Amelia Earhart PNG Theory
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: hertfordshire
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see that the description and engine tag information is compelling . As you say David , what else could it mean if not that its Earharts Electra? Nobody as far as I can see has suggested a viable alternative explanation re the tag info. .
You won't want to go into conspiracy theories I suspect but I wonder if theres a twist to the story somewhere that explains how the Electra got there.
You won't want to go into conspiracy theories I suspect but I wonder if theres a twist to the story somewhere that explains how the Electra got there.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once you exceed Long range cruise which is higher with a head wind (LRC) you pay a penalty in wasted fuel. Max continuous which means what it says is certainly faster but is excessive for the head wind experienced, i suggest. Max power she surely would not use ,in view of the consumption and engine stress. I haven't followed the arithmetic apart from a simple howgosit . But i suggest theres possibly an error in the earlier assumed position reports.Instead of Z there was use of local time(standard time for location) which certainly led to confusion with radio skeds. Her lapsed time to the Howland vicinity was 20 plus hours.
I can only relate to my experience. but excessive thrust means you wont make the destination. Early days for me there was little emphasis on cost. The fuel uplift was sufficient but anything approaching Max continuous i would not have reached my destination.
I can only relate to my experience. but excessive thrust means you wont make the destination. Early days for me there was little emphasis on cost. The fuel uplift was sufficient but anything approaching Max continuous i would not have reached my destination.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 1912 GMT position and why ?
[QUOTE=greg47;10149131..... But i suggest theres possibly an error in the earlier assumed position reports.Instead of Z there was use of local time(standard time for location) which certainly led to confusion with radio skeds. Her lapsed time to the Howland vicinity was 20 plus hours. [/QUOTE]
The 0518 GMT PR at CHOISEUL checks out to be close to that time. On previous forays into the "Plot" of laying it all out in MS Excel, the timing seemed to be that the Radio Tx at 0518 was made a few minutes "after" sighting a landmark at or on CHOISEUL Island . The 0718 GMT call is a different kettle of fish.... It Just does not work that the Lat/Long of the PR was at the time of 0718 GMT simply because the Groundspeed is "too low" in a quartering wind. There was obviously a NAV error there for to be so far off in Drift surely means that Noonan had assessed the wind strength incorrectly and my Vector diagram in the website shows this quite plainly.'
The real quandry, puzzle or enigma in the flight that I regards as the most important thing is why Earhart Tx'd that she "Must be on Howland" at 1912 GMT. On G/S alone on reaching the ONTARIO, it is obvious from my plot a G/S at the present selected "Cruising" TAS and Power setting is not going to get them to HOWLAND until around an ETA of 2036 GMT and yet as I showed in the last post, a Power application to produce an average G/S of 148 mph and an arrival at 1912 GMT is out of the question due to one: Fuel wasted and two: Engine operation in the extreme endangering the aircraft.
I have tried juggling previous FP times and changes to the ETA's in the knowledge of the G/S's achieved and I am beginning to think there was a foul-up in the form of a miscalculation. If anyone reading this thread has any idea as to why Erahart would call their closeness to Howland at 1912 GMT, I am all ears.
[QUOTE=greg47;10149131..... But i suggest theres possibly an error in the earlier assumed position reports.Instead of Z there was use of local time(standard time for location) which certainly led to confusion with radio skeds. Her lapsed time to the Howland vicinity was 20 plus hours. [/QUOTE]
The 0518 GMT PR at CHOISEUL checks out to be close to that time. On previous forays into the "Plot" of laying it all out in MS Excel, the timing seemed to be that the Radio Tx at 0518 was made a few minutes "after" sighting a landmark at or on CHOISEUL Island . The 0718 GMT call is a different kettle of fish.... It Just does not work that the Lat/Long of the PR was at the time of 0718 GMT simply because the Groundspeed is "too low" in a quartering wind. There was obviously a NAV error there for to be so far off in Drift surely means that Noonan had assessed the wind strength incorrectly and my Vector diagram in the website shows this quite plainly.'
