Cazalet has a great idea....
Originally Posted by
Cazalet33
It's unsurprising that the B-17 wreckage was found, by the 1945 patrol and others, at the B-17 crash site.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
1. AUST Army SITREPS in the AWM show that it was a patrol of the 16th Battalion which found the B-17 well before the 11th Battalion arrived at Wide Bay, so that wreck was known. The B-17 was lost in 1942 and a photograph of that B-17 at Brisbane before it was lost show it to be camouflage painted. The wreck that Patrol A1 found was not painted at all and if it
was the B-17, you are then saying the paint was gone after two and a half years ? Also, why would the W/O on the Patrol A1 see the words or logo of the Pratt & Whitney Company on a B-17 when they were powered by Wright Cyclone engines ? So, to counter your proposition, there are two pointers there why you are mistaken, 1. Painted wreckage, 2, Wright engines, not P&W.
2. I agree that the map border had the transcribed detail from the U.S. Army written upon it on 24 May 1945 (24/5/45) or thereabout, no dispute there, because of the abbreviation "Ref:" as reference to what the U.S. Army was replying about. Why do I say "thereabout" ? I say it because the date may have been the date on the signal, not the date when "D" Coy were at TOL waiting for a barge to take them to the UNAMITKI River. The date the Patrol A1 ended was 18 April and I would expect that it would take some days, even weeks, for the U.S. Army to reply to the AUST Army concerning what they obviously considered was "Not one of theirs". If what you say is correct: Why would anyone wanting to give information to the AUST Army about the Electra, start by mentioning 600 Horsepower ? Or, by mentioning "S3H1" without saying "Pratt & Whitney R-1340 S3H1"... I can see them saying 1055 but why no "NR 16020" which is the PRIME written and painted identifier on the Airframe. What you say is not logical because it does not give the AUST Army enough information which is pertinent and advisable in the nomal way that it would be given (as I explained in my previous post.... which you may have read).
I still maintain that the metal tag removed was a repair tag left on by some kind fella at Burbank in around April 1937....
David Billings