Amelia Earhart PNG Theory
Silly Old Git
Thank you David perhaps you are right, I certainly never made a cent flying aeroplanes
Have fun on your quest, if you are near the Dero or Yat Klab in Goroka ask for a helo pilot chap, friend of Tinpis .
Have fun on your quest, if you are near the Dero or Yat Klab in Goroka ask for a helo pilot chap, friend of Tinpis .
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep an open mind....
About the Irene-Amelia website; when I discussed the 'Earhart mystery' matter with Tom Crouch of NASM at the Smithsonian Institute, he was forthright in describing how the Smithsonian offers no support to any of the various disappearance theories, even to the point of his admitting,"We're not permitted to." They do however, 'favor' the simple crashed and sank theory. National Geographic, also based in Washington DC follows suit, as it only conveys what private citizens are offering up about Earhart and never commits to supporting any of it. As for anyone's Bill Prymak referral, thanks but no thanks. He has evidenced himself as one dogmatically awry when it comes to Earhart. Half the stuff he says about Gervais and his Irene claim is outright incorrect. Mr. Prymak founded his illustrious 'Amelia Earhart Society' back in 1989, taking over the past membership of the AE Consortium founded by Ron Reuther years before. (Reuther had gained some notoriety and established a relationship with the National Geographic Society after his nursing of, and involvement with Koko, the famous gorilla who learned sign language back in the 1970s.) Reuther continued to be a member. The curious thing to be realized about Bill Prymak, Ric Gillespie, and Elgen Long... is for decades they have remained steadfast as the three most media dominating people when it comes to how the press annually covers the Earhart mystery. Reporters are always steered towards those guys first by their editors. Interestingly, (and although he has historically refused to commit to believing in anything about Earhart other than she turned up missing in 1937) Prymak gobbled up Reuther's past Marshall Islands theory supporters as his main membership constituency, to include making Colonel Reineck and Major Gervais two of the AES's first honorary members. For years he showered them both with praise and adulation, Gervais especially (Joe Klaas too, a good friend of Prymak's) while always showing respect to Gervais regarding his claim about the enigmatic Irene Criagmile (Bolam) having 'possibly' been the former Amelia Earhart. Incredibly, right after Gervais passed away in 2005 Mr. Prymak started decrying Gervais’ many years of research, to especially include his sudden staunch damning of the by then four decades old 'Irene controversy.' He claimed it was finally proven false when it wasn't. (Even Kevin Richlin, the fellow who appeared on the 2006 National Geo 'Unsolved History' show about AE, refused to outright state the Gervais claim was proved 'untrue.') Prymak and his partner, a Ukrainian physicist named Alex Mandel also started telling people how Gervais and Reineck both admitted they were wrong about Irene before they died, and that simply is not true. In Gervais' last filmed interview shortly before he died he still stressed his certain belief of how one of the three 'same identified' Irene Craigmile (Bolam) women could only have been the former AE. Whether she was or wasn't, it's a matter of record Gervais and Reineck both died still believing and stressing she was. Even Reineck was interviewed just before he passed away in September of 2007, and he still avowed how in spite of all nay-sayers one of the three Irene's had been formerly known as Earhart. His entie theory about it appeared flawed, but he expressed his certainty about the Gervais part time and again.
Otherwise it's a tad curious how Bill Prymak, a very wealthy retired construction engineer who in the 1990s established himself as the media's main go-to guy about the Marshalls theory; and Ric Gillespie, who has been the media's go to guy about his Gardner Island (Nikumororo) theory for more than a quarter century, and Elgen Long, Amelia's Sister Muriel's past good friend who receives the most 'polite' media attention always, has also since the 1970s been advocating his simple crashed and sank theory. Muriel had initially cooperated with Fred Goerner of CBS radio who basically introduced the Marshall Islands theory in 1966, and whose reasearch included the Admiral Nimitz admission how it was quietly 'known and documented in Washington' that 'Earhart and her navigator went down in the Marshall Islands and were picked up by Japan; and the Naval Commander Pillsbury quote from 1962 remarking how the real Earhart loss story would "stagger the imagination." In time Muriel evolved to only support Elgen Long's simple crashed and sank theory by the 1980s. (Muriel died in 1998.) Yes... I find it curious how over the years the three fellows of Long, Gillespie, and Prymak have all but dominated the entire Earhart mystery scene, while saying entirely different things about it, while forever commonly dissing the Gervais-Irene claim at the same time. Nothing has ever been solidly proved or disproved about Earhart's loss, other than the world wide recognized common fact of how she and Noonan and their plane were not seen nor heard from again after July 2, 1937. Plus, contrary to what anyone says or implies, the official record shows their radio messages stopping while they were still safely airborne, with what was likely close to four or five hours of fuel left.
