Information about Amelia Earhart's location.

Cooter said:
l

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
Click to expand...
If we continue down this road, post will be deleted and warnings will be given. I have no clue how this subject has anything to do with Amelia Earhart's location.
 
Everskyward said:
If we continue down this road, post will be deleted and warnings will be given. I have no clue how this subject has anything to do with Amelia Earhart's location.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, I don't think any real information was given concerning Amelia's location. ;)

Point taken.....Moving along now, moving along. Nothing more to see here.
 
Everskyward said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well if Fossett was in an aerobatic plane doing aerobatics without a G suit the repeated strain of positive g and breatholding at the bottom of the loop could result in saturation of nitrogen in the blood and subsequent negative g and exhale at the top could produce tiny embolism bubbles. Stuff like this can happen. He did not go diving before his flight. We can't point to down drafts or anything else that will explain why an entire flight of top military pilots slam themselves into the desert floor.
There is a distinct difference between "I think" and "you must believe". I am not trying to convince you of anything. If you or others are bothered by what I think, the forum has a convenient tool to simply blank my posts as you read the thread.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Well if Fossett was in an aerobatic plane doing aerobatics without a G suit the repeated strain of positive g and breatholding at the bottom of the loop could result in saturation of nitrogen in the blood and subsequent negative g and exhale at the top could produce tiny embolism bubbles. Stuff like this can happen. He did not go diving before his flight. We can't point to down drafts or anything else that will explain why an entire flight of top military pilots slam themselves into the desert floor.
There is a distinct difference between "I think" and "you must believe". I am not trying to convince you of anything. If you or others are bothered by what I think, the forum has a convenient tool to simply blank my posts as you read the thread.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is bothered by what you think. I'm simply very skeptical about this, not to mention the location you propose for Amelia Earhart's airplane based on one image from Google Earth.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
.. .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...
Maybe it's semantics, and what you intended to say was "maybe an embolism. . ." Otherwise, it's just silly. . .there are probably dozens of medical events as, or more, likely than a G induced embolism. And real good pilots make mistakes all the time, including fatal ones.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Well if Fossett was in an aerobatic plane doing aerobatics without a G suit the repeated strain of positive g and breatholding at the bottom of the loop could result in saturation of nitrogen in the blood and subsequent negative g and exhale at the top could produce tiny embolism bubbles. Stuff like this can happen. He did not go diving before his flight. We can't point to down drafts or anything else that will explain why an entire flight of top military pilots slam themselves into the desert floor.
There is a distinct difference between "I think" and "you must believe". I am not trying to convince you of anything. If you or others are bothered by what I think, the forum has a convenient tool to simply blank my posts as you read the thread.
Click to expand...

What makes you think a G suit makes any difference? If anything it would make him more susceptible to the condition you attribute to his death, not less. I'm sorry but you but the stuff you are proposing sounds absurd. I've been around military aviation for 20 years and been lectured annually for that entire time on aviation physiology. I've never heard of a case of Gs producing an embolism. If it does happen, it is such a remote possibility that the military doesn't seem to consider it worthy of notifying their pilots of the threat. There's a point when you should bounce your ideas off of reality and see where they stand.
 
Last edited:
Cooter said:
What makes you think a.......

There's a point when you should bounce your ideas off of reality and see where they stand.
Click to expand...

Your right. I'm not an aviation medicine expert. I'll not make -"I think" style-statements about subjects outside the scope of the thread.
Bouncing the Orona idea off reality results in my thinking that the Orona idea does have some merit when compared to other ideas. The crash and sink idea does not have any recent clues. It's mainly dependent on the strong radio signals from Amelia's (plane) reported at the time and guesstimates about fuel consumption. It has been tested several times in the recent past and failed. The upcoming test is supported by a wide audience that includes the US gov't NOAA. So people think they can find the plane based on the old facts and interesting sonar hits from previous tests. These old facts are being treated as evidence but are really only clues. The fees Nauticos pays to use the Oakenos Explorer must be considerable. But I think it's a pay to play deal. It's what I think.
 
Tom Maxwell said:
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?
Click to expand...

If you can’t get anybody interested enough to spend several hundred thousand dollars for a high-level exploration based on a globular photo of coral heads, but you believe it’s solid, why don’t you and a buddy go to the Republic of Kiribati and take a look on a tourist-like budget? Then, if you see something more believable, use your photos of said evidence and your eye-witness testimony to get others interested.

Or hire a couple of kids to do it if you're not physically capable.


Step 1 - Fly to Kiribati’s main island, Tarawa, via Fiji, on Fiji Airlines

http://kiribatitourism.gov.ki/practicalinformation/gettinghere

Distance: about 6,800 miles

Cost - $1,300, round trip from LAX to Fiji to Tarawa (and back)


Step 2 - Book yourself as a passenger on Kiribati Shipping Services to get from Tarawa to Kanton Island (aka Canton Island)

http://kiribatitourism.gov.ki/practicalinformation/gettingaround/between-the-islands

Distance: about 1,000 miles

Cost – don’t know. Go ask


Step 3 - Find a boat owner on Kanton Island and charter it to take you to Orona (aka Hull Island)

Distance: about 100 miles

Cost – don’t know. Go ask.


