Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 11:01:28 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Artifact S-45 From Christopher Ferro I can see the can being used for target practice...? LTM, who'd like to target my can for shooting my mouth off at times... Christopher, reeling in Wheeling ******************************************************************* From Ric Maybe....but none of the rusted flakes of metal are bent as you'd expect from bullet holes in the can and you'd have to be pretty good to shoot the spout off that cap. ******************************************************************* From Mike Muenich I tend to run in streaks, bear with me. If we have the patent number, do we know who the patent was registered to and when? What is the patent description? If a person has a patent registered to them, I would think they might know who purchased the rights to manufacture or use or to whom and for what purpose they might have sold the object patented. ********************************************************************* From Ric The patent was granted on Decmber 20, 1932 to Edward McGinnis, assignor to Consilidated Fruit Jar Company of New Brunswick, New Jersey. If it eventually ended up being used on something as unfruity as gun oil I would guess that it was licensed by a wide variety of companies. ********************************************************************* From Mike Muenich I didn't mean to say that Gallagher lived at the 7 site. It is my understanding that this may be the real estate he elected to "own". He may have put up a shelter, he may have stayed overnight, he may have moved things there for future use. he may have stayed there repeatedly while the post bones search was conducted in ?October?. You did raise a point I had not previously noted. Why do you think there was a spout on the cap? **************************************************** From Ric - That's what the patent is on, a "spout and closure" - The example we've seen of a cap with the same writing and patent number on it has a spout coming up through the middle of the cap. - The artifact shows pretty clear signs that there was once something sticking up through the middle. ***************************************************** From Marty Moleski > 2. Why is the can/cap here? Lost out of a carpenter's toolbox? Gun oil might be helpful for preserving tools as well as guns. The same toolbox and carpenter--both brought there to build "Gallagher's house"--could be the source of the crude aluminum fasteners (2-6-03a and 2-6-03b). They seem to me to be more consistent with islander technology than with something Fred would do to one of his sextant boxes. I can't see the castaway unscrewing those from the sextant box. My guess is that the wood they were in rotted away from them. > 6. Is it possible that a cap on an item left with the cache of supplies from > the Norwich City could have met the criteria of S-45? Not if it is a U.S. utility patent number on it. All of the seven-digit numbers of the form 18xxxxx are from after the NC wreck. > ... If AE did find the Norwich > supplies, wouldn't she have raided it for all it was worth? She, Fred, other tourists, and all of the natives, too. I wonder whether the "cruciform" area seen by Jeff Glickman might have been the last trace of the NC cache. An oar lock was found there when TIGHAR searched that area. >From Ric's reply: > I'll betcha that a further search of > the area will turn up the lead spout that was apparently intentionally broken > off, most logically to get at the last dregs of whatever was in the can. Having worked with lots of spouted containers, oil, glue, and solvent, I would never rip a spout off to get the last few drops. Shaking the can or bottle gets the last of the fluid into the spout. Answering the question of why S-45 was found with the damaged hole and without its spout probably won't help find the Any Reasonable Idiot Artifact (ARIA). > So Watson, what could somebody have in a can designed to dispense its > contents in drops or a thin stream that would logically be present at such a > remote location and was so important that somebody tore the spout off to get > at the last drops (or because the spout became clogged)? I don't know. People do strange things. We don't have to answer all questions to get an answer to some. ;o) LTM. Marty #2359 *********************************************************** From Ric A point of clarification - the debacle of the "cruciform object" was completely my folly, not Jeff's. Having watched him perform miracles in Photoshop I tried it myself and, in my ignorance, drew unwarranted conclusions. The "cruciform object" turned out to be just a cross-shaped bush. There is probably great symbolism in all of this that I won't touch wth a ten foot spear. ****************************************************************** From Angus Murray Ric said, > So Watson, what could somebody have in a can designed to dispense its > contents in drops or a thin stream that would logically be present at such a > remote location and was so important that somebody tore the spout off to get > at the last drops (or because the spout became clogged)? Ric, Now lets not jump to conclusions! The spout could have been broken off accidentally by someone standing on it. If the site was used for target practice at short range, the spout on an empty can would make a nice (difficult) target. Alternatively the empty can itself might have been the target and the spout broken off when the can hit the ground after being hit by a round. If the can rusted away, the cap should be undistorted in the area of the clenching which secured it to the top of the can. If on the other hand the cap was mechanically separated from the can, it should show signs of stretching, straightening or distortion in that area. Incidentally, sewing machine oil was also supplied with this type of closure. It would not suprise me if almost any type of oil you can think is also a candidate. The only one I can think of that fits all the criteria you mention above is suntan oil! Regards Angus. ********************************************************* From Ric There's no obvious distortion to suggest that the cap was pried off the can but there is some indication that the spout was rocked back and forth in the process of its removal. If that's true then the stepped-on and shot-off scenarios don't work. ************************************************************* From Tom King I think you're reaching, but it's fun. Obviously the gun oil would be useful as an assist in starting fires, but could it in fact have come from the Norwich City, and if not, how would you associate it with our Famous Friends? The ferrous metal something near S-45 was about 40 cm. on a side. Isn't that rather large for a gun oil container? To me, its rusted fragments looked like either a sheet of metal (non-corrugated), or a collapsed rectangular ferrous metal box. For whatever that's worth. And we really have no idea how many more shell casings there may be on the Seven Site, because we don't know what the boundaries of the "site" are, and therefore don't know how much of it we've looked at. And of course, what you define as the "site" depends on what variables you use to distinguish between it and "not-site." If you use the distribution of fire features and say that represents the "site," then the shell casings may be distributed over a larger (or smaller) area than the site, and the number of shell casings on the site may be less than (it couldn't very well be greater than) the total number of casings in the area.. If you use the shell casings as your defining criteria, then you get a different figure, but for all we know there could be shell casings scattered all the way from the Loran station up to the north end of the island. ****************************************************************** From Ric That's an awfully big can. Forty centimeters is almost 16 inches. That's enough gun oil for a field artillery battery. It also seem like way too big a can for this dinky little cap and spout. Whatever liquid you put in the c an it's gonna end up weighing a ton. The spout is designed for dispensing small amounts of liquid with some precision. Doesn't make any sense. I seem to recall that Herb Moffit, the Coastie who was there with Dick Evans, described seeing a rusty can with a wire handle that he assumed had been used to boil water. We have that interview on videotape but it's on one of those old cassettes where you have a full-sized VHS tape on a small cassette that requires an adaptor - and I dont have an adaptor. I'll have to see if I can find one. ********************************************************************** From Tim Smith From Tim Smith Don't assume it was a gun oil can. The same type of spout was also used for sewing machine oil, lighter fluid, and other "3-in1-" type oil cans. If FN carried a Zippo lighter, he may have had lighter fluid. The last drops of that might have been useful to get a fire going (with an inverting eyepiece?). Tim Smith 1142 CE ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 11:03:11 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Artifact S-45 From Mark in Horse Country > So Watson, what could somebody have in a can > designed to dispense its > contents in drops or a thin stream that would > logically be present at such a > remote location and was so important that somebody > tore the spout off to get > at the last drops (or because the spout became > clogged)? > > LTM, > Ric How about anything flammable enough for the castaway to use as a fire starter? My WAG is that with the heat on Niku, finding dry kindling would be pretty easy (how well does scaevola burn?), but that doesn't mean our fearless castaway knew how to build a fire... perhaps he/she used the lighter fluid or gun oil or whatever it was to get his/her fires started. If so, there would be little incentive to practice one's "proper" firestarting skills until ... ... darn it ... almost out of fluid ... maybe I could get a little more out if i just ... [snap] there! the spout's off! Just a thought... LTM, Mark in Horse Country ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 11:13:46 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Authentic L10s From Denise Herman de Wulf says; "The other alternative, Ric, is that you travel around the world to go and inspect the supposedly authentic L10s left. There is one in New Zealand ..." Look, does this supposedly authentic L10 have another name that we mere-mortals-unconnected-with-flying would know it by? Some regular name that doesn't have those technical-thingy-type numbers in it? If it does, let me know what it is, because there's a chance I could get you some photos of its cockpit ... which means no one will have to travel around the world or climb up tall ladders. LTM (who never liked technical-thingy-type numbers) Denise ************************************************************** From Ric "L10" is just an abbreviation of Lockheed 10. Earhart's plane was a Lockheed Model 10 "Electra". Specifically, hers was a "10E Special" meaning that it was one of the "E" series airplanes that had the larger 550 h.p. engines and it was "special" in that it was modified with extra fuel tanks for long dis tance flying. There are two Electras at the Museum of Transport in New Zealand and they've both been looked at by one of our researchers. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 16:39:08 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Why clean the guns at the Seven Site? An answer! From Richard Young First, a little firearms history - the modern primers used in most, (unfortunately, not all), small-arms ammunition encountered today, (usually trade-named somthing like KLEEN-BORE, or some alternative, and based on lead stephenate compounds),did not exist until well after World War Two. This means ALL small arms cartridges in use then, (and, unfortunately, in some counterfeit U.S. government rounds made in Mainland China recently...) blew potassium chloride salts down the bore with each shot. Pottasium Chloride and related compounds are so close to table salt chemically that they are used in salt substitutes. Like table salt, they are very corrosive. (This is why many military arms dating from this period have "chrome lined" bores - to try to slow down the corrosion from what are known as "corrosive" primers.) In an environment where ferrus metal rusts "as you wait", I can see why it would be SOP for the Coast Guard, or anyone, to immediately at least swab out the bore with bore cleaner, to try to get the worst of the salts out. Even in normal environments, with modern primers and solvents, it's still a recommended practice to at least swab out the bore immediately upon finishing the shooting, as the fouling becomes harder to remove as it cools and oxidizes. Most bore cleaners have a kerosene or naptha base, possibly explaing the lead spout? Anyway, if I had just cranked off 20 rounds, I would darn sure want to at least run a damp patch down the bore before heading back - even if I had to tear up the can. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 08:54:13 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Forum traffic From Ric Just so you know, I'm not asleep at the switch. There just haven't been any postings submitted for the past couple of days. Must be summer or something. