Amelia Earhart PNG Theory
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do not dismiss David too quickly - he's been on it for a while
With a bit more direct information from David, quite a bit in fact, I posted this in 2016 : https://www.pprune.org/9574746-post91.html.
MJG
Still waiting for my numbers to appear on the winning list each Sunday.
MJG
Still waiting for my numbers to appear on the winning list each Sunday.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
She only had an hour left...
Greg47 says: "She had a maximum of an hour when she commenced her search along the nth south line."
To be able to say specifically that the Electra had a maximum of one hour fuel left under the circumstance quoted above, Greg47 must have done fuel work participate to the usage by Earhart as the manager of the engines. Other researchers say she had four hours of fuel remaining after the line search was completed , which completion, we do assume was at 2014 GMT.
I am not going to ask Greg47 how he came to that conclusion for no doubt he will not answer.
It is a little indeterminate exactly how much fuel the Electra did carry for most state "1100 US Gallons" and to add to that we have Robert Iredale in Lae who supplied the fuel saying he topped off all tanks before they left, meaning there would be 1151 USG total on engines start. Even that 40 gallons after the ground usage in taxying would add another hour at Cruise Power to Greg47's one hour.
Was 2014 GMT the last Tx made by Earhart ? I think it unlikely and Itasca going frantic on the radio may have blocked her short transmissions but as written in the website, Fred Goerner wrote in his book of a US Navy signal where a call was heard by Nauru which can be timed at 2200 GMT of: "Land in sight ahead", which would fit very nicely with a sighting of The Gilberts or one of the two islands before The Gilberts on activating her Contingency Plan. That would mean 2.5 Hours after 1912 GMT., on Greg47's figuring...
Getting back to the aircraft type.... if the wreck was not the Electra. Can anyone suggest an aircraft which would fit the bill... Any aircraft with P&W engines can be called out as the culprit and we will deal with each one.
The weirdest aircraft that has been mentioned so far (a few years ago) was the German Dornier Do17 (the fabled "Flying Pencil")....that, by an ex-Colonel of the USAF, no less. Can anyone find a weirder and more eligible aircraft than that ?
Greg47 says: "She had a maximum of an hour when she commenced her search along the nth south line."
To be able to say specifically that the Electra had a maximum of one hour fuel left under the circumstance quoted above, Greg47 must have done fuel work participate to the usage by Earhart as the manager of the engines. Other researchers say she had four hours of fuel remaining after the line search was completed , which completion, we do assume was at 2014 GMT.
I am not going to ask Greg47 how he came to that conclusion for no doubt he will not answer.
It is a little indeterminate exactly how much fuel the Electra did carry for most state "1100 US Gallons" and to add to that we have Robert Iredale in Lae who supplied the fuel saying he topped off all tanks before they left, meaning there would be 1151 USG total on engines start. Even that 40 gallons after the ground usage in taxying would add another hour at Cruise Power to Greg47's one hour.
Was 2014 GMT the last Tx made by Earhart ? I think it unlikely and Itasca going frantic on the radio may have blocked her short transmissions but as written in the website, Fred Goerner wrote in his book of a US Navy signal where a call was heard by Nauru which can be timed at 2200 GMT of: "Land in sight ahead", which would fit very nicely with a sighting of The Gilberts or one of the two islands before The Gilberts on activating her Contingency Plan. That would mean 2.5 Hours after 1912 GMT., on Greg47's figuring...
Getting back to the aircraft type.... if the wreck was not the Electra. Can anyone suggest an aircraft which would fit the bill... Any aircraft with P&W engines can be called out as the culprit and we will deal with each one.
The weirdest aircraft that has been mentioned so far (a few years ago) was the German Dornier Do17 (the fabled "Flying Pencil")....that, by an ex-Colonel of the USAF, no less. Can anyone find a weirder and more eligible aircraft than that ?
Last edited by David Billings; 21st Feb 2018 at 04:42.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Food for Thought
I see no-one has ventured to provide a possibility of another type aircraft being lodged in the jungle as an alternate to an Electra 10E after over 350 views of the thread, since I posted the request for readers to do so if they wished…..
In regard to “possible” other aircraft types that the wreck “may be”, I recently went through the list again. I followed the Pratt & Whitney website which lists the Aircraft Types that Wasps were fitted to (all designations of Wasps that is) and I also followed the Wikipedia site which has the subject of P & W Wasp and which also contains list of aircraft types. I came to the same conclusion that I came to many years ago that there is no alternative aircraft type which could fit the wreck powered by two R1340 S3H1 “Civil” or “Commercial” engines as against the “Military” designation of AN-1.
