Where are you Amelia?

[flywatcher]

Has anyone noticed that it is eighty years today since Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan flew off the radar enroute Howland Island?

[Centaurus]

There are many accounts of the disappearance of Amelia Earhart and Frank Noonan during their planned route from Lae PNG to Howland Island in the Central Pacific region. During my time flying 737's with Air Nauru (1976-88) at least three of our routes crossed their presumed track in the region of the then Gilbert Islands now called Kiribati.

Flying at high altitudes we could look down and see the literally thousands of small cumulus clouds dotting the vast ocean from horizon to horizon - each cloud casting a shadow on the water. With their Lockheed flying over the Pacific among those low level clouds where the base of the fair weather CU would be around 1000 ft and tops around 3000 ft, any one of those shadows could be an atoll. It was an illusion of course.

The distance from Lae to Howland Island (itself a tiny atoll albeit with an airstrip) is 2556 statute miles. That's a long way in a small twin engine aircraft not much bigger than a Piper Chieftain and certainly not as fast.
The estimated flight time was between 20 and 23 hours passing through two time zones. It was reported they flew at 12,000 ft some of the way which raises the spectre of mild hypoxia made worse with time at that altitude.

It is after the sun rises, that thousands of small Cu clouds start to appear. Even if only 10 miles off track after 18 hours plus of flight (remarkable navigation for a tired crew) and flying between these clouds, it would have been almost impossible to spot a tiny atoll under its duty Cu among the hundreds surrounding it. Many times I have approached Nauru on descent, unable to spot the island among the low clouds until 15 miles out - keeping in mind we were using the island NDB and DME so we knew where we were

I am not a conspiracy buff and therefore don't believe any other reason for the disappearance of Amelia Erahart's Lockheed other than the limitations they faced. That included sheer mind-blowing fatigue, lack of reliable navigation aids, purportedly no autopilot, the huge distance they set out to fly in a small aircraft to a tiny atoll which was their destination. Add to that the almost impossible task of seeing land under seemingly 8/8ths small separated Cu cloud cover with a base of 1000 ft tops 3000 ft which in that region is typical of Pacific weather at sunrise.

After sunrise in that remote part of the Central Pacific called the Gilbert Islands, every shadow cast by the sun looks like a tiny atoll. With a thousand shadows, which one could be Howland Island to a desperately tired crew?

[aroa]

The Dave Billings teams....they were bound for the New Britain jungle in June ?
Hopefully they will find that elusive silver twin as found and noted by the Australian Army patrol during the war.
Fingers crossed !!

[jolihokistix]

Oh, I thought you meant Amelia...


Amelia Warner (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0912396/mediaviewer/rm3390740480)

[aroa]

No radar on the Lockheed or at Howland Is. either...unfortunately.

Centaurus...you have seen those things that others have only dreamed of.... in that long delirious blue. And that VAST Pacific.. Sure is an awful lot of water out there !

Seen the shadow trap tho, gave it eta + 15, ignored the many "islands" and headed off to the next place...after some sweaty dr and guesstimates...to the right destination...fortunately. (SE, one radio. lighty)

Frank Noonan was given to be one of the top trans-Pacific navigators of his day, so always figured that he would have had a back up plan if things were not working out.
But what....??? All the way back to Rabaul...I dont think anybody even contemplated the idea. But....

MH 370 has taken it from top billing. I wonder if it is still unfound and talked about 80 years hence.

[parabellum]

Last speculation I saw was that Frank Noonan enjoyed a drink and was thought to have 'pushed the boat' out the night before, may well have dropped off to sleep at a critical time and may have forgotten to allow for crossing the IDL when making his calculations and using tables.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

This 'may' be a cloo......

Dated today, 6.7.2017....

Lost photo could solve Amelia Earhart mystery (http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/lost-photo-could-solve-amelia-earhart-mystery/ar-BBDOFNI?li=AAabC8j&ocid=spartandhp)

Cheers:ok:

[aroa]

Interesting photo but.... pre war plenty of other europeans about..
Would need to see more of the picture to see a Lockheed size whatever. behind the boat, at far right ??

While Frank may have overdone it (true/false) the night before take off...he had plenty of time to recuperate before the following daybreak...and he was a very good navigator.
So there would have been a contingency plan for sure.

[Fris B. Fairing]

Frankly, his name was Fred.

[Centaurus]

I am quite confused and Mayday. Trying to post a picture on this thread as part of the Amelia discussion but going nuts. I use photobucket website which I have done for years. It was always not user friendly but is worse still. I managed to place the selected picture on the photobucket website. But getting it from photobucket to a post on Pprune has proved totally confusing to navigate. :* Appreciate any helpful advice.

[Centaurus]

[URL=http://s2.photobucket.com/user/HSWL/media/Pacific%20ocean%20001_zps0g7r5awe.jpg.html]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/HSWL/Pacific%20ocean%20001_zps0g7r5awe.jpg[/URL

At last managed to get this photo into Pprune by trial and error and much gnashing of teeth. But couldn't get rid of extraneous text above picture.

They say one picture is worth a thousand words. This is such a picture and taken over the approx track that the Lockheed was estimated to have flown over the Gilbert Islands group of atolls (now Republic of Kiribati) while trying to find Howland Island. Taken from an Air Nauru Boeing 737 circa 1979.

As mentioned before, it is all too easy to imagine how a tired crew after 18 hours of hand flying, could miss Howland Island (only 1.5 miles long) among the plethora of low altitude Cu clouds that are a characteristic of that part of the Pacific after sunrise. Each cloud casts a sun shadow on the surface of the sea that can easily be mistaken for an atoll. There are thousands of these clouds. Take your pick which could be an atoll or an illusion.:(

[scroogee]

No comment on Amelia but apparently photobucket have changed their terms so linking photo's to 3rd party sites is restricted to paid subscribers.

[Centaurus]

Thanks for that info, Scroogee.
Cent :ok:

[Airbubba]

Last speculation I saw was that Frank Noonan enjoyed a drink and was thought to have 'pushed the boat' out the night before, may well have dropped off to sleep at a critical time and may have forgotten to allow for crossing the IDL when making his calculations and using tables.

Fred Noonan's departure from Pan Am was rumored to be due to alcohol and some, but not all of the cites on this page seem to confirm the issue:

https://earharttruth.wordpress.com/2015/01/06/fred-noonans-drinking-in-search-of-the-true-story/

Here's a version of the ending of Noonan's career at Pan Am based largely on a 1972 interview in the PAA archives of fellow crewmembers Victor Wright and Harry Canaday:

Fred Noonan was 'let go' at the end of 1936 for drinking. He was in the words of a fellow crew member sent to the Cincinnati Division. I am assured by a former PAA navigator that that was the euphemism for 'getting the boot.' What is my evidence for this and how credible it that evidence?

