========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 07:59:39 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson I have researched the weather and oceanography during the time period on question (July 2-9), based upon all meteorological and oceanographic observations, mostly from the ships at sea. Major storms are readily apparent via the bridge logs of the ships, due to the period, wave height, and direction of swells and seas. These data can be used to determine whether any large and significant storm was within 2000+ miles or so. July is a calm month for the tropics, and is so indicated in the readings. There is no major swell, nor swell heights of much signficance. This rules out anything but a small, localized squall or minor organized storm. The Colorado ran closer to Gardner/Niku than all other ships, and there is nothing in their records to indicate anything but nice, benign, tropical weather. Almost all the swell was from the east, in concert with the predominant surface winds. If the plane was on the western side of Gardner, then it would have been in the lee of the swell, minimizing any damage by wave action. If the plane was not up on its gears, but on it's belly, all bets are off. Coral growth on islands is incredibly slow, perhaps 5 cm/100 years. Most accumulation is done by migration of sand due to major storm events. *************************************************************************** From Ric On its gear, standing in one meter of calm water, the airplane shouldn't move. But, of course, even on rare flat-calm days the water on the reef at high tide moves. I would expect some tendency to weathervane with the advancing or retreating tide under even the calmest of conditions. Add just a little bit of swell and I think you'd have a situation at high tide where the airplane would lift and shift a bit with passing waves. That could be very tough on the gear and quite scary to experience if you were inside. Bottom line: Rather than taking unusually rough seas to move the airplane, I think it would take unusually calm seas to leave it undisturbed. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:03:44 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Watch what you wear! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Jack Underwood Well, having been a lurker for a few years now, I finally have something totally useless to add. The fellow with the 5 planes theory was right that there is a Clinton, SC. I live twenty miles from it. But, he failed to get that correct, since it not a mountain town, but thirty miles from the nearest mountains. So who was supposed to have died in Clinton that was the real A.E? I don't think I have heard that one before. I reallly enjoy reading along with everyone, so thanks for all the hard work. If yall ever need any help from a public librarian in upper South Carolina, please let me know. Jack Underwood ************************************************************************ From Ric Thanks Jack. Irene Bolam (the "real AE" of the Joe Klaas book) died in New Jersey in 1983 so I guess Clinton, SC has a new candidate. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:10:17 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Watch what you wear! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Carol Dow Ric, I would like in on this one. I understand one of the Irene Bolam's (there were two) threatened Joe Klass with a lawsuit if he didn't stop accusing her of being Amelia Earhart. After that, Joe Klass stopped making accusations. Anyone want to comment on the foregoing? I have an old E-mail from Joe Klaas where he denied accusing Irene Bolam as being Amelia Earhart. I suspected a threatened lawsuit may have been behind this. Carol Dow *********************************************************************** From Ric Bolam and her husband sued the publisher, McGraw-Hill, who settled for an undisclosed amount rumored to be in the neighborhood of a million dolars. McGraw-Hill withdrew the book from publication. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:12:44 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris in Petaluma. Ca. Ric, I talked to my dad and without seeing it the only thing he thought of was a pendulum alarm device they used on autos in the forties. It was a bell shaped device mounted on the car and when it was the car was disturbed, the pendulum would make electrical contact with the bell which set off a siren or something else. Could it be a pendulum for a bell? Chris#2511 ******************************************************************** From Ric Auto theft has never been a big problem on Niku. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:19:33 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Knob MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ric, Unfortunately I don't think the quest for the identity of the knob and what it was attached to is going to be as "simple" as looking at patent drawings if there are any. Often the drawing is of a "working model" which may have little similarity to the final product as it comes out of production. Shapes, knobs etc. may change, but the patent still applies. It may be necessary to make some reasonable assumptions (ie, not a mattress spring, but perhaps a gun sight) and then look at the products of the company that owned the patent. Of course this all gets a lot simpler as more numbers come into focus. LTM, Jim Kellen 2331 ************************************************************************* From Ric The drawings do vary. Some are quite detailed while others are little more than schematics. In any case, the knob is somewhat complex in that it features a soft lead exterior and an internal steel collar or channel which probably served as an interface with whatever shaft the knob turned. I'm hop ing that the complexity of that structure will be specified in the patent. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:20:17 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Putting on the Dog MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Denise Ron says: "AE was on a world tour and I am sure that she brought a change of clothes along just in case she had she had to put on the dog at some special dinner or reception." Ron, A.E. requested that she were to be given no "special dinner or reception" on her world tour precisely because she didn't bring any special clothes with her. LTM (who loved a special dinner or two) Denise ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:42:56 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: "double carrier wave"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Gary LaPook Your explanation makes sense but raises the question of where did the other signal come from that was right on the Earhart frequency. And if one other station, that wasn't Earhart, could be transmitting on that frequency to cause the heterodyne then why not two or three or more that weren't Earhart. And why would she be using CW when she didn't know morse? The young whippersnappers don't know that radios did not used to have digital readout of frequencies and that you couldn't just tune in any frequency you wanted. Communication radios used to have only a few crystal controlled frequencies and that was all you had. To change to another frequency required having the radio taken apart by a radio technician who would install a new crystal and adjust the various tuning coils. Earhart apparently had crystals for 600 meters and for 3105, 6210 and 7500kc although it is not clear to me if she could transmit on 7500. 3105 and 6210 are harmonically related so that certain circuits in the radio could be used to do double duty and work on both of them and the antenna could be tuned to work both. Crystals weren't available for every conceivable frequency but were ground for only standard channels. It doesn't do you any good to have a radio that transmits on a frequency if nobody else had the same crystal, there would be nobody to talk to. (Any of you pilots remember using a "Superhomer"? Even into the '60s aircraft VHF radios only had a few crystal controlled transmit channels and all airports shared just these few frequencies.) 600 meters was then (and was until about one year ago) the standard world wide calling and emergency frequency and was used by every ship and coastal station in the world. I would bet that 3105, 6210, and 7500 were standard frequencies at that time used by many, many stations world wide. So it is not much of a mystery that people heard transmissions on 3105 and 6210 after the disappearance of NR16020. Also you have to remember that the people reporting hearing these signals were using radios without digital tuning readouts. They only had a tuning dial to use and these were not very accurate. That is the reason that communications radios used crystal control to ensure that each radio was transmitting on exactly the same frequency so that they could be heard by the other stations that were listening for them. This was the essence of setting up a radio "net." What this means is that very few casual listeners could tune their receiver to either 3105 or 6210 on the tuning dial and be certain to be tuned to that frequency. Therefor many people who reported hearing Earhart on those frequencies actually were tuned to some other frequency and, obviously, hearing some other station since Earhart couldn't transmit on any other frequency except maybe 7500. Remember how difficult it was to tune in an AM broadcast station using just a tuning dial, you couldn't be certain that you had the right frequency tuned in until you heard the station identification. Then you would look at the tuning dial and it almost never indicated the correct operating frequency of the broadcast station. And this was the difficulty trying to tune in stations that broadcast continuously so that you could tune back and forth until you heard a station and then you could wait for the station ID. I really like the image of Betty with her head in the radio cabinet tuning back and forth on the tuning dial and just happening to tune onto a frequency being used by Earhart at just the precise instant that Earhart just happened to be transmitting for a couple of seconds, not very likely. Even if the transmitter was "dirty" and put out some energy on harmonics of the primary frequency even in the '30s the amount of power on the harmonics would be much, much, less than the energy put out on the primary channel which was pretty low to begin with. It would be difficult to receive the full power signal on 3105 or 6210 in the US from near Howland let alone the much weaker signal on a harmonic. Look at the difficulty Lae and Itasca had hearing AE and the distances involved were only about 1,000 miles. It is almost 4,000 miles from Howland to California and about 6,000 miles to Florida where Betty had her head in the radio cabinet. So it is very unlikely that Betty heard one of the harmonics also just by chance. Bottom line, I don't give any credence to any of the post loss messages. 73 de KA9UHH P.S Multi engine pilots use the heterodyne or beat note to synchronize their propellers. gl ************************************************************************** From Ric Earhart could not transmit on 7500. She had crystals for 500, 3105, 6210. For a better understanding of the technical aspects of the possible post-loss receptions see Bob Brandenburg's "Could Betty Have Heard Earhart On A Harmonic" at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Bulletins/03_15_01Bulletin/03_15_01bull etin.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:02:30 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: "double carrier wave"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Gary LaPook Another point while we are talking about radios. The explanation that the reason that Itasca could no longer hear AE was due to her changing from 3105 to 6210kc and therefor the Itasca was in the "skip zone" at that time of day for that higher frequency doesn't hold water. High frequency (short wave) transmissions can be heard at great distances because of the signal bouncing off of the ionosphere (actually being refracted by it) and then returning to earth at a great distance from the transmitter. This is called "sky wave" propagation. Inherent in this type of propagation is a "skip zone" where the signal can't be heard even though the receiver is closer to the transmitter than the more distant receiver who can hear the transmission. In the skip zone the signal is passing high overhead, hundreds of miles high going to the ionosphere so it can't reach the antenna of the closer receiver. The location and extent of the skip zone is related to the frequency being used and the time of the day since the solar radiation being received during the day changes the height of the ionosphere, higher during the day and lower during the night. Usually lower frequencies (e.g. 3105 kc) provide longer range communications during the night and higher (6210) frequencies are better during the day for long range communications because the ionosphere refracts the different frequencies to different extents. But, close to the transmitter propagation is by "ground wave" and it doesn't matter which frequency is used since you are closer to the transmitter than the location of the skip zone. In fact, higher frequencies are a little bit better here since there is less attenuation of the higher frequencies by the atmosphere. The government publication, "Radio Navigational Aids" on page 4-34 has a table to use in deciding what frequency to use for communications based on the range to be achieved and on the time of day. It states: "When less than 200 NM, any frequency can be used." The accompanying table states that to achieve communication for distances between 200 and 750 NM the frequencies to use at 0400 local time at the receiving station is between 3,000 to 4,700 kc; at 0800 local, 3,000 to 6,700 kc; and at 1200 local 4,700 to 6,700 kc. At about 0800 Itasca time (closest to the loss of signal time) either 3105 or 6210 should have worked equally well even if NR16020 was more than 200 nm from Itasca and less that 750 NM away. Note, the Phoenix, Marshalls, and Gilberts are all within this range. 