Warbird Information Exchange

For fleet16b: Thanks for responding....

Whether "sketchy" or not, I have to say that the documentary evidence on the map discovered in 1994 and the visual sighting in 1945 by the now veterans is the only evidence that we have as to the location of the Earhart 10E. So what do we do ? Do we say that all this is a fable and she really did ditch out near Howland Island ? Four Vets were alive until 2000 and now there are two left. We do not have (cannot find) one SITREP (Situation Report) numbered 63A, which is an annex report which I believe carried the details of the find in the jungle. The only mention of the wreck in Army signal traffic is contained in one signal which states that: "a/c plates will be available with the patrol report at 0900 hours...." "a/c" being the abbreviation for aircraft which also appears in other signals in that context.

The evidence is not a theory, there is a wreck in there as a bottom line. A "disowned" wreck, nobody claims it. Who's then might it be, this all metal, twin-engined unpainted and corroded wreck. Incidentally, it would be impossible for a WWII wreck to display the corrosion that it carried after three years of the war's endurance in that area. If it had salt on the bare aluminium, yes, it would display corrosion.

I am not hostile, I seek questions on the subject, I am as open with this project as I can be. All I ask is that people review the project with an open mind. When I first became involved, I too said, "She went down at sea out in the Pacific...." See, it's catching !

Earhart's long distance flights were mainly conducted at 10,000 feet. She had flown the Electra at 12,000 feet in the U.S., she would know what fuel she could use at that altitude. That fact is recorded in a newspaper report when she suffered a stuck pitch change on one prop and descended through a break in cloud to a tiny country airfield where the problem was fixed for her. The engines had automatic rough leaning (the carrot in the hole controlled by a capsule). A small saving in fuel would be possible by going higher.

The "return to The Gilberts" was said to Gene Vidal, who at the time was a confidant, friend and partner in a small airline they owned. It was said before she left the U.S. as a response to the question: "What if you cannot find Howland". The record has been found in a taped interview which was made with Vidal and which rests in the University of Wisconsin. So, the return to The Gilberts was the intention. She stated that she would find a cleared area, a beach; or ditch close to shore. No airstrips in The Gilberts in 1937.

Establishing "where" they were would be a first priority and that would rest with Noonan on sighting any of the Giberts. They might not know "which" atoll they were headed for and reached as they only carried the NatGeo map of the Pacific and Commander Williams strip maps. Flying westward the sun would be ahead, assisting Noonan. The NatGeo map has an inset which names the Gilbert Atolls against Lat/Long, the William's strip map does not name them and they appear as minute dots.

The book "Last Flight", composed by George Palmer Putnam and made from Earhart's writings and the notes she made and passed back to George contains the clue as to how Earhart could manage to eke out the fuel. This is on Page 37 in her own handwriting and in the text. Heading westwards in the now tailwind, she is heading towards a long landfall line which stretches from the southern end of the Solomon Islands on the left and runs northwards to the top of New Guinea Territory on the right and this landfall line stretches for hundreds of miles. This therefore is a large target on her reciprocal. There are also some islands ahead of her.

Regards,

David Billings

Well,

I haven't had a chance to look at your website but I certainly will over the next few days. The idea of a discovered and then forgotten "unidentified" wreck certainly raises eyebrows. I do look forward to hearing about how your next expedition to New Britain.

My mind is open.

Peace,

David

daveymac82c,

Bravo ! I guess that there are now about three and a half of us now with open minds who are conjunct on this forum.

In percentages that's about a 40% increase in about two weeks...... My Goodness !

As to Expeditions, we will be venturing again around May next year. It is not pleasant in there during the rainy season which starts very shortly.

David Billings

Hi David,
with the headwind Amelia had,i cant see how she turned around and went back.I know you know more about the ways to save gas than i do.Can you explain how she did?One of the things about Gardner island is that there was a fly over.Nobody saw a plane.Nobody was standing waving.The reason Howland wasn't found by Amelia is that its very hard to see.It also looks like nobody in the plane knew how to use the directional finder. Just a series of errors.No wonder they got lost.Good luck on your next trip.
Billy Roberts

Mr. Billings,

You have put forward a very interesting hypothesis.

The last radio call that you mentioned, which was previously dismissed, seems like a fundamental piece of the puzzle to me. Can you provide a clearer description of why it had been dismissed and any possible coordinates for its source?

