Information about Amelia Earhart's location.

So, besides the 2006 Google Earth photo, this area is photographed by satellite approximately every two weeks, under a wide variety of lighting, sea surface conditions, water turbidity, and cloud cover. You can browse these images on Terraserver at https://www.terraserver.com/view?ut...Lng=&lat=-4.498611&lng=-172.1575&bbox=&center= . You can download higher resolution versions for a fee.

What is interesting is that you CAN see seafloor features in many of these pictures. The lightish spots are most likely coral heads. They are in the same position in photos taken on different days. This demonstrates that is possible to see sub-surface objects in this area, that they are persistent from day to day, and that it is not an unusual or rare circumstance of lighting and weather.

However, in none of these images can you see any evidence of anything located at Lat -4.498611 Long -172.1575. The 7/9/2015 picture is particularly insightful, as the lighting and sea conditions are such that the pattern of the vegetation on the seafloor is clearly visible, as it is in the 2006 photo. There is no evidence of any object.
 
Nauticos, the deep sea exploration company of David W Jourdan, (not associated in any way with TIGHAR) went out in 2002 and again in 2006 and is set to go out again in 2017. The next expedition will explore the small area not searched in the first two explorations and will revisit a couple of sonar findings from the first two explorations. The search used a number of different approaches to determining the most likely ditching site, as related in the book "The Deep Sea Quest For Amelia Earhart" by David W. Jourdan. I heard the news of the 2017 sailing just this last Monday from one of the members of the Rockwell Collins Radio Club which analyzed radio signal reports using the exact same models of Collins radio equipment and recommended certain areas as most likely to be the ditching site. Other approaches by experts in other disciplines were developed and all the findings were overlaid to try to find the area most likely to be the resting site. This area was searched in 2002 and 2006 except for a small area with negative results.

Jourdan found the DAKAR, Israeli submarine lost in 10,000 feet of water and wrote about it in "The Search and Discovery of Israel's Lost Submarine DAKAR". I have no knowledge of the DAKAR search, but sat in on at least three presentations by people who were on the first two Nauticos expeditions searching for Earhart and found the discussion very interesting.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
The Orona theory of disappearance doesn't have to call others liars in order to be plausible?
Click to expand...
Seems like that's exactly what you're doing when US Marines have said "We poured gasoline on the airplane and burned it."
 
Everskyward said:
It seems implausible to me that an airplane would be lying there as it would on a flat hangar floor. I agree with the rest that you are reading blue blobs like a Rorschach test and seeing what you want to see.
Click to expand...

I speculate Amelia successfully landed her plane of the lagoon surface. The water there about 35 feet deep. Heavy engines and nose down first touches bottom and the tail settles down to give a "hanger floor" type appearance from above. Amelia doesn't get much credit as a pilot from some but she was a adequate pilot and fully capable of a Sully _Hudson River style water landing.

The Terraserver site doesn't allow the altitude to get below (1000' ? just a guess) before the screen goes blank. Slacktide or anyone know how to get down further for examination. I agree_ I can't see anything like the GE2006 image using the Terraserver site link slacktide provided. I wouldn't expect every image to show the airframe. Using the 2016 GE image as an example of why it won't appear in most images: the image is very dark in the area of the airframe- not brilliant sunshine? The relation of the clouds and the shadows they cast indicates a low sun angle making it impossible for the reflection to be aimed at the satellite camera above. Satisfying the requirement for intense sunshine, calm surface conditions, and just perfect angle relation of sun and satellite to project the reflection into the camera lens will be rare. Slacktide:how did you get down to low elevation to examine the images at the Terrserver site?
 
We can track the Okeanos Explorer as the Nauticos search gets underway.
https://service.ncddc.noaa.gov/website/EXAtlas/viewer.htm

Note that they have circled Canton several times and Nikumaroro at least once. Haven't gone near Orona. The ship will be at Apia, Samoa on the 11th and I guess the Nauticos team will join the ship there. Search around Howland last of Feeb and into March.
 
orona-png.51040

If I had more time, I'd start a poll with this picture and ask all the pilots here to say where they would make an emergency landing. Maybe I'm an idiot, but I wouldn't land in the water with the options available in the pic.
 