The real quandry, puzzle or enigma in the flight that I regards as the most important thing is why Earhart Tx'd that she "Must be on Howland" at 1912 GMT. On G/S alone on reaching the ONTARIO, it is obvious from my plot a G/S at the present selected "Cruising" TAS and Power setting is not going to get them to HOWLAND until around an ETA of 2036 GMT and yet as I showed in the last post, a Power application to produce an average G/S of 148 mph and an arrival at 1912 GMT is out of the question due to one: Fuel wasted and two: Engine operation in the extreme endangering the aircraft.
I have tried juggling previous FP times and changes to the ETA's in the knowledge of the G/S's achieved and I am beginning to think there was a foul-up in the form of a miscalculation. If anyone reading this thread has any idea as to why Erahart would call their closeness to Howland at 1912 GMT, I am all ears.
Last edited by David Billings; 17th May 2018 at 22:07.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@CONSO
Yes... Take Off at 0000 GMT and with LAE being GMT +10 that made it 10:00 am. It is really quite convenient that they did leave at 0000 GMT because all the elapsed times of the flight coincide with the GMT time. Local times rarely figure into the flight but when they do they do cause a litttle confusion and particulary the old U.S. Navy times used I would rather forget because of "half-hour differences in "ship time " at HOWLAND for example was different to "Island time" and the Hawaiians on Howland used Honolulu Time ...... The 0518 GMT call is in the same Local time zone as LAE for instance but the NUKUMANU Local time zone is one half-hour ahead so that 0718 GMT at Lae is 1718 or 5:18 pm Local but at NUKUMANU it is 1748 or 5:48 pm Local so you can see that as soon as they saw NUKUMANU they were into night flying.... At the Latitudes where LAE, and RABAUL are, "Night-time" shuts the door as early as 5:45 pm Local time and by 6:00pm it is dark.
I also use Decimal time when writing elapsed time, for instance 10.6 hours means 10 Hours and 36 minutes. In aviation now it is almost totally, the norm to record flight times to the nearest 3 minutes (0.05 Hours) with 0.1 hour being 6 minutes. Working in MS Excel it is convenient to use decimal time. I will use decimal time when writing and then also at times, put the hours and minutes in brackets with the hours and minutes separated by a colon..
Being as you are going to work on the Excel Solver, if you will PM me or email me your email address I will send you a MS Excel file showing all the different times involved in the saga just to confuse you and make your eyeballs roll !!!!! The file has ITASCA Time, HOW Time, HNL Time in the Western Hemiphere, a Central column of GMT Times and then LAE Time and Nauru Time in the Eastern Hemisphere, so that you can compare all the times in a single line. NAURU had two time zones just to further confuse the issue as they had a "Civil" time and an "Official" time, with 30 minutes difference..
Yes... Take Off at 0000 GMT and with LAE being GMT +10 that made it 10:00 am. It is really quite convenient that they did leave at 0000 GMT because all the elapsed times of the flight coincide with the GMT time. Local times rarely figure into the flight but when they do they do cause a litttle confusion and particulary the old U.S. Navy times used I would rather forget because of "half-hour differences in "ship time " at HOWLAND for example was different to "Island time" and the Hawaiians on Howland used Honolulu Time ...... The 0518 GMT call is in the same Local time zone as LAE for instance but the NUKUMANU Local time zone is one half-hour ahead so that 0718 GMT at Lae is 1718 or 5:18 pm Local but at NUKUMANU it is 1748 or 5:48 pm Local so you can see that as soon as they saw NUKUMANU they were into night flying.... At the Latitudes where LAE, and RABAUL are, "Night-time" shuts the door as early as 5:45 pm Local time and by 6:00pm it is dark.