I guess all I'm recommending is for people to still try and keep an open mind about Earhart's 1937 disappearance and aftermath. It's quite possible everyone in the public realm, to include Long, Gillespie, and Prymak... who has ever postulated anything about Earhart's final fate thus far remains way off. To add one more item about why one might find the Gervais claim about the Irene he met in 1965 curious... where even the original Irene's still living Son (born 1934) in the past displayed much ambiguity about his mother's true identity, and in 2006 he did admit he holds no photos of his mother pre-dating 1947, and where the film idea came into play, evidently, after he (Swindell) befriended Author Randall Brink and Joe Gervais in the mid 90s and learned there had never been a serious forensic study done on the Gervais Irene claim, he set out to arrange one. After he realized the person who Gervais met in 1965 appeared no where in the photo history of Irene's person prior to the 1940s, yet two other people did, a new window to the controversy had been opened. In 2000 Reineck reviewed the preliminary study results, and by 2002 he ws so taken by it, it inspired him to complete his book “Amelia Earhart Survived.” He also talked Prymak into combining with him for a five thousand dollar investment into the documentary project, and Prymak soon after started demanding his half of the investment back as he felt himself losing his dominance over the Irene-Amelia topic, that he always struggled so hard to maintain. Prymak, Gillespie, and Irene’s and Amelia’s family & past friend connections have been damning the study ever since the plural Irenes discovery was made in 2002. Yet no one, absolutely no one has ever forensically disproved the Gervais claim about the Irene he met. And one of the three Irenes did look like Amelia and was her exact same height. Again, nor Prymak, nor Gillespie, nor the Smithsonian, nor National Geographic, nor anyone else has ever lifted a serious finger to forensically disprove the old Gervais-Irene claim. They avoid it and tell others to avoid it too. See the Irene-Amelia site for more info. Try to take it more seriously where some might persuade others not to.
Otherwise it's a tad curious how Bill Prymak, a very wealthy retired construction engineer who in the 1990s established himself as the media's main go-to guy about the Marshalls theory; and Ric Gillespie, who has been the media's go to guy about his Gardner Island (Nikumororo) theory for more than a quarter century, and Elgen Long, Amelia's Sister Muriel's past good friend who receives the most 'polite' media attention always, has also since the 1970s been advocating his simple crashed and sank theory. Muriel had initially cooperated with Fred Goerner of CBS radio who basically introduced the Marshall Islands theory in 1966, and whose reasearch included the Admiral Nimitz admission how it was quietly 'known and documented in Washington' that 'Earhart and her navigator went down in the Marshall Islands and were picked up by Japan; and the Naval Commander Pillsbury quote from 1962 remarking how the real Earhart loss story would "stagger the imagination." In time Muriel evolved to only support Elgen Long's simple crashed and sank theory by the 1980s. (Muriel died in 1998.) Yes... I find it curious how over the years the three fellows of Long, Gillespie, and Prymak have all but dominated the entire Earhart mystery scene, while saying entirely different things about it, while forever commonly dissing the Gervais-Irene claim at the same time. Nothing has ever been solidly proved or disproved about Earhart's loss, other than the world wide recognized common fact of how she and Noonan and their plane were not seen nor heard from again after July 2, 1937. Plus, contrary to what anyone says or implies, the official record shows their radio messages stopping while they were still safely airborne, with what was likely close to four or five hours of fuel left.
I guess all I'm recommending is for people to still try and keep an open mind about Earhart's 1937 disappearance and aftermath. It's quite possible everyone in the public realm, to include Long, Gillespie, and Prymak... who has ever postulated anything about Earhart's final fate thus far remains way off. To add one more item about why one might find the Gervais claim about the Irene he met in 1965 curious... where even the original Irene's still living Son (born 1934) in the past displayed much ambiguity about his mother's true identity, and in 2006 he did admit he holds no photos of his mother pre-dating 1947, and where the film idea came into play, evidently, after he (Swindell) befriended Author Randall Brink and Joe Gervais in the mid 90s and learned there had never been a serious forensic study done on the Gervais Irene claim, he set out to arrange one. After he realized the person who Gervais met in 1965 appeared no where in the photo history of Irene's person prior to the 1940s, yet two other people did, a new window to the controversy had been opened. In 2000 Reineck reviewed the preliminary study results, and by 2002 he ws so taken by it, it inspired him to complete his book “Amelia Earhart Survived.” He also talked Prymak into combining with him for a five thousand dollar investment into the documentary project, and Prymak soon after started demanding his half of the investment back as he felt himself losing his dominance over the Irene-Amelia topic, that he always struggled so hard to maintain. Prymak, Gillespie, and Irene’s and Amelia’s family & past friend connections have been damning the study ever since the plural Irenes discovery was made in 2002. Yet no one, absolutely no one has ever forensically disproved the Gervais claim about the Irene he met. And one of the three Irenes did look like Amelia and was her exact same height. Again, nor Prymak, nor Gillespie, nor the Smithsonian, nor National Geographic, nor anyone else has ever lifted a serious finger to forensically disprove the old Gervais-Irene claim. They avoid it and tell others to avoid it too. See the Irene-Amelia site for more info. Try to take it more seriously where some might persuade others not to.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If your Dad was in Lae and got out before the gentlemen from the Rising Sun arrived, he was lucky
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: < 10ft AGL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm...this caught my eye today, seems this group is pretty keen on the idea of the castaway theory based on hypothetical reports from the Brits 
. Ah I wish that you're theory David could be proved... 
