========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:11:05 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Recordings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Frank Westlake > >From Frank Westlake > So sometime after 0740 GCT (1740 local?) the Mooseby has ... That was an odd typo. My apologies. Frank Westlake ************************************************************************** From Ric Just yankin' your chain Frank. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:12:57 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1965 Collopy letter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt Something I may have mentioned in an earlier post was about material that may still exist in the old D.C.A. archives (if in fact they were kept). In 1965 I was living with an uncle and aunt. The uncle was a projectionist for Department of Civil Aviation and I spent a lot of time at: "D.C.A. Henty House Little Collins St. Melbourne 11-1-65 " I imagine there was a certain amount of official correspondence between Collopy in New Guinea and his head office in Melbourne. Unfortunately although my uncle was still alive and in his 90's when I last heard, I had a falling out with him some 30 years ago. I suspect there are records in the Australian system relating to happenings in Lae, but I don't know if I have the financial resources to track them down. In the mean time I'll try to find out whether correspondence from that period was archived and is available somewhere. As I worked for the commonwealth government from 1970 prior to entering the Air Force, I believe there is just such a chance. Australia had an amazing safety record under D.C.A. and the anecdote about a piece of antenna fascinates me. Floyd Kilts' "bones" were just anecdotal, but look where that led. It is possible there are some official reports buried in a box... Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:17:46 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1965 Collopy letter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Evans Katz True, Collopy wrote the letter 28 years after the incident, but it was written prior to the publication of Fred Goerner's book. David Evans Katz ************************************************************************** From Ric Yes, but the letter contains no implication that Noonan had a "probelm" with alcohol. It does, however, seem to fulfill some fondly expressed hopes that Fred was a scotch drinker. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:25:25 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Moorsby/Moorby MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Cam Warren Att: Bob Brandenburg - Sorry Bob, it was MOORBY, and - besides other documentation - there's a photo of the ship with the name in view, in Donahue's BRITISH CONNECTION. Cam Warren ************************************************************************** From Ric Cam is right. The 1937 Berne list has her as MOORBY, call sign GYSR. She's shown as having A1 (CW) and A2 (MCW), but not A3 (voice) capability. I still like Moose Berry. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:26:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Brines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Cam Warren To Randy J. - Or Brines could have heard it at an even more likely spot - Anthony's Coast Guard Monitoring Station in the Aloha Tower. Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:28:04 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Takeoff film MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Cam Warren Some years ago Joe Gervais tracked down Sid Marshall in Australia, who shot the original footage. Joe said the film was in very bad shape, patched together with Scotch tape, and broke more than once when run through the projector. I don't recall if the 99's actually got the original, but - as you say - it turned up missing after being borrowed by someone. The home splicing job likely accounts for the out-of-sequence scenes. Cam Warren ***************************************************************************Fro m Ric What scenes do you think are out of sequence? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:31:10 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: More from U of W MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dustymiss Here's the latest from U of W. August 30, 2000 Dear Ms. McLaughlin: Thank you for your inquiry about Amelia Earhart's Plan B in the Gene Vidal Papers (6013) at the American Heritage Center. Dan Davis has left the AHC for Utah State University, so your e-mail message was forwarded to me. There is no reference to Plan B in the inventory of the Vidal Collection. I pulled 3 boxes of correspondence and memos (boxes 19, 19A, and 20; about .75 cubic feet of correspondence altogether), because I felt that any investigative and background information would have been filed after her disappearance. Regrettably, the correspondence files proved to be of no value. There is no mention of Earhart's flight plan prior to her trip. Even more surprisingly, there is no correspondence from February 1937 until January 1940. The correspondence from 1940 until Vidal's death in 1969 may contain a reference to Plan B or Amelia Earhart's disappearance, but it is not possible for me to review it all due to a current staff shortage and other commitments. However, there are two alternatives for you. One is to contact UWIN, the University of Wyoming Information Network, at the University of Wyoming Library, 766-2510. UWIN offers research assistance at the rate of $50/hour. My other suggestion is to contract the services of a graduate history student by calling Dr. William Moore at 766-5101, budmoore@uwyo.edu. As to Doris Rich's research at the AHC, I am not permitted to release any information about her work. I did find in Box 19 five telegrams sent to Richard Widmer, Miss Tinney, and Charles E. Rosendahl, and will send complementary copies to you. Best wishes in your research. Sincerely, Carl Hallberg Assistant Archivist, Reference American Heritage Center University of Wyoming PO Box 3924 Laramie, WY 82071-3924 Phone: (307)-766-2563 Fax: (307)-766-5511 hallberg@uwyo.edu *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Dusty. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:50:58 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Fiji Consul MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman There may have been no chain of command to break. A private citizen acting as a consul mainly processing visas and passport matters doesn't oversee the same kinds of diplomatic responsibilities that an ambassador would. It could have been quite normal for protocols to have been in place for them to contact the US embassy in Australia directly for inter-government diplomatic matters. william 2243 ************************************************************************** From Ric I wonder if there was a U.S. embassy in Australia at that time. Australia was not yet an independent nation but still a British Commonwealth. Vaskess refers to the U.S. Consul, not ambassador or embassy, in Sydney. ************************************************************************** From Phil Tanner Is it possible that a US consul in Fiji at that time would not have been a fully fledged diplomat, but a prominent national living locally and acting as honorary consul, as is the case with some countries' overseas representation in some locations even today? If so, Sir Harry would have been taking it outside the diplomatic chain of command by dealing with an honorary consul. And maybe the dignity of his post dictated (to Vaskess at least) that ambassadors deal with ambassadors? LTM, Phil 2276 ************************************************************************* From Ric Sir Harry was not an ambassador. As High Commissioner he was almost a Head of State, but I agree, he would probably want to deal with the highest ranking U.S. government official in the region. Again, the reference is to the U.S. Consul in Sydney. On October 26th Vaskess again suggested to Sir Harry that a "carefully worded" letter be sent to the "U.S. Consul-General in Sydney." Whether Mr. Abbot was signing visas in Suva or not, it doesn't seem very likely that His Excellency would bring him in on this. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:00:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Radio details MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: >Mike said: > > > > > Sidetone is transmitted audio, generated within the transmitter's >speech > > stages (or a tone oscillator in a CW transmitter) and fed directly into >the > > receiver headphone circuit. It is for the purpose of monitoring your > > transmission.... to let you know (after a fashion) that it's working. >But > > it does not tell every thing you need to know, obviously. Yes, I said that. It is true. Now for the next issue: > > > > >This raises another question: IF we are talking about a real sidetone, (as >far as I know, a real sidetone is for CW only!?!?!?) then, we are talking >about a transmitter with "true CW capability", then, aren't we? NO. The term "sidetone" refers to BOTH the voice fed into the receiver headset circuit AND a tone fed into the same circuit for monitoring CW transmissions. And we are NOT to infer from this that AE's rig was designed with CW in mind. It was added on as an afterthought-modification, and not too well carried out, even by Bell Labs/Western Electric who designed the rig, built it and later did the mods. AE's xmtr DID NOT have a tone oscillator to generate any sidetone for CW monitoring... in most rigs of the day, when the xmtr was switched over to CW, the speech amp was made to oscillate at 800-1000 Hz and this oscillator was keyed along with the RF stages. NOT done, in AE's rig. > >I thought last year the conclusion of a VERY long thread was that the only >way for AE to send Morse was tapping the PTT switch on the mike... NO NO NO. The transmitter did indeed have a keying circuit, with a special keying relay, operated by a telegraph key. What in effect happened, was that the push-to-talk line was closed -- using a toggle switch -- to put the rig on the air on CW, then the keying relay was used to actually key the RF stages on and off... and the relay "followed" the key. To receive, the switch closing the push-to-talk circuit had to be OPENED. This meant the xmtr could not be "break-in keyed." Standard practice in a/c xmtrs since way, way back was to use break-in keying, so the operator in the plane could hear the sytaion he was working "between the dots." Apparently W.E.Co. felt too much redesign of the 13C xmtr would be required to achieve break-in keying, so they did it the quick and dirty way... very easy, too, to confuse a non-tech operator. This rig could NOT be properly "keyed" on CW simply by using the mic button, without seriously damaging the radio due to transients, etc generated by making-and-breaking some whopping current-carrying circuits never intended to be so handled. Doing so would produce a very sloppy, rotten-sounding signal... hmmm, that's consistent with at least one description of a post-loss transmission, too. > > > > Again: This is NOT a method of getting the rec and xmtr on the same > > frequency. Absolutely not. > > > > The principle, on voice, is: if the speaker can hear his/her own voice >in the headphones, they will not shout. Simple, effective automatic gain > > control. Same principle used in your telephone at home. > > > > I have seen nothing to indicate that there was ANY method of >"whistle-thru" or "spotting" incorporated in AE's radio setup. As strange and/or >ludicrous > > >Sure sounds quite strange to me! It is many years since I've handled my >"Command Sets", but I would have thought that there was a way to hear the >transmitter in the receiver, possibly with a special position on some >"Mode" switch... NO. There was NONE in the old Command Set. That's a fact. I know that rig very, very well indeed. I assure you I am right on this one. > >Again: I don't have the diagrams... Sure wish there was a way I could buy >them, either tru faxing, or an electronic file or... > > > as it may sound, the method of tuning the receiver to the transmitter >was. "look at the dial." (This was the norm, even in military a/c radios of >the period.) Very dangerous practice, because often those old dials could >be "off" and you had to know the fudge factors. And respect them! This >could be hard for a non-tech (even anti-tech) person to deal with (a la AE). > > > > LTM (who always likes to hear herself talk) and > > 73 > > > > Mike E. > > >*************************************************************************** > > From Ric > > > > Sounds like I just just stop posting the stuff from Janet Whitney >entirely. > > > > > >Sounds fine to me: will save a huge amount of bandwith, on my slow Internet >connection... > >Cheers. > >Christian D. Aw, c'mon.... I agree with Vern on this one. Let Janet post away. She's making me think some more. And that's good. And she may come up with some angle we haven't thought of yet. And that's possible. LTM (who has been known, sometimes, to put mouth in motion w/o brain in gear, but don't you DARE question her on it) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:02:10 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Brines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: There ain't no way in Hades that rig AE had could have been transmitting continuously for 2 hours! Remember we are NOT talking about modern solid state low current drain gear. We are talking about an electronic equivalent to the Dinosaur. This thing drew around 60 AMPS (!!!) from a 12-volt battery, in key-down transmit mode. This is not new information. That radio would suck the life out of the batteries in no time if the key was held down... unless the tubes melted in fervent heat before the batteries died. LTM (whose hot flashes are legendary) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:05:46 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1965 Collopy letter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman Collopy quotes Noonan in the letter (posted by Don Jordan) as saying that both he and Earhart were not good "w/t operators". I'd assume it's some sort of reference to radio, but I've never heard the term. What do the letters stand for? Ah, so Fred WAS a scotch drinker after all. My fond suspicions are confirmed. william 2243 ************************************************************************** From Ric As I recall "w/t" is one of those quaint Britishisms and stands for "wireless telegraph." ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:06:53 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Recordings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson I'm beginning to wonder whether Brines used the AP radio facilities in Honolulu to listen for AE signals. Since landlines for also used, I wonder if they also had a radiotelegraph office as well, which could be tuned to various frequencies. That seems to make more sense of the situation IF IF Associated Press had radio facilities. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:10:21 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Electra's Belly Antenna MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern From Vern ><the "A" and "N" quadrant system.>> And Ric said: >I'm not aware of any such consensus. So, what would you say the belly antenna on that Electra, Junior is? ************************************************************************** From Ric My apologies. I didn't read carefully enough. I thought you were referring to the belly antenna on NR16020. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:25:02 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Random Radio Ramblings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern Thoughts prompted by various recent postings relative to radios and antennas. I think it is well to keep in mind that a lot of people tinkered with AE's radio equipment. Some may have done things in pretty unconventional fashion -- Joe Gurr, for example. *** THESE ARE ONLY MY OWN OPINIONS BASED ON MY OWN CURRENT UNDERSTANDING *** QUESTION: Was the belly antenna the receiving antenna? Very possibly. The lead in enters the plane in the vicinity of the receiver location under the copilots seat. Of course, the RDF loop coupling unit was also in the cockpit somewhere. The belly antenna may well have been the RDF sense antenna -- or, it may have been both. (See later comments on RDF-1) A little of Janet's "State of Radio in 1937" speculation... Whether or not it was true (it probably was), there was the perception on the part of many airplane and radio people that T/R relays in transmitters were a frequent source of trouble. It was believed that the relay contacts frequently "welded" due static electric discharges. Past postings suggest that it was not uncommon to use a dedicated receiving antenna, such as a belly wire, while an antenna on top, or a trailing wire, was used for transmitting. It is my understanding that this was practical with relatively low-power transmitters and vacuum tube receivers. Vacuum tubes were much more tolerant of RF voltages from the transmitter than are present day solid-state circuits. Conclusion: The belly antenna may well have been the receiving antenna. It may also have been the sense antenna for the RDF. The topside "V" antenna may have been use for transmitting only -- no need for wiring from the receiver to the transmitter T/R relay terminal. QUESTION: What about the the two antenna terminals (HF and LF) on the Western Electric receiver that are switched depending on the frequency band selected? If you have no "designated" LF antenna -- like if you've done away with the trailing wire antenna, as had AE -- then you connect the two antenna terminals together and to whatever you use for a receiving antenna, via the T/R relay in the transmitter, or not. Now this antenna is functional on all bands. QUESTION: Was the Bendix coupler unit necessary whatever receiver was used with the Bendix RDF loop? Yes, a coupling unit of some sort was pretty much necessary. It was necessary to transform the balanced, high-impedance, of the loop to the unbalanced, low-impedance, input of the receiver. Some amplification was also desirable due to the inefficiency of the small diameter loop compared to a more conventional, relatively long, wire antenna. This would also be the place to introduce the signal from a sense antenna -- if such was used. QUESTION: Was there a problem getting operating power to the RDF loop coupling unit if it was used with the Western Electric receiver rather than a Bendix receiver? No. The schematic diagrams of the WE-20 series receivers clearly show a terminal strip where all power and control functions are available. This is used to make the required electrical connections to the remote control unit installed where the pilot and copilot can reach it. This same terminal strip could be used to provide operating voltages to the Bendix RDF coupling unit. QUESTION: Is a sense antenna necessary for operation of the Bendix RDF loop and coupler unit? No. The sense antenna serves to resolve the 180 degree ambiguity problem of the loop. There are other ways (non-electronic) to resolve this ambiguity. If one chose not to use a sense antenna, he would simply ground the sense antenna terminal of the coupling unit. Or leave it unconnected. It probably wouldn't make much difference inside a metal airplane. Now the loop exhibits the typical two-null response of a simple loop antenna -- the figure "8" sort of response. This avoids some problems in getting everything properly adjusted so the bearing obtained is a correct bearing. (Phasing and amplitude of the two signals must be right.) The simple loop is subject to fewer problems once it has been calibrated (bearing-wise) for the particular aircraft and the particular installation. QUESTION: Was the Bendix RDF loop coupling unit on AE's plane similar to the RDF-1 for which we have a schematic diagram and description? There is little doubt that it was similar but, if we assume it was the unit described in the Aero-Digest article, there were certainly differences. This does appear to be the unit seen in some of the photos of AE with the loop in her hands. To my knowledge, we do not have a schematic of the Bendix unit, nor do we have photos good enough to do much educated guessing about it. The RDF-1 is described as being designed to simplify the switiching between the various functions available. AE may not have had benefit of this more simplified switching. We simply do not know what all she had to do to change over from normal communication receiving (which wasn't working) and RDFing. Whatever she did, she did hear the Itaska signal on 7500 kc. She reported that she could not get a null. Might she have been able to get a null on that frequency? Did she just not try hard enough? AE seemed to have the idea that a radio bearing could be determined rather quickly. In her repeated requests for the Itaska to take a bearing on her, she was never on long enough for a bearing to be taken. I can imagine her giving her loop a rapid turn one way then the other and concluding that she couldn't get a null. QUESTION: Could AE have expected to get a null on 7500 kc? Frequencies above the AM broadcast band (up to about 1500 kc in that time) were not generably considered usable for RDFing. Since she did hear the Itaska, apparently via the loop, would the loop have exhibited its normal directional characteristics? Should she have been able to get a null? There is one instance, that I know of, when a person familiar with radio and DF loops of that time was asked that question. It's purely anecdote and a rather off-hand response. When asked whether a loop such as AE had would give a null at 7500 kc, his response was: "Sure it would." One thing that has long bothered me is the matter of the automatic gain control switch on the receiver and its remote control unit. Did she get that turned off before trying to get a null? If the Itaska signal was strong, she would not have got a null with the automatic gain control functioning. (It's labeled AVC on the receiver for "automatic volume control." AGC is the modern, more generic term.) I wonder if that might be the genesis of AE's idea that she couldn't get a null when too close to the transmitting location -- such as at Lae? Maybe nobody had ever got through to her that she needed to turn off the AVC switch. QUESTION: Was there a second receiver specifically for RDF, presumably Bendix? Possible of course. Where was it located? AE had said that the receiver was under the copilot's seat, the transmitter was in the cabin, and that they had a Bendix RDF. She didn't say where that was. It was pretty obvious where it was. It was on the roof. Anyone could see that. Does the fact that she didn't say where the RDF receiver was located mean it didn't exist? If there was a second receiver there must have been a second remote control unit somewhere in the cockpit. Even if it was pretuned to 7500 kc, she had to have means to turn it on, adjust volume, and she had to have a jack to plug her earphones into. Hopefully she would be sure the AGC was turned off! *************************************************************************** From Ric Very nice summary and I agree with most of it (which is why I think it's very nice). I will point out that Amelia DOES say where the Bendix direction finder is. She lists it as being on the instrument panel among her "navigation instruments" such as "compasses, directional gyros, the Bendix direction finder, and various radio equipment." ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:32:04 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Fiji Consul MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman From the US Embassy website at Canberra, Australia (http://www.usis-australia.gov/embassy/history.html) "United States consular representation was gradually expanded but official diplomatic relations, which had previously been conducted through the Government of the United Kingdom, were not established until January 1940. At that time, the Right Honorable R.G. Casey became Australia's Minister to Washington and Mr. Clarence E. Gauss was appointed United States Minister to Australia. In July 1946, the rank of representatives exchanged by the two countries was raised to that of Ambassador. The American Embassy was the first embassy to be established in Canberra." This implies that the consul in Sydney was part of an "expanded" diplomatic consul at the time, but not an embassy (which came to Canberra a decade later). I still suspect that the diplomatic liason Sir Harry was discussing was beyond the scope of the US consul in Fiji (which probably dealt mostly with routine visas and passport matters), and more appropriate for the professional diplomats in Sydney. william 2243 ************************************************************************** From Ric So, technically, the Top Yank in Sydney in October of 1940 was the U.S. Minister but that had only been since January and it wouldn't be surprising if the Secretary of the High Commission up in Fiji still used the old term "Consul-General". ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:58:44 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Story of the "Map Case"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mart Moleski I have a vague (but perhaps not altogether unreliable) recollection of hearing of an aluminum box found on Niku I or Niku II. I've read all of the Forum and looked at all the web pages (I think) and haven't come across any story of how this was ruled out of consideration as coming from the Electra. Did TIGHAR find such a box? If so, how was it disqualified? Marty *************************************************************************** From Ric You're referring to the famous (infamous?) Navigator's Bookcase. That all went down back in the days before the (communications) Revolution, so it's not on the website. Gather 'round the campfire and I'll tell you the tale, in which are many lessons. The story begins on the first day ashore at Niku on the first expedition in 1989. Among the junk that littered the remains of the abandoned village was an aluminum box, beat up and partially cut apart. Not the sort of thing you'd look at and immediately recognize as part of an airplane, but it was aluminum and that was good. But we weren't looking for bits and pieces. For all we knew the whole enchilada was parked somewhere in the bushes just waiting for us to hack our way to it, so hack we did. For three weeks we explored and searched and tried to at least get a general feel for every part of the island. The only place we came across anything that might resemble airplane parts was in the village, and those few pieces - included the cut-apart box - had been carefully noted but left in place until we decided what was worth collecting. When it came time to leave we took a hard look at our disappointing assortment of scrap metal and decided to collect about a dozen artifacts which looked at least vaguely promising. Among them was the box. We liked the fact that it had very regularly spaced rivets and had traces of something that looked like it might be zinc-chromate paint or wash (both indicators of aviation use). Most of all we liked that it had a number stamped into it - 28F4023. If that was a part number we should be able to find out for sure what the thing was. When we got home we went to work researching the number and quickly discovered that what we had was an interior "furnishings" (that's what the "F" means) for a Consolidated Model 28 flying boat, known to the U.S. Navy as the "PBY." The particular fixture we had was "Box - Navigator's book and paper storage." The next step was to find a photograph of such a beast installed in a PBY and see if it looked like what we had. The National Archives had photos and, sure enough, there was our box - except not quite. Our artifact had some straps and fasteners that weren't in the photos and, although we couldn't be sure from the pictures, it looked like the mounting holes were wrong. Might we have a PBY bookcase that was actually used in some other airplane? We needed to find an actual bookcase in its original installation aboard an actual, unrestored PBY. Good luck. After an exhaustive search we found an early PBY-5A that had been wrecked in a tornado out behind the New England Air Museum in Windsor Locks, Connecticut. Sho' nuff. The box was right there on the bulkhead and sho' nuff, the mounting holes were entirely different from what saw on our box. Despite the part number, it appeared that this Navigator's Bookcase had never been in a PBY. So what kind of airplane HAD it been in and how did it get to that island? Could it have come from the airplane that we think ended up on that island? The one that we know was specially outfitted for a navigator who would be using the same books that case was designed to hold? Okay, first question. Is the design of the box old enough to have been available in 1937? Yes, the PBY-1 went into service the previous year. Next question, would the Earhart organization have any access to such a bookcase? Yes, we know that they borrowed a bubble octant from the Navy at North Island, San Diego and there was a PBY squadron based there. In fact, the Consolidated factory was in San Diego. How about the greenish paint? Is there anything about it that would disqualify it being that old? To get that question answered we enlisted the help of the FBI lab in Washington, DC. Their answer - there's nothing about this box that would preclude it being aboard Earhart's aircraft. Cool! But is there any indication that such a box WAS aboard? A photo of Earhart and Noonan standing before the open cabin door in Darwin, Australia shows a shadowy object on the cabin floor that COULD be the bookcase. It's the right size, the right shape, but it just isn't clear enough to be sure. We built a full-scale model of an intact case and photographed it on the floor of a Lockheed 10, duplicating the angle of the Darwin photo. Yup, looks right. We built a scaled-down model of the interior of the cabin and put a scaled down bookcase under the scaled-down navigator's table. Yup, fits. We tried to always be careful not to claim that anything was proven, because of course, it wasn't. It was a tantalizing clue, that's all, but the press loved it and we got lots of good coverage, not all of it accurate (surprise, surprise). Our critics howled and that generated more press and so it went. Meanwhile, the answer came from an unexpected direction. We were still trying to identify some of the other aluminum hunks we had collected on the island. One badly bent and corroded gusset-like structure had a part number still partially discernible - 32B108??? Looks like the same Consolidated pattern. Model 32 was the B-24, Liberator, PB4Y-1 series. "B" meant a fuselage structural component. We never did find a solid match for the rest of the number, but in looking through the parts catalog for the B-24D/PB4Y-1 I started to come across "28F" part numbers. PBY parts in a Liberator? Yup. Mostly interior furnishings. (We're in a hurry. This thing we designed for a PBY will work fine for now in a B-24. Why take the time to design a whole new part?) Oh my God, I wonder if.... sure enough, there it is, 28F4023 "Box - Navigator's book and paper storage." Quick to the National Archives. Find a photo. Yes, there it is in all its glory, exactly like the one we found on the island, fasteners and mounting holes and all. Two years of research but we found the answer. It wasn't the answer we would have preferred but even a disappointing answer is far better than no answer at all. How did a B-24 part get to the island? Most likely from Canton. At least one and possibly more B-24s were wrecked there during the war and others may have been modified (eventually Consolidated came out with a bookcase especially for the Model 32 with a "32F" part number). After the war lots of settlers from the PISS worked for the airlines on Canton. Plenty of opportunity to bring home useful stuff. So that's the story of the map case. Lessons: Things are not always what they seem (duh). You can build a pretty respectable castle out of thin air. The press will misquote you and people will hold you accountable. Don't worry about it. If you keep hammering you'll find the answer, but not necessarily the one you expected or the one you wanted. No matter. The real answer is always the right answer. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:00:31 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Moorsby/Moorby MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Bob Brandenburg For Cam Warren: Oops!! Thanks, Cam. I was relying on the majority spelling in the message transcripts on the research CD. All messages had the call sign right. But the ship's name is spelled "Moorby" and "Moorsby", the latter occurring most frequently, so I chose that variant. Bad decision. I just rechecked, and there's a message from Moorby to commercial radio station KHK in Honolulu. It's spelled "Moorsby" in the transcript header, but the literal text of the message from the ship's master to KHK begins with "Moorby . . . ". The ship's master knew how to spell his ship's name, and I should have caught that. Bob Brandenburg ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:01:37 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Fiji Consul MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman Ric wrote, So, technically, the Top Yank in Sydney in October of 1940 was the U.S. Minister but that had only been since January and it wouldn't be surprising if the Secretary of the High Commission up in Fiji still used the old term "Consul-General". --------------- Not surprising at all. william 2243 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:02:48 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Brines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman Oh my, certainly, Mike E. is correct. There is no way that the radio transmitter in the Electra could have transmitted a continuous carrier for two hours. Some time ago this was discussed on the forum and I remember doing some calculations, and coming up with 1.5 hours as the maximum ideal (based on the 85 amp hour battery and a transmitter drawing 50 amps). Factoring in mushy tubes and other problems that could easily be whittled down to not much more than an hour. And, as Mike implies, the transmitter probably wouldn't have lasted that long sending a continuous signal. I hope no one has gotten the impression that there is any consensus or serious consideration that the transmission Brines referred to was possibly from Earhart and Noonan. Obviously, given what we definitely know about their equipment, it couldn't have been. william 2243 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:04:07 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Random Radio Ramblings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman Vern wrote, The belly antenna may well have been the receiving antenna. It may also have been the sense antenna for the RDF. The topside "V" antenna may have been use for transmitting only -- no need for wiring from the receiver to the transmitter T/R relay terminal. ------------ Which fits the facts and the theory. With the evidence we have, showing damage to the belly antenna, if it was both the receiving antenna and the sense for RDF, they were in serious trouble as they approached Howland and apparently unaware of it. william 2243 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:08:48 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Electra's Belly Antenna MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson I believe that AE's radio test that she avoided in Oakland was to use this A/N quadrant system. This was the standard way of homing in on an airfield using radios, at least in the US. Her plane was also used in the US, so wouldn't it be logical for her to keep that antenna in place for use? Just curious... ************************************************************************** From Ric As Cam is fond of saying, my expertise in radio is on a par with AE's, but on the face of it I can't think why the belly antenna as described by Vern could not be used to recieve "The Range" (A/N quadrant system). ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:53:02 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Story of the "Map Case"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Frank Westlake After two years of research I'm sure you also tried to find out if Noonan could have had a navigator's bookcase that had been intended for a Liberator. Did the Liberator not go into service until after July '37? Frank Westlake ************************************************************************** From Ric First flight of the Model 32 (XB-24) was December 29, 1939. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 16:01:45 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Recordings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Muenich In my previous two postings of 8/28 I tried to establish the authorship of the indented material of the Brines' letter as Brines himself. Absent verification the indented material has no author and its content is subject to question, the source being unknown--been there-done that. I will assume that the author is now established as Brines, the letter is contemporary with the event, and its content has some merit if it can be accurately interpreted. The first paragraph of the second page of the letter, as noted on this forum, discusses "reports". "Except the screwy reports of amateur operators who persistently heard voices" when we were trying to sleep. I bounced out of bed half a dozen times each night, sleepily trying to check up on some new report that had Amelia * * * *." Note that Brines carefully or at least deliberatly couches this in the form or "reports" and "check[ing] sic up" on those new reports. This language is different than that found in the second paragraph. "The first time came early in the story when that British freighter, the Moorby, reported overhearing a 'conversation' which consisted of a series of unholy 'squeals' that might have meant something to somebody, but not to me, after hearing them. 