Salty said:
orona-png.51040

If I had more time, I'd start a poll with this picture and ask all the pilots here to say where they would make an emergency landing. Maybe I'm an idiot, but I wouldn't land in the water with the options available in the pic.
Click to expand...

Fair statement, but what did it look like in the 1930's?
 
Salty said:
If I had more time, I'd start a poll with this picture and ask all the pilots here to say where they would make an emergency landing. Maybe I'm an idiot, but I wouldn't land in the water with the options available in the pic.
Click to expand...
I'm curious. How would you land? The stiff breeze is from the east most of the time.

MauleSkinner said:
I guess if one is going to believe what they're going to believe, turning what others say into something they didn't is part of the M.O.
Click to expand...

Throttling back...the Orona theory says USMC Devine, Ford and others did see a L10 destroyed at Saipan. The Orona-Saipan theory incorporates the statements of the Marines. The leading theories- crash and sink and Nikumaroro -dismiss the statements of the veterans..says they are lying. But the Orona theory does not support the "she was a spy and the US gov't knew about it".
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Throttling back...the Orona theory says USMC Devine, Ford and others did see a L10 destroyed at Saipan. The Orona-Saipan theory incorporates the statements of the Marines. The leading theories- crash and sink and Nikumaroro -dismiss the statements of the veterans..says they are lying. But the Orona theory does not support the "she was a spy and the US gov't knew about it".
Click to expand...
...and the Orona theory, like the "leading theories", says that a Marine who says he personally poured gas on Earhart's plane to burn it is lying.
 
MauleSkinner said:
...and the Orona theory, like the "leading theories", says that a Marine who says he personally poured gas on Earhart's plane to burn it is lying.
Click to expand...

Guess I don't understand. The Orona theory says the marines destroyed a plane at As Lito Field they identified as being Amelia's plane. That plane was an L10 the Japanese bought prior to the 1938 embargo and was used by the IJA to hoax the IJN into believing the US was spying on the Japanese buildup in the mandated islands. In Devine's book, it was USMC Ford who describes the plane as "just like Amelia's with two windows towards the back of the plane". The TIGHAR group has discovered that the plane was field modified and left the US with only one window. There are two planes involved; the fake plane destroyed at As Lito and the actual plane in the Orona lagoon. The veterans were being truthful; they thought they were burning the real Mcoy.
 
Last edited:
Ought to be easy to prove. Take a boat there (or hire someone to go there), put on a mask, and dive down to the plane. Or not.
 
kyleb said:
Ought to be easy to prove. Take a boat there (or hire someone to go there), put on a mask, and dive down to the plane. Or not.
Click to expand...

Yep. With a permit in hand, a public GoFundMe type campaign could maybe raise the 200,000 or so for a three week "discovery"expedition. Getting the permit is the problem. Without it, fines and lawsuit ensue. A clean- no strings discovery is required so that a reputable museum- like the Pacific Air Museum at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor- can go for the big bucks fund raiser required for recovery and restoration. The major searchers (Nikumaroro and crash and sink) are going for bits and pieces of the plane. Air Museums don't have a Keen interest in bits and pieces. But the whole plane together-certain to make a good display and attract more aviation enthusiasts to the museum. Later this summer the situation may begin to clear as both Nikumaroro and crash and sink complete tests-both certain to fail. The Okeanos Explorer approaches Apia and should dock on the 11th as scheduled. See the tracking map.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Yep. With a permit in hand, a public GoFundMe type campaign could maybe raise the 200,000 or so for a three week "discovery"expedition. Getting the permit is the problem. Without it, fines and lawsuit ensue. A clean- no strings discovery is required so that a reputable museum- like the Pacific Air Museum at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor- can go for the big bucks fund raiser required for recovery and restoration. The major searchers (Nikumaroro and crash and sink) are going for bits and pieces of the plane. Air Museums don't have a Keen interest in bits and pieces. But the whole plane together-certain to make a good display and attract more aviation enthusiasts to the museum. Later this summer the situation may begin to clear as both Nikumaroro and crash and sink complete tests-both certain to fail. The Okeanos Explorer approaches Apia and should dock on the 11th as scheduled. See the tracking map.
Click to expand...

Why do you need $200k? You have the exact location. You need a rowboat, a swimsuit, a gps, and a GoPro.