Earhart theory to be tested - World - NZ Herald News
. Ah I wish that you're theory David could be proved... Earhart theory to be tested - World - NZ Herald News
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amelia Earhart Project in PNG
J5 PiperCubFan:
One thing about Bill Prymak that I do know and that is he is not about telling porkies.... A few years back Bill told me (and a few others) that he and Joe Gervais visited Gertrude Hessien for an interview and she told them of a Mary Eubank who knew Irene Bolam from childhood and who had been seeing Bolam on and off. Gertrude suggested that they visit Mary on their way back to the airport but Gervais would not go and swore (pressured) Bill to secrecy as it was obvious that if Eubank knew Bolam for years and has seen her regularly until she dies then Bolam could not be Earhart.
The cross-reference to this is as I said before, Bolam worked in a bank in NYC during WWII so how could she be in Weishien Internment Camp in China, or in Garapan Jail on Saipan, or in the Emperors Palace in Tokyo or any other place where conspiracy theorists have her incarcerated, located, comatose or broadcasting as one of the Tokyo Rose gang, or whatever; if Bolam was working in a Bank in New York during WWII ?
SEAL 11:
I discussed the Nikumaroro Hypothesis in post No. 10 and gave four good reasons why it has faults. I think you would agree that the Electra certainly appears to have been late at the half-way point where the USCG Ontario was located with an average Groundspeed of only 120 Smph for the distance LAE-ONT of 1278 Statute Miles after 10.5 hours. Yes, I know some people say the ship was the SS Myrtlebank but the rate of acceleration needed from the PR at Nukumanu Atoll (at 0718GMT) and the final G/S at arrival over that ship's position (about the same distance as Nauru Island from Nukumanu) cannot be achieved in the "obvious" headwind that was affecting the progress of the Electra.
Therefore, it stands to reason (and logic) that if she only "thinks" she is at or lateral to Howland (by the inference of the 1912GMT call: "We MUST be on you but cannot see you"), then she does not know for sure that she is there. She has to be there to get that 157-337 sunline, which as I keep saying, is in TRUE degrees and Aviators do not work in TRUE degrees and even if they do, they do not broadcast in TRUE degrees and neither do ATC guys.
Look at the Flight Plan time, she said it would take her over 18 hours to get to HOW. She always planned for the magical 150 Smph G/S (if she could get it). She had power settings for weights which gave her that speed in still air for those particular settings. Her flight planning consisted of dividing the distance by 150 and getting an hour figure. Commander Williams' chart shows a NIL wind time LAE-HOW of 17 Hours and 1 minute. Divide 2556 by 150, that's what you get. All she did was feed in the wind. So she used the low end forecast of 12 Smph Easterly and divided 2556 by 138 = 18.52 Hours. 18 Hours 31 minutes.
If she is calling at 1912 GMT, then she is late and she has "missed" the sunrise at Howland and the sun's azimuth is no longer at 067 degrees TRUE, the degree number falls off as time passes and the sun sweeps the sky. By the time they got there (they did not get there...remember !), it would have been more like 138-318 degrees TRUE.
So, I say that as her approach heading to HOW was supposed to be at 068 MAGNETIC, Fred Noonan may have told her to steer 067 MAG due to the wind which by all accounts from records was from the N-East. So if she now, at 1912GMT starts a search, she is going to turn perpendicular to her course and that means 157-337 which is what she called, simple as that, it was not a sunline at all. "We are on the line 157-337", not "We are on the sunline 157-337".......
Regards,
David Billings
One thing about Bill Prymak that I do know and that is he is not about telling porkies.... A few years back Bill told me (and a few others) that he and Joe Gervais visited Gertrude Hessien for an interview and she told them of a Mary Eubank who knew Irene Bolam from childhood and who had been seeing Bolam on and off. Gertrude suggested that they visit Mary on their way back to the airport but Gervais would not go and swore (pressured) Bill to secrecy as it was obvious that if Eubank knew Bolam for years and has seen her regularly until she dies then Bolam could not be Earhart.
The cross-reference to this is as I said before, Bolam worked in a bank in NYC during WWII so how could she be in Weishien Internment Camp in China, or in Garapan Jail on Saipan, or in the Emperors Palace in Tokyo or any other place where conspiracy theorists have her incarcerated, located, comatose or broadcasting as one of the Tokyo Rose gang, or whatever; if Bolam was working in a Bank in New York during WWII ?
SEAL 11:
I discussed the Nikumaroro Hypothesis in post No. 10 and gave four good reasons why it has faults. I think you would agree that the Electra certainly appears to have been late at the half-way point where the USCG Ontario was located with an average Groundspeed of only 120 Smph for the distance LAE-ONT of 1278 Statute Miles after 10.5 hours. Yes, I know some people say the ship was the SS Myrtlebank but the rate of acceleration needed from the PR at Nukumanu Atoll (at 0718GMT) and the final G/S at arrival over that ship's position (about the same distance as Nauru Island from Nukumanu) cannot be achieved in the "obvious" headwind that was affecting the progress of the Electra.