The nearest example of an aircraft type that comes close is the Boeing Model 247 but it was powered by the R-1340 S1H1 or the AN-1 Wasp. There is no mention of S3H1’s being used to power the Boeing 247. The USAAF did use 27 of them which were impressed into service but 19 of those were returned “Surplus to Requirements” in 1944. No knowledge of what happened to the other eight…. (possible losses ?) but it does not fit anyway. In any case if used it would be camouflage painted. I can find no record of the type in New Guinea.
I also want to openly discuss here an alternative explanation of how “600 H.P. S3H1 C/N1055” came to be on the map. I do this so as to “get it out of the way” in case it is raised. This alternative explanation was given by “the Historic Aircraft Recovery Forum ” many years ago and the writer wrote that “The Americans” gave “The Australian Army” those numbers and letters as a means of identifying the wreckage they had seen in case it was Earhart’s.
Now before I discuss this, I will take you back to when I interviewed the man who found the Metal Tag: Keith Nurse. Keith said that when he found the tag hanging by wire from the engine mount tubing at the back of the detached engine, he took it off the tubing and looked at it and what he saw was “a string of letters and numbers” which did not mean anything to him so he put the tag in his shirt pocket, intending to hand it in with the patrol report. So, that little thought of: “a string of letters and numbers” was in his mind, on site, before any news was given to their Unit that they had found aircraft wreckage.
Now, if “the Americans” had received information about an engine being found and had NOT been sent “600 H/P S3H1 C/N1055” and then considered in the knowledge that the engine was just a “Pratt & Whitney engine” as the Warrant Officer had said he saw Pratt & Whitney somewhere but could not remember precisely where. Why then would the Americans Army say the engine was a “Wasp”, as they had done back in a signal to the Australian Unit….and it was not one of theirs. That is strange because the USAAF were using P&W Engines in New Guinea on many types of aircraft, they must have been sent some detail which allowed them to identify the engine as a "Wasp" and not a "Twin Wasp" as this was the powerplant for several aircraft types in use in New Guinea.
“IF” they had considered that it could be Earhart’s aircraft what would they do and what would they give as a request in any return signal ?
I suggest that if this thought had occurred in the minds of the American Military, they would gather information about the Earhart Electra and give as much detail as they could concerning salient features which would provide sufficient detail for the Australian Unit to properly identify the wreck and this would be accompanied by a request that if possible the Australian Unit go back and relocate the wreck and provide an answer for the American Military. IF that return back to find it was not possible, then the U.S. Army would send someone themselves.
IF the American Military did this, what would those details of the Aircraft encompass ?
I suggest the information would have been on these lines:
“The wreckage may be a Lockheed Electra aircraft bearing the Registration NR16020 in large black lettering and numbers on the wing top surface and bottom surface. This Registration is also on the two vertical fins at the back of the aircraft. The fuselage will have a plate in the cockpit with the Serial Number 1055. The aircraft has two engines and propellers. The Engines are Pratt & Whitney Wasp engines with Serial Numbers 6149 and 6150. The aircraft is unpainted except for some red paint on the front of the wings . A marked distinguishing feature is that the fuselage Cabin of the plane is filled with fuel tanks. There were two crew members on the aircraft.”
Would that be a fair appraisal of information to describe the Electra ?
If that had been so, then the members of “D” Company who were read the reply from the U.S. Army would not have been told, “The Americans say it is not one of their engines”.
I ask readers to compare that information with a string of letters and numbers such as “600 H/P S3H1 C/N1055” which does not contain the obvious recognition feature of the Registration NR16020 which is the Primary outside piece of identification for the Electra to anyone chancing upon the wreck and the Fuel Tanks in the fuselage being a dead giveaway…. which surely would be forwarded to anyone if it was suspected that Earhart’s Electra had been found.
David Billings
I see no-one has ventured to provide a possibility of another type aircraft being lodged in the jungle as an alternate to an Electra 10E after over 350 views of the thread, since I posted the request for readers to do so if they wished…..
In regard to “possible” other aircraft types that the wreck “may be”, I recently went through the list again. I followed the Pratt & Whitney website which lists the Aircraft Types that Wasps were fitted to (all designations of Wasps that is) and I also followed the Wikipedia site which has the subject of P & W Wasp and which also contains list of aircraft types. I came to the same conclusion that I came to many years ago that there is no alternative aircraft type which could fit the wreck powered by two R1340 S3H1 “Civil” or “Commercial” engines as against the “Military” designation of AN-1.
The nearest example of an aircraft type that comes close is the Boeing Model 247 but it was powered by the R-1340 S1H1 or the AN-1 Wasp. There is no mention of S3H1’s being used to power the Boeing 247. The USAAF did use 27 of them which were impressed into service but 19 of those were returned “Surplus to Requirements” in 1944. No knowledge of what happened to the other eight…. (possible losses ?) but it does not fit anyway. In any case if used it would be camouflage painted. I can find no record of the type in New Guinea.
