========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:11:09 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forensics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ron Bright Re Data base Dr Hoodless used the "Karl Pearson" formula for stature in arriving at his conclusions that the skull and bones represented a MALE. Perhaps it was the only published scientific stature table in 1940s. I am not sure if he used it for the determination of sex as he refers to various pelvic bones, ratios, etc. Drs out there, what is the criticism of Pearsons formula. When was it printed? What was the data base? Are there any scientific challenges or reviews of his formula? Would his data base be far different and inferior from the Fordisc or the Trotter and Gleser stature table published in 1952. Would there significant differences? How much smaller was his data base? etc. Heck maybe it was better! Curious in Seattle., Ron Bright ************************************************************************* From Ric Good point. Science was much more advanced in the early 1940s than it is today. (Sorry. Don't mean to be nasty, but really.....) Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:17:53 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE's frequencies MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig Ric Wow - that was a rapid reply - thankyou! I guess the next question / supposition is that IF she did transmit from the ground, and Betty actually did hear AE, then the aerial must have been intact? And no part of it in the sea? [aircraft landed on terra firma] Could AE have rigged a jury aerial - did she have the necessary knowledge to do this? I would suggest that, to achieve the range necessary for Betty to have heard AE, AE must have been at some height [flying?] with an undamaged aerial. Just a point of note - the 500kcs marine distress frequency was, I think, CW [Morse] only. As you say, she would not have used this frequency anyway. *************************************************************************** From Ric Earhart could not, realistically, have rigged a jury antenna unless she had a small emergency radio with her (and there is no evidence that she did). You might find it instructive to read Bob Brandenburg's research paper "Could Betty Have Heard Earhart on a Harmonic?" on the TIGHAR website. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:30:02 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Mystery G MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Moleski > From Ric > Were there tribal initiation rights? You tell me. The guys who found the > bones were Catholic. ... Conversion sometimes takes a while. Trace elements of former religions can be found wherever Christianity is new: mixing pagan rituals with Christian. This is true of Europe, the Caribbean, Africa and Latin America; my guess is that it might be true of the Pacific, too. The islanders might have rituals that they didn't discuss with the priests (did priests ever visit Niku?). Marty #2359 *************************************************************************** From Ric Of course, you're correct. I was yankin' your rosary. Sorry. Yes, there was a certain amount of clinging to the old ways. After all, the island was named after the traditional home of the spirit ancestor Nei Manganibuka and we have it from a later resident that there was a place somewhere on the island that was said to be sacred to her and included a shrine of some sort. This place was known as "Niurabu" but nobody we've talked to so far seems to know where it was. We do have a translation of what was known as "Nei Manganbuka's Chant." It goes; Blow strong winds Rain fall Lightning, lightning Coming with thunder Roaring her footsteps Her traveling From her abode in Niurabu That's Nei Manganibuka Stronger, stronger Welcome Madam Over there, over there There is your enemy. Clearly, Nei Mangnaibuka is not to be messed with. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:35:20 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Bevis Report MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Harry Poole >From Ric > >What is the Bevis report? Here is a copy of the report as sent to the forum in June 6, 1999. Harry Poole #2300 Subject: Bevis and McMenamy Date: 6/6/99 From: Angelo Campanella Palmer Bevis report of McMenany & monitor radio signal receptions in Los Angeles 2-7JUL37. In February of 1940, Palmer Bevis, hired previously by the "Amelia Earhart Foundation " of Oakland, sent a detailed report to Eleanor Roosevelt to inspire a new expedition to find AE. I quote from a copy of Bevis' report copied from the Roosevelt Library: That report includes an account of Walter McMenamy who was one of AE's previous radio experts that was noted for being able to " pick up AE's signals when others could not". The story goes that after Lockheed learned that AE was overdue, they called McMenamy and asked him to listen. In the company of another radio amateur, Karl Pierson, some signals were picked up that they "positively identified as being from the Earhart plane". Shortly after 11pm 2 July 37 (LA time, GGT-8= 07CGT 3JUL37, Howland +3:30 = 19:30 2JUL37, trip-hour 31), a weak signal was received on 6210kc, not understood. On another radio receiver set tuned to 3105kc in the same room, they heard two distinctly separate signals they say were from the Itasca and from the plane; apparently not hearing each other. [Itasca ship's log indicates searching near Howland at that time. I do not have Itasca radio log information for that time.] Early the morning of 3JUL37 (LA time) McMenamy & Pierson heard a distress signal on one of those frequencies, that McMenamy positively identified as being "...from the plane, poorly sent". All three radio operators now present in the room "state that this first SOS signal was repeated over and over again for about five minutes". Further distress calls and garbled attempts to give position were received until about 9am (06:30 Howland time). Some signals were sufficiently loud to be heard on the loudspeaker. On 3July the British cruiser HMS Achilles in the Pacific had reported that "at 11:30am we heard an unknown station on 3105kc make a report as follows: "Please give us a few dashes if you get us'. The station then repeated KHAQQ twice, then disappeared." Later, the Government San Francisco monitoring (receiving) station made several receptions with their antenna that was beamed to the pacific. The more credible (my opinion) were: 4JUL37 shortly before midnight (about Howland 9pm) Itasca was heard calling the plane, asking for an answer. Shortly after a carrier was heard on the Earhart frequency and this was reported 15 to 20 minutes past each hour until 9:05 the next morning 5JUL37 (Howland 5:35am). That same morning, McMenamy et al telephoned (to the monitor station?) to say that they picked up more Earhart signals - the "first in two days". They reported hearing the Itasca call Earhart, and also definite answering signals from the plane, the last of which ended "in a decided sputtering". At 6:17 the same morning (Howland 02:47 5JUL37) the monitor heard Itasca call KHAQQ, and a man's voice answered on the Earhart frequency. Only one word, "one", was distinguishable. The "Press Wireless" also reported hearing signals which they could not identify on the Earhart frequency. Howland Island (Itasca?) reported that same morning at 10:43 (5JUL37, but who's location?) hearing "KHAQQ" quoting a bearing of 281 degrees - with no reference & hence of no use. Pan American Airways also the same morning heard apparently the same signal on which they found a bearing of 155 degrees from Wake Island. The next morning - 6 JUL37 - a Los Angeles operator, Louis Messier, reported he heard a weak code signal at 3:30 am (Howland midnight). It was sent very slowly and Messier logged it as: "17 na u 61 4 southwes 1 23 sou owl 23 ja so not nx call equen 170 sou sec will sou nant now sou". (In my opinion, radio Hams might recognize some useful meanings from this poorly sent and received message.) The next morning (7JUL37) McMenamy and Pierson heard their last sounds from the Earhart frequency, a rippling carrier at 1:22am (Howland 9:52pm). This same effect was heard by Honolulu amateur stations from 9:17pm to 10:37pm (Howland 8:47pm to 10:07pm) the same day. Ang. Campanella 6JUN99. ******************************** From Ric Very interesting. I wasn't aware of the Bevis Report and I'd love to have a copy of the complete report for our files. This information illustrates the difficulties in assessing the post-loss messages. Walt McMenamy is a problem. He represented himself as "one of AE's previous radio experts" but we've never been able to find any independent documentation to back that up. He and Pierson got lots of media attention at the time of the dissapearance but McMenamy later made all kinds of wild claims about the Navy and secret missions. I have a 1955 audio tape of an interview with him that should be called the Butthead Report. I suspect that we could have a lot fun with the fragmented message reported by Messier, but in the end it would all be guessing. I think that the best we can say about the post-loss messages is that some of them may have been genuine but there is no way to tell for sure - yet. LTM, Ric **************************************************************************** From Ric Lordy, I had completely forgotten about that. Just goes to show how much we need to get the forum highlights indexed. Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:38:35 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Correlations? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Barry Limoges Ric, Photos from the Colorado searchers of 1937 and the photos from the seaplanes from the Leander point to drought conditions on Nikumaroro during that time. Also, according to Smithsonian botanists, the famous "wreck photo" shows sick palm trees. Could there be a connection? We know that Emily remembers the wreck being out on the reef. Of course, the plane in the "wreck photo" may have been one in the same, washed up onto shore. All this leads me to the thought that George Carrington might be a big help. Is he still alive? Is he now willing to help us even though he is still at odds with his theory in regards to AE? It would be very helpful to identify the British seaman who gave George the picture (if the seaman exists) LTM Barry Limoges (who often puts two plus two together and gets five) *************************************************************************** From Ric Repeated attempts to get more information from Mr. Carrington have been unsuccessful. Suffice it to say that he seems to be a rather troubled individual. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:54:16 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: The New Mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon A surveyor's mark crossed my mind as well, but in the US, these are usually brass discs sunk in concrete. Did the Niku land surveyors set up towers for triangulation? If so, maybe the pits were their foundations. Someone on the list had photos of one of the original survey maps. Were there any "benchmarks" marked "G" on this map? Is this a likely location/size for a taro growing pit? Jane resture's Pacific Island site mentions that these were tried during the P.I.S.S., but abandoned due to saline water. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ************************************************************************ From Ric Good thoughts Dan. There is a U.S. Navy survey marker set in a concrete plinth up near the village. The 1939 Bushnell survey erected three towers along the north shore but none anywhere near the Seven Site. The map produced from the Bushnell survey shows the tower locations and observation points, but there is no "G" benchmark. The depressions near the G are way too small to be babai (taro) pits. We see several examples up on Nutiran and in the village. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:59:16 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: The New Mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson I didn't realize that the white coral outline of a "g" was near a adjacent shallow hole. Hmmm....perhaps that was Gallagher's way of marking where the skull was buried, buy putting up an obviously man-made marker, large enough to be recognized from the ground. The hollow might be the actual burial site. The letter "g", of course, would mean Gallagher, and indicate a non-Kiribati letter. Makes sense to me! Plus, this hypothesis is testable: were there any diggings around this marker? *************************************************************************** From Ric I dug some very shallow test pits around the area to see if there was an underlying layer of white coral (there isn't) that might explain the feature as something dug up by a crab making a burrow. Remember that Gallagher did not bury the skull - he dug it up. If he made a G on the ground to mark where he dug up the skull, how would you test that? It also doesn't explain why there are other similar depressions/holes in the area, none of them marked with white coral. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:02:47 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Sextant Box MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alexander Wombat wrote: > I don't think it would prove much.. Fred could > have loaned it to the > castaway somewhere else on his trip....... > > *************************************************************************** > From Ric > > Yeah, good point. what would be the odds of him giving it to some 'person' who at a later date ends up a castaway on the same island where AE possibly crashed ?...anyone care to add it up out there ************************************************************************ From Ric We were kidding. We do that sometimes. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:05:25 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: forum mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alexander now we have a new mystery...which is...RIC is he real,what evidence is there ? ********************************************************************* From Ric You really don't want to know. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:09:55 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re Atafu population MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From Chuck Boyle Ric, Today I sent email to several people who live on Atafu, have lived on Atafu=20 or have worked on Atafu to see what they have to say about some of the=20 thoughts express on the Tighar Forum recently. So far one has replied. I have copied Peter McQuarrie Email below. Lee Boyle 2060 =20 Dear Chuck, Thanks for your e-mail. I am sorry but I cant answer your questions very well because I don't have much information on the topics. 1.=A0 I don't know about the ship "Janine" but there are quite a few America= n purse seiners in the Pacific with helicopters and many of them make unofficial (illegal!) stops at islands. 2.=A0 I understand that Atafu was named Duke of York Island in 1765 by Capta= in Byron who was the first white man to lay eyes on the island. 3. I know nothing of a plane crash on Atafu in the mid 1930's and I would be very interested to learn more about this. The first record of planes in the area that I have is Earhart and Panam survey flights, both in 1937. Then there was a flight in Tuvalu (Funafuti only) in 1938. Then the next record I have is April - June 1941 in the lead up to WWII.. 4.=A0 I also have no record of any shipwreck on Atafu in the 1930's and woul= d be interested to hear more of this. Regards Peter ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:12:26 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Polynesian vs Micronesian MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marjorie > From Dave Bush > > Ric: Answer this - what are the "typical" cranial measurements for a > polynesian. Also today, Ric referred to polynesian house styles with regard to "Gallagher's house." In my island days, the Gilbert Islands (now Kiribati) were considered to be Micronesian islands. While the Phoenix Islands are inside the Polynesian triangle, weren't the settlers from the Gilberts? And thereby we also need to consider Micronesian house-building habits and cultural icons and cranial measurements. Or perhaps anthropologists no longer perceive a difference? We used to think the distinction was obvious because there was one Polynesian outlyer, Kapingamarangi, inside the boundaries of the Trust Territory which was otherwise all in Micronesia (although not all of Micronesia was in the Trust Territory). Anyone who visited the Kapinga settlement outside Kolonia, Ponape (now Pohnpei) was very aware of cultural (house styles, artifacts) and linguistic differences -- and, we thought, that there were clear physical differences. LTM (who always thought those wasted years in the Western Pacific might come in handy someday), Marjorie ************************************************************************** From Ric I'll let a card-carrying anthropologist answer that one. Tom? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:15:52 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dave in Fremont Bones, schmones... am I the only one who thinks that from the neck down, AE looked more like Jimmy Stewart than she did Ginger Rogers? I'd be ashamed for the above opinion if it wasn't so obvious :) *************************************************************************** From Ric Esthetics aside, it is true that Earhart had a slim build and had never had any children. How much that might make her pelvis appear more "male" is outside my pay grade. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:16:56 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 2-6-S-46, cup handle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dave in Fremont I'm willing to do some research on the thermos bottle issue, if that's alright... One question... Was Thermos the only brand of glass insulated vacuum beverage container in 1937? LTM (wow! this coffee is still HOT) Dave ************************************************************************** From Ric Good question. Anybody know? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:31:23 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: magazine capacity of .30 carbines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dave in Fremont For an additional reference, the M-1 Garand used stripper clips to load an internal 8-round magazine ******************************************************************** From Ric Okay, here's a kicker. The "stripper clip" found at the Seven Site amidst several .30 cal shell casings does not fit a .30 cal shell but does fit a .306 cal shell found out on the ocean beach and somewhat north of the Seven Site in 1991. To my eye it looks like you could get five .306 rounds in the clip but we found no .306 shell casings at the Seven Site. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:33:15 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: The "knob" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike E. #2194: Something occurs to me, perhaps this possibility has occurred to others and even been mentioned before: I wonder if the knob-like object, Artifact 2-6-S-45, might be the metal "core" of a larger knob? Many knobs on early radio equipment -- and more than likely, other scientific apparatus, such as surveying instruments etc -- were made of Bakelite, and were molded around a metal core which included the hole for receiving the shaft to which the knob was affixed. These knob cores would have "teeth" around the outside edge of the core for the Bakelite to "grip." If there was a hollow collar (now missing) for a shaft to slide into, there probably would be some threaded holes in this collar -- or perhaps in the core itself -- for set-screws to attach the knob to the shaft. Some knobs had one set-screw, but better quality stuff (aviation or military grade) used two, at 90-degree angles. Bakelite is an extremely durable material, and it takes a good bit of effort to remove the stuff from whatever it's molded to... unless you drop the knob (or whatever) and it hits "just right" against something hard, and cracks the Bakelite. The size of this thing makes it appear that it could have been such a core for a large knob, let's say an inch or inch and a half in diameter or even bigger. One reason the core could have separated from the Bakelite, would be if the thing was used as a tool of sorts, to pound something -- and broke. But then you'd expect to find pieces of the Bakelite scattered around... maybe. Pure speculation, yes. LTM (who always speculated on what her kids were up to) and 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:44:12 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Politically incorrect forensics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jim Pearson Did Gallagher suspect that he had found a womans bones because there was more than one pair of shoes near the body ? Oh, I can't believe I said that ! But seriously I wonder if there was a reason why he may have thought that it was a woman other than the shoes. The type and size of the shoes does not seem to be enough to determine the sex of the bones and there were more than one pair. So how did he guess which shoes belonged to the body ? I wonder if there may have been clothing fragments or something else that made him identify the body as female. **************************************************************************** From Ric Exactly what Gallagher and the others said about that is all in the Bones Chronology in the Documents section on the TIGHAR website. It seems that Gallagher initially found only part of a sole that he was quite sure was from a woman's shoe. Later, his more thorough search appears to have turned up part of a man's shoe. The presence of shoe parts from two individuals - one male and one female - was never addressed by the British authorities, at least in any of the notes and correspondence in the file. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:44:47 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forensics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kerry Tiller > From Dennis McGee > > Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary says: > > Dennis, you're on dangerous ground here. You have the same the dictionary I do; the one that doesn't have "impliedly" in it! Kerry Tiller ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:52:53 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mule > From Ric > > Third is the "couple of millimeters" question. I really don't understand the > problem. Would it be fair to say that the conclusions drawn by modern experts based on the measurements of a "forensic amateur" have no more credence than they are willing to give the amateur's own conclusions? Dr. Burns indicated that the technique of measuring the cranium can change the measurements significantly, which makes accurate measurements critical. If the conclusions of an amateur are suspect due to a lack of expertise, aren't his measurements suspect for the same reason? A couple of millimeters makes all the difference according to Dr. Burns. In her paper, she said a couple of millimeters would change the FORDISC classification to male. When I first read Dr. Burns' paper on the web site I accepted that there is a possibility that the bones are Earhart's and I still hold that opinion. What bothers me about this thread is that in previous discussions where a contemporary source conflicted with a more recent source, Ric staunchly defended the contemporary source. Bases on what has been written previously, I would have expected a "close call" to go to the contemporary source. Except, apparently, for close calls that strongly support the working hypothesis. Mule **************************************************************************** From Ric I understand your concern but I really do think there is a difference between accepting the most original source for issues of "what happened" and using the best available analytical techiniques to evaluate the information in the original source. We've applied the very same standard to the questions involving of radio transmissions. We rely on original sources to tell us what people heard but use modern computer modelling to understand why and how they heard them. As Dr. Dan Postellon has pointed out, if Hoodless was an accomplished anatomist his measurements should be reliable but the forensic conclusions he drew from them may be less so. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:54:24 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: ARTIFACT INFO - M1 carbine MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kerry Tiller > From Troy > > 15, 30, and 45 round clips. There is also a mini one, I believe, that > has 5 or 10 (I think) > > LTM (who says the more rounds the merrier) > > BTW, I didn't mention that those are the clip sizes today. I don't know > what the standard sizes were when first issued; only my gun is original, > my magazines are modern. > > Troy The 5 and 10 round magazines are modern. New legislation passed in 1994 makes the manufacture of magazines of more than ten rounds for civilian use illegal. It's not illegal to have "high capacity" (hi-cap) magazines, or even to buy them, as long as they were made before 1994. Current manufacture hi-caps are stamped "for police or military use only". It is illegal for private citizens to own magazines so stamped. Consequently, new M1s as well as all semi-automatic rifles come with magazines of ten rounds or less (at least here in the U.S.). That means original hi-cap magazines currently sell for premium prices, as there is now a finite number of them. These magazines that attach to the bottom of the receiver should not be confused with stripper clips which hold five rounds and feed from the top of the receiver. The M1 has an attachment on the front of the rear site base for such stripper clips. I don't think the carbine version had that option (I know I'll be corrected if I'm wrong - I used M14s in the navy). Kerry Tiller ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:01:46 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King In response to Chris Kennedy's latest, I could and probably should just say that I agree with Ric, which I do, but I can't resist elaborating a bit. Chris says: FORDISC is simply not using the best bones to make the sex determination. Well, Chris, as we science types often say, "well, DUH!" You don't use what you don't got, and we don't got the pelvis. Chris goes on: None of this was discussed in our report. Uh, no, I think we kinda thought it was obvious that what we didn't have wasn't subject to analysis. Chris goes on: Let's then be clear that Dr. Hoodless was looking at the best bones to look at for making the sex determination and that we were not. That's more or less true, depending on what shape the pelvic bones he looked at were in. It's odd that his notes don't contain any metrical data on the inominate that he must have looked at. I've forgotten most of what I ever knew about sex determination from bones, but there are quite standard measurements that one normally takes as a basis for inferring sex from pelvic bones, and he doesn't include them. So yes, he was looking at the best bones, but for some reason he either wasn't looking at them very rigorously, or didn't report it. I suspect that the inominate was too crab-chewed to make reliable measurements possible, but that's only a suspicion. Chris summarizes: (1) So, as far as the sex determination is concerned, let's be clear that that TIGHAR never saw the bones (Hoodless did), I rather thought that WAS clear. We hardly obfuscated the fact. (2) TIGHAR's analytical tool doesn't even include the best bones for det erming sex (Hoodless looked at the best bones), See above (3) TIGHAR' s work finds a very low certainty that the bones were female (Hoodless was certain they were MALE) Yes, and as a dabbler in the law, I can be very certain about how a given law should be interpreted, but a professional like yourself, counsellor, with access to modern case law databases, are likely to have a much more authoritative opinion -- which I'll bet would tend to be more guarded, less absolute, than mine. I think that's a meaningful distinction between the Hoodless and Burns/Jantz analysis: Hoodless says he's certain; B&J (and FORDISC) say "we think it's likely." (4) only "a couple of millimeters" separates TIGHAR's report from agreeing with Hoodless that the bones were male, Sex differences in bones tend to be measured in millimeters; it's in their nature to be small and subtle. You'd prefer cubits? (5) there is no discussion of whether this "couple of millimeters" in FORDISC falls within a general industry measurement variance standard. I'm not altogether sure what you're getting at, here, but FORDISC is all about the application of standard statistical measures; if the "couple of millimeters" weren't statistically significant based on "industry standards," FORDISC shouldn't have come up with the diagnosis it did. Our paper was not an exhaustive description and rationalization of FORDISC (Jantz has published extensively on the subject). (6) There is also no discussion of whether a "couple of millemeters" also changes FORDISC's ancestry determination; Well, suppose a couple of milimeters would change the ancestry call from Nordic to Polynesian. So what? A couple more or less might change it to African, or American Indian, or Vulcan. We got measurements; we work with the measurements. Why in the world should we consider what might happen if we had some OTHER measurements? Where would one stop? The measurements might have been off by meters, kilometers; the castaway could have been a giant or a midget. What's the point? But no, Chris, I am not asking for your answers. I really don't think this is a useful argument, but when you impugn the integrity of the analysis that Burns and Jantz did and that Ric and I helped report, it's irritating enough to require some kind of response. After reiterating his arguments in the guise of "constructive recommendations" (Let's come out of the closet and admit what's perfectly obvious and has never been denied, that we're working with marginal data and therefore have ambiguous results), Chris goes on to moan that: Anyway, I'm sure all this will be rejected again, so TIGHAR will be pushing one more ball of incomplete work in front of it as a basis for reaching still other conclusions. This is what is going on with the Seven Site. And with THAT, Christopher, you go over the line. Just what do you think is "going on with the Seven Site?" I haven't seen you peering over my shoulder as I've sorted the bird from the turtle from the fish bone, nor have I seen you puzzling over the mapping data, the shellfish data, or much of the artifact data. But you feel quite free to jump to the conclusion that our analysis is going to be biased. OK, baby, let me tell you what I'm most afraid of that may bias our analysis: it's the possibility that we didn't collect consistent bodies of data from all the excavation units, which would make our comparative analyses questionable. And why do I worry about this? Because I repeatedly heard you joking over the screen about how silly it was to keep all these little bones and scales. Are all the little bones and scales really important? I don't know, but I do know that it was my job to collect as accurate a body of data as I could about the phenomena that make up the Seven Site, and it bothered me considerably to think that you either didn't understand or weren't concerned about this responsibility. To have you now not only presume to impugn Burns and Jantz' analysis in retrospect, but to prospectively impugn my analysis, really goes beyond the pale. Tom King ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Tom. That needed saying. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:05:04 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Artifacts O3A &B MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric, Something in my memory is nagging at me regarding these tabs with the screw and teeth, but I'll be darned if I can dredge it up. What does come to mind though, is that I seem to recall this type of hardware being used to hold something else in register. In other words, the adjustable part is kept from moving (sliding? rotating?) by engagement with the teeth on the tab. The hole certainly could fit over a pin, or be stabilized somehow. The bent one looks much too uniformly radiused to me to have been bent by accident, but who knows? ltm, jon 2266 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:06:28 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 2-6-S-45 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric, No two part knobs, but look at the cap for the fuel compartment - it's got the pressure pump built right into the center. My Coleman lantern has something similar. The opening in my lantern is not all that large ( maybe slightly larger than a penny in diameter), and the cap is aluminum with a knurled rim. ltm jon 2266 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:08:08 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: .22 casings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Hi Ric, My cartridge book (_Cartridges_, by Herschel C. Logan), shows the "U" indicates cartridges manufactured by the Union Metallic Cartridge Company, later Remington-UMC. We (the forum) looked up and discussed quite a bit of information on Colt .22's while you were galavanting around the South Pacific. Colt had two that might fit the bill. The Woodsman and the .22 Ace, which is essentially a Government Model 1911 in .22 caliber. I would speculate that it is most likely that Gallagher's was a Woodsman, which was more of a target pistol. I have the conversion kit for my Government Model, to switch it to .22, and would be happy to send you one or some cases for firing pin, extractor and ejector comparisons if you like. I don't have access to a Woodsman, but as I recall there were some out there who did. ltm jon 2266 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:12:57 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Artifact #2-6-5-46 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jon Watson Does this thing look familar to any of our other ancient > pelicans on the forum? Have you ever hung up a headset on something like > this? Or maybe the microphone? I don't recall ever seeing earphones hanging up in the cockpit photos, but then I don't recall seeing the microphone hanging around either. I will go back and look through my pictures. Remember, the hatch was right over the pilot's head. ltm jon 2266 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:13:49 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Mystery G MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Holt >From Ric > > Bwere is eager to help but so far the gods of email and fax have thwarted my > attempts to get the information to him. I'll keep trying. Sacrifice a small pig, burn the carcass, and then lose the bones. That should work. LTM (who apologizes for this. Really.) Mike Holt ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:16:49 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: M-1 carbine MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt Interesting, the number of us who own or have owned an M1 carbine.. One of the nicest little firearms ever built.. Unfortunately I had to hand mine in for destruction when the gun laws were changed in Australia, but I still have magazines and ammo lying around the place.. Th' WOMBAT **************************************************************************** From Ric Don't anyone even THINK about launching that thread (and that goes for you too Mr. Heston). ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:17:38 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE's frequencies MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt Just out of curiosity, am I correct in thinking that a quarter wave antenna for 500kcs was about 468 feet? Or is this another bit of my Air Force radio theory I've forgotten over the last 25 years.... Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:18:24 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: ARTIFACT INFO MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris in Petaluma A small correction for Skeet Gifford, according to my Dept. of Army and Air Force tech manual dated 1953 The M1 and the M1A1 carbines used 15 round magazines. It was the M2 and M3 that used 30 round magazines because they could be switched to full auto fire. The only difference between the M1 and M1A1 was the latter had a metal folding stock with a wooden handgrip while the M1 had a fixed wooden stock. Both types of magazines were interchangeable. Chris in Petaluma (who also likes his WW2 I.B.M. M1 carbine) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:19:58 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: magazine capacity of .30 carbines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris in Petaluma I believe the rifle that used the stripper clip is the M1 Garrand and not the M1 carbine. I believe the Garrand was also a 30 caliber but had a more powerful load of gunpowder behind it, thus the shells were longer. Chris in Petaluma ************************************************************************ From Ric Wasn't the Garrand a .306? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:21:12 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: The Word on Hoodless! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Denise Dennis O. McGee #0149EC says about Hoodless: "The guy may have been good, but I don't think he was perfect." Dennis, sweetheart, no one said the guy was 'perfect' ... they - his contemporaries - said he was 'a marvel'. And when you take into account the calibre of the people who found him 'a marvel' - who themselves would be seen as 'marvels' by we lesser mortals - I think we need to assume as a bottom-line that Hoodless was pretty damn special! Look, Fiji's ex-President Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara - himself a giant among mere mortals and I'm not just referring to his height - was (until his calibre was realised and he was sent off to study at Oxford) one of Hoodless's medical students and, to this day, still considers Hoodless one of the best people he's ever known - and Mara's met just about EVERYBODY important in the entire world. I think that really says something; don't you! LTM (who once ranked Indira Gandhi, Margaret Whitlam (wife of former Australian P.M. Gough Whitlam) and Dr Hoodless as the three most personally impressive personalities she'd ever met ... and M. also had met just about EVERYBODY important in the entire world.) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:22:05 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Have you considered ... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From denise Ric says: "Short of finding the bones, I really don't see what more could be done." Well, I know nothing at all about forensic science, but even I can see two things which can be done ... 1) Find the photographs that Gallagher very likely took of the bones on their disinterment, and do some sort of superimposition computer-generated thingy looking for a match. 