Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:24:42 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Amelia Hears W4OK. Okay, how? > What folks are doing is creating a scenario based solely on insupportable > assumptions and then arguing about it. Talk about tilting at > windmills................ Alan, substitute "hard evidence" for "scenario" in the above statement, and you'll have the situation down exactly. Hue ********************************************************************** From Ric Let's see... that would be: > What folks are doing is creating "hard evidence" based solely on insupportable > assumptions and then arguing about it. Talk about tilting at > windmills................ Yeah, that's about right. ********************************************************************* From Bob Brandenburg > What folks are doing is creating a scenario based solely on insupportable > assumptions and then arguing about it. Talk about tilting at > windmills... Alan, Amen!!!! My interest was merely to dispose of the technical aspect of this matter. It is by no means necessary that AE learned Carroll's call sign via radio. There are many other ways she could have acquired it, but it doesn't really matter how. Nor can it be concluded that W4OK was the only call sign Amelia had, merely because it was the only one in Betty's notebook. Bob ************************************************************* From Cam Warren Alan says: >Actually you want us to believe she was NEVER aware of any ham radios. This >is nonsense. I don't think so. Judging from Earhart's cavalier attitude about radio in general, and consequent lack of knowledge, I 'd guess her awareness of ham radio was next to nothing. Cam Warren ***************************************************************** From Ric Earhart's association with the Los Angles area ham community goes back at least to 1935 when Walter McMenamy provided some assistance during her Honolulu/Oakland flight. There's a photo of McMenamy standing with Earhart at a microphone in front of the Vega after her arrival in Oakland. ******************************************************************* From Ron Bright Re: Shortwave help for AE In Brinks book,p.68 and on, he describes how the Radio Relay League, a worldwide organization of hams, were to be involved with AE';s first flight, going west. He mentions several LA operators, including McMenamy and Pierson, but on page70, lists a Jacques Berlant, at New York City, who was to play an instrumental part at AE's New York headquarters. It stands to reason the RRL would be a part of the second try, but I have no evidence of that. As Alan suggested, AE was undoubtedly given a list of the Hams en route and the call signs.(None were listed in Florida). But it is remarkable that New York was the location of a ham. Could it be possible AE tried to contact him since it was a "headquarters" link. There are four or five references to New York or NY, in Betty's notebook. Could someone look up his call sign? LTM, REB ********************************************************************* From Ric Brink's book is, for the most part, a tissue of lies but I know there was (and I believe still is) a Radio Relay League and it may be that Jaques Berlant in New York did play some role in the Earhart saga. We need to find out. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:26:17 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Daryll said . . . Daryll said: >Who was making the quote, who's mouth was moving, is my >question? Was AE speaking the words and Noonan was standing next to her shaking >his head in the affirmative? Unless you can produce a reliable non-hearsay >quote by Noonan about his lack of Morse capabilities then it is still pretty much >up in the air and just a PR comment of the moment. Noonan's background and >experience (head of navigation?) with PAA was pretty well separated from the PR >of the "world flight". What AE said can be believable from her standpoint but >becomes a little harder to believe from Noonan's standpoint when there is >conflicting evidence. Daryll, are you saying that Noonan was, at the least, competent in Morse, but let AE tell everyone that neither she nor he could copy or transmit Morse? Boy, if that was me I'd been real pissed. If I am capable of doing something and my friend is telling everyone she talks to that I'm not, and I learn of it, I think I'd straighten her out in a hurry. Wouldn't you? Noonan had several opportunities over the course of the world flight to set the record straight regarding his Morse capabilities if AE was misrepresenting his qualifications. He never, to my knowledge, disputed her statements. His silence speaks volumes. LTM, who is back from the edge Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:35:20 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF >Why do you believe an undocumented allegation by Anthony over an undocumented >allegation by Safford? Both "allegations" are documented, as you should know. And I think you'll agree both gentlemen were Earhart contemporaries, and highly credible sources. further - >Do you >develop some kind of "feel" for the truth? Yes. Cam Warren ********************************************************************** From Ric I can only conclude that you don't even know what documentation is. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:41:31 EST From: Tom Strang Subject: W40K Speculation What If? For W40K Speculators, For the sake of W40K speculation - What if more than one hand was responsible for the authorship of Betty's notebook? Respectfully: Tom Strang # 2559 ********************************************** From Ric I know of no reason to think that unless you're suggesting that Betty is lying. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:45:23 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Ric's question Ric says to Darryl - >Cam Warren seems to agree with your original statement that Safford thought >the Howland HFDF came from a PBY. I've tried to find some reference to that in >Cam's edited and expanded republication of Safford's book but it's so rambly >and poorly indexed that i can't find anything. In the hard bound edition of "Earhart's Flight Into Yesterday" (chapter 13, "The Radio Direction Finder", page 158) you'll find the following: "There was another HF/DF involved in the flight. This one, described as a 'back-up system,' and operating on Earhart's main frequency of 3105 kc, was set up on Howland Island. Capt. Safford thought this equipment was 'borrowed' from a PBY undergoing an overhaul at the Fleet Air Base, Pearl Harbor. (A good guess, but apparently incorrect.) Much later however, his friend, Chief Radio Electrician Henry M. Anthony, USCG (later Commander) revealed that it was an experimental portable model borrowed from the Navy Radio Intercept Station at He'eia, Hawaii. Although nominally in charge of all radio intercept activities at the time, Safford might not have been fully informed of what was essentially an "off the record" operation, involving - to some extent - Richard Black, Army Lt. Cooper, and Paul Mantz." Sorry to be so "rambly", but you asked for it, and we like to be helpful to our dedicated readers. Cam Warren ***************************************************************** From Ric So Safford was just guessing and Anthony's revelation was an anecdotal recollection many years later. And THIS is what you call documentation??? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:47:32 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Audio recording interviews? I would appreciate input from anyone on a good modern way to record a phone interview. I am thinking of something newer & better than a cassette tape deck, altho i do still have an older phone answering machine that claims it can do this. (Maybe private offlist mail is best for this?) Thanks- Hue Miller ( write kargo_cult and that's at msn dot com ) ( anti spambot measures) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:39:42 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF >As for the Morse key(s): >W. A. Titus, of Western Electric, says Amelia sent him back one key from >Miami; Joe Gurr claimed to have the other one. I saw that information in Lovell's book in Ch 19 but it was Lovell writing that and it wasn't footnoted so I don't know where that came from. Is there some documented source for W.A. Titus' statement? As for C.B. Allen's quote it is not in Lovell's book, Cam so you must have it in your Allen file some place. Is that correct? Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:40:45 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF >And to answer Alan's question; Safford was apparently incorrect that it >was from a PBY. Thanks, Cam. I have photos of all the radio equipment in the old PBY's and will post them to you when I get time so you can tell me what all those boxes are. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:41:56 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Fact and fiction Ron, my complaint was that the statement posted that Thompson said the 281 message was a hoax was not ALSO qualified that there was no support for the statement. Ric had to add that. By now most of us can recognize which statements have been supported but newer folks can't. Anyone who did not see Ric's response could now easily believe the 281 message WAS a hoax and discard that piece of possible evidence. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:43:11 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF >Alan, not sure i understand the question, Hue, that is only because I didn't make a very clear question. Let me try again. I'm confused about the dynamotor spinning up problem. Your comment was about turning the transmitter off and on and I was wondering if just keying the mike and releasing it caused anything to occur with the dynamotor. Keying the mike is not the same as turning the transmitter on and off is it? If this still isn't clear email me separately so we don't bore everyone else with my radio ignorance. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:22:41 EST From: Daryll Subject: Safford's quotes COPIED FROM SAFFORD'S MANUSCRIPT. Preface; Pref-7 2nd para "......From 1936 through 1941 all the Navy's high-frequency direction finders (used for intelligence purposes) were under my cognizance and also the coastal intermediate-frequency D/Fs (used for navigation) until July 1941......" **************************************************** pg. 1-4 Safford acknowledges 2 different radios. 1st para; "Even the Western Electric Co. , makers of Miss Earhart's 50-watt transmitter and her all-wave receiving set,......" last para; "She was then striving frantically to get a bearing on the ITASCA through her own Bendix radio compass,..... ****************************************************** pg. 1-22 2nd para "I followed Miss Earhart's Around-the-World Flight with great interest and took advantage of her Oakland-to-Honolulu hop in March 1937 to try to arrange comparative tests of two experimental high-frequency direction-finders owned by the Navy and the Adcock high-frequency direction finders used by the Pan American Airways for guiding their "CLIPPERS" across the Pacific....." SEE preface ; (Unfortunately the test could not be carried out because both sets of Navy D/Fs were disabled at the time : see exhibits ___and___in the appendix.) ****************************************************** pg. 41 last para "....It is worthy of note that the significant words "ON SEVENTYFIVE HUNDRED" were omitted by Comdr. Thompson from his radio-report to Washington.... pg 42....and also from his written report to Honolulu. These words were likewise omitted from all publish accounts [last sentence underlined my note]." MY NOTES IN UPPERCASE. MORGENTHAU INTERVIEWED THOMPSON IN HAWAII. IF THOMPSON'S OMISSIONS ABOUT 7500 WERE INTENTIONAL, THEN THIS COULD BE THE BASIS FOR MORGENTHAU'S STATEMENT ABOUT EARHART "DISOBEYING ORDERS" IN MAY '38'. ****************************************************** pg. 77 1st para "Mrs. Morrissey had very little to add to the above account, but in a personal letter she stated: "I do not know the names of the ships that went searching the South Pacific. I know George Putnam had published at the time (late in 1937), 'A List of Books to take on a Sea Voyage' ". CHECK TO SEE IF THERE IS A NOURMAHAL CONNECTION TO THIS PUBLICATION. Ie DID PUTNAM WANT SOME READING MATERIAL FOR THE CRUISE ON THE NOURMAHAL TRYING TO GET TO JALUIT **************************************************** pg 4-6 1st para ".....What she had not found out (and it cost her her life) was that she could take accurate bearings on frequencies above 1500 KC ONLY at distances of less than 100 miles and in some cases less than 50 miles. Amelia could not hear most of the ITASCA's homing signals because she was in the "skip-zone" and the signals were going high in the sky, over her head, and coming down to earth hundreds of miles beyond her......." last para "....To Miss Earhart's misconceptions about the Electra's loop D/F was added the hoax perpetrated by Richard B. Black of the Interior Department and Lt. Daniel A. Cooper of the Army Air Force. (incidentally this hoax interested the author in the Earhart flight and ultimately resulted in this book.) The so-called Navy high-frequency which these men brought aboard the Itasca and persuaded Comdr. Thompson to set-up and operate on Howland was a 24 volt, aircraft type of loop D/F, similar to the one in AE's plane - possibly its twin. To make a bad matter worst, these worthies forget to furnish a 24 volt battery to operate the blasted thing. The D/F in question had been "Moon-light Requisitioned" from a Navy patrol plane at the Fleet Air Base, Pearl Harbor, without the matter coming to the attention of anyone.....pg 4-7..... who knew anything about direction-finders and, consequently would have put a stop to it - and would have saved two lives by so doing. Richard Black later admitted (or rather boasted) to Fred Goerner - "I bought that D/F aboard the itasca. It was given to me by a Navy man at Pearl Harbor and it was a very hush-hush deal Actually it was an experimental model of some of the direction-finders we used during the war." Lient. Cooper, however, spilled the beans in his official report - "It is true an airplane direction finder capable of working 3105 KC had been borrowed from the Navy just prior to sailing. This was set up on Howland mainly as a standby in case the ship's direction finder on 500 KC should go out." The ITASCA's log merely states - "Received high frequency direction finder from Fleet Air Base, Pearl Harbor." ***************************************************** pg 4-8 "DIRECTION FINDER INSTALLED ON HOWLAND" "This fact was reported to Mr. G.P.Putnam, then in San Francisco, and he passed the news on to Miss Earhart who was then at Darwin, Australia.........Miss Earhart and Capt. Noonan had logical reason for believing that their recommendation made to the Coast Guard , four months earlier, ("PLANE SUGGESTS DIRECTION FINDER IS SET UP ON ISLAND, IF PRACTICAL") had been carried out and that a genuine high-frequency direction finder ( PAA Adcock or equivalent) was available to guide them safely in to Howland Island." ***************************************************** Daryll ************************************************************ From Ric You've done a great job of documenting how appallingly bad Safford was at historical research. He jumps to all kinds of conclusions and then states them as fact. Incidentally, Thompson did not omit the words "ON SEVENTYFIVE HUNDRED" from his report to Washington. They're right there on page 42 of "Radio Transcripts Earhart Flight". In that same report, on page 5, Thompson explained the matter of the high-frequency direction finder this way: " Mr. Richard Black, Field Representative of Department of Interior, stated in conference on ITASCA that he had arranged with the Navy Department to supply the ITASCA with radiomen. This arrangement was not acceptable to the Commanding Officer of the ITASCA for the reason that the Coast Guard had sufficient radiomen to perform its work. Mr. Black and Lt. Cooper of the Army had the Navy send a high frequency direction finder on board. The Coast Guard did not request the equipment and did not receipt for it. In discussing the practicability of the high frequency direction finder equipment put on board the ITASCA by the Navy under the conditions mentioned above, it was the impression of the Coast Guard officers that limits of accuracy reasonable to be expected from this equipment in the circumstances which would obtain on Howland Island were decidedly not sufficiently close to warrant its use as a dependable navigational device to bring the plane safely to the island. It was considered desirable, however, to set the equipment up on Howland as an accessory precaution. It was the decision of the Coast Guard officers in conference that the procedure to be followed in connection with the radio navigational assistance to the Earhart plane in coming into Howland Island would be governed by the apparent desire of the plane to use its radio direction finder on signals sent by the ITASCA in the hope that in case of difficulty approximate bearings might be obtained which would be of some value. The TANEY transferred a radioman second class to the ITASCA." The radioman transferred from the TANEY was Frank Cipriani. There is no record of just what kind of HFDF Black and Cooper procured from the Navy but it's very clear that its presence was unwelcome and set off a turf war between Thompson and his guests. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:23:40 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: For Alan & Ric I'm sorry I asked the Morse code questions. Guys, I'm happy to believe and won't again question whether AE and/or FN were proficient to ANY degree in sending and/or receiving Morse Code. Actually I'm not sure what the significance is. All we have in this issue is two poorly sent Morse Code messages. There is NO issue about our heroes RECEIVING Morse Code, only sending. I accept they weren't good at it and the fact both messages were poor certainly doesn't contradict that. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:34:11 EST From: Neil Barnett Subject: Re: For Alan & Ric Ric wrote: > It's more than a comment by someone at Lae. Earhart herself repeatedly > specified that the Coast Guard should send only voice, and Chater is > very specific on this point. > "On enquiry Miss Earhart and Captain Noonan advised that they entirely > depended on radio telephone reception as neither of them were able to > read morse at any speed but could recognise an individual letter sent > several times. This point was again mentioned by both of them later when > two different sets at Lae were used for listening in for time signals." > What would convince you? There are a lot of open questions about the > Earhart disappearance but this ain't one of them. Ric, what makes Chater more credible than anyone else? Apart from the fact that his report is contemporary and in writing, there is no compelling reason to believe him. He states that before leaving Darwin for Lae, Earhart had advised via AWA (Australia) that she would be sending and receiving on 36 metres (approx. 8.3 MHz), and via Vacuum Oil Co. that she would be using 36.6 metres (approx. 8.2 MHz). On arrival, AE pointed out that she in fact had used 49 metres (approx. 6.1 MHz). Someone has clearly misrepresented the frequencies to be used. I'm not sure that Earhart was that person, since her life was at stake. So, how much credibility do we give to Chater? He did not explain the frequency discrepancy in his report, which makes me deeply suspicious that he was hiding something, possibly his own negligence or worse. He and his company (Guinea Airways Limited) were not impartial bystanders in this affair. It may turn out when this disappearance is finally explained, that Chater's report, in which you place so much faith, has survived only so that it might be an indictment of him and his conduct. Sometimes people lie, even in official reports, to minimise their own culpability. I note that Chater was killed October 13, 1941 when he was struck by a propeller. Neil Barnett Auckland, N.Z. ************************************************************************* From Ric Given Earhart's demonstrated incompetence in radio matters I have no trouble believing that the screw-up in frequencies on the Darwin/Lae flight was entirely her doing. Yes, sometimes people lie in official reports but we have to have some equally-well documented reason to accuse them of lying before we can make that charge. I see no reason to suspect Eric Chater of doing anything but representing the facts as he understood them to be. The fact that he was an aviation professional who was directly involved with Earhart and Noonan, and that he wrote his account shortly after the events he was recounting makes his letter the most credible source we have. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:50:39 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Morse sending I was thinking about morse the other day, after reading some of these posts, and i recalled some years back, i was using for ham radio, an old Navy radio built about 1943. That was roughly 8 years newer than AE's gear. It had 100 watts input power, simple receiver that tuned to 12,000; no selectivity adjustment just like AE's rig, pretty simple. I also was using a wire maybe 30 feet long along the lower edge of the roof. I was regularly able to make reliable contacts, chat-quality stability, from Washington state to So. California and Utah. That is about 1000 miles. I seemed to have trouble, with this particular setup, getting much further, like 2000 miles. I doubt, from experience, that i would have gotten 70 miles or so on voice. What got me thinking about this, is that IF AE had keyed the microphone for morse sending, I would think that would have put in a pretty good signal for anyone listening in the medium-distance Pacific area. ( These are night distances-daytime was zilch - maybe 40 miles. ) There might be a skip zone - i dunno yet about quite what that would be - maybe 60 ?? miles of no signal zone, but beyond at skip distances, the signal would definitely be usable. I guess i relate this to the Messier message - i would think instead of his partial copy, some ship or station in the Pacific area could have copied the text 100%. Purely anecdotal, yes; just me ruminating. Hue Miller ********************************************************************* From Ric Your experience is actually remarkably similar to the geographical distribution of the post-loss radio events. Fully 44% of all the events were reported by stations that were within 1,000 miles of the Howland Island (the search vessels, Howland itself, Nauru). Another 23% were reported by stations farther than 1,000 miles but less than 2,000 miles (Hawaii, Midway, Wake) but consisted almost entirely of weak carrier waves. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:51:37 EST From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Audio recording interviews? First, I suggest Hue makes sure it is not illegal where he lives, to record a phone conversation. In some places notice is required (remember the old "beep"?) Here in Colorado, as long as one party to the conversation is aware it is being recorded, that is okay. ltm jon ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:16:05 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Documentation Much of the fuss here on the Forum seems to stem from what IS and what is NOT documentation. I would suggest, since we want this to be a reasonably scientific investigation, that Ric might expound a little on what that is. I know it has been done many times but the explanation doesn't seem to be sinking in. From my point of view, I will offer the following: 1. NOTHING merely written in a book, newspaper or magazine is documentation. It must be footnoted and the footnote, to be of value, cannot simply be the name of a person or another similar publication. 2. Official records work although it helps if there is more than one source. 3. NOTHING said by a second or third party is documentation. That's hearsay and not admissible in court. For example, in Cam's note he refers to Chief Radio Electrician Henry M. Anthony's revelation found in "Earhart's Flight into Yesterday." That is not footnoted or supported in any way. Anthony did NOT write that. Apparently Stafford did. I have no clue whether Anthony ever said what he supposedly said. Even Stafford's comments are not supported in any way. None of that is documentation. At best they are leads for further investigation. 4. No anecdote is documentation. 5. "Smoothed" radio logs are not documentation. The raw logs are. Having said that someone will complain that definition leaves us with virtually nothing. That's true if we're only talking about documented, supportable facts. But like in any investigation we use everything we can find, opinions, anecdotes, hearsay, periodicals, etc. TO LEAD TO SUPPORTABLE FACTS. Alan ************************************************************** From Ric I think your definition of documentation is too black and white to be of much use. In my view the key to assessing the value of documents starts with the recognition that "the dullest pencil is sharper than the sharpest memory". No document, no matter how contemporaneous with the event it purports to record, is necessarily perfect but time is the first measure we can apply. A raw log and a log that has been "smoothed" a few days later are both documentation, but given a contradiction between the two, raw trumps smoothed every time. Newspaper stories are documentation but, as anyone knows who has ever been the subject of one, more often than not at least some of the details are wrong. Some of the best forms of documentation are simple records of transactions - purchase orders, fuel receipts, etc. So there are lots of shades of gray within the various sources that we accept as "documentation". I do agree wholeheartedly with your assertion that anecdotes are never documentation, but we have to define anecdote. I would say that documentation is a written or photographic record generated in the context of the event in question or its immediate aftermath. Any later recollection about what happened, even if written down, is anecdotal. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:16:59 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Amelia Hears W4OK. Okay, how? Doesnt' someone have the 1937 Ham Operators book (if that is what it is called) to find out Berlant's call sign in 1937. Correction, the cite about that Ham network was in Brinks book but actually in an article in the LA Times on March 10, 1937 . I thought it noteworthy that the Berlant was a "New York City" ham, not just New York, a phrase that was found in Betty's notebook. REB ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:19:11 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: Amelia Hears W4OK. Okay, how? There are 2 NY ham calls named in the April '37 RADIO article. I do intend to copy and mail to Ric. One would wonder, if AE was working off the list, why she would bother to call a Florida ham. Her list had the high power ham stations in Hawaii and California listed; she had worked well with them in the past, on the flight to Hawaii. (But that was with Manning (?) aboard, who had more of the specialized skills. ) So why call W4OK ? Betty says she was all excited, like she was trying to get back to someone. Not, that AE was all excited about going down her list. Was she still excited about hearing W4OK 4 hours previous? If she really did hear W4OK, now that was something to get excited about, because as Bob Brandenburg has pointed out, the odds were miniscule that was possible. (I say Mr. Brandenburg is even generous with the odds - consider that all clues are that Carroll ran less than full legal power - which required a relay rack sized transmitter - that Carroll probably ran something like 100-200 watts; and that AE was receiving solely on the 1-foot diameter loop antenna. Which direction do those limits tilt the already slim odds? ( Yes, i know, it's still "nonzero" ! ) Betty does say AE was trying to get back to someone. The only callsigns in the notebook are W4OK and KGMB. The notebook account has AE fiddling with the headphones, indicating she did hear something. Altho the April '37 list may be incomplete - it says the California organizer was trying to recruit more stations - in addition, we may assume the magazine article was actually written 2 months before cover date- it seems from the available list, the US hams were west and east coast and Hawaii - plus numerous hams overseas. Also, the Howland station ( K6GNW ? i think ) is listed. Why call Florida? If she could hear hams, why not get all excited about the Hawaii and California stations she had heard calling her? But, the next 2 hours, no more calls to specific ham stations. Just cabin arguments, etc. Anyone going to tell me AE could NOT hear the California and Hawaii hams, and COULD instead hear moderate-power W4OK in Florida? Maybe Carroll did join the ham support network. Maybe he would have even mentioned that to his daughter - she was also a ham. Never mentioned it. As to whether hams were indiscriminately calling AE - maybe so. I will try to get some first hand witness. If a California ham could call her, why not Florida? Why not North Dakota, or Greenland? Why not try? Who cares about odds? I think we all agree that the evidence should be coherent, logical. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:20:24 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: To Hue Hue, you're right. The usual way we tape phone calls is inadequate. Radio Shack can help you and you might check with the engineer of your local radio talk show for the best way to achieve good audio. Using the answering machine capability is poor and so is putting a mike on the phone. It needs to be an intercept on the phone line and Radio Shack can help. If you strike out, let me know and I'll find something for you through one of my sources. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:22:11 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: NY hams > it may be that Jaques Berlant > in New York did play some role in the Earhart saga. We need to find out. The RADIO article: "When the plane hits Australia, George Putnam, husband of Amelia Earhart, will go to New York to be in closer contact with plane on the balance of the trip. [ HM: i don't get this. ] He will work with amateurs through stations W2APV and W2FPT [ No names given ]. " I suggest from experience using the radio, even AE had no illusion that she could reach NY from Niku. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:23:17 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: NY hams With the caveat that this article was from Apr '37. With lead time, i expect it was prepared around 2 months previous. That leaves half a year for additions to the group or network. Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:30:16 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) Bob Brandenburg wrote: > It is by no means necessary that AE learned Carroll's call sign via > radio. There are many other ways she could have acquired it, but it > doesn't really matter how. Otherwise, how? By, as Alan suggested, by listening to hams back in the USA, then remembering or jotting down callsigns? Or was he somehow on her list? > Nor can it be concluded that W4OK was the > only call sign Amelia had, merely because it was the only one in > Betty's notebook. But, it was the one reported by Betty, who says AE was excited about getting back to someone. That's sustained excitement for several hours, but i guess it would be exciting to hear W4OK, considering the odds for it, that you outlined. Then, somehow for the next two hours, we have a live broadcast instead, with the engine running all time, apparently, to sustain the heavy current drain of the transmitter. Ric wrote: > Earhart's association with the Los Angles area ham community goes back at > least to 1935 when Walter McMenamy provided some assistance during her > Honolulu/Oakland flight. There's a photo of McMenamy standing with Earhart > at a microphone in front of the Vega after her arrival in Oakland. Ron Bright wrote: > In Brinks book,p.68 and on, he describes how the Radio Relay League, a > worldwide organization of hams, were to be involved with AE';s first flight, > going west. He mentions several LA operators, including McMenamy and Pierson, > but on page70, lists a Jacques Berlant, at New York City, who was to play an > instrumental part at AE's New York headquarters. It stands to reason the RRL > would be a part of the second try, but I have no evidence of that. > > As Alan suggested, AE was undoubtedly given a list of the Hams en route and > the call signs.(None were listed in Florida). > > But it is remarkable that New York was the location of a ham. Could it be > possible AE tried to contact him since it was a "headquaters" link. There > are four or five references to New York or NY, in Betty's notebook. Ric wrote: > Brink's book is, for the most part, a tissue of lies but I know there was > (and I believe still is) a Radio Relay League and it may be that Jaques > Berlant in New York did play some role in the Earhart saga. We need to find > out. The RADIO article: "When the plane hits Australia, George Putnam, husband of Amelia Earhart, will go to New York to be in closer contact with plane on the balance of the trip. [HM: i don't get this.] He will work with amateurs through stations W2APV and W2FPT [No names given]. " I suggest from experience using the radio, even AE had no illusion that she could reach NY from Niku. Here is something else: "Already amateur radio has had a chance to prove its worth, for on the first leg of the flight the plane was out of contact with the world for approximately four hours except for amateur station W6NNR on 75 meter phone and the plane, KHAQQ, on 3105 kc. phone and cw. [earlier flight with Manning ? aboard as navigator / radio op]. W6NNR was able to copy the plane's signals solid until the plane neared Honolulu, and they reported W6NNR's signals as being of good signal strength at all times during the hop. During the four hours that the signals of KHAQQ were inaudible except at W6NNR, all messages were relayed through this station until regular communications with the scheduled stations was resumed... "For several weeks Guy H. Dennis, owner-operator of the station [W6NNR, Los Angeles, California ], has been lining up a chain of amateur stations on the charted course of the plane around the globe. It was no easy task, and at the present time the chain is not entirely complete, though arrangements are being made to fill in the gaps before the plane will reach those positions on the globe. Miss Earhart will not rely upon amateurs for communication during flight except in emergencies. The amateur service will be supplementary, just as a precaution in case other communications should fail..." "For the reason that the contemplated places of call are not definite, it was necessary to line up amateurs all along the route, so that no matter where she should make a stopover, there would be an amateur station not too far away. The amateur stations will also assist in relaying messages back from the plane to the sponsors of the flight in the United States, and be available for sending orders for gasoline or other supplies, should the plane land in some out-of-the-way place..." "As an example of typical amateur cooperation K6AYD, K6CRW, and K6NTV at Maui labored three days straight to put on a 500 watt 75 meter [~ 3800 kHz] phone station at K6NTV...." "On Howland Island, next stop on the flight, is K6GNW, with whom W6NNR [Los Angeles] is keeping schedules [i.e. "regularly communicating with"]. "The amateur station W6NNR [Los Angeles] uses ....800 watts input to the transmitter [ maybe 70% of this is "output", so reckon ~500+ watts to the antenna]...lays down a good signal to all stations in the chain on 20 meter [~ 14,000 kHz] phone...." My comments: Why ham stations? As i posted to the Forum some long while back, the usual ground-to-air service stations for public use, at least in the USA, used surprisingly low power. This was because it was wanted to strictly (try) to limit the range of what were intended as landing-operations frequencies 3105 6210. The power, if i recall, was something like 10 or 30 watts. You did not want the signal carrying over, from, say Seattle airfield to Portland Oregon, or Salt Lake City, at night when the propagation really rolled in. ( Today this has been solved by use of VHF in the 118-136 Mhz 118,000-136,000 kHz range; clearly, there are 18,000 kHz available there, whereas the shortwave aircraft band maybe only offered 2000-9000 kHz; also the VHFs are not sky-reflected, so you don't have the propagation bleed-over problem. Apologies for this simple material, but i wanted everyone to be on board.) So these ham stations running what was high power compared to the ground service stations, would be very advantageous. I note that ground stations belonging to airlines, which totally owned and operated their own communications networks, ran powers of 1000-3000 watts, both voice and telegraphy. They also had their own specific, "owned" or dedicated frequency channels, not for other people's use. Also: This does not necessarily explain the W4OK mystery. Perhaps his daughter Nancy Carroll, also a ham licensee, can answer whether he ever indicated any membership or activity in this "chain". Also, indications from Nancy are that his equipment was modest, not the level of power the chain station regulars addressed in the above article quote. Which leaves the mystery of why AE called W4OK. If you are establishing "hard evidence", via some science-like method, i don't think this is a shruggable item. The results on the California-Hawaii flight are interesting, yes? The plane was heard for 1600 miles minus 4 hours by normal ground stations, as i make it out. Does this mean reachable by them for 600 miles ( 4 times ~~150 mph ?? ) or about 300 miles at each terminus, and the middle 1000 miles ( or 500 one way ) only reachable by the higher power ham station? By this crude logic ( just roughly juggling numbers here ) the normal (non ham) ground station could reach her 300 miles out, and the ham could reach her 1600 miles out (at least). Keeping in mind this circuit has 2 advantages over solely ground-to-ground communication: elevation of the aircraft antenna, and totally over saltwater path. I note also that the plane could be heard by W6NNR over its total flight, but note, apparently at some point, telegraphy had to be resorted to. I think that's about it for now. Oh, the other thing about this article: 3 hams Australia 1 "Kupang" ( i dunno ) 6 Dutch East Indies ( Indonesia) 4 Malaya 2 Thailand 3 Burma 7 India 1 Aden 1 "Africa" ST2WF ( "This is perhaps the most perilous part of the trip, and there are but few amateur stations on the proposed route across Northern Africa" ) 2 Brazil 3 Guiana 2 Trinidad 2 Venezuela 1 Panama 1 Nicaragua 1 Guatemala 6 Mexico Why Trinidad, Nicaragua? I dunno. I suggest there's also the "fun factor" at work, for some of these: an opportunity to feel important, needed, and to use one's hobby radio too. -Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:36:46 EST From: Daryll Subject: Noonan's ego? Dennis McGee wrote: >Daryll said: "Who was making the quote, >who's mouth was moving, is my question?" > >Daryll, are you saying that Noonan was, at the least, >competent in Morse, but let AE tell everyone that neither she nor he >could copy or transmit Morse? Boy, if that was me I'd been real >pissed. If I am capable of doing something and my friend is telling >everyone she talks to that I'm not, and I learn of it, I think I'd >straighten her out in a hurry. Wouldn't you? You're injecting your own personality into a situation without considering the hierarchy of the situation. I believe they were friends but it was advertised as an employee employer relationship. Would you publicly contradict your boss in front of the foreign press? It was basically a non-issue to Noonan. He had no way of knowing that not commenting on that would become one aspect of evidence in their disappearance. What if there was a documented statement by AE that they both could do 10 words per minute? That would mesh with Waliupe's opinion of "...POOR KEYING...". Have you ever wondered what that employee employer relationship was between FN & GPP? I'm not so sure Noonan was totally cut loose from Pan Am and out begging around for a job. It's too easy, for political purposes, to hid that fact. Noonan had only been married a couple of years. You don't get married without some kind of feel for your job stability. But let's say he was out and foot-loose. What do you think he negotiated for the "world flight" job? A years salary, 6 months salary, equivalent to Pan Am's rate? Did Noonan's price go up after the Luke field ground loop with Manning backing out? It probably would have been better business on Pan Am's part to keep him as an employee at what, $10,000 a year and TDY him to Earhart. You can't ignore that a successful completion of the flight would have produced a lot of knowledge and information, which had a dollar value in cost alone. It was information that could be used by Pan Am. A route survey done without public, political, foreign or business commitments. A "War Plan Orange" alternate to get to the Philippines. The Lae - Howland leg would come close to being what Pan Am's Clippers could do at one time. How much would Pan Am have paid for a survey of a central route through the Pacific with only having to deal with the Dutch? You could use the cost of the New Zealand survey (conducted in the same time frame) as a negotiating starting point. I can't see Noonan's ego being hurt enough to want to divert the lime light from AE by inferring publicly that he had more skills than her. The flight WAS (supposed to be) her show. Daryll *************************************************************** From Ric It's always fun to see your mind at work. ***************************************************** From Rollin Reineck It is my opinion that the reasoning should start at the back end of this argument. For instance: Why did AE say that neither she nor FN could take code when we know for a fact that Noonan could and did when he worked for Pan AM? Why did AE do away with the trailing wire antenna when we know for a fact it was needed in order for her to transmit of 500kcs? Why did AE want a bearing on 7500kcs? Who ever heard of such a thing? Why did AE have the Bendix receiver installed with the Bendix loop. If AE wasn't going to transmit on 500kcs what did she do with that channel on her transmitter? Originally she had a 500 kcs Xtal. Did she have a channel that we are not aware of? Why did AE turn down PA AM's offer to help on her flight? All of these questions are interrelated and should be looked at together. Rollin C. Reineck ---- Kailua, HI *************************************************************** From Ric Once you start "knowing" things that are not known you can go anywhere you want to. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:38:51 EST From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Amelia Hears W4OK. Okay, how? Regarding the supposed use of Carroll's call sign by AE. It is a possibility that AE was hearing a conversation between two hams and alternately tried calling each of them in hopes that they would respond or she had their call signs from previous communications earlier in the world flight and was now trying to raise them in hopes of establishing communications. LTM, Dave Bush ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:27:36 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Audio recording interviews? Jon Watson wrote: >First, I suggest Hue makes sure it is not illegal where he lives, to record a >phone conversation. Good point Jon. I did not mention that to hue as I understood he was referring to phone interviews wherein the person being interviewed would obviously be made aware the interview was being taped. As long as that is the case I know of no law against it. Alan ************************************************************* From Ric When taking calls from creditors I find that it's often useful to make an announcement that " This call may be monitored for future use in litigation." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:33:54 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Documentation Ric, as you can see I take a very hard line on evidence but you understand why. Alan ******************************************************** From Ric It's interesting to me to contemplate how the "rules of evidence" in historical research differ from those of the courtroom. Cases in court are often decided on the basis of anecdotal "witness testimony" that we would consider to be no more than a starting place in the search for hard evidence. And, of course, convictions that were based upon anecdotes are often overturned when hard evidence (such as DNA) becomes available. I guess the difference is that a court has to reach a verdict based upon whatever evidence is presented when the case is tried. We have no such deadline and can afford to insist upon a higher standard. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:34:58 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Amelia Hears W4OK. Okay, how? Have I missed something? All this argument about W40K and we don't even know that's what Betty heard. Where is all the discussion about WOJ? What was actually said might not be either one. I can certainly see trying to track a rabbit trail down but folks are trying to build a case against Betty's notebook using a straw man. The bottom line in this issue may be that W40K is not what Betty heard or that it wasn't really Carroll's ham radio designation but you can't use that to invalidate Betty's notebook. If you're going to do that you'll have to do it some other way. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:36:33 EST From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) Hue Miller wrote: > Bob Brandenburg wrote: > >> It is by no means necessary that AE learned Carroll's call sign via >> radio. There are many other ways she could have acquired it, but it >> doesn't really matter how. > > Otherwise, how? By, as Alan suggested, by listening to hams back in the USA, > then remembering or jotting down callsigns? Or was he somehow on her list? Try thinking outside the box. Here are two possibilities: Carroll might have met Amelia during her layover in Miami; Carroll's call sign might have been on a list of amateurs who had offered to support the flight. >> Nor can it be concluded that W4OK was the only call sign Amelia had, >> merely because it was the only one in Betty's notebook. > > But, it was the one reported by Betty, who says AE was excited about > getting back to someone. That's sustained excitement for several hours, > but i guess it would be exciting to hear W4OK, considering the odds > for it, that you outlined. Then, somehow for the next two hours, we have > a live broadcast instead, with the engine running all time, apparently, to > sustain the heavy current drain of the transmitter. And your point is .... ? What, specifically, is the significance of W4OK being the only call sign recorded by Betty? How do you know that Amelia didn't mention other ham call signs that Betty didn't hear and record in her notebook? > Which leaves the mystery of why AE called W4OK. How do you know that AE called W4OK? Why would a "call" be the only context in which AE could mention a call sign? Bob #2286 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:37:47 EST From: Carl Peltzer Subject: Re: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) An Update if I may be allowed: Radio Relay League mentioned is now called American Radio Relay League and they might have some archives. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:46:01 EST From: Mike Juliano Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF Let me see if I can Help. When you turned your radio(s) on the dynamotor come on and stays on as long as the radio circuit is hot providing the proper voltage to the oscillator creating "carrier" for transmission. The dyno does not have to "spin-up" every time the mic is keyed. LTM Mike J. ******************************************************** From Ric What do you mean "as long as the radio circuit is hot"? Hot as in temperature? Hot as in electrified? The transmitter needs boosted voltage in order to transmit. The dynamotor provides that voltage. Unless you have some way to tell the dynamotor to stay on and keep boosting the voltage it's going to cut off every time you release the push-to-talk - isn't it? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:50:11 EST From: Mike Juliano Subject: Re: "Ham Chain" Wouldn't AE trying to contact "Ham" operators imply a greater savvy of radio operation than given her credit?!? Somtin'don't sound Kosher in Pago-pago.(where-ever that is) :) LTM Mike J. ********************************************************* From Ric Why does it require great radio savvy to say a callsign? Your assignment is to find Pago Pago on a map and tell us what country it's in and how to correctly pronounce it. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:52:57 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Documentation Ric wrote: >Cases in court are often decided on the basis anecdotal "witness testimony" >that we would consider to be no more than a starting place in the search for >hard evidence. Worse than that, Ric. Folks are executed on such ridiculous "evidence." Hard to overturn when the better evidence becomes available. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:55:44 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF >Unless you have some way to tell the dynamotor to stay on and keep boosting >the voltage it's going to cut off every time you release the push-to-talk - >isn't it? I read Mike's reply and thought, "Now I understand" and then Ric replies as above and I'm back to square one. Alan ****************************************************** From Ric At least I know where Pago Pago is. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:59:59 EST From: Tom Strang Subject: Re: W40K Speculation What If? Ric wrote: > I know of no reason to think that unless your suggesting that Betty is > lying Ric the term Lying I find harsh and demeaning - NO I'm not suggesting that Betty is intentionally misrepresnting her notebook - If I was suggesting anything it would be "False Memory Syndrome", which appears to effect all human beings young and old. Simply put studies in "False Memory Syndrome" suggest that human memory of an event degrades with the passage of time and is contaminated by external influences of daily life - True or false memory can only be determined by corroborative factual evidence- Ric,it explains and qualifies your aversion to anecdotal information being construed as factual information. I suspect I'm speaking to the choir on this subject. Respectfully: Tom Strang # 2559 ************************************************************************* From Ric So you're suggesting that Betty has simply forgotten that some of the entries in her notebook were written by someone else? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:03:43 EST From: Ed Subject: Re: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) Could it be that Carrol's (recruited) role was on the outbound leg from Miami since he lived on the East Coast (WPB) of Florida and they thought they needed someone though the normal air-to-ground link would be used? Or perhaps he somehow linked with her outbound. Just some thoughts. LTM Ed Of PSL #2415 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:02:58 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Ham and Radio-Facility books RE: Amelia's possible possession of ham call signs enroute to Howland from Lae. Balfour, Lae radio operator, claims that prior to takeoff, "she unloaded all her surplus equipment on me including her [Very] pistol, and ammunition, books, letters and facility books". [ Lovell, p268] Balfour: That night before takeoff she gave me a stack of surplus stuff from her plane. There were maps, navigation books, radio-facility charts...and her 32. automatic pistol". Cam Warren Archives, Balfour interview by Frank Underwood, People Magazine (Australia) Aug 23- Sep 8, 1967 (Photo copy of original on file) Long writes that "they packaged the three books that listed the world maritime navigational lights, broadcasts stations, and the coast and ship stations." [Long, p. 190] The question here for radio/ham experts is would the radio facility books have contained any ham call signs . Is that the type of book that would contain them. It seems that the above list is pretty inclusive. In my opinion it would be unlikely she would have written them down independently on some list. Ron Bright The pages refer to specific cites in the note sections. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:08:16 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: Documentation >For example, in Cam's note he refers to Chief Radio Electrician >Henry M. Anthony's revelation found in "Earhart's Flight into Yesterday." >That is not footnoted or supported in any way. Anthony did NOT write that. >Apparently Stafford did. I have no clue whether Anthony ever said what he >supposedly >said. Even Stafford's comments are not supported in any way. None of that is >documentation. At best they are leads for further investigation. The above from "Alan". According to the unabridged Random House Dictionary of the English Language (to name but one source), a "document is: 1) any written or printed paper furnishing information or evidence . . . 2) any written item as a book, article or letter, esp. of a factual or informative nature." "Documentation: 1) the use of documentary evidence. 2) a furnishing with documents, as to substantiate a claim or the data in a book or article." You may not think so Ric, but I don't come up with theories out of thin air, but have worked long and hard and done considerable field work over 10 + years investigating the Earhart disappearance, with particular emphasis in the critical area of Radio and Direction Finding, a field in which I am reasonably well qualified. Professionally, I am recognized as a qualified and credible non-fiction writer for publications both in this country and abroad (Incidentally, such magazines as Newsweek check out every quotation for accuracy). If I pass along information to the Forum, it has been carefully researched. Since I don't have the time or inclination to produce an encyclopedic report every time someone raises a question, I tend to respond as briefly as possible, but with no little authority. In the case of Henry Anthony, he made the statements referred to more than once; in interviews, letters and in his own writings. The same goes for Capt. Safford, and I have several draft copies of his Earhart book, plus having carefully evaluated - and occasionally corrected - his rare factual errors, based on information that became available after his death. E-mail is a dangerous medium of communication, as corespondents tend to dash off remarks and/or replies all to frequently "from the hip". I may have occasionally been guilty myself, but try to always make hard copies of messages, and proof-read outgoing messages. I can sympathize with you for having to cope with the large burden of incoming mail, much of it simplistic and repetitious. However, feel you should refrain from the same flip responses in the case of someone's serious attempt to present relevant material. Cam Warren ****************************************************************** From Ric After careful and thoughtful consideration I think that the greatest obstacle you have faced in your research is your misconception about what documentation is in the context of historical research. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:14:56 EST From: Mike Juliano Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF I had a physics professor in college who made me feel I was wrong even when I was right. Unlike the aircraft radios of today the WE radios used in AE's era used "vacuum tube" technology. These tubes are similar to a TV picture tube. These electronic vacuum tubes had to warm up to their operating temperature(They actually glow and give off heat). The dynamotor is a 6-28volt DC motor coupled to an DC generator in one light weight unit ,generating 225vdc-1000vdc depending on its design and application. When the radios were turned on the dynamotor started generating the voltage to energize the tubes and kept running until the radios were turned off. Keying the mic didn't start and stop the dynamotor. That would be like trying to watch tv while switching it on and off. The "click" that's heard when a mic is keyed is the spark of electricity between the contacts in the mic switch before the contacts are fully closed -not to reliable to send morse with but it can be done. Something of interest is that dynamotors are voltage dependent. The out-put voltage is dependent on the input voltage. If the batteries are low the output voltage will be low not giving the full power to the transmitter. But that's another story. Did I do better this time Prof or do I still get an "F"? LTM Mike J. *************************************************************************** From Ric Excerpted from a Feb. 8, 2003 forum posting by Mike Everette: >If the key was left behind, there was no way to place the radio in the >"correct" CW mode. The only way to "key" it would be by using the mic >button. This would cause the dyno to start and then de-energize as the >starter relay tried to follow the keying. VERY hard on the dyno and on the >relay, not to mention the battery. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:18:40 EST From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: For Alan & Ric Alan wrote: > I'm sorry I asked the Morse code questions. Guys, I'm happy to believe and > won't again question whether AE and/or FN were proficient to ANY degree in > sending and/or receiving Morse Code. Actually I'm not sure what the > significance is. Actually Alan, without too much speculation it shows a very interesting behavioral pattern from AE and FN. I may suggest that her comments about her (their) radio proficiency may have been more about her dislike of radio communications than actual ability. I am certainly not saying that she was an highly capable operator -- but Fred's silence on the matter does seem to indicate a degree of deference toward AE that borders on the unhealthy. Bob ********************************************************************** From Ric I'm not aware of any evidence that Noonan was excessively deferential toward AE. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:03:46 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Documentation If Cam Warren had supplied copies of Anthony's writings, letters, and transcripts of interviews ( or so cited them) along with a date they were made in his post, would not that be considered "documentation" of what Anthony said. The content may not be accurate but Anthony's position would be clearly stated. The date they were made would be valuable in determining the value in this historical research. Ron Bright ************************************************************************** From Ric "Documenting" an anecdotal recollection by recording and/or transcribing it merely memorializes what was said. It's better than simply trying to remember the story someone told you but writing it down doesn't make it any more reliable as information. As you say, if Cam provided us with the particulars you mention we would be able to make an informed judgment about the reliability of the information Anthony provided. If, for example, Anthony had written a letter or memo or journal or report in the summer of 1937 mentioning where the HFDF that was put aboard the Itasca came from, that would be "documentation" in a historical sense. If all Cam has are Anthony's later writings or notes from interviews conducted long afterward then it's all anecdote - maybe it's true, maybe it isn't. Cam believes he can get a "feel" for the truth. We'd all like to think we can do that and, indeed, we all make gut judgments every day. Sometimes we're right. Sometimes we're wrong. But for anyone to think that they have developed some sixth sense for the truth is pure hubris. Are Anthony's recollections more accurate than the memories the Itasca's chief radioman Leo Bellarts related to Elgen Long in 1973, or more reliable than the story Floyd Kilts told a San Diego newspaper in 1960, or more truthful than Emily Sikuli's 2001 memory of seeing airplane wreckage on the reef at Gardner in 1940? Without a disciplined approach to historical documentation you end up simply choosing between whose story you want to believe. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:17:37 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Ham and Radio-Facility books >Balfour, Lae radio operator, claims that prior to takeoff, "she unloaded all >her surplus equipment on me including her [Very] pistol, and ammunition, >books, letters and facility books". [ Lovell, p268] That was footnoted as being from Francis X Holbrook. So it was from wherever Holbrook got it to Lovell to the her readers to us. I have no confidence in things like this. I don't know whether Balfour ever said that and if he did when it was said. This is not support for what is being contended. Alan ************************************************************************** From Ric The problem with all of this information that was later solicited from players in the Earhart drama is that there is no way of knowing to what extent the fact that is was a huge controversial drama may have influenced people's memories. Many of these guys tried to inflate their role. Balfour later claimed that Earhart wanted him to come along as her radio operator. Al Bresnick later claimed that she wanted him to come along as her photographer. Brad Washburn said that she wanted him to be her navigator. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:23:14 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Ham and Radio-Facility books >Balfour: That night before takeoff she gave me a stack of surplus stuff from >her plane. There were maps, navigation books, radio-facility charts...and her >32. automatic pistol". Cam Warren Archives, Balfour interview by Frank >Underwood, People Magazine (Australia) Aug 23- Sep 8, 1967 (Photo copy of >original on file) A magazine piece thirty years later??? >Long writes that "they packaged the three books that listed the world >maritime navigational lights, broadcasts stations, and the coast and ship >stations." [ Long, p. 190]" Long did not footnote or say what the source for this was. Alan ****************************************************************** From Ric This is classic. You'll often find that anecdotal recollections relating to the Earhart disappearance date from key periods in the controversy. Most of Nina Paxton's revelations about the post-loss message she heard date from 1943 (when Flight For Freedom was released) and the early 1960s (when Goerner was making headlines). Balfour's interview in 1967 comes on the heels of Goerner's 1966 best-seller "The Search for Amelia Earhart". ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:38:04 EST From: Neil Barnett Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF Mike Juliano wrote: >When the radios were turned on the dynamotor >started generating the voltage to energize the tubes and kept running >until the radios were turned off. Keying the mic didn't start and stop the >dynamotor. You are not necessarily correct about dynamotors running continuously. I have been unable to find any information on the W.E. receiver and transmitter carried on AE's plane. In general (and I'm talking about military radios of WW2), dynamotors function like this. The receiver has its own (small) dynamotor, which produces typically 250 volts DC. When the radio is turned on, this dynamotor runs continuously, even during transmit periods. The transmitter has a (much larger) dynamotor which produces 500-1,000 volts DC, typical for the 50-100 watt class of transmitter. This dynamotor does not run continuously, because it would cause excessive noise (hash) to be heard in the receiver if it did. It runs according to the following schedule: Morse mode (CW): dynamotor runs continuously during sending, does not stop and start when the key is depressed or released. The carrier generated by the transmitter is keyed on and off by the key contacts. Voice mode (AM): dynamotor starts when mic. switch is pressed and runs until mic. switch is released. Carrier is transmitted continuously during this period, and any speech spoken into the mic. is impressed onto the carrier (AM modulation process). If no key is available, it is possible to send CW by keying the carrier on and off by pressing the mic. switch in Voice mode, but this is a highly unsatisfactory method of keying, because the transmit/receive and antenna changeover relays are being asked to perform the keying process. Their operate/release timing is such that they tend to mutilate the initial parts of a character. Entire dots and parts of dashes tend to get lost. As if that's not bad enough, the transmit dynamotor is being cycled on-off with each press-release of the mic. switch. It never reaches full operating speed, and may even stop completely if the operator pauses. A large dynamotor like this can be expected to take up to 4 seconds to come to a stop. Although the dynamotor does not stop instantaneously, its output voltage drops very quickly to zero when the input voltage is removed, because there is no longer any current flowing in its field windings. To make matters even worse (omg) I understand from Mike Everette's archived posts that Earhart's radio used screen-grid modulation of the final tubes, rather than the more efficient plate modulation. Screen-grid operation requires that transmitter power input be reduced to one-quarter of the normal CW input. This means that, for a transmitter capable of 60 watts in CW mode, the Voice mode power level is only 15 watts. Note also that screen-grid modulation is not tolerant of misadjustment, or badly matched antenna conditions. To quote the ARRL Handbook, "Grid modulation does not give quite as linear a modulation characteristic as plate modulation, even under optimum operating conditions. When misadjusted the nonlinearity may be severe, resulting in considerable distortion and splatter". In AE's case, this is most likely the cause of some of the adverse signal reports. > Something of interest is that dynamotors are voltage dependent. The out-put > voltage is dependent on the input voltage. If the batteries are low the output > voltage will be low not giving the full power to the transmitter. But that's > another story. Low battery voltage? Yes, in general terms you are correct. But in Earhart's case we have been specifically told by the plane's manufacturer that the radio would not run if the plane's engine was not running. There are no ifs, buts, or maybes about this. The manufacturer states explicitly that the engine MUST be running, implying that the radios were wired through a cutout switch to prevent battery-only operation. Neil Barnett ZL1ANM Auckland, N.Z. ************************************************************************ From Ric Detailed information about Earhart's radios, including wiring schematics, are available in the Earhart Project Book, Eighth Edition which can be ordered via the TIGHAR website. Mike Everette, who wrote that section of the Project Book and is as familiar with the radios in the Electra as it is possible to be given the available information has already discussed this subject on this forum and I've recently even excerpted his earlier postings. Also, Lockheed NEVER said that the engine must be running to operate the radio. They said only that the post-loss messages had gone on so long that the plane must be able to operate an engine to recharge the battery. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:47:41 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) Mistake in my last post titled "Re: ham chain....". SHOULD have read, "During the flight to California with Manning as navigator / radio operator, AE somehow did not notice that Manning had to rely on telegraphy to cover that distance, which was a substantially lesser distance than the Niku - Florida span." ***************************************** From Ric Correcting your correction, the flight was FROM California with Manning.... and, of course, we've already said repeatedly that these long-distance voice receptions were highly anomalous but not impossible events. If it were otherwise we'd have dozens, if not hundreds, of such reports. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:51:53 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Re: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) Bob Brandenburg wrote: > Try thinking outside the box. Here are two possibilities: Carroll > might have met Amelia during her layover in Miami; Thank you for the suggestion. Carroll and AE met at Florida. AE did not have enough experience using the radio for long overwater flights to not know, that her radio had no prayer of reaching Florida. During the flight to California with Manning as navigator / radio operator, AE somehow did not notice that Manning had to rely on telegraphy to cover that distance, which was a substantially lesser distance than the Niku - Florida span. > Carroll's call sign > might have been on a list of amateurs who had offered to support the > flight. Yes - so she calls him. Why not call to ANYONE ? Or the powerful Hawaii ham stations, 2 of them, supporting her flight, with whom she had worked in the past? > And your point is .... ? What, specifically, is the significance of > W4OK being the only call sign recorded by Betty? How do you know that > Amelia didn't mention other ham call signs that Betty didn't hear and > record in her notebook? Great. For 2 hours after the call to W4OK, we get to listen to general comments, recriminations, wrestling, fighting for the radio, talking about talking on the radio. No more calls to ANY station, Howland, Itasca, Hawaii hams. > > Which leaves the mystery of why AE called W4OK. > > How do you know that AE called W4OK? Why would a "call" be the only > context in which AE could mention a call sign? Well, what did Betty say? "...She was all excited, like she was trying to get back to someone". Or, thinking outside the box: was the world being treated to more live cabin conversation? FN and AE were discussing hams they knew? AE was NOT "trying to get back to someone"? What context, pray? A reminder of some ground we've travelled here: It was suggested that AE was listening to KGMB that morning at 10:00 AM. It was suggested that AE could receive and transmit at the same time. That both AE and FN had microphones and used them to talk to each other while grounded on the beach on Niku. That AE heard W4OK calling her. Would you say this account has grown stronger legs? Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:53:55 EST From: Hue Miller Subject: Edge of the seat listening The other night i was listening to the old "Gunsmoke" cowboy series radio show over KSL, Salt Lake City, about 1000 miles from here. About 25 minutes into the story, the station took a deep fade. Damn, those radio gremlins always know the absolute worst time to get their licks in. Of course, i got up to fiddle with the radio, first turn up the volume a lot, then twiddle the tuning dial a bit. It occurred to me: how could i NOT get up to fiddle with the radio? I thought about why i would NOT get up to try to adjust for continued reception. If it was news or an infomercial i was listening to, a reception wipeout would either not faze me, or i would know that i would hear the material again if i just stayed put and listened long enough. If i knew the stability of the radio's operating pararmeters, i mean if i was certain the room temperature was absolutely stable, the AC mains voltage was stable, and the radio's tuner had never in my experience drifted, and was never likely to ever drift, never would drift, then i might resist, knowing i couldn't effectively improve things. But some of these parameters i did not feel i had nailed down fast; I lacked that comfortable confidence. So how could i, how could anyone, resist getting up to adjust those knobs? But, we have a notebook scripted in a neat, unhurried hand, and never touched that dial once. Yes, i know it was important to write down clearly the important words. And i know the probabililty is, by all means, "nonzero". Hue Miller ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:13:40 EST From: Gary LaPook Subject: Dynamotors and new forum policy Not quite. Vacuum tubes need a high voltage between the cathode and the anode (two plates inside the tube) in order to amplify the signal for transmission. In addition, the cathode must be heated to operating temperature. This heating is accomplished by a separate component inside the tube called, not surprisingly, the "heater" which is where the orange glow comes from inside radio tubes. These heaters operate at 6, 12 or 24 volts (depending on type of tube) and do not use the high voltage produced by the dynamotor. These heaters are on when the radio is turned on, working only off of battery voltage. Mike Juliano wrote: >Unlike the aircraft radios of today the WE radios used in AE's era used >"vacuum tube" Technology. These tubes are similar to a TV picture tube. These >electronic vacuum tubes had to warm up to their operating temperature(They >actually glow and give off heat). The dynamotor is a 6-28volt DC motor coupled >to an DC generator in one light weight unit ,generating 225vdc-1000vdc >depending on its design and application. When the radios were turned on the >dynamotor started generating the voltage to energize the tubes and kept running >until the radios were turned off. Well, if keying the mic did not start and stop the dynamotor then what did? Was there a switch on the radio that was set to "transmit" prior to talking on the mic and then turned to "off" or "receive" after the transmission was completed? Did throwing this "transmit" switch start the dynamotor? And if this was the case then exactly what did the "push to talk" button on the mic do anyway? >Keying the mic didn't start and stop the dynamotor. That >would be like trying to watch tv while switching it on and off. The "click" >that's heard when a mic is keyed is the spark of electricity between the >contacts in the mic switch before the contacts are fully closed -not too >reliable to send morse with but it can be done. Was there a switch that was set to "CW" that started the dyno running continuously or did follow the input from the key? There shouldn't be so much speculation on these points since somebody out there must have a manual for the radio equipment that has the answers to these questions. gl ***************************************************************** From Ric Male pattern baldness does not run in my family but the forum inspires me to tear my hair out by the roots. This matter has been thoroughly researched and written up, complete with schematics, by Mike Everette and it is published in the Earhart Project, Eighth Edition which can be ordered via the TIGHAR website. For those who are too cheap to avail themselves of that excellent source of documented data I have repeatedly excerpted Mike's earlier posting to the forum on this subject. Despite Alan's earlier posting in which he voiced concern about people posting bad information as fact, the trend continues. The danger, as Alan pointed out, is that this forum - via Google - is widely used as a source of information about the Earhart disappearance. If we post bad information and somebody Googles it and doesn't scroll down far enough to see my correction then we're doing more harm than good. There are lots of topics worthy of debate and, Lord knows, we debate them here - but I'm going to have to start bouncing submissions that state speculation or outright falsehood as fact. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:21:11 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: Crash and sank Ric said: >Many of these guys tried to inflate their role. Balfour >later claimed that Earhart wanted him to come along as her radio operator. Al >Bresnick later claimed that she wanted him to come along as her photographer. >Brad Washburn said that she wanted him to be her navigator. Too bad AE didn't take these guys. Had she done so she'd been so overweight that she'd have definitely run out of fuel well before Howland, giving the "Crash and Sankers" some real meat for their theory. Let's see three guys at the FAA standard 170 pounds, is 510 pounds, or about 85 gallons of fuel. At 35 gph that's just under 2.5 hours of flight time, the approximate flight time from Howland to Niku. Hmmm, maybe . . . nah, never mind. LTM, whose CG is well forward these days Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************** From Ric Remember, she put as much gas aboard as she could without compromising the 100 octane. With another crew member aboard the crash and sink would have probably happened off the end of the runway. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:39:17 EST From: Dennis McGee Subject: speculation and falsehood Ric said: >There are lots of topics worthy of debate and, Lord knows, we >debate them here - but I'm going to have to start bouncing submissions that state >speculation or outright falsehood as fact. Oh, Ric, don't be such a party pooper. :-) Speculation and falsehood are our meat and potatoes here. If it wasn't for speculation and falsehoods most of us would have to actually do some work during the day instead of spending time responding to speculation and falsehood by adding our own speculation and falsehood. Historical accuracy be damned! We're having fun! Right, guys and gals? SPEC-U-LATE! SPEC-U-LATE! SPEC-U-LATE! LTM, who awaits a pithy reply Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *************************************************************** From Ric I don't know how pithy this is, but I athure you that it ith thinthere. Speculation is, indeed, our meat and potatoes and I welcome it. What I'm going to start bouncing is speculation stated as fact. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:44:06 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Ham and Radio-Facility books Of course the cites re Balfour's recollections of events at Lae some thirty years later are anecdotal and suspect, but as we all agree these may lead to avenues worth pursuing. [Balfour's claim that he heard AE every hour is suspect as well, and as I recall he lost AE's pistol sometime during the war.] The question is, if true, would AE's radio facility books have contained the ham signs. Would these be the appropriate depository for station, ship and ham signs? Ron B ***************************************************************** From Ric What Balfour was almost certainly referring to are publications known as "Berne lists" (we have a 1937 copy for "Coast Stations and Ship Stations"). Berne lists do not include amateur stations. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:01:16 EST From: Tom King Subject: Re: Pago Pago >It must be someplace where they have monkeys 'cause the monkeys have no >tails in Pago Pago. > >Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, Ca. >******************************************************** >From Ric > >There are no monkeys in Pago Pago>> Geographic confusion. It's Jamboanga in the Philippines where the monkeys have no tails. "The monkeys have no tails in Jamboanga; Oh, the monkeys have no tails in Jamboanga, Oh the monkeys have no tails; They were bitten off by whales; Oh, the monkeys have no tails in Jamboanga." From "We Won't Go Back to Subic Any More," a sea chantey. **************************************************** From Ric I shudder to think of the thread this could start. ***************************************************** From Dave in Houston, Texas: The song lyrics are Pango Pango - not Pago Pago however, both spellings are used for the same port on the island of Tutuila in American Samoa. And if there are no monkeys in Pango Pango, then it is an absolute that they have no tails. Also, they do not know what a LOP is and have no photos of AE or FN in Japanese captivity. For more on Pago Pago go to the following website: http://members.tripod.com/MataiPalagi/Samoa/ Please note that this is a smoke free website (good lord - what next!). There is also a map of the island and you can identify the location of Pago Pago which is in the larger of the two inlets on the southeastern part of the island (the island runs mainly east-west). Very interesting. Too bad it is so far and so expensive to visit! LTM, Dave Bush *************************************************************** From Ric Awright guys...the name of the place is Pago Pago. It's pronounced as if it were Pahngo Pahngo with the "g" kind of swallowed. (Dan Quayle once called it Pogo Pogo.) The introduction of an "n" sound between a vowel and a "g" is quite common in Pacific languages. For example, Emily Sikuli's given name was Segalo which is pronounced Sengalo. TIGHAR has many friends in Pago. We've embarked the last two expeditions to Niku from there. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:03:40 EST From: Rich Young Subject: dynamotor Mike Juliano - my understanding is that the receiver portion of the radio was engineered to operate on battery voltage, just as most home receivers of the time that were battery operated didn't have dynamotors. The voltage the DM generates is necessary to bias and energize the output tubes of the transmitter side of the radio: hence, the DM only spins up when the mike is keyed, or the transmitter is switched on to send Morse. All that was necessary for receive function is to supply the proper heater filament voltage so the pre-amp and audio output tubes would work - usually about 6 volts. Some low-powered transmitters, such as the GI. handy-talkie, were developed in WWII that could operate off of battery voltages, but they required special output tubes and their output power was in the 0,5 to 5 watt range. LTM, (who has a telefunken EC83 in her guitar pre-amp) Rich Young ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:07:08 EST From: Ron Bright Subject: Balfour and the radio facility lists Closer examination of Long's cite, p. 190, in which Long wrote that Earhart turned over to Balfour at Lae her books of radio -facility list, broadcasts stations and coast and ship stations, it appears there may be documentation. The hypothesis here is that the radio list would have contained any ham call signals and am stations she might have intended to call, or receive. Certainly she had ITASCA'S call sign. The cite infers that the "shipping list" of items sent by AE and FN from Lae to the US is at the Purdue Univ Library, Special Collections. Long also added his own interview of Balfour in 1975 and Mary B. Noonan Ireland. The way I understand it, the Purdue Library may hold that list of items and perhaps Mary B. Noonan had a list or somehow learned of what was sent to the US. That shipping list would certainly have a date and be documentation. Are you or anyone else familiar with this Special Collection? Mrs. Ireland's interview and contents? Ron Bright ***************************************************************** From Ric The Purdue "Special Collection" is the one that is now on-line. I don't recall seeing such a shipping list but it may be there. Perhaps someone would care to look for it. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:10:01 EST From: Bob Sherman Subject: Re: Pago Pago Presume you know that it is, Zamboanga, that 'the monkeys have no tails' .. Cheers, RC *********************************************** From Ric Tom King says, "It's Jamboanga in the Philippines where the monkeys have no tails." Same place? These questions are crucial to the investigation. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:24:26 EST From: Skeet Gifford Subject: Re: Pago Pago ... ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE. Formerly named "Jamboanga", Zamboanga del Norte was created on June 6, 1952, under Republic Act. No.711. ... Former Name: Jamboanga. ... www.livinginthephilippines.com/region9.html - 42k Skeet ************************************************ From Cam Warren Ric wrote: >There are no monkeys in Pago Pago. Wow! Talk about hard hitting scientific research! It's true you know. The tail less monkeys live in Zamboanga. (Pronounced "Zam - Bo - Ango" by most singers.) And - lest I be accused of arriving at a factoid by reckless speculation - I should point out that my Random House Unabridged dictionary says Z is "a seaport on SW Mindanao, in the S. Philippines". Dr. Warren (honorary title only) ******************************************* From GF According to that great actor Wallace Beery it was Zamboanga where the monkeys have no tails for they were bitten off by whales..... ******************************************* From Bill Leary According to: http://www.livinginthephilippines.com/region9.html "Formerly named "Jamboanga", Zamboanga del Norte was created on June 6, 1952,..." - Bill #2229 ************************************************ From Bob Brandenburg It is indeed Zamboanga. I have been there and the monkeys do have tails. Not only did I personally observe that the monkeys there have tails, but I also had the misfortune to be shipmates with two of the beasts. I was navigator of a Navy flagship that was revisiting areas in which our embarked admiral had operated during WW2 as captain of a submarine. We had just completed a visit to Davao, where the mayor presented a monkey to the admiral as a gift. Upon our arrival at Zamboanga, the mayor there learned of the first monkey and presented the admiral with a second monkey, of the opposite sex, for companionship. Those two monkeys quickly learned how to escape from their cage when it was opened by the hapless sailors in charge of their daily care and feeding. Their escapades, and the crew's frantic efforts to recapture them after each escape, are the stuff legends are made of. But the details are too voluminous to describe here. FWIW, a check with the San Diego zoo at the time turned up the fact that New World monkeys have tails and Old World monkeys don't. Since Zamboanga is in the Old World, the zoo folks concluded (tongue in cheek) that someone must have slipped New World monkeys into the Old World. A brief account of this affair appeared in the Pacific Fleet Amphibious Force newspaper, the Amphibian, in March 1960. LTM, Bob ******************************************************* From Ric Bob has told me the full story in person. It's pure "Mister Roberts". ********************************************** From Dave in Houston, Texas This could be crucial. That song is from the era in which AE/FN disappeared and is quite possibly an indication that when she landed her airplane, the tail fell off. Thus it must have some relevence to our investigation. I remember reading somewhere that the use of language such as used in this song is actually code for other things. Monkeys quite possibly stands for Japanese and the missing tails probably stands for the missing AE/FN and thus the song was written by either AE or FN as a way to alert the proper authorities that they had been captured by the Japanese. That is why it became such a well known and recorded song during the period. I have heard it in several movies of the era. This by the way makes it a documented song and thus is documented proof that AE/FN were captured by the Japanese. I know it is documented because I heard that it was and that is sufficient proof to anyone. Therefore we need to push for an official investigation by the authorities into the disappearance and subsequent capture of AE/FN. LTM, with tongue in cheek (and no monkeys in sight), Dave Bush ********************************************** From Kerry Tiller There are 75 or 80 different languages and dialects (5 major ones) in The Philippines. Pronunciation (and spelling) of place names is understandably inconsistent. "Zamboanga" is the most common current spelling for the two provinces (north and south) and the city in western Mindanao. I have also seen "Sambuwangga", among others. As for the anatomical condition of the lesser primates, I can't say for sure. I've never been south of the Visayas; (Or Bisayas). LTM Kerry Tiller ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:27:14 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Crash and sank Ric wrote: >Remember, she put as much gas aboard as she could without compromising the >100 octane. With another crew member aboard the crash and sink would have >probably happened off the end of the runway. How much more fuel was she able to take on by leaving the Morse Code key behind? Anyone know how much it weighed? I don't have a serious problem with the idea she left it behind but I DO have a problem with the reason being weight reduction. Alan ********************************************************** From Ric She left the key behind because neither she nor Noonan planned on sending any code. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:28:44 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: "Ham Chain", Apr 1937 RADIO mag. article (long) Hue wrote: >Would you say this account has grown stronger legs? Good point, Hue. We have a way of doing that don't we. This thread has a lot of material out of whole cloth. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:29:52 EST From: Tom Strang Subject: Re: W40K Speculation What If? Ric wrote: >So you're suggesting that Betty has simply forgotten that some of the >entries in her notebook were written by someone else? Yes it is possible that Betty has "simply forgotten" - But if she has forgotten I do not believe it was simple. But again being that this is my opinion, I could also be wrong. But studying the notebook's structure, layout, writting style, and positioning of the notebook's contents suggest to me otherwise. Old western proverb "no two cowpokes see the landscape the same" comes into play here. Respectfully: Tom Strang # 2559 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:31:19 EST From: Cam Warren Subject: Re: speculation and falsehood Ric says: >What I'm >going to start bouncing is speculation stated as fact. Careful! You might shoot yourself in the foot! Cam Warren *********************************************** From Ric It wouldn't be the first time. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:39:03 EST From: Neil Barnett Subject: Re: Mic buttons vs Keys and HFDF Ric wrote: > Also, Lockheed NEVER said that the engine must be running to operate the > radio. They said only that the post-loss messages had gone on so long > that the plane must be able to operate an engine to recharge the battery. I apologise if I've created a wrong impression about the "engine running" criteria. I had read the forum archives from 1998 thru to January 2003, and nowhere in those archives was a distinction made between Lockheed's statement that the engine must be running in order to transmit, and the fact that it must be running because the battery life would have (by then) been exceeded. There is an ambiguity in the archives on this point. Neil Barnett Auckland, N.Z. ****************************************************** From Ric You've made my point Neil. Nobody should consider these forum postings to be a primary source. All of the messages sent during the Earhart search, along with tons of other primary source research material, is available on the Earhart Project Reseach CD which can be ordered via the TIGHAR website. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:40:38 EST From: Mike Juliano Subject: Re: dynamotor My apologies to all. What started out to be a helping hand should have been prefaced by "my understanding of...." instead of a statement of "fact". Proving once again that if you stick your hand into the TIGHAR's cage you should offer it acceptable meat.(Although I've never tried monkey.) LTM Mike J.