Therefore, it stands to reason (and logic) that if she only "thinks" she is at or lateral to Howland (by the inference of the 1912GMT call: "We MUST be on you but cannot see you"), then she does not know for sure that she is there. She has to be there to get that 157-337 sunline, which as I keep saying, is in TRUE degrees and Aviators do not work in TRUE degrees and even if they do, they do not broadcast in TRUE degrees and neither do ATC guys.
Look at the Flight Plan time, she said it would take her over 18 hours to get to HOW. She always planned for the magical 150 Smph G/S (if she could get it). She had power settings for weights which gave her that speed in still air for those particular settings. Her flight planning consisted of dividing the distance by 150 and getting an hour figure. Commander Williams' chart shows a NIL wind time LAE-HOW of 17 Hours and 1 minute. Divide 2556 by 150, that's what you get. All she did was feed in the wind. So she used the low end forecast of 12 Smph Easterly and divided 2556 by 138 = 18.52 Hours. 18 Hours 31 minutes.
If she is calling at 1912 GMT, then she is late and she has "missed" the sunrise at Howland and the sun's azimuth is no longer at 067 degrees TRUE, the degree number falls off as time passes and the sun sweeps the sky. By the time they got there (they did not get there...remember !), it would have been more like 138-318 degrees TRUE.
So, I say that as her approach heading to HOW was supposed to be at 068 MAGNETIC, Fred Noonan may have told her to steer 067 MAG due to the wind which by all accounts from records was from the N-East. So if she now, at 1912GMT starts a search, she is going to turn perpendicular to her course and that means 157-337 which is what she called, simple as that, it was not a sunline at all. "We are on the line 157-337", not "We are on the sunline 157-337".......
Regards,
David Billings
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: tasman
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rog747; Howland & Baker
I applied to US Dept of the Interior to visit the above by sea in the 90s. An emphatic NO because of sea bird colonies having had no contact with humans. Huge fines if breached.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can say David that I am excited for you. If you find enough cash, get your chopper with required gear, head in there and find it, then you were right and everyone else was wrong and how good will you feel!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: < 10ft AGL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi David,
Just wondering if you were still considering a PayPal set up on the website? I reckon there are a few here that would put some dough in for a good cause. Even with a bit of marketing, who knows!?
Anyway keep up the good work!
~S.E.A.L.11~
Just wondering if you were still considering a PayPal set up on the website? I reckon there are a few here that would put some dough in for a good cause. Even with a bit of marketing, who knows!?
Anyway keep up the good work!
~S.E.A.L.11~
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering if you were still considering a PayPal set up on the website? I reckon there are a few here that would put some dough in for a good cause. Even with a bit of marketing, who knows!?
Not because I doubt the veracity of David's research and conclusions but because having flown many thousands of kilometres in PNG with geophysically equipped helicopters and processed the data, I have a good understanding of their capabilities.
The current state of the art system that can be flown in the country mentioned couldn't find a B747 if it were hidden from view let alone a possibly severely fragmented Lockheed Electra.
It is quite irresponsible of ANY geophysical contractor to claim that they can and I would say that they're driven by the commercial gain only, knowing full well that it is not feasible.. If they're that confident, why don't they fund the flying themselves and reap the publicity benefits?
I wish it were otherwise, but that is not going to make it happen.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wondered how long you were going to sit in silence on this matter Zeebee.
From what I have gathered sitting in 210s cutting never ending lines up and down the country, I had the same opinion as you have expressed. I'm glad someone that actually knows what he is talking about has expressed what I was thinking.
From what I have gathered sitting in 210s cutting never ending lines up and down the country, I had the same opinion as you have expressed. I'm glad someone that actually knows what he is talking about has expressed what I was thinking.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wondered how long you were going to sit in silence on this matter Zeebee.
From what I have gathered sitting in 210s cutting never ending lines up and down the country, I had the same opinion as you have expressed. I'm glad someone that actually knows what he is talking about has expressed what I was thinking.
From what I have gathered sitting in 210s cutting never ending lines up and down the country, I had the same opinion as you have expressed. I'm glad someone that actually knows what he is talking about has expressed what I was thinking.
I thought I had made the point before, but can't find the reference.
My reason for piping up again is that there is a call for people to put up some funds for this type of search and I feel some-one qualified has to warn them that it will be a waste of money.
David responded to my original post and said that he'd been assured by the company involved that it indeed could.
Since I was involved with "that" company and was one of the dissenters, my objection was over-ruled in the interest of commercial gain.
I maintain that any geo outfit who reckon that they can detect such a response, ought to do it as a public service. However, in this case, I wouldn't.
We actually did that some years ago when we ran a helicopter platform over Sydney Harbour in search of the missing Japanese Midget sub.
Unfortunately, we weren't looking in the right spot as it turned out, but we were reasonably confident of detecting it if it wasn't too fragmented.
But that was a 1,200 ton bit of steel not a 2800kg bit of aluminium with almost NO residual magnetic signature.