I also use Decimal time when writing elapsed time, for instance 10.6 hours means 10 Hours and 36 minutes. In aviation now it is almost totally, the norm to record flight times to the nearest 3 minutes (0.05 Hours) with 0.1 hour being 6 minutes. Working in MS Excel it is convenient to use decimal time. I will use decimal time when writing and then also at times, put the hours and minutes in brackets with the hours and minutes separated by a colon..
Being as you are going to work on the Excel Solver, if you will PM me or email me your email address I will send you a MS Excel file showing all the different times involved in the saga just to confuse you and make your eyeballs roll !!!!! The file has ITASCA Time, HOW Time, HNL Time in the Western Hemiphere, a Central column of GMT Times and then LAE Time and Nauru Time in the Eastern Hemisphere, so that you can compare all the times in a single line. NAURU had two time zones just to further confuse the issue as they had a "Civil" time and an "Official" time, with 30 minutes difference..
Last edited by David Billings; 17th May 2018 at 22:11.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David- just sent you via email a one page pdf plot - table- and assumptions. Did it simply by iteration such that only variable need be entered is range- all based on a max range flight at all times with zero wind. This to establish a plot line from which can be modifed- adjusted based on range effects of headwinds and average speeds based on
mantero pdf report data. This gives the best most optomistic total course from LAE to Howland and return to crash site- based on the non real world asumption t of range needed to fly lae to howland and back to crash site simply being the sum of 2620 plus 2209 = 4829 miles- which is of course well beyond any real world effort of the electra
So with zero wind for a given range say 4000 miles - and a distance of 2200 FROM LAE the distance to crash site would simply be 4000 - 2200 or 1800 miles..
And the distance TO go to Howland would be 400 rounded. - this due to the approx ' offset' of 400 miles via geometry of crash site from LAE on a simple 180 turn at 2200 miles from LAE. The simply sets the overall max and minimum range figures within which she had to pick a turnaround point for whatever reason.
I'll try to figure out how to publish a simple 4 column table here a bit later
My point is to simply establish that at some point, she did have the range to make a return to crash site. More precise calcs could establsh the most probable turnaround point based on geometric course deviations and head winds effects on best range. Other end would be minimum range based on low altitude, headwinds, etc. Range effects could then be adjusted in say 50 mile segments based on headwinds, course deviations from straight line, etc. For example a 90 degree course change to search for say one hour at 150 mph Airspeed- zero windspeed including return to baseline course would decrease range by 150 miles, etc
Conso
mantero pdf report data. This gives the best most optomistic total course from LAE to Howland and return to crash site- based on the non real world asumption t of range needed to fly lae to howland and back to crash site simply being the sum of 2620 plus 2209 = 4829 miles- which is of course well beyond any real world effort of the electra
So with zero wind for a given range say 4000 miles - and a distance of 2200 FROM LAE the distance to crash site would simply be 4000 - 2200 or 1800 miles..
And the distance TO go to Howland would be 400 rounded. - this due to the approx ' offset' of 400 miles via geometry of crash site from LAE on a simple 180 turn at 2200 miles from LAE. The simply sets the overall max and minimum range figures within which she had to pick a turnaround point for whatever reason.
I'll try to figure out how to publish a simple 4 column table here a bit later
My point is to simply establish that at some point, she did have the range to make a return to crash site. More precise calcs could establsh the most probable turnaround point based on geometric course deviations and head winds effects on best range. Other end would be minimum range based on low altitude, headwinds, etc. Range effects could then be adjusted in say 50 mile segments based on headwinds, course deviations from straight line, etc. For example a 90 degree course change to search for say one hour at 150 mph Airspeed- zero windspeed including return to baseline course would decrease range by 150 miles, etc
Conso
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is my pdf file-plot showing max range versus distance from Howland when earhart turned back to ' crash' site
BASELINE ITERATION-A.pdf
BASELINE ITERATION-A.pdf
Reminds me of a Hamish and Andy episode where they kept driving a car after the computer said that there were zero kms left and it went for slightly over 100 kms more...