I also want to openly discuss here an alternative explanation of how “600 H.P. S3H1 C/N1055” came to be on the map. I do this so as to “get it out of the way” in case it is raised. This alternative explanation was given by “the Historic Aircraft Recovery Forum ” many years ago and the writer wrote that “The Americans” gave “The Australian Army” those numbers and letters as a means of identifying the wreckage they had seen in case it was Earhart’s.
Now before I discuss this, I will take you back to when I interviewed the man who found the Metal Tag: Keith Nurse. Keith said that when he found the tag hanging by wire from the engine mount tubing at the back of the detached engine, he took it off the tubing and looked at it and what he saw was “a string of letters and numbers” which did not mean anything to him so he put the tag in his shirt pocket, intending to hand it in with the patrol report. So, that little thought of: “a string of letters and numbers” was in his mind, on site, before any news was given to their Unit that they had found aircraft wreckage.
Now, if “the Americans” had received information about an engine being found and had NOT been sent “600 H/P S3H1 C/N1055” and then considered in the knowledge that the engine was just a “Pratt & Whitney engine” as the Warrant Officer had said he saw Pratt & Whitney somewhere but could not remember precisely where. Why then would the Americans Army say the engine was a “Wasp”, as they had done back in a signal to the Australian Unit….and it was not one of theirs. That is strange because the USAAF were using P&W Engines in New Guinea on many types of aircraft, they must have been sent some detail which allowed them to identify the engine as a "Wasp" and not a "Twin Wasp" as this was the powerplant for several aircraft types in use in New Guinea.
“IF” they had considered that it could be Earhart’s aircraft what would they do and what would they give as a request in any return signal ?
I suggest that if this thought had occurred in the minds of the American Military, they would gather information about the Earhart Electra and give as much detail as they could concerning salient features which would provide sufficient detail for the Australian Unit to properly identify the wreck and this would be accompanied by a request that if possible the Australian Unit go back and relocate the wreck and provide an answer for the American Military. IF that return back to find it was not possible, then the U.S. Army would send someone themselves.
IF the American Military did this, what would those details of the Aircraft encompass ?
I suggest the information would have been on these lines:
“The wreckage may be a Lockheed Electra aircraft bearing the Registration NR16020 in large black lettering and numbers on the wing top surface and bottom surface. This Registration is also on the two vertical fins at the back of the aircraft. The fuselage will have a plate in the cockpit with the Serial Number 1055. The aircraft has two engines and propellers. The Engines are Pratt & Whitney Wasp engines with Serial Numbers 6149 and 6150. The aircraft is unpainted except for some red paint on the front of the wings . A marked distinguishing feature is that the fuselage Cabin of the plane is filled with fuel tanks. There were two crew members on the aircraft.”
Would that be a fair appraisal of information to describe the Electra ?
If that had been so, then the members of “D” Company who were read the reply from the U.S. Army would not have been told, “The Americans say it is not one of their engines”.
I ask readers to compare that information with a string of letters and numbers such as “600 H/P S3H1 C/N1055” which does not contain the obvious recognition feature of the Registration NR16020 which is the Primary outside piece of identification for the Electra to anyone chancing upon the wreck and the Fuel Tanks in the fuselage being a dead giveaway…. which surely would be forwarded to anyone if it was suspected that Earhart’s Electra had been found.
David Billings
Last edited by David Billings; 26th Feb 2018 at 23:34.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi David, what was your post about the lidar survey about, did someone (you?) fund a helicopter to perform the survey? Did it find any points if interest?
Also, I'm sure you would have researched it, however are there any promising prospects for the use of a drone as a metal detector? From memory Dick Smith was using one to try and find VH-MDX.
Also, I'm sure you would have researched it, however are there any promising prospects for the use of a drone as a metal detector? From memory Dick Smith was using one to try and find VH-MDX.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's unsurprising that the B-17 wreckage was found, by the 1945 patrol and others, at the B-17 crash site.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cazalet has a great idea....
1. AUST Army SITREPS in the AWM show that it was a patrol of the 16th Battalion which found the B-17 well before the 11th Battalion arrived at Wide Bay, so that wreck was known. The B-17 was lost in 1942 and a photograph of that B-17 at Brisbane before it was lost show it to be camouflage painted. The wreck that Patrol A1 found was not painted at all and if it was the B-17, you are then saying the paint was gone after two and a half years ? Also, why would the W/O on the Patrol A1 see the words or logo of the Pratt & Whitney Company on a B-17 when they were powered by Wright Cyclone engines ? So, to counter your proposition, there are two pointers there why you are mistaken, 1. Painted wreckage, 2, Wright engines, not P&W.
