courageous and wonderful work they are doing. In the field of great mysteries, not many have caused such a number of extravagancies that AE disappearance. TIGHAR scientific approach is a great step leading to the truth. I don't know if the following question is very pertinent, but i would like to submit a personnal guess regarding the "wreck photo". In this presumed picture of NR16020 we could see dense vegetation in the background with some great coconuts trees. We could think therefore that the remaining of the aircraft lied behind the beachfront, which is quite distant from the place were TIGHAR investigators supposed the landing of the Electra. If the "dash and dot" present in the photograph taken in 1937 are really the hull and rudders of the airplane half flooded by the raising tide, then the landing occured on the reef, aside of Norwich City Wreck, and at a quite important distance from the beach ( maybe 150 or 200 yards ). Furthermore, in the 1937 photo, with the cargo wreck in one side, we could see, in the other side, among the vegetation, what seems to be a grove of trees: maybe the coconuts trees of the "wreck photo".If all these speculations are right, then it is obvious that the center section of the plane must have been dragged by sea action across a considerable distance to "match" the location of the "wreck photo". Besides, a photo taken by US Navy's PBY in 1941 ( Forensic Imaging Project 11/29/99, TIGHAR tracks ) show a very thin vegetation on the northern part of Gardner Island near SS Norwich City, while in the "wreck photo" we could see a rather dense vegetation. I think that it is hardly believable that the wreck had been dragged across such a distance inland, whereas the sea flow uses to go from sea to the lagoon alongside to the beach ( Nikumaroro map ) and that the locals of the island located the wrecrage in the reef, near the remains of Norwich City. Of course, during the 4 of 5 years following AE disappearance, the coastline may have changed a lot. Also i'm not an expert in this kind of stuff. I would like to have your point of view about it. I am just an unpretending and non specialist person who is now very interested in NR16020 flight mystery ! In France, we also have great mysteries about vanished great aviators, such as Antoine de Saint-ExupŽry, Jean Mermoz, or Nungesser et Coli. Is TIGHAR involved with these matters ? Yours sincerely, Renaud Dudon, Bordeaux, France. ************************************************************************** From Ric I agree with what I think you are saying about the Wreck Photo - that it is unlikely that both the photo of something on the reef where Emily says there was airplane wreckage and the Carrington "Wreck Photo" could reasonably be NR16020. We have done no investigation of the Antoine de Saint-ExupŽry and Jean Mermoz mysteries, but Nungesser and Coli are old and dear friends of ours. You'll find a brief summary of our research into their disappearance on our website. Just click on Project Midnight Ghost (http://www.tighar.org/Projects/PMG.html) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:28:07 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Bevington's diary The portion of Eric Bevington's diary describing his voyage and visit to Gardner in October 1937 is now up on the TIGHAR website for your enjoyment and edification at: http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Documents/Bevington_Diary.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:38:15 EST From: Tim Smith Subject: Re: Vaguely on topic CRM #23/2 is not up on the web yet. As TIGHAR members will recall, there was an article in TIGHAR Tracks a year or so ago on the National Register bulletin. Ric wrote a savage review of it. Also included were sage comments by Tom King (if I recall correctly) and a couple of yahoos named Tim Smith and Paul Chattey. Tim Smith 1142C P.S.; my attempt to read CRM on the web froze up my computer completely and I had to reboot. Also, you'll need Acrobat Reader to view it. ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks for the opportunity to quote my favorite line from Braveheart: "I never lie, and I AM a savage." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:44:53 EST From: Margot Still Subject: Socks and Coconut Crabs I know I remember reading somewhere the research team on Niku learned early on not to leave their socks on the bushes to dry because the crabs would carry them off. Did anyone think to follow the crabs to see where they would go with them (and possibly whatever else they might have carried off)? LTM (who dries her socks on the line) MStill #2332 ************************************************************************** From Ric The sock thieves of Niku seem to be the smaller but more agressive land crabs. I had an awful fight with one once over a half-coconut. I lost. They live in burrows and I assume that that's where they take stolen property. Trouble is, there are thousands of them (crabs and burrows). ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 18:39:07 EST From: Renaud Dudon Subject: Strange aiplane indeed ! Well, not only the Carrington photo ( what i called "wreck photo" ) does not fit really with the puzzle, but also what said E. Sikuli is amazing. She said that the wreck was made of "piece of steel", she also said it was " very rusty (...) very red ". that supposes, if ES memories are right, that it wasn't aluminium. Aluminium doesn't rust ( as it seems to me ). I think only engines, and parts of gear are steel pieces of NR16020 big enough to be clearly seen. Despite all this, ES could remember it was "piece of an airplane". I guess she said the truth, but also that she might have added , during the years, her personal explanation of what she have seen. Another thing may somewhat cause perplexity : on 9th july, the scout plane from USS COLORADO didn't spot any aircraft on Gardner Island. TIGHAR said that the plane must have been engulfed by water from the raising tide. It is a good explanation... However, the tanks were probably almost empty ( 100 US gal max ). Don't you think that with such an air ballast the plane could have been able to float ? PS: thanks a lot for providing me an info source about Nungesser&Coli. Even in France, it is quite difficult to find reliable data about them. Also I wish to apologise myself for my "frenchy" english !!! *************************************************************************** From Ric No problem. Your English has a certain je ne sais quoi and it's infinitely better than my French. You make an interesting point about the airplane's buoyancy. The water on the reef, even at high tide, is proabably not deep enough to float the airplane. One would expect that a violent surf might result in the failure of the landing gear and once the aircraft is on its belly the water will tend to move it around until it jams in one of the reefs many depressions. I would expect that the action of the surf would then quickly tear the structure to pieces leaving behind only the heaviest structures, many of which are steel. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 19:52:33 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Dragon wanted We're putting together a flyer about the Aviation Archaeology Course and Expedition in July to be mailed out with the new triple issue (72 page) TIGHAR Tracks. We'd like to include a nice clean line drawing of a Douglas B-23 "Dragon" like the one we'll be surveying during the expedition and I wonder if somebody knows where we can find one on the web. Thanks ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 08:45:02 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Booking passage Influence with the owners of shipping lines and PAA's pioneering work aside, remember that ocean liners in those days were like airliners today: Standard transportation. A typical scenario for last-minute passage was to contact the travel agent's desk in the lobby of a good hotel and buy a ticket. I'd want to see evidence of special influence having been exerted for them before believing that their same-day departure was due to anything more than reasonable luck in finding a ship in port with available space. william 2243 *************************************************************************** From Ric I would think that catching a boat at that time was no different from catching a plane is today. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 08:48:33 EST From: Dick Pingrey Subject: Props not in high pitch Your explanation of what happens when one engine is not in high pitch or take off position and the other one is set correctly is right on. No way would she not know immediately that she had a problem and no way would the airplane travel 1200 feet down the runway before directional control was lost. More likely she tried to maintain directional control at the last minute with differential power and that is why the props were set differently. She might have pulled back on the prop control rather than the throttle. I still think the aft C.G and early lift off with resulting hard landing and a gear failure makes sense. Dick Pingrey 908C ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 08:52:15 EST From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Saint Exupery As for the Saint-ExupŽry mystery, I think this one was solved recently. It had long been speculated that the French pilot had been shot down over the Mediterranean by a German fighter plane when he failed to return from a recce mission in his Lockheed P-38 Lightning in 1944. The name of the German pilot who shot him down had even been traced but I fail to remember him. I think it was in 1998 that eventually French fishermen from Marseille caught aircraft parts in their nets. They were identified as being P-38 parts and the site was marked. I believe divers went down to investigate and they found the wreck of a crashed P-38 at the sea bottom. I remember they come up with a pilot's wrist watch which was identified as belonging to Saint-ExupŽry. The family refused permission to raise the aircraft wreck and decided they should let the famous French writer and pilot rest in peace at the bottom of the sea. LTM from Herman (who remembers things but can't put the right date on it) ************************************************************************** From Ric That's essentially my recollection also. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:29:35 EST From: Dave Porter Subject: R: dragon wanted Don't know if it's on the web, but the book "US Bombers: B-1 1920's to B-1 1970's" has a nice line drawing of the B-23 in it. I think it's out of print, but I'll send you my copy if you like. Do you need copyright permission to duplicate something from an out of print book? LTM, Dave Porter, 2288 PS is anyone besides this Toyota station wagon (if the brakes fail, I can always stop the car by turning on the air conditioning) driving yankee NOT surprised that TIGHAR's favorite GRIT is given to driving "snappy red sports cars" *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Dave but the redoubtable Captain Skeet Gifford just sent us a great line drawing of the Dragon. Copyright has nothing to do with whether the book is in print or not. I'm sure some of our legal minds on the forum can tell us the standard period after which a copyright expires. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:33:54 EST From: Sandy Cates Subject: B23 Ric, Here is the address for a pretty good photo of a B23 Dragon - I'll keep looking for some additional ones. www.elite.net/castle-air/b23.htm Thanks for the exceptional work on the forum. How can we get on the mailing list for the training class in June. Thanks again.. Sandy Cates *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Sandy. You'll get a flyer on the Course/Expedition with your new TIGHAR Tracks which we're hoping to mail on Friday. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:36:45 EST From: Sandy Cates Subject: Another one (B-23) Hey Ric, I just found another photo in the Wright-Patterson Museum web page.. Later Sandy Cates www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/outdoor/od28.htm ******************************************************************** From Ric Nice photo. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:43:55 EST From: Hugh Graham Subject: Re: Another eyewitness > From Ric: > "Did you drive the crash truck that morning - the morning she wrecked the > airplane?" > > "Sure did. Saw the whole thing. We were following down the runway behind > her just in case. Looked to me like she tried to pull if off too soon and it > settled back down crooked. The right wing dipped, then the right gear > folded and that was it." ------Yup, I believe it. Forget about the other "contemporaneous" a-- kissing AE-promoting accounts. HAG 2201. ************************************************************************* From Ric AE claimed that a tire blew. A tire did blow but it was a result of the accident, not a cause. AE characteristically blamed her failures on equipment or weather. The Army Air Corps board of inquiry said the airplane groundlooped but did not attempt to say why. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 14:46:07 EST From: Hugh Graham Subject: Re: Manning Exodus? From Hugh Graham > " Amelia Earhart was something of a prima donna. She gave the impression of > being humble and shy; but she really had an ego, and could be tough as nails > when the occasion required it. I got very fed up with her bull-headedness > several times." -----Ahhh, exactly the impression I had of AE from reading the forum. HAG 2201. ************************************************************************** From Ric All heros are mythical figures. The Amelia Earhart of today is no exception. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 08:18:21 EST From: Renaud Dudon Subject: Strange plane Indeed(2) Ric, you said: >The water on the reef, even at high tide, is probably not deep enough to >float the airplane. Does that mean the tide wouldn't have totally hidden the Electra ? So, if the plane was only partly surbmerged, why have Lambrecht, of USS COLORADO, seen nothing ? In my opinion, shining aluminium may be quite easy to see even from medium altitude... PS: If someone is interested in St-ExupŽry mystery, I have some documents about it... I seems that the "St-Ex" case is far to be closed... as you use to say: "Love to Mother" ! *************************************************************************** From Ric When the sea is rough the environment at the edge of the reef where the airplane was said to be is foaming "white water." Obviously, no one can say for certain what an airplane would look like from the air under those circumstances, but in trying to explain why Lambrecht did not see an airplane which the evidence increasingly suggests was there, the obscuring effect of the surf seems to be one possibility. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 08:31:45 EST From: Bill Carter Subject: copyright Ric- Okay, okay, I can take a hint. One of my practice areas is intellectual property so here is a very brief copyright primer for the forum members. The requisite disclaimer is that people with specific copyright questions should consult a lawyer that specializes in this area. This information is general in nature and shouldn't be universally applied or relied upon. Copyright protection exists for original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression. That would include - literary works, music (and lyrics), dramatic works such as plays or musicals, choreographic work, pictures, sculptures, motion pictures and sound recordings. How long a copyright lasts depends on when the work was first published and whether the copyright was federally registered or renewed. All copyrights issued from 1964 through 1977 are automatically renewed for a total of 95 years. For works created on or after January 1, 1978, the copyright lasts for the author's (or surviving joint author's) lifetime plus 70 years after the author's death. The copyright for a "work made for hire" lasts 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter. The existence of a copyright is NOT dependent on registration with the Copyright Office. The copyright exists by virtue of the creation of a work. You don't need to register your copyright in order to sue or enforce it. You don't need to place a circle "C" next to the copywritten work in order to sue. The Copyright Act of 1976 created for the owner of a copyright (i.e. author) the exclusive rights of i)reproduction, ii)adaptation, iii)distribution, iv) performance, and iv) display. Right about now, some of you, like AE may be saying "I'm lost". Well, hold on because here come the exceptions. Libraries and archives may reproduce, distribute, display or perform facsimile or digital form copies or phonorecords of works for purposes of preservation, scholarship or research during the last 20 years of the copyright if reasonable investigation shows that the copywritten work is not subject to normal commercial exploitation and can't be obtained at a reasonable price. As you may have surmised, I handle lots of copyright disputes and questions. Anyway, infringement is generally the unauthorized use or copying of the copywritten work. A copyright owner may prove infringement by establishing that the infringer has "access" to the work and the copy is "substantially similar". There are a ton of exceptions. It's okay to use a basic idea expressed in a work (not an actual copy. Example - two people can write a book about AE's disappearance), independent creation of the identical work, fair use of the work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research and use under license form the copyright holder. There are others but they apply to computer software and television and radio broadcasts. I could go on but Ric is going to be socked with an enormous bill for all this advice. Bill Carter TIGHAR #2313. ************************************************************************* From Ric Thanks (gulp). ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 08:55:48 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: dragon wanted You might be surprised-- if you write a note to the publisher of the book they may just give permission to use the drawing for nothing-- especially for an educational project. In any event, although I've forgotten the exact time period that extends to books published in the 70s, even out of print ones, it's going to be at least another 40 years, maybe 60, before that book falls into the public domain. Even then you'd want to be sure that the artist who did the drawing didn't have continued rights to it for some reason (a good inititial publication agreement and long life, etc). william 2243 ************************************************************************** From Ric With good software it's fairly easy to create an original work that is nearly identical to the copyrighted work thus avoiding the problem. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 10:20:17 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: The Cook, the Castaway and the Aviator/ The Same? The Bevington journal revelations and his recollections may present us a perplexing archeaolgy puzzle: where did Amelia die in relationship to known artifacts. In TIGHAR'S interview with Cadet Officer Eric Bevington in 1991, he pointed to a spot and placed a "?" on Aukeraime (near your ? on the Niku map) just east of Bauaserke Passage where he recalled seeing "signs of previous habitation" on 14 Oct 1937 and could only add from memory that it looked like someone had "bivouaced" for the night. Unfortunately, he was unable to further describe in detail exactly what he meant. During TIGHAR'S expediltion in 199l, a member discovered on Aukeraime a Catspaw heel,a sole,a campfire and other artifacts; the Catspaw heel has been circumstantially linked to Amelia's known footwear in 1937. Thus Bevington's observation of the bivouac area and the Catspaw discovery fit nicely together since they were found only about 400 or so yards apart on Aukeraime.