'Scoop' Culver, covering the 'Tiser from coastguard hdqts, reported the messages originated somewhere "between Howland and the Solomon Islands," which meant somewhere below Pearl Harbor" This appears much more direct and clearly tells me, and Richard, that he (Brines) heard the "squeals". He does not hear a "report", he does not refer to something that someone else heard--he directly states that he couldn't understand the squeals "after hearing them". He notes that "Scoop" was at coastguard hdgts, not him and he certainly wasn't on the Moorby. I agree with another member of the forum that doubts, even if the Moorby had recording equipment, that it docked in Honolulu, although it may have. Lloyd's records may recount its voyage through the Pacific and it might be useful to know where Moorby was during early July, 1937 and if it, in fact, docked at Honolulu. If he didn't hear it at Coastguard Headquarters and he didn't hear it on the Moorby, he heard an amatuer or a recording, which brings me to the issue. Several postings on the forum seem to indicate that this medium was not available, or not practical, to be on shipboard, or possibly at the Coastguard Headquarters to record this type of conversation. After several nights of straining my brain I recalled a passage from one of the volumes of my WWII collection that discussed recording by the US Navy, at sea, early in the War. Stanley Johnston was aboard USS Lexington from early April, 1942 until she was sunk at Coral Sea on May 8th, 1942. In his book "Queen of the Flattops, E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc, 1942 he makes three references to recording equipment aboard the "Lex". I have placed them in inverse order as I located them and refreshed my recollection. " It was just at this point I suffered a great personal disappointment. I found my way through the smoke to Commander Seligman's cabin to recover the recordings. In all we had made a dozen or more records. The first of these from the squadron commanders on that wonderful attack on the Ryukaku. Then there were several that I had made during the attack on the Lexington. In addition to getting the stuff as it was happening, and getting onto the wax the sound of the Jap bombs, plane engines, the torpedo explosions and the sounds of our own guns, I had gone down when the attack was over and amplified everything with 15 minutes more of my own explanation." Johnston, pp 252-253. About this time a great deal began to happen. Thinking back later I realize a thousand and one impressions were registering that I wasn't even conscious of at the time. Chiefly I was busy for the next few minutes getting my microphone and telephone circuits straightened out." Johnston, p. 219 "Commander Mort Seligman, the Lex's executive officer, brought with him to sea practically all his worldly goods except his house. With his civilian clothing, his golf clubs, fishing tackle, etc., he also had on board a superb combination recording and play-back machine. We often discussed the value of interviews with pilots, air commanders and air crewmen recorded on discs as a permanent record. Taken immediately after the men return from action while their impressions are still vivid and clear, such recordings would be of great value to supplement their written reports which often are laconic, stereotyped, and brief. We had been so enthused over the idea that the commander arranged for me to assist as questioner in his cabin on the night of the 7th. He invited, for the experiment, all the commanders of the air squadrons that took part in the day's attack on the Jap carrier, later identified as the Ryukaku. Those who were present that evening after the air conferences were over and plans for the 8th had been laid, were: Group Commander Bill Ault, Lieut. Commanders Ramsey, Brett, Hamilton and Dixon. My part was to see they were properly introduced for the recording (with Commander Seligman acting as the recording engineer) and to ask a question now and then to get them talking. We wanted everything they could remember about what each man saw and did in the fight. All of them were skilled observers, reporting about jobs in which each was an expert. What they had to say was precise and to the point. It was without frills of any sort and just about the most dramatic thing I ever heard. From their flying grandstands above, these five men were eyewitnesses to everything that took place and was interwoven into the battle itself. As each man finished his own statment he made a summary accounting for his squadron and then added his conclusions concerning tactics. They also gave their evaluation of enemy movements and defensive action, described and sumed up the strength and weaknesses of enemy pilots, planes, anti-aircraft guns, and vessels. I believe that had these recordings been preserved and sent on to Washington as Commander Seligman hoped and intended, they would have been of the greatest value to the Navy's staff, personnel and procurement sections. They would, in my opinion at least, have been of truly material benefit as supplemnental to the paper reports that already go in on every phase of any action. We played the four discs, each one of about 20 minutes' playing time, back for ourselves that night. So good were they that Seligman and I decided to attempt to make a recording the next day of any fighting that might take place around us. We were anticipating an air assault on the Lex and Carrier II almost as soon as it was light, so there was real point to the preparations we then made. Earlier experiments along the same line had been unsatisfactory because the recording microphone had picked up too much noise from the ship itself. The rattle and slam of gunfire on the Lexinton's flight deck alone had been enough to jam the mike and create a noise level over which it was impossible to talk. So we taped the microphone so, that by cupping my hands over it and holding it close to my lips we could exclude almost any other sound and yet get a clear recording of the voice itself. We extended the microphone line from the Commnader's cabin up to the signal bridge--my battle station--and had about 40 feet of loose line there to enable me to move freely around the bridge and see everything that might happen. One of the orderlies was shown how to operate the recording machine. We rigged an intercommunications telephone between the bridge and his cabin so that he could be given directions when to start and stop the turntable." Johnston, pp 193-195 Yes, I know this does not take recording back to July, 1937, but much has been posted over the past two weeks claiming no such equipment existed, or couldn't or didn't exist until after the war, it wasn't practical, affordable, capable of re-play, wouldn't work on shipboard, etc. Whatever equipment this was, it was either affordable on a Lieut. Commanders pay (really cheap in 1941/42) or was furnished by the Navy, (I suspect the latter), was "hearable" in Washington (substantiating my opinion that this was Navy property since Seligman expected to provide the Navy in Washington with the disks and expected them to hear what was recorded on them), was at least semi-portable, worked at sea, was adaptable and versatle, capable of remote recording, was done on a "wax" disk, each about 20 minutes in length, could be immediately played back, and with all due respect to Navy orderlies must have been somewhat easy to operate. Seligman and Johnston also acted as "sound engineers" aparently without training and were clever enough to shield or mask the microphone under severe noise conditions. Johnston notes that the recordings were so good they decided to attempt a combat recording. Although I doubt that Moorby had such equipment in 1937, it is entirely possible that Coast Guard Headquarters or some amatuer might have had an earlier, less portable version for the very purpose of recording important radio messages. Targets up--shoot away. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 16:10:17 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: W/T MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Everette, The Radio Historian >From Ric > >As I recall "w/t" is one of those quaint Britishisms and stands for >"wireless telegraph." From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: You are absolutely correct. W/T = Wireless Telegraph, Wireless Telegraphy. Another is R/T, which means Radio Telephone, aka voice radio. Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric And so I checked my Sutton harness, hit the boost, grabbed the R/T, and said, "Hello Red One. Red Three calling. I say, old boy, don't look now but you seem to have a Hun on your tail. I'll be right there." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:20:26 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: recordings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Greg (referring to Mike Muenich's long posting about recordings made aboard ships) Ric, my business partner (electronics R & D company) spent a good deal of his life as a recording engineer and believes that the 20 minute disc technology mentioned here was a 3 mil 33 1/3 RPM system. Greg ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:21:30 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Fiji Consul MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Phil Tanner Ric: Quite right to point out that the secretary of the British high commission in Fiji in 1940 was not an ambassador. I was thinking in post-colonial terms - independent countries in the Commonwealth these days have high commissioners in one another's capitals, who are the exact equivalent of ambassadors to non-Commonwealth nations. LTM Phil 2276 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:25:07 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Fred, Hungover, Drunk or Sober? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kenton Spading From: Kenton Spading, 1382CE Subject, Fred, Hungover, Drunk or Sober? William WG wrote: Plainly put, Fred Noonan looks sober in that clip. It contains no proof that Fred was drunk on that flight, and provides reasonable evidence of the contrary. Patrick G. wrote: The point is that a given amount of alcohol does not always produce a given result. I stand by my conviction that the Lae takeoff film conclusively refutes the "Fred was drunk" theory, regardless of his consumption the night before. ****************** Spading replies: There are really three issues here. 1. Did Fred get drunk the night before the flight and was he, therefore, hungover the next morning? 2. Was Fred drunk the morning the flight left? 3. Did Fred drink (or get drunk) during the flight? Obviously the film cannot answer No. 3. It can, however, provide clues related to Nos. 1 and 2. I agree in part with William.....the film can provide "reasonable evidence" of Fred's condition. I disagree with Patick. ..I do not believe the film provides "conclusive proof" of Fred's condition whether it be either drunk or hungover. Conclusive is a very strong word. I have played a numer of different sports with some very talented athletes who had drinking problems. Prior to a game, these guys would down an amount of alcohol relative to their body weight, that would place them in the legally drunk category. They would then proceed to perform feats of athletism during the game that would make a sober person dizzy. I can only imagine how they might have performed sober. The drinking after the games would continue on into the evening. These guys would then show up the next day for the continuation of the tournament in what had to be a severly hungover mode and still outperform your average athlete. Amateur sports are not the only instance of this. A number of well-known professsional athletes played their whole careers either drunk, hungover or both. The spectators had no clue as to their state (e.g. Mickey Mantle, Tommy Kramer, John Daly etc. etc.). How someone walks or for that matter dances or their general appearance does not offer "conclusive proof" as to their blood alcohol level or as to whether or not they are hungover. When you are severely drunk...yes....even a seasoned drinker will show signs. But there is a lot of room below that level when you cannot determine their state by obseving their actions. LTM Kenton Spading ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:34:09 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: AE Returns From Saipan (again) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From Ric This just in. Apparently there's a new second edition of this old conspirac= y=20 classic. ************************************************************************** FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE AMELIA EARHART RETURNS FROM SAIPAN ISBN: 0967764920 Title: Amelia Earhart Returns from Saipan Author: Joe Davidson, DVM Edition: Second Format: trade paperback About the Book: Amelia Earhart Returns from Saipan A faint =93SOS=94 was the last sound heard from Amelia Earhart=92s ill-fated= flight=20 around the world in 1937. From that day forward, there has been great=20 speculation about her mysterious disappearance. Thirty years after the event, a group of determined men from several walks o= f=20 life dedicated themselves to learning the truth about Amelia Earhart and her= =20 navigator, Fred Noonan. The investigators made two trips to Saipan, lived=20 through two typhoons, experienced endless hardships and adventures, and kept= =20 their =91never-say-die=92 attitude until they found convincing evidence that= =20 Amelia and Fred were captured and executed by the Japanese prior to World Wa= r=20 II. This group of dedicated researchers faced many strange situations, and met=20 many fascinating people in the course of their search. They kept the faith=20 and solved a mystery that has puzzled mankind for decades. About the Author: Joe Davidson=20 =20 Joe Davidson, DVM, began writing in Texas Interscholastic League competition= =20 while attending a rural grade school. His love for writing continued throug= h=20 high school, college and graduate school, and into professional life. Conducting a busy veterinary practice from 1946 to 1958 left Dr. Davidson=20 little time to write more than notes. His first book, Horseman=92s Veterina= ry=20 Advisor was published in 1967. This was followed in 1968 by All Horse Races= =20 are Fixed. Davidson has traveled widely and is a dedicated student of history. These=20 interests were integral in motivating him to write this historic adventure. The cover image may be copied from the following web location: http://www.unlimitedpublishing.com/images/covers/0967764920.jpg Joe Davidson 306 Rivercove Dr Garland Tx 75044 972 495-2792 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:35:37 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: recordings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman Mike Muenich wrote, Although I doubt that Moorby had such equipment in 1937, it is entirely possible that Coast Guard Headquarters or some amatuer might have had an earlier, less portable version for the