In the archives of PAA, in Miami, there exists a series of transcribed interviews between John Leslie, a former PAA executive and several crew from the pioneering days of the Clippers. Two of those crew flew with Fred. They are Victor Wright and Harry Canaday. Both, but particularly Wright tell in no uncertain terms what happened.

Fred developed a severe drink problem after Acapulco where the Clipper stopped during its transfer across country from Miami to Alameda. He suddenly found fame according to Wright and it went to his head. Before this he had been 'rock steady' with no sign of a 'crackup'. He 'did a beautiful piece of work'. Then in Acapulco everyone was shaking his hand. Overnight he became a celebrity, invited to all the parties where he regaled the company with sea faring tales. He was very much in demand and the partying habit continued in Honolulu, Wake, Guam and Manila. One day he had to be sought out by Wright who had to get into some 'interesting situations' and proceeded to sober him up before his flight This resulted in a fall in the bathtub which knocked out his front teeth.Canaday navigated on the way back. One might say that this was 'normal behaviour' for the aviators of the time. Maybe for some but not for PAA.

Andre Priester another executive of the era instantly dismissed anyone under the influence of alcohol. It is a measure of the esteem in which Fred was held that he was tolerated for almost two years. Wright says that the 'Old Man' covered up for Fred. Was that Musick? or Priester? or Trippe? They knew he did a faultless job and he was indispensable for the proving flights. But by the time regular passenger carrying service was set up and other navigators were trained his value waned and he became a liability. The company carried very high class personages from heads of state to movie stars. It simply would not do for them to see the plane's navigator carried aboard comatose. He had to go. But according to Wright, PAA could not lose face by admitting they had employed Fred when he was in this state. They had too much to lose so he simply disappeared from the payroll. That is why there is no official record of him having been dismissed.

https://earharttruth.wordpress.com/2015/01/06/fred-noonans-drinking-in-search-of-the-true-story/

Decades later there were similar rumors at Pan Am about the father of the skipper of the ill-fated oil tanker Exxon Valdez. :(

Also, Paul Mantz was originally planned to be the other crewmember on the fatal Pacific crossing according to some accounts but bailed out of the deal after Earhart's ground loop on takeoff in Hawaii on the earlier Pacific crossing attempt.

Paul Mantz had his own alcohol issues as cited in coverage of his fatal crash while filming a stunt for The Flight of the Phoenix (1965).

The idea of a female aviator setting records for speed and distance in flight has been explored many times in the eight decades since the Earhart-Noonan disappearance by women like Brooke Knapp, Terri Jones and Jeana Yeager.

[olasek]

As mentioned before, it is all too easy to imagine how a tired crew after 18 hours of hand flying, could miss Howland Island (only 1.5 miles long) among the plethora of low altitude Cu clouds that are a characteristic of that part of the Pacific after sunrise.
Yes, I agree, it is easy to imagine this - it is however much, much harder to imagine that after failing to locate Howland Island they mysteriously navigated to Gilbert Islands. Noonan was a very good navigator and such a miss by almost 1000 km makes no sense at all. Further it makes no sense since Amelia's voice was clearly heard in the vicinity (based on the radio technology at the time) of Howland island with minutes of aviation fuel to spare (her panicky voice at the time). She is even heard saying very loudly - we must be on you but can not see you. So assuming, based on preponderance of evidence that at 7:42 they were within 100 nm from Howland Island and the fuel was supposed to last another ~30 minutes - how did they get to Gilbert Islands almost 4 hours flight time away? Makes absolutely no sense.

[aroa]

Always wondered why Amelia and Fred didnt go for the 'offset method', as used successfully by Chichester. Go for a point well south and with chronometer and sextant, pick up the north -south/appropriate angle sun line, get an accurate drift as possible and track for the target not so far away. When they missed / couldnt spot Howland /or were not even in visual distance...they had no idea..north or south of ??
Amelia did talk if running on a line ..337-157 was it?..but to and fro where.

There were purportedly other issues, HF freq no. didnt match aerial length no.
Time zones differed, putting call and listen out times to be mismatched.
Batteries for the radio beacon on Howland had been left on overnight and were flat by the morning....
Was the Chronometer off, did the sextant get dropped and damaged...?
And after the greatest aerial search ever.....narry a trace.
So where are you Amelia (and Fred).?

[olasek]

I think this 'offset' method was in Noonan's tool bag, he knew about it. Not sure if they actually used it.

[flywatcher]

Of all the experts who have their theories of where Amelia got to, not one of them is thinking like a pilot. Amelia may have not been the best operator of a Lockheed 10 ever, but she was not stupid. She, like any of us, certainly had a "plan B". This was documented to turn back the the Gilbert Islands, 600 miles north to south, a bit hard to miss, find one with a decent sized village, ditch in the water, on the reef, in the scrub and wait for the US navy to find her.
But just suppose she had run into strong headwinds, had been hundreds of miles short of Howland and tried, after getting a fix, either at the Gilbert Islands or with sun sights, and, commercial pressures here, tried to make it back to Rabaul at best endurance speed and a reasonable tailwind. At full fuel her aircraft had a documented range of 4,000 miles and she had talked to Lindberg and also worked with P and W on extended range operations.
She could feasibly made it to New Britain or one of the offshore islands before dark. We will, of course, probably never know.

[olasek]

Of all the experts who have their theories of where Amelia got to, not one of them is thinking like a pilot. Amelia may have not been the best operator of a Lockheed 10 ever, but she was not stupid.
I think it is a poor choice of words to think of her in terms stupid/smart. She clearly did not do a very smart thing when she overruled her navigator and chose to turn in the wrong direction when approaching Africa - contrary to Fred's advice. It is impossible to miss Africa so it did not have and bad consequences. This mishap is well documented and almost made Fred walk away from this endeavor. He must have realized that he is there only for a ride and his work may not be taken seriously. This could be what happened at the end (as suggested by some historian, not my invention) - his precise navigation instructions were disregarded around Howland Island and this time there was no way out.

[mostlytossas]

I agree with olasek, she would have been close to her destination at the time she ran out of fuel and crashed / lost altogether. In my view those that believe otherwise are the same conspiracy theorists that believe Elvis is still alive or man never walked on the moon.

[jolihokistix]

A semi-translation of the original Japanese blog with clickable photo, and link to original book page.