2. I agree that the map border had the transcribed detail from the U.S. Army written upon it on 24 May 1945 (24/5/45) or thereabout, no dispute there, because of the abbreviation "Ref:" as reference to what the U.S. Army was replying about. Why do I say "thereabout" ? I say it because the date may have been the date on the signal, not the date when "D" Coy were at TOL waiting for a barge to take them to the UNAMITKI River. The date the Patrol A1 ended was 18 April and I would expect that it would take some days, even weeks, for the U.S. Army to reply to the AUST Army concerning what they obviously considered was "Not one of theirs". If what you say is correct: Why would anyone wanting to give information to the AUST Army about the Electra, start by mentioning 600 Horsepower ? Or, by mentioning "S3H1" without saying "Pratt & Whitney R-1340 S3H1"... I can see them saying 1055 but why no "NR 16020" which is the PRIME written and painted identifier on the Airframe. What you say is not logical because it does not give the AUST Army enough information which is pertinent and advisable in the nomal way that it would be given (as I explained in my previous post.... which you may have read).
I still maintain that the metal tag removed was a repair tag left on by some kind fella at Burbank in around April 1937....
David Billings
It's unsurprising that the B-17 wreckage was found, by the 1945 patrol and others, at the B-17 crash site.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
2. I agree that the map border had the transcribed detail from the U.S. Army written upon it on 24 May 1945 (24/5/45) or thereabout, no dispute there, because of the abbreviation "Ref:" as reference to what the U.S. Army was replying about. Why do I say "thereabout" ? I say it because the date may have been the date on the signal, not the date when "D" Coy were at TOL waiting for a barge to take them to the UNAMITKI River. The date the Patrol A1 ended was 18 April and I would expect that it would take some days, even weeks, for the U.S. Army to reply to the AUST Army concerning what they obviously considered was "Not one of theirs". If what you say is correct: Why would anyone wanting to give information to the AUST Army about the Electra, start by mentioning 600 Horsepower ? Or, by mentioning "S3H1" without saying "Pratt & Whitney R-1340 S3H1"... I can see them saying 1055 but why no "NR 16020" which is the PRIME written and painted identifier on the Airframe. What you say is not logical because it does not give the AUST Army enough information which is pertinent and advisable in the nomal way that it would be given (as I explained in my previous post.... which you may have read).
I still maintain that the metal tag removed was a repair tag left on by some kind fella at Burbank in around April 1937....
David Billings
Last edited by David Billings; 26th Feb 2018 at 23:37.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The wreck that Patrol A1 found was not painted at all and if it was the B-17, you are then saying the paint was gone after two and a half years ?
We have no way of knowing whether the engine/cowl was found upright or inverted. From the sketch, made many many decades later, very little of the cowl remained.
An absence of memory of paint is as uninformative as a memory of absence of paint in this case. It's a B-17 part in a known debris field of a (now) known B-17 crash debris field.
Sure, the guys were unaware of the B-17 crash. Sure, the guys hoped they'd found Amelia Earhart. So the legend was born. Legends like that die hard, especially when people truly madly deeply want to believe the legend.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cazalet’s continued fixation that Patrol A1 saw the B-17
Cazalet says: “Some B-17 cowls were painted . Some were not, Some were half painted" ......and then shows us a picture of a fully painted B-17G with Drab Olive upper surfaces and Light Grey undersides which includes the engine cowlings.
I would hazard a guess that in 1942 when 41-2429 was lost that it was painted overall as per the last picture of it at Brisbane and I certainly saw the grey paint on the underside of what remained of the centre section wing when I saw it in 2000. There was no paint on the top surfaces. There is a photo on the Pacific Wrecks site showing 41-2429 at Brisbane in full camo.
I repeat… There are no outer wing panels or intermediate wing panels on this remnant of the B-17. There is no cockpit forward of the production joint, there is no tail section.
The fuselage of this B-17 points to the West, if anything slightly South-West.
What Patrol A1 saw:
My Point 1. Lieutenant Backhouse remembers the Stbd, outer part of the wing panel being bent upwards for about ten feet from the tip.
My Point 2. A sketch made by Lt. Backhouse shows the fuselage pointing to the East.
MY Point 3. Lt, Backhouse looked down into the cockpit area which was smashed backwards.
My Point 4. They were certainly climbing the hill where the B-17 rests but more to the East. If they had seen the B-17 they would still have been climbing after leaving that site because it is on the side of the hill, not on the top. In fact they report that after leaving the site where the engine and airframe were, “the going got easy” and was downhill.
My Point 5. Where we search is not in the vicinity of the B-17 it is a mile away from there.
The Sketch
That sketch you show was drawn by myself. It was sent to Keith Nurse for comment. My capital letters are at the RHS. My Dimension of 5’ (feet) is at the top. The rest of the writing was made by Keith Nurse. I have no idea where you got the idea that there was “very little of the cowl remaining”. Keith said the cowling was there but split open with the edges of the split being straight. He says “Burst open” as can be seen. Is that indicative of “very little of the cowl remained” ?