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:39:06 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Artifact S-45 From Christian D > So Watson, what could somebody have in a can designed to dispense its > contents in drops or a thin stream that would logically be present at such a > remote location and was so important that somebody tore the spout off to get > at the last drops (or because the spout became clogged)? > I don't know much about round engines: any reason they'd require a very specific US type of oil in routine maintenance? Something may be not always available on a voyage to the end of the world? A few drops on the magneto shafts? Dynamotors bearings? Whatever? Starting fluid? Any technical reason for that artifact to have been carried on the plane? Just part of the plane kit, as delivered from the manufacturer (and hence not inventoried as a separate item)? We are talking precious little weight: with a 18mm diam cap... Was that cap removable? Could AE/FN have used the can to carry petrol to the campsite, salvaged from the plane or the cache? Or just a convenient way to dispense it sparingly on kindling; using a supply from a big can of kerosene found at the cache... If it was a Coastie's can there is a great potential for it to be at the 7-site: the colonists -and their kids, had a quarter century to canibalize the Loran station and drag anything to anywhere on the island... Let's never forget Tom K's warning about multiuse archeological sites! Or when the Coasties took stoneware and radio tubes to the seven-site for target practice, they also brought along empty cans and etc... Lots of likely logical possibilities. Niku was not "mothballed" between the time the Coasties left and the time Tighar arrived. If I remember correctly, the Patent is too recent for S-45 to have been on the NC ship? How about the Kiwi survey team? I'd say they were likely to have firearms. One good reason for the castaways to have kept the can at their campsite is in helping to start fires -ALONG WITH the inverting eyepiece. And what are the chances that there was some firearm on the Electra? At the time it was common for travellers/adventurers to take them along on long voyages; a small 22 perhaps? Mariners, like Noonan, always had guns, in lockers, on ships; may be he had one, un-officially, on board the Electra? Could the bird/fish bones show specific traces of bullets? Christian D ************************************************************************** From Ric The control surface hinges on the Model 10 were of the piano-hinge type and required periodic oiling. You can bet they had the proper lubricant with them in some kind of contianer. My understanding of the patented cap is that it is not intended to be removable. The Kiwi survey might be less than likley to have something with an American patent on the cap. They did have .303 rifles with them and, in fact, the Niku IIII team found a .303 shell casing on the shore of the main passage that might well be one of theirs. The chances of AE and Fred having a firearm with them are remote. There is official correspondence about various customs restrictions governing what they could have aboard the airplane and firearms are a definite no no. AE did have a flare gun which she apparently left behind in New Guinea. The only logical origin we've found for the .22 shell casings is Gallagher's known .22 Colt automatic. Among his effects were 3 "and a half" boxes of ammunition, perhaps suggesting that the weapon was used to some extent. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 11:06:56 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: G.V. Berger's visit to Gardner Is 1939 FRom Ron Bright Ric and Forum, Retired Navy Chief Gerald V. Berger described his visit to Gardner Island on 30 April 1939 aboard the USS PELICAN and his eyewitness account of Amelia Earhart's groundloop at Luke Field, Honolulu, on 23 March 1923. He enlisted in the Navy in 1936 and was assigned as an Aviation Mechanic Third Class to VJ6 Squadron at Ford Island, Hawaii, in 1937, and later aboard numerous ships including the USS PELICAN. Berger, now 86, eventually retired from Boeing Aircraft Company and lives in Seattle, Washington. His memory now, he admits, is faulty and he cannot clearly recall some of the dates, details, and the sequence of events. He has several photo albums of his personal photos that show the Electra at Luke Field and of the Norwich City on the reef at Gardner Island. Most of the photos do not have dates or in the case of the Phoenix group identify the island or the people. He made a good faith attempt to affix dates to events and clarify the activity. His documents contain written accounts in places but are undated which of course take away the value of a contemporaneous description. He has also corresponded to or talked with Elgin Long. Berger's interest grew out of Tigar's early expeditions and he has corresponded with Ric Gillespie about his observations at Gardner Island. He continues to received TIGHAR TRACKS. On 15 March 00, Ric posted his take on Berger's recollections and photographs when Ric provided a Gardner Is timeline that included the 30 April 1939 visit by the USS PELICAN. Ric notes that Berger's photos of the Norwich City and Gardner Island were taken from the ship and the Deck Log does not specifically identify if anyone in fact went ashore; natives and Jack Pedro did row out to the PELICAN and Berger's photos document that visit. The PELICAN did launch the seaplane and photographed the Island. Thus there are two parts to Berger's story: the Electra groundloop crash and his claim that he went ashore at Gardner island, talked with natives and Gallagher . In this post, I shall relate his recollections of the Gardner Is visit and in part two the Luke Field incident. Gardner Island. Part One For orientation purposes, the USS PELICAN Deck Log of 30 April 1939 (which Berger has a copy) shows the following;' 0922 arrives of Gardner Island 0925 hoisted out the motor whaleboat 0938 hoisted out plane 1120 Jack Pedro and two natives came aboard 1136 Two natives leave the ship 1240 Hoisted in plane 1241 Three natives came aboard 1405 Two natives left 1405 Hoisted in motor whale boat 1448 One native left the ship 1513 Jack Pedro left the ship 1516 Got underway. Berger recalled that he lead a party of nine men ashore in a "motorized whaleboat" to Gardner.[It is possible that he left with the motorboat at 0925 although the Log doesn't specifically identify the crew or the purpose.] The crew got out somewhere near the lagoon entrance and they went into the village. "We saw lean twos, and copra", Berger said as they walked in the village. "We also saw hogs and oil drums" , he continued, and saw the coconuts drying on racks. Berger said that a Cadet Simonsen, an intelligence officer, accompanied him when they talked with Gallagher. Note: Try as I might, I couldn't be sure if they really talked with Gallagher or whether he was simply aware of the name as the British head of the colonization. He couldn't recall the nature of the conversation, a description of Gallagher, or any other details. Additionally, Gallagher may not have been on Gardner on 30 Arpil 39 but one of the other Phoenix Is (Mantra?). I just couldn't establish the facts of that alleged meeting. Berger said he took a photo of nine natives on Gardner, which he showed me, but the photo was undated and not labled Gardner. [ Again this may have been natives on one of the other Islands that the USS PELICAN visited during that cruise into the Phoenix, spring 1939. The Pelican was sailing from Canton when it arrived at Gardner. Berger said he learned that a native (unidentified) on Gardner has been banished to the southern end of the Island, he believed, for "molesting" someone. He thought that was a common practice if a native broke one of the "taboos". He couldn't provide any additional details . Berger also had a photo of Pedro coming aboard the PELICAN from an outrigger canoe and also a photo of the NORWICH CITY aground on the reef. ( I would estimate the photo about mile away taken from the deck of the PELICAN). The distance made it impossible to determine any significant features of the ship. One of the most interesting observations, although of doubtful reliability, was his report of seeing an ALCLAD aluminum piece of aircraft skin maybe 3' by 4' sticking up from the reef some short distance from the NC. He said it was definitely aluminum but because of the rivets and spacing (?) he was positive it didn't come from the Electra. I reminded him of the Tighar theory and anectodal evidence of aircraft parts in and around the NC, but he remained non-commital regarding a connection with the Electra. [ The more I questioned him for details the more vague he became about the description of the artifact. He could not really describe any exploration in or around the Norwich City. ] Berger estimated his total time at Gardner City at "eight" hours, but the log shows the whaleboat was gone for about 4 hours. If he did walk into the village, his visit was certainly not a search for Amelia Earhart or the Electra or if so it was cursory at most and nothing of value was found relating to the fate of AE. Berger also thought he visited Gardner twice, once on the PELICAN and a second time later on the SWAN or another ship. He was not certain. He couldn't differentiate between visits. When the PELICAN left Pearl Harbor in the Spring he believed the ship was on a survey "mission" of some sort but never clarified to the crew. They visited Christmas Island, Palymrya, line islands then down into the Phoenix visiting Hull,Sydney, Swains,Canton, and others, he recalled. He recollected that the crew was aware of the possibility the AE went down in the Phoenix and that he himself had a special interest in her fate as he saw the first crash at Luke Field in March of 1937. Nothing surfaced regarding the Electra or AE, Berger said, that developed during the voyage of the PELICAN. I shall report in a separate post his recollections of the Luke Field groundloop which he personally witnesses and claims to be one of the first to the Electra after it came to rest. INTERVIEWERS NOTE: The 63 years between Berger's visit to Gardner Island have taken their toll on his memory try as hard as he could to provide answers. Many times he simply couldn't focus on a specific response to questions. In the end, he provided no clues to her possible landing at Gardner. Whether the Navy had secret orders to continue looking for her in the Phoenix is another aspect of the PELICAN that should be looked into. Bergers mention that the ship had two or three National Geographic personnel aboard for the Eclipse might help in fixing the date and the ship Berger was on. He didn't have his navy record to check out the duty stations. I shall eventually reinterview him. Ron Bright ******************************************************************** From Ric Jerry Burger is a very nice guy and entirely well-meaning. He really was where he says he was but his recollections point up classic problems of anecdotal testimony, especially when it involves events which later take on great perceived historical significance. I think our various naval authorities will bear me out when I say that if anyone left the ship to go ashore at Gardner, that event would appear in the deck log. Gallagher was definitely not on Gardner during Pelican's visit. In fact, the deck log records his visit to the ship when it had called at Sydney Island two days earlier. Jerry's recollection of seeing piece of aluminum on the reef near the shipwreck is a new addition to his story since he talked with me two years ago. If he remembers Nat'l Geo people aboard to look at an eclipse he has to be talking about the June 1937 visit of USS Avocet (another seaplane tender and sister to the Pelican) to Canton Island. The ship did not go to Gardner. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 11:07:41 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Berger's Visit to Gardner Is 1939 Ric, Correction , first paragraph, line 3, should be 23 March 1937, not 1923!! Ron B. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 11:09:49 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: G.V. Berger's visit to Gardner Is 1939 From Tom King Ron -- Very interesting. His description of the village seems consistent with what we've seen, but is probably also consistent with the villages on Manra and Orona, and indeed on many other islands. Gallagher certainly wasn't on Niku at the time, but it's easy enough to imagine his name coming up in conversation with Jack Pietro or others. Anyhow, a very good stone not to leave unturned. Thanks. Tom ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 09:25:08 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Berger visit From Lawrence So Berger claims to have seen a 3' by 4' piece of aluminum on the reef next to the Norwich City, but the rivet patterns were not the same as an Electra. Is Berger qualified to make such a statement? ********************************************************************** From Ric It seems pretty clear from the log that nobody from the PELICAN went ashore, so if Berger saw anything it had to be from shipboard. That means he could not have been closer than about 50 yards at the very least. Even with binoculars and assuming an intimate familiarity with the Lockheed 10 (which, as far as we know, he had seen only once two years previously) it's hard to see how such a judgement could be warranted. In fact, you can make a pretty good argument that ANY airplane aluminum seen at Gardner Island in April 1939 could ONLY have been from NR16020. That said, I think Mr. Berger's recollection - coming, as it does, after much familiarity with TIGHAR's work - must be regarded with considerable skepticism. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 09:29:57 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Equipment From Dave Bush Ric: In an attempt to identify the various radio components from the electra, have you tried studying old manuals from the period? I recently purchased a WWII manula on instrument flying and it has a lot of photos of the fronts of different radios and peripheral equipment. Among the different equipment listed are: * Pilots bearing indicator * Automatic radio compass (and a larger photo entitled tuning the ARC) * Radio Compass * Rotatable loop radio compass * Anti-static, secondary receiver operation * Three boxes side beside with labels: - Transmitter & receiver "on", Filter switch on "both" - Improve tower reception switch to "voice" - Switch to "range" tune desired frequency - Tune few kcs across freq for best reception * loop antenna (fixed loop installation and rotatable loop installation) * Filter box (marked range, voice, both) I realize that these may be more advanced and refined than what AE carried in the electra, however, many times components are only updated and still have some resemblance to the earlier models. Also, I purchased an instrument made by Weston Electrical Instrument Corp. Still new, unused, in the original box (cardboard), marked Box No. 37. On the side on a paper tag is: WESTON Mod. 500 MA Flush Bakelite Range 200 MA. Spec. Red Blocks, "Voice" Scale Navy Spec 17-I-12 and it has further info on the company and its home offices in Newark NJ USA F1226-150M-4-12 Made in USA Box is 3" w x 2-7/8" d x 3" h The instrument is marked: MILLIAMPERES D.C. the arc is calibrated from 0 to 200 with red marks labelled voice (160 - ?) and C.W. (175 - ?) At the bottom it says Model 506 Patents: 1,579,849 1,635,595 1,661,214 The instrument is round with two brass (?) lugs on the back (one of which has a + sign) and two brass screws (inset in back) that look like they might be adjustments. The back of the instrument is stamped with a series of numbers and letters that are slightly distorted but appear to read: 458N0710 but, the 5 is distorted and could be a six or o or 0 and the last number is also distorted, but looks most like a 0 - however, the outside of the box, on the label is plainly stamped 458N0710 and thus I ascertain that the two should be identical.The outside of the instrument has three brass "set" screws. In the box is an unopened envelope with what sound like more screws. The front of the instrument is wider than the base indicating that it most likely fitted into the panel from the front rather than the rear. The face is 2 - 11/16" with three small mounting holes. The back section is 1/4" narrower all the way around (1/2" small dia). Anyway, I know that AE probably didn't have this exact equipment, but since many of these items changed only in small ways at times, I thought it might be helpful in identifying any artifacts if we had items from or near the period. Anyway, I'm a pilot and aviation buff of sorts and even if they are of no avail to TIGHAR, I was interested in them. I have managed to pickup some wings from time to time and place to place. I think some of them are rather unusual and even unique. The most interesting to me is a small metal set marked: Flying Dodo Bird Disc Jockey No one that I have met in the radio business has the slightest idea who this was or where they come from. Rather art deco in appearance. I picked them up at an auction in Galveston (if memory serves me correctly - but I never made notes about where I purchased these items). If you want more infor or need to see the originals on either of these items, let me know and I will make arrangments to get them to you. Yours, Dave Bush ************************************************************************ From Ric Thanks Dave. If a question comes up it's good to know that you have those resources. I'm not familar with the Flying Dodo Bird Disc Jockey wings either but I've flown with some guys who should have had them. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 09:42:48 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: rifle bore cleaner From Tom Cook A few comments .30 carbines: 1. All G.I carbine ammo (not rifle) has had non corosive primers, not to say that a thurogh cleaning was not required after fireing. 2. I found 2 cans of G.I. rifle bore cleaner, appeared to be WW2 vintage: no spout, no knob, just plain course thread stamped sheatmetal cap. 3. The only country that I know of who chrome plated their rifle bores during WW2 was Japan. ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 13:45:52 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: G.V. Berger's visit to Gardner Is 1939 From Bob Brandenburg > I think our various naval authorities will bear me out when I say that if > anyone left the ship to go ashore at Gardner, that event would appear in the > deck log. > Absolutely, Ric. The Navy does not look kindly on failure to account for the whereabouts of crew members. Bob Brandenburg #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 13:49:59 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Wave Action and Memory From Jim W. First, G. V. Berger's memory lapses reminds me that this research project has prompted me to reevaluate my memory of things I read and later try to remember in a conversation. I go back to the source to verify what I said is actually what I had read. Good mental practice inspired by the rigors of TIGHAR. In the March 2002 issue of National Geographic there is an article about exploring ancient ships off the Turkish coast. When the excavation season ended in 1999 the researchers moved their two electric generators, each about three thousand pounds, inland about thirty feet and above the water line about twenty-five feet. As the article states, it took six men to lift the metal covers alone. The first storm of the winter picked them up like corks and one had to be retrieved from the sea floor in one hundred and forty feet of water. This is a pretty fair example of the power of water upon a fairly compact concentration of metal and weight. Reminds me of what the water could have done to an airplane and its engines. Jim W. ********************************************************* From Ric So the waves pulled the generators off the shore and out to sea? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 10:12:49 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: OK, LA TIGHARs From Tom King From Tom King At last I have an actual engagement to talk about The Quest in the LA area. On November 15, a Friday afternoon, I'll be the speaker in the Seminar Series on Archaeology Theory and Research at the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA,. The Institute says that off-campus visitors are welcome. If you're interested, send me your addresses and I'll make sure the Institute sends you an invitation with directions, etc. I'll also be in the area in late August, but time is getting pretty squeezed. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 11:06:30 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: G.V. Berger's visit to Gardner Is 1939 From Gary Fajack From Gary Fajack I'm not too sure about this. From my Navy days some 38 years ago I do not recall logging individuals on and off the ship. With work parties, liberty, base errands a deck log would fill up in no time. Usually deck logs noted significant and regularly occuring events of the day. A log might indicate that a party was sent ashore to explore the island but I doubt if a detail list of the individuals would be included. But after 38 years what do I know? my memory may have been affected by the 60's cultural movement. ************************************************************************* From Ric I imagine that Bob Brandenburg's memory of Navy regs from his days as captain of a destroyer is pretty good, but the best measure of how the PELICAN's log was kept is other entries made during the same cruise. On occasions when people went ashore or came aboard their names were entered in the log along with the time of departure or arrival. In the Phoenix Islands however, it seems quite clear that no one left the ship. Ownership of the Phoenix Group was a point of contention between the U.S. and Britain and a visit to Canton by a solar eclipse expedition aboard PELICAN's sister ship USS AVOCET in June 1937 had resulted in an international incident when they ran into a similar British expedition. PELICAN's job was to take aerial photos of the islands and when they stopped at Hull on April 29 British Lands commissioner Harry Maude happened to be there inspecting the new colony. PELICAN's log shows that Maude came aboard and lodged a formal protest against the ship's presence and the taking of aerial photos. I see no support for the idea that anyone from PELICAN went ashore at Gardner. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 11:07:56 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Carbine ammo From James Kelly For what its worth on the carbine thing, the ammunition for the .30 caliber carbine was non-corrosive; that is to say immediate cleaning might not have been immediatly necessary. All .30-06 ammo was corrosive which led to the rebarreling of almost all M1s used overseas. While it might not have been immediatly necessary, it would be if there was a Chief Petty Officer handy! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 11:18:15 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Connection? From Denise Ron Bright says: "Berger said he learned that a native (unidentified) on Gardner has been banished to the southern end of the Island, he believed, for "molesting" someone." Isn't there another story buried deep within this saga about someone from an island someplace who "molested" someone? A "molester" who got ill and required treatment at the hospital in Tarawa? I think Tom will recall the story I mean. Since "molesting" isn't a common practise in the Pacific among Islanders, I wonder if there's a connection between these two men? LTM (who believed banishment too good for these sorts) Denise ************************************************************************** From Ric You may be thinking of allegations made against your friend Dr. Isaac (Verrier). I don't think there's a copnnection. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 11:26:06 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Well, at least it makes sense to me! From Denise Ron Bright says of Berger: "his visit was certainly not a search for Amelia Earhart or the Electra or if so it was cursory at most and nothing of value was found relating to the fate of AE." But then again, Ron, there's that story in "Shoes" from the former Niku. colonist who talked about Americans visiting the island in this timeframe and taking photographs over the reef edge where the plane was. If this is the only American visit in this period, then this must be the occasion the story refers to. Remember the First Rule of the Pacific: "someone sees everything you do"! The Americans would definitely have been watched the whole time they were there, and that story is pretty specific. So, that whaleboat was gone four hours. What was it doing in that time? And why unload the plane at all? What was it doing there? And here's another thought: if you're going to send someone out to the Phoenix Islands to check on a report or rumour (and I will always continue to believe these reports were made, even if it were just a word across the bar at a particular club), who better to send than someone already familiar with this authentic L10.? LTM (who loved a good "conspiracy theory") Denise ********************************************************************** From Ric Dear heart, I'm afraid that your nose for a good story is getting the better of you. The plane was there to take aerial photos for the U.S. survey of the Phoenix Group being conducted by USS BUSHNELL. The motor whaleboat was always launched and standing by whenever the airplane was being used. The story repeated in "Shoes" was told to me and Kenton Spading by Tapania Taeke on Funafuti in 1997 and her statement that men in a "goverment ship" took photographs of the airplane wreckage was not tied to any particular time period. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:19:36 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: .30 carbine From Richard Young Mr. Cook is correct - after further review, all carbine ammo WAS non-corrosive. The fact that the M2, (full auto version of the M1 carbine), as well as all M1 carbines built or re-built after the developement of the M2, had chrome-lined barrels threw me, I guess. The cleaning methods taught in boot camp, however, may have been based on the corrosive nature of all of the rest of the arms and ammo available at that time. Any old Coast Guardsmen out there remember boot camp? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:37:01 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Berger's Visit From Hal Ric, I've probably missed something, but how can we be sure that the PELICAN sent no one to the island? Why would the ship hoist out the whaleboat at 0925 and hoist it in 4 1/2 hours later at 1405? Was it to send a party ashore or to facilitate Jack Pedro and natives in boarding the PELICAN or what? Thanks, Hal *************************************************************************** From Ric PELICAN was a "bird" class seaplane tender. She and her sisters SWAN and AVOCET were converted minesweepers that carried one Grumman J2F "Duck" on the afterdeck. To launch the plane a derrick hoisted it up and plopped it over the side where it took off, performed its mission, and landed back on the water. The derrick then hoisted the plane back up on deck. The PELICAN's log shows that it was standard procedure to launch one of the ship's two "motor whaleboats" before the commencement of aviation operations and recover the boat a couple of hours after the plane was safely back aboard. In any event, nothing about the deployment of the motor whaleboat on April 30 looks at all unusual. In fact, the fact that the second whaleboat was NOT launched further reinforces the argument that no one went ashore. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 14:23:17 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: G.V. Berger's visit to Gardner Is 1939 From Ron Bright The only support that a shore party was dispatched for a short time is that the whale boat was lowered at 0925 and hoisted back at 1405. Is there another purpose for lowering the boat? Guard for the seaplane taking photos? But someone had to be in the motorized whaleboat. Believe me not all navy logs are complete and accurate! What did they do for 4 1/2 hours? This is independent of Berger's memory. R.Bright ********************************************************************** From Ric A closer look at the log raises some questions. Although the comings and goings of passengers are carefully recorded by name, the same does not seem to be true of regular crew. Even when the ship is in port in Pago Pago from May 5 to 12, there is no mention in the log of officers or crew going ashore - which they almost certainly did. The motor whaleboat was clearly used as a plane guard but there is consistently a significant amount of time after the plane is safely back aboard before the whaleboat comes back aboard. From the PELICAN deck log: April 25, 1939 Off Canton Island. 