The Lost Evidence Photo published 2 years before Amelia Earhart's disappearance - ?????3? (http://yamanekobunko.blog52.fc2.com/blog-entry-338.html)

[porterhouse]

Amelia may have not been the best operator of a Lockheed 10 ever, but she was not stupid. She, like any of us, certainly had a "plan B".
These are very controversial statements, probably difficult to support.
Actually the reverse was probably close to truth - she was an excellent operator of the aircraft as her prior numerous races, achievements and awards show. But when it came to meticulous flight planning she was probably falling short. People were urging her to better master the use of the radio and the use of the new directional antenna (brand new technology at the time) that could help them in the final minutes honing in on the island. She did neither, she could not even hear transmissions from the ship due to some mishap with frequency setting. She disregarded all these details that could potentially could have saved them. Noonan was in the back of the airplane, separated from her by a series of fuel tanks, the only communication between them, due to noise was through some paper notes he would send her through a stretched cable - clearly it was she who needed to operate the antenna, the radios, etc.

[Kewbick]

Within days of the Earhart and Noonan disappearance, U.S. Navy seaplanes performed an aerial reconnaissance of Nikumaroro, or Gardner Island, and reported signs of recent human habitation. For reasons still unknown, no follow-up search of the island was done.

[First_Principal]

Prompted by porterhouse's comments on Amelia's radio operation I was interested to investigate solar activity for the time - this can have a significant impact on hf radio operation (http://www.arrl.org/here-comes-the-sun).

It turns out that July was the highest month on record in the Pacific for 1937, and that 1937 was the peak year for that particular cycle. This (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1939PASP...51...51N) site and this (http://www.sws.bom.gov.au/Educational/2/3/6) site refer.

I'm not sure it's the right place to debate the possible effects of this here, it's quite a complex subject, but suffice it to say that it perhaps lends some possibility towards some reception reports that might otherwise be dismissed. Conversely it could also introduce difficulties for Amelia, particularly if she was unfamiliar with such things.

Quite probably this has been thought of before and done to death, but between this and the difficulty of correctly operating a fixed-frequency transmitter and a variable-frequency receiver together it seems to me a likely recipe for the ensuing mess - both in terms of whatever happened, and in any later rescue/recovery/research...

FP.

[porterhouse]

I always wondered if they anticipated the presence of low deck of scattered clouds (around 1000 ft) above the water level. You can't really spot such tiny island when you are above them but if you go below the clouds the horizon is limited (the radius is about 60 km from that altitude, probably closer to 50 km if you want to spot something). But Noonan flew a lot in that area for Pan Am (if I am not mistaken) and he must have been aware of the typical weather patterns there. A guy with his navigation credentials could calculate the maximum error of his navigation procedure - this way he could have estimated probability of spotting or missing the island even before the trip. Probably someone well acquainted with navigation method at the time could perform such calculation today, it could be very educational and would shed light how much pure 'luck' was a factor there, I never saw it done. This of course assumes they they worked perfectly as a team, that Amelia never doubted her navigator which we know is a stretch.

[troppo]

Amelia Earhart: Conspiracies explore what really happened (http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/true-stories/conspiracy-theories-surrounding-amelia-earharts-1937-disappearance/news-story/3aecbd46cb066414f87b90d650b71103)

[flywatcher]

These are very controversial statements, probably difficult to support.
Actually the reverse was probably close to truth - she was an excellent operator of the aircraft as her prior numerous races, achievements and awards show. , etc.

She did manage to ground loop the same aircraft and severely damage it in Honolulu on her first attempt on the round the world flight in March 1937. Her first choice navigator decided to take no further part in the expedition and Fred Noonan got his chance. She was probably very capable in most singles, up to, I believe, a Northrop Altair, or a Vega, but a Locheed 10 may have been a bit much aircraft for her experience level.
I am not being critical, there are many photos about of a very sorry looking Locheed less undercarriage and one engine almost completely detached. She probably had very little time in the aircraft when she left.

[Tee Emm]

She probably had very little time in the aircraft when she left. Add to that she was hand flying in and out of cloud, day and night, for 20 hours. Her fatigue must have been overwhelming and course keeping inaccurate. After all, we read of todays airline pilots bitching about hand flying for 30 minutes:E

[porterhouse]

You guys make excellent points, I do remember this mishap during her attempted takeoff from Honolulu, it is true that perhaps she wasn't that skilled in the Electra, I was referring to her rather excellent flight record in her prior years. Regarding her course keeping - therefore I was wondering to what extent Noonan's navigation could 'reset' errors that were building up during such long leg, like I said I found it strange that with all the attention her trip garnered, with a few people literally spending years of their life researching her fate, no one really (to my knowledge) presented a comprehensive, mathematical justification of what they attempted (I am a mathematician/physicist, hence my obsession ;). But I don't think there was any plan B and with the distance they planed to cover and with scarcity of land - it is hard to come up with any sensible plan B.

[aroa]

Would presumably sane people head off into the vastness of the Pacific with no plan B...I doubt it.
Depending on the remaining calculated fuel state, Fred would have had a divert to ??? at a certain point.
...' If we cant see Howland within the next 15 mins, we must now head for ..'
Nukuamoro /Gardner (with a stiff quartering head/x wind) ?
..or turn back to the huge span of the Gilbert Is across the track ? ( with a ubeaut tail wind).
Maybe Amelia rejected that advice as with Africa, to keep looking.
Perhaps we'll never know.

How's Dave Billings going. Any news of the New Britain search? .

[FL235]

Haven't been following the various analyses of the flight, but does anyone know if she used or knew of Chichester's method of the "deliberate error" -aim off to one side, intercept the sun line that runs thru the island, then you know which way to turn.
Noonan's radio of "running the line???"suggests she did. I don't think there was any mention of which way they turned. Maybe 180 out?

[olasek]

...' If we cant see Howland within the next 15 mins, we must now head for ..'

They did not have plan B or if they did they clearly did not act upon it. The existing radio transmission is the proof - they kept flying in the vicinity of the Howland Island looking for it and did not fly anywhere else. The timeline of their transmissions and the content make it very clear. It also hard if not impossible to come up here with any sensible plan B considering their destination was at the close to maximum range of the aircraft. However I would not use words like sane/insane, they don't apply, this was not a "commercial transport flight" in a modern sense of the world, this was an attempt at something that hasn't been done before, I don't think Lindbergh had plan B either when he was flying solo across Atlantic. This was a stunt, you accept much higher risk when you perform a stunt. Their sensible plan B should have been use of the radio navigation (do some practice runs, learn limits of the technology, etc.) - but they both seemed not to show enough interest in it.

[David Billings]

There was a Contingency Plan to return to The Gilberts and find somewhere clear (beach, playing field) or ditch close to shore. AE had discussed this with Gene Vidal former head of Air Commerce.....

It appears to me that a bit of a read of my website may be in order. I discuss the Contingency Plan and how it was discovered.