OH, I see what you are seeing…. You are thinking that I just drew the ”Outline” of the engine cowling because I made a depiction of the engine ‘inside’ together with the faint lines of a supposed engine mount… No, not so, in fact they reported that the sheet metal of the cowling had very little corrosion except for the front cowl ring which was heavily corroded.
“Sure, the guys hoped they had found Amelia Earhart”
None of them spoke of the thought that Earhart was involved with this wreck at all. Not then and not until Don Angwin saw the TV program that her aircraft was powered by Wasp engines.
It is a pity that none of them are alive today to answer you Cazalet.
Cazalet says: "Legends like that die hard, especially when people truly madly deeply want to believe the legend.".... "Truly, madly, deeply "!!! I think you've seen too many movies.
Cazalet….You have read the website ? Something tells me you have not.
Cazalet says: “Some B-17 cowls were painted . Some were not, Some were half painted" ......and then shows us a picture of a fully painted B-17G with Drab Olive upper surfaces and Light Grey undersides which includes the engine cowlings.
I would hazard a guess that in 1942 when 41-2429 was lost that it was painted overall as per the last picture of it at Brisbane and I certainly saw the grey paint on the underside of what remained of the centre section wing when I saw it in 2000. There was no paint on the top surfaces. There is a photo on the Pacific Wrecks site showing 41-2429 at Brisbane in full camo.
I repeat… There are no outer wing panels or intermediate wing panels on this remnant of the B-17. There is no cockpit forward of the production joint, there is no tail section.
The fuselage of this B-17 points to the West, if anything slightly South-West.
What Patrol A1 saw:
My Point 1. Lieutenant Backhouse remembers the Stbd, outer part of the wing panel being bent upwards for about ten feet from the tip.
My Point 2. A sketch made by Lt. Backhouse shows the fuselage pointing to the East.
MY Point 3. Lt, Backhouse looked down into the cockpit area which was smashed backwards.
My Point 4. They were certainly climbing the hill where the B-17 rests but more to the East. If they had seen the B-17 they would still have been climbing after leaving that site because it is on the side of the hill, not on the top. In fact they report that after leaving the site where the engine and airframe were, “the going got easy” and was downhill.
My Point 5. Where we search is not in the vicinity of the B-17 it is a mile away from there.
The Sketch
That sketch you show was drawn by myself. It was sent to Keith Nurse for comment. My capital letters are at the RHS. My Dimension of 5’ (feet) is at the top. The rest of the writing was made by Keith Nurse. I have no idea where you got the idea that there was “very little of the cowl remaining”. Keith said the cowling was there but split open with the edges of the split being straight. He says “Burst open” as can be seen. Is that indicative of “very little of the cowl remained” ?
OH, I see what you are seeing…. You are thinking that I just drew the ”Outline” of the engine cowling because I made a depiction of the engine ‘inside’ together with the faint lines of a supposed engine mount… No, not so, in fact they reported that the sheet metal of the cowling had very little corrosion except for the front cowl ring which was heavily corroded.
“Sure, the guys hoped they had found Amelia Earhart”
None of them spoke of the thought that Earhart was involved with this wreck at all. Not then and not until Don Angwin saw the TV program that her aircraft was powered by Wasp engines.
It is a pity that none of them are alive today to answer you Cazalet.
Cazalet says: "Legends like that die hard, especially when people truly madly deeply want to believe the legend.".... "Truly, madly, deeply "!!! I think you've seen too many movies.
Cazalet….You have read the website ? Something tells me you have not.
Last edited by David Billings; 26th Feb 2018 at 23:40.
David, fascinated with your dedication to this mystery. When the patrol found the engine, what happened or where was the rest of the wreckage, or even the second engine, did they not look for it etc ?
FN
FN
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skywagon1915:
The Airframe with the second engine on-wing (which is most probably the No.2) was hidden under vines and tree debris 30 yards further in from the engine. It is very dense jungle in there. We did not find out about the Airframe being there until 1994 (as I related earlier), up until then the story as related was that there was only an engine there.
That is why the U.S. Army was only informed about an engine as it appears Lt. Backhouse was under some sort of disciplinary action after they got back to base and we think the Patrol Warrant Officer made out the report and he did not know of anything but the engine.
Common sense says that if there is an engine loose on the ground, the rest of the aircraft will be nearby. Common sense also says that with the basically complete Airframe being there with the detached engine (most probably the No.1) close by, the angle of descent must have been steep. They reported a hole about 40 feet across, not a teardrop hole, just a hole. The breaks in the tree branches were reported to be blackened with age, they themselves thought the engine and the airframe had been there several years. The war in New Britain started on 23rd January 1942 so it had been just over three years since then. Earhart and Noonan had been lost for nearly eight years.
