The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Amelia Earhart PNG Theory

Old 15th Mar 2018, 21:15
  #241 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: QLD
Posts: 491
What about putting up a big reward for the people of New Britain PNG?

Say K10,000 (AUD$3600).
geeup is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2018, 22:15
  #242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ON TOP OF OLD SMOKEY
Posts: 132
may I second guess what David's response might be?

we would if we could but we can't

the good indigenous people of
that island would need more than the promise of kina to form an
army of heavy duty machete wheeling chanters. I say chanters because
those big fellas from the Torres Strait Islands who worked on the railway from Mount Tom Price to Karratha in the mid '60s ; to hear them lift and lay in place, singing all the time, all along lugging that heavy iron down a track of about 168 miles (I think), was a memorable experience.

Last edited by FAR CU; 16th Mar 2018 at 02:24.
FAR CU is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2018, 02:54
  #243 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 199
Rewards and Help from the local people

The Pomio people all know about our endeavours in their territory and they are as keen as we are to locate the site where the BD Driver buried it but they don't know where it is either. The "Post-Courier" and "National" newspapers in PNG take time to filter down to the Wide Bay area but they know my name has been in the papers so they can read that is is a genuine search for "the American Lady".

They know that a find and proving it to be Earhart's aircraft will bring tourists to the area, impoverished as it is, but tourists, if looked after, bring in economic benefit.... They know that, so they are willing to help and have helped us enormously.

Money would help them but their really desperate need is for a Lucas Mill, a gasoline powered mobile sawmill that turns logs into usable lumber on site at the felled tree.

Our best bet at finding it would be the LiDAR survey which would show all the old tracks made by the Bulldozer and where it was working. Obviously we have walked the main track and the BD Driver bumped into it when he was making access tracks before the loggers arrived so it has to be near to one of the main tracks. He is said to have backed off and "gone around it" , ie; re-routed the track away from it and then come back and covered it over.

All the old tracks now have new growth on them but can be discerned at ground level but the secondary stuff gets in the way of a visual picture of the immediate local ground area. Lidar would show it without trees and secondary growth. The best example of what I am trying to describe as to what LiDAR can do is the LiDAR Picture of "The Marching Bears " Monument in the U.S. which is shown in Wikipedia.

The BD Driver did attend a "Kommuniti Meeting" in 1995 and he said that he knew where it was but would not say where. The Pomio's took that as being boastful.

He apparently also knew of the importance and intended go back and uncover it himself after we had stopped looking. We didn't stop looking but in any case he reportedly met his end in the year 2000.

We are working on an alternative to LiDAR at present to see if that alternative can help.
David Billings is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2018, 18:11
  #244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ON TOP OF OLD SMOKEY
Posts: 132
So David may I ask ? In percentage terms how do you you rate the probability that what you believe is there is in fact there? (Your credentials are beyond question. Mr Money-bags might take little convincing of that. But, needless to say, he will equally want to assess the probability of you being right in your assumptions as to the crash site.) It must be very tiring having to go over the theory time and time again. Apologies.
FAR CU is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2018, 22:00
  #245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 199
What do I believe is there in percentage terms ?

1. The Army Sitrep tells us: "A/C plates will be available at 0900 (with the report)", so that tells us that the Patrol A1 definitely saw aircraft wreckage and handed in "plates", the Vets could only remember the one plate that being the metal tag removed from the engine mount. They were mystified why it said "plates" (Typo ?).

2. The W/O on the patrol saw the words "Pratt and Whitney" on the detached engine "somewhere". He could not remember exactly where. He removed a Metal Tag hanging by wire from the engine mount tubing. He said it had "A string of letters and numbers on it."

3. The Vets said the reply from "the Americans" said that from the information they had given, the Americans said (in their reply) that the engine was a WASP and "Not one of theirs". If it had been a TWIN WASP then they surely would have known it was one of theirs.

4. So, as it was twin engined aircraft, there are actually TWO Wasp engines there.

5. We have "600 H/P S3H1 C/N1055" together with details of patrol A1 on a TOPO Map used by the men of "D" Coy 11th Batallion AIF. The map had always been in the possession of men from that unit. Those identifiers say that with "S3H1" being a WASP engine same as used by Earhart and the rating in H.P is correct and so is the "1055" as the sequential build number of her aircraft, the writing references (Ref the L10E Model Electra aircraft used by Earhart.

6. 100% there is aircraft wreckage there.

7. On the evidence it is the Electra 10E aircraft which belonged to Earhart.

If anyone skilled in aircraft identification involving aircraft types from the era 1930 to 1945, can tell me of a different type of aircraft that this wreckage could be,... other than a Lockheed Model 10E Electra, I would be delighted to know what that aircraft could be.