We did go in JUne but had to pull out early due to a set of circumstances too many to discuss right now. I'll put another post up later today bringing things up to date..

In the meantime please read the website and ask lots of questions and think about "Best Lift/Drag speed".

David Billings
www.earhartsearchpng.com

[David Billings]

I take it that persons interested have not had time to read and digest the website. I'll come back tomorrow.

David Billings
www.earhartsearchpng.com

[First_Principal]

David, your dedication is to be applauded.

Practically; I wonder if you or your team have considered the use of an aerial magnetic gradiometer? Given the comments on terrain/access issues perhaps this type of technology may be a viable and effective means of searching, particularly if there is a relatively defined area, such as there appears to be here

FP.

[fujii]

Charles Kingsford Smith disappeared probably in The Bay of Bengal = end of story.

Amelia Earhart disappeared in the Pacific Ocean = conspiracy theory.

Why?

[First_Principal]

Charles Kingsford Smith disappeared probably in The Bay of Bengal = end of story.

Amelia Earhart disappeared in the Pacific Ocean = conspiracy theory.

Why?

Well in the case of Sir Charles there is some punctuation at least insofar as traceable parts from his machine showed up some time later. There has not been the same certainty in the case of Amelia therefore the disappearance remains a 'mystery' with all that entails.

And of course the elephant in the room; she's a she with all that entails :rolleyes:

So hardly conspiracy, just all the makings of a perfect story - dashing heroine, adventurous daring, lost without trace...

FP.

[porterhouse]

I take it that persons interested have not had time to read and digest the website.
I read parts of it and find your theory preposterous. I am a private pilot and would not imagine flying back 750 miles after failing to find Howland and probably convinced I would find it any second. I don't believe the remaining fuel even allowed for half that distance. Here you are flying (as they were certain) in the vicinity of their destination yet all of a sudden, they decide just like that to fly over 750 miles in the opposite direction. At 7:42 by their own admission they are in the vicinity of the island (based on strength of the signal), at 7:58 their signal is really strong at 8:43 they are still around the island, if they decided minutes later to fly to Gilbert - there was simply no fuel left (the fuel was calculated to run out at around 10:00). At 7:42 Amelia is heard saying the fuel is running low, and by the way she still had about 2 hrs of fuel left. I do't think she would be complaining about low fuel if she had another 4 hrs or more fuel left (needed fuel to get to Gilbert islands). So I would say your story not only makes zero sense, numbers make no sense, it contradicts existing facts.

By the way, you are clearly at odds with another Amelia conspiracy theory peddled by so called project TIGHAR, these people at least came up with a more believable alternate destination - Nikumaroro (Gardner) Island, about 400 miles away.

[Cazalet33]

They did have a Plan B.

Plan A was to navigate traditionally by a combination of dead reckoning and Astro, with a mid-course correction augmented by sighting the pre-placed guardship Ontario.

Plan B was to DF to Howland/Itasca.

Plan C was to have the ship at Howland DF on them and give them a QDM.

There was no possibility of a diversion to alternate once they had reached where they thought Howland was.

Her last few transmissions make it abundantly clear that there was no possibility of a div to an alternate and quite certainly no attempt to fly to Saipan or Rabaul or Gardners Island.

The ugly truth is that Noonan cocked up his navigation. Contributary factors are likely to include hypoxia, dehydration and chronic fatigue.

The only realistic chance they had of diverting back towards the point of departure was if they had turned around after failing to find Ontario. Actually, her only chance of salvaging the project slipped away after she failed to identify the reasons why she was unable to get an RDF bearing on the Lae station during her test flight the day before departure.

[David Billings]

For First Principal

Magnetic Gradiometer: That has been mentioned but at the moment we are looking at LIDAR which can give a "bare earth" picture of the terrain. We would be able to see bulldozer tracks and would be looking for that activity close to mounds or an obvious disturbance.

For Porterhouse

You would know about groundspeeds then.... Take a look at the groundspeeds that we can figure. The 686 Statute miles LAE to Choiseul done in 5:18 (if you take the time of the Radio call): G/S 129 Smph Av. Choiseul to Nukumanu PR 224 Sm in 1:75 gives G/S 128 Smph Av. and PR to Ontario 442 Sm in 3.6 hours gives G/S of 123 Smph Av. The overall average for the 1352 miles to the Ontario in 10.6 hours gives an average G/S of 127 Smph down 23 miles per hour from the normal cruise of 150 Smph. But the last sector was down 27 mph off the 150 normal. This shows an increasing headwind.

With 1252 more miles to run their ETA based on that information and with the prospect of no ASTRO over the sector you have to plan on an ETA of a further 10:12 added to 10:36 making the ETA 20:48 or 2048 GMT, Why call "Must be on you" at 1912 GMT ?

I read where Mr. "Kelly" Johnson told Earhart to "lean off" into an adverse headwind to conserve fuel.... if she was already leaned off the only way t conserve fuel is to ease the Throttles.

You base distance on HF Signal strength ??? How does that work ?

Fuel exhaustion at 10:00 am ? How do you come to that conclusion ? Lockheed documents say with 1100 USG and a specific fuel consumption from Report 487 the Electra could range for 4200 miles... IF it has already done 2556, where did the other 1700 go ? Are you an advocate of opening the throttles into an adverse headwind when "range flying" ?

Could Earhart have meant "my fuel is running low and shortly i will be eating into my reserves"

There are Facts within the East New Britain story... there was a twin-engined unpainted aircraft wreck seen which bore no military insignia and a map used by the Army unit that saw it bears identifiers for Earhart's Electra "600 H/P S3H1 C/N 1055" ...Why ?

That wreck has to be found even if to eliminate it from the Earhart search.

We can argue all day about a "Hypothesis" of the how's and the why's that ensued as to how it could get to be where it is. Earhart and Noonan never reached Howland and no-one on this globe can tell me exactly how far they did reach on the "Last Flight" but it seems to me based on the Groundspeeds that they were "short" of Howland and they did have a Contingency Plan to turn back for The Gilberts.

They would expect to fly for four hours if they did consider they had reached a lateral point to Howland, seeing land after 1:45 would raise numerous possibilities...

Regards,
David Billings

[parabellum]

Not sure if they were adopting this principle but for navigation over vast areas of ocean or desert it was usual to pick an en route diversion point, if they couldn't carry round trip fuel, at the diversion point one either had to have a positive current position to continue or divert to an easily located diversion field. Missing the Ontario should have been the heads up?

[Cazalet33]

the only way to conserve fuel [into a headwind] is to ease the Throttles

????

You add a bit of power to increase your groundspeed against a headwind. One thing you do not do is reduce below max range speed/power. Any such increase is actually quite minor: something of the order of a quarter of the headwind component.