Secondly, a magnetometer search of land is dramatically cheaper than an ocean floor survey. So, if you can somehow build up support, maybe by writing an article in a US based aviation history magazine or something similar, you can generate the support necessary. Alternately, the materialmay exist through some already conducted survey.

Best of luck to you in finding the wreck and determining whose it is.

Regards,

Art S.

Mr. Billings,

Could you post the coordinates of the area where you believe the wreck is? I would like to look at it on Google Earth.

Thanks,

Art S.

ArtS.

I will not post the co-ordinates, that would be giving the game away ! Suffice to say that the area is some 40 nm south-west of Rabaul, in some very rough country. If you look for a very large bay to the SW of Rabaul on the south coast and then imagine yourself going inland into the bush, you'll get the picture.

I have previously had the story on "Wings over Kansas" and on an Aviation Radio show. I have been very surproised at the lack of attention that we receive given that the evidence we have is excellent.

For "brcr29", the guy who asked "how" she would get back: She told Gene Vidal that she would turn back at a point where she had four hours of fuel left for a return to the Gilberts. There is a transcript of a taped interview with Vidal in the Uni of Wisconsin ( I believe in box 40 of Vidal's files bequeathed to the Uni ) and Vidal quoted Earhart as saying this. My position is that if she was much closer to The Gilberts than she thought she was (ie: a long way from Howland), due to the headwind encountered, then, she would not use that fuel in a return to The Gilberts and there would be a dilemna in the cockpit as to what to do with the fuel (?)

Either ditch there and then, crashland or .... continue on as Ocean Island lay ahead, Nauru was ahead and they can easily make Nukumanu Island on 240 USG.

The clue as to the "how" is on Page 37 of "Last Flight" (written by AE and published posthumously by GPP) where she describes a flight from SFO to HNL at 10,000 feet throttled back to 120 IAS ( I suspect this is CIAS) and she was using 20 USGPH. With 200 USG left she can endure for at least nine hours, 240 USG she can endure for 11 hours. With a 25mph Tailwind, her groundspeed would be 145 Mph. I'll leave you gentlemen to do the math and leave you to work out the distance from the Gilberts to say Rabaul, which had the only to airstrips. Google Earth will show this by using the rule(r).

Goerner saw the radio call made at 1030 Local ITASCA time (2200 GMT) and wrote it into his first edition book but left it out of the second edition, I suppose because it conflicted with his Saipan theory. Nauru reported the later calls at 32.5 Hours endurance and these appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald in July 1937.

There are many and varied circumstantial bits and pieces which fit with the puzzle of the New Britain Project. The radio calls which people disregard are just one facet.

Food for thought, gents.

To "jikoms4" who is trying to contact me... Please use the email address on my website. Anyone else who wants to talk direct may also do so.

Regards,

David Billings.

To my mind she picked an island that was too small in that vast ocean...flown around the Pacific a lot and it's a lonely place with every cloud shadow looking like that island you're looking for.

For Ian Quinn

She had few "American Owned" islands to choose from and she could hardly ask the Japanese or the British for some asphalt.....

Don't go past the DAKAR-ADEN flight plan of 28 Hrs and 40 mins for the distance of 4307 Statute Miles that is written onto Commander Clarance Williams strip maps. This is a "NIL Wind" Flight Plan at 150 mph Groundspeed average. Why would Earhart accept this flight plan if the Electra could not do this flight ?

The Lockheed fuel consumption figures published say that the tankage of 1151 USG was not enough and my workings on their figures say she would need 1267 USG so what did Earhart know about the fuel consumption of the Electra on such a long-distance flight.

What Earhart was saying was that her "practical" knowledge of the fuel usage and the Electra could achieve this 4307 Sm flight..... She's got the knowledge and can we as latter day interested parties argue with what Earhart knew about the Electra ? Can we argue ?

Personally I think this "4307" flight could be achieved with a tailwind of 10 mph, that's what my workings tell me. Maybe that's what Earhart was banking on, a tailwind across Africa.

David Billings

The thread is alive again !

For Mark Pilkington:

Mark, we do not know who wrote the letters and numbers on the map edge. It may be possible to find out after the find when money would be available for research into this because the writer had a very distinctive way of writing a capital "H" as can be seen. Families tend to hang on to old letters and such and it may be possible to find out which member of the Army unit did indeed write the script.