The aircraft has to be an aircraft powered by P&W Wasp engines specifically with the designation "S3H1".
David Billings is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2018, 05:59
  #246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ON TOP OF OLD SMOKEY
Posts: 132
That's good to have concisely set out. I will run off a few copies so as to have them handy to pass to persons (with contacts) who may be enthused enough to be intermediaries in accessing higher up the gravy train.
FAR CU is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2018, 10:15
  #247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: hertfordshire
Posts: 36
FAR CU

Well said Far Cu , and it would be useful to interested people to read David Billings website.

It has so much detail and information.
propertee64 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2018, 15:21
  #248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ON TOP OF OLD SMOKEY
Posts: 132
Noted, with thanks. It could be that there are still aspects to mounting
a renewed campaign to muster up concrete and substantial support that need to be explored.
FAR CU is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2018, 06:49
  #249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 199
Another hole in TIGHAR's Nikumaroro Hypothesis

A few days ago I discovered something that I had missed probably because the fanfare from TIGHAR about the Aluminium Patch, "Artifact 2-2-V-1" went quiet.

In 1991 TIGHAR found a piece of aluminium aircraft skin on Nikumaroro with four rows of rivet holes and a ragged edge and pictures of it that I saw reminded me of the way South-west Pacific islanders remove aluminium sheeting off of aircraft wrecks and that is by using a bushknife to first chop through the skin and use the bushknife to lever it, pop the rivet heds off and then tear the piece off, by bending it backwards and forwards until it fails in fatigue.

TIGHAR touted the piece that they found as coming from the Electra but failed to find a match when they went over an Electra with the scrap of sheeting which measures roughly 2 x 1 feet (600 x 300mm). They couldn't prove it so it rested for bit but they still kept mentioning it as coming from the Electra. Then 20 years later they dragged it out and tried to convince everyone that the piece was from a "Patch" that had been riveted over the RH Rear Window frame, the glass having been removed at Miami, before the World Flight began.

I and a couple of other guys were instrumental in proving that it didn't come from that patch either. TIGHAR wrote thousands and thousands of words, reams and reams of pages, on this subject and it ran for ages on their Forum to their captive audience.

There were WWII wrecks (B-24's ) on Canton Island and a C-47 wreck on Sydney Island, both these islands being in the Phoenix Group as is Nikumaroro. It had been suggested many, many times that the piece of aircraft skin came from one of those.

People opposed to their insistence that the ragged piece of skin came from the Electra had good news some time back but it has been kept quiet by TIGHAR.

The New England Aircraft Museum in the U.S. found a Match, They have a template of the piece of skin with all the rows of rivets marked.

The match was discovered in 2017 while they were restoring a DC-3 in Eastern Airlines colours. The spare wing for this DC-3 came from a C-47B-10-DK, c/n 26458, msn 15013, built in 1944 and the template that they have fitted this wing. The artifact template did not fit their DC-3, c/n 6314, AAF number 43-1973, built in 1942.

So the template and the TIGHAR "Artifact 2-2-V-1" the piece of aircraft aluminium skin touted for 27 years as coming from the Electra C/N 1055 came from the C-47A that crashed on Sydney Island.

As many of us were saying for years, the piece was most probably hacked off the crashed wreckage of the C-47A and transported by canoe from Sydney Island to Gardner Island (now Nikumaroro) and as it appears to have been in a fire, it was most probably used to cook fish by islanders on Gardner.

An entertaining little story.

Last edited by David Billings; 26th Mar 2018 at 06:33.
David Billings is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2018, 02:46
  #250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
David in your opinion did Erhart reach the area of Howland island island and then return to ENB some must be 20 hrs plus away
greg47 is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2018, 09:33
  #251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: hertfordshire
Posts: 36
Greg47, David Billings very detailed website contains schedules of fuel and ranges issues..

They show what was possible.


Its well worth a read. Its fascinating.
propertee64 is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2018, 12:06
  #252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: hertfordshire
Posts: 36
Web address

I should have given you the website adress:


www.earhartsearchpng.com


It is a great read.
propertee64 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 02:13
  #253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
propertee64.
Tells me very little. Her Electra originally had a still air range at LRC of some 600miles
After the modification, there were six fuel tanks in the wings and six in the fuselage. This allowed her to carry 1,150 gallons of fuel, enough for over 20 hours of flight time at normal cruise. As previously pointed out the fuel had been sitting in Lae for some time and would have deteriated some. Also a lower SG due to temp meant there was less mass loaded. Power is a product of mass ie how much fuel and air in weight can be rammed into the engine on the induction cycles.On the trip to Howland it would have used more volume of fuel. There was a maximun of an hour left on arrival. Nutters were transmitting "we are floating ..come" or similar, two days afer she would have ditched. It would have not floated for long. Likely broken open on spashdown
greg47 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2018, 06:36
  #254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 199
For Greg47

Greg47 says to propertee64:

"Tells me very little. Her Electra originally had a still air range at LRC of some 600miles"

I think you actually mean that the "Standard 10E" had a range of 600 miles. I can't comment on that because I haven't paid much attention to it.