The reason why we know that there was no diversion to Gardner/Saipan/Lae/whatever is that we have the radio logs. We know that when they found themselves at where they thought Howland should be they reacted by first circling and then trogging back and forth on the sunrise LOP (NNW/SSE).

If they had intended to divert to any of the suggested alternates she quite certainly would have said so when commencing the div and also would have tried to contact Ontario on the way back. No such transmissions were made, so the diverting theory is obviously misguided and devoid of supporting factual data.

As to the thread title question: I think it is pretty clear that they were well North of intended track and quite probably short of Howland longitudinally. By quite a long way too because they were unable to see the very conspicuous smoke signal from Itasca.

We know that they were already North of track from the earwitness on the tramp steamer and the absence of earwitnesses on Ontario. If they misidentified Ontario when they were actually looking at the steamer Myrtlebank or the lights of the strip-mining on Nauru then it's likely that they would have compounded the error by correcting for it in the opposite way, ie sending them even further off-track to the North.

[porterhouse]

You base distance on HF Signal strength ??? How does that work ?
It is a bunch of BS, the people who heard her estimated her to be no more than 100 miles away based on radio technology at the time. Also you want me believe that they were hundreds of miles short of Howland island - this is like saying that Noonan had no clue what he was doing. So it is a bunch of 'religious' beliefs, trying to navigate around the facts and bending them to make your theory fit. If Ric Gillespie was here who would be arguing that he has all the proofs that they flew to Gardner Island, you really deserve each other. And with this 'easing throttles' you clearly have no clue about flying airplanes, if you ease throttles beyond your max endurance - you actually make situation worse.

By quite a long way too because they were unable to see the very conspicuous smoke signal from Itasca.
.
They had no chance seeing this smoke with the typical cloud coverage. You would have to be very, very close to actually see it and then you would probably see the island too.

[First_Principal]

It is a bunch of BS, the people who heard her estimated her to be no more than 100 miles away based on radio technology at the time....

See my earlier post re sunspot activity of the time - based on this well recorded data I suggest that determining distance on signal strength at that time on that frequency could have been somewhat fraught to say the least!

@David Billings. I quite understand the LiDAR approach but suggest a magnetic survey could have some particular advantages - it's probably worth a read to get a grasp of the principles.

I interpret that you are funding much of this exploration yourself and/or that funds are limited? You may find a basic gradiometer could be carried by a drone :eek: and would survey significant area with relative ease. Using Snuffler or similar you could plot the resultant data to give a mag anomaly map; an aircraft would be a significant anomaly.

FP.

[David Billings]

Expert Aviator 'Porterhouse' writes:

"It is a bunch of BS" :

You are after all, entitled to an opinion...rude as it is.

"...the people who heard her estimated her to be no more than 100 miles away based on radio technology at the time." :

Based on HF S5, you mean, which is not a true gauge and could mean they were hundreds of miles away at the time. Even radio experts say that distance cannot be measured by HF strengths and it has been said here (twice), 1937 was an unusual year for sunspot activity.

"Also you want me believe that they were hundreds of miles short of Howland island - this is like saying that Noonan had no clue what he was doing." :

I am not asking you to believe anything. It is plainly obvious from your way of speaking to other people that you know everything there is to know about aviation, so what is the point of conversing with you ? No point at all so this will be the last time. I am merely saying that the Groundspeeds point to a different operating mode compared to other LD flights made. Certainly, I do think that there was a miscalculation as to how far they had reached. YOU as an expert, may have a different opinion, to which you are entitled.

"So it is a bunch of 'religious' beliefs, trying to navigate around the facts and bending them to make your theory fit." :

The only facts in the New Britain Project are the detail surrounding the find of an all-metal, unpainted, twin-engined aircraft powered by P&W "Wasp" engines, with no military insignia, seen by an Australian WWII patrol and the appearance discovered years later of cryptic letters and numbers on a map from that era, used by the particular unit, which, had surprisingly enough detail information to identify the cryptic info as being of Earhart's Electra.... due to this astounding find, research went from there. The explanation of how it "could" get to be there is a HYPOTHESIS and is open to discussion and criticism, which I expect and do not mind. What I do mind, however, is people who tend to be bl--dy rude, such as you are. You are entitled to an opinion, but don't abuse the entitlement. Work your own aerodynamic and power usage formulas and see what you get if it is within your expert comprehension to do so.

" If Ric Gillespie was here who would be arguing that he has all the proofs that they flew to Gardner Island, you really deserve each other." :

Now you have upset me. "Deserve each other" ??? Mentioning Gillespie in the same breath as myself... Wow, you are quite a nasty pugnacious little man aren't you ? Dear Oh, Dear...

"And with this 'easing throttles' you clearly have no clue about flying airplanes, if you ease throttles beyond your max endurance - you actually make situation worse.":

Now there's a thing.... Do you have in your possession a Flight Manual for the Lockheed Electra 10A aircraft ? If you have, turn to Page 35A. Now, I mentioned that I had read somewhere that Clarence "Kelly" Johnson (in 1936) had advised Earhart to 'lean off' into an adverse headwind. Read Page 35A.... You don't have it ? I'll tell you what it says.... It says specifically that pilots should increase speed into an adverse headwind. Loose leaf Page 35A Amendment is printed in Courier Font. Courier Font was invented post-WWII and Lockheed felt it necessary to inform and instruct pilots to increase speed into an adverse (extra value to the flight planning) headwind. I didn't say "I" would lean off or ease the throttles. If you have a copy of "Last Flight" written by Earhart, on Page 33, it gives an indication that she could well be using lean of peak and if she did use lean of peak she would not be able to lean any more now would she ? The only way after that to use "less" gas would be to retard (ease) the throttles slightly. I obtained that AFM for the Electra 10A about twenty years ago from Lockheed at Marietta and was struck by the fact that Lockheed found it really necessary to include the point about increasing speed into a headwind years after production of the Electra had ended... Then again, that might be because of an incident in a flight or U.S Companies were facing more and more litigation over products (i.e: could be a reason why).

Have a nice expert aviator day.

[Cazalet33]

They had no chance seeing this smoke with the typical cloud coverage. You would have to be very, very close to actually see it and then you would probably see the island too.

The master of Itasca disagreed with your idea. He reckoned that the smoke plume was at least thirty miles long and was highly conspicuous to a distance of at least ten miles.

That's one of the reasons why I believe that they were more than 60 miles short when they thought they were "on top" of the island.

There are several reasons why I'm sure they were to the Nor'ard of intended track. For one thing, we know that the weather was a bit thick to the NorthWest but clear to the South.