All we do know is that the map lay undisturbed in the possession of former Lance Corporal Len Willoughby from 1945 until it saw the light of day again in late 1993, before I even came into the venture. Willoughby and Don Angwin met on a street in Perth, Western Australia in early 1993 and discussed the fact that Don had been approached by a writer for the "West Australian" newspaper and the paper had published a full page article on the 1945 find and asked the question, whose wreck is it (?), before the map was even in the picture.

As related to me by Don Angwin, Willoughby told Angwin that he had seen the article in the newspaper and then said, "You know, I have a map of that area from that time when we were in New Britain. I am going into hospital shortly but I'll send the map to you."

Don himself went into hospital at about the same time for a small operation and when he came out, in the stack of mail waiting for him was a large envelope which contained the map. Willoughby had done what he said he would do which was fortunate because Len Willoughby, who had gone into a Vets Hospital for a by-pass operation, didn't make it. He passed away.

The map itself, when laid out, had the edges folded under for about 2 inches (50mm) around the entire map and the edges had been stuck down with what Don described as "..old, wrinkly masking tape..". In 1994 when I joined the venture, he had nothing to show me at all except the map and went to have it photo-copied for me before my scheduled arrival in Perth. He removed the tape from the folded over edge and the writing came into view. That was in August 1994.

Of the B-17 wreck in the area. Yes, I have seen sections of that wreck and there are no engines on it, they came off the descending aircraft when it blew up and we have only ever seen one engine in a river bed, with one prop blade speared into the clay bed. The outer engine wing panel sections are missing from the main piece of wreckage and the outer wing panels too. One O/W panel is down in the river bed not far from where the engine is (was, as it has now been swept away). The cockpit section is also missing from the production joint forwards and the rear section is broken off from the radio shack rearwards. The cockpit section must have been found post-war because the Australian co-pilots' remains were recovered. I saw the tail section with the starboard side tailplane stuck into the river bank in 1994 with the large distinctive fin sticking straight up, minus the rudder and obviously there was no perspex in the tail-gunners window frames. That has now disappeared from the river bank after Cyclone Justin went through the area in 1995. The distance of the tail section from the main part of the wreckage was about half a mile. Other bits and pieces are scattered far and wide, ammo trays and chutes, engine panels, heat exchangers to name a few bits. There is a photo of this particular B-17 showing it to be camouflage painted before it was lost. In 1945, that paint would have still been on the wreck. I could see no fire damage at the main wreck site and the rubber tyres were still there and would have burnt along with the magnesium alloy wheels if there had been a fire. It appears to have exploded and snuffed out on the way down.

The unpainted twin-engined wreck seen on the patrol by the Vets in 1945 was basically complete with one engine close by and one still attached and points to the East whereas the main wreckage of the B-17 points S-W. My theory there is that it spun in and the outside engine came off on clunking the trees and dropped into the site followed by the aircraft which was said to be resting on its' belly with the starboard side wingtip bent upwards for about ten feet of the outer wing. So what they saw is not the B-17 and the -17 had Wright Cyclones anyway. The recent news of a twin-engined wreck in the area of the Ip River near Milim in East New Britain will be a WWII wreck as our Vets were never in the Ip River area. That could be a B-25 or B-26 or an A-20. My contact at the Civil Aviation Office in Port Moresby has been trying to get funds so that he can go and see "what" it is but so far no funding.

As you know there are many USAAF aircraft still missing in New Guinea and probably most famous of these is the B-17, "San Antonio Rose" which carried Brig-Gen Kenneth Walker and is missing from a daylight (noon) raid on Rabaul. I have the film of the raid and did some preliminaries on this one and got a sniff of two aircraft up in the Bainings Range which were said to be close together, one a "Bikpela Balus" (pidgin for big aircraft) and one "Liklik Balus" (pidgin for small aircraft). The SAR was followed out of Rabaul harbour by some fighters (Hayabusas) and one fighter never returned to base and the thought is that he shot down the SAR which in turn got him.

When we located a B-24 on top of the Finnesterre Range in 1989, I also was asked of a B-17 in the Tauta area of the Finnesterre Range foothiills which is missing with two Generals on board (17 people in all) so that must have been on a Staff move from Port Moresby to Hollandia. In 1989, the CILHI unit asked me if I had seen/heard of this one as they wanted to find it. The conclusion I came to on this one was that there could be documents on board that the U.S. wants to keep closed and/or, there could be other things on it too ! Sounds interesting but I am more interested in the elusive C/N 1055 resting in East New Britain....