The solution to the problem is simple......
Raise the money go find the plane in the jungle!
That finishes the debate.
Ahhh if only it were that simple...
Sat nite - 2,4,9,18,33,38,28......
Raise the money go find the plane in the jungle!
That finishes the debate.
Ahhh if only it were that simple...
Sat nite - 2,4,9,18,33,38,28......
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@mattyj
I guess if I am flogging un cheval morte then I am doing it out of interest and if it makes me look ridiculous in your eyes then I guess that is my fault.
When I stepped out of a helicopter crash into low trees in Borneo in 1967, I considered that I could have been killed and because of the density of the forest in Borneo it would have been difficult to find the wreck if the entry into the trees had occurred two or three minutes later in really big trees. So at the time, I wondered..."Who would have come looking for me ?"
I am happy to go looking for wrecks in PNG, because there were a lot of good people lost up there.
This is my interest and according to the 45,541 views of this thread at an average of 19 an hour since the 4th of February, the thread is interesting to a lot of other people..... seemingly, even including you...for you opened it.
Thankyou for your comment, have a nice day.
I guess if I am flogging un cheval morte then I am doing it out of interest and if it makes me look ridiculous in your eyes then I guess that is my fault.
When I stepped out of a helicopter crash into low trees in Borneo in 1967, I considered that I could have been killed and because of the density of the forest in Borneo it would have been difficult to find the wreck if the entry into the trees had occurred two or three minutes later in really big trees. So at the time, I wondered..."Who would have come looking for me ?"
I am happy to go looking for wrecks in PNG, because there were a lot of good people lost up there.
This is my interest and according to the 45,541 views of this thread at an average of 19 an hour since the 4th of February, the thread is interesting to a lot of other people..... seemingly, even including you...for you opened it.
Thankyou for your comment, have a nice day.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David id suggest you assume she was Howland area at 1912Z and look for your error further back along the plot. It could be a simple transcription error. Remember Noonan was probably the best of his day, certainly one of. I understood she had a PNR of 10 hrs from Lae. Critical point ?. Surely something was calculated for a diversion as you lost an engine beyond the critical point you would not make it to destination. It would be common practice as it is today. Nowadays its the depressurized critical point which can be critical on long Etops.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Greg47
I do assume that the flight went towards Howland but did not get there. The MS Excel plot also assumes a steady speed from the Ontario point of 155 mph TAS with a wind of -32mph but that speed is not set in concrete for the ETA at HOW at that speed would be 2054GMT. With that constant speed the Electra is 207 miles from Howland at 1912GMT and has 303 USG remaining. All the MS Excel plot workings are done with data from LR 487 regarding Speed for the AUW, which in turn gives the H.P. required and total H.P. figures and I use an SFC of 0,45. We have discussed the TAS of 180mph required with that wind being an extreme power setting and wasteful on fuel and over the MAX Continuous setting..
As I have mentioned previously, the first half of the flight up to the 1030GMT point, when the “Ship in sight ahead” call was made can be reasonably plotted to give the climb out, the cruise periods, the further climbs and the descents that were made “on time” and “on location” and coincidental with the two speeds mentioned (…“making 140” which I do get as G/S and …”making 150” which I get as TAS), the heights mentioned and the radio call times. I have done that and I then assume that the 1030GMT call that saw a ship, was the Ontario and that the Electra was overhead the ship at 1036GMT, six minutes and 12 miles later.
It is what happened after that time that is the factor governing where their location was at 1912 GMT/2014GMT. It is night, they are dependent on Astro Navigation from this point on. We know that at 1415GMT there was cloud and overcast. “Overcast” was again repeated at 1515GMT. ”Partly cloudy” was said at 1615GMT.
What is a reasonable thing for Noonan to want to assist his navigation in the event he has to DED-Reckon as he cannot get Astro .....and the answer to that is a steady speed or a constant on the half-hour or at the most hourly update on the IAS but without Astro he will not know if the wind has changed in speed or direction. He would be working blind..