That's entirely consistent with her having to descend to 1,000' to attempt to get visual with the island/ship/smoke. It also strongly suggests that they had not been able to note the exact time of sunrise of the upper or lower limb of the sun. Without that observation, and a precise note of the time of that observation, the 157/337 LOP was worse than useless. It was a trap.

At the locus the fair weather cumulus was variable in extent and height was described as "low" in the deck log of Itasca. Have a look for yourself at the log and note that "amount" is in tenths, not oktas. Times are ship's time. Earhart reported 200 miles to run at 06:12 ship's time and that's when Itasca started making smoke. Cloud was between 2 and 3 10ths over the relevant time period. In modern parlance we'd call that "few".

https://s22.postimg.org/ybjqmfbtd/Itasca_Deck_Log1.jpg

[psycho joe]

If you have a copy of "Last Flight" written by Earhart, on Page 33, it gives an indication that she could well be using lean of peak and if she did use lean of peak she would not be able to lean any more now would she ? The only way after that to use "less" gas would be to retard (ease) the throttles slightly.

Except that if she tried that in a headwind she would in fact use more fuel. If she were to "ease the throttles" ie reduce power and therefore fly slower she would increase fuel consumption per Nautical mile (ie an adverse specific ground range). Between Emelia, Noonan and the various advisers along the way, they should have understood this and actually increased power slightly in a headwind in order to decrease fuel consumption/nm.

[sheppey]

He reckoned that the smoke plume was at least thirty miles long and was highly conspicuous to a distance of at least ten miles.

Viewed from the bridge of a ship (sea level). Yes, no problem with that opinion. However from the cramped tiny cockpit of the Lockheed possibly flying towards the morning sun reflecting off the ocean and seen between hundreds of fair weather Cumulus dotting the ocean. A different view altogether.

[Cazalet33]

From 1,000' below the couple of oktas of cumulus within ten or twenty miles of Howland, she'd have seen the massive smoke signal from Itasca quite easily. Sure, the island would have been a bugger to spot from much more than five to ten miles away, but she knew that. It was the ship and its huge smoke plume that she was looking for. That's a very different visual cue from an island which looks like a cumulus shadow.

Here's a snippet I found when researching in the Purdue files. She wrote a first draft of her memoirs in the interregnum between her first and second RTW attempts. Here's what she said of her solo flight from Hawaii to California:

https://s9.postimg.org/ijip6331r/Earhart_Mem_P31.jpg

[greg47]

She would have arrived in the Howland is area with about an hours fuel. The fuel had been sitting in lae for some time . It would have lost performance. Power is mass flow . Lae temps would men less mass due to the expansion relative to temp. Neither knew morse code. Due to an error of installation and consequent incompatibility with antenna loading and frequency they could transmit but not receive. They were tracked across the pacific.The personnel on the ground in their eagerness turned on the primitive NDB to early. With the range considerably reduced as the battery voltage had dropped. It would have given every indication to ground personnel it was transmitting.

[flywatcher]

She would have arrived in the Howland is area with about an hours fuel. The fuel had been sitting in lae for some time . It would have lost performance. Power is mass flow . Lae temps would men less mass due to the expansion relative to temp. Neither knew morse code. Due to an error of installation and consequent incompatibility with antenna loading and frequency they could transmit but not receive. They were tracked across the pacific.The personnel on the ground in their eagerness turned on the primitive NDB to early. With the range considerably reduced as the battery voltage had dropped. It would have given every indication to ground personnel it was transmitting.

I would suggest that her aircraft had a still air range of at least 4,000 statute miles and she could have quite probably rung out another 200 odd miles if she was utilising the techniques she had learnt from proving flights with Pratt and Whitney and from conversations with Charles Lindberg. She should have had plenty of fuel for Plan B, the Gilbert Islands, and if the headwinds had been strong enough for her to fall well short of Howland, possibly enough, or almost enough to make it back to New Britain with a good tailwind.Going by her fuel usage to Hawaii on her first attempt, she was using a lot less fuel than planned.

[megan]

The fuel had been sitting in lae for some time . It would have lost performanceNot so. Lae was a major airport at the time. Established in 1927 to support the goldfields at Wau and Bulolo, regular scheduled QANTAS flights to Australia were running also at the time of Amelias visit. So fuel aplenty and fresh.

[Cazalet33]

There was no possibility of diversion. That's why she didn't divert.

She'd massively blown her fuel reserve quite early in the flight, even before whatever nav bust(s) occurred.

We have very little actual track data and most of that is a bit flaky, but let's look at the numbers.

Depart 00:00z from Lae. We know the position of the end of the runway, thanks to Google Earth, to be 6° 44.3'N 147° 00.0'E. Noonan would have used the published co-ords of Lae which were 6° 45'N 147° 01'E.

At 04:18z she said she was at 7,000' and declared a speed of 140, but didn't give a position. It's unclear whether 140 was in mph or in knots and even less clear whether it referred to IAS or TAS or G/S. We can only conjecture with that data, but any such conjecture is unfruitful. The altitude is presumably to stay above the weather, but it blows any chance of adhering to the economical fuel plan which required staying down at 2,000' feet for the first 9 hours and only climbing to 8,000' after 17 hours of flight.
https://s17.postimg.org/4ae0wx773/Electra_Perf.jpg

At 05:19z she gives an altitude of 10,000' and a position of 7° 3'N 150° 7'E. The altitude is credible, though surprising. The position is clearly bollocks. If you want to mallet a square peg into a round hole you can substitute any Lat or Long (or both) into any theorised position for that time, but the more intellectually honest thing to do would be to set the false data to one side and move on. Her altitude of 10,000' shows that she'd massively blown her fuel budget in the very heavy climb. She shouldn't have been above 2,000' on the fuel plan at this point and shouldn't have been as high as 8,000' until about 18:00z. 10,000' was clearly necessary to remain VMC on top, but she paid a huge price in fuel to get that high so early in the flight.

Her position report of 07:18z at 8,000' at 4° 33'S 159 07'E is the only one of the entire flight which we can in any way corroborate. It is entirely consistent with the known nav plan and it is almost certainly based on a sunset shot. My own calculation produces a sunset time of 07:19:27z would have been observable on Noonan's bubble sextant at that place and aircraft altitude. This raises an interesting question as to whether Noonan's chronometer was correct. We know that he'd been unable to get a radio time signal at Lae to check the index and rate of his chronometers.

Her zero wind estimate for the flight was 18 hours. Her departure message gave an ETA of 19:00 which was based on the forecast headwinds in the first and second halves of the flight.

At 17:45 she declared her belief that she was approximately 200 miles from Howland.

At 18:15 it was 100 miles to go.