0700 - hoisted out motor whaleboat 0851 - hoisted out plane 1730 - hoisted in plane 1820 - hoisted in motor whaleboat (50 minutes later) April 28, 1939 Off Sydney Island 0939 - hoisted out motor whaleboat 0954 - hoisted out plane 1604 - hoisted in plane 1905 - hoisted in motor whaleboat (3 hours later) April 29, 1939 Off Hull Island 0806 - hoisted out motor whaleboat 0847 - hoisted out plane 1221 - hoisted in plane 1840 - hoisted in motor whaleboat (6 hours later) April 30, 1939 Off Gardner Island 0925 - hoisted out motor whaleboat 0938 - hoisted out plane 1240 - hoisted in plane 1405 - hoisted in motor whaleboat (1 hour 25 minutes later) May 2, 1939 Off Swain's Island 1253 - hoisted out motor whaleboat 1314 - hoisted out plane 1452 - hoisted in plane 2048 - hoisted in motor whaleboat (6 hours later) May 4, 1939 Off Rose Island 0640 - hoisted out motor whaleboat 0651 - hoisted out motor launch #2 0755 - hoisted out plane 1146 - hoisted in plane 1445 - hoisted in motor whaleboat (3 hours later) 1455 - hoisted in motor launch #2 They had to be doing something for all that time and Berger must have taken his onshore photos somewhere. However, it doesn't look there was enough time at Gardner for anything more than a quick visit. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 14:24:56 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Well, at least it makes sense to me! For Denise, From Ron Bright, For an even better story line: I didn't add this to Berger's recollections but he beleived that the PELICAN was on some sort of "secret " mission receiving orders by radio at 4PM everyday. He added that the PELICAN visited many islands, including the Gilberts and Marshalls taking photos,etc. As I say he has read a lot of books now on AE and I don't know where his memory ends and the other theories start. Like Ric, I found him quite competent and helpfull, but unable to fill in a lot of g aps in the Gardner Island story. His eyewitness account of the Electra crash, however, was full of details and his photos tend to back up his account as he raced alongside of the Electra on takeoff in a pickup fire truck with his CO2 extinquisher in hand!!! ltm, Ron Bright ============================================================================ Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:35:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Wave Action From Jim W. Source of the article about the electric generators: National Geographic, March 2002, page 116; Article title: Golden Age Treasures, by George E. Bass with photographs by Courtney Platt. Referenced also is the web site for National Geographic for more information about the expeditions. The author states that he was involved in the recovery from 140 feet down in January, 2000. We can accept what he has published as fact, be skeptical that it may have elements of theatrics or disbelieve his statements as fiction. A legitimate question could be why the author would make a false claim such as this? Like any other article in a respected magazine, you hope they are not pulling someone's leg. Could wave action have moved an engine from a 10E from shore to over the reef edge? And I am not advocating searching underwater around Niku to find one, just a question of the physical capabilities of tropical wave action. Jim W. ******************************************************************* From Ric We know that objects off shore can be swept ashore by weather events that involve big waves. There are coral blocks as big as a garden shed and must weigh several thousand pounds that were broken off the reef face and flung up onto the reef flat at some time in the distant past. We see pieces of Norwich City hull plating that must weigh tons lying up against the beach a good quarter mile downstream of the wreck. If it is also the case that objects weighing several thousand pounds can be removed from the shore and taken out to sea then we have to consider an interesting new range of possibilities. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:39:07 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Pelican Whaleboat From Russ Matthews (#0509CE) << They had to be doing something for all that time >> Not necessarily. All we know is that the Pelican's whaleboat was "hoisted out" and "hoisted in." Nothing says that it went anywhere. Isn't it possible that the thing was simply tied up alongside the ship when not assisting the plane? LTM, Russ ******************************************************************* From Ric Sure. Good point. I wonder how we can figure this out. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:47:25 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: G.V. Berger's visit to Gardner Is 1939 From Art There was a tradition in the Navy called Officers' Admin Ashore (basically, the officers not on watch would go ashore and knock back a few; munchies provided by the officers' wardroom mess). When I was the junior officer on a Navy ship, I had the job of getting the booze ashore (from the nuclear weapons locker, no less!). I guarantee you that the launching of the motor launch was in the log but not the names of the officers and civilians on board who went ashore. Any possible relevance here? Was the PELICAN at anchor or underway? Art from Maine ********************************************************************* From Ric Neither really. She was "lying-to". There is no anchorage at most of these islands. the pattern seems to be that the ship arrives in the morning, hoists out the whaleboat and plane, and sometime during the day whatever administrators live on the island come out and visit the ship. It's possible (but not mentioned in the log) that an invitation to visit ashore is extended which is subsequently honored after the plane's mission has been accomplished and the aircraft is safely back aboard. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:58:08 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: OK! Maybe I could be wrong! From Denise If the Pelican visit was in 1939 and "the bones" were in 1941, I think I may have to take it back. There couldn't possibly have been a quiet word at the bar at any club anywhere - well, there may well have been, but not on this subject. (So annoying! Why'd there have to be such a serious flaw in what was shaping up into a very fine conspiracy theory?) But I'm still not backing down from my stand that reports would have been made. It may not be in the paper trail but I can't see it happening any other way. Thus the club scenerio is back on, (or, alternatively, a quiet little "this is what's happened; what shall we do about it" chat over an after-dinner cognac and cigars at someone's house.), but it's just happening at a later date ... and wouldn't have involved the Pelican visit. But you must admit, there are grounds for suspicion in those serious inconsistencies in the Berger Report; like not getting off the boat yet still being able to sprout that stuff about the spacing in the wing-thing or whatever it was. There is something definitely happening in there that we're not being told about. LTM (who didn't like flaws in her conspiracy theories) Denise ********************************************************************** From Ric Discrepancies in recollections do not a conspiracy make. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 11:19:24 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: OK, LA TIGHARs From Emmett J. & Mary Lou Hoolihan Tom King; We'd be interested in being at your seminar Nov. 15. Keep us posted! Emmett J. & Mary Lou Hoolihan ejloulou@earthlink.net ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 11:31:53 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: .30 carbine oilers, Gallagher's effects, and S-45 From Dave Porter From Dave Porter in Detroit Ric, First off, every .30 carbine I've ever seen has it's own oiler. This is a small ( approx. 3/8" diameter x 3" long ) metal tube which fits into a recess in the side of the wood buttstock, and also serves as a "keeper" for the shoulder sling, a loop of which came through a hole in the stock from the side opposite the oiler. So, even if the tube had no oil in it, it had to be present if a sling was attached to the carbine. One might argue that the sling retaining oilers were empty, causing the Coasties to carry along oil in S-45's container, but anyone who's ever had to lug around military equipment on foot will tell you that the less stuff carried, the better, and why would you carry an extra oil can around if you had an empty oiler in the stock of your carbine. Transfer the oil from the can to the oiler in your stock, and voila, less stuff to carry. Even the "paratrooper" models of the .30 carbine, which had a metal frame folding buttstock had a slot in them for the oiler, though in that case, the sling was secured elsewhere. Angus tentatively ID'd S-45 as a lead sealing top for a can of Revelation Gun Oil yes? The .22 shell casings you found at the 7 site were marked with a letter F headstamp? Earlier this evening (Thursday, 08 August)at the gun shop where I work part time, I looked through a crate of old ammunition that someone found in grampa's basement and brought in for disposal. Among other not very interesting stuff, I came across a 1/2 full box of Revelation .22 ammo, which was marked with an F headstamp. Production by the Federal Cartridge Co. is likely, since the Revelation ammo was a product of the Western Auto Supply Co. of Kansas City, Mo. Any connection between Angus' discovery of a Revelation Gun Oil lead cap resembling S-45, and my find of Revelation .22 shells which appear to match those you found at the 7 site? I copied lot and product #'s off the box if needed. (even noted the Massachusetts ammunition tax stamp) Incidentally, we also recently took in (from a different source than the Revelation .22's) a nice old Colt Woodsman .22 semi-auto pistol, the serial # of which indicates that it was produced in 1940, which probably makes it too new to be Gallagher's. Do we have a serial # for Gallagher's Colt .22? Imagine my initial excitement at going to work and finding a Gallagher vintage Colt .22 and some Revelation (possibly same brand name as S-45) .22 ammo marked with the same F headstamp as the .22 cases you found on Niku. Before I got the story straight, I had visions of Gallagher's personal effects marooned on Tarawa at the outset of WW2, later liberated as war trophies by some G.I. whose hoplophobic baby-boomer offspring later brings it into the very shop where I work! I doubt that even Carol could come up with a more exciting script. LTM, who warned me about an over-active imagination Dave Porter, 2288 **************************************************************************** From Ric Not to spoil the plot but there were three .22 casings found on Niku. Two were marked with a P and the other was marked with a U. No Fs. We don't have a serial number for Gallagher's Colt. Angus Murray identified S-45 as a spout/closure of a particular type. He found a collector who had a can of Revelation gun oil that used that type of spout/closure with the same words and patent number cast into the closure that we see on S-45. However, the particular shape of the closure does not appear to be just like S-45 so it would seem that whatever type of product S-45 came from it was NOT that type of Revelation gun oil. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 09:54:38 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: OK, LA TIGHARs From Jim Tierney TOM KING--OK--Please put me on that list of people to keep advised of your speech/show in LA on Nov 15th... Looking forward to seeing the presentation at UCLA... Jim Tierney Simi Valley, CA ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 10:08:43 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Pelican Whaleboat From Ron Bright RE: Gardner Is Visit I reinterviewed Gerald Berger again. He again reiterates he was in charge of the whaleboat that went into Gardner along with Cadet Officer Simonsen. Seven or eight others were with him; he also confirmed that the boat was a guard for the seaplane. He couldn't recall other names of the crew. He again "recalls" seeing natives, women, perhaps "30" or so. He had the impression they were waiting for a British supply ship to arrive. He said the Pelican didn;t anchor, but layed to off the Island during this time. Berger added that he went to the southern part of the atoll (unable to fix the point using Tighars Niku map) and he launched ping pong balls in order to see the speed and direction of the current for future AE searches. He describes "heavy scavola" underbrush that impeded the path. He said he would send me the photo of a native going up a coconut tree at Gardner and the photo of the natives at Gardner. I suppose we could authenticate them . Whether he went ashore or not doesn't seem that important now. No evidence of AE or the Electra was reported in what could have been a very cursory visit. His photo of Pedro aboard is confirmation that he was at least close by Gardner as confirmed by the log. Berger said that after the Pelican left Gardner they ended up at Rose Is. Note: Berger's memory is at best fragmentary and incomplete, and he readily admits those limitations of that voyage. I think that this is about as close as we can get to mining his recollections of Gardner. LTM Ron B ************************************************************************** From Ric The PELICAN's log lists an Aviation Cadet USNR C.D. Simonsen as being aboard. There was also another Aviation Cadet, W.D. Gaboury. The pilot of the Duck seems to have been Lieutenant C.H.B. Morrison of VP-4. The "Intelligence" officer aboard was the captain, Lieutenant H. J. Dyson, who was also the "Navigator". Those four seem to have been the only commissioned people aboard. On April 30, 1939 there were 23 people living on Gardner. The wives and children of the initial work party had just arrived two days before. I was not aware that ping pong balls were standard issue on seaplane tenders. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:37:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: OK, LA TIGHARs From Tom King I appreciate the interest in my talk at UCLA. If everybody would just send me snail mail addresses, I'll make sure UCLA notifies you and not mess up the Forum with bipartite communications. LTM Tom King tfking106@aol.com =============================================================================== Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 12:53:06 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Forum doldrums The forum has been uncharacteristically quiet for the past week or so, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot going on. Numerous TIGHAR researchers are working on a variety of fascinating new leads and developments that simply aren't yet far enough along to "go public" with. In the meantime, we've put the entire Forum Archives on the website as downloadable text files that can then be searched with any conventional word processor. You'll find them at http://www.tighar.org/forum/Forum_Archives/archiveindex.html Everything is there all the way back to November 1997 when the forum began. The old Highlights are still up but the press of other work has made it impossible to keep them current so we've made the raw (on occasion very raw) files available. Because they're all now on-line you can, in theory, search for postings on any given subject using an internet search engine (such as Google) although it will take a while for the various seasrch engines to get them indexed. LTM, Ric ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:25:57 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forum doldrums From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, I'm glad to be back! Glade to be anywhere!! Since the conclave meeting you had in Delaware, were any decisions made regarding a deep-water search? If this has already been discussed, blame it on my medication! Hope all is well with you & Pat. LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ****************************************************************** From Ric Yes, we decided that it doesn't make any sense to spend a lot of money looking for a few things in a nightmare environment (the deep water) when, if our hypothesisi is correct, there should be lots of stuff in a relatively cheap and easy to search environment (on land) if we can just identify the right place to look. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:27:38 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forum doldrums From Marty Moleski > In the meantime, we've put the entire Forum Archives on the website as > downloadable text files that can then be searched with any conventional word > processor. You'll find them at > http://www.tighar.org/forum/Forum_Archives/archiveindex.html Many thanks to you and Pat for the great work you've done with TIGHAR and the Forum. > ... we've made the raw (on occasion very raw) > files available. ... Let the reader beware! :o) Marty #2359 ======================================================================= Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:31:09 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forum doldrums From Pete Sounds like a perfect time for Ric and Pat to get in a little horseback riding. Winter is coming, take advantage of the slow forum and go relax a little. Pete #2419 ***************************************************************** From Ric It's a nice thought but we're actually busier than ever. Besides, with Delaware doing a pretty good impression of the Nefud desert right now there's precious little riding to be done. ======================================================================= Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:33:30 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forum doldrums From Ron Bright Ric, Would the forum be interested in Gerald Berger's eyewitness account of the Luke field crash on 23 Mar 37 or in view of the Army investigation, it may be "OBE'd", that is overcome by events? His only contribution may be his speculation that when AE turned at the North end of the field on the grass, wet, that the right landing gear was damaged/weakened; and his speculation that the right propeller's problems later contributed to excessive fuel consumption in the second flight. As you know Berger's memory is somewhat suspect. Ron B. ********************************************************************* From Ric I'm sure the forum would like to hear what he had to say. We all understand (well, most of us anyway) that anecdote is anecdote. ======================================================================= Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:40:33 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forum doldrums From Warren Thomas Hi, Maybe I can help liven up the forum. If we still believe that one of AE's engines may of ended up on Canton (courtesy of Bruce Yoho)-I think that attempting to recover and identify the engine is the next logical step. While it does not conclusively connect AE to Gardner, it is a pretty convincing argument against a water landing. Perhaps it would also help direct money toward additional searching on Niku, since in many ways it aligns with the TIGHAR theory. Richard, your comments were instrumental in convincing me that this is a good direction-namely via. the Bob Ballard argument of only searing for items that are not really lost. It seems that in some respects-if we believe Bruce Yoho-this artifact is not really lost. It also seems that a delivery ship, a skidsteer (or backhoe) and a few archeological folks is not a tremendous financial undertaking. Maybe this has been discussed, beaten to death then dropped. If it has-well excuuuse meeee! Regards, Warren ********************************************************************** From Ric We'd feel better about expending further resources looking for the Canton Engine if we could find someone, anyone, who was on Canton at the time and remembers an engine being slung in from somewhere under a helicopter. Getting any kind of heavy digging equipment to Canton is a tremendous financial undertaking. For the same money we can put people on Niku where, we remain convinced, the conclusive answers are. ======================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 16:15:10 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Forum doldrums From Matt Mondro I know this has been all hashed over before. Whats the official stance on the crash photo? I was looking back on the tighar site at old research bulletins and it seems that there were a few positive things about the plane in that pic that were exciting. Like the circular hole in the wing metal on the crash photo that looks like the other pic of a 10a/e circular hole. Also the curved windshield bottom. Its missing an engine, bruce found one (supposedly). Id really like to see Tighar go look for that radial engine...... Matt Mondro Canton, MI *************************************************************************** From Ric The official stance on the Wreck Photo is that it looks a whole lot like a Lockheed 10 and if it's a Lockheed 10 we know that it's a big-engined Lockheed 10 whihc makes it either a C or an E. We also know that it was never involved in a crash (unbent prop) so - bottom line - if it's a 10 it almost has to be one of only ten possible airplanes (including NR16020). Based upon expert analysis of the vegetation, the photo could have been taken on Niku, but there is sure as heck no such wreck, or major remnants of such a wreck, on the island today (as far as we have been able to determine). If this picture was taken on Niku you have to say that the airplane was washed up on shore, photographed by somebody, and then washed BACK out to sea. That can happen, but as hypotheses go it's pretty complicated. LTM, Ric ======================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 16:16:40 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: USS Swan radio reception? From Tom Strang Forum: Did the USS Swan AVP 7 receive any of AE's radio transmissions of 2 July 1937? Respectfully: Tom Strang *************************************************************************** From Ric Not that's mentioned in any of the reports. Swan was way up north. ======================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 16:22:29 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Wreck Photo From Ron Berry Ric If the Electra was dismantled on Gardner Island by natives, there should lots of rivets and debris for metal detectors to find. In the wreck photo there is a lot of things such a cables,and frame work half buried in the weeds and what ever is there for the plant life to grow in. Once plants have grown over an area it is much harder for anything that is embedded in them and the soil around them to wash off. Ron Berry ======================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 16:24:07 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Brown Spots Here and There From Carol Dow Hi Ric, I have something for the group. I'm watching the Travel Channel on the tube several weeks ago and Elgen Long is blasting away. It's been bugging me ever since. Here's the pitch: If Earhart and Noonan were south of Howland Island and Baker Island, they could have looked to the north and seen Howland and Baker as brown spots on a silver sea. Brown spots! Maybe someone needs a trip to the eye doctor. But the travel channel went to unusual lengths to show Howland and Baker as brown spots on a silver sea. So, according to Elgen Long, this proves they were north of Howland Island otherwise they would have seen the two brown spots and turned back. I thought, oh brother, this can't be. Would anyone like to comment? It's been bugging me for quite some time. Did anyone ever see brown spots in the middle of the blue Pacific with the hot tropical sun staring you in the face and a silver sea and haze off the ocean floating by underneath the plane? Alan and a few others, hope you're there. The only thing I ever heard about was dark shadows. I assume this is more Elgen Long imaginations. Carol Dow #2524 ======================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 16:28:22 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: OFF TOPIC - Bill Mauldin From Ric TIGHAR member Roger Kelley has asked that I post this to the forum. It is totally off-topic and we've never posted anything like this before and I certainly don't want to make a habit of it, but just this once.... >For those of you too young to > >recognize the name: Bill Mauldin, who is now 80 years old, was the > >finest and most beloved editorial cartoonist of World War II. An > >enlisted man who drew for Stars and Stripes, he was the one who gave > >the soldiers hope and sardonic smiles on the battlefields; Mauldin > >knew their hearts because he was one of them. Using his dirty, > >unshaven, bone-weary infantrymen characters Willie and Joe as his > >vehicle, Mauldin let all those troops know there was someone who > >understood. A Mauldin classic from World War II: an exhausted > >infantryman standing in front of a table where medals were being > >given out, saying: "Just gimme th' aspirin. I already got a Purple > >Heart." > > >Baby-faced and absolutely brilliant, Mauldin became a national > >phenomenon. Talk about a boy wonder: By the time he was 23 years old > >he had won a Pulitzer Prize, been featured on the cover of Time > >magazine, and had the country's No. 1 best-selling book, "Up Front." > >Yet he remained the unaffected, bedrock genuine, decent and open > >guy ... his fellow soldiers loved him. > > >And he stayed that way - right down to the baby face - all the way > >into his 50s and beyond. I was brand-new in Chicago, 22 years old > >and a beginning reporter, when I walked by the old Riccardo's > >restaurant one night, and there was Mauldin having a drink at one of > >the outside tables with his friend Mike Royko. Mauldin had seen me > >around the hallways; he motioned me over and invited me to join > >them. I sat down and tried to act as if this was nothing exceptional > >at all, as I looked around me at the table and thought to myself: > >You're six weeks out of Bexley, Ohio. That's Bill Mauldin. That's > >Mike Royko. This is a dream. > > >He was always so nice to me; he volunteered to write the foreword to > >one of my first books. We sort of lost touch after he moved to the > >Western part of the U.S. full time, and I guess that when I thought > >of him it was still as the eternally boyish, eternally grinning, > >eternally upbeat Mauldin. > > >And then the message came the other day from the 3rd Infantry man. > > >Bill Mauldin needs help. > > >He suffered terrible burns in a household accident a while back; his > >health has deteriorated grievously, and his cognitive functions are > >barely working. He lives in a room in a nursing home in Orange > >County, Calif., and sometimes days at a time go by without him > >saying a word. He was married three times, but the last one ended in > >divorce, and at 80 in the nursing home Mauldin is a single man. > > >I spoke with members of his family; they said that, even though Bill > >hardly communicates, the one thing that cheers him up is hearing > >from World War II guys - the men for whom he drew those magnificent > >cartoons. > > >Which is not what you might expect. Mauldin was not