Has any reader an opinion on that ?
I do assume that the flight went towards Howland but did not get there. The MS Excel plot also assumes a steady speed from the Ontario point of 155 mph TAS with a wind of -32mph but that speed is not set in concrete for the ETA at HOW at that speed would be 2054GMT. With that constant speed the Electra is 207 miles from Howland at 1912GMT and has 303 USG remaining. All the MS Excel plot workings are done with data from LR 487 regarding Speed for the AUW, which in turn gives the H.P. required and total H.P. figures and I use an SFC of 0,45. We have discussed the TAS of 180mph required with that wind being an extreme power setting and wasteful on fuel and over the MAX Continuous setting..
As I have mentioned previously, the first half of the flight up to the 1030GMT point, when the “Ship in sight ahead” call was made can be reasonably plotted to give the climb out, the cruise periods, the further climbs and the descents that were made “on time” and “on location” and coincidental with the two speeds mentioned (…“making 140” which I do get as G/S and …”making 150” which I get as TAS), the heights mentioned and the radio call times. I have done that and I then assume that the 1030GMT call that saw a ship, was the Ontario and that the Electra was overhead the ship at 1036GMT, six minutes and 12 miles later.
It is what happened after that time that is the factor governing where their location was at 1912 GMT/2014GMT. It is night, they are dependent on Astro Navigation from this point on. We know that at 1415GMT there was cloud and overcast. “Overcast” was again repeated at 1515GMT. ”Partly cloudy” was said at 1615GMT.
What is a reasonable thing for Noonan to want to assist his navigation in the event he has to DED-Reckon as he cannot get Astro .....and the answer to that is a steady speed or a constant on the half-hour or at the most hourly update on the IAS but without Astro he will not know if the wind has changed in speed or direction. He would be working blind..
Has any reader an opinion on that ?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ships of the day passed 12 noon local positions. How does that play David ,your the numbers man. Noonan would have got a sun shot which would provide a westing within the area of probability. They certainly didn't find Howland but they were close David.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@greg47
If he 'could' see the sun you mean, then he could get a Westing but what about the Latitude ?
By all accounts the only direction which was showing cloud and could obscure the sun was to the Northwest of the ITASCA..
There was something wrong with the aerial side of the Receiving set up but she had received the letter A's on the DF Aerial. She knew that ITASCA was receiving her calls.
What beats me is why they did not keep trying with the DF unit or set up a "Yes/No" communication using the DF set using Morse "Y" and "N"
If he 'could' see the sun you mean, then he could get a Westing but what about the Latitude ?
By all accounts the only direction which was showing cloud and could obscure the sun was to the Northwest of the ITASCA..
There was something wrong with the aerial side of the Receiving set up but she had received the letter A's on the DF Aerial. She knew that ITASCA was receiving her calls.
What beats me is why they did not keep trying with the DF unit or set up a "Yes/No" communication using the DF set using Morse "Y" and "N"
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@propertee64
“A very good question David. But I know speculation isn't on your agenda......!”
Well, not off the agenda totally for we are discussing “hypothetically” and in a discussion, ideas can be put forward.
There are a lot of “if’s” for the success of the Navigation
Firstly, Greg47 has suggested that Noonan would be able to get a sextant reading, a Westing, from the sun and presumably the Latitude from an almanac but they did not get to Howland so that idea does not produce the outcome of a landing at HOW.
Secondly, the sunrise was at HOW at 6:15 am Local time but at that GMT time of 1745GMT Earhart is on the radio saying they are 200 miles out and they would be lucky to see an indistinct glow of light far ahead. If Noonan had seen the sunrise clearly and timed the seconds before 1745GMT they would know how many miles to run to HOW in a lateral sense.
Thirdly, for an “Offset Approach”….where Noonan has the Electra purposely aimed off the track at a known distance from a “sunline’ onto a new course to reach the sunline and then fly down it (or up it) until reaching HOW.