2) Find that tooth which went missing between Gallagher and Vaskass and DNA test it. See, easy peasy! Two perfectly viable options! Of course, I could be overlooking a thing or two when I call these operations "easy". LTM (who loved a challenge) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:24:15 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: The Mysterious Vanishing of Noonan! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Denise Don Neumann says something that has suddenly struck me as very odd. He says: "in fact FN is never even mentioned in any of the correspondence (re: Earhart)" Don, this is so true. I've never noticed before, but in all the discussion I ever heard about Earhart as a child I never once remember Noonan's name mentioned. In fact, I was never given any reason to assume other than she flew alone on this trip. And I think you're right when you suggest "it must be a British thing!" The only reason I can think for this omission was that these good ex-pat folk would normally have considered it an impropriety for a young woman to travel unchaperoned with a young man and so unconsciously mentally edited Noonan out of the picture. Because everyone admired Earhart - thought her "a dashed fine lady" - it was just so much more convenient to have him not there than having to think about Earhart in terms of the moral issues involved. LTM (who herself never gave Noonan a moment's thought) Denise **************************************************************************** From Ric It could also have something to do with Putnam doing his damndest to downplay Noonan's role. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:30:05 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Electra on reef MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Ric, A couple of points. Who on the Forum was it that searched the Winslow reef area and what area did they cover? (I've accidentally dumped a lot of old e-mail) Does the first round the world map mark Atafu and describe it as such? There are some excellent high definition pics of Earhart and the electra (including close-up of DF loop and attached cable) at http://www.atchison.org/Amelia/earhartgrp1.html I note that these are courtesy of Mrs Gabrielle Bresnik, widow of Earhart's official photographer. Perhaps she has other photos that might be of use. If we could ascertain when they were taken they may be of use regarding rivet spacing etc. I note from the report of Amelia's marriage that she had a platinum wedding ring but these pics show no sign of one. It would certainly be a useful identifier if ever found. Regards Angus ****************************************************************************Fr om Ric Cam Warren visited Winslow Reef. He didn't recover anything as far as I know, except possibly from seasickness. We're very familiar with the Bresnick photos. None of the photos of Earhart taken during the World Flight that I have seen show her wearing any kind of jewelry except a wristwatch. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:48:52 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: magazine capacity of .30 carbines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Joy Ref. Dennis McGee's recollections of the M1 Carbine: Methinks he is confusing the M1 Carbine with the M1 Garand. The "stripper clips" for the Carbine were made to fit on top of the magazine and load it by pushing down on the ammo. These ammo clips were normally carried in cloth "bandoleers." On the other hand, the clips for the M1 Garand were, as Dennis said, loaded into the top of the receiver into an internal magazine. And yes, they did make a distinctive "ping" when ejected with the last round. This "ping" also alerted the enemy that you had to reload. I've heard that the Marines in the Pacific Theater in WWII, used this to their advantage by "pinging" one of these clips by hand, against their rifle causing the enemy to expose himself. LTM ( Who is NEVER off topic) Marty Joy 0724C **************************************************************************** From Jeff Bolen I think you need someone who knows something about firearms. The M1-Garand did not use "stripper clips" It used a very unique "en bloc clip" It was a u shaped piece of steel which held 8 rounds in a staggered fasion, and the big complaint of combat troops who used it was the distinctive PING it made when the last round was shot and the clip was ejected from the rifle. The Garand does use the .30-06 cartridge, which was developed in 1906, hence the 06 designation. The military has used this cartridge in various firearms from 1906 until today. The predominate rifle in use in the 30's was the Springfield A303. This rifle uses the .30-06 cartridge and does use a 5 round stripper clip. The bolt is opened and the rounds are "stripped" from the clip into the magazine inside the rifle. The Garand was first developed in 1936, but wasn't redily available to the troops until the start of WWII. As far as I know there is no cartridge called a ".306". There are two that are close, one is the .303 enfield, in use during the 30's and the .308 which didn't see manufacture until the 50's. The base of the .308 and the .30-06 are identical, and both would fit into a .30-06 stripper clip. The .308 is a shortened version of the .30-06. The M1 Carbine was not developed until after the start of WWII. It was a replacement for the officers sidarm. It was distributed with a 15 round clip. It fires the .30 carbine round and is a straight walled cartridge, as opposed to the .30-06 which is bottle-necked. It is now sometimes used in handguns as well. The civilian version of the M14 is called the M1A It is not the original M1, and it has a guide for a stripper clip. The M1 Garand does not I hope this info helps. Jeff Bolen Florida *************************************************************************** From Ric My error. I had thought that the "aught six" in "thirty aught six" (.30-06) had to do with the diameter of the case. If we have a 5 round .30-06 stripper clip it sounds like we have evidence of the presence of a Springfield A303, which is rather interesting. I wonder if the Coasties in 1944 may have had an old Springfield or two. If the M-1 Carbine was only issued to officers, that really narrows down the identity of our Seven Site marksman. There was only one officer stationed at Unit 92 - Ensign Charlie Sopko. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:52:48 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: The New Mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dave Chase Just a follow up on Randy's 'g' musings: Perhaps Gallagher found the skull and then dug some other test holes looking for other bones. Having no luck in the other test holes, he simply marked the location of the skull. On another subject: I'm assuming from the conversation about the thermos bottle that you do not have a picture of it? I could swear I saw a picture of it somewhere. If you confirm that you don't have one, Vanessa and I will bust open her research boxes and start looking! Dave Chase ***************************************************************** From Ric The other holes seem too widely scattered to be attempts to dig up other bones. Thermos bottle appear in several photos. The tricky part is finding one that shows a cup handle. I haven't had time to really look. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:54:22 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: The "knob" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Lawrence Did Irish have a metal telescope, microscope or binoculars with him on Gardner? The "knob" just might be an adjustment wheel of some sort rather than a lock-down for a sextant. Thanks, Lawrence ************************************************************** From Ric There's a list of Gallagher's personal effects on the website in the Document section. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:57:18 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris Kennedy Pending Dr. Burns' availablity, something to remember is that the "couple of millemeters" qualifier (discussed in the following posting), and the fact that it swings the sex determination from female to male, was first raised by Dr. Burns, herself. It would seem to be unnecessary to the conclusion reached in the paper, yet for some reason Dr. Burns felt that it was important to bring it up. Anytime that the writer of a paper brings up issues that are technically not necessary to the result and would change the result, it raises a red flag. That is what got me to wondering whether forensic science, like most sciences involving measurement, has a generally accepted "standard of error" for measurements---that is, where a slight difference in measurement (here, a "couple of millimeters") brings about two totally different results (the change from female to male), the result is considered too close to call one way or the other, one is as likely as the other. Also, while Ric is correct that FORDISC contains many different racial data bases for purposes of ancestry determination, it is not a system where you just load in your numbers and come up with, ping, a winner---there is a subjective element in determining which of many "matches" is the best match. Also, ethnicities are not equally represented within FORDISC. As I appreciate it, the data base available on FORDISC of possible matches for Pacific Islanders is rather thin compared to other ethnicities. This complicates the FORDISC analysis of the Hoodless bones, and also increases the difficulty and importance of the subjective element in determining which is the "closest" match----you can see the difficulty of this analysis, yourself, by taking a look at Figure 1 to the TIGHAR analysis. Note the interesting (and quite diverse) alternative matches available in relatively equidistant proximity to the "Nikumaroro" skull. "Norse" is hardly the clear winner. --Chris Kennedy ************************************************************************** From Ric This really is getting ridiculous. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:59:53 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Emergency radio MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Lawrence Although there is no list of equipment AE and FN carried aboard the Electra, I was under the impression an inflatable raft, portable radio, and yellow signal kite (doubled as an antenna) was on board. George Putnam stated this in several interviews/statements with the press. Thanks, Lawrence ************************************************************************ From Ric Putnam, of course, was not with Earhart during the world flight. I think you'll find that kites were just kites, not radio antennas. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:02:05 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: magazine capacity of .30 carbines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jeff Bolen I would bet the coasties had ONLY the bolt action Springfield, the Garands were reserved for the frontline troops, and the training of them. And I mistyped it, it's the 03A3, sorry.... The first model was the 03, made in 1903 and it used a .30 cal cartridge similar to a .30-06 but the army standardized on the .30-06 in 1906, and the Springfield was modified and then used .30-06 since then. The Garand was just being issued at the start of the war, so most troops in the field had the Springfield. As far as the .30 carbine some non-comms used it too, but not many. Also, remember the .30 carbine ammo was issued in 15 round magazines, not stripper clips, as well as the fact that a .30 carbine round would not fit in a .30-06 stripper clip. You can still find all this ammo and clips if you go to a gun show in your area. A lot of these dealers are also collectors and are a wealth of information. They will gladly answer any questions you may have, and maybe even have an example to show you. Jeff Bolen *************************************************************************** From Ric By coincidnece I just received the following snailmail letter from Unit 92 veteran Lou Pantages: Ric I have checked with several more CG's who served on Gardner but no one has a knowledge of any .22s. The guys all remembered their carbines, several Springfield .03s, some hand grenades (good for fishing) and the officers had .45s. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:03:08 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Stripper clips MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From R.L."Doc" Holloway Ric, Yes. The M1 Garand was indeed a .30-06 weapon. It was loaded using an eight round "en-block" clip that stayed in the rifle until the last round was fired, and then it was automatically ejected. My guess is that you have a five round stripper clip that was used with the bolt action, .30-06, U.S. Model 1903 Springfield rifle. LTM Doc ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:12:48 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re List of Equipment on Electra MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ron Bright Roessler and Gomez,in AE, Case Closed?, list all of the Electra stuff from an inventory taken at Luke field in March 37 on the first Flight attempt. See p.173-180. Of course no such inventory exists for the second flight, but common sense would indicate that much of the same equipment, repair stuff, tools, etc., would have been in the Electra. It is a comprehensive list and Tighar would be looking for any of those items that may have been removed from the Electra by AE/FN on Niku. Ron Bright *************************************************************************** From Ric The list has been on the TIGHAR website at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Luke_Field.html for years. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:13:37 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: The Word on Hoodless! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon The point is that Hoodless may have been a very special person, but that says nothing about his abilities as a forensic pathologist or anthropologist. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 LTM (Who was special.) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:14:51 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From JHam 2128 re bones analysis thread: I vote that it's time this thread is buried. The bottom line is we have two different conclusions drawn by two different experts making judgements at two different time periods using the best information available to them. There is no way to prove, at this point, which of the two expert opinions regarding the bones is correct. Nothing more can be gained from flogging the poor beast further. Let's go on to more productive activities. blue skies, jerry *************************************************************************** From Ric I couldn't agree more. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:18:39 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Emergency radio MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig I would be surprised if AE had not carried a liferaft. If she did, and it contained an emergency radio, then would that radio be crystalled the same as the aircraft radio - to do so might be logical. As already discussed, 500kcs would not be much use as it was a maritime CW distress frequency. Incidentally, I am surprised that FN had trouble reading or sending morse - he was after all a 'sailor' and at that time morse was the most reliable and primary method of radio communication. *************************************************************************** From Ric Lots of things about the Earhart flight are surprising to many people. There was no liferaft aboard for the first attempt to fly to Howland Island. Neither was there an emergency radio. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:26:32 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: A Tighter Forum MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric This is to let everyone know that starting Monday, Dec. 3rd, I will be moderating the forum much more tightly in order to reduce the volume of postings for you to wade through and the time spent by me answering nonproductive speculation and questions that are already answered on the website. If your submitted posting does not show up on the forum you can assume that it did not make the cut. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:15:36 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Officers at Unit 92 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chuck Boyle Ric, The muster roll for USCG Unit 92 also list as Commanding Officers Lt. George A. Finn, Jr., attached August or September 1945, detached March 1946 and Lt. Ralph A. Peterson, attached March 1946 and detached May 13, 1946, as the Station closed. Lee Boyle. *************************************************************************** From Ric I stand corrected. Thanks Chuck ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:32:37 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Theodolite concentric knobs. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D From Christian D: > Spading replies: It also looks like the micrometer knob on my theodolite. > A > theodolite is, in laymen terms, an instrument used by land surveyors....and, > of course, land surveyors have been on Niku. Hopefully the numbers will > narrow it down. I believe I sent you pictures of my theodolite, and the > wooden box it is stored in, a number of years ago when the alleged sextant Modern theodolites have 2 concentric knobs. Off hand I can't remember if one is a lock and the other one just a single speed -or if the 2 knobs can control 2 different speeds separately... Anybody knows when that technological arrangement first came about? I'll confess I don't know, but doubt it was a common arrangment in the 30's I think Ric had said the Niku knob seems to have had some mechanics down the center... I still think one should not dismiss the possibility it came from some pressure kerosene appliance just because it doesn't come from ONE particular Tilley lamp. There were several types of pressure parafin burner appliances, including cooking stoves, and like "Irish" own Coleman iron. I always thought Coleman was a US brand, by the way. Also, while that knob might have had the air pump piston rod going through it, it could also have had a tiny pressure relief valve instead, in the center, like an old stove I used to own. While a sepate pump was located elsewhere on the appliance. Ric: can you describe that artifact better? Are you positive there couldn't have been a thread on the inside surface, to make it into a cap? What is the "channel" you are mentionning? Just ONE single circular groove -like for crimping on something? Come to think of it: even the lack of a thread inside the thing doesn't disqualify it from coming from a pressure kerosene tank; this knob could have been brazed or crimped on an extension -or the cylinder of an air pump, with the thread and gasket on this extension... Christian D ************************************************************************** From Ric Sounds like we need to get more photos up on the website. - There are no threads on the inside. - The internal channel is a separate component inserted into the inside of the knob. It is a single cirucular groove which gives the impression that it once held a disk which rotated within it without causing the entire knob to rotate. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:35:39 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 2-6--S-45, The knob MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D From Christian D: > 2-6-S-45 looks to be about the right size and configuration to be the > micrometer > drum knob from the index arm of a sextant. The interior channel might be > where > the knob fitted onto the calibrated micrometer drum. > **************** Very old sextants etc didn't have micrometer drums; they had instead an "interpolating subscale", the vernier, I believe it's called. Two questions: 1-when were micrometer drums introduced to sextants? 2-what type was the Florida sextant known to have belonged to Fred? Is the Niku knob similar, by the way? Regards. Christian D ************************************************************************** From Ric The Florida sextant was a Ludolph (Bremerhaven, Germany) dating from the first decade of the 20th century. Artifact -45 does not resemble any feature on that sextant. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:36:21 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Noonan and Musick MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D From Christian D: > From John Dipi > > There Is a Monument For Eddie Musick C anton Did Any Of You Guys See It On > The South Side When YOU WERE There > **************************************************************** > From Ric > > 'Fraid not. We were never down on the south side. > I did, in 1996. Still there; but it seems to be beginning to work loose from the cement support. 'Hope nobody takes it away as a souvenir... Christian D. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:38:12 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Lonely sextant box MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D From Christian D: > From Phil Tanner > > I always think the discovery of the (subsequently lost) sextant box is THE > big pointer to Earhart and Noonan having been on Gardner. Much more than the > bones - every human being has bones, but how many have sextant boxes? > > > I'm looking down the investigative process at 180 degrees from the > scientific > method, but it strikes me anyone arguing they weren't there has to explain > away the box. The only other contenders would seem to be the Norwich City > survivors (but would a box survive in the open air for 11 years in that > environment and the lettering remain legible?) or the New Zealand surveyors > (but would a sextant in their use ever stray far from its box, and would a > group leaving the island at leisure be so careless as to leave such an > important part of their professional kit behind?) > > > What did a sextant cost in the 1930s? I assume we are talking large sums and > the 2001 equivalent would be someone leaving a laptop lying around, correct? > > > LTM > > Phil 2276 > ************************************************************* Another thought: Let's assume AE/FN salvaged the sextant and brought it to their camp; after quite a while in their ordeal they might have decided that the sextant had to be put on its own on the ground someplace, and the box used for a much more important function: with the major problem the crabs were, they might have used the box as a safe place to transport and save food items... You can't even leave food unattended in the open for 10min over there. The sextant box would have been one of the very few containers they had access to. This is one of the few simple reasons that could explain how a valuable sextant box came to be SEPARATED from its valuable sextant on the island of Nikumaroro... And while we are at it: once the sextant was laying in the dirt, and it was not going to be used again as a sextant, may be they started taking it apart in an effrort to make tools, etc. Use the telescope to start fires with the sun. Might also explain why someone might have found ONE piece of it in one place... Yes, a sextant INSIDE its box are quite valuable to ANYBODY -except perhaps, and only, to desperate castaways! Christian D. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:44:06 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D. I think Chris Kennedy raises a few interesting points in his looong explanation. The "2 millimeters" question seems valid to me. If Kar was to measure, today, the skull (in the same condition it was for Hoodless) would her measurements be perfectly the same? The "tools" (or whatever...) could be different, applied differently, using different pressure, etc... The skull was very "weather beaten": was it a bit soft? Thinned by erosion? Also if FORDISC is just a database: how universal is it? Does it have a fair representation of Pacific Islanders? Let's say it was applied to the skull of a castaway who had drifted in a boat from the Marquesas... Would that mislead FORDISC into an erroneous determination, because its database doesn't know the first thing about Marquesan people? Hopefully Kar can give us some details, time permitting... Christian D. *************************************************************************** From Ric We're really not going to spend any more time on this. The paper stands as written. It does not pretend to draw firm conclusions. Anyone is free to accept or reject the liklihood of the bones being Earhart's. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:10:50 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Chronology of House built for Gallagher? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From Christian D. The problem we have, though, is that Laxton's > description of it as a "house" is LATER than the Coast Guard description=20= of > it as simply some posts with something draining water into a tank. So -- > options seem to be: > =20 > 1. The original house deteriorated to the condition observed by the Coast > Guardsmen, and then it was rebuilt before Laxton saw it. > =20 > 2. The house built for Gallagher (HBFG) and the Coastie Tank (CT) are not= =20 > the > same things (and either one could be the Seven Site Tank (SST). > =20 > 3. There's a rend in the fabric of space-time...... > =20 > TK > =20 You guys lost me... Obviously you have MUCH more documents than me: by coincidence I just=20 received the "Shoes" book. I also have the recent "Conflict in Kiribati" by=20 Peter McQuarrie. I just can't find the real dates when Kilts and Laxton did their=20 observations, and the related document references... "Shoes" pg 117 says that Laxton reported in '49 seeing the sealed Loran=20 buildings waiting to be dismantled... 1949 seems a bit late? Could he have= =20 taken his hike a few years earlier? Page 281 your book says that a USCG reference records Kilts as being on Niku= =20 in 46 to REPAIR an antenna tower... I don't have the San Diego newspaper=20 article: is there a date as to when Kilts would have in fact dismantled the=20 NIKU station? Come to think of it: what if all the stations were removed, except Niku's=20 because the only access was trough the surf on the windward side? Peter in his book page 159, says the Loran was shut down soon after the last= =20 military transpac flight on Dec 3, 1945. With the stations decommisionned=20 "soon afterwards". His reference is in the Kiribati National Archives.