73 de KA9UHH gl ************************************************************************* From Ric As is usually the case with your pat dismissals, the issue has already been examined far more closely with better information and greater expertise. See Bob Brandenburg's "The Radio Riddle" (Chapter IV, Section B.6 of the Eight Edition of the Earhart Project Book). Don't have an Eighth Edition? Not a TIGHAR member? If you're serious about wanting to help solve this mystery maybe you should consider joining. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:13:40 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From DavyFlyer I still Question that it may have been a wheels up landing, Thus have your empty wing tanks closer to water for float. Radio, they used Battery power for the 2 or 3 days?? Also that would have gotten the bottom plane to the reef so as to tear that piece of metal off that you found. If I looked over the area before landing and knew that it was a one stop ditch, and not sure of the conditions, I would go for wheels up since they are somewhat exposed like the old B17. DavyFlyer *********************************************************************** From Ric No way the batteries would last that long unrecharged. That's not me talking. That's Lockheed in 1937. The piece of metal we found was blown outward, not crushed inward. Would you land gear up if you thought there was a good chance you could land safely wheels down? I once investigated an accident where a student pilot had had an engine failure in a Cessna 150 while on the downwind leg of his landing approach. He had always heard that if you have to make a forced landing you should try to put the airplane two trees so that the wings will take the shock. So instead of just turning and landing on the runway he landed in the orchard straight ahead. He did a beautiful job and put the airplane right between two big apple trees. Sheared the wings off and rolled to a stop unharmed, very proud of himself. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:24:38 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D Some comments from Christian D: > e.. at high-tide, the relatively shallow water on the reef flat would have > allowed a significant portion of the Electra to be above water revealing its > distinctive outline shape. (Note: since Tighar has visited Niku many times > and has targeted the most probable zone on the reef flat for a safe landing, > has someone determined the depth of water there at high tide and estimated > if > the Electra would have been totally submerged, or above water. Does 60+ > years of coral growth change the depth dimensions, such that it is now > shallower? Maybe I missed it in previous expedition reports?) Historical sea level records in the area indicate the average level varies up to a foot or so every few years... I'm not sure if it is El Nino related or what. Unfortunately there is almost no data going back to 1937, for us to compare with. If I remember correctly, during the week following AE's disappearance, the moon was such that the general trend in the tides was for the high tide to get higher every day. The plane main gear is rather tall, but I understand the tail end of the fuselage is quite low, so this is critical: only a little higher high tide would start swinging the tail end of the fuselage, and then the carcass would grind itself rather very quickly. I feel it is likely there was a critical water level/wave height combination, above which destruction would snowball. The main gears are quite sturdy, but not designed for lateral efforts: Once the waves action pushes the fuselage sideways I would expect the legs to collapse, which of course leads to the fuselage becoming fully immersed, hard to see, and grinding away on the coral... Wave action and "bad weather" are not the same: a few years back I was on Palmyra, (in the same region) and we could all hear lots of pounding surf on the distant south shores When we went for a hike a little later we were amazed at the destruction on the low lying shores. With the same results that Tighar once witnessed on Niku, like veggies and sand blonwn inland a few hundred feet. The island keeper who had been there for years, had never seen anything remotely like it. All along the weather had been beautiful. Some VERY distant storm had sent several days of high swells our way. May be even only barely noticeable on a ship at sea... There is lots of likely possibilities. > *************************************************************************** > > It would seem, therefore, that the Electra remained more or less intact - or > if broken up, the pieces did not move shoreward - until the 1950s. > Ric, could you explain that idea that stuff can get blown back up from the outside face of the reef, and back on the top flat? Do I understand correctly there is a few boulders on reef flat at Niku? Massive enough to be somewhat permanent? How big? I can't remember seeing such things anywhere else. How does the whole thing work? I understand sand, shells, coral rubble following that path, but BIG stuff? Christian D ******************************************************************* From Ric On the reef flat just to the south of the entrance to the main passage there are probably a couple dozen blocks of coral up on the flat a good 50 yards from the present reef edge. Some of them are as big as a good-sized garden shed and must weigh several tons. They are clearly blocks of coral that were broken off the reef edge and hurled up onto the flat long ago. It's hard to tell from the earliest photos but we don't see any appreciable change in their size or distributon since 1938. There are a few more blocks up near the northwest tip. I can't imagine the kind of force it would take to do that but I'm sure as hell glad I wasn't there to see it. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:27:35 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: FLOAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From RC Mike: There have indeed been cases where a ship had to use gunfire to sink a floating fuselage acct. it was a hazard to nav. One case I recall was in the pacific & it was a Connie .. it floated for days. A destroyer fired away, but not using explosive shells, took a number of rounds to finally punch a hole below the water line. The first ditching of a four engine B-24 [that looked like a flying boat] was in a river It was more than half sunk before its forward motion ceased. It made a beautiful landing, but the bottom impact was in the area of the bomb bay doors which caved in instantly, opening up half of its bottom area. In the early '50's, a Convair 340 ran out of fuel and ditched in the English Channel less than a mile from shore. The pax waited on the wings and tail assembly for the rescue boats. The two pilots were cited for escaping from the cockpit windows and swiming to shore [to get help they said]. RC ******************************************************************* From Ric And of course there was the Provincetown-Boston Airlines Lockheed 10E that ditched just offshore Cape Cod in 1967. All the passengers and crew got out okay before the airplane sank after eight minutes. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:28:14 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Amelia Earhart Festival MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King Carol -- Please do pass on any info you can about the Atchison festival. I could at least send a copy or two of "Shoes" to have kicking around. Tom King ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:29:06 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Disappearing artefacts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King > I don't > think we noted any behavior like that, did we Tom? > No, except that they'll walk off with just about anything that's not nailed down that might be edible. I was looking for evidence that they were attracted to shiny things, and saw none. I also haven't seen anything about it in the biological literature, which is also pretty dismissive about the business of tearing coconuts upen. Can you give us a citation to the article, Angus? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 09:30:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FROM DAVE IN HOUSTON: Ric: As to why they might use lead in the knob. One of the cheaper metals, very easy to form and also, you can put a steel rod in it easily. I have seen knobs that I took off things that were a thin veneer or brass with what looked like a chalklike material inside that was hard enough to give the outer brass its shape and relative strength. In making knobs, sometimes they are made for durability, sometimes for aesthetics (glass door knobs), sometimes for economy. LTM, David Bush ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 10:40:00 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Knob Possibility MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig in Kingston Hi Ric: I've got a possibility on the knob, but please take a look at and see what you think. It's not a perfect match, but it's the closest thing I've seen in the 150 patent numbers I've been through so far. It's from an October 25, 1932 patent for a 'Electric Condenser' - 1,884,229 and used again on another patent in 1978 - 4,104,595. The description of the item is as follows: "The object of my invention is to provide an electric condenser especially adapted to be used in connection with radio circuits of simple, durable and inexpensive construction having a comparitively large capacity and a comparatively small external electro-static field "...an electric condenser of the type employing a rotatively mounted knob or dial for varying the capacity of the condenser..." Craig in Kingston ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Craig. That's the best one I've seen so far but it's still "no cigar". The only real similarity is that the device has a knob. The shape of the knob is different and there is no mention of any of the distinctive features (lead compostion, steel collar). The biggest discrepancy, however, is that it's really hard to make that third figure an "8". ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 10:41:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From David Ric, Just a passing thought here---do you know if Amelia knew how to swim at all? david *************************************************************************** From Ric No, I don't. I've seen photos of her in a bathing suit at a beach but that doesn't mean anything. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 10:42:58 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: coral blocks MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dan Postellon There are historical records of coral blocks being washed up and deposited on the beach in Hawaii, including one charming story of blocks being washed up just as a church was being built. Of course, after the church was finished, built almost entirely of the coral blocks, a storm came up and washed away the remaining debris. I suspect that for any atoll, you will find the reef edge relatively permanent, while the land above the water level moves around quite a bit. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 10:52:14 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: New knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ric, We have another digit. Jeff Glickman reports that the fourth figure is probably a "4". If it's not a "4" the next most likely candidate is a "1". That gives us four out of seven. There is a fairly high probability that the patent number on the knob is 1,894,???. That means that the patent was awarded sometime in the two week period between January 10-24, 1933. Only 999 possibilities. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:41:29 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, I mentioned once before that I personally watched a 40 foot sailboat torn to pieces in Mexico over the span of one week in very mild wave action two years ago. It wouldn't take storm conditions to tear the Electra apart in very short order. I have always believed that she landed gear up but against Mother Nature, that little Electra didn't have a chance to survive on the reef for very long. I also beleive that Betty did, in fact, hear post lost messages from AE--too many points in her recollections that could not be coincidental. LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:44:42 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marty Moleski > From Ric > ... I'm hoping that the complexity of that structure > will be specified in the patent. My bet is that the patent is not about the knob but about the mechanism to which it was attached. On this hypothesis, the knob was just a handy place to record the patent number. From glancing at the patent descriptions the other night, it seems to me that materials are rarely, if ever, described in the patent. I won't kill or die for this opinion. :o) Marty #2359 **************************************************** From Ric I would expect the materials would be mentioned only if they were an essential part of the patent. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:47:49 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Disappearing artefacts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Murray Tom, Can you give us a citation to the > article, Angus? Go to http://www.animalfact.com/article1018.html and http://www.szgdocent.org/ff/f-robcrb.htm I have to admit that the sources are not very authoritative but the author(s) do seem to know quite a bit about the crabs so there may be something in what they says re their acquisitive tendencies. Because of the use of similar words and expressions in the articles I suspect that one may plagiarise the other. Regards Angus. ********************************************* From Ric Sometimes is seems like there is almost as much mythology about Birgus latro as there is about Amelia Earhart. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:52:12 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Chris in Petaluma, > Auto theft has never been a big problem on Niku. Good answer. I looked at the photo of the knob and it looks like a large flat washer. Every time I hear "knob" I think of a bulbous shape, not a flat washer. Do signal bells have pendulums that look like that? Chris#2511 ****************************************************** From Ric I think you mean a clapper. Lead would not be a good metal to use in that application. We'll put a new knob report up on the website ASAP which will include a side view. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:53:36 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FLOAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Herman De Wulf (#2406) For good measure I'd like to add that there were two American International Airways Boeing 314 NC-18612 and NC-18601 (ex-Pan American "Capetown Clipper" and "Honolulu Clipper") which made emergency landings at sea following engine trouble, the first in the Atlantic on 10/14/45 and the latter in the Atlantic on 6/5/46. Being flying boats they floated very well. As engine repairs at sea were impossible, both were eventually sunk by gun fire by the USCG because they had become a hazard to shipping. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:20:16 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Amelia in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Marjorie A friend sent this CNN connection which summarizes the theories (including TIGHAR). It includes something on Irene Bolam I hadn't heard -- that she withdrew her suit when required to give fingerprints? Title: CNN.com - Searching for Amelia - June 30, 2002 http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/06/30/search.earhart.ap/index.html Marjorie in Montana ******************************************************************* From Ric The story on the CNN site is an AP story put together by a not-so-sharp reporter in Hawaii. The focus on the old Irene Bolam myth is little short of bizarre. It is, I believe, true that Mrs. Bolam never consented to giving Gervais and Klaas her fingerprints but that's the first I've heard that she turned down a $2 million dollar settlement. My understanding is that the publisher, McGraw-Hill, did settle with the Bolams and took the book off the market. The AP story credits the $2 million dollar tale to Gervais. If somebody cares enough about this I suppose a call to the McGraw-Hill legal department could set the record straight. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:23:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: "double carrier wave"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ron Gary, The girl in Florida didn't just happen to listen in on the conversation, she just happen to find it. Your right about the tuners not being very precise, but if you were just turning the knob on the tuner not looking at what was on that dial, you could still get the "skip wave" from the transmission. If the atmospherics that day were just right you could not be ten miles away from AE's transmitter and not be able to hear anything but a carrier wave. someone thousands of miles away would be getting 10s on the meter. Before modern comunications radio was a completely different animal. Ron *********************************************************** From Ric I say again, this subject has been dealt with in detail. Gary understands it better than Ron and Bob Brandenburg understnads it better than Gary. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:28:58 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob Possibility MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From Mike Z. Ric said: "The only real similarity is that the device has a knob. The shape of the knob is different and there is no mention of any of the distinctive features (lead compostion, steel collar)." How much should we get hung up on matching the knob exactly to a patent drawing? From what little I know about getting patents, I believe you're protecting a general idea not an exact design as illustrated in the patent. A patented mechanistic or electronic device may be produced with any number of different knobs designs while the underlying device itself is protected (and thus labeled with) the same patent. The only way we'd expect an exact match between the knob and the drawing is if the knob design itself was patented (e.g., something like "Adjustment knob of cast lead with a wear-resistant steel insert"?). It seems to me that any invention that has a knob-controlled component -even if the knob itself is not shown in the drawing -is a possibility, as long as the numbers match. All I know about patents was from a little research I did in high school. Anyone more knowledgeable want to comment? T-minus 999 and counting ... --Mike Z. from Massachusetts. ********************************************************************* From Ric I agree that we may not get an accurate picture of our knob in a patent drawing. As you say, the patented device or mechanism must have a knob and the patent number will have to match the one on the artifact within a reasonable margin of interpretation. I think we'll know it when we see it. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:54:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: New knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig Hi Ric: I did some more searching today, and didn't come up with much of anything. Some cool things like Aircraft Gyroscope, several Airplane Propellor's, a Slide Rule, a Sextant Adjustment Knob (just kidding), and several other things, but nothing that is in any way obvious to me. I'm also starting to wonder about the 5th digit is a 2 (assuming 1,894 is correct). I searched for everything as follows with a 2, but got nothing: 1,894,2xx 1,891,2xx Also seached were: 1,894,0xx 1,894,[3,6,8,9][2,3,8,9][0,3,8,9] I'll keep trying, Craig in Kingston ************************************************************* From Ric We have an analysis of the fifth digit from Jeff Glickman. This is a tough one but Jeff feels that it is probably a "3". The most likely first alternate is a two "2". The most likely second alternate is an eight "8". That gives us 1,894,3?? and narrows the field to 99 possibilites (if we're right so far). LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:56:25 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Watch what you wear!/Bolam MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Cam Warren Ric - I think if you'll check more closely, you'll find that McGraw-Hill never paid a cent to Irene Bolam. Try Joe Gervais for the straight story. Cam Warren ********************************************************************** From Ric If I want the straight story Joe Gervais is about the last person on earth I'd go to. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:02:00 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From DavyFlyer Ric, Thanks on Question, good point on landing. Yes, After flying with Navy P5Ms over islands and seeing how hard it is to judge the depth of water over some possible rocky flat at a fly by speed, I would still go for wheels up to cut chances of ground loop, I would take the chance of a belly slide on water. Coarse EA Wasn't flying flying boats. Ha Thanks and keep up the good work. DavyFlyer ************************************************************** From Ric She also wasn't flying a government-owned airplane. Military pilots will seldom try to preserve the airplane if it appears safer to "spend" the airplane to save their butt. Civilian pilots who own their own uninsured airplanes will take incredibly stupid chances to save the airplane. I've seen it a hundred times. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:09:21 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef-Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom Riggs From Tom Riggs Ok then...since nobody really knows what happened, there are alot of possibilities. How about this scenario (the Tighar theory with a twist.....but still big-time speculation): The Electra never landed on the reef flat at all. Approaching Gardner Island, and seeing the reef flat come into view, AE aimed the Electra for the most probable landing area. Unfortunately, the engines gasped their last fuel and the Electra was suddenly dead-stick. AE couldn't quite stretch the glide long enough to make it onto the reef flat, and crashed a wee-bit short into the waves and surf at the reef edge. The Electra remained floating long enough for AE & FN to make their exit and swim the short distance to shallow water. Pros: a.. explains why 7 days later, Lt. Lambrecht didn't see anything during his fly-over (ie. Electra was obscured in the wave action at reef edge) b.. explains why 15 years later, airplane wreckage was present to be observed by native islanders c.. explains why Gallegher found bones of castaways, turtle/bird remains, sextant box, etc. d.. explains why Tighar has found their numerous artifacts e.. anything else I haven't thought of Cons: a.. does not support theory for post-loss radio distress transmissions (ie. radio was under water) b.. anything else I haven't thought of TR #2427 *********************************************************************** From Ric I think you accurately assessed the pros and cons. The biggest problem I have with the hypothesis is that it requires a specific event (fuel starvation) at a specific point in time and space (close enough to be near but not close enough to reach the island). It's a little bit like Elgen Long's theory about the engines quitting immediately after the 08:43 message. It could have happened but it's a huge requirement to put on a theory. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:12:14 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: "double carrier wave"? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Gary LaPook > For a better understanding of the technical aspects of the possible post-loss > receptions see Bob Brandenburg's "Could Betty Have Heard Earhart On A > Harmonic" at > http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Bulletins/03_15_01Bulletin/03_15_01bull > > etin.html That's a great analysis, thanks Ric. ********************************************************* From Ric You are most welcome. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:38:13 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From PBS CNN reports: "Joe Gervais' research convinced him Earhart survived, was repatriated and returned secretly to the United States where she lived in New Jersey..." To some of us, "Living in New Jersey" sounds like an oxymoron... PBS *************************************************************** From Peppy Was there ever a picture of Irene Bolam to compare with of Amelia from the TIGHAR reports???? peppy3000 **************************************************************** From Ric No. We actually think Nancy Reagan is a better possibility. Think about it. ***************************************************************** From Carol Dow Ric. I think it warrants a phone call to McGraw Hill, but the question is what would they be willing to say? Joe Klaas is telling me they are still selling his book. It's a mess. Carol Dow ************************************************************* From Ric I'll look into the Irene Bolam controversy as soon as we've finished investigating the alien abduction hypothesis. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:40:24 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: New knob update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, Will the photo of the patent number that is being studied ever be put up on our website? I think it would be very interesting to see what Jeff Glickman is actually looking at so we could form our own opinions. (and God knows the forumites will) LTM Mike Haddock #2438 **************************************************** From Ric Yes, we'll put the analytical photos up on the website for everyone to second guess. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:42:01 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Knob Source MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ron Bright Ric, I may have missed it while on vacation, but with all of the effort to identify the knob, has anyone speculated the source of the knob; for instance, some item that AE or FN would take from the Electra? Was there any device,etc., that this knob could be consistant with? Or is the knob independent of the equipment aboard the aircraft and not related to an Earhart artifact? Ron ********************************************************************** From Ric Hell, I dunno. It was found at the Seven Site. It has an American patent number on it. The patent was awarded after the Norwich City went aground so it didn't come from the shipwreck. It's distinctively unlike anything else we've found at the site. It has been noted that aeronautical navigation instruments have adjustment knobs not unlike this in general size and feel but there could be lots of other exlpanations. That's all we know at present. Once we have the patent pinned down we'll know what we have and then we'll see if we can figure out how it got there. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:49:00 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Carol Dow Ric, Dave Flyer brought up a really good point. Was Earhart's airplane insured? Can we find out? Carol Dow *********************************************************** From Ric There may have been some third party liability coverage required for some portion of the flight but I've never heard of it if there was. As for physical damage (known and "hull") insurance (like "collison" coverage on a car) I'm quite certain there was none. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:56:38 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1,894,3xx MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Craig Hi Ric: Not looking good for 1,894,3xx, unless it's from a Pressure Gauge - 1,894,366, but I'm doubtful. Craig in Kingston 1,894,3xx ---------------------------------------- 1,894,300 pocket lighter 1,894,301 nitrate processing 1,894,302 lamp shade 1,894,303 slide buckle 1,894,304 slide buckle (duplicate?) 1,894,305 cotton harvester 1,894,306 rake 1,894,307 rope measuring device 1,894,308 speedometer 1,894,309 joint 1,894,310 window shelp 1,894,311 load carrying vechicle 1,894,312 power mover 1,894,313 bobbin winding machine (sewing) 1,894,314 valve 1,894,315 mail pouch catcher 1,894,316 loom mechanism 1,894,317 tape serving machine (desk) 1,894,318 variable speed transmission 1,894,319 knitting method 1,894,320 utility trailer 1,894,321 brake band method 1,894,322 distorting elimination means 1,894,323 oil purfying method 1,894,324 mold forming device 1,894,325 fire extinguisher (huge) 1,894,326 unloading aparatus 1,894,327 fixed clamps 1,894,328 resistance tester 1,894,329 cable cutter 1,894,330 chemical manufacture 1,894,331 chemical processing 1,894,332 sanitary milk pail 1,894,333 toy projectile/parachute 1,894,334 blackboard desk 1,894,335 phantom telephone circuit 1,894,336 loom 1,894,337 hat box 1,894,338 high-voltage line connection 1,894,339 electric switch (large) 1,894,340 insulator pin (electrical) 1,894,341 conduit protector 1,894,342 barber pole 1,894,343 vacuum cleaner 1,894,344 floatation seperation 1,894,345 tea bag making method 1,894,346 tea bag making method 2 1,894,347 tire retread device 1,894,348 heating device 1,894,349 vaporizer 1,894,350 typewriter 1,894,351 stress equilazer 1,894,352 chemical processing 1,894,353 rotary engine 1,894,354 carburator 1,894,355 oil treating method 1,894,356 vehicle body construction 1,894,357 wind electric plant 1,894,358 drill and hole cleaner 1,894,359 refrigeration device 1,894,360 vapor regulator 1,894,361 suction cleaner/agitator 1,894,362 combination bed/furnace 1,894,363 car coupler/controller 1,894,364 hand fertilizer distributer 1,894,365 chemical compound 1,894,366 pressure gauge (w/knob) 1,894,367 automatic control device 1,894,368 ceramic mold method 1,894,369 viscometer 1,894,370 wheel alignment gauge 1,894,371 acidproof tank 1,894,372 pressure indicator valve 1,894,373 sound recording system 1,894,374 varnish 1,894,375 product manufacture 1,894,376 loud speaker/horn 1,894,377 food preparation 1,894,378 outboard motor starter 1,894,379 tape serving device 1,894,380 panel unit sign 1,894,381 valve tag 1,894,382 cam grinding machine 1,894,383 auto body construction 1,894,384 taxi flag 1,894,385 spring damping car truck 1,894,386 spring damping truck 1,894,387 child's toilet seat 1,894,388 pipe joiner 1,894,389 rope end finisher 1,894,390 oil well joints 1,894,391 desuperheater 1,894,392 concrete floor gauge 1,894,393 turbine pump 1,894,394 shingle machine 1,894,395 edging device 1,894,396 cutter package 1,894,397 variable speed transmission 1,894,398 rock drill 1,894,399 sewing machine ****************************************************** From Ric Lord 'o Mercy, you've been busy. Looks like one or more of the alternates is correct. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 11:55:49 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Floats MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From S. Wesley Smith Just curious from an historical perspective; did Ms Earhart ever consider a float plane for all or part of the last flight? Regards, S. Wesley Smith ******************************************************************* From Ric According to May Lovell's book (The Sound of Wings), Earhart and Putnam at first considered the new Lockheed 12 (a smaller version of the 10 that came out in 1936) with the addition of floats. Of course, a float plane would present some of the same problems as a land plane in reverse over the vast expanse of Africa. Amphibious floats (with retractable wheels) would be way too heavy. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:24:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Knob Possibility MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson Once we can identify the appropriate patent number, then the manufacturer (s) should be easily found, and then an historical investigation as to what equipment carried the patented item should give us a better listing of what those pieces of equipment may be. ****************************************************************** From Ric I hope it will be that easy, but I suspect that it will be more of a chicken-or-the-egg process. We're not going to get a rock solid read on what the number is. We'll get a number of possibilities. We'll then need to investigate the most promising candidates. To get a confirmed identification we'll eventually have to have a drawing, photo or actual object of known identity that has a knob exactly like Artifact 2-6-S-45. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:13:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1,894,3xx MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Lawrence Just a thought for some of the gun and rifle experts out there. I remember seeing little adjusting knobs on the rear sight of older type rifles. I can't recall at the moment, and I'm too lazy to look itup, but did you find any spent shells at the 7-site? **************************************** From Ric Yes. As we've said, we recovered 20 shell casings from M1 carbine ammunition and three .22 caliber shell casings. The Coasties had M1 carbines , Springfield rifles, and .45 automatics. ****************************************** From Kerry Tiller > From Craig > > 1,894,309 joint Somebody patented a Joint? Must be the rolling technique. LTM (who never inhaled) Kerry Tiller (sorry, Ric) ******************************************************* From Angus Murray Ric, What do we know about the knob? It appears to have an early thirties American patent number on it, from its construction it is more likely an adjustment rather than securing knob, it was found in close proximity to two artefacts which were probably homemade securing clips of American origin and it, like them, is damaged. A USCG origin would certainly fit. The time frame of manufacture is just about feasible bearing in mind the long lead time of military equipment, the mode of use is appropriate to equipment from the Loran station or telescopic rifle sights, the country of origin is appropriate and other, probably deliberately damaged items (from target practice), have been found at the site of certain USCG origin. The single thing that ties most of the small artefacts, which were found at the seven site, together, is target practice. The items were mostly things which would break well; vacuum tubes, plates, glassware, radio parts, a bulb. In conjunction we have shell casings. Another possibility is that it is Earhart related. We think a sextant box was found at this site, AE & FN were of American nationality, and it is quite possible that even something as exotic and expensive as a sextant could have been sacrificed to expediency when circumstances became desperate. The "securing clips" would tie in with a boxed instrument of some sort. Against this, no other Earhart related items have been found recently at the site as far as is known, the knob is of a construction less likely to have been used on a sextant, there were few, if any, American sextants (which might bear American patent numbers) available in the early thirties of a quality which FN would have been likely to use and the clips were certainly amateur made. I think if one had to bet, the USCG would be the most likely source, assuming the knob did not originate with the Bushnell survey or perhaps the water distillation unit which appears to have been used near the site. Gallagher's party, Bevington and Gilbertese seem less likely and NC not possible assuming the numbers we have are correct. I note that one possible patent number is for a pressure cooker. A weighted (lead) knob is just the sort of thing one might use to control the needle valve on such a device. The patent drawing seems to show a spring loaded valve however. 1894308 shows a couple of knobs (speedo) and 1891308 shows a knob on a pinking machine. Not much chance of these being the knob in question though. Regards Angus *********************************************** From Bill Leary > I agree that we may not get an accurate picture > of our knob in a patent drawing. As you say, the > patented device or mechanism must have a knob Maybe not. I helped with the submission of several patents and, unless the patent is for the knob itself, there's no need for it to appear in the drawings. All that has to be there is some kind of indication of an adjustment. It might illustrate a screw-and-nut type of adjustment, and they changed their mind about that before manufacture. Or if the patent focus is elsewhere might not even be that specific. If the patent for the primary gadget, and this knob were on, say, the leveling platform under it there might be nothing in the patent but an indication that the gadget has to be leveled before use. > and the patent number will have to match the one on > the artifact within a reasonable margin of interpretation. > > I think we'll know it when we see it. I hope so, but I'd encourage being flexible in what you see. If we're explicitly looking for a knob that looks like this one, we may miss it. - Bill #2229 ******************************************************* From Ric Agreed. I'd suggest that we need to initially consider anything that meets three basic criteria: 1. The patent number must be within the possibilities of the numbers as interpreted by Photek. 