(If I'm reading the Niku map correctly) The Catspaw heel,sole,campfire,etc and the bivouac area strongly support, in my opinion, a castaway survival camp at Aukeraime. The heel probably originated in the mid-30s and the Oct 37 bivouac area seen just 3 1/2 months after Amelia's loss,is reasonable,but not conclusive, evidence of either Amelia or an undocumented Castaway at Niku -just coincidence? Now it looks like TIGHAR,based on some new evidence (see Earhart Project-Signs of Recent Habitation)is leaning towards an area near the "7" on the southeast tip of Niku where Gallagher may have found the partial skeleton in the summer of 1940.Not at the Aukeraime area. The skeletal measurements also have been anthropologically linked to Amelia.(See Burns and Jantz). The puzzle here is that if Gallagher in fact discovered the skeletal remains near the "7" area, the skeleton doesn't seem archaeolgically connected to the Catspaw heel, sole,etc and Bevington's bivouac sighting on Aukeraime. It's like finding the Peking man near Peking but his stout walking sandals near Shanghai. (And we don't have man carrying crabs) The answer to this riddle could be simple. The Catspaw heel and the skeleton are not related; or the Catspaw heel is Amelia's,but not the skeleton or visa versa. A neat clean scenario is that the Catspaw heel, the bivouac area and the skeletal bones were found in the same general area- seldom do these discoveries present such a easy explanation. Hence a possible conclusion is that the cook over the campfire, and the castaway and Amelia are all one and the same! My bet is that Amelia,if she did make it to NIKU,hung around the Aukeraime area where you found the artifacts and where you orginally speculated that Gallagher found the skeleton,patiently awaiting rescue. The next archeology dig at NIKU by TIGHAR, perhaps of a grander scale (money), may well solve this enigma. LTM AND VOLUMES TO FOLLOW, Ron Bright,Tighar #2342 *************************************************************************** From Ric Allow me to make a few observations: - Just as interesting as what found is what was not found. We found a Cat's Paw heel and most of the sole it came from, one brass shoelace eyelet, a few small scraps of the uppers - all judged to be from a woman's blucher oxford. A little distance away we found another heel from a different pair of shoes. Nothing else. Where are the other shoe parts and two heels? Burned up in the campfire? Okay, but then where are the other 19 brass eyelets (each of the blucher-oxfords should have 10)? They should be in or near the fire, but they weren't. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that at least two shoes - one from each pair - got moved from their original point of deposition. - The campfire at Aukeraime has been dated by means of a partailly burned can label found in the charcoal. The label includes a fragment of a European barcode, from which we conclude that the fire dates from not earlier than the 1970s. Clearly, the campfire we found at the Aukeraime Site is not the campfi re seen by Gallagher nor is it part of the bivouaced-for-the-night scene noticed by Bevington. - The spot where TIGHAR found shoe parts in 1991 is not where Gallagher found shoe parts in 1940 because Gallagher did not find the shoe parts that we found (duh). - There are remarkable parallels between the shoe artifacts found by Gallagher in 1940 and shoe artifacts found by TIGHAR in 1991. In both cases, evidence of two shoes, but not a pair, were found. In both cases, fragments of a sole were found that were judged to be from a woman's shoe. In both cases, additional shoe parts were found which seemed to be from a man's shoe. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that there were originally two pair of shoes and that Gallagher found what was left of one shoe from each pair and we found what remained of the other two shoes. So it does seem like, somewhere along the line, shoes got moved. Because several features of the "7" site seem to fit so well and because extensive work at the Aukeraime site has failed to turn up anything else, I tend to think that it's most likely that the shoes we found at Aukeraime were found at the "7" site after Galllagher's departure and brought to the Aukeraime site which we know was an active work site at around the same time. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 10:40:55 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: copyright Ric wrote, > With good software it's fairly easy to create an original > work that is nearly > identical to the copyrighted work thus avoiding the problem. If it's nearly identical or obviously derivative, and the copyright owner can establish that one had access to the original copyrighted work, infringement probably exists, so be careful. At this point, however, I should add my standard disclaimer that I use when discussing third party copyright issues: I am not a lawyer. If copyright advice on this or any other issue is required, consult a lawyer. william 2243 ************************************************************************** From Ric I'm thinking of Bill Carter's comment: "It's okay to use a basic idea expressed in a work (not an actual copy. Example - two people can write a book about AE's disappearance), independent creation of the identical work,..........." So if I'm