A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Amelia Earhart Report
From: Greg R_
Date: 2011 Mar 21, 23:28 -0700
From: Greg R_
Date: 2011 Mar 21, 23:28 -0700
Gary: Thanks for jogging my memory by posting something Earhart related - I'd meant to reply to this earlier, but it fell through the cracks... > Another disagreement with him is that he marks out 90 degrees of of the > circle as having reduced visibility due to the glare of the sun. I > measured the glare on the sea at sunset with my sextant and it is only > 5 degrees wide. I'll defer to your expertise on this one, since you have more experience with overwater flights than I do - but my big question would be why they planned to arrive at Howland in the early-morning hours when glare would definitely be a problem while trying to locate a tiny speck of land in the vast ocean. Just seems to be another in a long series of mistakes, oversights, miscommunications, etc. that led up to the accident. As Capt. Laurance F. Safford (who was also responsible for the Mid-Pacific Strategic Direction Finding Net, and the decoding of the Japanese PURPLE cipher) put it in his analysis of the Earhart flight during the 1970s: "Poor planning, worse execution." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earhart -- GregR ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary LaPook To: NavList@fer3.com Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 6:40 PM Subject: [NavList] Re: Amelia Earhart Report Long's book is the best one out there. He used the same methodology that I did. I have some differences with him. He places the uncertainty of airborne celestial LOPs at +/- 15 NM and I use +/- 7 NM which is in keeping with all the text books and also with the Federal Aviation Regulation requirement. His assumption ends with a larger area of uncertainty than mine. I also disagree with his explanation of why they didn't land at Dakar, see my posts last month about this. http://www.fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=115631&y=201102 http://www.fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=115635&y=201102 http://www.fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=115642&y=201102 Another disagreement with him is that he marks out 90 degrees of of the circle as having reduced visibility due to the glare of the sun. I measured the glare on the sea at sunset with my sextant and it is only 5 degrees wide. As you can see, these are minor disagreements and don't change the conclusions much. Regarding the experimental high frequency DF equipment on Howland, there are no documents showing that Earhart knew of its existence, it appears that it was a last minute addition by Mr. Black when sailing out on the Itasca. You would think that if she did know about a plan to have it installed on Howland that in one of her radiograms to Itasca she would have asked to have its installation confirmed before relying on it yet there is no mention of it in her messages. gl --- On Sun, 3/6/11, Greg R.
wrote: From: Greg R. Subject: [NavList] Re: Amelia Earhart Report To: NavList@fer3.com Date: Sunday, March 6, 2011, 4:12 PM > Looks like it was a turtle bone that TIGHAR found Nikumororo. LOL! What a surprise (not...). Though it probably still won't stop Ric and his band of merry "explorers" from enticing even more people to help bankroll their wild-goose chase expeditions. Has anyone ever really thought about the fact that her radio transmissions were really strong (signal level 5, according to the Itasca radio log) up until the time she disappeared, and if they'd managed to land anywhere that was above water the radio would still be operable (granted with no fuel they couldn't run the plane's generator(s), but the ship's batteries should have lasted at least long enough for them to get out a distress call - or several). I went back and looked at some of my Earhart source material, and it turns out that the Itasca had set up a DF station on Howland that would work on frequencies that she was using, but apparently the batteries went dead before they were in range and could use the DF steer. Have you ever read _Ameila Earhart - The Mystery Solved_ (Elgen and Marie Long)? The authors make a very compelling case for their theory (also backed by a ton of research, interviews, etc.) - no bizarre conspiracy theories, just an honest reporting of the facts and the obvious conclusions (which also happens to agree with my own theory about what happened to them, and that the plane is at the bottom of the ocean somewhere NW of Howland). http://www.amazon.com/Amelia-Earhart-Elgen-M-Long/dp/B003E7ET9O -- GregR ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary LaPook To: NavList@fer3.com Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:49 PM Subject: [NavList] Re: Amelia Earhart Report Looks like it was a turtle bone that TIGHAR found Nikumororo. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/8953017/expert-scotches-png-earhart-claims/ gl ---------------------------------------------------------------- NavList message boards and member settings: www.fer3.com/NavList Members may optionally receive posts by email. To cancel email delivery, send a message to NoMail[at]fer3.com ----------------------------------------------------------------