This is where adventure stories go wrong. The treasure is always protected by a dragon, boobytraps, or something too hard to deal with. If you think it's there, go take a picture. The world will beat a path to your door.
 
kyleb said:
Why do you need $200k? You have the exact location. You need a rowboat, a swimsuit, a gps, and a GoPro.

This is where adventure stories go wrong. The treasure is always protected by a dragon, boobytraps, or something too hard to deal with. If you think it's there, go take a picture. The world will beat a path to your door.
Click to expand...


$200K yes. Add up expenses for a well funded and safe expedition. Three weeks- Compensations: a world renown scuba diver photographer=$15K; a safety diver/assistant=$8K; a surface tender/ watercraft driver expert= $6K; a medical doctor familiar with diving problems= $8K; a dive boat captain/crew and boat $25K; a support and supply boat captain/crew= $45K; expenses to host the Kiribati representative $3K.....communications, satellite phones ......the list goes on and on. The photographer(s) I am thinking about is Darren Jew ( Australia) and Tobias Friedrich (Germany).

Dragons and booblytraps are the least of the worry. The real worry are legal entanglements. Getting a permit PLUS :Included in the costs would be legal expenses associated with enjoining the Earhart/Putnam heirs in a salvers contract such that the copyright proceeds from discovery photos and ultimate museum display could be used to reward GoFundMe participants of the initial search. Tee shirts could be used but are no real inducement. The courts would, without doubt, award the recovery rights to rightful owners under Admiralty Maritime Law and award the salvers some portion to cover at least expedition expenses+ incentives.
 
Good grief. I'm a certified safety diver and a published underwater photographer. I'll do it for free and need no support team, just pay for my transportation.
 
I free dive 35 feet all the time, and I'm a fat out of shape semi-old guy.
 
Salty said:
I free dive 35 feet all the time, and I'm a fat out of shape semi-old guy.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The whole thing is a fantasy. From the "evidence" to the reasons he couldn't go locate the thing if it really was there.
 
kyleb said:
Exactly. The whole thing is a fantasy. From the "evidence" to the reasons he couldn't go locate the thing if it really was there.
Click to expand...

Never chose you as a dive buddy. Air embolism(s) are very common in diving and a doctor is required to insure the degree of embolism is not life threatening. Can occur after any depth dive- lung, heart, brain-all very dangerous. Can be mild-wow he seems odd- to severe- He's not breathing. Decades ago divers were well trained athletes and embolisms not much of a problem. Today everybody dives and no requirement to be in top notch shape much less well trained. But even the best can make mistakes. So a doc makes sense when your in the boonies. It can happen to jet jockeys as well. I think an embolism is what got Steve Fosset flying that super Citabria. He was too good a pilot to just fly into a mountain.
 
Salty said:
Good grief. I'm a certified safety diver and a published underwater photographer. I'll do it for free and need no support team, just pay for my transportation.
Click to expand...

I'll sign you up if I ever get a permit.
 
It might be hard to get a permit for something that doesn't require a permit.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Never chose you as a dive buddy. Air embolism(s) are very common in diving and a doctor is required to insure the degree of embolism is not life threatening. Can occur after any depth dive- lung, heart, brain-all very dangerous. Can be mild-wow he seems odd- to severe- He's not breathing. Decades ago divers were well trained athletes and embolisms not much of a problem. Today everybody dives and no requirement to be in top notch shape much less well trained. But even the best can make mistakes. So a doc makes sense when your in the boonies. It can happen to jet jockeys as well. I think an embolism is what got Steve Fosset flying that super Citabria. He was too good a pilot to just fly into a mountain.
Click to expand...
The NTSB said he likely encountered downdrafts that exceeded the climb capabilities of the Super Decathlon he was flying. That was based on the POH and meteorological analysis of wind conditions in the area (high Sierras) that day. What evidence do you have that the cause of the crash was even medical, much less something so specific as an air embolism?
 
azure said:
The NTSB said he likely encountered downdrafts that exceeded the climb capabilities of the Super Decathlon he was flying. That was based on the POH and meteorological analysis of wind conditions in the area (high Sierras) that day. What evidence do you have that the cause of the crash was even medical, much less something so specific as an air embolism?
Click to expand...
Witnesses reported that the piece of sheet metal that TIGHAR said was added but they found elsewhere wasn't on fossett's airplane.
 
kyleb said:
Nothing strange about it. I can name many people who have done exactly the same thing. Flying car developers. Leaders of "prosperity" churches. Televangelists. Civil rights leaders. And plenty of others.