Currently, there is no known airborne surveying platform that can detect this target in a practical and economic manner.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Earhart Project in PNG
Hello again to all who are interested in this project.
I've a had a log-in problem lately but it seems to be OK now.
First off:
VH-XXX:
I was a bit irked by your supercilious remark of two months ago that "I will be right and everyone else will be wrong". It is not a case of that, ending the mystery and perhaps actually finding out what did go wrong out there will be reward enough. I have been at this for 15 years now and I will say this to you: If you had the evidence we have, you would be at it too mate. If you want to partake in meaningful discussions, please do, but keep remarks like that to yourself and if there was "perhaps" any jealousy in it too, you can keep that to yourself as well. Thankyou.
SEAL 11
Thanks for reviving the thread. I couldn't find it (so to speak).
ZEEBEE
Thanks for your forthright statements. If that's the way it is then we have to have a re-think.
It was in 1994 that I and Don Angwin sat down with the CEO of GeoScience in Perth and discussed how it could be done. He assured Don and I that with the technology he had then that he could find the ferrous in the engines to a depth of 85 feet by a chopper towing a bird over the trees. He offered the data processing for free if we could raise the required 100K as it was then. Was that all pure BS ?
Since then technology has improved by leaps and bounds from what I read and the chopper with a boom can get closer to the trees. Data processing apparently now consists of removing the hard drive from the gear, taking it to the hotel room plugging it into a laptop and we get the Lat/Long in the morning.
I have spoken with Fugro on a few occasions. I say "I" have spoken with them, they seem not to want to talk until I show them the dough. This is broadly speaking along the same line as you infer.
Which company were you with, the former or the latter ?
There is about 500 lbs. of ferrous in each engine which is the crankshaft, the bob-weights, the con-rods, the clinder barrels and heads. Two concentrated blobs about 30 metres apart. There are also the ferrous parts in the landing gear struts and steel tubing of the mounts.
None of that would show ? What about the Magnetometer work done in PNG in the sixties and seventies where "it is said" WWII wrecks showed up as pinpoints on the scans ? BS too ?
Latest update
Two interested parties at the moment. We will see how that goes.
Back in 1936 when Earhart took delivery on C/N 1055, she and Kelly Johnson of Lockheed ran a series of flight tests to see what the Electra could do with some serious fuel management. This resulted in Lockheed Report 487 "Long Range Study of a Bi-Motor Airplane", the tests being done to see how far it could go on 1200 USG. The results show a range of 4100 to 4500 Statute Miles on that tankage but of course she never did fly with that amount for shortly after the tests they took out one tank and the tankage then became 1151 USG.
The tests seem to have been done at "Lean of Peak" and Johnson was a bit concerned about CHT's and figured that they may have to put shutters in front of the cylinders (like the Russians did on some of their radials)
There are three examples of fuel loads that we know about which would have resulted in extreme ranges:
1. OAK-HNL in March 1937. 2400 Sm on 947 USG. AE stated she had over four hours of fuel left if she missed Oahu. That would be for searching at low level.
2. HNL-HOW in March 1937. This flight did not take place as she groundlooped on T.O. The flight was supposed to be for 1900 Sm but with the contingency of the Gilberts making 2500 Sm possible on the 900 USG.
3. LAE-HOW, the final flight. 2556 Sm plus The Gilberts as a contingency which would be another 600 Sm making 3156 SM on 1100 USG.
Looking at Report 487 and Johnson advice to AE if she encountered adverse winds "Lean off into adverse winds..." we can say that she met an "adverse" wind at Nukumanu Atoll when she reported 23 Knots but did not give a direction.
Take -off from LAE was at 0000GMT 2nd July.
From my workings of the flight which from "The Chater Report" (on the www.) went by way of LAE-CHOISEUL Is-NUKUMANU the sector CHO-NUK is on a track of 040 degrees TRUE. They ended up some 19 miles to the West of NUK, obviously blown off the track by an abeam wind. A simple vector diagram shows that Noonan used an Easterly of 12 Smph and if you use the 25 Smph reported and do the vector again you end up where they ended up. So the higher wind value was an Easterly.
If it was 25 mph Easterly at 7,000 feet what "could" it have been at 10,000 or 12,000 (Lovell reports the Cruise at 12 K) going into night ???
They were obviously late at the USCG Ontario at the half-way point at 1030GMT
Running the numbers again on fuel you can see that the turnback fuel available at around 2015GMT, twenty and a quarter hours from T.O would be around 300 USG.
On the OAK-HNL flight in March 1937, AE had not wanted to arrive at Wheeler Field on Oahu in the dark. On page 37 of her book "Last Flight" she says (in her own handwiriting it is on Page 36): "We are throttled down so as not to arrive in the dark. At 10000 feet and 120IAS we are burning less than 20 USG of gas."
I say that faced with no land where she thought HOW would be, she searched and then turned for the Gilberts. If you arrive overhead of the Gilberts with around 240 USG in tanks and you know that at 10,000 feet with 120 indicated that you will burn "less than" 20 USGPH, you KNOW that your endurance is 12 hours (MAX) to tanks dry, say 11 Hours Max to unusable fuel. If AE turned back at 2015 after searching and headed for the Gilberts and saw them at 2200GMT she can endure until around 0900GMT on the 3rd July.