We will be going in again next year after the NW winds and rain season ends, probably in May, when the weather is friendlier, it is no fun in there at all when it rains.

David Billings

Emphasis added.

For the life of me I can't image what documents...if they survived a crash and 60+ years (very remote at best)...would be that secretive.
I don't think we're talking wikileasks level of stuff, especially conmsidering the governments involved have all changed a few times since 1943.
The US has let all kinds of "secrets" out about WWI over the years. And there is a good chance that any thing out here would be legally declassified by now.

Your statement has a lot of assumptions and guesses.
Do you KNOW it was a staff move? Who were the generals? Have any proof they were working on something that secret?
Has anyone asked JTF Full Accounting in Hawaii if they're interested in the missing B-17?
Or is it just your assumptions in trying to prove that the government is somehow evil when it comes to missing planes in the SW Pacific?

As far as vets seeing a Lockheed, lets not forget the Japanese made Lockheed Lodestars under license. I'm guessing 95 out of 100 vets couldn't tell the difference. And juding by general aircraft recognition skills, they could be wrong even if it wasn't a LOckheed.

Sorry I'm not a fan of conspiraciy theories.
Most don't hold water when subjected to any logic. The easy way out when you can't find an answer...or plane in this case...is charge a "coverup".

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.

For J Boyle:

All I am saying is that when I phoned in the B-24 near the top of the hill at 10,500 feet, to your CILHI recovery team in Hawaii in 1989, they asked me "if" I had seen or had heard of a B-17 wreck in the same or near area. I asked "Why". The guy on the phone said that they knew that a B-17 with 17 SOB had gone missing in that area and two Generals were on board. So I said, "Then it was a Staff move". "Yes, and we would like any information on it". I said, "Then it most likely has documents on board".... he didn't say much after that except that they really would like to find it. I guess it just about has the same import as they would like to find the "San Antonio Rose" in the Bainings area of East New Britain which had Brig-General Walker on board.

There's no "conspiracy"; I know Americans love Conspiracies but there ain't one here. It's just the possibility that the B-17 they would "like to find" was in the same Tauta area where we went to find the B-24 BUT the B-24 was up the top of the hill and goodness knows where the B-17 is. I don't. Possibly there are documents on board that they don't want broadcast where Big Mac said something derogatory about the Australian Government or Chiang Kai Chek or Stalin for that matter, who knows ? All I know was they (CILHI now JPAC) were keen on that B-17. I couldn't help them.... maybe you can ?

Know your History ? Know the country you are in ?

The USAAF de-camped and went (on MacArthur's Plan.... to the Phillipines..."I shall return"...even had Cigarettes made with the slogan)....one of the stepping stones was Hollandia. After the initial move on Hollandia, it was no secret and Staff moves occur after the major action. Enter Google Earth now and draw a rule line from Port Moresby to Jayapura (formerly Hollandia). Which area in Papua New Guinea which has mountains at a fair altitude does that line cross over ?

It's mostly Americans who say your own Government isn't quite right so don't hang that on me, Buddy. Of course they're NOT evil, where the heck did you get that idea ? From your own Press and TV ? Heck, you're American, we have to believe in you !!

The two remaining Vets out of the four that were alive in 1994 when I joined the gang and who saw the wreck in 1945 would agree with you that they would not know a C-47 from a Barn Door and nobody but and except for your own USAAF in their reply to the Australian Unit said that from the information they were sent..."It could be a Lockheed", that was in May 1945. Since then of course we have the map with the writing on the edge which just screams that IT IS a LOCKHEED.....

I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories either, I'd have joined TIGHAR or Ed Dames "Remote Viewing" if I was......

I'm enjoying this "lively" thread! I'm new here but just found it! Thanks to all who have contributed!

It may be 60+ years but "if" the acft had documents aboard that in today's world might be somewhat "embarrassing", the US Gov may not want them all over the Internet..... If a B-17 is flying around with 17 people aboard, rest assured that 10 of them are not a regular combat crew but it was probably a skeleton crew (4-5?) and the rest were passengers/staff...... Figure on lots of those leather briefcases aboard.....