=20 Everybody seems to assume that all was quickly removed after 1945, but is=20 that documented? When was the LAST time that Kilts was on Niku? Any chance=20 that all the stuff was just mothballed and never removed, much like on Kanto= n=20 with the near new power station etc? Of course, now that I check this posting I come accross more "fabric rends'.= .. Page 117 also mentions a Dr Richard Evans seeing a rain collector DURING th= e=20 war ( I assume NO house?)... I suggest we rename this tank from "CT" to=20 "Evan's". Then I also notice that Evans is told in 44/45 than the natives don't know=20 the first thing about THIS tank!!! Did he check carefully with all of them?= =20 Did it look to him like an aircraft tank? Did he think "AE"? And then again: did he describe his tank in details? To me, his sketch page=20 118 shows a longish narrow tank, with the ROUNDED bottom corners -more like=20 aluminum sheet. It needs to be propped by piles of rocks. Could the glass=20 float shard tools have been used to cut open an aluminum tank? Now compare that to the Tarawa Police Tank (TPT for short?) found by Tighar,= =20 page 155: a cube 3ft to a side, made of riveted heavy iron! Do we indeed have 2 tanks in the same general area? Evan's is earlier and unknown from the natives? Hard to see that it could be= =20 AE's and it was not found during the Bone search by Gallagher -IF the bones=20 were at the 7 site... But *soon-after-the-war* some of the natives take the site over, and build=20 some simple house(s) nearby with their new TPT. Didn't Laxton get things=20 rolling suddenly after the war? And he talks of "weekend houses" at times?=20 Also as the Coasties are gone, they are free to settle closer to Ameriki -ma= y=20 be scrounge materials from the base?=20 Evan's tank aluminum is more useful as sheet material back in the village, o= r=20 something? If Gallagher had put his name on this plot of land before he died= ,=20 then it is quite likely the natives would use his name to name the outpost=20 they built there after '45 Did the Tighar archeologists manage to find the holes for the corner posts o= f=20 the TPT? Is the pattern a long rectangle like in Evan's sketch on page 118? I'm sure I must have missed something quite basic by now and I'm waaaay out=20 on a limb? (ie "galloping on a dead horse"?) Shoot guys! Regards Christian D. *************************************************************************** From Ric Let's take the various tank and house sightings and relate events=20 chronologically. 1. Evans is there from the construction of the station in July '44 through=20 (as I recall) December of '45. He thinks he and a couple of friends found=20 the tank during an exploratory hike early in their stay on the island. =20 Maybe September of '44. The tank he described is about the right distance=20 from Unit 92 along the northern beach but seems to be closer to the beach an= d=20 of a different shape than the tank TIGHAR found. He did not recall what it=20 was made of. He made no mention of anyone target shooting. He thought it wa= s=20 a place where the natives came to do laundry. There was no thought of=20 airplane parts or AE at the time. It was not familar to some of the natives=20 who played baseball with the Coasties but Evans did not conduct any kind of=20 extensive investigation. Herb Moffitt, who was with him, remembered that nea= r=20 the tank were bird bones and feathers, a fire site and a metal can with a=20 wire handle. 2. Our next Coast Guard "tank witness" is Glen Geisinger whom I interviewed=20 by phone just prior to Niku IIII. Geisinger arrived on Gardner in late 1945= =20 and stayed though the closing of the station in 1946. He was a LORAN=20 technician. Didn=E2=80=99t explore much. Did not remember names of other veterans I mentioned nor did he remember=20 Kilts. =20 He has souvenirs acquired on Gardner with metal inlaid in a model canoe and=20 other wooden items said to be from =E2=80=9Ca downed plane.=E2=80=9D (This=20= matches Mims'=20 story) I asked if it was his impression that the downed plane had been on that=20 island or some other island. He said that he definitely had the impression= =20 that the downed plane had been on that island. He once saw a water holding tank that he thought might be an airplane fuel=20 tank. It was =E2=80=9Cclose to the Britsh end of the island=E2=80=9D but no= t in the=20 village. To get to the village you go left out of Unit 92 and drive up the=20 shore across a lagoon passage that you can drive right across at low tide. =20 To get to where the tank was you go RIGHT out of the station and go up that=20 shore =E2=80=9Cat least a couple of miles=E2=80=9D. The tank was not out on= the beach but=20 back on higher ground. There were bushes around but he doesn=E2=80=99t reme= mber big=20 trees. No buildings or anything else around it. The tank was =E2=80=9Cquit= e=20 large=E2=80=9D, perhaps five feet long. He didn=E2=80=99t remember if it wa= s square or=20 oblong. =E2=80=9CI only saw it from one side.=E2=80=9D The tank was in active use for collecting rainwater. =E2=80=9C One time of o= ur boys=20 put a .45 slug through one side of it and had to go back and fix it. I gues= s=20 they patched it somehow.=E2=80=9D The tank at the Seven Site has two holes that were patched with bolts and=20 washers. The holes line up and there was a .30 caliber carbine shell casing= =20 a few meters away along the suggested bullet trajectory. It appears that th= e=20 Seven Site tank is the tank Geisinger remembers even though the distance fro= m=20 Unit 92, the size of the tank, and the type of gun used to shoot it are quit= e=20 different.=20 My own opinion is that the discrepancies between the tank at the Seven Site=20 and Dick Evans' recollections are more likely due to the frailty of memory=20 than the presence of a different tank. 3. Kilts was at Niku in May of 1946 to help secure the station after it was= =20 shut down. I don't know where the antenna repair story in "Shoes" came from= .=20 Kilts, of course, makes no reference to the tank. =20 4. Laxton visited the island in early 1949. There is no doubt that his=20 account of seeing the "house built for Gallagher" dates from that time. 5. Apparently the U.S. had some intention to eventually recover the=20 equipment that was secured in 1946 but that never happened. A 1955 article=20 in Pacific Islands Monthly was headlined "Valuable Radio Equipment Rusts On=20 Gardner Island." Excerpt - "Nearly ten years after VJ Day a great deal of=20 valuable radio equipment and other machinery lies rusting in its buildings o= n=20 Gardner Island, Phoenix Group - a part of the WPHC territory. The equipment= =20 is a complete Loran radio station, with several diesel generators to provide= =20 power, and other camp equipment, including several big refrigeration units. ... Whether the Americans wished the stations to be left intact in case of=20 future trouble; or whether their disposal has been tied up with red tape may= =20 never be known. The Atafu station was finally purchased by the New Zealand=20 Government and dismantled by a team under the the supervision of the Apia=20 radio superintendent about three years ago - by which time much of the radio= =20 gear had suffered weather damage due to neglect. ...The Gardner buildings are no longer weather-proof and thousands of pounds= =20 worth of valuable dollar-source equipment appears likley to be left to=20 perish. " It's apparent that the stuff was eventually liberated, appropriated, looted,= =20 salvaged (pick your verb) by the colonists because we see junk from the Lora= n=20 station up in the post-Laxton era village - but it seems pretty clear that i= n=20 1949 when Laxton sees the "house built for Gallagher", the assumption was=20 that the Yanks would be coming back for their stuff and, as late as 1955, it= =20 was still basically undisturbed. Makes you really wonder about Laxton. His "house built for Gallagher" does=20 not seem to have been there just three years earlier. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:30:46 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: The New Mystery MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D (To save time I'll answer Christian's questions as we go.) ************************** > From Ric > > Good thoughts Dan. There is a U.S. Navy survey marker set in a concrete > plinth up near the village. WOW! Why at the village??? When you say a Plinth, Ric, you mean as to mark an elevation? Is it fairly close to the water? Could there have been a tide gage nearby (it would have been surveyed into that Navy benchmark)??? Any chance there was tidal records made in '44/45? (From Ric: It's a concrete pillar about four feet high. Not close to the water. It's in the same location as the "observation point" in the map from the Bushnell survey. No sign of a tide gage. No record of tidal observations.) > The 1939 Bushnell survey erected three towers > along the north shore but none anywhere near the Seven Site. The map > produced from the Bushnell survey shows the tower locations and observation > points, but there is no "G" benchmark. Even if not Bushnell, it still can be later surveyors. Ric: are you saying you found the tower locations, and they had not put survey monuments of some sort in the center of the base? Strange. (From Ric: The tower locations are shown on a map from the survey. We found the concrete pads for the most northerly tower (up at the NW tip) in 1999. We didn't look for the others nor did we look for a survey marker at the center point.) Also: just checked a current topo map for Gardner. It shows 3 "Doppler Satellite stations", called: Gardner 2, about the sw corner of Ameriki. (could this be close to your helipad and jet fuel drums -AEs shoes page 93?) Gardner AZ, just a bit W of the center of Aukareime S ( I wonder how close this is to your site!) Gardner 1, at the very NE tip of the old village. Have you found any of them? No details on the topo, as to date established... I can only guess they were put in (in the 70s?) with the old "Transit" satellite system... I'd think whenever it was, those people would have been on the island for a few days. SAMTEC? (From Ric: Those "Doppler Satellite Stations" are from a 1985 Australian military survey. We found the Aukeraime South marker in 1991, almost completely washed away. We located the NE village marker on this last trip.) So why wouldn't a survey monument be next to the coral "G", or under it? Did you try a metal detector? May be some iron rod in the ground... What is the length of that "G" feature again? (From Ric: Yes, we metal detected all around that area. Just a few tiny rusty metal flakes on the surface a few meters away. No sign of a survey marker. The feature is about a meter tall by almost a meter wide. The depressions near the G are way > too small to be babai (taro) pits. We see several examples up on Nutiran > and > in the village. What about the bigger holes? One is 9ft long by 2 deep: may be they were testing for a pit, and when they had'nt found sand and gravel at 2 feet, they were still in coarse rubble, they gave up? Babai is not the only veggie: they also dig smaller, shallower single holes for trees like breadfruits etc? (From Ric: There was only one bigger hole that I know of and that is the suspected "skull hole." ) Regards Christian D ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:31:43 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forensics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Kar is far more knowledgeable about this than I, of course, but Karl Pearson's formulae were pretty much the industry standard in the osteology game in the 1940s, and were still being used (though supplemented by other stuff) when I learned what I did of osteology as an anthro student in the '60s. There's nothing wrong with them, but of course they were based on a much, much, much smaller data set than we have to work with today, and on a lot less detailed analyses, to say nothing of lacking access to the kinds of massive data-crunching computer-based analyses we have today. There's been a great deal of advance in osteological analysis in the last fifty years, based not only on computer technology but on the conduct (unfortunately) of many, many studies of genocide victims, where there's good controlled data on who the folks are you're digging up. TK ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:37:21 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Atafu population MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Chuck -- Glad you're working on this. The absolute key question to try to get answered, I think, is this: were there people living on Atafu in July 1937, and if so, how many were there? *************************************************************************** From Ric Didn't we already establish that there were 300 and some people there in like 1934? I do think it would be interesting to know what name was shown for the island on maps available in 1937. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:38:36 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Polynesian vs Micronesian MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Marjorie -- You're right, Micronesians are different in all kinds of ways from Polynesians, though on the whole (particularly physically) there are a lot more similarities than differences -- and probably more differences WITHIN what we call Micronesia than between the eastern Micronesians and Polynesians. Linguistics, physical anthropology, and archeology over the last 30 years or so have led to the general conclusion that parts of Micronesia were settled in multiple waves out of SE Asia over the last several thousand years, and then by a sort of back-migration out of Polynesia during the great expansion that resulted in the settlement of Hawaii and Easter Island. I Kiribati and Marshallese people are generally more like Polynesians than, say, Yapese and Palauans. Linguistically, the I Kiribati and Marshallese are a good deal closer to Polynesian than they are to the western Micronesian languages (Palauan, Yapese, Chamorro). In terms of things like house styles, those in Kiribati and the Marshalls are at least as much like many Polynesian forms as they are like those in nuclear Micronesia -- where as you say there are some very distinctive types on places like Pohnpei. Anyhow, the Phoenix Islands were settled primarily by I Kiribati, who are Micronesian, but also by Tuvaluans ("Ellice Islanders"), who are Polynesian. I don't think there's a whole lot of difference between their house styles. Sometimes a low platform of coral rubble surrounded by low coral slabs, then posts or slabs to support a raised floor, with corner posts, a thatched roof, and roll-down matting walls. Gallagher's house in the village was a grand-style version, with a concrete floor and milled lumber used to frame the walls, as well as the massive concrete bathroom. TK ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:39:34 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bones analysis/Lines of Inquiry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King > How much that might make her pelvis appear more "male" is > outside my pay grade. > Kar Burns tells an amusing story about taking the bones of a bag lady she'd known as a living breathing bag lady, and laying them out in front of a bunch of her colleagues, most of whom unhesitatingly identified them as those of a male. Sexual differentiation is no more a black and white matter in the skeleton than it is in any other aspect of physiology or psychology. TK ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:42:49 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 2-6-S-46, cup handle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Walking through San Francisco International Airport yesterday, where there's an exhibit on "car culture," I saw a boxed set of auto-picnic equipment, no date but certainly no later than the '50s, that contained nested food service containers, kind of like mess kits, with lock-over handles that looked a lot like 2-6-S-46. I was just passing through; maybe someone in the neighborhood would like to look into this one. TK **************************************************************************** From Ric Aargh! You didn't smash the glass and collect a sample? You could have the gotten out of the terminal by running down the up escalator and losing yourself in the crowd. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:44:25 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Tighter Forum MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Thank you. If there are things that need answering off-forum so people won't feel completely unresponded-to, or for other reasons, I'd be happy to help. *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks. I'll let you handle the bone measurement questions. :-) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:47:21 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: DNA ? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dave Bush Ric: It just came to me last night that a DNA match may be available to you. One of the artifacts that you found appeared to be a makeshift shoe from roofing material and some sort of padding - if the padding was next to someone's skin it will contain shed skin, therefore, it will contain DNA. Now, if its still viable after 60 years, I don't know, but the padding is still there, so maybe there is a chance. Blue Skies, Dave Bush #2200 *************************************************************************** From Ric Dr. King thought of that and we've been very careful to avoid contaminating the artifact (such as by handling it without gloves). ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:53:40 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Bevis Report Analysis MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson Ric: I compared the Bevis report to the complete radio message database of Itasca and Howland Island, and my comments are below. Original message paragraphs start with ">>" >>Shortly after 11pm 2 July 37 (LA time, GGT-8= 07CGT 3JUL37, Howland +3:30 = 19:30 2JUL37, trip-hour 31), a weak signal was received on 6210kc, not understood. On another radio receiver set tuned to 3105kc in the same room, they heard two distinctly separate signals they say were from the Itasca and from the plane; apparently not hearing each other. [Itasca ship's log indicates searching near Howland at that time. I do not have Itasca radio log information for that time.] Randy: First, the time zone transcription is wrong. LA is +8, Howland is +10.5, and Itasca is +11.5. During the time cited, no transmissions from Itasca on 3105 or 6210. Itasca was monitoring the PBY plane flying down from Hawaii. Itasca was also monitoring 3105 and 6210, but heard nothing during this time. >>Early the morning of 3JUL37 (LA time) McMenamy & Pierson heard a distress signal on one of those frequencies, that McMenamy positively identified as being "...from the plane, poorly sent". All three radio operators now present in the room "state that this first SOS signal was repeated over and over again for about five minutes". Further distress calls and garbled attempts to give position were received until about 9am (06:30 Howland time). Some signals were sufficiently loud to be heard on the loudspeaker. Randy: No start time for this sequence of radios, but we do know that Itasca never heard an SOS, nor did anyone else. >>On 3July the British cruiser HMS Achilles in the Pacific had reported that "at 11:30am we heard an unknown station on 3105kc make a report as follows: "Please give us a few dashes if you get us'. The station then repeated KHAQQ twice, then disappeared." Randy: Well, this is interesting, as we have a good set of actual transmissions made in message traffic. First, the Achilles only reported that this was said at "0600GMT/3", not 11:30 AM. This report is well documented. >>Later, the Government San Francisco monitoring (receiving) station made several receptions with their antenna that was beamed to the pacific. The more credible (my opinion) were: 4JUL37 shortly before midnight (about Howland 9pm) Itasca was heard calling the plane, asking for an answer. Randy: Itasca broadcast on 3105, 6210, and 7500 at 0730, 0745, 0800GMT, respectively, repeating the cycle. Midnight Pacific time is 0800 GMT. >>Shortly after a carrier was heard on the Earhart frequency and this was reported 15 to 20 minutes past each hour until 9:05 the next morning 5JUL37 (Howland 5:35am). That same morning, McMenamy et al telephoned (to the monitor station?) to say that they picked up more Earhart signals - the "first in two days". They reported hearing the Itasca call Earhart, and also definite answering signals from the plane, the last of which ended "in a decided sputtering". Randy: 0905 Pacific is 1705GMT. Nothing in the radio logs resembling this, including any transmissions from Itasca. >>At 6:17 the same morning (Howland 02:47 5JUL37) the monitor heard Itasca call KHAQQ, and a man's voice answered on the Earhart frequency. Only one word, "one", was distinguishable. The "Press Wireless" also reported hearing signals which they could not identify on the Earhart frequency. Randy: 617AM Pacific is 1417 GMT/5. No calls made by Itasca during this time. >>Howland Island (Itasca?) reported that same morning at 10:43 (5JUL37, but who's location?) hearing "KHAQQ" quoting a bearing of 281 degrees - with no reference & hence of no use. Pan American Airways also the same morning heard apparently the same signal on which they found a bearing of 155 degrees from Wake Island. Randy: Two reports of bearings were made by Howland: both NNW or SSE (no degrees given) at 1105GMT/5 and 0812GMT/6. Wake Island's report was of 155 degrees at 1236GMT/5. >>The next morning - 6 JUL37 - a Los Angeles operator, Louis Messier, reported he heard a weak code signal at 3:30 am (Howland midnight). It was sent very slowly and Messier logged it as: "17 na u 61 4 southwes 1 23 sou owl 23 ja so not nx call equen 170 sou sec will sou nant now sou". (In my opinion, radio Hams might recognize some useful meanings from this poorly sent and received message.) Randy: 0330 Pacific is 1130GMT/6. Itasca hears code on 3105 at 1111-1112GMT. During 1130GMT, Howland reports interference from a Japanese station, and can't make out the signals. >>The next morning (7JUL37) McMenamy and Pierson heard their last sounds from the Earhart frequency, a rippling carrier at 1:22am (Howland 9:52pm). This same effect was heard by Honolulu amateur stations from 9:17pm to 10:37pm (Howland 8:47pm to 10:07pm) the same day. Randy: 122AM Pacific is 0922GMT/7. Itasca is no longer tranmitting, and nothing was heard at Howland during this time. Randy's conclusions: This is an excellent example of how data gets distorted over time (wrong time zones, bearings, etc.). Almost all of the message traffic (e.g. Achilles, Pacific Coast beaming onto Itasca, etc.) was part of unencrypted radio traffic sent to/from Itasca from CG Radio Station in San Francisco, and any amateur would be able to read those messages. I think Pierson and McMenamy were listening in to the CG and Navy message traffic, and putting various pieces of the puzzle together (e.g. time zones, 281 degrees from another message (purported to be from Earhart) with a bearing from Howland, and Wake Island bearings being wrong. Perhaps much of the information was available in the newspapers. It's a shame we don't have Pierson's and McMenamy's radio logs. In truth, I don't think we can give much credence to the Bevis Report, as it is rife with known errors. The sections that are not substantiated, therefore, could hardly be taken as truth. *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Randy. The Messier message looks like it be worth trying to authenicate. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:56:13 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Holes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Andrew Mckenna Don Neumann said "I was also impressed with the depth of the 'gravesite' holes you dug out, (About two feet deep?)..." If you liked that one, you should see the crater that Gary Quigg, Bill Carter, and others dug at the suspected grave site up near the Norwich City. I believe it finally topped out at 2 meters wide, 3 meters long, and 2 meters deep. Moving 12 cubic meters of sand & coral rubble was no small task, and when we found nothing, we had the pleasure of shoveling it all back into the hole. Ric, you really should put one of those pics up on the website to show everybody how much fun it was. Andrew McKenna 1045 CE ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:00:19 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Ponds at SE tip MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Bill Carter Ric wrote: Bill Carter Responds: When John and I were surveying the remains of the Loran Station on September 11, we walked past the large roundish sunken area that was devoid of vegetation and had some small pools of water in it. (I took a photo of this area). The ground is dark brown almost black with what I believe is (or was told) was some sort of fungus growing here. This area also appears as a large brown patch on the sat photo. The area could (and probably does) hold rainwater during a large rainstorm but the area is positioned such that the primary source of water is overflow from the lagoon and my guess is that most of the water in this area is salt water. Remember that for mosquitoes to breed and live they need pools of fresh water. There are no mosquitoes on Niku. Bill Carter #2313CE ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:12:23 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Curious dumb question MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Gary Fajack Why was so little time spent on Niku field work? Was this purely a budgetary constraint or were other factors involved. It seems that there was not enough time to do all that needed to be done this time around. Gary Fajack ************************************************************************** From Ric More field work was accomplished on this expedition than on any previous trip. For 21 days the team worked their asses off in very uncomfortable and, at times, dangerous conditions. Twentyone days was roughly twice the length of most previous stays at the island, and you are correct, there was not enough time to do all that needed to be done. There never is. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:14:15 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Theodolite Knobs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kenton Spading Ric Wrote: Does the knob [on my theodolite] look like an exact match [to 2-S-6-45] or just the same sort of thing? ********** Spading replies: It is the same sort or thing. It is not an exact match. I checked a friend's theodolite that is much newer than mine. It also has these types of knobs... in other words....knobs that resemble little bowls (if you ignore the shaft component). His knobs are not an exact match either...they are also plastic while mine are brass.... but then my theodolite was made in the 1930's of 40's. In comparing these knobs to pictures of the artifact...it appears that the artifact could be from a scientific instrument of some kind. By the way, the knob that resembles -45 is attached to what is called a "tangent screw" on a theodolite. ********************* Ric wrote: The first land surveyors we know of on Gardner were the New Zealanders in late 1938/early 1939. Then came the U.S. Navy Bushnell survey in November 1939. For the castaway, whose skull seems to have been first discovered around April of 1940, to have had a theodolite and box somehow left behind by either of those surveys, the castaway would have to be on the island and alive after those events took place. The island was inhabited by the first colonists for that entire time (since Dec. 20, 1938). ************** Spading replies: This is good information and you make some good points. However, We have to examine all the artifacts in the context of when they were found....in this case the year 2001. The artifact could have been lost/discarded any time time period prior to 2001 either before or after the Gallagher period. LTM Kenton Spading *************************************************************************** From Ric Very true. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:17:30 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Atafu population MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Phil Tanner > From Ric > > Didn't we already establish that there were 300 and some people there in like > 1934? I do think it would be interesting to know what name was shown for the > island on maps available in 1937. Yup - 378 people in 1936, says the British Naval Intelligence Division's 1943 handbook, which also uses "Atafu" almost exclusively in its text and on its one very small map. "Duke of York" seems to feature only as a name the island was given by the first European in those parts. But this only answers half the question, IMHO - did they land at Atafu? Pretty well inconceivable if there were almost 400 people there. But as to whether they landed on Gardner having initially thought it was Atafu/Duke of York - conceivable, particularly keeping in mind (as I sometimes fail to) that the one absolute is that they were lost, or they would have found Howland. If they knew Atafu was populated, it might have made them more inclined to put down, and maybe the Gardner shipwreck in its 1937 state would have suggested a populated island? LTM (who was six in 1937) Phil 2276 **************************************************************************** From Ric Makes me wish I had time to cruise some antique map stores and figure out when Duke of York became Atafu. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:20:14 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 2-6-S-46, cup handle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee Ric said: "Herb Moffitt, who was with him, remembered that near the tank were bird bones and feathers, a fire site and a metal can with a wire handle." A wire handle? Hmmm, sounds familiar. Could this be artifact 2-6-S-46? LTM, who's wired real tight today Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ************************************************************************** From Angus Murray Ric, Herb Moffitt, who was with him, remembered that near the tank were bird bones and feathers, a fire site and a metal can with a wire handle. Is this is can the origin of 2 6 S 46 perhaps? Dejeuner sur l'herb? It seems far more likely to me that this was some kind of locally made handle than anything associated with AE. ************************************************************************* From Ric I don't think so. The impression I got was that what Herb saw was a can with a jury-rigged piece of wire to serve as a handle like the hoop-shaped "bail" on a bucket. Artifact -46 is obviously a manufactured item. ************************************************************************* From Tom King > Aargh! You didn't smash the glass and collect a sample? You could have the > gotten out of the terminal by running down the up escalator and losing > yourself in the crowd. > I'll try that on the way back. Maybe if I disguise myself in a burkah..... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:23:21 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Glass Floats MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kenton Spading Ric said: We try, but we're not perfect. ********** It would be foolish to think otherwise. My point is...a Niku float may have beem recovered and might prove useful for comparison to some of the Niku4 artifacts. KS *************************************************************************** From Ric Good point. Trouble is, I don't know who might have a float. Thems as collect souvenirs don't advertise that to the boss. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:28:02 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Funafuti, 1938 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kenton Spading Chuck B wrote quoting Peter Mc.: The first record of planes in the area that I have is Earhart and Panam survey flights, both in 1937. Then there was a flight in Tuvalu (Funafuti only) in 1938. Then the next record I have is April - June 1941 in the lead up to WWII.. *************** Spading asks: Who flew to Funafuti in 1938? LTM Kenton Spading ************************************************************************ From Ric I believe that Emily Sikuli told us that a British warship visited Funafuti (where she lived before moving to Gardner) in 1938 and sent it's float plane ahead to prepare the way. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:29:52 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Gender and Shoes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Kenton Spading Jim P wrote: The type and size of the shoes does not seem to be enough to determine the sex of the bones and there were more than one pair. ************ Spading replies: There is anecdotal evidence that the gender association (female) with the shoe parts was determined based on the height of the heel. Gallagher may have assumed, based on his experience in a western culture (England), that a shoe with an elevated heel would have been worn by a woman. This anecdote is the only lead we have of how the female tag was put on the shoe parts. LTM Kenton Spading ************************************************************************** From Ric What anecdotal evidence is that? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:32:30 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Point of Interest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig Pardon me if this is commong knowledge, but I found a picture today that shows Amelia and Fred standing next to one another. http://www.inca-productions.com/Amelia/photo1-small.gif We often make comments about how small and "non-typically female-shaped" (as P.C. as I can get) Amelia was, but in this picture, she looks beefy compared to Fred. I had not realized how thin he was. Craig ************************************************************************** From Ric That photo was taken in Bandoeng, Java about ten days before they disappeared. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:35:17 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: 1937 Pics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig Hi Ric: One last thing about pictures. Do we have a concept of how many exist from the last flight (that we know about)? Does TIGHAR have a CD or anything containing such pictures? I've been trying to compile as many as I can from the last flight, in case some day we need them to identify an object combed from the Seven Site. Is every photo showing both AE and FN in frame from the actual last flight, or were there promo photos done previous to the flight itself? Thanks, Craig *************************************************************************** From Ric The best source is the Purdue University website at http://www.lib.purdue.edu/earhart/images/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:41:07 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Chronology of House built for Gallagher? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Re: > I don't know where the antenna repair story in "Shoes" came from. Answer: The Unit 92 Station log at the National Archives reports a group including Kilts arriving from Kanton to repair the vertical radiator, which was one of the antennae. TK ************************************************************************** From Ric Doesn't it seem odd that they were repairing stuff that was about to be dismantled? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:43:18 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Atafu research prt1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alexander duke of york island... http://www.multimap.com/index/pp27.htm http://www.meltours/divesites_rab.html these links have maps and also tell u what it is like underwater. Atafu: dubbed DUKE OF YORK ISLAND by its first european visitor british commodore JOHN BYRON. Atafu is the smallest and northern most of the TOKELAUS 3 atolls Which has 42 islets which measure 3.5SQ KM. The population is around 500(1997).protestant ATAFU is the more traditional with rationed alcohol sales and a reliance on old style dug out canoes. The houses are more traditional due to their prized supply of KANAVA(wood), these houses are slowly being replaced by CYCLONE-PROOF CONCRETE & CORRUGATED-ROOFED housing.The wet season is between OCT~MAR and on average 350cm (12ft) of rain falls in a NORMAL year. The U.S whaler GENERAL JACKSON visited the area in 1835(FAKAOFO). The islands were annexed by BRITAIN in 1889 & incorperated into the GILBERT and ELLICE islands(now KIRIBATI & TUVALU) in 1916 by which time they known as THE UNION GROUP. The island has been administered by N.Z since 1925.the name TOKELAU ISLANDS was given in 1946.its a POLYNESIAN word meaning NORTH WIND...more to come but i need arest as i dont have keybord!imagine dreamcast type inut on a digibox...more ltr)--- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:44:12 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Curious dumb question MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King A little more in response to Gary's question, which suggests that some people may not know how TIGHAR expeditions work. We're all volunteers, Gary, which means that most of us have to take time off from our day jobs. That creates one time constraint. Another is that Nai'a (or any other vessel) can only carry provisions for a certain number of people for a certain number of days. A third is that Nai'a (or any other vessel) costs a helluva lot to charter. The result is that three weeks or so on-island, with anywhere from six to ten days in transit to and fro, is about all we can cobble together, however much we'd like to do more. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:46:38 EST Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: 2-6-S-45 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom MM Ric: I don't see the piece given as 2-6-S-45(? I think) as a part of a two part sextant micrometer drum, but here is an example of such. The Cassens and Plath Horizon Ultra sextant at http://www.landfallnavigation.com/-nhu01.html This ad has a good photo, but does not tout the special feature. Other than Cassens and Plath sextants, I have not seen this available today (but I'm not a sextant historian). I do not know when this feature was introduced, but you might be able to find out from them whether this or anything like it was in production prior to 1937. This feature allows removing the index "error" (or zero offset) from the sextant without adjusting the mirrors. This is a convenience, not a necessity, and does not impact the accuracy of the sight when accounted for in the sight reduction. I have a simpler modern sextant with a standard drum, as well as a late 1800's vernier sextant which to this day is very accurate (in my view the biggest advance since then has been modern optics). Neither have anything like 2-6-S-45 (?). My guess is that such a system would have been a harder sell when equipment had to be affordable, simple and robust. TOM MM ===================================================================