Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:17:31 From: Bob Brandenburg Subject: Re: Titles Ric Gillespie wrote: > I could trump Jerry and go for Master and Commander. Would that be the lesser of two weevils? Bob #2286 ******************************************************************* From Ric No doubt. Next time we need to take a close look at the Norwich City wreckage from Naia's launch I can't wait to say, "Lay me along side in pistol shot." ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:48:05 From: Jerry Anne Jurenka Subject: B-24 in Santa Fe Ric: I just returned from Santa Fe where the airport manager, Jim Montman, presented a keynote address for the South Central Section of The Ninety-Nines. During it, he mentioned that he has heard there is a B-24 buried at the end of one of their three runways and first time he gets a chance, he wants to find and dig it up. Is that something TIGHAR would be interested in? Hope all is going well ~ Jerry Anne Jurenka ************************************************************************ From Ric Very possibly, but we don't want to impose ourselves upon someone else's project and there are many questions that must be answered before anyone tries to dig up anything. The first question, of course, would be "Is there really something there?" Rumors of buried airplanes are a dime a dozen. If there is an airplane there, how did it get there? Is it a crash site (possible human remains)? Is it a disposal of stripped hulk? Who owns it? What regulations apply? The excavation of a B-24 would be a great subject for an aviation archaeological field school but we'd have to know a lot more about it. If Mr. Montman is interested in sharing whatever he knows we'd be happy to talk to him. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:34:21 From: Reed Riddle Subject: Re: Titles > May as well stick with the traditional epithets. > (Them are the things you wear on your shoulders, right?) Only if the person giving them to you speaks with a bit more force and liquidity than usual. ;) Reed ***************************************************************** From Ross Devitt > (Them are the things you wear on your shoulders, right?) Nah, Ric, I'm sure them's called epitaphs... Th' WOMBAT ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:32:11 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Newbie Questions <> You are probably right but how could she expect the Itasca to do the DFing if she could not receive any transmissions from anyone. She had to know she had no receiver. You see, there is something not kosher in our understanding of the events. Alan ************************************************************************ From Ric Given: The test flight in Lae on July 1 confirmed to Earhart that her receiver and transmitter were working but the engineer cautioned her that there were some problems with the transmitter on 6210. Given: When she was approaching Howland after sun up she tried to contact Itasca on 3105 even though 6210 was her "daylight" frequency. She only switched to 6210 as a last resort. Hypothesis: Earhart believed she had a problem with her 6210 transmitting crystal. During the early part of the flight she attributed her failure to hear any response to her calls back to Lae on 6210 to them not hearing her transmissions. She did not realize that she had a receiver problem. She fully expected that she would be able to communicate with Itasca on her "good" frequency - 3105. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:30:38 From: Scott White Subject: Re: Newbie Questions Thanks to Ric, Alan, and Jerry for the thoughts and details on this. I haven't finished the Long & Long book yet, but I already know their conclusion from the TIGHAR web site. L&L sometimes dwell on bad decisions in selecting radio and antenna equipment, her (and Noonan's) inability to use it properly, and so on. Meanwhile, they also dwell on Earhart's careful attention to the engines and especially the devices that kept track of fuel use (fuel flow meters, exhaust gas analyzers). Their conclusions depend on the premise that Noonan's navigation got them close to Howland, and that fuel consumption over the course of the flight can be carefully calculated to show where they were when it ran out. So emphasizing Earhart's seemingly cavalier attitude about radio communication and her careful attention to fuel metering throughout the book could be straightforward reporting, or it could be a rhetorical trick to lead the reader toward their conclusion. Alan's detailed reply on Earhart's and Noonan's decision to press on despite the problems with receiving and direction-finding support the "straightforward reporting" perspective (unless his info comes from Long & Long). If I understand right, there were two kinds of DF available in those days: Equipment on board the plane could find the direction of an incoming signal, or equipment on the ground could find the direction of a signal broadcast by the plane, and then radio the crew to tell them their location. Both rely on having a working receiver on board the plane. Earhart dumped the equipment needed for the second option 'way back in Florida and relied 100% on the first method. It sounds like Earhart never was able to receive any radio messages at all from the time she left Lae. Is that right? Anybody know of any transmissions she sent that replied specifically to a message? It's beyond reason to imagine that she and Noonan never figured out that their receiver didn't work (gosh, I wonder why nobody talks to us? Do you think we offended somebody?). So, somewhere in the flight, they just had to have had a little talk: Our radio receiver doesn't work. We need it for direction-finding. Should we turn back, or should we press on? The only rationale I can think of for "press on" would be that Noonan would be able to get them close, and that they were confident they'd have enough gas to either find Howland (probably by some standard systematic search pattern) or else find some other place to land. Well, I'm rambling now. You guys must have given all this a lot more thought than I have. Jerry Kiffer made the point that young technology has its glitches, and that it never develops without adventurers like Earhart. Which is absolutely true. But how do you tell the difference (in advance) between a daring adventurer and a doomed reckless fool? After the fact, it's easy: the one is a hero and the other is dead. But the only real difference may be blind luck. BTW, does anyone know the correct year of Earhart's birth? Long and Long say 1897; my cheapo get-one-each-visit-to-the-supermarket encyclopedia says 1898; Rollin Reineck says 1987 (I guess that's the date of her reincarnation). Best, -SW ************************************************************************ From Ric AE was born on July 24, 1897. >If I understand right, there were two kinds of DF available in those days: >Equipment on board the plane could find the direction of an incoming signal, >or equipment on the ground could find the direction of a signal broadcast by >the plane, and then radio the crew to tell them their location. Both rely on >having a working receiver on board the plane. Correct >Earhart dumped the equipment needed for the second option 'way back >in Florida and relied 100% on the first method. It's bit more involved than that. Of her three transmitting frequencies - 500 kcs, 3105 kcs & 6210 kcs - only 500 kcs was suitable for DFing but to transmit efficiently on that frequency requires a very long antenna (the infamous "trailing wire"). Contrary to Long and to legend, Earhart's trailing wire antenna was not removed in Florida. The mast through which the trailing wire was deployed was destroyed in the Luke Field accident and photos taken in Burbank the day after the airplane came out of the repair shop (and before it left for Florida) show that the mast was already gone at that time, apparently not reinstalled. Earhart had allowed radio technician Joe Gurr to lengthen the aircraft's dorsal vee wire antenna as a compromise. The thought was to save the weight by eliminating the trailing wire and, by lengthening the vee antenna, provide reduced, but sufficient, propagation capability on 500 kcs. In fact, no meaningful propagation capability on 500 kcs was achieved and the lengthened antenna merely served to screw up 3105 and 6210. As you correctly note, Earhart ended up with no capability to send signals upon which the Itasca could DF, and yet that is what she tried and tried to do. When she finally decided to try using her own DF she asked for signals on a frequency (7500 kcs) far higher than her radio was capable of homing on. >It sounds like Earhart never was able to receive any radio messages at all >from the time she left Lae. Is that right? No. >Anybody know of any transmissions she sent that replied specifically >to a message? Earhart did hear the signals on 7500 kcs, although she was unable to "get a minimum" to obtain a bearing. Her ability to receive those signals ( a series of letter "A"s in morse code - dit dah, dit dah, dit dah, etc.) tells us that her receiver was working. The problem was in the antenna. Prior to trying to use her DF she had been using the long wire antenna on the belly of the aircraft - the one that we now know was lost during the takeoff from Lae. When she decided to try to use her DF she switched to the loop antenna over the cockpit and, for the first time, heard something over her headphones. However, she was unable to take a bearing and the signals themselves contained no useful information. Tragically, at that point she switched back to the (missing) belly antenna and never heard anything further. Had she correctly diagnosed the problem she could have transmitted to the Itasca on 3105 and received their replies via the loop. She still couldn't have gotten DF help but at least she would have had two-way voice communication with the Itasca. >Jerry Kiffer made the point that young technology has its glitches, and that >it never develops without adventurers like Earhart. Young technology never develops without people who are willing to take chances to test it, but Earhart does not belong in that category. LTM, Ric ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:43:01 From: Kerry Tiller Subject: Re: Titles I vote for "El Chingon" (accent over the "O"; my machine doesn't do Spanish) uh, respectfully, of course. LTM Kerry Tiller ************************************************************************ From Ric I'm having a hard time finding a translation for that. (I may regret this.) ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:45:39 From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Titles Try HEAD HONCHO or CHIEF COOK AND BOTTLE WASHER! LTM, Dave Bush Houston, Texas ************************************************************************ From Ric "Head Honcho" is a redundancy. "Chief Cook and Bottle Washer" is pretty much on target. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:53:24 From: Dave Bush Subject: pioneering new technology > From Ric > > Earhart was not pioneering new technology. She failed to competently > use the technology that had already been developed, tested and proven. And there were plenty of screw ups- 1 - her radio antenna lost at Lae 2 - difference in capabilities of her radios and the radios aboard the Itasca 3 - difference in the "time" used by AE and the Itasca 4 - AE's lack of knowledge of radios coupled with Fred's lack of knowledge (when one would expect his PanAm experience to have been better than it apparently was. and more problems that I didn't discuss here. LTM, Dave Bush Houston, Texas Oh, by the way, for those who wonder about my relationship to the presidents - I asked the Secret Service about this and they said that it was "Need To Know, Only" and they would tell me when I needed to know. ************************************************************************ From Ric We can't really hold AE responsible for the antenna loss at Lae - accidents happen - but she did fail to diagnose the problem. The difference in time used by AE and the Itasca was totally the Coast Guard's fault. The had asked her what time zone she would be using and she had replied that she would use Greenwich. They then ignored her and used local. It's a hard job being a Bush. The American people know that. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 11:21:43 From: Terry Simpson Re: Titles Hello Forum and Ric,hope all are well......Ric how about.....BOSS!....you know like Stapellton...Terry(#2396) LTM ************************************************************ From Stretch Sorry fellas, those things on your shoulders are epaulets (I wear some, that's why I know). An epitaph is what is inscribed on a headstone. An epithet is a disparaging or abusive word or phrase. Just thought I'd help set the record straight. Feel free to sling some epithets my way, but I'm not ready for an epitaph yet, not until I've got a couple more stripes on my epaulets, thanks!! LOL Stretch ************************************************************ From Ric This is such a great forum.... ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:58:38 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Newbie questions Scott, nothing I wrote came from Long's book. I would suggest you read that book carefully in regard to the fuel usage issue. Although some disagree, it appears to me there was an effort made to make the fuel run out at the precise time Elgin believed it ran out at 8:43 AM local. Without evidence to support the contention he had some fuel evaporate over night and assumed the tanks were not checked and topped off if necessary. He had the airplane climbing to 12,000 feet to get over mountains to use up more fuel even though AE's two position reports showed her flight path differently. He found a large headwind that is not supported by any evidence. On the contrary most of us working the fuel issue found the Electra with about four hours of fuel when they departed the Howland area. There is no evidence leading to the conclusion they ran out of gas. It is certainly possible but we know of no credible reason for that assumption. For your information, Scott, we have the fuel charts for the airplane and Kelly Johnson's test flight data in addition to his recommendations to AE and the example of a similar flight in the "Daily Express" which was also a model 10E. Fuel planning and monitoring was one of my tasks during my USAF flying career so I am somewhat familiar with the subject. Others in TIGHAR have even better qualifications and we generally agree on the subject. In fairness to Elgin Long I am convinced he thoroughly believed AE ran out of gas and made a number of assumptions to show why he thought that occurred. Alan ************************************************************************ From Ric Long, in fact, went to extreme lengths (no pun intended) to back into the numbers he needed to support his foregone conclusion. He not only proclaimed an entirely speculative headwind but he then piled speculation upon speculation by claiming that Earhart had increased her power settings to suicidally high levels based upon recommendations in Lockheed report. The trouble is, Elgen misread the report. Even based on his own speculation, his numbers are wrong. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:06:01 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: pioneering new technology Ric said: >We can't really hold AE responsible for the antenna loss at Lae - >accidents happen - but she did fail to diagnose the problem. Aha! Another worrisome issue. Wouldn't that antenna snapping off made a rather significant noise? I think I would have wondered enough to do a fly by of the tower to see if any damage had occurred. OR were the engines so loud the gear could have fallen off without anyone hearing? Alan ************************************************************************ From Ric Try this experiment. Park two T-6s wing tip t0 wing tip. Set the brakes and chock the wheels. Stand between the two engines and have them run up to full power with the props in flat pitch. Now ask your lovely assistant in the sequined outfit standing about 20 feet behind you to break a broomstick over her knee. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:12:10 From: Jerry Kiffer Subject: Re: Newbie Questions I have always been interested in early flight, as a newcomer lacking any history with group I only can assume the information has been thoroughly checked for accuracy. Having said that I am more interested than ever in the comments. The entire aircraft industry at that time is full of stories that today we attribute to recklessness, but at the time could be considered a "standard" in the industry. What I am hearing from the forum is their flight was akin to the Gillam flights in Alaska, who also just didn't think, but got lucky a lot? RDF in those days was an important tool in navigation and the idea they didn't know the DF was not working properly shortly takeoff from Florida is quite a stretch in my mind? ************************************************************************ From Ric I worked for 12 years as an aviation risk manager and accident investigator. Time and time again I saw it dramatically illustrated that pilots who repeatedly "ask for it" eventually "get it". It takes a while - often far longer than you would expect - but the ancient adage is true and. I suspect, has always been true. There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:06:07 From: Pat Gaston Subject: Balfour again >It's harder to understand why she pressed on after apparently not >hearing anything from Lae. She had to know that being able to hear >voice transmissions was literally a life or death issue. I keep coming back to Balfour's "recalibration" of Earhart's receiver at Lae. Even if this consisted only of putting a couple hash marks on her receiver dial, it's an alternative explanation of why she never heard Itasca on 3105 kc, and does not require the loss of an antenna. Let's assume for a moment that she >could< hear Balfour's transmissions from Lae (on 6540 kc), so she had no reason to think her receiver was out. But we know that AE was a radio novice (to put it mildly), and after 20 hours in the air she was mentally and physically exhausted, perhaps verging on disorientation. Under these circumstances it strikes me as quite plausible that she would again use Balfour's hash mark -- hey, it worked before. One of these marks was probably at 6540. We don't know if there were others. Of course AE could transmit on 3105 because her xmit frequencies were crystal-controlled. But her receiver was tuned manually, and if she was relying on Balfour's "shortcuts" then her ability to receive depended upon the accuracy of those tick marks. In any event, Balfour's fiddling at Lae has never been adequately explained and I've always thought it may have played a major role in the flight's tragic outcome. BTW I notice from the Itasca radio logs that O'Hare (Position 1) makes absolutely no mention of the 8:43 am reception. There is nothing between 8:00 and 8:56 am, although O'Hare notes that Position 2 was keeping "pertinent data." Still it's odd that the 8:43 am msg is not noted, considering O'Hare logged transmissions from Earhart at 7:40 and 8:00. This provides some support for TIGHAR's view that circumstances surrounding the 8:43 reception were chaotic. It's also curious that O'Hare doesn't log the 8:00 reception - in which Earhart acknowledged receiving Itasca on 7500 kc -- until 8:57 am. LTM Pat Gaston ************************************************************************ From Ric I'm not Amelia but if I wasn't getting anything when tuned to the hash mark I'd sure as heck fiddle around with the dial to see if I could get something. I'll also point out that the existence of "hash marks" is purely speculative while the loss of the antenna is right there in the photos. As for O'Hare, his job was not to listen for Earhart. His job was to handle administrative traffic. He's only logging overheard Earhart transmissions because he can't stand not to, and he often misses them, mis-hears them, or has to play catch-up. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:07:51 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: pioneering new technology Ric wrote: >Try this experiment. Park two T-6s wing tip t0 wing tip. Set the >brakes and chock the wheels. Stand between the two engines and have >them run up to full power with the props in flat pitch. Now ask your >lovely assistant in the sequined outfit standing about 20 feet behind >you to break a broomstick over her knee. Sorry, Ric, but I was so distracted by the sequined outfit I didn't even notice the two T-6s. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:26:20 From: George Rat Werth Subject: El Chingon Ric commented that he was having trouble translating "El Chingon." I conducted a search of >El Chingon< and amongst the information that came up was a paragraph in a website that seems to be appropriate. Go to >http://www.junkmedia.org/?i=226< Hope this helps, Ric! GRW1 ************************************************************************ From Ric I blush to offer the referenced paragraph: "In Mexican slang El Chingon is used as a noun to describe the bad-assed dude. The coolest, the best. As an adjective, it describes something good, actually excellent. El Chingon also has a macho reference, as you would expect, meaning the male, the macho or the one that "opens"." In fact, all TIGHAR members - male and female - who have completed our Introductory Course in Aviation Archaeology and our Field School have the letters "EC" appended to their member number -"E" for Expedition Qualified and "C" for Course - but they could just as well stand for El Chingon. Who could ask for more than to be the "Illustere Jefe de los Chingons"? ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:37:17 From: Christian Duretete Subject: Re: Newbie Questions 1---When the belly antenna broke, do we have evidence (Lae film/pix) that 100% of the wire was gone, OR, do we accurately know the design of said antenna, with the conclusion that it was impossible for a few feet of wire to remain attached to the plane? Even a few feet of wire would give a somewhat decent receiving. I've never seen this discussed. 2---Is there any reasons as to why AE would request a transmission specifically on *7500*??? Where is that number coming from??? Christian D ************************************************************************ From Ric 1. We know the design of the antenna from numerous photographs. We know it's function only from supposition, and not everyone agrees about that. There is not sufficient resolution in the Lae takeoff photos to know for sure that all of the wire departed the aircraft. 2. Why the heck Earhart requested signals on such a high frequency is a real mystery. She first asked for it in a message she sent to the Coast Guard several days before the flight, setting up radio procedures. They didn't question it even though they had previously been told that her DF would only respond to much lower frequencies. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:56:45 From: Marcus Subject: Re: Newbie Questions Ric wrote: >Young technology never develops without people who are willing to take >chances to test it, but Earhart does not belong in that category... -terribly sorry, but as it seems this statement shows rather a personal prejudice than any kind of factually correct access. Generally, how to interpret EXACTLY the expression "to test the new technology"? Whether any exact "formal definition" of this process exist? As far as I know - no, it isn't. So who can be a "judge" to make a "verdict" whether some person belongs to this "category"? Such a discussion looks simply senseless from beginning. It shows more the personal prejudice of some people against other people, than anything interesting in factual aspect. For the matter of fact, let me to remind however, that Earhart really esteblished many records, that was certainly a PIONEERING work in those conditions. It helped to TEST the "ultimate" abilities of new aviation constructions, and established the "beacons" for aviation industry to achieve such an abilities and characteristics in following serial "products" - new planes. In my - purely personal - opinion it certainly may be called as "testing new technique and equipment". Best Regards - Marcus ************************************************************************ From Ric I think you're right that all such judgments are subjective but I must disagree that my opinions about Amelia Earhart's career are the result of any personal prejudice. When we began this investigation I had no opinion one way or the other about Earhart. After 15 years of trying to separate folklore from fact I find that I can only conclude that Earhart is one of the most overrated figures in aviation history. That said, I have no desire to tear down AE's image as a hero and role model. That image, accurate or not, has been and continues to be a very positive force in many lives. Our job, however, in trying to solve the mystery of her disappearance, is to be as objective as possible. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 13:02:10 From: Scott White Subject: Re: Newbie Questions Thanks again to Ric and Alan for details. I presume you guys have been over this ground many times, and I appreciate your patience. You both warn about Long & Long's calculations of fuel usage. Yes, I'd kind of figured as much. It's hard to imagine that anyone, several decades after the fact, could calculate fuel usage to anywhere near the kind of precision they claim (though I still haven't heard their side of the story . . . haven't got to that part of the book yet). But I am familiar with the tried and true practice of beginning with a conclusion and working selectively backwards through data and premises. Another thing about that book . . . It starts right off with a speculative account of what happened, with a big splash, right in Chapter 1. That chapter is written in the same factual tone as the rest of the book. I know perfectly well that L&L are only speculating in Chapter 1. But, as the reader, how am I supposed to distinguish speculation from documented facts throughout the whole rest of the book? In my (always) humble opinion, the authors blow their credibility in the first chapter and leave me doubtful of everything else they write. I'd forgotten about 7500 k. Wasn't there another problem with that freq.? Like AE could only receive or Itasca could only broadcast Morse Code on it, and neither AE nor FN was proficient with code? Or was it just that they'd planned in advance to use it for DF, and hadn't arranged to make voice transmissions on it? Anyway, yes, what a shame that she and Noonan didn't figure out that they could have received voice messages with the DF antenna. In any case, she evidently never received any voice message on 3105, 6210, or any other frequency at any time during the flight. Is that right? Alan mentioned in his post yesterday that AE had tested her DF receiving antenna at Lae prior to leaving for Howland. I just read that chapter last night. According to L&L, she tried the antenna but it didn't work (because she had it set to the wrong band). She attributed this to being too close to the signal source, and didn't follow up. If that's accurate, it seems like one more example of a really casual attitude about a critical piece of equipment. Best, -SW ************************************************************************ From Ric >In any case, she evidently never received any voice message on 3105, 6210, >or any other frequency at any time during the flight. Is that right? It certainly seems clear that she never heard anything form Itasca on either frequency during the flight. Whether she heard any of Lae's transmissions on 6210 earlier in the flight is less certain. I don't think she did. There are those who disagree. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 13:06:36 From: Ron Berry Subject: Re: Bones Mystery In regards to the bones: If someone wanted to make the bones that were discovered on the island vanish what would be an easy way to do this? The smart thing to do would be to take them out to sea and toss them over the side of the ship. With the proper weight they would never be seen again. Governments don't work that way they have to have channels for all of that paper work to go through. Just for fun lets say that the bones were taken and brought to the USA. I know that there is no known proof of anything like that happening. Where would the bones be taken here in the states if the military had anything to do with it. What process would be followed to dispatch the problem of having someone famous, or infamous bones? Ron Berry 2640 ************************************************************************ From Ric Or suppose the Electra was abducted in mid-flight by a UFO? I know there's no known proof that it happened but, just for fun, what planet or galaxy would it have been taken to? Or is it pointless to ask such questions? ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 13:11:47 From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Hiatus For the next couple weeks Pat will be moderating the forum while I retire to an undisclosed secure location to meet a self-imposed October 15 deadline to have a draft of the too-long awaited Post-Loss Radio Study ready for review by our Earhart Project Advisory Council (EPAC). ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 14:54:36 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Newbie Questions > From Marcus > > ... how to interpret EXACTLY the expression "to test the new > technology"? Whether any exact "formal definition" of this process > exist? ... Without giving a "formal definition," we may note some facts about AE & FN: 1. Radio communications were old technology. Someone else pioneered airborne radio communications. 2. Use of radiotelephony (voice transmissions) was pioneered by someone else. 3. Many other aircraft, commercial and military, were using Radio Direction Finding in the Pacific. AE and FN were flying a new route, but they were not "pioneering" the technology. In fact, according to the Hooven Report, AE took a step backward, removing more modern RDF equipment and returning to a previous generation. All of the other technology used in the trip was not even arguably new: stressed skin aircraft, radial engines, retracts, exhaust gas temperature sensors, plexiglass windows, etc. It was "state of the art," not developmental. The novel elements of the flight were: 1. A woman pilot. 