At 19:12 she believed that she should be "on top" of Howland. She declares low fuel state and estimates only half an hour left. That is presumably at cruise power and we can presume that she then pulled the power back to max endurance and quite probably had Noonan scavenging the last dregs of fuel from the emptied tanks.

At 20:13 she makes what was to be her final call. She says that they are still running "North and South" along the 155/337 LOP.

No diversion. No fuel to attempt one either.

[Cazalet33]

I'll tell you what it says.... It says specifically that pilots should increase speed into an adverse headwind. Loose leaf Page 35A Amendment is printed in Courier Font. Courier Font was invented post-WWII and Lockheed felt it necessary to inform and instruct pilots to increase speed into an adverse (extra value to the flight planning) headwind. I didn't say "I" would lean off or ease the throttles. If you have a copy of "Last Flight" written by Earhart, on Page 33, it gives an indication that she could well be using lean of peak and if she did use lean of peak she would not be able to lean any more now would she ? The only way after that to use "less" gas would be to retard (ease) the throttles slightly. I obtained that AFM for the Electra 10A about twenty years ago from Lockheed at Marietta and was struck by the fact that Lockheed found it really necessary to include the point about increasing speed into a headwind years after production of the Electra had ended.

The Billings hypothesis appears to suggest that Earhart did not know the basic airmanship knowledge that you increase airspeed into a headwind for max range by pushing the throttles up. He appears to suggest that this was not written by Lockheed until after the War and by inference he appears to suggest that she did not know this fairly basic piece of airmanship and engine handling. I say bollocks!

Here's what she was told, in writing, by Lockheed with the very specific topic of her proposed long range flight in mind:
https://s2.postimg.org/ka34bip6x/Lockheed_Headwind1936.jpg


Edited to add:

Not because she's a wumman or anything, but Kelly Johnson even drew her a nice little picture to clearly show the physics of the thing if the words were too complicated:
https://s2.postimg.org/f3tz40pvd/Lockheed_Headwind_Fig2.jpg

[sundaun]

A couple of posts previous Lae quoted as 6 degrees N or so! I would have thought 6 South would have been more like it! Typical winds in the dry season below 10,000' could be variable 10. Maybe very little night vertical development over the water with the ICZ to the North. British Phosphate Commission's "Myrtlebank" (NORAD)was in the area and could have been misidentified!! Residents on Nauru and locals at Tabitieua in the Gilbert's claim hearing an aircraft! So much conjecture, however a fascinating story. Good luck DB I admire your tenacity.

[sundaun]

From GCmap.com Lae is 6 degrees 43' 59" S/146 degrees 59' 50" E so given a bit of track crawl down the centre of the Huon Gulf and a heavy aircraft her first position report is not too unreasonable.

[David Billings]

Thankyou Cazalet33 for a very forceful explanation of your Hypothesis of what happened and what should not have happened during the Last Flight. It is sometimes pleasant to read of other Hypotheses.

The Lockheed Report you refer to was made and written in 1936 as evidenced by the page date. There are later telegrams from C.L. Johnson in 1937 which stipulate different Power regimes and different heights and your display of Page 7 of LR487 is for a Gross Weight of 16,500 pounds and unlikely that Earhart attempted that AUW.

There is a Lockheed Regime which has 8000' after two hours and 10,000 feet after ten but there is also a notation that 1000' either side is not important. Climb outs would waste fuel at high power and the term cruise-climb would be more likely.

The Chater Report records Noonan's Chronometer as three seconds slow from two time signals.

In referring to the 0519 GMT PR call, I think you mean 7 deg 03' SOUTH 150 deg 07' E, instead of the North Latitude which would put them up in the Carolines. Can we then have a consideration by you that this recorded position included in The Chater Report is incorrect ?

NOTE: I work in Statute Miles (Sm) because by all accounts Earhart also did work in Statute Miles.

I recall that I measured this 7 deg 03' S, 150 deg 07' location on ONC M-14 as being only 215 Statute Miles from Lae (GE says 219) and at a position 60 Statute Miles south of the direct track line to Howland. If so, their G/S is only 42 Smph average, which surely cannot be correct unless they were going around in circles.....

In your consideration then, would it be possible for this particular PR Longitude to have been heard as 150 deg 07' when in reality it could very well be 157 deg 0' making the distance after 5:19 (or thereabouts) as 686 Sm for an Av. G/S of 129 Smph. Would you consider that a scratchy HF Tx made with a low tone American accent and heard by Australian Radio Operator Harry Balfour in Lae could erroneously be recorded as 150 deg 07' East Longitude ? Say 150-7, 150-7 to yourself a few times, you get the drift...

I, personally, believe it was recorded incorrectly and should be 157 deg 0' E Longitude which coupled with the South Latitude sits the PR very nicely over the landmark of Mount Maetambe on Choiseul Island.

Why fly ESE to Choiseul instead of ENE towards the Buka Gap ?

Well, for one, it fits with Earhart and Noonan avoiding the reported LOW off the S.E. corner of New Britain Island. For two, it also fits very nicely with the port drift off the N.E. Track to Nukumanu Island, an obvious drift caused by the Easterly wind which in turn caused one of the (as you say) "NAV busts" and which put the Electra 21 Sm to the West of the Nukumanu Atoll. However, I do not think that the PR given by Earhart was a PR at 0718 GMT. For the third reason, you have to consider that if the reported LOW really was a bad tropical storm then they are headed towards the region of Mount Balbi (8,500') on Bougainville Island and unlikely to wish to be on instruments over there.

You mean that the Electra turned West and Noonan took a sunshot into the dying sun at that Lat/Long ?

I consider (my consideration) that in respect to the 0718 GMT call, Noonan needed to know where he had been "when" they sighted NUKUMANU off to their right and made that a Turnpoint, so the Turnpoint needed to be fixed and the only way to do that is to time the run to the Main Island of Nukumanu to the abeam point or overhead and estimate his distance by the timed run. This would then give him the chance of working "what the wind had been" which had caused him to drift by 21 Sm. To do that he has to work it out ....so in my consideration the Turnpoint was at ~0705 GMT and the Tx on the normal time of 18 minutes past the hour then reported the PR and the wind of 23 Knots. If you consider the context of Choiseul at 0518 GMT and the PR of 0718 GMT for the distance of 224 Sm the G/S of 112 Smph (97 Kts) average is way too low, I recall I worked that it was too low to remain in the air in cruise power at the weight. If you include the 21 Sm and the Lagoon and accept another few miles while Noonan ran the numbers the G/S comes up to around the 130 Smph Av. mark. More likely in an abeam wind.

Yes, agreed, her reporting of PR's was lousy.

Noonan had to have his distance from the Turnpoint at Nukumanu (the PR Lat/Long) because he had already fixed the distance NUK to Ontario and the "extra bit" of the (as you say) NAV bust, was needed so that he could work his G/S NUK to Ontario.