Looking at the graphs for a weight of 9,500 lbs at 10000ft and 120 mph you get the H.P required and if you use an SFC of 0.46 the consumption is 18USGPH if you use an SFC of 0.50 (richer) you get 20 USGPH.
At 6:31pm, 6:43pm and 6:54pm RABAUL local time on 3rd July '37, (0831 to 0854 GMT) NAURU radio Station VKT heard calls on 6210 Kcs. The operator said the voice sounded the same as the voice he heard the night before (AE's call at 1030GMT "Ship in sight) but there was no hum of the aircraft in the background. He could not make out what the voice was saying. If the aircraft was near Rabaul it is still within VKT's reception range at night.
Who would be airborne over the SW Pacific and Tx'ing on 6210Kcs at that time of night ? Sounds to me like someone trying to raise a Ground Station. Those times are at last light and darkness in the Rabaul area.
0000GMT/2 to 0900GMT/3 is 33 Hours.
Any opinions/suggestions/remarks on this ?
Regards,
David Billings.
I've a had a log-in problem lately but it seems to be OK now.
First off:
VH-XXX:
I was a bit irked by your supercilious remark of two months ago that "I will be right and everyone else will be wrong". It is not a case of that, ending the mystery and perhaps actually finding out what did go wrong out there will be reward enough. I have been at this for 15 years now and I will say this to you: If you had the evidence we have, you would be at it too mate. If you want to partake in meaningful discussions, please do, but keep remarks like that to yourself and if there was "perhaps" any jealousy in it too, you can keep that to yourself as well. Thankyou.
SEAL 11
Thanks for reviving the thread. I couldn't find it (so to speak).
ZEEBEE
Thanks for your forthright statements. If that's the way it is then we have to have a re-think.
It was in 1994 that I and Don Angwin sat down with the CEO of GeoScience in Perth and discussed how it could be done. He assured Don and I that with the technology he had then that he could find the ferrous in the engines to a depth of 85 feet by a chopper towing a bird over the trees. He offered the data processing for free if we could raise the required 100K as it was then. Was that all pure BS ?
Since then technology has improved by leaps and bounds from what I read and the chopper with a boom can get closer to the trees. Data processing apparently now consists of removing the hard drive from the gear, taking it to the hotel room plugging it into a laptop and we get the Lat/Long in the morning.
I have spoken with Fugro on a few occasions. I say "I" have spoken with them, they seem not to want to talk until I show them the dough. This is broadly speaking along the same line as you infer.
Which company were you with, the former or the latter ?
There is about 500 lbs. of ferrous in each engine which is the crankshaft, the bob-weights, the con-rods, the clinder barrels and heads. Two concentrated blobs about 30 metres apart. There are also the ferrous parts in the landing gear struts and steel tubing of the mounts.
None of that would show ? What about the Magnetometer work done in PNG in the sixties and seventies where "it is said" WWII wrecks showed up as pinpoints on the scans ? BS too ?
Latest update
Two interested parties at the moment. We will see how that goes.
Back in 1936 when Earhart took delivery on C/N 1055, she and Kelly Johnson of Lockheed ran a series of flight tests to see what the Electra could do with some serious fuel management. This resulted in Lockheed Report 487 "Long Range Study of a Bi-Motor Airplane", the tests being done to see how far it could go on 1200 USG. The results show a range of 4100 to 4500 Statute Miles on that tankage but of course she never did fly with that amount for shortly after the tests they took out one tank and the tankage then became 1151 USG.
The tests seem to have been done at "Lean of Peak" and Johnson was a bit concerned about CHT's and figured that they may have to put shutters in front of the cylinders (like the Russians did on some of their radials)
There are three examples of fuel loads that we know about which would have resulted in extreme ranges:
1. OAK-HNL in March 1937. 2400 Sm on 947 USG. AE stated she had over four hours of fuel left if she missed Oahu. That would be for searching at low level.
2. HNL-HOW in March 1937. This flight did not take place as she groundlooped on T.O. The flight was supposed to be for 1900 Sm but with the contingency of the Gilberts making 2500 Sm possible on the 900 USG.
3. LAE-HOW, the final flight. 2556 Sm plus The Gilberts as a contingency which would be another 600 Sm making 3156 SM on 1100 USG.
Looking at Report 487 and Johnson advice to AE if she encountered adverse winds "Lean off into adverse winds..." we can say that she met an "adverse" wind at Nukumanu Atoll when she reported 23 Knots but did not give a direction.
Take -off from LAE was at 0000GMT 2nd July.
From my workings of the flight which from "The Chater Report" (on the www.) went by way of LAE-CHOISEUL Is-NUKUMANU the sector CHO-NUK is on a track of 040 degrees TRUE. They ended up some 19 miles to the West of NUK, obviously blown off the track by an abeam wind. A simple vector diagram shows that Noonan used an Easterly of 12 Smph and if you use the 25 Smph reported and do the vector again you end up where they ended up. So the higher wind value was an Easterly.