Step 4 - Bring your handheld GPS and go snorkeling and see what you see.


Adventure of a lifetime.

Flight_to_Canton_Island.jpg
 
"Adventure" and "finding the airplane" aren't the primary goals here, evidently.

 
Here is the simple symmetry analysis I did that led me to the conclusion that this is Amelia's L10E. As shown in the attached image, seven points (A thru G) are selected that I believe to be airframe components. After the points are selected the positions can't be fudged; i.e. moved around to get better results. One must use knowledge of the aircraft shape to make the subjective selection. The points (7!=6+5+4+3+2+1=21) allow 21 lines to be drawn. The length of the lines are measured using the GE ruler from the app tool bar. Each line is divided by other lines to create a ratio(s). The 21 lines allow (21!=20+19+18+...........4+3+2+1=210) 210 ratio comparisons. Exactly the same thing is done using the L10E overhead drawing or sketch (8 1/2 X 11 is ok) except the exacting locations of the 7 points are more clear and a drafting ruler is used to measure the length of the line. Scale is not a consideration as it is the ratios that will be compared. In most cases the 210 ratio comparison are the same within a 5%-7% range. I think the airframe is oriented right wing down slightly (left wing up) and slightly nose up slightly (tail down). So some error is induced by not knowing those slight axis rotations. I don't know if the .xls file with the results can uploaded. Apparently not.100ftsymmetryL10E.jpg

Readers may note my posts seem out of order in the flow of the thread and not responding to some questions? I am ignoring some posts.
 
The Okeanos Explorer is on it's way towards the equator and Howland Island where it will meet up with the Nauticos team aboard the Mermaid Vigilance. You can follow the expedition on the Dave Jourdan/Nauticos http://nauticos.com/category/explorer-insights/ activity blog. I think the Okeanos Explorer will be locating wide field sonar targets of interest and passing them to the Nauticos team and Nauticos will use those locations for up close sonar and photography by the AUV.

If it fails, this well funded and professional expedition should open the AE mystery to more possible solutions. If they find the plane!: as Astroduster says...... HOLY****!
 
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...

Or just fly an airplane over with a good belly camera and take better pictures than one can take from space.

Acrodustertoo said:
Holy ****, you guys are still arguing over that picture!
Click to expand...

No kidding. If these guys were serious, they'd already have a better photo. No rowboat required.
 
denverpilot said:
Or just fly an airplane over with a good belly camera and take better pictures than one can take from space........
No kidding. If these guys were serious, they'd already have a better photo. No rowboat required.
Click to expand...

I'm old and broke and don't fly anymore. It would take a considerable airplane to fly to Orona and get a proof picture. One could ferry a plane from Honolulu into Kanton. There is a nice long runway there. Unattended no maintenance. Then hop over to Orona and get the picture (if the weather is good and the surface of the lagoon is calm). Then ferry back. Or as teamandras has suggested, use commercial into Pago Pago or Tarawa and rent/ferry over to Kanton and then to Orona. Ferry distance would be cut on account of the raft and emergency gear. Pilot should be a good swimmer just in case of problems.

Yes Kidding above. This is not a job for a amateurs. A respected aviation museum would be the people capable of doing that before investing any real money on recovery. Serious in this context means someone with a couple million $ to spend. Let's see what the Nauticos exploration finds. There's a couple million for ya!
 
Tom Maxwell said:
This is not a job for a amateurs. A respected aviation museum would be the people capable of doing that before investing any real money on recovery. Serious in this context means someone with a couple million $ to spend. Let's see what the Nauticos exploration finds. There's a couple million for ya!
Click to expand...

The issue isn't recovering the aircraft. It is about finding the aircraft and bringing back viable proof.

Do that and the line of people to recover it will be a mile long.
 
I clearly see Bigfoot, db cooper, jimmy hoffa, and the holy grail in that image.
 
kyleb said:
Yeah, but where's Elmo?
Click to expand...
Give me 14 million dollars to hire a crew of 30 friends, er, I mean professionals, and I'll hire a yacht (with a helicopter in case someone gets seasick) and go find out for you.
 
Well Salty I wish I could do just that. Unfortunately, I don't have the 14M$.

Here is a screen grab from the NOAA website. The Okeanos Explorer sets immediately off of Howland Island. A limited search pattern is seen in the ship's track. Don't know exactly if this where Nauticos is now searching or if Okeanos is just generally looking around as part of the survey. Note that the ship's track from Apia mostly follows the 157/337 rhumb line.OkeanosExplorereatHowland.png

Some of the nations best aviation folks are involved in this search and if nothing is found at least the data and research provided should be valuable in the future. The MH370 results and this high quality search, I think, force the air industry to have built into every commercial plane beacons that deploy and don't go down with the ship.
 
gkainz said:
did you mean Waldo? Or Nemo? I don't think Elmo ever went lost...
Click to expand...