2. A longer route than had been taken by most previous circumnavigators. LTM. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 14:58:01 From: Ron Bright Subject: Itasca logs As a favor for Dave Bellarts, son of Chief Radioman Leo Bellarts, he is inquiring whether any Tighar researchers has physically touched and looked at the "original" Itasca log as submitted by his family to the National Archives c. 1974. He is unable to verify that it is there, and available. The one the Archives is printing is a retyped version, I think with a S-5 missing. Thanks, Ron Bright ******************************************************************** From Ric Randy? Have you laid hands on the originals? We have photocopies of what certainly appear to be the originals. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 14:59:29 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Balfour again Pat, I flew many long distance flights across the pond and from start to finish of the missions I often exceeded 20 hours. We were on autopilot much of the time except for take off, landing and air refuelings. We had two pilots. AE had an autopilot albeit not as good as ours. There were also two pilots. When my missions were near the end I was a little tired but hardly physically and mentally exhausted. I doubt AE was in such terrible shape either. They could have taken turns dozing off for that matter. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:00:20 From: Mary Moleski Subject: Re: Bones Mystery > From Ron Berry > > ... Just for fun lets say that the bones > were taken and brought to the USA. It's an idea that Roger and I discussed in Fiji. I'm not sure that any relevant archives have been searched in the U.S. to try to find correspondence from the High Commissioner and his proper U.S. contact (a consul? an ambassador? an envoy?) between 1940 and 1952. I suppose there is at least some chance that the HC may have said, "We've found some stuff. Do you want to look at it?" Arguing against this idea is the Doctor's opinion that the bones were from a male too short to be Fred (if they even knew that Fred was aboard the plane!). Why bother the Americans if it was some lost fisherman who died on Gardner? LTM. Marty #2359 *************************************************************** From Ric The minutes in the file show quite clearly that Sir Harry actively disagreed with suggestions that he advise the Americans about the bones. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:00:58 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Newbie Questions Scott, one reason we are "being patient" (although I think we are simply answering your good questions) is that you are trying to learn as opposed to a few we have suffered through in the past. I would recommend going to the TIGHAR web site and laboring through from front to back. In particular there is an excellent review of Long's book. Several actually but Rollin Reineck did a good job ferreting out some of the errors. You will also find many postings on the fuel issue as well as all the issues you will encounter in learning about this mystery. A good example is a lengthy posting on the radio issues. Glad to have you aboard. You are in a unique position. You don't know enough yet to be attacked. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:01:48 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Balfour Again > From Alan > > ... When my missions were near the end I was a little tired but hardly > physically and mentally exhausted. I doubt AE was in such terrible shape > either. It is at least conceivable that your flights were not as difficult as AE's, apart from the similarity in duration. Were your ears a few inches from the tips of the props for most of the flight? Did you make these flights after a month of traveling around the world? Were you filled with anxiety about the danger of not finding your destination? LTM. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:03:18 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones Mystery For Ron Berry What I think is more fruitful than speculating about the bones wandering to the U.S. is to speculate about what might have happened to them if they just slowly worked their way out of government possession during or after WWII. The last documentation we have has them in Dr. Hoodless' possession. Assuming they remained there, there'd be no reason for anything to be added to the file. If they remained with Hoodless or his successor until about the time the WPHC went out of business, something could then have happened to them without their being identified as government property. I'm wondering about how closely coincident in time the following events were: 1. Hoodless' retirement 2. The various relocations of the medical school 3. The relocation of the WPHC to Honiara. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:03:38 From: Russ Matthews Subject: Re: Itasca Logs Ron wrote: >Dave Bellarts... is inquiring whether any TIGHAR researchers has >physically touched and looked at the "original" Itasca log as submitted by >his family to the National Archives c. 1974. Yes, I saw them, touched them, and copied them while working on the NBC New Productions syndicated documentary TV special "Untold Stories: The Search for Amelia Earhart." However, that was over 12 years ago and things may have changed since then. LTM, Russ ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:12:49 From: Marcus Subject: Re: Newbie Questions Dear Marty! Thanks for your thoughtful answers. Your "facts" that you provided are absolutely correct of course no doubts about it. The problem is that they are slightly "off-topic." Let's see. Ric wrote: "Young technology never develops without people who are willing to take chances to test it, but Earhart does not belong in that category..." It was a very common statement. As I understood it, it was some kind of estimation of all the Earhart's career, not just some opinion about some particular radio-related matters or something about her Last Flight exclusively. However, the flying career of AE did not consist from this unlucky World Flight only. It was started in 1921. She got her flying license in 1923, and was a competent pilot many years before the 1928 flight, not even mentioning the 1937 flight. She really broke many records -- that was a PIONEERING work in those times, and certainly can be (in my personal opinion -- must be) called as "testing new technique in ultimate conditions". So it was a deserved flying career of 16 years, and during this period Earhart did a lot of daring, important and pioneering things -- in many aspects. In my opinion, it is a damnishly good reason to respect her properly and avoid a public sarcasm or sharp criticism dictated by any kind of personal prejudice. [In my understanding, the statement made on Forum -- especially by the Boss of the Forum -- is a public statement]. At least it is my personal opinion based on far more than 15 years of studying Earhart's biography and career. Ric seemed as refusing to admit this, and this is why I wrote my message. And I still cam see a clear signs of prejudice in his position, although he tries to refute it now. Ric wrote: "After 15 years of trying to separate folklore from fact I find that I can only conclude that Earhart is one of the most overrated figures in aviation history". I believe we have a perfect "example" just here. AGAIN: What means: "overrated"? Who is "officially approved" to "rate"? Who can be a "judge" to make a "verdict" about it? And please show me these "criteria of judgment"! The record flights of Earhart are well documented, and she certainly made many big "firsts". Of course, somebody may think it is not important, but I think (my personal opinion of course) that this kind of achievements in those times was really important. Also - additionally - she attracted a lot of people's attention (and money!) to the young aviation industry. Maybe somebody thinks that it was not important for the development of this industry -- well but I don't think so. Also -- additionally -- she inspired many women to join the world of aviation, contributing their talents and abilities to it's development - in many aspects. Maybe somebody thinks that this contribution was not important for the development of this industry -- well but I don't think so, and such a statement seems for me as, in a very best case, as "politically incorrect". I am sure that somebody will try to say that last two points are "not connected" to "aviation itself" (if to understand "aviation" in a narrow way - only as "planes and flights"), so probably I must to remind that they are "additional" ones there was a lot of good FLYING made by Earhart, and nobody can refute this. Of course anybody can have a personal opinion about "comparative importance" of different flights and achievements etc., but I cannot see any connections between these abstract speculations and the real research of what happened with Earhart and her navigator in July1937 I believe somebody (Tom King?) already wrote this a few months ago I couldn't agree more LTM -- Marcus (who respects pioneers) ************************************************************************ From Ric I disagree. A realistic assessment of the pilot's strengths and weaknesses based on his or her prior performance is a standard, and an essential, part of any accident investigation. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:16:00 From: Ted Campbell Subject: Radio questions Pat and Radio Guys, I need some help in understanding the functions of the various antennae on AE aircraft. From what I have gathered over time, from the forum, this is how I understand their location, function and operation: 1. A "VEE" antenna was on top of the aircraft running from behind the cockpit to both vertical tail plains. 2. A Belly antenna was from the pitot tubes to a mast near the tail. 3. A DF loop antenna was above the cockpit. This is how I understand their function: 1. The Vee: This is what AE broadcast on e.g. the COM side of the radio. 2. The Belly: This is what AE received COM on. 3. The DF loop: This is what AE used to home in on (i.e. find the bearing to) a radio transmission from a ground/ship station. It also allowed some, albeit weak, voice signals to be heard by AE. This is how I understand how AE had to operate each: 1. The Vee: Flip a switch to "transmit" and then make her radio call. 2. The Belly: Flip a switch to "receive" and then listen for a reply. 3. The DF loop: Flip a switch to "receive" a signal from a ground/ship station to home in on. The questions I have regarding the antennae are as follows: 1. If the Vee was used to broadcast on and it was modified in Miami to offset the removal of the "trailing wire" antenna what good would that do if you didn't also adjust the receiving antenna on the belly? i.e. she may have been able to broadcast over a greater distance but it didn't improve her reception distance on replies. 2. If the Belly antenna was lost on takeoff from Lea then she never was able to receive a subsequent signal from anyone. If this is true wouldn't she have noticed this early on into the flight? Also, wouldn't she have noticed this missing antenna upon her arrival at Gardner and therefor reached the conclusion that any of her outgoing "post lost messages" which may have asked (I don't know if any did) for a reply were fruitless? 3. If the DF loop antenna was still working when she reached Gardner could she have heard and homed in on the direction of the radio traffic that was being used to find her? This would have been of little help in her communicating with anyone but at least she could have known where to look for the direction of rescuers e.g. the low level Navy fly over. 4. Could Balfour have been the "fly in the ointment" in the whole radio failure fiasco? Do we know for certain what radio equipment Balfour worked on? A. If it was the DF loop system does this imply that AE knew she was having trouble with the system from previous attempts to use it? If so, then maybe she wasn't as inexperienced in its function as we have become to believe. If the DF problems were only encountered on the leg into Lae then could it have been with Lae's equipment and any attempt to fix it messed it up? B. If it was the Com side of the radios it seems that Balfour's only fix was to instruct AE to pitch her voice, could this have been an indication of faulty Lae equipment? Keep in mind that the Itasca could hear her fine and I don't recall any other stations along the route indicating anything was wrong with AE's transmissions. C. If it was the Receive side of her radios could Balfour have messed up the whole thing? Keep in mind that Lea couldn't hear AE's broadcast coming into Lea (albeit the 36 metres vs 49 metres mix-up that was reported in the Chater Report), nothing was said in the Chater Report about AE having problems with receiving Lae signals. Why then would Balfour adjust something on the aircraft so as to "calibrated for reception of Lae radio telephone?" Could Lae's radio been the one out of calibration (both on the receive and transmit side) and Balfour's reception fix messed the whole thing up? D. If Balfour gummed up the works because his equipment was out of calibration could this have resulted in the same reception problems encountered by AE as that of losing her Belly antenna at takeoff from Lae? If so, does this muck-up the lost antenna theory? Finally, it is the Chater Report that indicates there were radio problems with AE's bird and they were numerous - or at least they were reported on in detail. Are there any other accounts of radio problems along the way before getting to Lae? We have pictures, and I believe narrative on some of the pictures along with other reports of instrumentation and engine problems being corrected along the way but I don't recall any details relating to radios. Also, the Chater Report indicates that they were having trouble receiving other radio signals i.e. weather, time signals, etc., which may or may not indicate that Lae had some radio problems of their own. Ted Campbell ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:17:12 From: Dennis McGee Subject: Re: New Shoes I just now ordered a copy of the October 2004 edition of Shoes. My sister-in-law is interested in the mystery also, so I'll probably get her a copy for Xmas. I'm going to have to keep this a secret from my wife. She was miffed about me buying the coffee mugs but fully supported coughing up a $100 for raffle tickets to the Caribbean vacation resort TIGHAR offered last year. I guess I just don't get it. LTM, a gentle "sole" Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:29:33 From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Palau request One last note before I bury myself in the Post-Loss Radio Study: The Historic Preservation Officer in Palau has not been