Mon May 18, 2015 5:18 pm
gary217 wrote:And we know that the plane arrived close to Howland based on the strength of the radio signals and also on the sunline LOP. And we know the plane had not started a return to Bougainville prior to 2013 Z and even with 32 hours of fuel on board it would have been too late to start such a diversion after 2013 Z. And we know that Noonan did this same computation for the original planned flight from Hawaii to Howland so it is a rational assumption that he would have done the same if contemplating a diversion to Rabaul and would have computed that it was not feasible.
Mon May 18, 2015 6:42 pm
David Billings wrote:"We know the plane arrived close to Howland based on...."gary217 wrote:And we know that the plane arrived close to Howland based on the strength of the radio signals and also on the sunline LOP. And we know the plane had not started a return to Bougainville prior to 2013 Z and even with 32 hours of fuel on board it would have been too late to start such a diversion after 2013 Z. And we know that Noonan did this same computation for the original planned flight from Hawaii to Howland so it is a rational assumption that he would have done the same if contemplating a diversion to Rabaul and would have computed that it was not feasible.
Based on the Radio Signals ?
Pardon me.... but HF can travel for hundreds of miles (Even thousands) and although it does seems there were increasing strengths in reception as the flight wore on "S5" does not mean that they were "close to Howland". Even the TIGHAR Radio Gurus repeatedly warn Gillespie about saying the same thing about "S5" they too are ignored. Agreed strength five could have come on at "line of sight" from 10,000 or 12,000 feet (Lovell) as a line of sight between aerials but S5 does not mean AE, FN and the Electra were on top of Howland. How then is it known that AE, FN and the Electra were close to Howland ?
On the Sunline ?
How is it known that AE, FN and the Electra were on the Sunline ? Is that because Gillespie thinks that is the case ? Did Earhart say "Sunline" ? Or did she say "Line" ? Could it have been a simple "Line of Position" at Right Angles to the steer they were on of 067 degrees laying off for wind ? How is it known they were on a Sunline ?
Wind of 23 Knots ?
Did the wind stay constant at 23 Knots or did it vary ?
Bougainville ?
Where does Bougainville come into this ?
Diversion to Rabaul ?
A diversion Rabaul was not prior planned so how does that figure in this ? A Diversion was planned to The Gilberts as per "The Contingency Plan".
Take it from there.......
David Billings
"Must be Noonan's, then..."
Mon May 18, 2015 10:09 pm
gary217 wrote:It's an amazing coincidence that the 157-337 line just happened to be the exact azimuth of an LOP derived from an observation of the sun during the period from sunrise and for an hour afterwards. And she said they were on a line, not that she was flying a heading of 157-337.
gary217 wrote:So it varied.
gary217 wrote:it comes from your prior post on May 14, 2015 stating your hypothesis: "The Electra is at The Gilberts at 2200 GMT, and 11 Hours totals a flight of 33 Hours. and a range needed of around 4200 SM to the crash site. Crash Site ? Not yet ! lt was possible that she intended to attempt RABAUL. "
Tue May 19, 2015 2:19 am
David Billings wrote:Response to Gary217gary217 wrote:It's an amazing coincidence that the 157-337 line just happened to be the exact azimuth of an LOP derived from an observation of the sun during the period from sunrise and for an hour afterwards. And she said they were on a line, not that she was flying a heading of 157-337.
Yes, we all know about the "amazing coincidence" of the azimuth and the time of day and the sunline being at 157/337 but they were late on arriving and "Must be on you but cannot see you" let's the cat out of the bag as far as "deep uncertainty" goes, that they knew where they were, for obviously they did not. Will you or any other Navigator lay a big one on the table at evens and say, "I know they were in that sunline" ? I doubt that you or any other NAV would do that.
It is my understanding that a "Line of Position" at right angles to a 067 track has to be corrected for drift to maintain the new track 157-337 if there is a head or tail wind, so what you are saying is already known.... similarly a "Sunline" heading also would need to be corrected for drift to maintain the sunline. Nothing new there. She didn't say "Sunline" so we do not know for sure that she was on a sunline which for her purpose HAD to cut through Howland.... we do not know if it did cut through Howland either, do you ?.
Indeed the wind would vary. From what I read the July winds in Pacific at the equator are from the East. They come down the West coast of North America and up from the West coast of South America and then join and blow from the East straight across the Pacific.
As I have said, I have worked it to be 35 mph overhead the USCG ONTARIO which was experiencing 20 Knots on the surface, 35 mph is 30 Knots and it is 20 mph over the high end forecast that she received.
I have previously mentioned high Easterly wind values in mid-year told to me by pilots who have flown over the area at the 8000' to 14000' levels.
Possibly Earhart a first decided to try to get back "closer" to civilisation, later when it dawned that Rabaul may be possible.....
David Billings
"Must be Noonan's, then..."
Tue May 19, 2015 2:29 am
Tue May 19, 2015 4:37 pm
Tue May 19, 2015 5:19 pm
David Billings wrote:Gary La Pook
Your determination to run down the East New Britain Project is exemplary.
If you spent as much time on your own project as you do running down other peoples projects you might at last realise the time to raise the $10 Million it will take to search for your crashed and sank theory "somewhere" around the Howland Island area.
In the main I have spent my own money and as I have said hundreds of times, "I don't particularly care 'how' the Electra ended its' days on a hillside in East New Britain". The most important point is that there exists some documentary evidence with the ENB Project as to a location and there has been a sighting by responsible people with a description that fits which is more than anyone else has. This wreck seen has to be found to prove one way or the other whether it is the Electra. Isn't that what all Americans want ? Or is it that it has to be an American that finds it ? Is that it ?
You seem to want to run this ENB Project down and it surprises me when I thought that Americans detested negativity when there are salient points backing up a subject. You seem to breed negativity.
Please take the time to have an inwards look at yourself. Gather your acumen and your energy and devote your time to being positive especially about your own crashed and sank project, then you might get somewhere. When you do, I hope you enjoy your swim.
David Billings
Tue May 19, 2015 6:22 pm
gary217 wrote:(heck, I'd even be happy if TIGHAR found it! (Not REAL happy, but happpy nonetheless.))
gl
Thu May 21, 2015 1:01 pm
Thu May 21, 2015 5:56 pm
Thu May 21, 2015 8:28 pm
Fri May 22, 2015 8:53 am
Fri May 22, 2015 11:07 pm
Sat May 23, 2015 1:33 pm
eljefe wrote:Pardon my confusion, but is this warning misplaced? This thread seems fairly tame, no?
Wed Jun 03, 2015 6:01 am