2. The patent must have some reasonable provision for a knob of some sort. 3. The patented object must be something that might reasonably be at the site given the various known and theorized activities that occurred there. That covers a lot of ground but it does exclude things like a sanitary milk pail, a toy projectile/parachute, and a blackboard desk. ****************************************************** From Michel A couple folks have touched on this before, but this patent no. may not have much to do with "The Knob"; here's a story by way of illustration - I license veterinary vaccines for a living. (Look, someone has to do it.) One of my companies submits a bunch of label revisions, with a common feature being addition of 2 patent numbers prominently displayed on the front of the label. The logical assumption is it's a patented product, right? And hey, sure looks impressive that way, that company must have some patented technology making theirs the best product out there. But wait a minute, I licensed this stuff, I know what's in the bottle, and I know it's nothing unique or different, so I look up those patent numbers and guess what... one's for the fancy 'tear off' style label, the other's for the glue that holds it to the vial. Not much to do with vaccine products there Possible moral(s) for the subject at hand: don't dismiss a patent description because it doesn't describe The Knob, it may be for something else entirely, or for the method used to produce The Knob, the materials it's made of, the way it was used or attached to whatever, who knows. Certainly The Knob is involved in some way, but maybe in some minor, quirky fashion that's not at all obvious. What if the patent was for a method of mass-producing knob-like fasteners for vacuum cleaners that was licensed to someone else who made adjustment controls for ... um... aircraft radios using the process. Sure will be fun to figure out no matter what it is though... Michel ****************************************************** From Craig Hi Ric: Not looking good for 1,894,8xx either. The only thing of possible interest in this one was Mathematical Instrument - 1,894,886. It has knobs per se, but not like ours. Craig in Kingston ****************************************************** From Ric Well...given the cautions mentioned above...it does have a "knurled binding nut" but I think we'd be pushing it to say that something like this might be carried by a field survey crew on a tropical island, or even by a navigator on a world flight. ********************************************** From Craig Hi Ric: For those keeping score at home (or those wanting to help out) - as per Jeff's results, we have now searched: 1,891,2xx 1,894,2xx 1,894,3xx 1,894,8xx I'm starting 1,891,3xx right now. By the way, how sure was Jeff on the 9 at #3? I think I missed that email. Craig ********************************* From Ric That's Symbol #14 in the grand scheme. Here's what Jeff said: <> *************************************** From Alan Come on guys. Don't get carried away by what each patent says it is for. Many parts of devices were originally designed for some other use. If you decide to build some piece of equipment first you will use existing parts where ever you can. No one is going to invent all new knobs if they can use existing ones. Alan #2329 ******************************************************************** From Ric You're suggesting that Amalgamated Widget, Inc. obtains a patent for an adjustable widget and stamps the patent number into the knobs used on the adjustment shaft. Later they decide to produce a doohickey (as distinct from a widget) which also happens to require a knob. Having a bunch of knobs lying arond that were made for the adjustable widget (never a big seller) they decide to use the knobs on the totally unrelated doohickey? Can you cite an example of such a thing happening? ************************************************** From Alan Don't over look the possibility this "knob" may have been a temporary substitute for a broken or otherwise missing knob on some device. That means we now need to consider it might have been not just on something it was meant for but also on something it conceiveably might fit on as a temporary replacement. An example might be that a knob on some device Noonan had or maybe an aircraft radio broke at some point on the trip and a substitute part was scrounged as a replacement. So the additional question should be "On what device connected with the flight could this artifact fit?" Alan, "accidentally" muddying up the waters. #2329 ************************************************************* From Ric Yes, it's theoretically possible that Noonan lost the adjutment knob from his bubble octant and replaced with a knob from a pressure cooker that happened to fit. I'll let you argue that one with Joe Klaas. ************************************************************ From Mike in Gulf shores Hi Ric, I was looking at this page on cigarette lighters after a search on Google for patent numbers in our range when I got the latest Forum letter showing a 3 as the latest number. I know a lighter striker wheel made of lead will not spark a flint but it looks like the artifact. The knurled edges and the steel insert fit but it would have to have been sheathed in steel to spark. My computer has some problems and will not display the patent info on the USPTO site. Anyway it's a thought. http://www.vintagevault.com/aussiepete3.html "#0021 ~ BEATTIE JET (AUSTRALIAN MODEL) A Melbourne company in the 1950's decided to make the popular American Beattie Jet in Australia, under licence. Printed on the base is: BEATTIE JET LIGHTER made in Aust. by ABC Rep.Eng. Co. Pty. Ltd. Melb. #0021 ~ BEATTIE JET (AUSTRALIAN MODEL) A Melbourne company in the 1950's decided to make the popular American Beattie Jet in Australia, under licence. Printed on the base is: BEATTIE JET LIGHTER made in Aust. by ABC Rep.Eng. Co. Pty. Ltd. Melb. U.S. Pat. 1 894 300 Other Pat. PendOther Pat. Pend" Mike in Gulf Shores ****************************************************** From Ric I took a look at it. No way. *************************************************** From Craig Hi Ric: 1,891,3xx is done. Several have knobs (annotated below), but nothing jumps out. The most notable being a Gun Sight - 1,891,395. Of Jeff's predictions, the only thing left to check is 1,891,8xx. Craig 1,891,3xx ---------------------------------------- 1,891,300 elevator 1,891,301 truck body 1,891,302 rotary pump 1,891,303 barbers comb 1,891,304 tubular metal alloy manufacture 1,891,305 refrigeration aparatus 1,891,306 worm water motor 1,891,307 feeding device 1,891,308 seaming machine 1,891,309 skimming aircraft landing sail 1,891,310 necktie holder 1,891,311 furnace feeding device 1,891,312 hydraulic dump truck hoist 1,891,313 liquid tap device 1,891,314 welding flame device (w/knob) 1,891,315 dispensing device 1,891,316 hatch frame production method 1,891,317 condensation process 1,891,318 loom shuttle 1,891,319 stoker control 1,891,320 head for lens surfacing machine 1,891,321 internal combustion engine 1,891,322 internal combustion engine 1,891,323 celophane printing method 1,891,324 pocket toothbrush 1,891,325 sprayer device (w/knob) 1,891,326 internal combustion motor 1,891,327 air conditioner 1,891,328 oil well drilling aparatus 1,891,329 oil well drilling brake 1,891,330 oil well drilling signal 1,891,331 rod cleaner/polisher 1,891,332 rontgen diagram 1,891,333 acetone production 1,891,334 hat shipping box 1,891,335 auto lube annunciator 1,891,336 wheel 1,891,337 cellulose production 1,891,338 pipe bending machine 1,891,339 washing machine 1,891,340 shock absorbers 1,891,341 electric light attachment set 1,891,342 folding crate 1,891,343 stranding 1,891,344 hat press 1,891,345 electrical condenser 1,891,346 long span building arch construction 1,891,347 excercising aparatus 1,891,348 microscope (w/many knobs) 1,891,349 rail train telephone connector 1,891,350 elevator control 1,891,351 excavator dipper switch 1,891,352 shovel type excavator 1,891,353 ad folder 1,891,354 airplane 1,891,355 fullverizing mill rollers 1,891,356 milling machine 1,891,357 refrigeration 1,891,358 lock nut 1,891,359 door operating mechanism 1,891,360 window cleaning device 1,891,361 perfume dispenser (w/knob-like parts) 1,891,362 duplex telephone aparatus 1,891,363 egg yolk tanning 1,891,364 valve seat gauge 1,891,365 valve seat gauge 1 1,891,366 platen roller (typewriter) 1,891,367 paper box making machine 1,891,368 slicing machine (w/knob) 1,891,369 carrier for electromagnetic pickup 1,891,370 glassware manufacture 1,891,371 glassware manufacture aparatus 1,891,372 sheetglass production 1,891,373 glass forming method 1,891,374 valve 1,891,375 card index 1,891,376 sheet shifter - index binder 1,891,377 index - for binder 1,891,378 index tray 1,891,379 slide support - index tray 1,891,380 portable index 1,891,381 index cabinet 1,891,382 index cabinet 1,891,383 liquid cofee extract 1,891,384 aircraft propeller 1,891,385 gull wing airplane 1,891,386 sound reproduction aparatus 1,891,387 film phonograph 1,891,388 recording of sound 1,891,389 reproduction of sound 1,891,390 car ventalation system 1,891,391 creasing press 1,891,392 engine pump 1,891,393 collapsable tea wagon 1,891,394 pull-out compartment 1,891,395 gun sight 1,891,396 filter press 1,891,397 fire control of anti-aircraft guns 1,891,398 film printer 1,891,399 motor vehicle suspension system **************************************************************** From Ric That gun sight is for an artillery piece. This is very interesting. At the very least we're seeing that it is not the case that there are numerous possibilities. Like zilch so far. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:19:27 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Don Jordan "CNN reports: "Joe Gervais' research convinced him Earhart survived, was repatriated and returned secretly to the United States where she lived in New Jersey..." Just for the record, I'll put in what I know about this Irene Bolam thing. I researched it somewhat some time back. This is what I was told. I didn't find this out myself, so if some of it is not quite right I apologize. However, I did read the book! The book by Joe Klaas and Joe Gervais was pulled from the shelves shortly after publication. Irene Bolam did sued them. To my knowledge there was no settlement, the book was not available for sale anywhere until just recently. I think it was not to be reprinted until some time after Irene's death. I think it was reprinted last year and offered for sale. It was interesting reading 30 years ago, but the book is now very outdated. It's so absurd that it's a joke. Just think about it for a minute. Amelia gave up her identity, her husband and all her friends to become Irene Bolam. She was so good at it that her mother and sister did not recognize her. Not even the press recognized her. But Joe Gervais did, and Joe Klaas wrote the story. The funny thing is that everybody else and his brother knew about it. The list is endless of those who kept the secret. The gardner, the maid, the president of some airlines, the head of some mental hospital, Jackie Cochran, some Cardinal, some guy at Weihsien Internment camp who got her out . . .and on and on and on. It's just my opinion, but I think this Irene Bolam stuff is about as far off the deep end as one can get. And the author of that book should be ashamed to re introduce it. Don Jordan Merced, CA ************************************************ From Alan Caldwell Ric, there WERE published pictures (maybe just one) of Mrs. Bolam. I saw no resemblance in her facial structure to that of AE. Although I didn't bring up the subject with AE's sister, Muriel did while verbally castrating the infamous author. She said it was a disgusting allegation and expressed sympathy for Mrs. Bolam. Muriel did not say so but I got the impression she did not know Irene Bolam. Muriel's home was almost a museum of AE memorabilia. I had no doubt Muriel believed Amelia crashed and died at sea. Alan #2329 ******************************************** From ric There were lots of published pictures and TV spots featuring the beleagured Mrs. Bolam. As I recall there was a minor problem involving eye color. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:22:41 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alik >Ric. >I think it warrants a phone call to McGraw Hill, but the question is what >would they be willing to say? Joe Klaas is telling me they are still selling >his book. It's a mess. >Carol Dow >************************************************************* >>From Ric > >I'll look into the Irene Bolam controversy as soon as we've finished >investigating the alien abduction hypothesis. > > > Carol, A couple of cents worth: CNN has gotten stories wrong in the past; numerous times, actually. So, I wouldn't be surprised if the facts on that website are a little hokie. But I'm curious, was the civil suit brought by Bolam against McGraw-Hill or the author? In any case, an objective resolution of this "fingerprint-suit withdrawal" relationship can only be objectively resolved by finding the court records themselves; and then only if those records show that the offer for surrendering fingerprints was made and that the suit was dropped immediately afterward (by checking the dating). I wouldn't trust the author or McGraw-Hills' legal department for an objective take on the timing of motions and events. Wink: I think a court records check will quickly show this claim is false. Alik ************************************************************ From Ric Investigating this thing is a bit like investigating the Love to Mother thing. You only need to do it if you can't recognize how ridiculous it is on the face of it. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:23:54 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FLOAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Gary LaPook If I remember correctly a B-707 ditched in the sea near the Virgin Islands in about 1970. It had air in the fuel lines : ) It is the only comercial jet airliner to make an intentional controlled ditching, this excludes the B-767 that was crashed into the Indian Ocean by terrorists about ten years ago. It floated long enough so that all of the passengers could be safely evacuated and no one was lost in the incident. Does anbody have any more details about this one? gl ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:29:17 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Amelia Earhart Festival-Atchison MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fro carol Dow Ric, I talked with Kristy Falk in Atchison for a list of the speakers for the A.E. Festival. This is for Breakfast with Books, Sat. July 20, 8-11:00 AM at the Public Library. Confirmed Speakers: Pat Ward, Todd Swindell, Bill Cipris, Art Parchen, Gene Tousseau, and Mary Nickerson. Unconfirmed Speakers: Elgen Long They will know more in a few more days about Elgen Long. LTM Carol Dow ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:21:31 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FLOAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Mike Haddock For: Gary LaPook Gary I believe the intentional landing of the 707 was enroute to Hawaii and I think it was before 1970. You might also check out www.planecrashinfo.com. LTM Mike Haddock, #2438 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:29:41 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Interchangeability MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Dennis McGee Ric said: "You're suggesting that Amalgamated Widget, Inc. obtains a patent for an adjustable widget and stamps the patent number into the knobs used on the adjustment shaft. Later they decide to produce a doohickey (as distinct from a widget) which also happens to require a knob. Having a bunch of knobs lying arond that were made for the adjustable widget (never a big seller) they decide to use the knobs on the totally unrelated doohickey? Can you cite an example of such a thing happening?" Well, we could start with the American automobile industry, specifically Ford Motor Company. In restoring my 1967 Ford Fairlane I am using numerous parts that were made for the Galaxie, Falcon or Mustang lines, in addition to parts specifically designed for the Fairlane. Interchangeability was a real cost cutter in those days so mixing and matching was perfectly acceptable. For example, an engine block may have a casting number C5AE-6015E. That number tells me the block was DESIGNED a 1965 (C5) Galaxie (A) Engine (E) block (6015), 5th engineering level (E), but this block was used extensively in all Ford products in 1965, 1966 and 1967. So, just because I find an engine block with that casting number doesn't mean I've found an engine from a 1965 Ford Galaxie; it could just as well be from a 1966 Mustang or a 1967 Fairlane. I don't know if other manufacturers worked that way, but I suspect many of them would. LTM, who has a hot rod heart Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ********************************************************************** From Ric Ah, but I think we're talking about something rather different in the case of a patent number. The number on the engine block correctly identified the block although not necessarily it's specific application. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:31:21 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Don Jordan Ric wrote: "There were lots of published pictures and TV spots featuring the beleagured Mrs. Bolam. As I recall there was a minor problem involving eye color." There is a picture of Irene in the infamous book, at least in the earlier book. I haven't seen the newer version. But don't run out a buy the book just to see the picture. It's a waste of money. Also, I hadn't heard about the eye color problem. But even if it were true, that won't stop the True Believers. They still believe that a man named Bilamon Amaron saw Amelia and Fred onboard a Japanese ship in July of 1937. The man saw something, and seemed to have a very good memory about it. He described the duo to a tee. He said the woman was wearing a skirt and the man had a mustache. Anybody out there ever see Fred Noonan wearing a mustache? Or Amelia flying in a skirt? I know, I know . . .just a minor detail! Don Jordan Merced, CA ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:32:32 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Klee Passage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Murray Ric, Does anyone have any confirmation that Klee Passage exists and if so is it between Knox island and Mili atoll? A quick web search did not find it so it is difficult to believe Nina Paxton was able to find it in her school atlas or whatever in order to perpetrate a hoax. Regards Angus ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:35:01 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Klee Passage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Angus Murray Ric, I answered my own question with a further search. See http://marshall.csu.edu.au/html/histmaps/Langhans1897_map_Mile1.html which shows Klee Str. Regards Angus. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 16:31:53 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Float MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Simon Ellwood Gary LaPook wrote:- "If I remember correctly a B-707 ditched in the sea near the Virgin Islands in about 1970. It had air in the fuel lines : ) It is the only comercial jet airliner to make an intentional controlled ditching..." Off topic & wrong, a Dutch Antillies DC-9 made a controlled ditching off the Virgin Islands in 1970 after (virtually)running out of fuel. Sank quickly & 23 died. Now back on topic......... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 16:34:36 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Amelia Earhart Festival-Atchison MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For Carol Dow From Ron Bright Carol, Hollywood producer Todd Swindell is THE living expert on the metamorphosis of Amelia Earhart into Irene Bolam. I suggest you contact him via the AES channel. He made a presentation at AES Oakland Conference. REB ********************************************************* From Ric Ever notice how many of these characters have Dickensian names? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 16:36:04 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Klee Passage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FRom Ron Bright For Angus, Contact Woody Rogers via the Tighar channel. He is a living expert on Klee passage just off Mili. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 16:37:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Float MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From S. Wesley Smith Gosh, I somehow knew this would happen. Thanks for answering my question about Ms Earhart. Regards, S. Wesley Smith ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:38:00 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Klee Passage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Cam Warren According to Sailing Directions for the Pacific Islands (4th Ed. 1992); "Knox Atoll lies about 2 1/4 miles SSE of the SE extremity of Mili Atoll, being separated by Klee Pass, in which there are reported to be depths of from 16 to 30 ft." Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:40:01 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: FLOAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Herman De Wulf (#2406) I used several search engines. There seems to be no trace of a 707 having been ditched in the Pacific. There has been a DC-8 which landed 2.5 nautical miles short of San Francisco airport runway 28L in San Francisco Bay on a flight from Tokyo on 11/22/68. All 107 on board were safe. I think the story Gary refers to is the "textbook ditching" of a Pan Am Boeing 377 Stratocruiser on 16 October 1956 in the Pacific en route from Honolulu to San Francisco. The aircraft was named "Sovereign of the Skies". While cruising at FL 210 it suffered a runaway propeller on #1 engine, followed by loss of power on # 4 engine. This caused considerable drag, reducing the aircraft's speed. Eventually #4 engine backfired and failed. The crew calculated it was impossible to reach land on the fuel remaining and captain Ogg decided there best chance was to divert to the weather ship "November" and ditch alongside. In fact "November" was the US Coast Guard cutter "Pontchartrain" on station in the Pacific. The emergency landing was executed according to the book and is still cited as an example of how to ditch an aircraft at sea. The Boeing 377 broke in two but both halves remained afloat for about 20 minutes, allowing all 24 passengers and seven crew to evacuate the aircraft via the emergency exits and climb into the rafts that were successfully deployed. All were saved by the "Pontchartrain" life boats which had been lowered and were on stand by. You'll find all the details on www.aviationsafetynetwork.com. The story is also described by Valerie Lester in "Fasten your Seat Belts !" (Paladwr Press - 1995). The book contains good pictures taken from the "Pontchartrain" of the ditching phases and the rescue of the passengers and crew. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:41:57 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Cam Warren You're right about one thing . . . . the Bolam story fits right in with flying saucers, Elvis lives and other extreme stretches of human imagination. After first reading Joe Klaas' book - based on the research, but not necessarily the opinions of Joe Gervais - I was rather appalled at his seeming invasion of the woman's privacy. BUT, bear in mind, if you've ever read Bullfinch's Mythology, fanciful tales invariably have some grain of truth. (Sometimes a lot, too). Bolam certainly was a mystery woman, and despite having a long list of influential friends, her stories never quite checked out. Nobody ever got her fingerprints, she died a "pauper" (despite a life of high living) and was conveniently cremated, leaving no DNA samples. She did bear a certain resemblance to AE, and Tod Swindell has much forensic data to support it. The "99s" claim her as a member, but I've been told no records have ever turned up, and she (apparently) never even had a pilot's license until about the time AE was lost. Her husband (Guy - one of several) was with British intelligence. Etc. Etc. At this point in time, it looks as though she may have been a "grifter" (i.e., a highly talented con-woman) who could impress unsuspecting people with her alleged talents, cultivated the wealthy, and managed to successfully pull the wool over a lot of people's eyes. A fascinating story, and I wish I had the time to fully research it. Cam Warren ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:43:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: 1,894,3xx MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Ross Devitt > From Lawrence > Just a thought for some of the gun and rifle experts out there. I remember > seeing little adjusting knobs on the rear sight of older type rifles. I > can't recall at the moment, and I'm too lazy to look itup, but did you find > any spent shells at the 7-site? I'm not a gun or rifle expert, but I was involved with M1 carbines for many years. Due to changes in our gun laws I haven't owned one for some years now, but I know there were at least two distinct types of knobs on the rear sight windage adjusters. One was cylindrical and knurled over its entire "cylinder" surface. The other was about the same size, but machined so it was stepped, with grooves machined into the outer surface. This one would be the closest in appearance to the knob. On the other hand, I think the knob was probably made of the same steel as the rest of the sight. I can't imagine it being a lead knob, especially as lead would be rather soft and easily damaged under wartime conditions. The M1 was a very popular "varmint" rifle in the USA, and I'm sure some of the forum either have one in the family or know someone who does. If there is a patent number on the knob it will be obvious. The Springfield Armoury in the USA would probably have details if anyone wants to ask them as they were a good source of spare parts. Th' WOMBAT ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:44:39 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Interchangeability MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alan > Ah, but I think we're talking about something rather different in the case > of > a patent number. The number on the engine block correctly identified the > block although not necessarily it's specific application. Not only that but I was implying the use would have been on something entirely different rather than a similar use - only to expand the possibilities. I checked for an answer to Ric's challenge to give an example and found that in my house - other than door knobs - there are no knobs at all. But I'll not rest till I find some screwy example. Well, at least not until this evening. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:49:27 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Carol Dow For Alik: CNN here in Kansas City had an Irene Bolam on the TV in an interview recently, and she was mad as "H" at being called Amelia Earhart. In fact she was roaring mad. She stated the whole thing was absurd. Also, I have an E-mail from one of the Irene Bolam's (which I sent to Ric), and this particular Irene Bolam was flabbergasted at what was going on. However, if you knew Joe Klaas, you would have some of the answers. He is very aggressive. I didn't know about the fingerprints. The last A.E. Festival in Atchison, KS, had a man there with forensic evidence (the width of the eyes of the two women and all kinds of detective work) that no one wanted to accept, and the guy couldn't get his book published, and no one in the film industry wanted to touch ( he was in film production in NYC). It's a subject matter that everyone (except Joe Klass) wants to stamp out because the whole concept is so ridiculous. Here's some of the parts of the E-mail I got from one of the Irene Bolam's. I would have to have Ric's permission and Irene Bolam's permission to reprint the whole letter: "After that meeting at Morgan Hill, John and I were so filled with info that we couldn't digest it all! To be told that John's brother, Guy, was a British M16 member, and then to introduce us to Guy's illegitimate son (who looked exactly like Guy) was almost too much to comprehend at one time. Sincerely, Irene Bolam " Well, we have our moments on the Earhart Forum talking back and forth. I enjoy it. LTM Carol Dow ************************************************************************ From Ric Carol, the clip you saw on CNN was shot 30 years ago. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:57:28 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Troy <> Ric, I heard that story as a student pilot but thought it was urban legend. You actually investigated this one? I thought it was just another funny joke...... *************************************************************************** From Ric Swear to God....the year was probably about 1977. I was working for National Aviation Underwriters at the time. The FBO was North American Aviation in Hammonton, NJ. They did a big trade in "ab initio" training of foreign students up through comm/inst/mel. Mostly northern Europeans, but this particular genius was a Turkish kid. I took the call and I handled the loss. Some urban legends are true. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:34:46 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: A Search in New Directions? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From tom Riggs For almost 15 years, Tighar has spent great amounts of time, money, and effort looking for evidence that AE and FN perished on Niku after landing there in July 1937. The Tighar directors and all team members deserve the greatest respect and admiration for their hard work, dedication, tenacity, and skill. However, after all these years searching, a definitive artifact that can be positively identified from AE, FN, or the Electra has yet to be found. Some artifacts recovered by Tighar are tantalizingly coincidental with items that could have been left behind by the Electra, or AE & FN as castaways on the island. Unfortunately, some of the most valuable artifacts identified in official government documentation (ie. bones, sextant box, etc.) were lost and have not since been seen. Sixty -five years is a long time for artifacts to remain on the island surface in the harsh tropical environment. Many artifacts may not have survived due to severe degradation. Native islanders, or others may have disturbed or carried-away artifacts unknowingly. For whatever reasons, it seems very evident after all the years of searching, there may not be any blatantly obvious or easy to find artifacts laying around on the Niku island surface. Perhaps what is being looked for may lay buried beneath the island surface, but therein lies a difficulty. Suppose the Tighar theory is what actually happened. That is, the Electra landed on the Niku north-shore reef flat and was able for a period of time to make radio distress transmissions. Sometime thereafter, the Electra was swept over the reef edge. AE & FN were unable to survive and later perished. If in fact the Electra went over the reef edge, then one (or more) of the following assumptions could be possible: a.. the Electra is located somewhere near the northern shore which is the most probable area on which a safe landing could have been made. An underwater search could logically be focused on the northern shore reef edge. b.. the Electra is no longer intact, and has been broken up by the surf action at the reef edge. Native islanders reported seeing pieces of the airplane in the waves many years later which lends credibility to this theory. c.. the Electra is deep underwater and wedged in a crevice or crack in the reef (this theory has been extensively discussed previously in numerous Tighar Tracks articles, FAQs, etc.). Numerous pieces lie scattered in cracks and crevices of coral. However, when the reef edge was searched by recent expedition divers, the pieces of the Electra were at depths greater than was possible for the divers to see. The heavy engines weighing hundreds of pounds may have eventually rolled down the reef slope, or over the drop-off and lay thousands of feet below. d.. even though submerged in salt-water for many years, identifiable pieces of the Electra remain. Note that Japanese and U.S. aircraft from WWII are still intact after being submerged in salt-water since 1940s in Truk Lagoon (Chuuk?) and similar battle-sites elsewhere. e.. The completely intact Electra (or broken-up pieces) may have been carried by strong currents over the drop-off and lay on the bottom thousands of feet below. Ok, if we can all agree with the Tighar theory that the Electra did in fact go over the reef edge, then in my opinion there is a significantly greater probability of finding SOMETHING stuck in the reef edge (or on the ocean bottom) than continuing to sift thru sand and rubble on the island. Based on the above assumptions that something of the aircraft remains that can be physically observed and/or retrieved, then why not shift the focus from the island (Niku) itself which has already been painstakingly searched, and focus all future search and funding at the place where the "holy grail" itself may lay waiting off the north shore reef edge? So lets now address some issues that would obviously arise in order to do this: a.. Searching for things underwater is difficult. However, modern technology and underwater research techniques have provided some excellent tools that can perform the required task. b.. Searching for things underwater is expensive. The budget Tighar has been working with the past 15 years would need increasing several orders of magnitude. c.. Independent underwater research companies currently searching the vast open waters north-west of Howland are being funded entirely by wealthy independent investors. These investors are spending their money on blind-faith alone, based only on a theory (Long). Tighar, on the otherhand has recovered numerous artifacts, official government documents, and other substantial evidence that provides SOME credibility for their theory (also, let us not forget that if the Electra simply crashed and sank, there could be no explanation for the many post-disappearance radio transmissions that were clearly received and documented). If it is possible for these other search groups to obtain funding on nothing more than a theory alone (ie. no artifacts or evidence), then it would seem feasible that Tighar with all the accumulated artifacts could attract an independent investor with the financial resources capable of funding a deep underwater search of the north shore reef edge. Also, the search area for the Niku north shore reef edge is enormously smaller (by thousands of square miles) than is being attempted by the underwater research companies searching northwest of Howland. Also, consider this - Mel Fisher searched 16 years before he finally found the Spanish galleon Nuestra Senora de la Atocha (or whatever the name of it was?). Much like AE searchers, he started with only a theory. Once again..just some food for thought. TR #2427 ******************************************************************* From Ric Thanks for your thoughts Tom. First let me say that I think there is LOTS more to be found on land once we have focused in on the right place - and I think we identified one of the right places (the Seven Site) last summer. We're also evaluating a new theory about where we may be able to find more washed-ashore lightweight debris such as Artifact 2-2-V-1 (the section of airplane skin). We'll talk about that more after we've done some more work on it. Second, let me say that I'd LOVE to search the deep water off the reef for just the reasons you list. Now let's talk about money. There is a fundamental difference between what TIGHAR is doing and what Long/Nauticos, Timmer/Willamson, and Kammerer/Whoever are doing. Those are or were commercial ventures based upon the assumption that there is an intact airplane that can be found, recovered, and exhibited for fun and profit. Just the media attention surrounding the search, even if unsuccessful, is valuable to a deep water technology company - as long as they never admit that they're through searching. How many people had ever heard of Nauticos before they got involved in the Earhart circus? TIGHAR, on the other hand, is a nonprofit testing a hypothesis that says there is nothing left but bits and pieces. And whatever is left belongs to the Republic of Kiribati. We're never going to attract treasure hunter money because there's no treasure to hunt. Kammerer gave us $300,000 for the media rights to Niku IIII because he hoped to make millions from controlling the media coverage of the smoking-gun discovery. He gambled and lost. He was ready to plunk down another couple of million to join the deep sea treasure hunt until he found out his technology couldn't perform. Hard as it is to comprehend, there are people out there who simply have that kind of money to throw around. TIGHAR's funding comes primarily from people who want to see the Earhart mystery solved for the same reason we want to solve it - because it CAN be solved. We may also continue get funding from the sale of media rights. That would be nice. We'll continue to do the best we can to raise the money we need, but we'll never be able to compete with the treasure hunters. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:43:09 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: A Hand-Cranked Generator? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom Riggs Was doing some net surfing looking for AE items of interest. Found a hit on this New York Times article published Saturday July 3, 1937 (the day after). This relates to recent Forum thread discussing possibility she had a portable hand-cranked transmitter: Most of the article is generic stuff we already know. But there is an interesting comment confirming AE carried a "hand-cranked generator" (hmm, could it have had a lead knob with a steel insert and....?). I wonder how they got this information? Don't recall reading anything about it in the documentation listing items she was carrying on-board for the final flight. We all know who McMenamy was. Anyone know anything about Carl Pierson, if possibly still alive? Feel free to read the whole thing: http://www.nytimes.com/specials/magazine4/articles/earhart1.html . I cut and pasted the interesting part from the article as follows: ---------------------------- Amateurs Pick Up Signals LOS ANGELES, July 2 (AP) -- Two amateur radio operators claimed to have picked up signals tonight on frequencies officially assigned to the plane of Amelia Earhart. Walter McMenamy said he picked up weak signals on 6210 kilocycles at 6 P.M. (10 P.M. Eastern daylight time) and heard the letters "L-a-t" which he took to mean latitude. The letters were followed by indecipherable figures. The signals continued for some time. Mr. McMenamy expressed belief they came from a portable transmitter. He received other signals from a Coast Guard boat, presumably the cutter Itasca, requesting listeners to "stand by and listen on all frequencies." At 8 P.M. (midnight Eastern daylight time), Carl Pierson, chief engineer of the Paterson Radio Corporation, picked up similarly weak signals on 3105 kilocycles, Miss Earhart's daytime frequency. He said they were erratic and indecipherable. Both Mr. McMenamy and Mr. Pierson said the signals came from a hand-cranked generator. Miss Earhart carried one in her plane. ************************************************************************** From Ric Itasca, of course, never made any such request for people to "stand by and listen on all frequencies." Pierson seems to have been McMenamy's buddy and they both got a lot of press attention in the days following the disappearance. Their claims seem highly suspect. There was no hand-cranked generator aboard the airplane when it was inventoried following the Luke Field wreck nor was one mentioned in any of the newspaper interviews AE gave about what she planned to carry on the flight. We can't say that there wasn't one aboard but we can say there there is no credible primary source that suggests that there was one aboard. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:48:46 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: A Niku Cool Season? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom Riggs Tighar expeditions to Niku have required working long hours in oppressive heat from the tropical sun. Is there such a thing as a cool season for Niku? If so, wouldn't it be more preferable to plan future expeditions when working conditions are cooler? I suspect that because the island is located near the equator, its blazing hot most of the time. Just curious. TR #2427 *************************************************************************** From Ric From November through March temperatures tend to be a bit cooler because of more frequent rain. Of course, that's also Cyclone Season (known as Typhoons in the northern Pacific and Hurricanes in the Atlantic). Been there, done that. We'll take the heat, thank you. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:58:21 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: L10E Model MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Simon Ellwood #2120 Just got my latest TIGHAR Tracks and read about the amazing L10E model Bill Harney has designed & built. Wow - just look at the rivet detail in the photos ! The cabin door even opens ! Any internal details ? (Fred's nav. position ? - just kidding :-) And how did you fabricate those props, complete with the external conterbalance weights, Bill ? Amazing. Great job, Bill. ************************************************************************** From Ric Unfortunately Bill Harney is not on the forum and doesn't use email - but you're right. The model is incredible. He built a special machine to punch the impressions in the aluminum to accurately reproduce the rivet patterns on the entire airraft (a subject of much research and debate between me and Bill). Noonan's nav position is in there, as is all of the cockpit detail right down to the headset hanging on the control wheel. A large section of the starboard side of the fuselage is removable to reveal the interior detail. We have lots of great photos. As soon as we can get to it we'll put a photo gallery up on the website. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:15:27 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Search in New Directions? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Tom King While I agree with Ric about all the rest of his response, I'm not so sure about the premise that "We're never going to attract treasure hunter money because there's no treasure to hunt." True, the artifacts belong to Kiribati, and true, it seems very very VERY unlikely that there's an intact airplane to be found, but that doesn't mean that a reasonably definitive (or even not-so-definitive) collection of Earhart-related artifacts couldn't be exhibited, with the permission and to the financial benefit of the Government of Kiribati, in a context where admission could be charged or money otherwise raised by the "treasure hunters" who do these kinds of things. Long ago, a guy at the Hiller Museum in California gave us some advice along these lines, and for years we've kicked around the idea of getting together some kind of travelling exhibit based on what we already have -- not necessarily as something to which admission would be charged, but as a way of attracting attention to our work. Anyhow, I certainly understand that there aren't any "treasure hunters" beating down the door wanting to support a deep water search (or anything else), but I don't think that's necessarily because there isn't any treasure to be found; it may be just that nobody's recognized the commercial value (to investors, TIGHAR, and Kiribati) in what we already have or might find. Well, nobody but Mike Kammerer, who's something of a -- er -- special case. ********************************************************************** From Ric This gets into some fairly interesting philosophical and ethical issues about the nature of philanthropy. The gentleman who gave us the impromptu lecture at the Hiller Museum was basically telling us "There is no such thing as philanthropy any more. It's all about return on investment. If you want to attract big dollars you have to show the prospective contributor how he'll come out ahead financially." That is certainly one approach, and a not uncommon one these days - but true philanthropy is not dead. FedEx, for example, has supported us with free project-related shipping for about five years now. I have never seen TIGHAR or the Earhart Project touted in a FedEx ad and it was only in the last few moths that we got around to putting their logo up on the TIGHAR website. That brought a phone call from the FedEx legal department saying, "Hey! Who said you could put our logo on your website?" I explained the situation and the attorney said, "Oh, okay." Most of TIGHAR's funding comes from true charitable contributions from our members. They ask for nothing more - and nothing less - than to be a part of this epic quest. Is there money to be made from a travelling exhibit of Earhart artifacts? Probably, but I suspect that the collection would have to include a smoking gun of some kind to draw enough of an audience to make it pay. Do we want to seek funding from an individual or corporation who would want to cut a deal like the following? "I'll give you $5,000,000 to thoroughly search the island and surrounding waters on the condition that I get the proceeds from the exhibition of whatever you find." Of course, we'd have to get Kiribati to go along with the deal. They're not stupid. They'd want a cut. The real problem with a deal like that would be that it would change the entire nature of the project. The Earhart Project would be "owned" by someone whose principle motive was profit. We would all, in a very real sense, be working for that someone. Kammerer intially wanted to buy the entire project. We wouldn't sell it. We limited the transaction to the commercial exploitation of information developed during the contract period. Even so, he tried his damndest to run the project but, with the contract on our side, we were able to stand toe to toe and trade expletives until he baccked off. The strength of TIGHAR's investigation is the contributed expertise and hard work of a diverse and truly impressive array of bright and knowledgable people. How many of you would be eager to knock yourselves out to make someone else richer? If this project had to hire the help it now gets for free, $5,000,000 wouldn't be nearly enough. Hell, I'd want that much myself as salary. I have always felt that this can't be done as a treasure hunt. It's not worth doing as a treasure hunt. It's way too difficult. The only treasure that's worth this much work is the satisfaction of using our brains and our backs to find the truth. The fact that it's the truth about what really happened to Amelia Earhart is almost incidental. I think that funding for the project will continue to come from individuals and corporations who share our values and understand the nature of true philanthropy. I hope we'll also get more funding from the sale of media rights - a form of commercial expoitation that does not compromise the fundamental nature of the project. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:17:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Search in New Directions? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alan > Second, let me say that I'd LOVE to search the deep water off the reef for > just the reasons you list. > Let me add that I can see no supportable reason to search any particular place OFF of the island. Although it may seem rational our duo landed on a particular stretch of beach and/or in a particular direction that fact is really unknown. In any case we have no clue as to where the plane might have ended up if washed out to sea. We don't know whether it sunk immediately or floated off with the current for some indetermine time and distance. That leaves an awesome volume of ocean to search in. Even the question of whether they DID land on Niku has not been pinned down irrefutably. Lots of good evidence but no smoking gun quite yet. I think the plan being followed is the only sensible way to go. Somewhere on Niku the magic bullet will be found. Alan #2329 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:21:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Reef -Flat Landing? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From DavyFlyer As a student from in the 50s, and an old tail dragger in Mich.; and coming out of grass runways, I was instructed to do the same upon takeoff because of the apple orchards. NEVER turn back to the to the runway; was drilled in to me. I guess the kid forgot what end he was on. As I said the other day, we also where told it "It was a good landing if you could walk away from it." A lot of training was also to study the land (which a lot of Computer Aviators never heard of). I know, we don't have much grass left. Anyway, this instructor came out of the 20s . Maybe he had the same instructor??? DavyFlyer ******************************************************* From Ric This is getting way off topic, but the student lost the engine (probably from carb ice) on downwind just before turning base. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:24:57 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Visited Gardner MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Paul Gilbert Hi Richard I spent a few years in the Phoenix Isle,Hull isle and Canton and I took a trip to Gardner several times before they became occupied. **************************************************************************** From Ric By all means, tell us more. When were you out there and why? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:33:44 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: the "un-Knob" update MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Christian D After reading all the recent posts, I, too begin to wonder if we are not jumping the gun in calling this a "knob"... What if indeed this item was >meant< to be heavy, hence the lead... Pendulum of some kind, counterweight, scale weight, speed governor, (tele)typewriter part, etc... The steel insert in that case is still for mounting, but not for a control knob to a shaft. Ideas anybody? (this is as far as I can guess at the moment). As for the patent Nr being cast on the "item", that might imply it was not an internal, hidden part; and may be it was a critical part instead... Ric, also: is the Nr cast with the part, or was it stamped later? Christian D ************************************************************* From Ric The number is cast into the part. The figures (letters and numbers) stand up above the surface but have been squished and distorted by impacts to the soft lead. The sides of the object feature "knurling", raised parallel lines cast into the surface apparently to provide a grip for fingertips. I call it a knob because that's what it looks like but it could, of course, serve some other function and just look like a knob. I agree that it is probably not an internal component. It certainly appears to have been intended to be manipulated (specifically, twisted or turned) by fingertips and it would make little sense to put patent information someplace where nobody would see it. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:57:52 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A Hand-Cranked Generator? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Randy Jacobson Actually, Ric, the Itasca did ask for all ships and stations in the area to listen in for Earhart. This message, sent out on 500 kHz, was sent several times. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if McMenamy and Pierson picked this signal up on the international distress frequency, and the newspaper account is a corruption of that radio message. ************************************************************************ From Ric I stand corrected. At 0103 on 7/3/37 ITASCA sent the following message out to "CQ" (All ships, all stations): AMELIA EARHART PLANE ENROUTE HOWLAND ISLAND FROM LAE NEW GUINEA UNREPORTED SINCE 2045 GCT JULY 2 AND APPARENTLY DOWN AT SEA POSITION UNKNOWN PERIOD ITASCA SEARCHING PROBABLE NORTHWEST SECTOR OFF HOWLAND ISLAND PERIOD REQUEST SHIPS AND STATIONS LISTEN ON 500 KCS FOR ANY SIGNALS FROM PLANE COMMANDING OFFICER U S COAST GUARD CUTTER ITASCA Pierson claimed to have heard signals on 3105 at 8 p.m. PST on 7/2 (0400 Z on 7/3) McMenamy claimed to hear signals on 6210 at 10 p.m. (0600 on 7/3). Both could have been in response to the ITASCA request at 0103 Z but ITASCA had said to listen on 500 kcs. The times that Pierson and McMenamy say they heard Earhart would be daylight in the Central Pacific (15:30 and 17:30 respectively). LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 10:02:17 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: AE in the news MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From Alik >>From Carol Dow > >For Alik: > >CNN here in Kansas City had an Irene Bolam on the TV in an interview >recently, and she was mad as "H" at being called Amelia Earhart. In fact she >was roaring mad. She stated the whole thing was absurd. Also, I have an >E-mail from one of the Irene Bolam's (which I sent to Ric), and this >particular Irene Bolam was flabbergasted at what was going on. However, if >you knew Joe Klaas, you would have some of the answers. He is very >aggressive. I didn't know about the fingerprints. > >The last A.E. Festival in Atchison, KS, had a man there with forensic >evidence (the >width of the eyes of the two women and all kinds of detective work) that no >one wanted to accept, and the guy couldn't get hi