Ontario decklog was recording 20 Knots of wind from 090 degrees at 1030 GMT when they were going over so who knows what the wind was at 10,000 feet ? Noonan had the distance in mind but there was another complication. Ontario was recording a position at 1030 GMT which was 29 Sm to the East of the U.S. Navy designated position.

Now Cazalet33.... what complication would that cause ?

At this point in the flight, my belief is they should have called a stopper on it, turned back, waited out the dawn and landed back at LAE.... but it was a record setting flight wasn't it ?

Take note Cazalet33 and anybody else: I have NEVER, EVER, said that Earhart did not know about speeding up into a headwind. What I have said is that there is a written statement by C.L. Johnson in a telegram that he sent to Earhart which advises to lean-off into a headwind. The telegram is dated March 11th 1937 and it says:

WIRE FROM MARSHALL CONFIRMS MY RECOMMENDATIONS OF POWER AND FUEL CONSUMPTION STOP REMEMBER TO LEAN MIXTURE VERY SLOWLY STOP NINE HUNDRED GALLONS FUEL AMPLE FOR FORTY PERCENT EXCESS RANGE TO HONOLULU FOR CONDITIONS GIVEN IN WIRE THIS MORNING STOP IF NECESSARY MIXTURE CAN BE LEANED TO ZERO SEVEN ZERO ON LAST HALF OF FLIGHT IF EXCEPTIONAL HEAD WINDS EXIST STOP CHECK SPARKPLUGS etc, etc, etc....

Cambridge 070 indicates a mixture ratio of 14.3: 1

...and another thing: "Pulling Power Back, "Easing Throttles", "Retarding Throttles", "Throttling Back" "Reducing Power" will ALL cause less fuel to go into the engines and therefore less power produced. In the intended context that is what happens. Whether it will result in more fuel usage per Nautical Mile was not a mention in the context nor intended. I hope that is made clear.

Oh, by the way, can I have less of the bollocks please and more of your astute mind..... We are all interested in this Mystery but that expression serves no purpose. I deliberated long and hard before deciding to post and that sort of stuff turns me right off (as does arrogance).

[David Billings]

Sundaun

The PR at 0718 GMT was given as 4 deg 33.5'S, 159 deg 07E.

NUKUMANU Island itself is at:

4 deg 37' S, 159 deg 28'E

The Position of the USS Ontario according to the US Navy was:

3 deg 05' S, 165 deg 00' E.

The deck log of the USS Ontario say that at 1030GMT it was at:

2 deg 56' 21"S, 165 deg 22' 54" E

The position given for the SS Myrtlebank was:

2 deg 20'S, 167 deg 10'E

If we leave NUKUMANU at say 0700 GMT and arrive over the Ontario at 1030, I make it say: 420 Sm for 3.5 Hours = a G/S of 120 Smph Av..

I make the distance LAE-ONTARIO 1363 Sm through the dogleg of Choiseul, plus the "NAV bust" and if they were at the Ontario at 1035GMT (lights in sight ahead at 1030 GMT), then the Average G/S over the distance is 128 Smph Their G/S is decaying.

The SS Myrtlebank was a further 145 miles to the East making the distance 565 Sm delivering a G/S of 161 Mph average.

If my start speed at Nukumanu is 130 Smph to average 161 over the sector , I have to be doing 192 Smph when I am overhead the Myrtlebank (Law of Averages)

Cazalet33 says she has already "busted" her fuel by climbing to 10,000' ...now she busts it again by opening the Taps.....if she wants to do 192 MPH !

On a Long Range Plan that would be the last thing to do.

I have looked very closely at the Groundspeeds and it is my belief that they were low compared to previous flights. Certainly "in the era" and "for the aircraft" being nobbled by a 26 mph wind at Nukumanu and forward certainly would get her attention and Fred's alarm !

My persistence.... well now I am sort of forcibly retired, I suppose I've got nothing better to do... it has only been 23 years.... I have a firm regard for the evidence that has kept me at it. Thanks for the kind remarks....

[psycho joe]

...and another thing: "Pulling Power Back, "Easing Throttles", "Retarding Throttles", "Throttling Back" "Reducing Power" will ALL cause less fuel to go into the engines and therefore less power produced. In the intended context that is what happens. Whether it will result in more fuel usage per Nautical Mile was not a mention in the context nor intended. I hope that is made clear.

The idea that you have put forward, that reducing power will reduce fuel consumption is correct for maximising endurance, ie time in the air, but incorrect for best range, ie getting as far as possible with the fuel available in the tanks.

Leaning the fuel/air ratio to allow for the thinner air at alt will achieve a chemically balanced or stoichiometric ratio of fuel, which will result in reduced fuel consumption. This has nothing to do with wind.

Reducing, easing etc throttles will reduce power, and subsequently reduce speed. Whilst this will reduce fuel consumption/hour, the reduced groundspeed in a headwind means that the duration of the flight will be longer (compared to no wind or tailwind) and therefore the fuel consumed over a given distance will be greater. (Due to the fact that the aircraft is exposed to the headwind for a greater period of time.)

Otoh, increasing throttles (power) and flying faster in a headwind will reduce the time that the aircraft is exposed to the headwind and therefore reduce the overall fuel consumption for the entire trip, compared to flying slower. This is demonstrated very effectively in the charts above, and the physics would have been well understood at the time.

The idea that trip fuel can be reduced, or that range can be extended by reducing power in a headwind is incorrect.

[FGD135]

The idea that trip fuel can be reduced, or that range can be extended by reducing power in a headwind is incorrect.Not the whole story. It depends on what speed you were at when you made the power reduction.

If at the speed for best range, then yes, reducing power will reduce range. But if at a greater speed than that for best range, then reducing power will increase range.

[Centaurus]

Post No 2 wrote:
Flying at high altitudes we could look down and see the literally thousands of small cumulus clouds dotting the vast ocean from horizon to horizon - each cloud casting a shadow on the water. With their Lockheed flying over the Pacific among those low level clouds where the base of the fair weather CU would be around 1000 ft and tops around 3000 ft, any one of those shadows could be an atoll. It was an illusion of course.

Post 49 quotes from the first draft of Amelia Earhart's memoirs where she wrote:
"There is no doubt that the last hour of any flight is the hardest. If there are any clouds about to make shadows, one is likely to see much imaginary land."

While one can appreciate the differing points of view expressed by Pprune contributors and varying scenarios put up for consideration, this contributor leans towards a simpler explanation.. That is, after 20 hours of flying towards Howland island, in the end they were fooled by the shadows under the low altitude clouds and were lost and forced to ditch.