able to determine whether or not the offending producer, Ms. Eva Wunderman of Wunderman Films, Inc., is under contract to the History Channel or just hoping to sell her film to them. He does, however, feel that it is important to contact the History Channel as soon as possible so that they know that she deliberately broke the law. He says, "If she is under contract, it is hoped that the History Channel will never contract with her again. Also, if its contract does not have a provision that film crews must abide by all applicable laws, such a provision should be added to prevent future violations. If the film is ever completed and broadcast it should include her confession of violating the law and her admission of the damage caused. She will try it again and so will others. "It still is not clear to me if she was under contract to the History Channel or just hoping to sell it to them or the History Station, Canada. She may have been using the "History Channel" in a generic way. If the History Channel responds that it does not have a contract with Eva Wunderman or her film company and/or does not know about the project, then at least the History Channel will be forewarned that she broke the law, there is a court case, and it could have a lot of bad publicity over her film if they ever show it with dealing with the crime violation in an open and honest way. Then we could contact other history stations to make sure she does not market it elsewhere." If you would like to write to the executives at A&E Television Networks (the company that owns the History Channel) about this situation, here are the email addresses: davatzes@aetn.com - Nickolas Davatzes, President & CEO whitney.goit@aetn.com - Whitney Goit, Executive Vice President abbe.raven@aetn.com - Abbe Raven, Executive VP/General Manager, A&E Network ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 13:30:35 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones Mystery Roger, I examined the files of the U.S. consulate in Suva from its inception in about 1939 through most of WWII, focusing on the time when Sir Harry was in the WPHC chair; the files are in the National Archives in College Park, MD. Absolutely no references to the bones at all, no evidence of contact on the subject. The U.S. Consul had no use for Sir Harry, and the feeling may well have been mutual. TK ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 13:14:39 From: Pat Thrasher Subject: A test to see if I did this right This is a test. This is only a test. Had this been an actual message, you should read it, but as it is, ignore it -- I am merely checking to see if I set the header correctly for messages to come directly to me instead of to Ric's email. LTM, who is no computer whiz Pat ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 13:33:01 From: Mark Guimond Subject: Re: Test Hi Pat Came through fine at this end. Good luck. Mark ******************************* OK, so we're in business. You may now post freely. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:09:01 From: Bob Sherman Subject: Noise in the cockpit It has been posted that AE would have been really tired and prone to errors in judgment after 20 hrs. of flight especially because of the constant noise level and the effects of less oxygen at altitude. That was countered with a post by one who had experienced 20 hr. flights with no ill effects. And Ric made the noise issue graphically by suggesting two T-6's wing tip to wing tip with AE inbetween. [should have been wings overlapping by half to bring the engines closer to her position.] I am going to add some extremes from my 50 years in the air. 15+ hours in R-2800, C-46's with 'cans' on the ears [the approx. 2" dia. hard bakelite earphones with no surrounding padding to keep out noise] and pressure altitudes between 6 and 10k. On one arrival at an island base, the twr. advised, "When you are finished with the acrobatics, [bounces and skips] turn off at the next .... " Beds never felt so good. Some years later in 'over the weather Connies' and three pilots [CAA/FAA reg. for over 8 hrs.] and a bunk period, the cabin altitudes of 6 to 10k took a toll on energy and thinking ability. Still later in the smoothest & quietest of the bunch, the B-747 [that had three pressurization sources] there are several hundred thousand crew members who will testify that using all three systems with cabin altitudes several thousand feet below the use of only two systems, sure made a difference. I have never quantified it, but cabin altitude and noise are without a doubt, debilitating. RC 941 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:09:28 From: Mike Haddock Subject: Re: test Message came through fine. Most of us know who the real brains behind TIGHAR is! LOL! Have a great day, Pat. LTM, Mike Haddock, #2438 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:21:19 From: Eric Beheim Subject: Re: Bones mystery Ric wrote: > The minutes in the file show quite clearly that Sir Harry actively disagreed > with suggestions that he advise the americans about the bones. What about advising British Intelligence? And he would he have had to report this to the "Home Office?" Perhaps the bones, etc. ended up in England. Hmmmm. LTM Eric Beheim, Naval Station San Diego ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:42:01 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones mystery Eric Beheim wrote: > What about advising British Intelligence? I doubt that British Intelligence would have been interested in the bones of an unknown person who died at an indefinite time on an unoccupied island far from any military site. > And he would he have had to > report this to the "Home Office?" I think Ric and the Hanslope team sought info on that angle. Once the doctor said the bones were those of a man, the excitement goes out of the case. I doubt that the Home Office would worry about a "European or half-European" dying on a deserted island in the Pacific. > Perhaps the bones, etc. ended up in > England. Hmmmm. That would be wonderful. That's the "Raiders of the Lost Ark" hypothesis--they'll turn up in a warehouse Some Day. LTM. Marty ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:44:11 From: Tom Strang Subject: Earhart Project Bulletin #25 For Dr. Tom King Re: Earhart Project Bul. # 25 Dt'd Aug 01, 2000 Dr. King in your research of Colonial Officer Gerald B. Gallagher, did you find any documentation referencing wireless operator training in Gallagher's background prior to his posting to the Gilbert and Ellice Island Colony? Respectfully: Tom Strang # 2559 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:45:44 From: Jim Preston Subject: Re: Titles Ric, its a Mexican word not Spanish and it is CHINGAR. I was President of the Spanish Club in HS. I got up in class and asked the teacher how to conjugate the word. He told me to sit down and shut up. He was Mexican and was my advisor in SP.CLub & Honor Club. After school he told me about it. You don't want to know. Jim Preston ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:48:32 From: John Wood Subject: Autogyro question I know this is off topic, and I apologize. I am doing a play about AE (research for which is how I found TIGHAR and this forum) and this play has her being given an official reprimand by the Commerce for Aviation; TRUE or FALSE? I am enjoying this forum immensely, and expect to become a member of TIGHAR soon. LTM, JMW (John M. Wood) ***************************************** Anyone? Outside my paygrade. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:49:58 From: Scott White Subject: Lindbergh Baby Lives! I haven't been around this list long enough to know if this kind of thing is on topic. My main internet recreation is on the "skeptic" list server. Here's something I posted there, and I thought it might be of interest here too. The AE reference below is to Rollin Reineck's book, Amelia Earhart Survived. -- forwarded msg.--- Today's (Sunday) LA Times magazine has an article about a guy who claims to be the long-missing son of Chas. Lindbergh. I have only read a few paragraphs of it. Kind of like the Amelia Earhart thing I was reading about a few weeks ago, the main basis of the claim is an "uncanny resemblance." Along with a bunch of hypnosis. Presumably there also are some unexplained coincidences and maybe even an eerie dream sequence or bizarre feeling. You can read it at latimes.com As always . . . login: skeptics password: everyone Best, -SW ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:50:44 From: Seth Brenneman Subject: Re: Newbie Questions Marcus wrote: > there was a lot of good FLYING made by Earhart, and nobody can refute this I guess that depends on how you define "good flying" and how you define "nobody". And how you define "refute" for that matter. --Seth ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:20:26 EDT From: Roger Kelley Subject: Re: A test to see if I did this right Message received 5x5. However, image was a little dark due to volcanic ash on the monitor. Roger ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:21:40 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones mystery Eric asks: "What about advising British Intelligence?" -- which strikes me as a very interesting question. I've seen no evidence that British Intelligence had a presence in Fiji at the time, but when I think about it, it would be strange if they didn't. Roger Kelley, Kris Tague, any thoughts? ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 20:50:58 EDT From: Alan L. Caldwell Subject: Re: A test to see if I did this right I ignored your message as you asked so I don't know what it said. I hope that helps you do whatever it was you tried to do. I also don't understand what I just wrote. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 10:17:09 From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: something new in forum Pat: I have received three messages that are displaying the e-mail address of the individual posters. I've not ever seen this before. Alfred ************************************************ Some of the messages are coming through to me with a link back to the listserv which, if I click it, automatically approves the message and posts it. Yours didn't come that way, Alfred, I don't know what the difference is. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 10:25:57 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: titles I thought that word was chienga! Dan *************************************** Oh dear, I KNEW I should have taken Spanish instead of German.... Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 10:43:24 From: Carl Peltzer Subject: Re: Lindbergh Baby Lives! I know, off thread, but to put the Earhart situation I believe the times should be brought into the proper perspective. We learned about Lindbergh's other Family in Germany after his wife passed away but can we suppose he might have had other children here in the United States and kept that information to himself. After all he was definitely handsome enough, perhaps a one night stand or a long term affair, after all he had to be much more careful about his reputation and to me it should have been easier to keep secrets back then. CHP if we are all using abbreviations ********************************** Which, in fact, we are not. Postings must be signed, first and last names please. --not a poke at you, Carl, you always do so, but no noms de keyboard or 'screen names' or whatever. Real names, please. Pat Thrasher Forum Moderator Pro Tem ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 10:44:33 From: Tom King Subject: Earhart Project Bulletin #25 For Tom Strang Good question about Gallagher's wireless training. I'm afraid I don't have any data on the subject, though I seem to recall that Ric found something about his general training for the colonial service, either in the WPHC archives or on Tarawa. All I can recall from my own reading is that Gallagher had a good deal of trouble learning the I Kiribati language, and had only just passed his qualifying exams before he died. I feel sure that basic training in wireless operation was part of the training for colonial officers, and Gallagher's training as a pilot would have given him some further acquaintance with the subject (though to judge from AE's abilities in that regard, maybe not much). But I don't know how much training he had, or what kind. Some digging in the files from the WPHC might answer the question to some extent, or might not. How's that for a nice, clear, black-and-white answer? ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:16:42 From: Tom King Subject: Peleliu incident: Target Correction For anybody planning to write The History Channel about the Peleliu vandalism incident: I just received the following: Thomas F. King, PhD Project Archaeologist, Amelia Earhart Search Project The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery P.O. Box 14515 Silver Spring, MD 20911 Dear Mr. King: Your October 4th e-mail to Nick Davatzes regarding the violation of a WWII historic site on the island of Peleliu in the Republic of Palau was bought to my attention. I was sorry to hear about this incident and find it disturbing. This is to inform you that The History Channel was not involved in this project. It seems that the project was commissioned for History Television - Canada which is not related to The History Channel even though their name is similar. Therefore, since this is not our project, we cannot take any action. Sincerely, Daniel E. Davids President, The History Channel - USA cc: N. Davatzes To which I replied.... Dear Mr. Davids -- Thank you very much for your response. We'd gotten conflicting stories about to whom the contractor was responsible, though she herself is reported to have said it was "The History Channel." In any event, I can appreciate the fact that you can't do anything about the incident in question, but in a larger sense, it seems to me to ring a warning bell that The History Channel should heed. If a contractor for History Television -- Canada can engage in this kind of egregious activity, what's to keep a contractor (or would-be contractor) for The History Channel from doing the same? It seems to me that The History Channel could do the cause of historical research and historic preservation a very good turn by exercising some leadership in this area -- both by providing some very explicit direction to those who aspire to sell you their products and perhaps by airing something on the subject. I will, however, pass your message on to others I know who may be gearing up to send you nastygrams, and suggest that they direct their fire at History Television -- Canada instead. Thanks again for your prompt reply. Tom King Thomas F. King, PhD Project Archaeologist, Amelia Earhart Search Project The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery PO Box 14515, Silver Spring MD 20911 _www.tighar.org_ (http://www.tighar.org/) To purchase Amelia Earhart's Shoes: Is the Mystery Solved?: _www.altamirapress.com_ (http://www.altamirapress.com/) **************************************************************** Thanks, Tom. I guess we need to find out who the honcho is at History Television Canada. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:27:07 From: Tom King Subject: History Television - Canada More from Tom King Here's the website for History Television - Canada. _http://www.historytelevision.ca/_ (http://www.historytelevision.ca/) Haven't found information on their power structure, and I HAVE to stop this and do some paying work today, but maybe someone else on the Forum can pursue it....?? LTM Tom ************************************ Let slip the dogs of war.... Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:41:46 From: Tom King Subject: Re: History Television-Canada Contact information: History Television -- Canada: 121 Bloor St. East, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4W3M5. HT-C is owned by Alliance Atlantis, information on which is provided below. An inside source tells me that the person to address is Michael MacMillan, President, Alliance Atlantis. Phone 416-967-1174. Alliance Atlantis web site: _http://www.allianceatlantis.com/_(http://www.allianceatlantis.com/) And NOW I'm going to do some paying work... Tom Alliance Atlantis Alliance Atlantis is a Toronto-based media company. It distributes American and Canadian-made films both in Canada and the United Kingdom. It has been known to fund projects regarded as too controversial by US companies, such as Bowling for Columbine. The company now owned the now defunct Salter Street Films which produces a number of television shows for both the Canadian and international market such as This Hour Has 22 Minutes, CODCO, Emily of New Moon, Made in Canada, Blackfly and Lexx. It also owns a number of Canadian cable and digital television channels such as History Television, and Showcase, along with BBC Canada and BBC. In some cities the company also owns movie theaters. Alliance Atlantis produces the hit U.S. series CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:42:30 From: Mike Haddock Subject: Earhart Project Bulletin #25 Do we have any record of anyone on Lae attempting to contact AE to advise her that she had lost an antenna on takeoff? I don't recall ever reading anything to that effect. Were the people on Lae even aware that she lost the antenna? Anyone? LTM, Mike Haddock, #2438 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 13:53:41 From: Pat Subject: Re: Balfour again The next few postings got lost in the shuffle on Sunday, but here they are. **************************************************************** From Alan Caldwell Marty, I was asked this same question off forum and I provided the following answer. I will supplement by saying my duty time was 105 hours per week -- flying, class, alert, SAC briefings for five years. We were pretty well worn out most of the time in SAC. Here is my answer to someone else. Alan ****************** My airplane was completely cramped and I could not leave my seat nor could I stretch my legs or recline. I had an oxygen mask covering my face all the time and it was icy cold. We were not electronically monitored other than by HF radio reports which occasionally worked. Our navigation equipment consisted of an ADF, sextant and a radar of limited range. Our weather briefing was never close nor were we able to get weather enroute except for Bermuda and Lajes. That was of little value as we weren't going to either place. Our route was just air. There was no land other than what I just mentioned. It is true we did not worry about finding a tiny speck but were looking for the continent of Africa which is not easy to miss. The "ergonomics" consisted of a piss tube between my legs and a thermos of stale warm water. The only way anyone knew where we were was when we were able to tell them through the static of HF radio. Although the Atlantic ocean was well traveled there was nothing to chart. It's just water and air. Stress? The plane did not have enough gas to get across and we had to mid air refuel twice. Weather could have wiped us out as could air refueling equipment malfunctions or tankers failing to arrive. All of those things happened periodically although not to me, fortunately. Some planes did not make it for various reasons. 1. One blew up in mid air for unknown reasons. 2. One simply disappeared during let down to the tanker rendezvous and was never found. 3. Often the pilot was unable to fly the necessary formation to get his gas. Nervous, tired, stressed out? 4. Equipment failure. 5. Tanker aborted. 6. Unable to find the tanker. Given the choice I would have taken AE's flight anytime. BTW, I flew T-6s and the noise issue is far over rated. I have not flown a 10E but have flown twin Beech aircraft. Smaller engines of course. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:01:54 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Balfour again Marty, as an after thought you are certainly correct, AE flew just about every day but each flight was only a few hours with a couple of exceptions. I have not had a similar experience so I don't know what toll that took but I could easily accept the argument they needed the few days they had at Lae before continuing. In Vietnam I flew every day for two solid weeks, averaging 20 to 30 take offs and landings each day before getting a week off. This cycle was repeated for two years. I never felt tired during each day's flights but that may have been out of terror. I really was happy to get my week off though. That resulted in 1196 combat missions over parts of five years. I WAS tired when I came home. I get tired now riding in a 737. I've added a chart of AE's routes but I know you are more than familiar with this. It's for the benefit of a couple of new folks. Alan May 20 Oakland, California Burbank, California 325 May 21 Burbank, California Tucson, Arizona 450 May 22 Tucson, Arizona New Orleans, Louisiana 1250 May 23 New Orleans, Louisiana Miami, Florida 675 June 1 Miami, Florida San Juan, Puerto Rico 1033 June 2 San Juan, Puerto Rico Caripito, Venezuela 750 June 3 Caripito, Venezuela Paramaribo, Suriname (Dutch Guiana) 667 June 4 Paramaribo, Suriname Fortaleza, Brazil 1200 June 6 Fortaleza, Brazil Natal, Brazil 268 June 7 Natal, Brazil Saint-Louis, Senegal (French West Africa) 1961 June 8 Saint-Louis, Senegal Dakar, Senegal 103 June 10 Dakar, Senegal Gao, Mali (French West Africa) 1130 June 11 Gao, Mali Ndjamena, Chad (Fort Lamy, French Equatorial Africa) 989 June 12 Ndjamena, Chad El Fasher, Sudan (Anglo-Egyptian Sudan) 700 June 13 El Fasher, Sudan Khartoum, Sudan 501 June 13 Khartoum, Sudan Massawa, Ethiopia (Italian Eritrea) 450 June 14 Massawa, Ethiopia Assab, Ethiopia 300 June 15 Assab, Ethiopia Karachi, Pakistan (India) 1600 June 17 Karachi, Pakistan Calcutta, India 1390 June 18 Calcutta, India Sittwe, Myanmar (Akyab, Burma) 335 June 19 Sittwe, Myanmar Rangoon, Myanmar 306 June 20 Rangoon, Myanmar Bangkok, Thailand (Siam) 300 June 20 Bangkok, Thailand Singapore, Malaysia (British Crown Colony) 904 June 21 Singapore, Malaysia Bandoeng, Java, Indonesia (Dutch East Indies) 560 June 24 Bandoeng, Java Soerabaja, Java, Indonesia 355 June 25 Soerabaja, Java, Indonesia Bandoeng, Java, Indonesia 355 June 27 Bandoeng, Java, Indonesia Koepang, Timor, Indonesia 1165 June 28 Koepang, Timor, Indonesia Port Darwin, Australia 500 June 29 Port Darwin, Australia Lae, Papua New Guinea (Territory of New Guinea) 1207 July 2 Lae, Papau New Guinea Howland Island, U.S. Territory 2556 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:02:34 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Radio Questions I might mention the belly antenna did not go all the way back to the tail but just to near the cargo or passenger door. I'll leave the rest to the radio experts. I WILL say there is some controversy over the function of the belly antenna. It is not a well settled matter in the minds of some. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:04:43 From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Itasca Logs Yes, I have touched, and xeroxed the original, typescript radiolog from the Itasca. It is part of the National Archives, Record Group 200, IIRC. I have provided TIGHAR central a copy of it...that's where we find the overtyping and platten offsets. Ron Bright wrote: > As a favor for Dave Bellarts, son of Chief Radioman Leo Bellarts, > he is inquiring whether any Tighar researchers has physically touched > and looked at the "original" Itasca log as submitted by his family to > the National Archives c. 1974. He is unable to verify that it is there, > and available. The one the Archives is printing is a retyped version, > I think with a S-5 missing. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:05:36 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Bones Mystery In my opinion, there would be a limited number of US organizations that would be candidates for investigating the bones. Probably the best is the predecessors to CILHI, the US Army Central Identification Laboratory Hawaii, associated with the Punchbowl Cemetery. Also, either the Bishop Museum in Hawaii, or the Smithsonian. I suspect that someone could make a short list of British or Pacific Colonial institutions that did similar work, and they would be more likely, as the bones were found on British (colonial) soil. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:08:26 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones mystery Tom King wrote: > 1. Hoodless' retirement David Winn Hoodless: Founding Tutor, later Principal of CMS/FSM Set to retire 31 May 1942 Stayed on as acting director until 1 Feb 47 Succeeded by A.S. Frater Went to Tarawa to give a doctor relief November 1948 1953: Second trip to the Gilberts Died 15 Apr 1955/56 in England. His wife had problems proving that he was a Fiji citizen. He is buried in Britain. Hilda Hoodless died Dec 31, 1956. Hoodless came and "really helped" the people of the Pacific. > 2. The various relocations of the medical school I don't have a grip on this. Roger or members of the earlier team may have some feel for the sequence. > 3. The relocation of the WPHC to Honiara. Here is the list of "turning points" that seemed likely times for the Gardner collection to get "cleaned up": 1942: Sir Harry Luke leaves Fiji 1944: The British Return to Tarawa 1945: Peace in the Pacific (GBG's trunk) 1947: Hoodless retires 1952: WPHC Moved From Fiji to Honiara 1954: Central Archives Open in Suva, Fiji Records Destroyed at FSM by Acting Director (!) 1970: Fiji gains independence. 1972: GEIC removed from WPHC. 1973: New Hebrides removed from WPHC. 1976: Archival Process begins (Paddy Mac!). 1978: Archives separated: GB, Tarawa, Funafuti. WPHC defunct. BHC takes over in Fiji? People disagree on how to date the death of the WPHC. It's between 1973 and 1978. I can't find my source for the assertion that an "Acting Director" destroyed many of the records of FSM circa 1954. I believe we may have learned this from Imeri Waibuca, who is archivist for FSM now. Waibuca was very pleasant, even enthusiastic, but wouldn't let us see any archival material. She said she commissioned students to look on our behalf. I guess the records either aren't open to the public or else they're not organized and prepared for researchers to use. The head of Fiji School of Medicine wouldn't give us the time of day, so he would be of no help in getting a chance to examine the FSM Archives for ourselves. LTM. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:09:25 From: Alan Hall Subject: Re: Radio Questions About the reports of unintelligable transmissions, for example: 'The unintelligibility of the voice message is attributed to "bad modulation or speaker shouting into microphone."' 'While in Lae, New Guinea Earhart was advised to "pitch her voice higher to overcome distortion caused by rough carrier wave"' If her transmitter had an MCW switch, if MCW mode were switched on it could sound like bad modulation. And without being able to hear her own transmissions, she would not have realized there was a problem. It may not have occurred to the radio operators that it was MCW interfering with the voice transmission. About her shoes, she may have found all leather soles to be slippery and simply asked a porter in a hotel, perhaps in Lae, to have rubber heels put on. I don't suppose that Cat's Paw heels were only available in the US. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:11:41 From: Marcus Lind Subject: Re: Newbie questions Ric wrote: > A realistic assessment of the pilot's strengths and weaknesses > based on his or her prior performance is a standard, and an essential, > part of any accident investigation. - Thank you - yes, here I completely agree of course Only problem here -- again - is a criteria of judgment about which assessment may be considered as "realistic", and who and how will judge about it So I only proposed (for to avoid this problem) to stay with firm facts and try to avoid too common conclusions (especially "discriminating" ones) and abstract speculations about "whether some person deserves to be called as pioneer" etc. etc. etc., that may looks simply offending, or "politically incorrect" especially if the person really deserves some "credit of respect and careful attitude" because of many good and factual reasons... Such a speculations may seem "curious" in certain aspect, but in fact it eflects nothing objective but a purely personal opinions, adding no useful information to the factual picture LTM - Marcus ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:12:25 From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Itasca logs For Russ M. Do you still have a copy of what purported to be the original. If so, Dave Bellarts would love a copy. Thanks so much. R. Bright ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:14:17 From: Mike Haddock Subject: Balfour again I've always been curious if anyone tried to contact AE after she took off from Lae to notify her regarding the loss of the antenna or did anyone even notice that she had lost it? LTM, Mike Haddock, #2438 ****************************************** The story is that someone (or ones) picked up the antenna wire from the runway. I don't know quite how they would have gotten in touch with her on the subject. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:31:38 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Balfour again Alan Caldwell wrote: > ... I flew T-6s and the noise issue is far over rated. > I have not flown a 10E but have flown twin Beech aircraft. > Smaller engines of course. The noise issue is the sound generated by the tips of the props. In a T-6, all that noise is out in front of you. In the Electra, it is a few inches away. Look at how the props line up with the cockpit. I've flown in small prop commuter planes. The noise is not trivial. I'm not saying this proves anything. It is a possible factor that may be weighed differently by different evaluators. LTM. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:32:32 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones mystery Thanks, Marty. Looks to me like the early '50s, when Hoodless retired and the WPHC relocated from Suva, is a time when the bones might well have gone missing. My recollection is that the Medical School relocated at about this time, too, from the hospital to the old military base at Tamavua. Another variable: when did Vaskess retire? ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:02:16 From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Lindbergh baby lives! Oh heck... I know I used to have a name... Years ago before TIGHAR re-christened me... Now where is it... I know it was here somewhere... Th' WOMBAT ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:05:10 From: Andrew McKenna Subject: Re: Search Technology Carl Peltzer wrote: > Those in search of lost aircraft artifacts should look into a > longtime sar > organizattion that has some very sophisticated equipment recently made > available to them. Computer programing has enabled the finding > lost items which are > manufactured not made by natural causes and this is meant simply as a > lead for them and all I can say about it. > > In thinking about Tighar's research into the Nungessor and Coli > search a few years ago this could be used up there with good effect. ************************************************************************ > From Ric > > Carl, what are you talking about? I think what Carl Peltzer was cryptically referring to (and I don't know why as it is public knowledge) is the new Hyperspectral Imaging System that will be coming on line for the Civil Air Patrol over the next year. The system looks for spectral signatures of man made and other objects which can include humans, vehicles, aircraft debris, trash, oil spills, marijuana, corn, whatever you want to look for that you can provide a spectral signature for. The idea is to fly over areas of interest and let the camera and computer do the looking instead of the traditional three sets of eyeballs, which can't look everywhere, all the time, with a high probability of detection. 15 Gippsland Airvan GA8 aircraft will initially be equipped with this system. See http://www.gippsaero.com/index.asp See also http://www.cap.gov/mediacenter/releases/scc.html Civil Air Patrol awards contract to Space Computer Corporation MAXWELL AFB, Ala. Civil Air Patrol has awarded a $1.6 million contract to Space Computer Corporation for the software to operate 15 hyperspectral imaging (HSI) systems. CAP will use the high-tech HSI systems to detect objects from the air. "Hyperspectral imaging is the next wave of reconnaissance technology," said Maj. Gen. Dwight Wheless, CAP national commander. "Space Computer Corporation is providing state-of-the-art software that will allow us to pinpoint objects very precisely. This will make a tremendous difference when we're searching for individuals or aircraft that are lost or in trouble." Space Computer Corporation (SCC) will provide all system control, detection, display, and ground-processing software for CAP's HIS systems. SCC also will provide field training for CAP members, all of whom are volunteers. CAP, the civilian auxiliary of the U.S. Air Force, has done extensive research on HSI technology and is fielding the first systems in the nation to be used on a continuing basis for community search and rescue work. Dubbed ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance), the HSI system can automatically search the ground before for objects having any specific "spectral signature" selected by the onboard operator. The technology is based on reflected light, so some portion of the object must be exposed for the HSI camera to pick it up. SCC's software provides a unique combination of real-time geo-rectified image displays (GeoPaint), target detection and location, and situational awareness for the spectrum of CAP missions. The ease of operation and timeliness of results were critical factors in CAP's decision to contract with SCC. The software is a mature product, leveraging the company's experience with similar systems developed for the U.S. Department of Defense. SCC will be responsible for integrating its software with hardware produced by NovaSol Corporation. SCC will also provide operator training and support. The ARCHER airborne component will initially fly on CAP's new Gippsland GA-8 Airvans, with portable ground stations available for CAP base operators. These ground stations will allow operators to rapidly review the recorded imagery gathered as soon as the aircraft touches down and delivers the data. Space Computer Corporation specializes in solving information-processing problems associated with advanced sensor systems. Their work in these areas extends from algorithm development and data analysis through design and fabrication of specialized signal-processing hardware. Since they began operations in 1987, their customer base has grown to include the Department of Defense and other government organizations, as well as CAP and several industrial firms and research centers. They are a privately owned California small business corporation. Civil Air Patrol, the official Air Force auxiliary, is a nonprofit organization with almost 62,000 members nationwide. CAP performs 95% of continental U.S. inland search and rescue missions as tasked by the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center. Its volunteers also perform homeland security, disaster relief and counterdrug missions at the request of federal, state and local agencies. The members take a leading role in aerospace education and serve as mentors to the almost 27,000 young people currently participating in CAP cadet programs. CAP has been performing missions for America for more than 60 years. On the Web: www.cap.gov and www.spacecomputer.com LTM (who sees all) Andrew Harbor Lights Villa A Special Place In the Caribbean www.harborlights.vi 720-635-1166= ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:35:29 From: George Rat Werth Subject: Off topic for Andrew For Andrew McKenna Nice looking spread you have there! http://www.harborlights.vi GRW1 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:58:39 From: Carl Peltzer Subject: Re: Search technology Oh, what the heck, we were told to keep this quiet just last January. Glad that the technology is available. See how things change in just a few months. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:37:31 From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Bones mystery One turning point that isn't shown below: Invasion by the Japanese. This could result in one of several possibilities for the bones: 1. Hidden by the British administrator on the island in one of the caves used for storage. 2. Removed to ? England ? Australia ? 3. Left in situ and confiscated by the Japanese - who might have either interrred the bones, dumped the bones and kept the artifacts or kept the bones and artifacts. After all, the sextant box, eye piece, etc might have some value in the eye of the conqueror. Also, the hand made box that the bones were in was of kanawa wood and may have had an especial value in the mind of the Japanese. IF the Japanese (either officially or as "souvenirs") confiscated the bones and artifacts they may have been shipped back to Japan and be in someone's private collection today or they may be at the bottom of the ocean aboard a Japanese ship that went down in the war action. They may have also been destroyed in the retaking of the island by allied forces. I still somewhat favor the last because I can't see the Brits bothering to pack and move the bones and artifacts - since they would, to me, seem to have a low priority in the scheme of things. LTM, Dave Bush Houston, Texas Marty wrote: > 1942: Sir Harry Luke leaves Fiji > 1944: The British Return to Tarawa > 1945: Peace in the Pacific (GBG's trunk) > 1947: Hoodless retires > 1952: WPHC Moved From Fiji to Honiara > 1954: Central Archives Open in Suva, Fiji > Records Destroyed at FSM by Acting Director (!) > 1970: Fiji gains independence. > 1972: GEIC removed from WPHC. > 1973: New Hebrides removed from WPHC. > 1976: Archival Process begins (Paddy Mac!). > 1978: Archives separated: GB, Tarawa, Funafuti. WPHC defunct. BHC > takes over in Fiji? > > People disagree on how to date the death of the WPHC. It's between > 1973 and 1978. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:38:58 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones mystery Tom King wrote: > Thanks, Marty. Looks to me like the early '50s, when Hoodless retired > and the WPHC relocated from Suva, is a time when the bones might well > have gone missing. Yes, indeed. > ... Another variable: when did Vaskess retire? Vaskess retired from the position of Assistant High Commissioner (Conjoint) on 1 May 1948. WPHC 15/1/III-IV "Officers no longer serving in the WPHC service" (1910-51). Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:39:37 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: search technology This sounds similar to technology used by archaeologists and geologists. Maybe it is a more portable or similar version? Daniel Postellon ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:43:27 From: Bill Leary Subject: Re: signing posts > Postings must be signed, first and last names please Is this new? I usually just sign... - Bill #2229 Perhaps I've gotten away with this all these years because my email address is my real name? ******************************************************** Well, it's sorta newish. We've been talking about it for ages, and in fact most people do sign their posts. But sometimes our worst trolls are hiding behind fake names or just "Micky" or something... not fair to those who are serious and will take responsibility for what they say. You may have noticed that I add last names to those who don't put them in. Don't want to make too big a deal of it, as I say, most folks do sign, and those who don't mostly have just forgotten. Pat, whose name is common enough to need that last name, Thrasher ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:44:33 From: Bill Leary Subject: Re: Peleliu incident: target correction > ((..much omitted..)) > It seems that the project was commissioned for History > Television - Canada > Daniel E. Davids > President, The History Channel - USA How does Mr. Davids know it's was History Television? We're an organization which prides itself on hard evidence. I assume Mr. Davids is telling us what he believes to be true, but unless we know how he knows this, or confirm the connection independantly, we may be about to descend wrath upon the wrong people, as unlikely as that seems at this point. - Bill #2229 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:45:12 From: Kerry Tiller Subject: Re: titles > Ric, its a Mexican word not Spanish and it is CHINGAR. > I was President of the Spanish Club in HS. I got up in > class and asked the teacher how to conjugate the word. > He told me to sit down and shut up. He was Mexican and > was my advisor in SP.CLub & Honor Club. After school > he told me about it. You don't want to know. > > Jim Preston Jim, El Chingon and chingar are NOT the same word. Chingar is, indeed, a "dirty" word, and we north-of-the-border types often substitute it for its "f" word English equivalent, as in "that's all chingered up". Chingon and chingar do share a masculine, phallic root, but El Chingon is not derogatory; it is honorific. See the earlier post by George Rat Werth for the correct interpretation of El Chingon. Kerry Tiller (who started this thread) ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:48:26 From: Jackie Tharp Subject: Re: Newbie questions I'd like to thank Marcus for his attempts to make some of our forum members more respectful in their remarks and personal bias about AE's piloting skills. It did my little heart good just to follow his threads and although the Amelia Basher's weren't "hearing" his message, it was great to know that I am not the only one on the forum that feels that same way. I know I'll be in trouble for this, but here's my opinion on the matter: Maybe it's a "Man Thing", but it seems to me that many of the statements and remarks about her piloting skills go way beyond statement of fact. Even if some of the examples of "incompetence" were true, there's no useful purpose in stating so in mean, nasty, sarcastic remarks. It strikes me the same way as the old "women driver" insults and remarks, and it feels very personal toward me as a woman as well as A/E. I don't think it has anything to do with Amelia being a woman, as men seem to be very insulting and sarcastic toward men as well. Maybe these guys don't see how ill-spirited their remarks appear in print. I dunno. But then, maybe they do, and just enjoy ruffling others feathers.. And I think Ric is just trying to hide his personal bias behind his accident investigation experience. You guys oughta give the girl a break already.... Jackie Tharp #2440 ******************************************************** Ric will have to speak for himself on the issue of "personal bias", but simply as one who has known him for 20 years, I haven't seen too much evidence of a bias against women pilots, drivers, or whatever. Against people who do stupid things, yes, but not against a gender. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:50:06 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Bones mystery You're too logical, Marty. Nothing there to argue about but you guys know far more than I ever will about the search for the bones. From where I stand, it appears you have not missed any idea on the search. I wonder if we might have a better chance finding bones on Niku that were not in the original find? I well know the guys have searched Niku as well as their time and plans could afford but could we do better? Do you think, Marty, there is a reasonable chance to be successful finding another bone on Niku. I haven't been there so the question may be foolish and I recognize that. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:50:45 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: autogyro story John, my first response would be to ask the writer or writers of the play where they got the "reprimand" story. Frankly I have never heard of it but if there is some grain of truth in it you need to get the full story before producing something in error. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:51:59 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Earhart Project Bul. # 25 Mike, Lae was not immediately aware of the lost antenna and the source of this issue was simply that long afterwards a piece of wire was found near the runway of unknown identity or origin. Lae may never have known the Electra lost an antenna. We only believe the antenna was lost because AE was unable to receive Itasca and the Electra take off movie was examined by experts who expressed their belief the antenna was missing on take off. This may sound like hedging but I am trying to measure my words. I believe the analysis was accurate and the antenna was missing. We just don't have 100% positive proof. We'll have to check the plane when we find it. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:52:45 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Balfour again Good points, Marty. Not being an aeronautical engineer I'll sure not argue the significance of the prop locations but what you say sounds reasonable. If it was a critical issue we could have fun pursuing it into the ground as we have other issues. Maybe it would be interesting to resolve anyway. At any rate I'll be happy to concede she endured far more noise than I ever have although what I DID endure put me into hearing aids. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:53:12 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: search technology So, if the plane is under water the new system has no application. Is that correct? Alan ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:53:50 From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Itasca logs Thanks Randy. I forwarded this to Dave Bellarts. For some reason, he says he is not getting the original, that is the one he got from his father Leo, from the Archives. He may be able to figure it out. Ron B ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:55:40 From: Ron Berry Subject: Re: Bones mystery Tom, This Bones issue has brought to mind a story that my father use to tell, he has long since passed away. So to try to get more facts is not possible for me. Thats why I mentioned the "what if the bones were brought to the USA. The story as I can remember was never thought to have anything to do with AE and FN. In 1937 my father went to work at Mc Clellan Army Air Corps Base, in Sacramento Ca.,he was in the first group of civilians to be hired. Sometime just before the war he was on a crew that loaded and unloaded aircraft. I remember the story because of the bones in a box, this has always stuck in my mind. The Story An airplane came in and parked on the ramp where they worked the crew got out of the plane and went somewhere, no one was with the aircraft. So the loaders opened the aircraft thinking that they would have to unload it. The funny thing is there was only one box in the cargo section, and it was marked Top Secret. The crew was curious and opened the box, inside was two skulls and bones. They closed the box up and left the airplane. Then the FBI showed up and questioned all of the crews who worked on the ramp. No one would admit to opening the box, so everyone on the ramp had to sign some sort of document that reminded them that if they every told what they saw they could be put to death. My question is how could this story be checked out? Where would something like this be shipped? Is this an odd way to transport remains? Tom King wrote: > Thanks, Marty. Looks to me like the early '50s, when Hoodless retired and > the WPHC relocated from Suva, is a time when the bones might well have gone > missing. My recollection is that the Medical School relocated at about this > time, too, from the hospital to the old military base at Tamavua. > > Another variable: when did Vaskess retire? ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:57:53 From: Marcus Lind Subject: Re: Newbie questions Seth Brenneman wrote: > Marcus wrote: > >> there was a lot of good FLYING made by Earhart, and nobody can >> refute this > > I guess that depends on how you define "good flying" and how you define > "nobody". And how you define "refute" for that matter. > > --Seth - ...I mean Earhart had a long and intensive flying career, during which she made many flights, including long-distance flights and record flights, including "firsts" that became a part of the World Aviation History. Some of them were made in really difficult and dangerous conditions, the flying that requires really good skills, good judgment and cool nerves - over the oceans, in nighttime, in a bad weather by instruments, with unreliable (sometimes broken) equipment. I am sure it must be called as really good flying. During her career Earhart flew planes of many types, and flew them competently, that is supported by evidence of many serious, credible and competent witnesses -- her colleagues - like Wiley Post, General Leigh Wade, and other good professionals. There were many characteristic cases, like that one in March 1929 just for example - when Earhart, being a guest of the airshow in Buffalo, flew during the day several airplanes that were new for her. All this is what I consider a "good flying", and it is factual material that seems for me as impossible to neglect or not to admit, and fair to respect. LTM - Marcus ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:01:12 From: Scott White Subject: Re: Lindbergh baby lives! Replying to Carl Peltzer (partly clipped): > We learned about Lindbergh's other Family in Germany after his wife > passed away but can we suppose he might have had other children here in > the United States and kept that information to himself. After all he > was definitely handsome enough, perhaps a one night stand or a long > term affair, after all he had to be much more careful about his > reputation and to me it should have been easier to keep secrets back > then. > > CHP if we are all using abbreviations I went ahead and read the LA Times article. I agree that it his strong resemblance to the original Chas. Lindbergh might be due to unreported parentage. On the other hand, maybe it's just a coincidence. Or maybe he's an unreported first cousin or something. The guy's claim to be the lost Lindbergh baby is based on memories "recovered" by hypnosis. The immediate Lindbergh family reportedly doesn't want to cooperate with a DNA test. More distant relatives (perhaps including the children in Germany?) have agreed to cooperate, but the guy evidently won't subject to a DNA test if he isn't to be compared with a full sibling. Or something like that. It sounds to me (and the article's author) that he'd rather keep the "mystery" intact than run the strong risk of discovering a less glorious truth. I don't know why the Times finds this newsworthy, even for a Sunday supplement. I usually sign my emails "Best, -SW." It's just a habit. If that's against the rules or custom here, I'll try to behave better. Just let me know. But my real name appears in the "from" line, and I see that this list keeps it intact at the top of each message it posts. I think I posted this message twice. Did you get two copies, Pat? Sorry. Best, -SW *********************************************** The "signature" requirement is just so everyone knows who everyone is. Since your name comes through with each posting and gets put at the top of your message, it's no problem. And yes, I got two copies; the Mac mail system seems to be a bit odd this morning. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:02:29 From: Scott White Subject: Personal story to relate Just for what it's worth, and in case anyone here has missing info . . . I started reading about AE because my dad asked me to get him a copy of Amelia Earhart Survived by Rollin Reineck. I borrowed the book and read it when he finished. My dad had worked for Lockheed from the early 1950s to the late 1980s. The last part of that span, he worked for Kelly Johnson. By the end of my dad's career, Johnson had retired and (if I understand right) suffered from significant memory loss. Around 1986 or so, my dad met a guy who was working on the AE disappearance and needed to talk to Johnson. He had a photo of an Electra, supposedly taken somewhere in the south Pacific during WWII. He wanted to ask Johnson if visible details in the photo were consistant with modifications made at Lockheed before the around-the-world flight attempt. I don't know if he ever was able to ask, or if Johnson was ever well enough to answer those questions. So, I'm curious . . . Does this story sound familiar to anyone here? Is this kind of stuff meaningful, or do stories like this fall into the dime-a-dozen category? Best, -SW ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:03:17 From: Russ Matthews Subject: Re: Itasca logs Ron Bright asks: >Do you still have a copy of [the original typed pages from the Itasca >radio log]...? I'd be happy to take a look out in the garage this weekdend, but it sounds as if there is a good copy on hand at TIGHAR central. Plus, Randy was even able to provide the record group number. As I recall (and maybe Dr. Jacobson can back me up on this), the pages of the radio log are not filed with other paperwork relating to Earhart -- rather they are kept in a separate box labeled something like "Leo Bellarts collection" with several other items including photos of Itasca standing off the reef at Howland (referred to in another Forum discussion quite some time ago). LTM, Russ ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:04:00 From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Lindbergh baby lives! Let's be careful with missing persons turning up... Would the person claiming to be the missing Lindbergh son be the same or related to the one who claimed to be the surviving member of the family of Czar Nicolas of Russia who was murdered in the revolution in 1917 ? LTM Herman ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:05:18 From: Jack Clark Subject: Re: Earhart Project Bulletin #25 For Mike Haddock I don't think there is any mention anywhere of anyone trying to contact AE re a lost antenna. What I cannot envisage is the antenna being lost and no one seing it and subsequently mentioning it. We have the Chater/Collopy reports which I feel would have made mention of such a happening. There were plenty of people present, including pilots who flew Lockheed 10's, who would have been watching events closely. These people would surely have seen such an incident and realised it's consequences. The TIGHAR report says the mast was struck off by contact with the ground and so leaving a mast trailing along under the aircraft to be later torn off in a puff of dust. I feel a trail of dust would have been evident all the time the aircraft was moving up the runway, if such conditions existed, so drawing attention to the broken mast. Just my thoughts on the matter. Jack Clark #2564. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:06:11 From: John Wood Subject: Re: Autogyro question Found part of the answer in a compilation of "LETTERS FROM AMELIA". Jean Backus compiled the letters that were found in a house in Berkley which her mother rented while waiting for Amelia to return. Her Mom moved there in 1947, serious denial. The Autogiro crashed at an air show in Detroit, but no mention of a reprimand. She says, in a letter to her Mom, that the landing gear gave way on take off and she ground looped. GP running to her, tripped on a wire and fell. She said to him "it's my fault", meaning his nasty fall, the press heard and had a field day with it. LTM John M. Wood ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:07:44 From: Marcus Lind Subject: Re: autogiro question John Wood wrote: > I know this is off topic, and I apologize. I am doing a play about AE > (research for which is how I found TIGHAR and this forum) and this play > has her being given an official reprimand by the Commerce for Aviation; > TRUE or FALSE? I am enjoying this forum immensely, and expect to > become a member of TIGHAR soon. > LTM, > JMW (John M. Wood) > > ***************************************** > > Anyone? Outside my paygrade. > > Pat - Yes, it is true. The Aeronautic Branch of the Department of Commerce issued a formal reprimand to AE in 1931. The reason was the autogiro crash that Amelia had in Abilene on June 12, 1931. During the takeoff "the air just went out from me", as AE described later, and the plane suddenly dropped for 30 feet hitting the ground, damaging its rotor, forward propeller and also two cars unluckily parked nearby. AE already had a lot of successful takeoffs and landings in autogiro before this case, and the exact reason of this incident, as it seems, remained not fully clear -- maybe really some kind of error, but more probably some thermal or other effect in the air layer near the ground caused by heat weather and air flows etc. Some spectators claimed they saw a whirlwind that hit the aircraft on takeoff. The report about the case was made by R.W. Delaney, the Department of Commerce inspector in Abilene, and since then the whole case was used many times by critics who tried to discredit AE's piloting skills. It is worth to remember, however, that in reality the autogiro was far not so easy plane to handle, in contrary to numerous public advertisements. The trial Pitcairn ship was nicknamed by pilots as "Black Marie" because almost all of them cracked up in it. Blanche Noyes who was a competent pilot hired to fly the identical autogiro for an oil company said "I think ten hours was the longest any pilot flew it without cracking it up". AE made much more in this aircraft, across all the country and making a lot of takeoffs and landings in different, mainly unfamiliar places and at very different conditions. When she turned her autogiro second over to the regular pilot, after five or six hours he cracked it on landing. LTM - Marcus ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:34:31 From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: signing posts Pat Thrasher wrote: > Pat, whose name is common enough to need that last name, Thrasher And I always thought pat Thrasher was an instruction of some kind.. Th' WOMBAT ****************************** :-PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:35:34 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: bones mystery Dave Bush wrote: > One turning point that isn't shown below: > Invasion by the Japanese. ... So far as I could tell, Fiji was never invaded by the Japanese. IF the bones were sent to Tarawa in 1941-42, they may have been lost there during the invasion. But IF the bones were sent to Tarawa in 1941-42, a note to that effect should have been put into the bones file, which was well known and used extensively in 1940-41. LTM. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:36:24 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones mystery Alan Caldwell wrote: > I wonder if we might have a better chance finding bones on Niku that > were not in the original find? Gallagher found only five (or four) teeth. That leaves a LOT of teeth left to be found. > ... Do > you think, Marty, there is a reasonable chance to be successful finding > another bone on Niku? The archeologist and forensic anthropologist in TIGHAR seem to have hope. I trust that they will do a good search. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:45:46 From: Alexander Gartshore Subject: Re: History television pat said... > 'Let slip the dogs of war....' a classic line from startrek 5 the undiscovered country! oh no my secret is out Alexander. L.T.M : ok i am a trekkie, lol ********************************************** "And Caesar's spirit, ranging for revenge, With Ate by his side come hot from hell, Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of war, That this foul deed shall smell above the earth With carrion men, groaning for burial." Wm. Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene 1. And I do believe the true devotees refer to themselves as "Trekkers." Pat ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:47:58 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Bones mystery Ron Berry wrote: > An airplane came in and parked on the ramp where they worked the crew > got out of the plane and went somewhere, no one was with the aircraft. > So the loaders opened the aircraft thinking that they would have to > unload it. The funny thing is there was only one box in the cargo > section, and it was marked Top Secret. The crew was curious and opened > the box,inside was two skulls and bones. They closed the box up and > left the airplane. Then the FBI showed up and questioned all of the > crews who worked on the ramp. No one would admit to opening the box, so > everyone on the ramp had to sign some sort of document that reminded > them that if they every told what they saw they could be put to death. Nice storytelling, but the last sentence is unlikely. What is the capital crime? > My question is how could this story be checked out? Very difficult, without a date. You could track the names and origins of all the planes that landed that day (week, year), then see where they came from, for a start. I would call this anecdotal. > Where would something like this be shipped? Some forensic pathology lab. If the FBI was involved, maybe their lab. The Smithsonian. Arlington Cemetery, if the bones were identified already and military. Some other cemetery. >Is this an odd way to transport remains? Probably not. How would you ship them? Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:48:45 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Lindbergh baby lives! > The guy's claim to be the lost Lindbergh baby is based on memories > "recovered" by hypnosis. Did you ever notice that with this technique, no one ever finds out that they are the child of a drunken sailor and a floozy? Their parents are always well known, romantic figures. Dan Postellon ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:52:01 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: signing posts No, you park your pat thrasher next to your pet combine and tractor. Ross Devitt wrote: > Pat Thrasher wrote: > >> Pat, whose name is common enough to need that last name, Thrasher > > And I always thought pat Thrasher was an instruction of some kind.. > > Th' WOMBAT > ****************************** > :-PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP ******************************* I say again my last. P ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:19:24 From: Sara Smedley Subject: Re: Lindbergh baby lives! Would you want to find out about a drunken sailor or a floozy? ha. Sara Smedley Dan Postellon wrote: >> The guy's claim to be the lost Lindbergh baby is based on memories >> "recovered" by hypnosis. > > Did you ever notice that with this technique, no one ever finds out > that they are the child of a drunken sailor and a floozy? Their parents > are alway well known, romantic figures. > > Dan Postellon ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 13:05:12 From: Dave Carter Subject: Re: Lindbergh baby lives! That's funny... I always thought the Lindbergh Baby became Casper the Ghost.... LTM, Dave (#2585) ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:41:12 From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Itasca logs For Russ, Thanks, I will pass the information on to Dave Bellarts. My guess he wants to get the original back from the archives (I don't know if that is possible) and sell them on ebay or hold for the future. He is sorry the family donated the originals vice good copies, I think. Ron Bright ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:42:06 From: Pat Gaston Subject: Re: titles Finally a subject I know something about! Now to (hopefully) put this thread to rest: "Chingar" is indeed a Mexicanism. The Spanish use "joder." Both words mean -- ahem -- "to copulate." Conjugation: chingo: I do it chingas: You (singular) do it chinga: He does it chingamos: We do it chingais: You (plural) do it chingan: They do it. "Chingon" is a noun form, and is loosely translated as a guy who lives to "chingar." Alternatively it could mean simply "one bad dude." Think of a common anglo-saxon word starting with "f" and ending in "er." No, not "finger." Try again. Therefore I do not think this would be an appropriate title for Ric. I prefer El Caudillo, which is what Franco used to call himself. LTM Pat Gaston PS During Franco's reign, Spanish coins were imprinted with his image and the words "Caudillo de Espana por la gracia de dios" (Leader of Spain by the grace of God). Spaniards turned this into "Caudillo de Espana porque dios tiene gracia" (Leader of Spain because God has a sense of humor). ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:42:51 From: Russ Matthews Subject: Re: History television Alex wrote: >'Let slip the dogs of war... > > a classic line from startrek 5 the undiscovered country! Actually the line is from Star Trek 6 -- and is much better enjoyed "in the original Klingon." LTM, Russ ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:43:26 From: Roger Kelley Subject: Re: Personal story to relate For Scott White > My dad had worked for Lockheed from the early 1950s to the late 1980s. Question, did your father know a Lockheed employee by the name of Max Green? Green may have retired from Lockheed in the sixties and apparently worked for Lockheed at the time Earhart's L-10 was repaired in 1937. Roger Kelley ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:15:13 From: Anne Springer Subject: AE relations In a posting last week (or it might have been longer) about the meaning of LTM, the Japanese prisoner story must have been true since they had a letter signed, "Love To Mother". (I should add I do not believe this theory, but its interesting just the same) I was curious how close Amelia and her mother were. I have done a bit of reading, but I cannot remember. How about her relationship with her father? -- Anne Springer *********************************************************** Amelia and her mother were quite close; not so much with her father. Her parents were divorced. If you would like to read the FAQ about Love To Mother and how Ron Bright was able to finally put that whole story to rest, it's on our website at http://www.tighar.org/forum/FAQs/ltm.htm Pat ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:15:39 From: Jim Tierney Subject: Re: Titles I think--El Caudillo--is a marvelous title for the Tighar Grand Imperial Wizard....We could get him one of those high crowned caps --favored by some foreign services---like --maybe a Russian Admiral with those extra wide caps... Opens up a whole new thread for the Forum lurkers... Jim Tierney ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:17:43 From: Russ Matthews Subject: Re: Itasca logs Ron Bright wrote: > My guess [is Dave Bellarts] wants to get the original back from the > archives (I don't know if that is possible) and sell them on ebay or hold > for the future. He is sorry the family donated the originals vice good > copies, I think. I'm very disappointed to hear that and hope he will reconsider his position. A lot of important research (like TIGHAR's work on the erasures and platen realignments) has been accomplished because those primary source documents are available to all who are interested -- rather than locked away, gathering dust in a old trunk or safety deposit box. In any case, I doubt the gift can be "ungiven." You should gently remind him that those log pages likely were not his father's to give in the first place -- after all, they were official Coast Guard documents generated at tax payer expense, which would make them rightfully the property of the people of the United States. Realistically, of course, we owe Leo Bellarts a debt of gratitude for "bending the rules" as he did or they would certainly not have survived to this day -- and for his foresight in donating them to the National Archives, thus insuring these important documents will be accessible to everyone in perpetuity. LTM, Russ ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:18:44 From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: Autogiro question Marcus Lind wrote citing Amelia Earhart after her autogyro crash : "The air just went out from me"... Doesn't that seem to indicate she stalled the autogyro on take off ? If one pulls up any airplane brutally it will stall. So will rotary winged craft, including helicopters and autogyros. Marcus goes on saying : "Some spectators claimed they saw a whirlwind that hit the aircraft on takeoff". Wouldn't that indicate the rotary wings were actually going around kicking the air so fast that the autogyro jumped from the ground, stalling as it did? What exactly did the Department of Commerce/Aviation reprimand AE for? LTM (who believes airplanes are like women: they have to be handled gently and with loving care) ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:21:33 From: Jerry Kiffer Subject: Re: search technology Carl, What new technology? I have received several replies to the notice but obviously have missed the first one? > From Carl Peltzer > > Oh, what the heck, we were told to keep this quiet just last January. *********************************************** From Pat I repost Andrew McKenna's explanation: I think what Carl Peltzer was cryptically referring to (and I don't know why as it is public knowledge) is the new Hyperspectral Imaging System that will be coming on line for the Civil Air Patrol over the next year. The system looks for spectral signatures of man made and other objects which can include humans, vehicles, aircraft debris, trash, oil spills, marijuana, corn, whatever you want to look for that you can provide a spectral signature for. The idea is to fly over areas of interest and let the camera and computer do the looking instead of the traditional three sets of eyeballs, which can't look everywhere, all the time, with a high probability of detection. 15 Gippsland Airvan GA8 aircraft will initially be equipped with this system. see http://www.gippsaero.com/index.asp See also http://www.cap.gov/mediacenter/releases/scc.html Civil Air Patrol awards contract to Space Computer Corporation MAXWELL AFB, Ala. =97 Civil Air Patrol has awarded a $1.6 million contract to Space Computer Corporation for the software to operate 15 hyperspectral imaging (HSI) systems. CAP will use the high-tech HSI systems to detect objects from the air. "Hyperspectral imaging is the next wave of reconnaissance technology," said Maj. Gen. Dwight Wheless, CAP national commander. "Space Computer Corporation is providing state-of-the-art software that will allow us to pinpoint objects very precisely. This will make a tremendous difference when we're searching for individuals or aircraft that are lost or in trouble." Space Computer Corporation (SCC) will provide all system control, detection, display, and ground-processing software for CAP's HSI systems. SCC also will provide field training for CAP members, all of whom are volunteers. CAP, the civilian auxiliary of the U.S. Air Force, has done extensive research on HSI technology and is fielding the first systems in the nation to be used on a continuing basis for community search and rescue work. Dubbed ARCHER (Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance), the HSI system can automatically search the ground before for objects having any specific "spectral signature" selected by the onboard operator. The technology is based on reflected light, so some portion of the object must be exposed for the HSI camera to pick it up. SCC's software provides a unique combination of real-time geo-rectified image displays (GeoPaint), target detection and location, and situational awareness for the spectrum of CAP missions. The ease of operation and timeliness of results were critical factors in CAP's decision to contract with SCC. The software is a mature product, leveraging the company's experience with similar systems developed for the U.S. Department of Defense. SCC will be responsible for integrating its software with hardware produced by NovaSol Corporation. SCC will also provide operator training and support. The ARCHER airborne component will initially fly on CAP's new Gippsland GA-8 Airvans, with portable ground stations available for CAP base operators. These ground stations will allow operators to rapidly review the recorded imagery gathered as soon as the aircraft touches down and delivers the data. Space Computer Corporation specializes in solving information-processing problems associated with advanced sensor systems. Their work in these areas extends from algorithm development and data analysis through design and fabrication of specialized signal-processing hardware. Since they began operations in 1987, their customer base has grown to include the Department of Defense and other government organizations, as well as CAP and several industrial firms and research centers. They are a privately owned California small business corporation. Civil Air Patrol, the official Air Force auxiliary, is a nonprofit organization with almost 62,000 members nationwide. CAP performs 95% of continental U.S. inland search and rescue missions as tasked by the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center. Its volunteers also perform homeland security, disaster relief and counterdrug missions at the request of federal, state and local agencies. The members take a leading role in aerospace education and serve as mentors to the almost 27,000 young people currently participating in CAP cadet programs. CAP has been performing missions for America for more than 60 years. On the Web: www.cap.gov and www.spacecomputer.com LTM (who sees all) Andrew Harbor Lights Villa A Special Place In the Caribbean www.harborlights.vi 720-635-1166 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:22:56 From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Itasca logs Russ Matthews wrote: > As I recall (and maybe Dr. Jacobson can back me up on this), the pages > of the radio > log are not filed with other paperwork relating to Earhart -- rather > they are kept in a separate box labeled something like "Leo Bellarts > collection" with > several other items That is my recollection as well. Mostly a scrapbook, some pictures, and some papers are in that box, all donated by Leo Bellarts. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:24:45 From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: Bones mystery Fascinating. Some comments are interspersed below: Ron Berry wrote: > This Bones issue has brought to mind a story that my father use to > tell, he has long since passed away. So to try to get more facts is > not possible for me. Thats why I mentioned the "what if the bones were > brought to the USA. The story as I can remember was never thought to > have anything to do with AE and FN. In 1937 my father went to work at > Mc Clellan Army Air Corps Base, in Sacramento Ca.,he was in the first > group of civilians to be hired. Why did the Air Corps hire civilians at that time? How common was it to have non-military personnel doing anything at all with military equipment on bases? > Sometime just before the war he was on a crew that loaded and unloaded > aircraft. I remember the story because of the bones in a box, this has > always stuck in my mind. No idea what kind of airplane or what year? Even what time of year? > An airplane came in and parked on the ramp where they worked the crew > got out of the plane and went somewhere, no one was with the aircraft. Given that the aircraft had something Top Secret on board, why