See, this is the problem. If people were looking for Elmo, we might find him. But noooo. We're looking at what I believe to be a blow-up of a Pink Floyd album cover, searching for signs of Amelia Earhart.

Actually, I should have typed Waldo, not Elmo, but...
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Well Salty I wish I could do just that. Unfortunately, I don't have the 14M$.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

It would cost thousands of dollars to simply go look, not millions, and the fact that no one has been inspired to do that, strongly suggests the Google Earth photo is not very persuasive
 
register@teamandras.com said:
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

It would cost thousands of dollars to simply go look, not millions, and the fact that no one has been inspired to do that, strongly suggests the Google Earth photo is not very persuasive
Click to expand...

Or that no one cares enough to put money down. Why find her wrecked plane, anyways? What's the point? See scraps of it on ebay? Put the wreck ina museum?
 
register@teamandras.com said:
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

It would cost thousands of dollars to simply go look, not millions, and the fact that no one has been inspired to do that, strongly suggests the Google Earth photo is not very persuasive
Click to expand...
Considering I was replying to a post asking to find Elmo, I would think it would have been obvious I was being sarcastic.

But give me 14 million and I will search for Elmo on a yacht with a helicopter in the South Pacific for at least a year before giving up.
 
UngaWunga said:
Or that no one cares enough to put money down. Why find her wrecked plane, anyways? What's the point? See scraps of it on ebay? Put the wreck ina museum?
Click to expand...

Obviously the plane, in a restored condition, would be beneficial to an air musuem. While others search for bits and pieces... ( crash and sink- Nikumaroro) the plane in the lagoon is whole. Certainly very fragile after 80 years under water but recoverable at great cost. That cost could be easily recovered over years in a reputable museum. What is the point? The point is history..history of the plane and more importantly...what happened to AE after landing in the lagoon.
 
What whole plane? I just see a pattern of repeating rows of pixels superimposed on random variations. Oh wait, I think I see the Virgin Mary!
 
Tom Maxwell said:
Obviously the plane, in a restored condition, would be beneficial to an air musuem. While others search for bits and pieces... ( crash and sink- Nikumaroro) the plane in the lagoon is whole. Certainly very fragile after 80 years under water but recoverable at great cost. That cost could be easily recovered over years in a reputable museum. What is the point? The point is history..history of the plane and more importantly...what happened to AE after landing in the lagoon.
Click to expand...
even if we pretend that the compression artifacts you think are an airplane, are actually an airplane, it would do absolutely nothing to resolve what you just claimed was most important.
 
I read a lot about aviation but I did not know that Earhart was still such a hot topic. I would think that any plausible location would have been well searched a long time ago.
 
DutchRoller said:
I read a lot about aviation but I did not know that Earhart was still such a hot topic. I would think that any plausible location would have been well searched a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Putting aside conspiracy theories, the most likely location is in deep water within a hundred or so of Howland. Finding something as small as an Electra in that setting is a tough, tough job, and would take a tremendous investment. That's why nobody has done it.
 
kyleb said:
Putting aside conspiracy theories, the most likely location is in deep water within a hundred or so of Howland. Finding something as small as an Electra in that setting is a tough, tough job, and would take a tremendous investment. That's why nobody has done it.
Click to expand...
To add evidence to this statement, they still haven found very much of Malaysian flight 370 despite it being a much larger plane, aside from pieces washed on shore. Although there was better technology for tracking that flight than for Amelia, we are still guessing with the data we do have.
 
DutchRoller said:
I read a lot about aviation but I did not know that Earhart was still such a hot topic. I would think that any plausible location would have been well searched a long time ago.
Click to expand...

The location in the lagoon at Orona has been known since 2008 and public knowledge since 2010. The search there is blocked by TIGHAR's exclusive search agreement with the Kiribati government. No others are permitted to look in the waters of Kiribati. The news media is completely unaware of this aspect of the AE mystery.
 
Last edited:
Salty said:
even if we pretend that the compression artifacts you think are an airplane, are actually an airplane, it would do absolutely nothing to resolve what you just claimed was most important.
Click to expand...

When the aircraft is investigated in-situ, among the items found might be AE's briefcase. Is it in the submerged plane? If not?? did USMC Wallack really find the briefcase in that safe on Saipan? History discovery awaits.

If Salty will keep looking at that image and using his own GE to investigate, he will eventually see and measure/analyze the L10E that Amelia safely landed on the lagoon surface. The Japanese pirates scuttled the craft along with the raft Fred had prepared. The pirates had to sink the craft knowing the USN search was closing in on the island.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top