Japanese building Lodestars? I think that the ground patrol in 1945 stated that the plane was unpainted/silver, etc which may have helped to lead the US folks to state "It's not one of ours...........". How many Japanese "Lodestars" were flying in combat zones in a natural finish? Uh........ probably zero........

With Ric Gillespie, he might be guilty of what we pilots call "fixation" when it comes to his narrow focus of where AE (may/ may not) came down..... Which is a shame since he seems to have the $$ backing to keep on his personal "fixation" with Gardner Island.....

"FIXATION" – A psychological condition where the pilot fixes attention on a single source of information and ignores all other sources.

Dave

Here is a transcript that records the radio traffic between A.E. and the Itasca.
Searching the web I cannot find any records of any significant different versions.
Now reading what she herself is reporting , it is quite clear that she was not looking at any alternative plan but was clearly looking for Howland.

"KHAQQ to Itasca. We must be on you but cannot see you. But gas is running low. Been unable to reach you by radio. We are flying at 1,000 feet."

In her own words, she states her fuel situation. This leaves no room to believe that she was saving fuel for another plan.
Again she thinks she should be right over the island and is low on fuel.
Nobody seems to want to listen to her. She is stating the obvious - lost with fuel almost gone. She stays there for over an hour looking for the island. Any pilot with room to execute an alternate plan would have realized quickly that they were not where they were intended and would have gone to plan B long before an hours time . I know this from first hand experience.
If she was giving up looking for Howland and was going to an alternate, she would have radioed her intentions just as any other logical and responsible pilot would have and just as she had been doing thru the flight.
I am sorry but having read you theories etc I am still not convinced
Writing around the edge of a page just is not proof that would counter what A.E. herself is telling people. The paper has not be 100% authenticated (?)
As much as anyone I would love to see the mystery solved but again your theories are very far fetched. However, I would encourage you to keep investigating at the very least you may find a wartime aircrew that can be accounted for.




Early on Friday, July 2, Carey wrote in his diary: "Up all last night following radio reports - scanty ... heard voice for first time 2:48 a.m. - 'sky overcast.' All I heard. At 6:15 am reported '200 miles out.'"

By the time Earhart, her voice stronger, reported she was "100 miles out," a welcoming committee had gone ashore and was "waiting restlessly," Carey wrote.

If Noonan's dead-reckoning did not bring the plane directly over Howland at the "line of position," Earhart would fly up and down the 337-157 degree line until she found the island.

"To the north, the first landfall is Siberia," says Gillespie, "so if they didn't find it soon, they'd have turned back south, knowing that even if they missed Howland, there were other islands beyond it - Baker, McKean and Gardner - on that same line."

But nothing was that simple. By now, Earhart would be burning into her five-hour fuel reserve, and even in daylight, islands could be obscured by billowy clouds and their shadows on the water.

At 7:42 a.m. local time, Earhart's voice suddenly came loud and clear: "KHAQQ to Itasca. We must be on you but cannot see you. But gas is running low. Been unable to reach you by radio. We are flying at 1,000 feet."

At 7:58 a.m., there was a nervous edge to Earhart's normal calm. A log entry had her saying, "we are drifting but cannot hear you." An operator changed this to "we are circling." Gillespie believes she actually said, "we are listening."

As birds wheeled over the Howland shoreline, human ears strained for the sound of engines, and binoculars scanned for any sign of the silver Electra. Itasca continued sending Morse code A's.

About 8:30 a.m., believing Earhart must be out of gas, Itasca's captain, Cmdr. Warner K. Thompson, ordered the welcoming committee back to the ship. "Flash news from ship Itasca: 'Amelia down,'" Carey wrote in his diary.

Suddenly, at 8:55 a.m., Earhart was back on: "We are on the line 157 337... we are running on line north and south." The radiomen agreed she sounded distraught; one thought she was near hysteria.

Then the radio went silent.

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

David..I didn't mean to sound like I'm going off on you, it's just that conspiracy theories are just silly. Usually the work of small people trying to look large.

There is nothing in brief cases that would cause the govt. not to find the ship.
As I said, if they weren't destroyed in the crash, how about 60 years of rain, fungus, mold, and animals?
Even then, I'd guess there are no secrets worth keeping now.
Would they embarass MacArthur? Who cares? He's long dead as is FDR..and (then) Australian Government leaders, Chiang Kai Chek and Stalin.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.