Earhart's 10E didn't get the 'keel laid' with the intention of it coming off the line as a standard 10E and then being modified for Long Range, it was built as a Long Range version in the drawings, the biggest difference was the Main Spar which was different, much stronger then the standard and this is shown clearly in Carrington's book where you can visually see the difference (I will give you that not everyone has Carrington's book but I do have it and as an Engineer, the dfference in the mainspars is quite striking).

Yes, on the fuel tanks, except there were originally seven in the fuselage but one was removed. It probably was removed because it put the C.G. right at the back of the C.G. range which is not a good thing. The sister-ship C/N 1065 did retain the aft tank and did carry 1200 USG. When Earhart was looking around for an aircraft they set criteria and one (the main one) was range, Lockheed boss Robert Gross had to guarantee a range and he did so by letter, presumably, very presumably, "after" the flight tests done in C/N 1041 which was the subject of Lockheed Report 465 and which were studied by the Performance Department at Lockheed before producing Lockheed Report 487 and before Mr. Gross put his head on the chopping block.....

If you did read the website which you say "tells you very little", you will have seen (and read) that the workings of Kelly Johnson predicted the fuel needed for the ranges for the mileage planned that were attainable, plus he also said that there were percentage "extra miles" available in the total carried on the 1st RTW attempt in March 1937. You will also have read of the FP for 4307 miles DAKAR to ADEN for a flight of 28 hours and 40 minutes which was included in all the "still air" FP's for a G/S of 150 mph, that were produced for her by Ex-USN Commander Clarence Williams.

For the Hypothesis side of the Project, I need 4170 miles into a headwind and back in a tailwind. If you read the website for the Hypothesis side of the project you wil have read (no doubt) that when they rounded the corner at NUKUMANU and confirmed a 26.5 mph wind (which must have been from the East) on their short track to NUKUMANU, then maybe there would have been a discussion about the virtues of "making it" on the fuel usage over the past seven hours. My inclination is to "think" that somewhere in that discussion there had to be a way of reducing the fuel flow somewhat if they decided to "carry on regardless" of what the wind was telling them.

To me, who only had to lob into an "Unscheduled Airport" once when flying (HALIFAX, Nova Scotia) en route, was very glad Halifax was where it was because we hit a tremendous headwind off of there...and our "HOWGOZIT" line went "below the line", so, to me, in Earhart and Noonan's case, they should have turned back when they realised the headwind was DOUBLE the planned value. WE were not on a record flight and they were and they were trying to get to LAX by July 4th.

Then we have the arrival or being in sight of a "ship ahead" which I am saying in the Hypothesis would be at 1036 GMT when overhead. In the Hypothesis, to be overhead the S.S. ONTARIO at 1036 GMT at 1352 miles covered, the G/S average is only 127.5 mph when by a reasonable FP for a wind forecast of 12 to 15 it should be 0948 GMT or 1000 GMT so they are obviously "late" in arriving at the ONTARIO. so... "indeed" the wind has increased.

What it all boils down to in the Hypothesis, which you have read and understood, is that it would be impossible on the G/S's exhibited in the first hours up to 1036 GMT at the ONTARIO, for the Electra to have reached a point by 1912 GMT where they are at or lateral to HOWLAND, therefore they will never see it by heading off on 15 minutes each way on a "LINE" at right angles to their trackline.

They must therefore invoke their Contingency Plan, which will have them seeing The GILBERTS surprisingy quickly if the Hypothesis is correct.

The rest you know, for you have read the website.

Last edited by David Billings; 26th Mar 2018 at 11:22.
David Billings is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2018, 00:07
  #255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 643
David...


From my first visit to this thread, then to your website, I've been impressed by both your thoroughness and your integrity. When I read the comments of some posters here I must also say that I am even more impressed with your patience.
grizzled is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2018, 03:22
  #256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 199
For grizzled:

My Mother used to say "Patience is a virtue".... whether I forever took a mental note of what she did say or whether I have been pre-programmed by The Almighty I have no way of knowing. However, seemingly, I am blessed with bucketfulls of it and can deal with non-comprehensiveness with that same commodity.