The Stbd,, wing was reported to be bent upwards and the cockpit smashed back which is indicative of a wingtip and nose hit simulaneously or one straight after the other as it hit the ground.
Not generally known is that the propellers could not be feathered and at fuel exhaustion the props would windmill and if the props start hunting from coarse to fine and back again and go out of synch. it would be a handful. A steep angle could indicate a spin entry or a straight out dive entry after loss of control. Putting the pitch levers into "Fine" will cause the props to go to Fine Pitch but the drag would be enormous
I have been to other wreck sites (B-24's) and when the airframe hits the trees in a glide angle or level angle the debris field is long and the engines break off and go rolling along the ground ahead of the airframe.
www.earhartsearchpng.com
The Airframe with the second engine on-wing (which is most probably the No.2) was hidden under vines and tree debris 30 yards further in from the engine. It is very dense jungle in there. We did not find out about the Airframe being there until 1994 (as I related earlier), up until then the story as related was that there was only an engine there.
That is why the U.S. Army was only informed about an engine as it appears Lt. Backhouse was under some sort of disciplinary action after they got back to base and we think the Patrol Warrant Officer made out the report and he did not know of anything but the engine.
Common sense says that if there is an engine loose on the ground, the rest of the aircraft will be nearby. Common sense also says that with the basically complete Airframe being there with the detached engine (most probably the No.1) close by, the angle of descent must have been steep. They reported a hole about 40 feet across, not a teardrop hole, just a hole. The breaks in the tree branches were reported to be blackened with age, they themselves thought the engine and the airframe had been there several years. The war in New Britain started on 23rd January 1942 so it had been just over three years since then. Earhart and Noonan had been lost for nearly eight years.
The Stbd,, wing was reported to be bent upwards and the cockpit smashed back which is indicative of a wingtip and nose hit simulaneously or one straight after the other as it hit the ground.
Not generally known is that the propellers could not be feathered and at fuel exhaustion the props would windmill and if the props start hunting from coarse to fine and back again and go out of synch. it would be a handful. A steep angle could indicate a spin entry or a straight out dive entry after loss of control. Putting the pitch levers into "Fine" will cause the props to go to Fine Pitch but the drag would be enormous
I have been to other wreck sites (B-24's) and when the airframe hits the trees in a glide angle or level angle the debris field is long and the engines break off and go rolling along the ground ahead of the airframe.
www.earhartsearchpng.com
Last edited by David Billings; 21st Feb 2018 at 04:09.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's unsurprising that the B-17 wreckage was found, by the 1945 patrol and others, at the B-17 crash site.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
We have no way of knowing when the secret treasure map was embellished with the Electra data requested from the Americans, but there's a pretty good clue in the date: 24/5/45. The date of the patrol's discovery of the wreckage at the B-17 crash site was 17/04/45.
Occam's Razor makes it pretty clear that the wreckage in the vicinity of the B-17 crash site is that of a B-17 and that the information received from the Americans on the 24th of May was transcribed onto a map's border on that date.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cazalet33...
You appear not to read and understand very well Cazalet, as you have repeated your former post.... I have answered your three posts concerning the B-17 and do not see the point of answering you again on the same points...
I completely understand your opinion and your propensity for expressing an opinion as seen on some of the other threads on PPrune which range from the engineering aspects of the Forth Road Bridge to The Erebus disaster to Mugabe through Bitcoin and North Korea and a nuclear armed Japan......
As one poster "tdRacer" (6th November 2016) has said when speaking of you, "I must admit you are consistent - when faced with information that disagrees with your pre-conceived notions you simply dismiss it as propaganda but never, ever offer anything backing your claims. In fact it's painfully obvious that you seldom (if ever) even bother to read the linked articles before condemning them."
Cazalet33.... When you have walked the hills there in East New Britain and have been where the Patrol A1 had been and have actually seen the crash site of the B-17, then I can believe that you have a genuine belief for your opinion, but until you do that, my opinion will be that you are painted blue and are monkeying around.
David Billings
You appear not to read and understand very well Cazalet, as you have repeated your former post.... I have answered your three posts concerning the B-17 and do not see the point of answering you again on the same points...
I completely understand your opinion and your propensity for expressing an opinion as seen on some of the other threads on PPrune which range from the engineering aspects of the Forth Road Bridge to The Erebus disaster to Mugabe through Bitcoin and North Korea and a nuclear armed Japan......
As one poster "tdRacer" (6th November 2016) has said when speaking of you, "I must admit you are consistent - when faced with information that disagrees with your pre-conceived notions you simply dismiss it as propaganda but never, ever offer anything backing your claims. In fact it's painfully obvious that you seldom (if ever) even bother to read the linked articles before condemning them."