Forthly… using the DF Equipment.
The peculiar thing is that at 1745GMT she stated 200 miles out “approximately” and then at 1815GMT “ 100 miles out, making the G/S 200 mph. Then at 1912GMT “Must be on you” the G/S has still been 200 mph. No success.
Due to circumstances, the Navigation failed, we can positively say that even though Noonan’s reputation was excellent, the circumstances made the navigation to Howland, difficult and impossible.
Ever since the report of “cloudy and overcast” at 1415GMT and subsequent overcast and cloudy reports, there had to be doubt as to whether they were going to make it. From the standards of the day, DED-reckoning would produce a maximum of a lateral 10% error either side of the target, even “if” the “reckoned” distance was correct. By my reckoning they still have 800 miles to run at 1415GMT so a 10% error delivers a possible 80 miles either side of HOW.
In the back of Earhart’s mind is The Contingency Plan. The question of the Fuel Reserve arises. On my plot, the fuel remaining at 1912GMT after a constant speed of 155 mph TAS since leaving the ONTARIO is 340 USG. At 2014GMT after searching for one hour, the fuel remaining is 303 USG.
Here is speculation for you: What if the Diversion Fuel for the Contingency Plan was a figure of 300 USG ?
“A very good question David. But I know speculation isn't on your agenda......!”
Well, not off the agenda totally for we are discussing “hypothetically” and in a discussion, ideas can be put forward.
There are a lot of “if’s” for the success of the Navigation
Firstly, Greg47 has suggested that Noonan would be able to get a sextant reading, a Westing, from the sun and presumably the Latitude from an almanac but they did not get to Howland so that idea does not produce the outcome of a landing at HOW.
Secondly, the sunrise was at HOW at 6:15 am Local time but at that GMT time of 1745GMT Earhart is on the radio saying they are 200 miles out and they would be lucky to see an indistinct glow of light far ahead. If Noonan had seen the sunrise clearly and timed the seconds before 1745GMT they would know how many miles to run to HOW in a lateral sense.
Thirdly, for an “Offset Approach”….where Noonan has the Electra purposely aimed off the track at a known distance from a “sunline’ onto a new course to reach the sunline and then fly down it (or up it) until reaching HOW.
Forthly… using the DF Equipment.
The peculiar thing is that at 1745GMT she stated 200 miles out “approximately” and then at 1815GMT “ 100 miles out, making the G/S 200 mph. Then at 1912GMT “Must be on you” the G/S has still been 200 mph. No success.
Due to circumstances, the Navigation failed, we can positively say that even though Noonan’s reputation was excellent, the circumstances made the navigation to Howland, difficult and impossible.
Ever since the report of “cloudy and overcast” at 1415GMT and subsequent overcast and cloudy reports, there had to be doubt as to whether they were going to make it. From the standards of the day, DED-reckoning would produce a maximum of a lateral 10% error either side of the target, even “if” the “reckoned” distance was correct. By my reckoning they still have 800 miles to run at 1415GMT so a 10% error delivers a possible 80 miles either side of HOW.
In the back of Earhart’s mind is The Contingency Plan. The question of the Fuel Reserve arises. On my plot, the fuel remaining at 1912GMT after a constant speed of 155 mph TAS since leaving the ONTARIO is 340 USG. At 2014GMT after searching for one hour, the fuel remaining is 303 USG.
Here is speculation for you: What if the Diversion Fuel for the Contingency Plan was a figure of 300 USG ?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was no contingency plan after 1000Z it was Howland or miss. She did not report they would be "lucky to see" but that they could see a glow in the east ,the sunrise. At 1912 they would have been lucky to have an hours fuel. They are going nowhere except to find Howland. Looking east into the rising sun the glare would be bad as there was Haze reported. If they were flying blind as is suggested they would have turned back at 10 hrs with fuel for daylight at Lae. That was the only "contingency."