an artist and I go to the art museum and sit down in front of a copyrighted painting and paint my own painting that ends up looking just like the one on the wall, I can then sell my painting and not be in violation of any copyright (as long as I make it clear that it's my own work). Artists do this sort of thing all the time. In this particular case, nobody owns the shape of the B-23 and any two line drawings of the airplane's profile and planform are, by definition, going to be very similar. I would think that we're pretty safe in creating our own rendition of that shape using a copyrighted drawing as a guide. I would think that a more complex work of art - for example, the National Geo photo of Finch's Electra over Howland Island - would be much harder to reproduce without infringing on the copyright. You could make a painting or drawing of the same scene using the photo as a guide, or you could go out and take a very similar photo, but you can't just scan it and use it. Have I got that right? (The preceding question is not a solicitation of legal services. ) LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:15:36 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Copyright for Dummies What is this world coming to? A lawyer who actually makes sense? A lawyer who writes prose that is readable by the masses? For shame! Have you no sense of dignity, Mr. Carter?! Where is your decorum, sir? where is your propriety, your sense of history and tradition? Disbarring you would be too kind. I suggest an appropriate punishment would be a week with Sactodave. LTM, who is appalled! Dennis O. McGee #0149CE P.S. Nice job, Bill! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:38:32 EST From: Frank Westlake Subject: Re: The Cook, the Castaway and the Aviator/ The Same? Ric wrote: > - There are remarkable parallels between the shoe artifacts found by > Gallagher in 1940 and shoe artifacts found by TIGHAR in 1991. In both cases, > evidence of two shoes, but not a pair, were found. In both cases, fragments > of a sole were found that were judged to be from a woman's shoe. In both > cases, additional shoe parts were found which seemed to be from a man's shoe. > > So it does seem like, somewhere along the line, shoes got moved. Looking at those similarities and the fact that the bones and artifacts that Gallagher recovered are now missing, I would suspect that, after many years of no apparent interest in the bones and artifacts, someone decided to give them a good Christian burial where they were believed to have been found. This may not appear to be a very likely scenario, but because of the similarities I would keep it in mind as a possibility when doing any further searching. Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric That the box of bones stored at the Central Medical School in Fiji ultimately received a "good Christian burial" is certainly a possibility, but the likelihood that someone shipped them 1,000 miles to a remote island just so they could be buried where they were found seems rather far fetched to me. By the time a decision was made to get rid of the bones, if that's what happened, it's even possible that no one remembered where they came from. Also, the box that the bones were in may also have been seen as far more valuable than the remains they contained. It was fashioned by Temou, the island carpenter, from seasoned kanawa wood at a time when Gallagher was still thinking that this might be Amelia Earhart. The box seems to have been highly regarded as a fine piece of craftsmanship and may not have been the sort of thing that someone might be willing to bury along with some old bones. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:51:10 EST From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: copyright > So if I'm an artist and I go to the art museum and sit down > in front of a > copyrighted painting and paint my own painting that ends up > looking just like > the one on the wall, I can then sell my painting and not be > in violation of > any copyright (as long as I make it clear that it's my own > work). Wrong. If the painting is copyrighted and not in the public domain, copying the painting and selling it is theft. Permission to reproduce the work must be obtained from the artist (or the owner of the painting). Public domain works, generally meaning paintings created more than 60-100 years ago, depending on the circumstances, can usually be freely copied and resold, although it may be unlawful to physically enter a museum and copy a work without permission, or to scan and redistribute an image of that work from a copyrighted book, since the photo of the public domain painting is probably copyrighted. >Artists do > this sort of thing all the time. The difference between art and theft is sometimes difficult for an amateur to understand, especially in our present age of rapid technological and cultural change, but there are still frontiers that respectable artists are generally uncomfortable crossing. > In this particular case, nobody owns the > shape of the B-23 and any two line drawings of the airplane's >