#2590 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 21:41:52 EST From: Eric Subject: Monkey Business Actually, in Jamboanga the monkeys TELL no tales ('cause the monkeys they're all males.) LTM Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, CA. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:17:01 EST From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: dynamotor Is there any way we can resolve what actually happens when someone try to send Morse Code by keying the mike using the same equipment we think AE had? I recognize that somewhere in all the past message traffic the answer lies but I don't know what it is. I think it is important to pin this down. Alan **************************************************************** From Ric What would satisfy you? We've had a highly knowledgeable and competent radio historian review the circuitry of the specific type of transmitter that Earhart used and he has explained what the effect would be of using the mic to send code. No one who has similar expertise and familiarity with the circuitry has disagreed. If we had a working example of a Western Electric Type 13C and the right dynamotor we could do a demonstration and conduct some experiments that would be a lot of fun but wouldn't really move the investigation forward. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:19:29 EST From: John L. Subject: Re: speculation and falsehood Double careful: Truth and Proof, like Beauty, are in the eye of the beholder. LTM, John L ************************************************************ From Ric If that is really true we can all pack up and go home. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:43:22 EST From: Dan Brown Subject: Laxton's article Paul B. Laxton's article "Nikumaroro" in the Journal of the Polynesian Society ends with an indication that the narrative would be continued in a subsequent publication. Do you have a citation for the second article? Dan Brown #2408 ********************************************************** From Ric Apparently there was no second article. At least not that we've been able to find. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:45:56 EST From: John Lutrell Subject: Socrates Triple careful: One day the great philosopher came upon an acquaintance who said excitedly, "Socrates, do you know what I just heard about one of your students?" "Wait a moment," Socrates replied. "Before telling me anything I'd like you to pass a little test. It's called the Triple Filter Test." "Triple filter?" "That's right," Socrates continued, "Before you talk to me about my student, it might be a good idea to take a moment and filter what you're going to say. The first filter is Truth. Have you made absolutely sure that what you are about to tell me is true?" "No," the man said, "actually I just heard about it and ..." "All right," said Socrates. "So you don't really know if it's true or not. Now let's try the second filter, the filter of Goodness. Is what you are about to tell me about my student something good?" "No, on the contrary ..." "So," Socrates continued, "you want to tell me something bad about him, but you're not certain it's true. You may still pass the test though because there's one filter left: the filter of Usefulness. Is what you want to tell me about my student going to be useful to me?" "No, not really. "Well," concluded Socrates, "if what you want to tell me is neither true nor good nor even useful, why tell it to me at all?" This is why Socrates was a great philosopher and held in such high esteem. It also explains why he never found out that Plato was banging his wife. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:02:00 EST From: George Werth Subject: Re: Socrates Funny, Funny, Funny GRW1 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:13:00 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: NZ survey and Tinian grave You'll find four (count 'em, four) new documents on the TIGHAR website dealing with the 1938/39 New Zealand survey of Gardner Island. Just go to the Documents index at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Documents_index.html Also, in the Research Bulletins section you'll find an informational report by Dr. Tom King about the suspected Earhart grave on Tinian. Go to http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Bulletins/11_07_03bulletin/tiniangrave.html Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:39:53 EST From: Paula Subject: Grace McGuire I came across an old show I videotaped that had Tighar in it, "The Search for Amelia". Did Grace McGuire ever finish her replica of Amelia's plane and did she also fly the same route as Amelia? Also, it was her opinion that Amelia's map had Howland Island 5 miles off course. Has that ever been checked out? I looked on the forum, but I couldn't find these questions answered. Sorry if I missed them but I am hoping someone can answer my questions. LTM, Paula *********************************************************************** From Ric The last I heard, Grace had the airplane to the point where she was running the engines but that was at least a year ago and I've heard nothing since. It is widely known that the map of Howland drawn for AE by Clarence Williams as part of the preparations for the first World Flight attempt had incorrect coordinates for the island that were about 5 miles off. No one knows for sure whether that error was corrected prior to the second attempt but we do know that Earhart's advisor with the Bureau of Air Commerce, Bill Miller, had the correct coordinates and it's hard to believe that he didn't share that information with Earhart. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:07:37 EST From: Daryll Subject: "Sextant box", "Benedictine bottle" & "corks with brass chains" From the TIGHAR website: The TIGHAR Hypothesis November 2001 ...Extensive official British government records confirm the discovery in 1940 of the partial skeleton of a castaway who perished while attempting to survive on Nikumaroro sometime prior to the island's settlement in 1939. The remains of a fire, dead birds and a turtle were present. With the bones were found a sextant box bearing a stenciled number that is similar to a number written on a sextant box known to have belonged to Fred Noonan, and the remains of a woman's shoe and a man's shoe. Also at the site were "corks with brass chains" thought to have been from a small cask which may have come from the Norwich City supply cache. Similarly, a Benedictine bottle found with the remains may have been part of the cache. The Sextant box could have belonged to Mr. J. A. Henderson who was also considered the "instrument man" and head of the expedition by Mr. Lee. He fell and broke his ribs, if we are to believe Mr. Hay, probably carrying stuff ashore. He could have even been carrying the Sextant Box and it got wet. Mr. Lee points out how difficult it was to get stuff ashore without anything getting wet. Mr. J. A. Henderson was the "instrument man" quoting Mr. Lee. The Sextant was an instrument which should have been Mr. Henderson's responsibility. His evacuation early in the mission would explain an empty Sextant box being found later on Gardner Island without the Sextant in it. We are all familiar with the enlisted man's out...."Hey I didn't sign for it". Of course the forgotten Sextant box could have been from the drunken navigator Mad Mac McGregor. Hmmm another navigator that drinks. Mr. Hay could have very well been responsible for the "corks with brass chains" and the "benedictine bottle" when he tossed the empty. On Xmas they celebrated with the medical brandy that he was in charge of. Another point. Since Mr. Hay was on a secret mission to Gardner, can Niku (Gardner) be considered in a conspiracy theory now? A Conspiracy to control the Pacific with airlines. Ah Jeez, Amelia flying a secret mission for Pan Am ending up an island British Airways wanted. Maybe someone could google search the forum archives a few years ago for a Mr. Lee. I seem to recall a Lee was transported from somewhere to somewhere maybe even by the ITASCA or SWAN. Below are TIGHAR Research documents that I noted with the referenced parts. Daryll Research Document # 25 Transcription of Text NEW ZEALAND PACIFIC AVIATION SURVEY EXPEDITION 9. Mr. J. A. Henderson owing to the recurrence of an ailment following on an accident in the surf at Raoul Island reported sick and was evacuated by the "Leander" to Suva and thence to New Zealand by the "Aorangi." Mr. Lee from this date took over as Second In Charge of the expedition and assumed command of the Gardner and Hull parties. Research Document # 26 28th March, 1939. PACIFIC ISLANDS SURVEY EXPEDITION GARDNER ISLAND. by E.W. Lee The reef is excessively slippery -- it is extremely difficult to walk on it unladen -- and as a result of the frequent falls of the carrying party practically all the gear was landed wet and in some cases spoilt through the carriers slipping and falling into the reef pools. Due to our inexperience in New Zealand of the conditions to be met, the gear was packed in packages far too bulky and heavy and, in some cases, perishable goods -- hops for instance -- were packed in cases not waterproof and were consequently ruined in landing... ...During the first day of landing Mr. Henderson had the misfortune to go down to suspected lung trouble, due probably to an accident that he had previously sustained on Sunday Island and, upon reporting to the M.O. H.M.S. "Leander" was evacuated by the warship to Suva that day and thence to New Zealand. This reduction in personnel was a serious one as it meant the loss of our instrument man and the consequent slowing up of the progress of the work... ...On the 21st December the Gilbert and Ellice Islands Administration's vessel "Niminoa" [sic] with Messrs. Maude and Gallagher and a party of colonists for Gardner Hull and Sydney Islands arrived and a pioneering party of 10 adult males was left on Gardner Island to inaugurate the settlement scheme... Research Document # 28 Transcription of Text THE JOURNAL OF M.H. HAY ...Captain called for me and told me what all the equipment and provisions were for. It was for a secret survey expedition to one of the several islands in the Gilbert and Ellis [sic] group... ...On arrival at Suva all the equipment was sent ashore. I was also transferred ashore and fitted out with civilian clothes and billeted in the Garrick Hotel and told to await further orders which would be given to me by the head of the expedition. For three weeks I loafed around ... ...visit to the local branch of the Bank of NZ who had instructions to supply me with enough money... ...Mad Mac McGregor, a Scotsman famous throughout the Pacific as a navigator and his colossal capacity for strong drink... ...two days at sea were informed that it was Gardner Island in the Gilbert and Ellice Group. We were to survey the island and lagoon for emergency landing of aircraft... ...too rough for Mad Mac to get the bottle to his lips... ...It was during this period that the man in charge of our party fell and broke two ribs and the second-in-charge had to take over. I managed to get in touch with HMNZS "Leander" by radio who eventually arrived and the injured man was transferred to her... ...I received a message one day stating that we were to have a visit from the High Commissioner of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands, a Mr. Maude who would arrive in the government schooner... ...Christmas was drawing nigh and we were wondering what we had to celebrate with. I had two bottle of brandy in the stores --- for medical purposes but we decided that we would break out one bottle for X'mas day. On that day the cook excelled himself and he produced a meal of turtle steak and lobster. We all got slightly tiddly on the brandy and considering our isolation we had a very good day... ***************************************************** From Ric Interesting speculation. I think the bit about the sextant box is pretty farfetched but Hay's account of knocking off the medicinal brandy could account for the Benedictine bottle (but not the corks and brass chains). Benedictine is a brandy-based liqueur. If that's where the Benedictine bottle came from it must have been recovered by the castaway after the New Zealanders left, clearly indicating that the castaway was still alive in the spring of 1939. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:13:16 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Re: dynamotor The WE receiver did indeed require a high voltage power supply. It did not, could not, operate using only "battery voltage." The receiver and transmitter did not operate from the same dynamotor. The receiver used its own separate dynamotor power supply. The receiver dynamotor was much smaller, physically, than the one for the transmitter. Its output was approximately 200 volts at 60 milliamperes. This dynamotor ran continuously when the radio was in use. The transmitter dynamotor supplied 1050 volts at approximately 500 milliamperes. It was only energized during transmission. On voice, the mic button activated the relay that started the dynamotor (a relay very similar in design too an automotive starter solenoid) and activated the antenna changeover relay. On CW (Morse code), the dynamotor was started by throwing a switch located on the housing for the Morse key, to the "CW" position. This activated the dynamotor relay and the antenna changeover relay. It was necessary for the transmitter dynamotor to run continuously during CW transmitting. The high voltage had to be continuously applied to the circuit, for proper operation and to ensure a stable signal for transmission. The transmitter was then keyed by a separate relay, activated by the Morse key. The keying method was "grid blocking," wherein a bias voltage was applied to cut off current flow in the tubes when the key was "up" (between the dits and dahs of the Morse characters). To switch back to receive, in CW mode, the switch on the key housing had to be thrown to its original position. NOTE: This transmitter did not use "break-in keying" like most other aircraft radios of the era. It was never designed to be used for CW. The one AE used was modified by Western Electric, for this purpose, and the modifications were not too well thought out, in comparison to other contemporary designs. Someone speculated a few days back that if AE had left her key behind, it would be a simple matter to pick up another one. NOT SO. This was no ordinary garden variety Morse key. It was specially made with the required switch to change over from voice to CW, and had a multiconductor cable with a special plug to connect to the transmitter. FYI, I have made a rather comprehensive study of the circuitry of the equipment. My report is contained in the 8th Edition of the Earhart Project Book. LTM (who is full of high-voltage energy) And 73 Mike E. ********************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Mike. Do I understand you correctly that, with the aircraft parked on the ground, you could receive using only battery power but if you wanted to transmit you would have to have an engine running? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:16:48 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Further thoughts on dynamotors Rich Young wrote: >Mike Juliano - my understanding is that the receiver portion of the radio >was engineered to operate on battery voltage, just as most home receivers >of the time that were battery operated didn't have dynamotors. "Battery radios" of that time had separate batteries for the tube filaments (A-battery) and the high-voltage supply to the tube plates (B-battery). B-battery requirements depended on the radio at hand, but were generally from 45 to 135 volts; somme were occasionally higher. AE's receiver used a separate, small dynamotor for the B voltage -- not B-batteries. >Some low-powered transmitters, such as the GI. handy-talkie, were >developed in WWII that could operate off of battery voltages, but they >required special output tubes and their output power was in the 0,5 to 5 >watt range. Your understanding is not correct. ALL these radios required both A and B voltages. There was no WW2 transmitter that operated just off a 6 or 12 volt battery. Even the "handie talkie" radio (SCR-536, aka BC-611) that could literally be carried in one hand, used an A-battery of 1.5 volts and a B-battery of 103.5 volts. These were dry cells, special batteries made for that equipment, so they could be installed inside its case. Their life was not too long, either. The tubes used in these radios were the same sort used in "portable radios" of the era -- stuff like 1R5, 1S5 and the like. Vacuum-tube technology is rather different from the world of solid state. 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:17:39 EST From: Mike Everette Subject: Re: "Ham Chain" Carl Peltzer wrote: >An Update if I may be allowed: Radio Relay League mentioned is now called >American Radio Relay League and they might have some archives. Been there, done that. They don't. 73 Mike E. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:28:50 EST From: Al Hill Subject: Re: NZ survey and Tinian grave Gosh Ric, I'm lost. The 1st reference leads to only the hand written report posted Nov 5th and the last reference goes to "page not found". What am I doing wrong? Al Hills ************************************************************************ From Ric If you go to the Documents index page at http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Documents_index.html you'll see all four New Zealand Survey-related entries. They are Document numbers 26, 27, 28 and 29. You're having trouble bringing up the Tinian Grave article because of a url "rollover" problem. The url is to long to fit on one line in an email. The easy solution is to just go to the TIGHAR homepage at www.tighar.org and scroll down to the Breaking News box and click on the "to read more" link. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:49:51 EST From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Welcome new subscribers MSN.com ran a lead story today about the Earhart mystery which included several links to the TIGHAR website. As a result we've had ten new forum subscribers today. Welcome. Enjoy the show. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:57:42 EST From: Angus Murray Subject: Re: dynamotor Ric wrote: > Thanks Mike. Do I understand you correctly that, with the aircraft parked on > the ground, you could receive using only battery power but if you wanted to > transmit you would have to have an engine running? There is no reason why either dynamotor could not be run directly off the battery. The only problem with running the transmitter/dynamotor off the battery is the current drain. Mike, 500mA seems like a lot of current at 1050V ie 525W. Even for a 100% efficient dynamotor the battery would be producing 44 A at 12V. At say 50% efficiency it would be drawing 88A. The generator was only rated at 50A and had to power the receiver on standby and all the plane's lights, instruments etc. Are you sure that figure is right? Regards Angus ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:59:17 EST From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: "Sextant box", "Benedictine bottle" & "corks with brass chains" > Due to our inexperience in New Zealand of the conditions to be met, the > gear was packed in packages far too bulky and heavy and, in some cases, > perishable goods -- hops for instance -- were packed in cases not > waterproof and were consequently ruined in landing....... Were they planning to set up a brewery on the island? What else could you do with hops? Dan Postellon TIGHAR#2263 LTM(love that Miller's) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:03:39 EST From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: "Sextant box", "Benedictine bottle" & "corks with brass chains" Ric wrote: > Interesting speculation. I think the bit about the sextant box is pretty > farfetched The reports generally indicate that the injuries occurred other than at Gardner and it was the complications following them that caused the requirement for evacuation. There is also considerable inconsistency in the story by Hay and the formal report as to dates of occurrences and also as to how and when the boat and ship arrived and left and the circumstances of evacuation. > but Hay's account of knocking off the medicinal brandy could account > for the Benedictine bottle (but not the corks and brass chains). Benedictine > is a brandy-based liqueur. Nobody could ever mistake Benedictine for Brandy. It may be brandy based, but it would be about as likely to be carried for medicinal purposes as Creme De Menthe. > If that's where the Benedictine bottle came from it must have been recovered > by the castaway after the New Zealanders left, clearly indicating that the > castaway was still alive in the spring of 1939. Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************** From Ric >Nobody could ever mistake Benedictine for Brandy. It may be brandy >based, but it would be about as likely to be carried for medicinal >purposes as Creme De Menthe. You're basing that judgment on what? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:04:39 EST From: Neil Barnett Subject: Re: dynamotor Mike Everette wrote: > The transmitter dynamotor supplied 1050 volts at approximately 500 > milliamperes. Mike, I do not have the reference, but in the forum archives you stated that the W.E. transmitter used a pair of W.E. 282A tubes in the final (output) stage. I assume that those tubes were connected in push-pull configuration, which was the usual configuration in the 1930's. My information (ARRL Handbook, 1936 edition) is that the maximum rated plate voltage for the 282A tube was 1,000 volts. You are no doubt aware that a designer exceeds this maximum rated plate voltage at his own risk. If he does, the result at best is shortened life of the tube(s), and at worst is catastrophic failure at an unpredictable time. To prevent such happenstance, it is usual practice to de-rate tubes and operate them at say, 80 percent of maximum rating, example 800 volts in this case. It seems incomprehensible to me that Western Electric Co. would apply 1,050 volts to the tubes, thereby exceeding the company's own published maximum ratings. Would you kindly confirm that the tubes used were W.E. 282A's, and could you explain whether the voltage was reduced by some means, such as a series resistor, or resistive voltage divider network? Neil Barnett ZL1ANM Auckland, N.Z. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:39:50 EST From: Daryll Subject: Sextant box and Benedictine bottle Ric wrote: >Interesting speculation. I think the bit about the sextant box is pretty >farfetched but Hay's account of knocking off the medicinal brandy could >account for the Benedictine bottle (but not the corks and brass chains). >Benedictine is a brandy-based liqueur. > >If that's where the Benedictine bottle came from it must have been >recovered by the castaway after the New Zealanders left, clearly >indicating that the castaway was still alive in the spring of 1939. Then you are making a definite connection between the castaway and the Benedictine bottle? I guess I'm not clear on how the nexus was made on those listed items except the statement "With the bones were found..." . IF the bones (skull) rested on the sextant box and the Benedictine bottle was in the grasp of the skeletal hand and those other items were found within a few yards from the castaway's remains. Then that would be a very good connection between the organic (bio-degradable) and non-organic items. IF the report by the Western Pacific High Commission was written after opening and examining the contents of a box sent by Gallagher from Gardner, then "With" takes on a different meaning. If Gallagher could have gotten the Norwich City in the box, the report could have included it as being found with the castaway. Daryll ***************************************************************** From Ric The bottle is first mentioned in Gallagher's Sept. 23rd telegram to the Acting Adiministrative Officer (David Wernham) in Tarawa: "Please obtain from Koata (Native Magistrate Gardner on way to Central Hospital) a certain bottle alleged to have been found near skull discovered on Gardner Island. Grateful you retain bottle in safe place for present and ask Koata not to talk about skull which is just possibly that of Amelia Earhardt. [sic] Gallagher." The phrasing indicates that Gallagher does not have first hand knowledge of where the bottle was found. That same day he sends a telgram to the Resident Commissioner (Jack Barley) on Ocean Island saying, in part: "Some months ago working party on Gardner discovered human skull - this was buried and I only recently heard about it. Thorough search has now produced more bones (including lower jaw) part of a shoe, a bottle, and a sextant box." Gallagher states that the bottle was found during the same search that produced the bones, shoe and sextant box. We're left with the impression that Gallagher did not know that Koata had found the bottle and had taken it with him until after Koata had left for Tarawa. On September 30, Wernham sends a telegram to Gallagher: "Koata has handed to me one benedictine bottle." On October 1 the new Acting Resident Commissioner on Ocean Island (Henry Holland) notifies the brass in Suva about Gallagher's discovery of the bones, shoe, and sextant box but makes no mention of the bottle. That same day Holland sends a telegram to Gallagher asking for more details and asks: "Is there any indication as to contents of bottle." On October 6 Gallagher replies: "Benedictine" bottle but no indication of contents" That's the last mention of the bottle anywhere. It looks like the brass in Suva never did know about it. In 1960, Floyd Kilts related what he had been told by one of the islanders on Gardner in 1946. "Beside the body was a cognac bottle with fresh water in it for drinking." Benedictine is not cognac any more than it is brandy but these distinctions get pretty fuzzy when related in recollections. In any case, it was clearly Gallagher's impression, and it certainly became part of the story among the people on the island, that the bottle was as much a part of the scene at the castaway campsite as were the bones, the shoe part and sextant box. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:22:56 EST From: Tanya Dolske Subject: New subscribers Thank you for accepting my request to join this forum. If you don't mind me asking, what brought you to the search for answers in her disappearance? For me, I am related to her. Are you as well? What type of degree do you and the other researchers have that are affiliated with the search? I am just trying to get some background. Trying to find out if you are professionals or avid fans of Amelia Earhart and just have a strong interest in her case. I hope I can bring some help to this group. I will be researching your archives over the next couple of days. Good luck and GOD Bless! Tanya Dolske ************************************************************************ From Ric Thanks Tanya. I'm happy to answer your questions. We have quite a few new subscribers due to the MSN.com story and they may also be curious about who we are and where we're coming from. TIGHAR is a nonprofit membership organization dedicated to responsible aviation archaeology and historic preservation. We came to the Earhart search very reluctantly 15 years ago. We had long recognized that the Japanese-capture allegations are unsupported by any real evidence and we had, like so many others, assumed that the most logical explanation for the disappearance is that the flight simply got lost, ran out of gas, and went down at sea. Aware that the technology does not exist to locate the airplane if it's somewhere on the bottom of the ocean (a fact that still escapes people who should know better) we saw the Earhart disappearance as an interesting mystery that was essentially unsolvable. Then, in 1988, two TIGHAR members who had extensive experience and expertise in the navigational methods employed by Fred Noonan, showed us that the flight "could have and should have" been able to reach either of two islands in the Phoenix Group and that neither island had been thoroughly searched in 1937. We had to concede that it was at least worth taking a look. Now, 15 years, eight expeditions, countless hours of research, and well over two million dollars later we have an abundance of evidence to indicate - but not yet prove - that the Earhart flight ended on Gardner Island (now Nikumaroro). As far as I know, I am in no way related to Amelia Earhart. The only person associated with our search who is a relative is Jim Morrissey, her great nephew (Jim's father was Earhart's sister's son). Jim was our medic on the 2001 expedition. I'm the executive director of the organization. I've been in aviation all my life and prior to co-founding TIGHAR in 1985 I was a risk manager and accident investigator with the aviation insurance industry for 12 years. My own academic credentials are minimal - I have a BA in History. We are fortunate to have an Earhart Project Advisory Council that is made up of some 30 individuals with impressive credentials in a wide range of disciplines including archaeology, forensic antrhopology, forensic imaging, chemical engineeering, aeronautical engineering, medicine, etc. Few of us could be described as fans of Amelia Earhart. Our interest is in conclusively solving a fascinating and very challenging historical mystery. This forum is a place for intelligent (we hope) discussion on an incredibly wide variety of topics related to TIGHAR's investigation of the Earhart disappearance. We also try to have a good time. Over 800 people subscribe to this forum and we welcome any subscriber's submission of questions, information, opinions, suggestions or comments but I would urge you to avail yourself of the information provided on the TIGHAR website before wading into discussions. I hope you find the forum entertaining and informative. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:24:57 EST From: Tanya Dolske Subject: new member I would like to take a brief moment to introduce myself to you all. My name is Tanya and I live in Wisconsin. I found this forum thanks to MSN's story on Amelia Earhart. About my interest in her.... while in the third grade I had to do a report on any famous people we are related to. I found out I am related to Amelia Earhart. She was my great-grandmother's 2nd cousin. Being in the third grade I had NO clue who Amelia Earhart was! But, I learned fast. My teacher was amazed, and the other kids in school gave me a hard time. I guess they had heard of her. They called me a liar, and made such a big deal about it. That is what sparked my interest in her life. I figured she must be a big person if all these people are making a big deal out of it. You can only imagine what happened when I told them I am also related to the late Lawrence Welk! Anyway, from th