If it was 25 mph Easterly at 7,000 feet what "could" it have been at 10,000 or 12,000 (Lovell reports the Cruise at 12 K) going into night ???
They were obviously late at the USCG Ontario at the half-way point at 1030GMT
Running the numbers again on fuel you can see that the turnback fuel available at around 2015GMT, twenty and a quarter hours from T.O would be around 300 USG.
On the OAK-HNL flight in March 1937, AE had not wanted to arrive at Wheeler Field on Oahu in the dark. On page 37 of her book "Last Flight" she says (in her own handwiriting it is on Page 36): "We are throttled down so as not to arrive in the dark. At 10000 feet and 120IAS we are burning less than 20 USG of gas."
I say that faced with no land where she thought HOW would be, she searched and then turned for the Gilberts. If you arrive overhead of the Gilberts with around 240 USG in tanks and you know that at 10,000 feet with 120 indicated that you will burn "less than" 20 USGPH, you KNOW that your endurance is 12 hours (MAX) to tanks dry, say 11 Hours Max to unusable fuel. If AE turned back at 2015 after searching and headed for the Gilberts and saw them at 2200GMT she can endure until around 0900GMT on the 3rd July.
Looking at the graphs for a weight of 9,500 lbs at 10000ft and 120 mph you get the H.P required and if you use an SFC of 0.46 the consumption is 18USGPH if you use an SFC of 0.50 (richer) you get 20 USGPH.
At 6:31pm, 6:43pm and 6:54pm RABAUL local time on 3rd July '37, (0831 to 0854 GMT) NAURU radio Station VKT heard calls on 6210 Kcs. The operator said the voice sounded the same as the voice he heard the night before (AE's call at 1030GMT "Ship in sight) but there was no hum of the aircraft in the background. He could not make out what the voice was saying. If the aircraft was near Rabaul it is still within VKT's reception range at night.
Who would be airborne over the SW Pacific and Tx'ing on 6210Kcs at that time of night ? Sounds to me like someone trying to raise a Ground Station. Those times are at last light and darkness in the Rabaul area.
0000GMT/2 to 0900GMT/3 is 33 Hours.
Any opinions/suggestions/remarks on this ?
Regards,
David Billings.
Last edited by David Billings; 25th Feb 2018 at 12:14. Reason: "examples"
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was in 1994 that I and Don Angwin sat down with the CEO of GeoScience in Perth and discussed how it could be done. He assured Don and I that with the technology he had then that he could find the ferrous in the engines to a depth of 85 feet by a chopper towing a bird over the trees. He offered the data processing for free if we could raise the required 100K as it was then. Was that all pure BS ?
Since then technology has improved by leaps and bounds from what I read and the chopper with a boom can get closer to the trees. Data processing apparently now consists of removing the hard drive from the gear, taking it to the hotel room plugging it into a laptop and we get the Lat/Long in the morning.
I have spoken with Fugro on a few occasions. I say "I" have spoken with them, they seem not to want to talk until I show them the dough. This is broadly speaking along the same line as you infer.
Which company were you with, the former or the latter ?
There is about 500 lbs. of ferrous in each engine which is the crankshaft, the bob-weights, the con-rods, the clinder barrels and heads. Two concentrated blobs about 30 metres apart. There are also the ferrous parts in the landing gear struts and steel tubing of the mounts.
None of that would show ? What about the Magnetometer work done in PNG in the sixties and seventies where "it is said" WWII wrecks showed up as pinpoints on the scans ? BS too ?
Since then technology has improved by leaps and bounds from what I read and the chopper with a boom can get closer to the trees. Data processing apparently now consists of removing the hard drive from the gear, taking it to the hotel room plugging it into a laptop and we get the Lat/Long in the morning.
I have spoken with Fugro on a few occasions. I say "I" have spoken with them, they seem not to want to talk until I show them the dough. This is broadly speaking along the same line as you infer.
Which company were you with, the former or the latter ?
There is about 500 lbs. of ferrous in each engine which is the crankshaft, the bob-weights, the con-rods, the clinder barrels and heads. Two concentrated blobs about 30 metres apart. There are also the ferrous parts in the landing gear struts and steel tubing of the mounts.
None of that would show ? What about the Magnetometer work done in PNG in the sixties and seventies where "it is said" WWII wrecks showed up as pinpoints on the scans ? BS too ?
To answer your questions;
I had associations with Geoscience years ago and worked for Fugro for five years or so after they took over the company I worked for.
World Geoscience never let reality stand in the way for a fast buck and their offer to process for free was meaningless since about five hours work was all that would have been required and they would have padded that into their flying costs anyway....modus operandi for them.
Yes things have progressed in leaps and bounds, but not far enough.
A "bird mounted" magnetic gradiometer is still the best technology to find the magnetic components, but unless you know within a square kilometer (for sure) where the aircraft was, the cost of doing so would be horrendous.
Of course, if you knew that, then finding it by a ground party would be more certain, quicker and cheaper.