Cazalet33.... When you have walked the hills there in East New Britain and have been where the Patrol A1 had been and have actually seen the crash site of the B-17, then I can believe that you have a genuine belief for your opinion, but until you do that, my opinion will be that you are painted blue and are monkeying around.
David Billings
David, it's clear you research things other than missing aircraft just as thoroughly 
I applaud your tenacity - and clear turn of phrase - and hope you are successful in locating whatever it is on the site. On a personal level I will be interested to see how any further work with LiDAR pans out for you; I have long been a proponent of gradiometers for this sort of localised research (assuming the terrain is such that ERM's aren't feasible), but it's always good to learn more about how other methodologies work in different situations.
FP.
I applaud your tenacity - and clear turn of phrase - and hope you are successful in locating whatever it is on the site. On a personal level I will be interested to see how any further work with LiDAR pans out for you; I have long been a proponent of gradiometers for this sort of localised research (assuming the terrain is such that ERM's aren't feasible), but it's always good to learn more about how other methodologies work in different situations.
FP.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First Principal...
Thankyou.
From what we do know, LiDAR seems to be the best shot.
For one, it will show the Bulldozer tracks and where the BD was working.
Secondly, if the detached engine was missed by the BD, then there will be a bright spot or a lump on the ground.
Similarly, the scan will show any change to the natural flow of the land.
Finally the Lat/Long availability within the readout will give us a pinpoint or targets that we can follow with the handheld GPS units.
I thought that maybe the U.S. Army has the treetop capability with airborne GPR but I am advised that it does not. Moving a trollied GPR Unit over the terrain there is just absolutely impossible.
One has to do the research if only to solve a problem which has to be dispersed...
Thankyou.
From what we do know, LiDAR seems to be the best shot.
For one, it will show the Bulldozer tracks and where the BD was working.
Secondly, if the detached engine was missed by the BD, then there will be a bright spot or a lump on the ground.
Similarly, the scan will show any change to the natural flow of the land.
Finally the Lat/Long availability within the readout will give us a pinpoint or targets that we can follow with the handheld GPS units.
I thought that maybe the U.S. Army has the treetop capability with airborne GPR but I am advised that it does not. Moving a trollied GPR Unit over the terrain there is just absolutely impossible.
One has to do the research if only to solve a problem which has to be dispersed...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bulldozer work started in 1995
Currawong.... Sometime in 1995 I had been up to Rabaul for a Port Inspection and flew back to Port Morbid in the Jump Seat of an F28 and asked the Captain (who I knew) if he would "go left a little bit" so I could get a squint at the whole of the search area and take some photos. He knew about the project and obliged....
I was amazed to see tracks creeping towards the search area from the North-west. I knew that the Australian Army Survey Corps had surveyed for a road across the narrow neck between Wide Bay and Open bay during WWII and there had been a rudimentary track. What I was now seeing was the road being made through to the Southern Coast at Wide Bay.
When we got in on the ground in early 1996 we met up with some part of this road through the Mumus River Valley and then up onto the search area hill, the track through was the point where we reached in late 1996 on our second visit that year and which was the time when I saw the bare earth patch that I now suspect as the burial site.
Then in 1996, logging had not commenced in this area stripping everything of value and you could actually see through the Primary Jungle on top of the ridgeline. The loggers were working their way towards the coast.
Last year we entered what was a complete mess. The bulldozer track that I knew on the ridgeline had become a water course exposing tree roots and causing deep puddles to form in the hollows. Secondary Jungle is the pits. Now you cannot see more than twenty feet while on the old track and visibility drops down to ten feet inside the bush off the track. New growth is everywhere. The "new" trees, post 1996 are not distinguishable from some of the older sprigs which have shot up since the light was let in...
So, it has made it harder and nastier.
Currawong.... Sometime in 1995 I had been up to Rabaul for a Port Inspection and flew back to Port Morbid in the Jump Seat of an F28 and asked the Captain (who I knew) if he would "go left a little bit" so I could get a squint at the whole of the search area and take some photos. He knew about the project and obliged....
I was amazed to see tracks creeping towards the search area from the North-west. I knew that the Australian Army Survey Corps had surveyed for a road across the narrow neck between Wide Bay and Open bay during WWII and there had been a rudimentary track. What I was now seeing was the road being made through to the Southern Coast at Wide Bay.
When we got in on the ground in early 1996 we met up with some part of this road through the Mumus River Valley and then up onto the search area hill, the track through was the point where we reached in late 1996 on our second visit that year and which was the time when I saw the bare earth patch that I now suspect as the burial site.
Then in 1996, logging had not commenced in this area stripping everything of value and you could actually see through the Primary Jungle on top of the ridgeline. The loggers were working their way towards the coast.