very purpose of recording important radio messages. Targets up--shoot away. ----------------- Interesting. I've never heard a story like that before. I would be delighted if some post loss transmission recordings turned up. Mike cites evidence of disc recorders on US Navy ships during wartime in 1942. This doesn't really correspond to what a merchant ship may have had onboard, or what an amateur operator might have been using, in peacetime 5 years earlier (1937). Finally, I've mentioned that it is certainly possible that recordings of post-loss transmissions were made in 1937. Unfortunately, we see no reference to any recordings in any of the documentation (and no discs or spools of wire have physically appeared yet). My remarks about the state of the technology in 1937, along with the expense and impracticality, were intended as explanations as to why it's reasonable that we've seen no evidence of any recordings. These remarks were never, never intended as proof that no recordings were made. william 2243 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:36:57 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Fiji Consul MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King << Whether Mr. Abbot was signing visas in Suva or not, it doesn't seem very likely that His Excellency would bring him in on this. >> Well, except that Sir Ian says they were friendly, and he, Sir Ian, can't imagine Abbott NOT knowing about it. Another good reason to get a look at Sir Harry's papers at Oxford. As for the State Department, yeah, Ric, I know who your man in Washington is. LTM TK ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:41:13 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Story of the "Map Case"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Moleski Ric, Thanks so much for the story of the map case. Now I understand some references on the web site that refer to finding B-24 parts on the island. I read the news accounts about the discovery of the case but never heard anything about how it was discredited. Now I know "the rest of the story." ;o) Marty ************************************************************************** From Ric Mysteries get more press than disappointing explanations, and so we end up with Bermuda Triangles, UFOs, and Loch Ness Monsters. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:49:13 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1965 Collopy letter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom Robison >>From Ric > >Yes, but the letter contains no implication that Noonan had a "probelm" with >alcohol. It does, however, seem to fulfill some fondly expressed hopes that >Fred was a scotch drinker. "probelm", Ric? One snort too many? And I thought this forum was moderated by a sober man. See, folks, this proves it, Ric Gillespie is a LUSH! Tom ************************************************************************** From Ric How does the old saying go? "I don't have a drinking problem. I drink - I get drunk - I fall down - No problem." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:53:54 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Radio details MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern For Mike E. >NO NO NO. The transmitter did indeed have a keying circuit, with a special >keying relay, operated by a telegraph key. What in effect happened, was >that the push-to-talk line was closed -- using a toggle switch -- to put the >rig on the air on CW, then the keying relay was used to actually key the RF >stages on and off... and the relay "followed" the key. I thought the last time we were down this road you were unable to see a way for the marginal sketch of a telegraph key and DPDT switch (probably center off) and a connector to mate with J12 to work. I couldn't find a way for it to work either. I suspected that what we were looking at was incomplete -- very preliminary thinking about how to implement CW capability. And there is that connection marked "T" (To Trans). I never figured out where that was to go. Anyway, I gather you have now found new information, or figured out something, that indicates AE's transmitter may have had CW capability. That makes that post-loss message a lot more believable. I never for a moment believed that keying with the mic button idea, for several reasons. In addition to those you mention, I think it would have been very difficult, if not impossible, to do. And I doubt it would have been readable at all. One could get out an SOS but that's about all. The comment about the quality of the keying didn't describe anything as awful as that would have been! ************************************************************************** From Ric Let me jump in here with just a couple of points: - There is good evidence that Earhart left her telegraph key behind in Miami. - I don't know of any credible post-loss message that contain keyed information. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:54:50 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Belly Antennas MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern I really think the belly antenna seen in that photo of the Electra, Junior served the same purpose as the belly antenna on AE's Electra. The one on the Electra, Junior has just been shortened so it wouldn't get snagged in the weeds on unpaved runways and get yanked off. So, now we know! LTM (Who is glad that's finally all cleared up!) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:56:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Brines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern >There is no way that the radio transmitter in the Electra could have >transmitted a continuous carrier for two hours. Not unless the the engine with the generator was running. Could the transmitter have held out? Hard to say. Some of that old gear was pretty durable. Of course, the ambient temperature on Niku didn't help. Would it make any sense for people such as Amelia and Fred to tie down the mic button and let it transmit a carrier for however long it would? Maybe someone would home in on it. What did they have to loose? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:57:37 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Radio details MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D. > This rig could NOT be properly "keyed" on CW simply by using the mic button, > without seriously damaging the radio due to transients, etc generated by > making-and-breaking some whopping current-carrying circuits never intended > to be so handled. Doing so would produce a very sloppy, rotten-sounding > signal... hmmm, that's consistent with at least one description of a > post-loss transmission, too. THAT exactly is what I was thinking about, Mike. Can't remember the time or reference, etc... I remember a looong thread months ago about a post-loss transmission which sounded like an atrociously chirped CW signal sent real slow on a mike key... So AE did have the capability to send clean Morse with a proper Morse Telegraph key.... -but didin't use it!?!?!? She just didn't bring a key along? This Tighar stuff is sooo complicated.... 'Wish I could spare the time to dig through many months or Forum postings; I just can't remember having read anything about that radio being CW-capable before.... Regards. Christian D. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:59:10 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Fred, Hungover, Drunk or Sober? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Spading says: These guys would then show up the next day for the continuation of the tournament in what had to be a severly hungover mode and still outperform your average athlete. King replies: Which raises the question of whether even if Fred WERE drunk or hungover he could have outperformed your average navigator. Lots of variables there, and we can't really know the answer, any more than we can know whether he drank himself under his bookcase once they were aloft. But the bottom line is that whatever his condition he got them pretty close to Howland. LTM (who outperforms your average mother ...) Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:00:35 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Earhart's WE Transmitter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Janet Whitney I have seen the power requirements for present (solid state) ham transceivers. They consume about 20 amps for 100 watts output at 13.8 volts DC. So, wouldn't Earhart's transmitter have consumed about 12 amps for 50 watts output at 12 volts DC? If Earhart's transmitter consumed 60 amps at 12 volts DC, that would have been 720 watts. Were dynamotor power supplies that inefficient? Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:47:20 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Story of the "Map Case"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman Ric wrote, Mysteries get more press than disappointing explanations, and so we end up with Bermuda Triangles, UFOs, and Loch Ness Monsters. ---------- And crop circles, Ric. Don't forget the crop circles (the discoveries of the individuals and methods behind these hoaxes have been consistantly under-publicized). william 2243 ************************************************************************** From Ric You... you mean... they're not....real? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:20:25 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: FN & AE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From William Webster-Garman I generally agree with Kenton Spading. A recap might be productive today: I am convinced that they unknowingly blew out some vital component of their radio gear on takeoff from Lae, failed to make useful voice or bearing contact with Howland, and got really close but couldn't see the tiny island because of cloud shadows. Hypothesis: Not finding Howland, they probably attempted to fly the LOP to Gardner as an alternate. Based on what TIGHAR has developed in its research over the years, they reached Gardner, an uninhabited and remote island, landing on the reef near the then-recognizable wreck of the SS Norwich City. Perhaps a few transmissions were made from the radio of the grounded Electra before it was swamped and severely broken up by waves. The debris was close enough to the remains of the Norwich City that it wasn't recognizable or notable. There is evidence, but not proof, that at least Earhart may have survived the wreck, and might have persisted on the island for some time, even finding stores left years earlier by the Norwich rescue party, before ultimately succumbing to exposure or some mishap. There is even a tragically tantalizing, remote possibility that only three months later, in October 1937 during a colonial recon visit, Eric Bevington passed within metres of her (possibly still alive), as he briskly walked around the island with several Gilbertese, encountering unexpected difficulties himself and concentrating on his own survival. Three years later, in September 1940, Gerald Gallagher sent the following telegram from Gardner to the British Resident Commissioner on Ocean Island: "Some months ago working party on Gardner discovered human skull - this was buried and I only recently heard about it. Thorough search has now produced more bones (including lower jaw) part of a shoe a bottle and a sextant box. It would appear that (a) Skeleton is possibly that of a woman, (b) Shoe was a womans and probably size 10, (c) Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542- - sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel. Bones look more than four years old to me but there seems to be very slight chance that this may be remains of Amelia Earhardt..." LTM, who knows the rest william 2243 *************************************************************************** From Ric Yeah, that's pretty much the current TIGHAR hypothesis. Now all we need is proof. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:26:20 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: trailing wire MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Rick Seapin Hi Forum: I just looked at the Lae take-off film again. I seem to recall about reading about the trailing belly antenna somewhere, but for the life of me, I can't remember where. It was said to be approximately 50' long and was deployed by a hand crank once the aircraft was airborne. This being the case, then the antenna must have been attached to something inside the fuselage and not the pitot tube. Thus, no bent pitot tube (at least not caused by the antanna) and the puff of smoke you see in the film is prop wash or a mound of soft dirt that one of the balloon tires ran over. Just a thought. *************************************************************************** From Ric The Electra was delivered with a trailing wire that deployed from the extreme end of the tail. Not sure if that one was hand-cranked or not. That installation was replaced in early 1937 with another trailing wire that deployed electrically from a mast under the cabin. The mast was wiped out in the Luke Field wreck and the trailing wire was apparently not reinstalled when the aircraft was repaired. There was no trailing wire antenna on the airplane at the time of the final takeoff. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:27:20 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Harry Manning MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Janet Whitney I wondered what became of Harry Manning, after he went "back to sea." He became Commodore Manning of the United States Lines and was Captain of the SS United States when it set the transatlantic speed record on its first transatlantic voyage in 1952. There is a Web site: www.ssunitedstatesdoc.com w ith the history of that voyage. Several groups are trying to preserve and restore the SS United States, which is docked in Philadelphia. Janet Whitney ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:32:30 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Crop Circles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ken Feder Back in 1994, Jim Schnabel wrote a terrific book, Round in Circles, about the crop circle phenomenon. Best part; after the two guys (Doug and Dave) who started the whole thing fessed up, the crop circle believers said, well, maybe those guys did some of the circles, but "experts" could tell the difference between the man-made fakes and the real thing. The BBC then secretly had Doug and Dave make a circle and they filmed the procedure. Sure enough, the next day, the true believers were out in force, and asserted that the newest circle (Doug and Dave's) was definitely the real deal. They had lots of scientific-sounding reasons why the newest circle could not have been made by human agengy. That's when the BBC brought out the tapes. I'm not sure the circle fans have ever fully recovered Ken Feder *************************************************************************** From Dave Porter Ric, Regarding crop circles, aliens, loch ness monsters, etc. There's a panel of the old, sadly extinct Far Side cartoon strip that depicted a view of the earth, surrounded by circus clowns. The caption read: "The Bozone Layer--protecting the rest of the universe from earth's harmful effects." Along that same line, but in slightly more serious mode for anyone interested, there is a delightful science fiction short story called "Danger--Human" by Gordon Dickson; and the idea presented by CS Lewis, in his space trilogy (Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, That Hideous Strength) that the reason other intelligent species don't visit earth is because we're too messed up. LTM, Dave Porter, 2288 ************************************************************************** From Ric Proof of that theory can be found in "Amelia Earhart Lives!" by Joe Klaas (McGraw-Hill, 1970). ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:10:52 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Gilberts/ Amelia's first choice MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ron Bright Ric and DustyMiss, I have been in correspondence with Carl Halberg at the Univ. of Wyoming and received the same reply re his search of Box 19 of the Vidal collection with negative results concerning Vidal's comments AE intended to fly back to the Gilberts if she missed Howland. Halberg said that his inquiry (which probably includes his reply to Dustymiss,see her posting) was not exhaustive because of the .75 cubic feet.So we are still not absolutely positive of Rich's research. Her cite may be wrong, so I suggest Dustymiss contact her. Loomis, Lovell, and Rich all mention this "plan" to return to the Gilberts.Now noneother than Fred Goerner in his book published in 1966 uses this quote from AE who talked with Vidal and Miller (page328):" ' If we dont pick up Howland,I'll try to fly back into the Gilberts and find a nice stretch of beach...' " Goerner quortes AE but doesn't cite a source. Now that plan seems to be coming from the horse's mouth. So to date, subject to further review, I'm certain Vidal must have said something to that effect; since he was such a long time friend and associate of AE why would he make up such a statement and attribute it to Amelia? I'll keep you posted. LTM, Ron Bright ************************************************************************** From Ric You bring up two of the mostly commonly raised arguments for the credibility of anecdotes. - He must have said it because so many people say he said it. - Why would he lie? The presence of the alleged anecdote in multiple Earhart books is, of course, meaningless. Without a verifiable source it's just one more piece of recycled Earhart folklore (the trailing wire was left in Miami, Noonan was fired from Pan Am for alcolholism, there was a Bendix RA-1 receiver aboard the airplane, etc. etc.). All it takes is one person who is perceived as being credible saying that Vidal said it. Intentional fabrication is rarely the start of groundless rumors. People can "remember" and relate with total conviction the most God-awful nonsense. Vidal may or may not have claimed to have heard Amelia describe a "Plan B." So far nobody has produced a verfiable source to indicate that he ever told that story. If he did, it may or may not have been true. The credibility of his recollection would depend upon how soon he wrote it down after he heard it. For example, if somebody came up with a Gene Vidal Diary and on page 234 was an entry for April 5, 1937 that went, "AE phoned last night. Noonan wrecked his car and almost wrecked his new wife yesterday. Rumor has it that he had been drinking. AE is worried about his reliability as a navigator. Says that if he can't find Howland she'll just turn back and find a nice beach in the Gilberts." That would be pretty good. But, if weeks or months, or even years, after the disappearance Vidal makes a comment to somebody either verbaly or in a letter that "AE once told me that (yadayadayada)" that's real shaky. Either way, I think it's largely meaningless. There has never been even an allegation that Noonan thought that such a plan would be a good idea (in fact, it's a supremely dumb idea) and the last tramsmission we have from Amelia specifically states that they're doing something else that does make perfect sense. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:12 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Earhart's WE Transmitter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D. Janet asks: < Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Belly antennas MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern Since I've been guilty of bringing up the "Radio Range" thing again, I'll continue with a question. I'm sure it has been suggested in the past that one of the belly antennas that were on AE's Electra may have been for Radio Range use -- she did fly around the states and I presume the Radio Range system was in use at that time. MY QUESTION: Is it not true that the Radio Range signal could be utilized by a plane with virtually any antenna and a receiver that could be tuned to the frequency of the Radio Range station one wished to fly toward? If correct, that suggests that any of the antennas on the electra could have been used with the Radio Range system, and also for general communication... and possibly as the "sense" antenna for RDF as well. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:16:10 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Still on the Clancy trail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern Still trying to find some of the Clancy family who might -- just might -- have information that would help discover where on the island the bones and other stuff were found. We once got some help from the media. The article in the "Malvern Gazette" turned up Deirdre Clancy. Unfortunately, she was not able to be much help and it turned out to be a dead end relative to finding any other Clancys. Maybe we could get some media attention again and, perhaps, the attention of some of the Clancys. The media tend to pick up on things kids do such as trying to raise money for some cause they believe is worthy. In this case, it would ideally be kids in England, but not necessarily. Maybe it could be worked from the states. How about a cooperative effort by some kids in England and some kids in the U.S? The Scenario... Having learned of Gallagher of Nikumaroro, (fill in some of the story here) we (us kids) have decided that replacing the plaque on Gallagher's grave marker on Nikumaroro would be a good and worthy thing to do. We have set ourselves the task of raising the necessary funds to have a replica of the original plaque made. The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) has offered to take the plaque to Nikumaroro and install it on their next trip out to that island. Maybe the U.K. media would take note of such a joint endeavour by British and American kids and give it some publicity. The kid's wish to find some living relatives of Gallagher would reasonably be included in that publicity. We do, in fact, have in hand information some of the Clancy family might like to have in addition to the fact of replacement of the plaque. And they just might have information we would like to have! This scheme, Plaque Inatallation Subsidy Scheme (P.I.S.S.), might raise some money for the plaque, and shake loose some kind of information pertinent to our research. Money raised for the plaque would mostly come from sources that would not otherwise be contibuting to TIGHAR. I don't see this as syphoning off research funds. Comments? Bright ideas? Shoot it down? LTM (Who says children are always being exploited!) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:44:36 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FN & AE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Frank Westlake > >From William Webster-Garman > (c) Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542- - > sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel. Considering all of TIGHAR's evidence, it seems that Gallagher's description of the sextant box could prove to be the best source of a "smoking gun" that would positively link Earhart with Gardner Island. I am aware that a significant amount of investigation has been done in an attempt to do that, but we seem to be somewhat stagnant right now so it may be worthwhile to try again. Someone stenciled a number on the box. Someone else, or perhaps the same person, wrote in a second number. Both numbers were probably viewed by additional people who were aware of the ownership of the box. There would very likely have been an even larger number of people who were familiar with the numbering scheme used on the box. It is possible that none of the aforementioned people are still alive, but I think the chances are better that someone is. I imagine TIGHAR has a lot more participants now (how many forum subscriptions are there?), perhaps we can enlist them in some old-fashioned gumshoe work. If everyone would check every local antique store, yacht club, navigation equipment outlet, etc., that they have easy access to, maybe we can find someone with a lead that you investigators can work with. Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric Subscribers come and subscribers go but the forum total has hovered right around 650 for about a year now. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 09:23:12 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FN & AE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Michael Holt > >From William Webster-Garman > > (c) Sextant box has two numbers on it 3500 ( stencilled ) and 1542- - > sextant being old fashioned and probably painted over with black enamel. What do those numbers mean? Michael Holt *************************************************************************** From Ric We wish we knew. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 09:39:12 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: post-flight messages MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Rick Seapin Were the post-flight messages heard after news of AE and FN were reported down/lost or were the messages heard prior to a news release? If the messages were heard prior to any news release, then the messages have a good chance of being the "Real McCoy". *************************************************************************** From Ric Good thought, but there was really no opportunity for that to happen. Because there were reporters aboard the Itasca and the ship was in radio contact with the West Coast, news of Earhart's failure to arrive on schedule reached the major wire services virtually in real time. Radio programs quickly broadcast the news all over the country. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:03:06 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Radio details MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: For Vern: Not sure I ever said I was "unable to see a way" for this to work... tell the truth I do not remember exactly what I said... but the circuit diagram clearly shows a number of things. In short, this radio was modified to include CW capability... however, it was done in very rudimentary fashion. The switch in the "key unit" does a couple of things. One, and most importantly: it grounds the push-to-talk circuit (PTT) to energize the antenna relay and the dynamotor starter relay. The dynamotor must be running continuously in CW mode. You can't "key" a dynamotor. It draws humongous current and making/breaking a circuit of this magnitude will quickly burn up the starter relay. Also the voltage output is dependent upon the speed of rotation. Fluctuation in voltage from a machine constantly speeding up/slowing down is intolerable for CW. It takes a hefty dynamotor like this one almost 1 second to reach full speed. The antenna relay and dynamotor relay in the rig were wired in parallel in the original design. They were energized when the PTT was grounded, by the mic button. As modified, the rig did not change in this regard. Therefore it was necessary to (a) throw the antenna relay over to "transmit" and (b) start the dynamotor, to put out a signal in either AM or CW mode. On CW (as modified), once these 2 relays were energized, the rig emitted no signal until the key was depressed. When this happened, an added "keying relay" was energized. This relay grounded an added "grid blocking" circuit, removing a cutoff bias from the tubes which allowed the oscillator and amplifier stages to function. To receive in CW mode -- and THIS IS IMPORTANT -- that toggle switch on the key unit had to be opened. And the positions were labled "CW" and "PHONE." So it had to be thrown to "PHONE" to receive CW... see the possibility for confusion on the part of a technical ignoramus? If AE left the key behind in Miami, there would be no problem with using the transmitter... on voice, that is. No need for the switch, etc if all you are going to use is voice. Just disconnect the cable connector and take the thing out of the cockpit or wherever. (Rather stupid...) For Janet Whitney et al: Dynamotor power supplies are about 35% (thirty-five percent) efficient. Maybe 50% under ideal conditions (seldom realized). That is, for every 100 watts the thing draws from the battery, it produces about 35 watts of usable power (simplified explanation obviously). This transmitter had some heavy-current tube filaments which were on all the time when power was applied (switched on). On standby the filament current drain was about 11 amps (same on transmit). The total transmit current drain was approximately 65 amps, including tube filaments, relays, and dynamotor. The dynamotor drew about 53 amps from the battery. For all that (648 watts) it had a rated output of 1050 volts at 300 milliamperes (about 315 watts), but not all the available current output was required... these things are typically overrated by about 25% but this does not affect the input current drain all that much. (Let me tell you a tale -- a true one. When I was in high school, back in the late 70s, one of my ham friends had a '67 VW Bug in which he'd installed an old tube type, dynamotor-powered ex police radio (he was a poor guy, like myself) operated on 2 meter FM. It was rated at about 25 watts output. He could be going down the road at night with lights, defroster and wipers running... and key the radio... and the car would stop dead! The current drain would kill the engine!) Given the tubes used in the transmitter, it had to operate at around 100 watts (or more) input to pump out 50 watts. Those old WE-282As were not real efficient and required lots of "drive," that is, power from the preceding stages. Note to Janet... It is simply not valid to try and compare current drain of this radio with the current requirements for a modern solid state rig. As I said last week... we are talking about the electronic equivalent to the Dinosaur. For someone else (William I think... forgive me): this rig did not have a really high-power audio modulator stage. It was screen grid modulated. The audio stage consisted of one WE-205D triode tube (about 15 watts max), driven directly from a carbon-button microphone. Screen modulation does not require much power but it also produces mediocre results. For someone else (I forget who posted this): If that radio lasted 15 minutes, key down, it'd be doing great. The discharge RATE for the batteries would be quite high, enough to kill them quickly. Does anyone seriously believe that AE may have landed with enough fuel to run an engine (and charge batteries) for 2 HOURS? I think not.... If she made a water landing one of the first things to be submerged would have been the batteries and more than likely the cockpit would fill quickly with water, drowning the receiver and more electrical gear. For Ric: I recall at least one alleged "post loss transmission" which was characterized as "extremely poor keying behind carrier." We went round-and-round over what, exactly, this may have meant. LTM (whose modulation levels were always pretty high) and 73 Mike E. ************************************************************************** From Ric You're thinking of the fabled "281 Message" heard by Navy Wailupe in Honolulu. Bob Brandenburg's computer modeling of the propagation has pretty much eliminated any realistic possibility that anybody that far away heard anything from that airplane. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:13:11 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Still on the Clancy trail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom Robison I realize it's a long shot, but has anyone tried to contact Tom Clancy, the author? Tom Robison *************************************************************************** From Ric Clancy is a very common Irish name. (There are 15 Clancys in the Wilmington telephone book and Wilmington is not a particulalry Irish city.) I think a more focused approach is in order. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:19:12 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Belly antennas MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Hue Miller : Belly antennas >>From Vern MY QUESTION correct, that suggests that any of the antennas on the electra could have been used with the Radio Range system, and also for general communication...and possibly as the "sense" antenna for RDF as well.>> MY SUGGESTION that seems truly possible, except that the belly antenna would provide a very poor transmit antenna (too close to the airframe all along its run) at MF/ HF frequencies, and use of it for such purpose would be nonsensical and violate communications wisdom. --Hue Miller who by the way, found & looked at his Berne List of Aviation Stations 1937, and did not see AE's call letters, nor was the Lae station listed ( the latter maybe too small?? ) (and maybe her call letters "would have been" published in the 1938 edition - << BUT.... >>) *************************************************************************** From Ric The Radio Range was a passive receive-only system. I think Vern is suggesting that the belly antenna was used for all receive functions and that transmit functions were served by the trailing wire(s) and later the dorsal vee. Odd that KHAQQ doesn't appear in the 1937 list. The airplane was delivered with a radio in July 1936. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:35:41 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Radio details MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern >>From Ric > >Let me jump in here with just a couple of points: >- There is good evidence that Earhart left her telegraph key behind in Miami. >- I don't know of any credible post-loss message that contain keyed >information. The "story" about Earhart leaving her telegraph key behind in Miami is just that isn't it? Anecdote. Moreover, in view of all the radio gear that was in and out of that plane and all the people who tinkered with it at various times, how confident can we be that there was only one telegraph key around at the time they left Miami? The "281 NORTH..." message received by Navy Radio Wallop (Hawaii) on the night of July 4, 1937 was described as, "keyed transmission, extremely poor keying behind carrier." I take that to be a reference to modulated CW (MCW) -- a continuous carrier signal with an audio frequency tone being keyed. If we can now say (Mike E's recent post) that Earhart's transmitter had CW and MCW capability and if we admit the possibility of a telegraph key on the plane, then that message becomes somewhat more credible. Incidently, I do not believe the above quoted characterization of the signal even comes close to what keying with the microphone push-to-talk button would have sounded like. *************************************************************************** From Ric I'll have to go back and check the sources but I think that the bit about the key being left behind was mentioned in a fairly contemporaneous letter. As for the "281 Message", Bob Brandenburg's computer modeling of the aircraft's system and propagation environement on that day concluded: "The SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) for a CW signal from NR16020 on Gardner Island to Wailupe during that period was far below the threshold for either detection or usability, and the hypothesis is rejected. The signal heard at Wailupe could not have originated at Gardner Island." ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:52:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Those sextant box numbers. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Vern Quoting, in part, from Frank's posting of 9-4-00, relative to the Nikumaroro sextant box numbers and the possibility that someone, somewhere may have seen such a numbering system on something else. >I imagine TIGHAR has a lot more participants now (how many forum >subscriptions are there?), perhaps we can enlist them in some old-fashioned >gumshoe work. If everyone would check every local antique store, yacht >club, navigation equipment outlet, etc., that they have easy access to, >maybe we can find someone with a lead that you investigators can work with. > >Frank Westlake I have a one-page flyer already made up to mail out to any person or organization that might have come across that kind of numbering system. It asks, in effect, have you seen ANY kind of navigational instrument with this sort of number on the box? It has a "clip-art" picture of a guy in a desert island sort of setting peering about with a telescope and says: KEEP A SHARP EYE OUT For instrument cases with numbers stencilled or handwritten on them. You might have the key to... etc., etc. At the bottom is the TIGHAR logo and all the addressing information to contact TIGHAR. There's also an invitation to check the web site. I only got a few sent to specially sellected places and with a cover letter giving my own postal address and e-mail address. Negative so far. If anyone would like to do some mailing to places they think of as possibilities, I'll be glad to send a few of these flyers. Of course, more copies could be made from one of them. We could maintain a list of where flyers had been sent and post the updated list to the forum whenever updating information was received from anyone. We're getting down to the point that all we can do is keep scratching around! *************************************************************************** From Ric Of course, we do have one example of a sextant box with numbers written on the outside, one of which - 3547 - happens to be rather similar to the 3500 on the Gardner box. That box is in the National Museum of Naval Aviation and once belonged to Fred Noonan. Vern, I really appreciate your efforts in this line of research but I have to ask, pretty please, that you (or anyone else) not send out anything that has the TIGHAR logo on it unless it has first been okayed by me or Pat. Your flyer sounds fine but the point is that if we don't maintain supervision of that trademark we won't be able to stop somebody who does misuse it. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:54:31 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Earhart's Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Hue Miller | >From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: | US Navy aircraft of the day which carried a radio operator (anything larger | than a single seat fighter) also carried a frequency standard to set the | receivers to the correct spot. My comment which follows, is not quite relevant to the AE discussion, but i have to point out that the above is simply not accurate. SBD, TBM, SB2C, SO2C ?? They did not rely on "netting" the receiver | to the transmitter... for one thing, the xmtr could drift, and the standard | was also used to check it. Not stictly correct. Some Navy receivers were *quite* broad tuning ( RU, ARB ) for this very reason. The transmitter had more accurate calibration, e.g. transmitters GF, GO, GP, ATC, ATD, ART-13, than the receiver. They were tuned in on the flight deck/ field, they did drift, but receivers were broad enuff, usually, to deal with that. If you changed frequencies in flight, you referred to the look-up table on the transmitter, tuned it, then set the receiver to the same frequency. True, most setups i am aware of did not allow true "netting", you could not power the receiver and transmitter at the same time. BTW, the Navy/ Army ART-13 incorporates a CFI standard. Not sure exactly what type designation the freq | standards --Navy type "LM". BTW, couple anecdotes indicate Army and Navy ops, as a lark, when nearing airfield, have been known to connect the frequency standard (calibrating equipment, BC-221 or LM ) to the ship's antenna, and key that, using that equipment's fractional wattage power to contact the field! Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:57:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Earhart's WE Transmitter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Hue Miller >>From Janet Whitney So, wouldn't Earhart's transmitter have consumed about 12 amps for 50 watts output at 12 volts DC? If Earhart's transmitter consumed 60 amps at 12 volts DC, that would have been 720 watts. Were dynamotor power supplies that inefficient? Was that 50w input or output? I think input power, the most common rating for commercial equipment altho not the most helpful, as power to the antenna was maybe 2/3 - 3/4 of the input power. Lacking a WE catalog listing their specs, and i haven't looked at the 1930s texts i dug out over the vacation, we *could* if we needed work backwards to determine the transmitter's 12DC draw: "Power of transmitter, rated input" + (1/2 of above, for modulation audio power added to carrier, x 2 since class B is "about" 50% efficient ) sum of above x 1/0.65 to account for dynamotor infficiency total power divided by 12 to get DC amperes + filament current for transmitter tubes (from "Tube Manual") +filament current for receiver and RDF tubes ( " " ) + residual current to spin receiver dynamotor under no-receive condition ( unless single dynamotor was used, unlikely?) That's maximum DC load current, under transmit condition. Janet's guesstimate is more intuitive than the above reckoning, but you can see her guesstimate is not unreasonable. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:59:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Radio details MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Hue Miller >>From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: AE's xmtr DID NOT have a tone oscillator to generate any sidetone for CW monitoring... in most rigs of the day, when the xmtr was switched over to CW, the speech amp was made to oscillate at 800-1000 Hz and this oscillator was keyed along with the RF stages. NOT done, in AE's rig.>> --I'm sorry, i do not think the above is quite true. As far as "most". I would say, "some". I base this on my reading and having inspected schematics for quite a number of equipments. I get the impression that Real Men were not expected to need telegraph sidetone. "You" supplied the sidetone- mentally. Hams were usually the ones to demand sidetone for monitoring one's sending. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 11:06:26 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Did AE Leave the Key Behind? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike E. the Radio Historian #2194: After I made my posting last night I took another look at the WE-13C transmitter schematic... something I said last night wasn't quite right. I stated that it would have been no problem for AE to leave the telegraph key behind if all she wanted was voice transmission; just unplug it and remove it from the cockpit. Well... that's not right. Indeed, it is not possible. The "key" in this setup was more than just a morse key. It was part of a subassembly, a control unit. The unit contained the key and a switch. The switch, a double-pole double throw type, had two positions, labeled "CW" and "PHONE." Like I said last night, throwing the switch to "CW" closed the push-to-talk line (like the mic switch would do on voice) and made the rig READY to transmit. The "keying" was through an added relay. This relay actually followed the operator's key. To RECEIVE on CW, it was necessary to throw the switch on the controller containing the key BACK to "PHONE." Potentially confusing. I had forgotten one more important function of that switching circuit, last night. That switch, when thrown to "PHONE," also closed the CW keying relay circuit. The keying relay, therefore, was energized continuously when the rig was switched to "PHONE." That way, the radio was ready to transmit on voice. It was NOT "keyed" on voice until the mic switch grounded the PTT circuit, energizing the dynamotor starter (and therefore applying high voltage) and antenna relays. The CW keying relay had to be closed to enable the tubes to function, by grounding the blocking-bias that kept them from drawing current (as well as applying screen grid voltage to the multiplier and final amplifier stages). To summarize: Since the transmitter operated in Push to Talk fashion (PTT) on voice, the CW keying relay had to be closed on voice. It did not operate with the PTT circuit. The 'CW-PHONE" switch closed this relay on voice. The key closed it on CW, AFTER the "CW-PHONE" switch was thrown to CW mode. The switch had to be returned to "PHONE" to RECEIVE ON CW, in order to de-energize the antenna relay and dynamotor. The transmitter DID NOT operate in "break-in" style on CW (the equivalent to push-to-talk operation on voice). But here is a thought, and an important one: If TWO ANTENNAS were used (one transmit, one receive) it would not have been necessary to have the antenna relay de-energized in order to receive; so returning the switch to "PHONE" would not have been a requirement. The bottom line: IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE FOR AE TO USE THIS RADIO AT ALL, EVEN ON VOICE, WITHOUT THE TELEGRAPH KEY UNIT CONNECTED TO THE TRANSMITTER. The switch in the key unit had to be in the circuit.... UNLESS, and we may never be able to completely resolve this... some sort of modifications were made to the radio in Miami, to bypass this switch. All it would have taken, was a "dummy" connector plugged into the transmitter where the key unit was connected... if Pin 4 of this connector was jumpered to ground, that would complete the keying relay circuit. Of course, an internal mod to the transmitter's wiring could have accomplished the same thing. How hard is the evidence that she left the key behind? Anecdotal? It may be worth the paper it is printed on. We have been through this before... wonder if there are any scraps of paper anywhere detailing the work done on that radio in Miami? Did Pan Am techs do it? Anybody search the Pan Am files that closely? (Chances are none to slim, right? Probably the document retention schedule was not that long and any such paper was tossed out with other routine stuff....) A lingering question from earlier postings by others: Would it have been possible to "key" this radio on CW, using the mic button? Yes. BUT... It would have produced a very ragged, awful signal. The keying speed would be very slow. And the radio would have been damaged quickly because of heavy current circuits being made and broken, which were never intended to be so operated. LTM (who sometimes gives out mixed signals) and 73 Mike E. *************************************************************************** From Ric Advantages to separate transmit and receive antennas huh? The plot thickens. Okay, let's dig for the key-left-behind source. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 11:14:31 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Off-topic lament MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric Reproduced below is a copy of an email we recently received via the website. It is, sadly, typical of the inquiries we receive from college students. The queries from 4th graders are usually more literate. ************************************************************************* I have grown close to attention on Amelia Earhart disapperance. I want to know one thing for once for all. How do you really know where she was actually at? I mean could she have flown on a different plane or flown in a different direction but headed to her destination? I don't know why I am talking about this cause I am 20 years old who don't know a whole lot about her whereabouts but I could say I would've found her 60 years ago cause I would've gone underwater and all the islands looking for her plane. Her shoe could have been washed up on the shore from the Pacific Ocean. Anyways, if I was the look for her, the first thing I would do is try to get a whole lot of scuba divers and boats and start tracking through the waters. Her plane may have went past the island. An island that is only about three miles or so, a plane could've have gone way past the island and crashing into the water. What I am going to do is research and research. Amelia could be anywhere near or far away from Howland. I wish I could help but I ain't no archologist. I was just trying to see if you know what is really going on and if you found any new information about Amelia Earhart and her airplane. If there is no airplane on the island, then it is not on the island and I would be out looking in the ocean no matter how deep or how dangerous it is. I hope you could give me some new information and maybe I could do some research. Thanks for reading this e-mail and hope you have a good day. Sincerely, (a student at a mid-western university) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 11:15:43 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FN & AE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Frank Westlake > >From Michael Holt What do those numbers mean?>> The Sextant Box Mystery (Earhart Project Research Bulletin 1/13/99) Frank Westlake ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 11:34:39 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Off-topic lament MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Evans Katz I think he inhaled. David Evans Katz ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:04:43 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re; Off-topic lament MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee Are you sure that was from a college student? As I've said before, that's why we pay YOU the big bucks.:-) LTM, who had a big buck once Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ************************************************************************** From Ric I withheld the name of the university to avoid embarrassing any possible alumni on the forum. ************************************************************************** From Doug Brutlag Geez Ric.......that submission from Goober there was a college student? I'd rather read the ones from the alien obduction groups. They are more entertaining. Doug Brutlag #2335 ************************************************************************** From Michael Holt This must be a joke. Michael Holt ************************************************************************** From Ric I wish. Like I said, this is just one example. To say that this letter is typical might be a bit of an exaggeration, but it's certainly not unusual. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:15:59 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Those sextant box numbers. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Frank Westlake > >From Vern > I have a one-page flyer already made up to mail out... If I can get my printer working I'll print a notice with the picture of the Pensacola sextant box and send it to Southern California yacht clubs with a request that it remain on their bulletin board. Some of these locations were probably already checked by TIGHAR members, but it's been a while and club membership changes. I suppose some should also go to 'old-pilot' hang-outs, but I don't know where those might be. Ric- I don't intend to make any mention TIGHAR or Earhart but I do intend to use your name and phone number as the point of contact for all responses, if that's OK with you. Is there any problem with me reproducing ? Frank Westlake *************************************************************************** From Ric Go ahead and use the photo. It's also no problem, as far as I'm concerned, with mentioning TIGHAR and/or Earhart. It's the use of the logo or any implication that you're speaking as the organization, rather than as a member of the organization, that we have to be picky about. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:16:53 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Sextant Box Flyers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Doug Brutlag Ric; If you work something out with Vern on the sextant box flyers I'd like to have a few. One party I know is a retired Naval navigator/instructor who repairs & overhaul sextants in his retirement, & I'd like to run this by him and whoever else. Doug Brutlag #2335 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:21:44 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Sextant box markings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Michael Holt > > The Sextant Box Mystery (Earhart Project Research Bulletin 1/13/99) > > The part about dovetailed boxes caught my attention. I have sitting before me right now the box for USAAF aircraft sextant Type No. A-8A. To box is painted olive drab, and it is most certainly dovetailed. Did I understand that the dovetailing was supposed to be unusual? (The serial number is AF43-4104, built by Bausch & Lomb Optical Co., Rochester.) The part I don't understand is the stenciling and then the other number -- is it handwritten? -- I would have expected at that time to have found a metal plaque on the box. Michael Holt ************************************************************************** From Ric From what I've seen, dovetailed corners are quite common in sextant boxes. All we know about the numbers is what Gallagher said. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:29:06 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Off-topic lament MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric, Hope you and all the rest of the Tighars had a nice holiday weekend. I think Janet just forgot to use spellcheck before she sent this out.... ltm jon