The problem re the ferrous components is that they don't have a lot of permanent magnetic properties and hence little signature.
That's why it's sister ship the Lockheed Hudson made such a good magnetic sensing platforms in the fifties.
In fact, with a 100ft towline, the Hudson virtually became magnetically invisible to the instrumentation!
The Hudson as I recall was even larger than the Electra.
Re the WWII wrecks, well I did much of those surveys and the only ones I ever saw were the landing craft on the beaches which did show up (many tons of steel).
To my knowledge no aircraft have been found by the magnetics other than those already known about.
We flew over a B25 at Madang that was just under water, and if we didn't know it was there we would have missed it completely on the magnetic readings.
I could go on, but would be happy to talk to you regarding the issues if you wish to PM me.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Earhart project in PNG
ZEEBEE
There is absolutely no problem about raining on my parade.... I only want the correct information and if GeoScience as it was then fed me BS all those years ago and the other mob have kept quiet and hoped I'd feed them money, well thay can keep hoping if their BS is the same.
We all enjoy it in there when we do get the chance to get into the bush and if it means more ground searches then that's the way it will be but I may have to be carried around in a sedan chair....
I have PM'd you.
Regards,
DB.
There is absolutely no problem about raining on my parade.... I only want the correct information and if GeoScience as it was then fed me BS all those years ago and the other mob have kept quiet and hoped I'd feed them money, well thay can keep hoping if their BS is the same.
We all enjoy it in there when we do get the chance to get into the bush and if it means more ground searches then that's the way it will be but I may have to be carried around in a sedan chair....
I have PM'd you.
Regards,
DB.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Perth
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amusing. There isn't a word in that Discovery Channel article that's less than five, maybe 10 years old. The exact same article--"Earhart's Final Resting Place Believed Found," or whatever the actual title was, could have been written in the year 2000.
Not Ric Gillespie's fault, though. Some blogger simply did some Internet research to write something coincident with the opening of the "Amelia" film. The reviews of which, by the way, have been universally near-totally negative.
Not Ric Gillespie's fault, though. Some blogger simply did some Internet research to write something coincident with the opening of the "Amelia" film. The reviews of which, by the way, have been universally near-totally negative.
amelia movie
saw the new amelia film in london last week, was very good...for a bio-pic
i liked it and the score/costumes etc...
hows things going with png theory david?
would love to know more
rgds rog
i liked it and the score/costumes etc...
hows things going with png theory david?
would love to know more
rgds rog
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amelia Earhart PNG Theory
Rog747:
We will be going in again this year (2010) and I am presently sweating on some funding coming our way for the trip.
No more evidence has turned up, I think we have exhausted the available information, except to say that a correspondent of mine did find a newspaper article from a 1937 U.S. newspaper which stated that "Miss Earhart plans to fly direct from Dakar to Aden...." which is a distance of 4300 miles and the article said over 28 hours of flight time required. Some other newspapers also carried the story.
I have seen an inference to this before in Clarence Williams strip maps and if you divide the distance by the "magic" Flight Planned groundspeed of 150 mph you do get the 28+ Hours required.
In the event she did not do this due to adverse winds but the intent to fly that distance means that the Electra was capable of that distance and also of that endurance, ie; particularly, it was capable of the range.
Regards,
David Billings.
We will be going in again this year (2010) and I am presently sweating on some funding coming our way for the trip.
No more evidence has turned up, I think we have exhausted the available information, except to say that a correspondent of mine did find a newspaper article from a 1937 U.S. newspaper which stated that "Miss Earhart plans to fly direct from Dakar to Aden...." which is a distance of 4300 miles and the article said over 28 hours of flight time required. Some other newspapers also carried the story.
I have seen an inference to this before in Clarence Williams strip maps and if you divide the distance by the "magic" Flight Planned groundspeed of 150 mph you do get the 28+ Hours required.
In the event she did not do this due to adverse winds but the intent to fly that distance means that the Electra was capable of that distance and also of that endurance, ie; particularly, it was capable of the range.
Regards,
David Billings.
dave billings
a long time has past since your last posting march 2010 but i see you wrote on
another site in jan 2012 so i hope you are fit and well,
u mentioned in 2010 you may go back to PNG to search again...
any news and updates most welcome
regards
another site in jan 2012 so i hope you are fit and well,
u mentioned in 2010 you may go back to PNG to search again...
any news and updates most welcome
regards
From Wiki, this seems to be latest news of the search for AE -
On March 20, 2012, the US State Department and TIGHAR together announced that TIGHAR is launching a new search based on the re-evaluation of a 1937 photograph taken of the reef at Nikumaroro. Called "Niku 7" and endorsed by Dr. Robert Ballard, the expedition will embark in July 2012 to undertake an underwater search off Nikumaroro.
On March 20, 2012, the US State Department and TIGHAR together announced that TIGHAR is launching a new search based on the re-evaluation of a 1937 photograph taken of the reef at Nikumaroro. Called "Niku 7" and endorsed by Dr. Robert Ballard, the expedition will embark in July 2012 to undertake an underwater search off Nikumaroro.