one to hold on > >to the past - he did not want to be categorized by the work he did > >on the battlefields when he was in his 20s. He went on to have a > >stellar career in journalism after the war, winning another Pulitzer > >in 1959. Many Americans, and I'm one of them, consider the drawing > >he did on deadline on the afternoon John F. Kennedy was > >assassinated - the drawing of the Lincoln Memorial, head in hands, > >weeping - to be the single greatest editorial cartoon in the history > >of newspapers. > > >But it's his World War II contemporaries he seems to need now. The > >guys for whom - in the words of Mauldin's son David - Mauldin's > >cartoons "were like water for men dying of thirst." David Mauldin > >said his dad needs to hear that he meant something to those men. > > >He needs visitors, and he needs cards of encouragement. I'm not > >going to print the name of the nursing home, so that this can be > >done in a disciplined and scheduled way. A newspaper colleague in > >Southern California - Gordon Dillow - has done a wonderful job > >organizing this, and he will take your cards to the nursing home. > >You may send them to Bill Mauldin in care of Dillow at the Orange > >County Register, 625 N. Grand Ave., Santa Ana, CA 92701. > > >What would be even better, for those of you World War II veterans > >who are reading these words in California, or who plan on traveling > >there soon, would be if you could pay a visit to Mauldin just to sit > >with him a while. You can let me know if you are willing to do this > >(bgreene@tribune.com), or you can let Gordon Dillow know > >(gldillow@aol.com). > > >Bill Mauldin brought hope, and smiles in terrible hours, to millions > >of his fellow soldiers. If you were one of them, and you'd like to > >repay the favor, this would be the time. ======================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:05:52 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Kanton logistics!!! From Christian D: > We'd feel better about expending further resources looking for the Canton > Engine if we could find someone, anyone, who was on Canton at the time and > remembers an engine being slung in from somewhere under a helicopter. Agreed... > Getting any kind of heavy digging equipment to Canton is a tremendous > financial undertaking. For the same money we can put people on Niku where, I still quite disagree with this: it has to be much cheaper -even if a slow process. To begin with, the container-carrying Govt ship stops at the Kanton dock up to twice a month nowadays, on its twice a month round trip to Xmas Is. Cheers Christian D *************************************************************************** From Ric Whether or not it's twice month, the Kiribati gov't ship does call at Kanton. So let's look at what would be involved in getting heavy digging equipment out there that way. 1. We'd have to decide what we mean by heavy digging equipment. When we were there in '98 they had a Kubota tractor that should accept a backhoe. That would seem the cheapest way to go. But does the Kubota still run, and how sure can we be that a backhoe can be installed? Communication with anybody on Kanton is next to impossible, but let's say we answered those questions and satisfied ourselves that a backhoe would work. 2. Next we'd have to buy the right backhoe and get it to where the gov't ship could pick it up - presumably Tarawa. I don't know what the expense would be but we're certainly talking several thousand dollars. 3. Next question - whose gonna do the dig? If we're going to send a crew - even if it's just one person - it means somebody who knows both how to install and operate a backhoe AND understands archeological and artifact preservation concerns and can be away from gainful employment for ( I would guess) at least a month, probably more, by the time you get to Tarawa (one flight from Fiji per week), hook up with the government ship, and make whatever rounds it makes before reaching Kanton. Is the ship going to wait while you get the backhoe working and do the dig? If not, you're stuck on Kanton until the next visit. There are no hotels or stores on Kanton. Maybe we just have the backhoe delivered and fly a team out later, as in '98. That trip cost $50,000 and we stayed for two nights. The inescapable bottom line is that for the money and hassle it would cost to further investigate a, so far, uncorroborated anecdote we're much better off focusing on the place where we have much more reason to believe consclusive evidnce is to be found. Ric ======================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:21:36 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Canton or Not From: Kenton Spading Ric wrote: We'd feel better about expending further resources looking for the Canton Engine if we could find someone, anyone, who was on Canton at the time and remembers an engine being slung in from somewhere under a helicopter. ***************** Spading adds: I would like to expand on this thought a little bit as folks seem to be confused about this. We have spoke to former Canton workers who remember seeing the engine Bruce was working on sitting next to the shop. What we need is someone who remembers the slinging operation from an outer island to Canton. Without that further confirmation...the very real possibility exists that the engine was slung from somewhere on Canton's reef. Lots of airplanes crashed on, around and near Canton. The dump, which is now buried, where the engine was allegedly discarded, covers a large area. Digging it would take lots and lots of time and money. We need a lot more evidence before we pursue an object that, at this point, only exists as anecdote. LTM Kenton Spading ======================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:22:40 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Kanton logistics!!! From Alan Caldwell Ric, I've always been intrigued by the so-called Canton engine too. I sort of agree with Christian that it is something that could be pursued but I can't find holes in your response to him. That kind of expense could not be justified even if the money was there. Sooooo, I'm anxious to read the next email from Christian telling you in detail how his theory could be accomplished for a tiny fraction of that and where the money would come from. Alan #2329 ======================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:25:21 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: A New Thread From Denise Since things seem to have quietened recently, perhaps it's time for a new thread to jazz things up a bit ... and may I offer those cryptic initials "B.U." in the "Bones File" as that thread. Someone who wasn't one of people known to have handled the file went through it and listed beside their "B.U." initials a possibly deliberately-obscured date. You must admit it's mysterious and is certainly something requiring more discussion. So, any suggestions who "B.U." could have been? Does it point to any name in this epic's vast list of characters? And if it doesn't, what other possibilities are suggested? Since Vaskass was known to be "The Prince of Bureaucrats" and a stickler for "things being done right", it has to be someone above-board. And since the bones discovery was being kept secret it had to be someone with a need-to-know status. Thus, whoever "B.U." is s/he would have to be someone who logically should have been allowed to see the files or it wouldn't have happened. Vaskass wouldn't have allowed it. So, those are the guidelines: it had to be someone with a need-to-know and, in addition, someone who logic dictates had to be told about it. So, who? what? when? why? As to the obscuring the actual date "B.U." handled the file, what was the point? Was it deliberate? Accidental? Just someone forgetful? Done at the time? Done later? In one handwriting? Two? Several different handwriting? Same pen? Different pens? This is the only part of this that stops me thinking we can rule out any shady dealings. It's a little too odd to be dismissed. I, for one, would love to find out more about those curious alterations and also to hear people's thoughts on the subject. LMT (who loved a good mystery) Denise ======================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:13:41 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A New Thread From Ed Dear Ric, Perhaps, the letters "B.U." were not initials but rather were abbreviations for "Buried Unknown". LTM Ed of PSL #2415 ======================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:59:09 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Research needed From Ric I'm writing the much-needed and long-awaited treatise on fuel. We'll publish it in a special issue of TIGHAR Tracks and, of course, put it on the website. Here's an excerpt from the introduction: ************* "Unless and until conclusively identifiable wreckage is found there is no way for anyone to know whether the airplane ran out of fuel near its intended destination or continued on for some period of time to some other location. However, sufficient technical and historical documentation exists to reliably establish the performance potential of the airplane for that particular flight within reasonable parameters. This paper will show that the documented capabilities of the Lockheed 10E Special and the known factors influencing the flight from Lae, New Guinea to the vicinity of Howland Island indicate that the aircraft should have had more than enough fuel to reach Gardner Island. We will also show that published calculations purporting to explain how and why the aircraft ran out fuel soon after the 08:43 transmission are mathematically incorrect. To know what could be expected of the Earhart Electra on that fateful flight we need four types of information: 1. We need to know the theoretical and demonstrated long range flight capabilities of the Lockheed Model 10E Special. 2. We need to have some idea of how skilled Amelia Earhart was at attaining the performance of which the machine was capable. 3. We need to know the airplane's fuel load and total weight when it began the journey. 4. We need to know what human and environmental factors influenced the progress of the flight. Some of the answers are known to a high degree of certainty and precision. Others are known only in broad outline which, necessarily, prevents us from reaching a specific conclusion about how long the airplane could have remained aloft. We do, however, have enough reliable information to draw an informed box around the problem" ***************** An important part of the paper will, of course, be Lockheed Report 487 (recently brought to light by Alan Caldwell) and the excellent computational work done by Oscar Boswell. In addition to the theoretical maximum range performance calculations presented in the report, there were a number of practical demonstrations of the type's performance which should be instructive IF we can pin down the details. The flights in question are: - Earhart's March 17/18, 1937 flight from Oakland to Honlulu. - Dick Merrill's May 9/10, 1937 flight from New York to London in the other 10E Special, NR16059 "Daily Express". - Merrill's return flight on May13/14, 1937. The flight's of the Daily Express are especially interesting because each exceeded the distance from Lae to Howland to Gardner. Indeed, the return flight was made almost entirely in instrument conditions, against headwinds, and took 24 hours and 3 minutes. However, to understand just what happened on all three of these flights we need reliable details such as how much fuel they started with and how much they had left when they arrived. Pinning down those numbers for Earhart's Oakland/Hono flight is tough enough. Getting them for the Daily Express flights is proving even more difficult and I'm hoping that our historians on the forum can help me find sources that have so far eluded me. A Google search will quickly take you to Jack King's 1981 biography of Dick Merrill, but I've found that King's book is fairly unreliable and, in places, self-contradictory. TIME magazine articles from May 17 and May 24 are helpful but not detailed enough. I also have a photocopy of a short article from Aero Digest which appears to be from the June 1937 issue. There are also a couple of good paragraphs in the wonderful article about the Model 10 by Tom Emmert and Bill Larkins which appeared in the summer 1978 issue of the Journal of the American Aviation Historical Association. But we need more. Any help would be appreciated. LTM, Ric ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 10:05:08 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: A New Thread From Jon Watson Ed of PSL wondered: <> If this is the case, then the poor old bones must have been dug up a bunch. I counted five entries for "B.U.". ltm jon 2266 ************************************************************************* From Angus ...................or Boston University or BaggeredUp? Laikim Long Mama Angus ****************************************************************** From Denise Ed of PSL #2415 says: "Perhaps, the letters "B.U." were not initials but rather were abbreviations for "Buried Unknown"." No, Ed, they wouldn't have been. The Prince of Bureaucrats liked people to put their initials on any file they went through, so they'd definitely be someone's initials. And I don't see him letting anyone out of his sight while they read this "so-secret" file, so he'd be looming and ensuring things were done right. As to who this could be, the deepest recesses of my mind are throwing up a name from childhood, a Brian Underwood, but I can't attach any information to it. Is there a Brian Underwood somewhere in this saga? If so, who is he? Would he be someone with a need-to-know? Or was he merely some childhood playmate who has been thankfully forgotten? The only two other possibilities my more logical mental recesses are throwing up must be rejected: 1) "P.U." bunked off to Britian when war clouds loomed in order to sign up to do his bit by joining the British Navy, so he wasn't around in this timeframe. 