For everyone:

What some people seem not to recognise here is that ALL other Lockheed Model 10E's have been accounted for except for two, both of them being the Long Range Versions. One of the two went to Russia and has two endings...a) Lost on the Steppe and abandoned and b) taken apart for the reverse engineering that the Russians were apt to do in that era, same as the DC-3 and the B-29.

The other 10E is Earhart's.

Patrol A1 on 17th April '45 bumped into an engine on the jungle floor. The airframe with one engine still attached was a bit further on. A Metal Tag was removed from the engine mount of the detached engine. The tag had a string of letters and numbers on it.

The wreckage looked to be "American" and had been there for several years, it was unpainted and they did not see any military insignia.

They reported the wreck, we can read that in a Signal SITREP and they handed in the Metal Tag.

Five weeks later they were told that the "Americans" in the shape pf the U.S. Army had replied and said that the engine was "Not one of theirs". The engine was a WASP engine and may be from a Lockheed as Lockheed were big users of Pratt & Whitney engines. They were therefore (on those grounds) not interested.

If the engine had been a Twin Wasp or a Wright Cyclone, they would have been interested no doubt, but they were not.

We have a TOPO Map from that time which was used by D Company of the 11th Battalion Australian Army which carries Patrol A1 Information and also a Reference, "Ref: 600 H/P S3H1 C/N 1055" which ALL are pointers to a 600 horsepower, Pratt & Whitney R-1340 S3H1 "CIVIL" engine and a notation C/N 1055 and Earhart's Electra was the 55th Model 10 built and carried the Build No. or "Construction No." 1055. I am saying that the "600 H/P S3H1 C/N 1055" in the readout to the troops and on the TOPO map, is the very same "string of letters and numbers" seen by the W/O "on site" as he stood by the engine on the jungle floor. This is borne out by the U.S. Army reply saying the engine is a WASP engine because the S3H1 is a Wasp Engine and a "Civil' version at that. No wonder the U.S. Army were not interested.

Nobody is willing to finance us to a point where we can really get stuck into finding this aircraft. For years I have toiled at this, spent my own dough and it is looking as if I will have to forget it. Time marches on and I am 78 now.

As before if anyone can tell me of an all-metal twin-engined aircraft powered by P&W R-1340 S3H1's that is other than a Lockheed 10E I will be delighted.

David Billings
www.earhartsearchpng.com

Last edited by David Billings; 26th Mar 2018 at 11:40.
David Billings is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2018, 11:06
  #257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 47
Posts: 580
You must be a very patient man indeed. Reading your research I cannot understand why someone will not finance a search. Maybe not considered important enough? Maybe they don’t agree?

Let’s face it with the push for women in aviation wouldn’t it be in the best interest of aviation to have a crack at finding this aircraft???

Sounds just right for some money from Qantas, leading the way in gender equality in the flight deck, sorry box office, hehehe...
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2018, 16:41
  #258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 384
seriously with this being the year of the woman etc i cannot believe that some rich lady will not take up and fund the cause to let you go find this wreck site and see if the plane is AE's (or not)

what about rich Oprah or Ellen .. they are minted and 'right on' for women

or some other Hollywood greats - Hilary swank and richard Gere played AE and Putnam in the new movie 'Amelia' - chris eccleston played noonan
Ewan mcgregor played gore vidal - have you asked these guys?
Fox searchlight pictures made the movie - if you found the plane they too get a load of credit

AE in her day was a 'demi god' for the age of women then

good luck in securing finance - TIGHAR have Nat Geo funding in full or part their project in 2017
rog747 is online now  
Old 26th Mar 2018, 16:48
  #259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
"I cannot understand why someone will not finance a search"

because, regrettably 99% of these sorts of searches find nothing

the sort of firepower Allen & Co can bring , plus the fact that ships sunk at sea often have reasonably accurate positions (for the time) of maybe a few miles or tens of miles. Amelia E could be anywhere in the S Pacific TBH - it's like looking for the MH jet
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2018, 17:18
  #260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 384
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry View Post
"I cannot understand why someone will not finance a search"

because, regrettably 99% of these sorts of searches find nothing

the sort of firepower Allen & Co can bring , plus the fact that ships sunk at sea often have reasonably accurate positions (for the time) of maybe a few miles or tens of miles. Amelia E could be anywhere in the S Pacific TBH - it's like looking for the MH jet
HH
if you don't ask the right folk you don't get - there is some cred here not some half baked notion

secondly DB has some evidence (tangible even ?) that this just may be AE's plane - he has military reports and proof of sightings of wreckage

all he needs now is some money to go forthwith and find it

Last edited by rog747; 26th Mar 2018 at 17:30.
rog747 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.