Last year we entered what was a complete mess. The bulldozer track that I knew on the ridgeline had become a water course exposing tree roots and causing deep puddles to form in the hollows. Secondary Jungle is the pits. Now you cannot see more than twenty feet while on the old track and visibility drops down to ten feet inside the bush off the track. New growth is everywhere. The "new" trees, post 1996 are not distinguishable from some of the older sprigs which have shot up since the light was let in...
So, it has made it harder and nastier.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: hertfordshire
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bulldozer work
I have read through your impressive website Mr Billings, and am intrigued by your theory. Lets hope the LIDAR kit will lead to this wreckage whether it be Earharts Electra or something else although I would agree with you its hard to see what else the map numbers refer to.
How extensive is the immediate area you will investigate? Did the bulldozers work a wide area ?
How extensive is the immediate area you will investigate? Did the bulldozers work a wide area ?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Propertee 64...
Thankyou.
The 1943 map that Lieutenant Backhouse had to work with just shows a "blob" of a hill with no contours but it does show a creek running to the east down the centre of the "blob" and the physical feature of the hill as being in a kind of Boomerang shape ("wouldn't it be ?") is not shown. [.....Incidentally, We do have the 1943 aerial photo taken by the Lockheed F-4 from 23,000 feet from which the map was produced - a very lucky find by one of my team.....].
We have been working from the 1976 map made by the Australian Army Survey Corps and it is accurate enough and the physical shape and contours of the hill are accurate enough and by GPS points it checks out, bearing in mind that GPS points are reliant in the U.S. fixing it globally..
The ridgeline we are interested in runs for two kilometres and at about the half distance point it splits into two, rather like a letter "Y" or "tuning fork". We know where Lt. Backhouse was aiming for, ie: which point on his map he was aiming to reach so they would have kept straight on as to go onto this left hand side leg of the "Y" would require a sharp left turn away from the direction they needed to maintain. From the spot height, the ridgeline gradually descends until it reaches a steeper drop off at the end.
The main bulldozer track follows the apex of the ridgeline and the BD driver smoothed out some of the bumps along it to give the timber jinker truck a better level track to drive on. Getting the logs out was done by dragging them to the main track where they were hauled onto the jinker and taken away.
What we have is that the BD driver bumped into it and it wouldn't move so he got out of his protective cage and peered through the bush, saw what it was and promptly buried it. This was before the army of tree thieves arrived to remove the booty so with no one else around, he buried it and took the track around it.
Backhouse's sketch shows it sited down below the ridgeline maybe 50 feet off from the top. We need to see where the tracks made by the BD go off the top of the ridgeline and then stop and back off and go back to the ridgeline and then continue on for a bit and then turn off again with a lot of workings at that point.
That only really could happen past the half way mark on the ridge travelling West to East.
Thankyou.
The 1943 map that Lieutenant Backhouse had to work with just shows a "blob" of a hill with no contours but it does show a creek running to the east down the centre of the "blob" and the physical feature of the hill as being in a kind of Boomerang shape ("wouldn't it be ?") is not shown. [.....Incidentally, We do have the 1943 aerial photo taken by the Lockheed F-4 from 23,000 feet from which the map was produced - a very lucky find by one of my team.....].
We have been working from the 1976 map made by the Australian Army Survey Corps and it is accurate enough and the physical shape and contours of the hill are accurate enough and by GPS points it checks out, bearing in mind that GPS points are reliant in the U.S. fixing it globally..
The ridgeline we are interested in runs for two kilometres and at about the half distance point it splits into two, rather like a letter "Y" or "tuning fork". We know where Lt. Backhouse was aiming for, ie: which point on his map he was aiming to reach so they would have kept straight on as to go onto this left hand side leg of the "Y" would require a sharp left turn away from the direction they needed to maintain. From the spot height, the ridgeline gradually descends until it reaches a steeper drop off at the end.
The main bulldozer track follows the apex of the ridgeline and the BD driver smoothed out some of the bumps along it to give the timber jinker truck a better level track to drive on. Getting the logs out was done by dragging them to the main track where they were hauled onto the jinker and taken away.
What we have is that the BD driver bumped into it and it wouldn't move so he got out of his protective cage and peered through the bush, saw what it was and promptly buried it. This was before the army of tree thieves arrived to remove the booty so with no one else around, he buried it and took the track around it.
Backhouse's sketch shows it sited down below the ridgeline maybe 50 feet off from the top. We need to see where the tracks made by the BD go off the top of the ridgeline and then stop and back off and go back to the ridgeline and then continue on for a bit and then turn off again with a lot of workings at that point.
That only really could happen past the half way mark on the ridge travelling West to East.
Last edited by David Billings; 21st Feb 2018 at 22:31.