2) "L.U." said he knew nothing about the bones and he's a gentleman of unassailable integrity, so it's the truth and definitely not him. So, that's it. If it's not the forgettable Brian Underwood, then I'm stumped. I have to leave it to you guys! LTM (a "B.K." these days) Denise *************************************************************************** From Ric We've never run across the name. This is really very silly. Note that all of the entries by "B.U." are purely administrative, never commentary. When I asked Foua Tofiga about it he explained that "B.U." are merely the initials of some minor functionary whose job it was to periodically review the "minutes" of the file and make sure things were properly logged in. We have plenty of mysteries to solve without manufacturing more. LTM, Ric ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 10:09:18 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Herman Ric, You may remember that as a (retired) journalist I'm still working as a European correspondent for FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL (the British counterpart of Aviation Week). I've asked for assistance and they will have somebody dig into their 1937 archives and see what they published on those flights. With a bit of luck they may come up with something more technical than TIME or any other general information publication at that time. I'll keep you posted. Herman *************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Herman. That's great. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 10:18:27 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Quantifying competence From Ric While we're looking for good data on the Daily Express flights, I'd like run some logic past the forum about another aspect of the study. Does this make sense? ******************************************* In recent years there has been much discussion about whether or not Amelia Earhart was a "good pilot," but debating the applicability of qualitative labels does not help discover her fate. To quantify Earhart's ability to derive from the aircraft the long-range performance of which it was capable we have to look at the available records of long distance flights she made in the 10E Special. And to be sure that it is AE's ability that we are quantifying, we can use only those flights on which she was the only pilot, which pretty much limits us to the second World Flight attempt. We must also make a necessarily arbitrary decision about what should be considered a long distance flight in a Model 10E Special. A fair measure of where "normal" flight operations leave off and special "long range" skills are needed is the point at which the airplane's takeoff weight exceeds the maximum allowed for operations in the "Standard" category. Any takeoff above that weight requires that the airplane be licensed to operate in the "Restricted" or "Experimental" category. In the case of the Standard Category Lockheed Model 10E, the Bureau of Air Commerce had set the maximum gross takeoff weight at 10,500 pounds. This was broken down as 7,100 pounds for the empty weight of the airplane (including radios) and 3,400 pounds of "useful load" (crew, passengers, baggage and gas). To permit higher takeoff weights the two Model 10E Specials - Earhart's NR16020 and the Daily Express NR16059 - were licensed in the Restricted Category as indicated by the "R" in their registration numbers. Unfortunately, we have no empty weight figure for the Daily Express and the latest actual empty weight figure we have for NR16020 - 7,265 pounds - dates from the fall of 1936 before many of the modifications were made to prepare the airplane for the World Flight. During the extensive repairs that followed the accident which ended the first World Flight attempt some of the aircraft's internal structure was strengthened and several equipment changes were made. The net effect of these changes on the aircraft's empty=20weight is not known so, rather than guess, we'll use the 1936 figure as a "ballpark", giving Earhart's Electra an estimated useful load of 3,235 pounds within the Standard category. If we allow a very conservative 400 pounds for two crew plus spares and baggage, we can say that any time the airplane was carrying more than 2, 835 pounds of fuel (about 473 gallons) it was "over-gross" and was engaged in a "long-distance" flight. For the Standard Category 10E, Lockheed advertised a rate of fuel consumption at 65% power of 56 gallons per hour (gph). At that rate 473 gallons would be adequate for a flight of about 8 and a half hours with no reserve. If we assume that Earhart planned at least a 20% reserve we can say that those legs of the World Flight that exceeded, say, seven hours duration required special long-distance flying skills. ********************************* LTM, Ric ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:09:51 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Brown Spots Here and There From alan Caldwell Carol, actually islands often show up as very light blue or bluish green. That's the shallow water around them but I've never seen a "brown spot" in the ocean - not to say no island could look that way. Don't get upset over anything Long says. He has created a scenerio designed to reach a predetermined conclusion and so everything must be bent to that order. Most folks find the conclusion last after all the evidence leads to it. Elgin's way is a lot better and quicker. It saves all that nasty scientific analysis, time and expense. Alan #2329 ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:17:25 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From David Carmack Ric, <<4. We need to know what human and environmental factors influenced the progress of the flight.>> Does environmental include mechanical factors? These would be impossible to know to without the aircraft or unless she alluded to problems in her transmissions, which I assume she did not? but, given the mechanical troubles she had at times with the plane I guess its possible there was something wrong mechanically at some point in the flight that she was unaware of or incapable of knowing while flying? also,I'm sure you addressed this before and I missed it ,but what about Longs contention in his book that the charts of the day were off by a few miles as to Howlands location? Is this true and how much bearing did it have? I think you are exactly right when you say there should be evidence on the island--you just have to find the right place to look for it. sounds like you have decided upon a good location for your next trip. good luck! david *********************************************************** From Ric We can't know the unknowable. The only known equipment problem during the Lae/Howland flight was with the radio but that would not effect fuel consumption. Simlarly, whether or not they had the correct coordinates for Howland Island has no bearing on the question addressed by the paper. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:35:12 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Dennis McGee Ric postulated: "A fair measure of where "normal" flight operations leave off and special "long range" skills are needed is the point at which the airplane's takeoff weight exceeds the maximum allowed for operations in the "Standard" category. " Is it really that cut-and-dried? Weren't there some legs of the flight that were shorter and did not demand "long range" skills, and where she took-off under gross? If so, it would be hard to argue that AE was engaged in "normal" flight operations at those times. Ric further postulated: "If we assume that Earhart planned at least a 20% reserve we can say that those legs of the World Flight that exceeded, say, seven hours duration required special long-distance flying skills." Perhaps I'm a bit naive, but technically aren't long-distance flying skills limited to knowing how to stay on course, at altitude, and management of the fuel? The actual "flying skill" needed is not too great. What she needed was skill in navigation, skill in communications, skill in planning, and skill in survival, none of which were her forte it appears. She also needed stamina, physical conditioning, emotional strength, and mental acuity and agility -- none of which relate directly to flying skills-- all of which she demonstrated on various occasions. I thought the fuel starvation horse was pummeled beyond all recognition, cremated, and scatted to the four winds several months ago. Obviously I've missed something during my hiatus because I'm not too sure what we're trying to prove with this thread. We know how much gas she had on take-off; we know the general performance characteristics of the plane, we have vague reports of her enroute weather, we know the capabilities of the crew, and we have a fair estimation of the crew's attitudes and conditioning. So where are we headed here? LTM, who appears to be lost Dennis O. McGee #0149 *********************************************************************** From Ric I'm not flogging a dead horse, I'm building the monument over the tomb so that everyone - even Elgen Long and Nauticos - will have an opportunity to see who is buried there. This paper has been needed for a long time and I think we've finally reached a point where we have, or can find, sufficient documentation to write it and make it stick. As to your question about long-distance flying: The objective is to reach a supportable conclusion about how good Earhart was at flying the airplane under circumstances requiring special power/fuel management skills. We're not addressing her physical or emotional competence. I don't know any way to quantify those things. All I'm trying to do is figure out which legs of the World Flight we need to look at to see how well the airplane performed under her management. The fact of the matter is, most of the legs flown by Earhart and Noonan required no special fuel management. LTM, Ric ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 13:11:46 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, Could you clarify exactly which piece of radio equipment that AE found to be inoperable before she took off from Lae? Thank you. LTM Mike Haddock #2438 ******************************************************************** From Ric That's not what I said. I said: <> The problem is known to us. It wasn't known to AE until she got close to Howland. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 13:15:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, In AE's last transmission, she was reported to have said "Wait" and nothing more is reported. Was that a transcription from Itasca's log or was it a voice recording? The reason I ask I have known two pilots who ran out of fuel. One successfully landed the aircraft and the other crash landed in the Mexican desert. Both pilots said it was a heart-stopping experience to see the prop stop. If AE's transmission of "Wait" was audio, was there any note of panic in her voice or was there any mention of panic in the Itasca log? Just curious as usual. LTM, (who only panics in the ER) Mike Haddock #2438 ************************************************ From Ric It was heard in a voice transmission and written down in the Itasca radio log. Her voice was later characterized as rushed but not panicked. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 13:17:15 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, I think it's important to mention to the Forum as you indicated to me some time ago when I questioned AE's flying skills, that she is most accurately classified as a "stunt" pilot. Nothing more--nothing less, with no disrespect to her memory. LTM, Mike Haddock #2438 ************************************************************ From Ric Earhart made long flights for the publicity value. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 13:23:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Static and Other Problems From Carol Dow Ric, You raised a question about radio problems Lae to Howland, I can't remember any reports about radio problems with Earhart's Electra on any other portion of their trip. All of a sudden they arrive on the Howland scene, and the radio problems startup. I looked at the CD from the Navy reports, and they Navy remarked there was a lot of static in the area supposedly at the time Earhart was lost. So all the Japanese spy theories start buzzing around (all they need is one excuse), but that doesn't explain anything. In fact, it makes it worse. What about thunderstorms coming through as static on 3105 and 6210? There are some real radio experts on the Tighar network. What would thunderstorms do to 3105 and 6210? Maybe I had better copy off the Navy remarks about static in the area and post the results. My thinking is that Earhart would have had to have been fairly close to those storms before she would experience static on the airways. I don't know if I'm right or wrong (probably wrong). It bugs me, you might say. Possibly some of that switching around between frequencies was an attempt to get away from the static. I know, there was a scheduled change between daylight and nighttime hours. Also, I am finding (in somebody's book - I believe it was Goldstein & Dillon)) Earhart knew about counting 1-2-3-4-5-6-7 etc. which is standard procedure for establishing radio contacts. Where did all this whistling into the mike come from? It's crazy what was going on, especially the part where she broke a valid radio contact....and in the fix she was in. My God. So all the spy guru's are barking back....well, Earhart didn't want anyone to know where she was. I can't accept spy arguments. The Navy could have sent a PBY seaplane over the Marshall Islands anytime they were in the mood (refueled at sea) and the same thing applies to Saipan which is exceptionally close to Wake Island. By rights, you could apply the same line of thought to the Island of Truk (Fred Goerner's book). But lets go back to the first question. What would thunderstorm static do on 3105 and 6210? The Navy report is saying the Itasca could hear her but she couldn't hear them. Do I have a valid point? Hello to Alan Caldwell, thanks for the reply on the brown sports here and there. Carol Dow #2524 ******************************************************** From Ric I'd still like to hear from anyone who can provide a good source for data on the Merrill/Lambie flight. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 14:40:49 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Mike Haddock Hi Ric, I was referring to an account of AE taking a short test-hop the morning of the Lae-Howland flight and it mentioned that AE noted some piece of radio equipment was inoperable & she elected to ignore it. LTM, Mike Haddock #2438 ************************************************************* From Ric She couldn't get the Radio Direction Finder (RDF) to work but she assumed it was because she was too close to the station. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 15:59:47 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Static and Other Problems From Pat Wouldn't an ADF act as a thunderstorm detector? If she was flying towards an ADF type signal, if there were thunderstorms, wouldn't the needle swing towards the storm and the static could be heard over the speakers. I don't remember if there were actual thunderstorms... Just wanting to throw in two cents so that I can -- tah dah - sign off Pat #2538 (a new mother lover!) *************************************************************** From Ric She wasn't using an ADF and there was no needle to swing. She was using an RDF and had to manually turn the loop antenna to get an "aural null" or "minimum" to take a bearing. She was unable to do that. There is no indication that there were thunderstorms in the area and, at that hour of the morning, thunderstorms would be very unusual unless associated with a weather system, which does not seem to have been the case. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 16:06:43 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Cam Warren Something else to think about - As you know, I postulate - based on exhaustive research - that Bendix provided RDF-1 HF/DF equipment for the Electra, most likely installed at Miami. "Conventional Wisdom" doesn't accept this; some experts even denying the Navy & Coast Guard ever used the high frequencies for direction finding. (WRONG, as I've proved emphatically). Still, such usage by Earhart serves to answer a series of nagging questions. They are: 1) Despite Putnam's attempts to convince the world of the enormous asset "The Flying Laboratory" was, why did a cloud of secrecy descend in Miami with regard to the radio/df gear installed? 2) Why did Amelia refuse the assistance of Pan Am and their well-established trans-ocean DF system? 3) Why did she knowingly jettison her 500 kc capability? 4) Why was she so vague (and misleading) when she described her DF equipment (and her available frequencies) to the ITASCA via an insecure radio circuit? 5) Why did she specifically request ITASCA transmit a homing signal on 7500 kc (which happened to coincide with the frequency range of the RDF-1)? 6) If that request was made in error, why did she so quickly acknowledge reception on that frequency? True, Amelia's technical knowledge was inadequate, but she was NOT an "air head". I think the best answer is that she was counting on her "wizard" still-classified RDF-1 to lead her straight to Howland. Unfortunately, she couldn't make it work. Cam Warren ******************************************************************** From Ric That's the great thing about the Earhart mystery. Everybody's got a theory. ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 16:08:45 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed Dave Chase here from Wilton, CA Hi Ric! You said "Earhart made long flights for the publicity value" I believe that is an accurate statement, but not complete picture of her flying skills. I had the opportunity a couple years ago to read alot of old newspaper clippings, both at the Purdue Earhart collection and elsewhere. We should not forget that over the years Earhart flew many hours all over the country both to her many speaking engagements (yes, she drove as well) as well as for pleasure and competition. This included landing at both airports and many a farmer's field. It was recognized by many of the 99's that Earhart was a bit of a PR hog but with her heart in the right place. And none of her female peers would have put in her the top ten list of best pilots. During the 30's (and apparently today!), there were those who characterized her as a stunt pilot because of the high profile "PR flights" she got lot's of $$$ and publicity for. What they really meant, of course, was that the flights were stunts or commercial enterprises. In NO WAY was Earhart a real 'stunt pilot'!!! (as you clearly know). Nonetheless, Earhart had many, many flight hours and to characterize her as a neophyte would hardly be accurate either. Not saying you do this, but others do have that impression. Her real problem as a pilot, IMHO, was that she clearly lacked discipline and had no patience for studying her trade. To her, it was a fun hobby that was dangerous enough to end her life at some point, which she acknowledged in her writings. But she was too busy raising $$$ to be the best at what she did, so she settled for 'just getting by'. Dave ======================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 16:13:50 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: New Thread (B.U.) From Mike Muenich Maybe we need to find out who B.U. might be. It has been my experience, personal--my secretary does NOT allow me to retrieve file or calendar appointments, that management generally has administrative assistants that are responsible for files (no--I will not call my secretary, or any other secretary, a "minor functionary"). If, as Foua Tofiga recalls, B.U. was a minor functionary who periodically reviewed the file, he, the functionary, might know how and where it was filed since he would have to retrieve and re-file. He might also know what happened to it. Do they have records of employment? ************************************************************** From Ric We saw, and copied, the Service List of WPHC officers but I don't recall seeing general employment records at Hanslope Park. In any event, there is no mystery about where the file is. We have it right here (copies anyway) and it's all on the website. ============================================================================== ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 08:50:00 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: New Thread (B.U.) From Tom King I think Mike raises an interesting point. True, we know where the file is, but we don't know where its subjects went, and it's just conceivable (sure, a long shot, but we've had a few of those before) that B.U. just happens to know. Minor functionaries do sometimes keep track of odd things, and even wind up with odd things in their possession as government offices close down and move. That said, I don't have any hot ideas about how to find B.U., and although I wouldn't dismiss his relevance out of hand, I don't know how much effort it's worth investing in him. ************************************************************************** From Mike Muenich <> Sorry--mis-understood which file you were talking about. What about the "bones" file and the artifacts themselves? ************************************************************************ From Ric There are two "bones" files - one in Tarawa and one in England. We have them both and they're combined as the "Bones Chronology" on the TIGHAR website at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Bones_Chronology.html We don't know where the artifacts are. ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:19:20 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Alan Caldwell > The fact of the matter > is, most of the legs flown by Earhart and Noonan required no special fuel > management. > From Alan Ric, special fuel management may have been necessary and/or have occured on many of those legs depending on how much fuel was aboard on each take off. If less than a full fuel load was taken on then it might have still been necessary to fly a good fuel management protocol. Secondly it might have been a good idea to practice such knowing the long leg would eventually come up. They certainly needed to know what fuel consumption they could get out of the plane before tackling Lae to Howland. Alan #2329 **************************************************************************** From Ric A full fuel load on NR16020 was 1,151 gallons. Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I know the airplane never in its short lifetime took off with a full fuel load. The closest it ever came was on the Lae takeoff with 1,100 gallons. The second World Flight attempt was made up of 33 individual flights of which 24 were of less than 7 hours duration (18 were under 4 hours long). We don't know how much fuel was carried on each leg and it's possible that Earhart intentionally or accidentally shorted herself at some point, but there's no mention of such an event. It's also possible, and indeed likely, that she practiced good fuel economy on even the short legs. What we're looking for though are occasions where she had to demonstrate the kind of skills she would need on the Pacific flight. I would suggest that those occasions are the South Atlantic crossing from Dakar to St. Louis on June 7th (13 hrs 22 min.) and the flight from Assab to Karachi on June 15th (13 hours 20 min.). The next longest leg was the trip from Paramaribo to Fortaleza on June 4 (9 hours 20 min.). ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:28:16 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Cam Warren Ric - So that's your answer to the questions? "Everbody's got a theory"? If I didn't know you religiously followed the Scientific Method (somewhat like the Rhythm Method, I assume), I'd say your reply was a cop-out. Cam Warren ************************************************************************* From Ric I feel no obligation to spend a lot of time refuting your speculations. We've been down this road several times and it's a dead end. ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:30:03 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: For Seattle-area TIGHARs From Tom King If any Seattle-area TIGHARs are interested in setting up an illustrated lecture on The Quest, I'll be in the neighborhood September 12-24, teaching during the days but for the weekends and September 16-17, and evenings free. I've put this word out to our publisher, Rowman and Littlefield, to see if there's a bookstore that might want a signing of "Amelia Earhart's Shoes," but I'm afraid the book's getting a bit long in the tooth to be attractive for such events. I'll be spending a good deal of time with my kids in Redmond, but will be able to travel. If anyone's interested in setting up a talk, please contact me at tfking106@aol.com LTM Tom ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 09:55:34 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Cam Warren Ric - > We've been down this road several times and it's a dead end. > I know your time is exceptionably valuable, but could you briefly summarize just why you feel it's a dead end? True, I haven't found the smoking gun yet, but have accumulated a great deal of significant data supporting the theory. Remember, just because a suspect can't account for his whereabouts the night of the crime, doesn't mean he's off the hook. Cam Warren ******************************************************************** From Ric And absence of evidence is not proof of a cover-up, and correlation is not causation. <<1) Despite Putnam's attempts to convince the world of the enormous asset "The Flying Laboratory" was, why did a cloud of secrecy descend in Miami with regard to the radio/df gear installed?>> Cloud of secrecy? What cloud of secrecy? You think something happened but you can't find any evidence that it happened so a cloud of secrecy must have descended. <<2) Why did Amelia refuse the assistance of Pan Am and their well-established trans-ocean DF system?>> Assuming you can prove that it was offered, I can think of any nmber of reasons that the Putnam/Earhart Celebrity Machine would not want to use the PAA system. <<3) Why did she knowingly jettison her 500 kc capability?>> Because 500 Kcs was code-only and neither she nor Noonan was competent in morse. <<4) Why was she so vague (and misleading) when she described her DF equipment (and her available frequencies) to the ITASCA via an insecure radio circuit?>> Never ascribe to malice (or subterfuge) that which can be explained by mere incompetence. Insecure radio circuit? Of course it was an inseure radio circuit. It was a civilian stunt flight. <<5) Why did she specifically request ITASCA transmit a homing signal on 7500 kc (which happened to coincide with the frequency range of the RDF-1)?>> I don't know and neither do you, but the coincidence does not put an RDF-1 aboard the airplane. <<6) If that request was made in error, why did she so quickly acknowledge reception on that frequency?>> That frequency was also within the range of her Western Electric 20B receiver via her Bendix loop. She would be able to hear the signal but not home on it. Like I said, speculation about some mysterious second receiver is just a time waster. LTM, Ric ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:01:40 EDT Reply-To: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum Sender: The Amelia Earhart Search Forum From: "Richard E. Gillespie" Subject: Re: Research needed From Jon Watson Hi Ric, Is it reasonable to presume that it wasn't that the RDF wasn't receiving, just that she couldn't get a null? My guess is, if it wasn't working at all, she