Finding suckers to send you money is an age old profession.
Click to expand...

Some, including a former President, even put their daughter on the payroll for $970K/year!
 
There was a plane with a woman flying it. The ocean is really really big. The possible options for where the plane are are really big. For someone to say over here or over here is just silly. Did they find that airliner yet?
 
I'm just glad that there are still people in the world who do fact-checking, and cite their sources, whatever they call it! :yes:
 
azure said:
The NTSB said he likely encountered downdrafts that exceeded the climb capabilities of the Super Decathlon he was flying. That was based on the POH and meteorological analysis of wind conditions in the area (high Sierras) that day. What evidence do you have that the cause of the crash was even medical, much less something so specific as an air embolism?
Click to expand...

If you want to call the wind analysis evidence of the accident cause you can because that's what you think. I think some medical thing- totally unsuspected-came out of the blue to cause the accident. You are assuming he was having a bad day as a pilot and forgot all about downdrafts. As a premiere plane and balloon pilot he wouldn't do that. His vast experience and skill is evidence that it's unlikely he forgot about downdrafts. So a medical situation is a possible explanation. Note that I said "I think". Must we have evidence for every thought?
 
That snopes article kind of sounds a little like debunking a serial killer that killed 10 vagrants by defending them against accusations that they didn't kill 40 rich people.
 
Salty said:
That snopes article kind of sounds a little like debunking a serial killer that killed 10 vagrants by defending them against accusations that they didn't kill 40 rich people.
Click to expand...
They provided a link to the tax return of the foundation, showing that her compensation was zero. What more do you want?
 
Tom Maxwell said:
If you want to call the wind analysis evidence of the accident cause you can because that's what you think. I think some medical thing- totally unsuspected-came out of the blue to cause the accident. You are assuming he was having a bad day as a pilot and forgot all about downdrafts. As a premiere plane and balloon pilot he wouldn't do that. His vast experience and skill is evidence that it's unlikely he forgot about downdrafts. So a medical situation is a possible explanation. Note that I said "I think". Must we have evidence for every thought?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, he might have had bad weather info, or simply fell victim to what I call "survivor bias" - the assumption that because he had faced similar forecasts in the past and had come out just fine, that he would be okay this time as well.

As to whether we need evidence for every thought, of course not... but this isn't just a thought, from what you wrote you gave the impression that you believe it to be true. You also believe that Earhart's plane is at Orona. If your evidence for the latter belief is as weak as your evidence for the former (and from what some apparent experts in image compression on this forum have written, it seems to be, though I lack the skill to evaluate that claim), then it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in your ability to reach a well-reasoned conclusion based on evidence... something of which you would certainly need to convince prospective funders for your proposed expedition.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
If you want to call the wind analysis evidence of the accident cause you can because that's what you think. I think some medical thing- totally unsuspected-came out of the blue to cause the accident. You are assuming he was having a bad day as a pilot and forgot all about downdrafts. As a premiere plane and balloon pilot he wouldn't do that. His vast experience and skill is evidence that it's unlikely he forgot about downdrafts. So a medical situation is a possible explanation. Note that I said "I think". Must we have evidence for every thought?
Click to expand...
Anyone can make a mistake. Yeah, it could have been medical, but it's way out there to pin it on a specific medical condition such as an embolism. You can think whatever you want but if you're going to try to convince others you need some evidence.
 
l
LDJones said:
Some, including a former President, even put their daughter on the payroll for $970K/year!
Click to expand...

Your memory must be failing you. Hillary and Bill were broke when they left the Whitehouse, and Chelsea really doesn't care about money at all, even though she's tried. I guess that's why she's able to donate so much of her time to the Foundation. Her family's lifetime of devoted civil service have shaped her well. I hope her apartment allows for easy travel to her foundation work each day.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nyda.../chelsea-clinton-care-money-article-1.1840138

http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/celeb-news/chelsea-clinton-husband-buy-10-5m-york-city-205928025.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top