New evidence of Amelia Earhart as a castaway

William Parcher

Show me the monkey!
William Parcher
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
27,350
She seems to have died on a now identified remote island after making repeated radio contact.

New York Post said:
Did Amelia Earhart survive her plane crash? This is the most likely theory, with evidence emerging that she was making contact for days after her plane disappeared.

The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) believes Earhart safely landed her plane when it disappeared in 1937 and died as a castaway.

During a presentation in the US last month, TIGHAR’s Ric Gillespie backed up all of the group’s theories.

Earhart’s plane was last seen on radar on July 2, 1937...
Click to expand...


Daily Mail said:
She must have landed with some fuel, Gillespie says, otherwise she wouldn't have been able to use the radio.

Earhart told those listening that she was injured, but Noonan was worse.

But if the pair were alive on the 3.7-by-2.1-mile island, no-one came to find them...
Click to expand...


TIGHAR said:
The video covers the evidence for the Earhart Electra being on the western reef slope of Nikumaroro and TIGHAR’s plan for the 2017 Niku IX expedition to find it...
Click to expand...


http://nypost.com/2016/09/09/amelia-earhart-survived-her-plane-crash-new-evidence-suggests

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ikumaroro-island-eerie-evidence-suggests.html

https://tighar.org
 
This isn't new, surely? I've been hearing about this for quite a while.
 
I was drawn to headlines which could be wrong. Various headlines in recent news say "new evidence" or "new theory".
 
I always thought she arranged the whole disappearance so she could go live in secret with Judge Crater. Years later their son, DB Cooper, would use his inherited aeronautic and criminal skills to good effect.
 
So they've looked on this island before and not found anything? I'm pretty skeptical about this too as I also seem to remember this song and dance before. They have theories but not a scrap of actual physical evidence.
 
So they are saying that a woman in Melbourne, another woman in Texas and a girl in Florida heard her radio transmissions but not the US Navy and all the people out in the Pacific searching for her?
 
TragicMonkey said:
I always thought she arranged the whole disappearance so she could go live in secret with Judge Crater. Years later their son, DB Cooper, would use his inherited aeronautic and criminal skills to good effect.
Click to expand...
No silly, she was recruited by TimeWatch.
 
I noticed in the articles referenced many repetitions of "last appeared on radar" and similar phrases regarding radar. There was no radar anywhere in the Pacific in 1937, and really no working radar outside of laboratories, certainly nothing at the time that could resolve distant single aircraft. The plane was equipped with RDF equipment, which might lead to some confusion, but this is not the same thing. This type of error reflects poorly on the expertise of the people involved, needless to say.
 
Orthoptera said:
I noticed in the articles referenced many repetitions of "last appeared on radar" and similar phrases regarding radar. There was no radar anywhere in the Pacific in 1937, and really no working radar outside of laboratories, certainly nothing at the time that could resolve distant single aircraft. The plane was equipped with RDF equipment, which might lead to some confusion, but this is not the same thing. This type of error reflects poorly on the expertise of the people involved, needless to say.
Click to expand...

This reminds me that at least at the beginning of WW2, they used these listening stations that were essentially enlarged ears to hear the planes coming as soon as possible, because there was no radar yet.

Something like this:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/77/0e/ba/770ebad4db88e7fdea7f150b1557d2fe.jpg
 
RDF was simply direction-finding using radio signals from a target. The target had to transmit a constant signal to home in on. They would literally turn the aerial of a receiver until the incoming signal was strongest to get a bearing. Another receiver would be used for basic triangulation. It was limited by the accuracy of determining signal strength and its direction. Over long distances with low strength signals, accuracy was quite low. If the signal was intermittent, even worse.

The confusion probably comes about because the British called their first primitive radar system RDF. It was not the same system as US naval RDF described above. The word "radar" was an Americanism not commonly employed until some years into WW2.
 
Last edited:
Orthoptera said:
I noticed in the articles referenced many repetitions of "last appeared on radar" and similar phrases regarding radar. There was no radar anywhere in the Pacific in 1937, and really no working radar outside of laboratories, certainly nothing at the time that could resolve distant single aircraft. The plane was equipped with RDF equipment, which might lead to some confusion, but this is not the same thing. This type of error reflects poorly on the expertise of the people involved, needless to say.
Click to expand...

I noticed that RADAR thing too.
 
Norman Alexander said:
RDF was simply direction-finding using radio signals from a target. The target had to transmit a constant signal to home in on. They would literally turn the aerial of a receiver until the incoming signal was strongest to get a bearing. Another receiver would be used for basic triangulation. It was limited by the accuracy of determining signal strength and its direction. Over long distances with low strength signals, accuracy was quite low. If the signal was intermittent, even worse.

The confusion probably comes about because the British called their first primitive radar system RDF. It was not the same system as US naval RDF described above. The word "radar" was an Americanism not commonly employed until some years into WW2.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but not quite.

The primitive radar system you are talking about was called CRDF (Cathode Ray Direction Finding). Rather than a system using a rotatable antenna that was swung around to maximize a signal, it used a fixed Bellini-Tosi crossed loop antenna operating the deflecting plates of a cathode-ray tube. The bearing was displayed as a trace on the CRT giving a direct reading.

Of course, it still required the target to transmit, so it wasn't a primary radar, but more like a form of secondary radar.
 
smartcooky said:
Well, yes, but not quite.

The primitive radar system you are talking about was called CRDF (Cathode Ray Direction Finding). Rather than a system using a rotatable antenna that was swung around to maximize a signal, it used a fixed Bellini-Tosi crossed loop antenna operating the deflecting plates of a cathode-ray tube. The bearing was displayed as a trace on the CRT giving a direct reading.

Of course, it still required the target to transmit, so it wasn't a primary radar, but more like a form of secondary radar.
Click to expand...

This was refined in WW2 by the RN as High Frequency Direction Finding ('Huffduff' as it was known)http://uboat.net/allies/technical/hfdf.htm
http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Tech-HFDF.htm
It used a distinctive 'Birdcage' antenna on top of the mast or on its own dedicated mast on some ships. It is censored out on a lot of wartime pictures.

It made a huge contribution in the Battle of the atlantic. As soon as a U-Boat started to transmit it's bearing was indicated as you say on a CRT. Two escorts could cross reference it and get a location fix within seconds and turn on to headings to run it down. When I was in the RN in the 80s the same set was in use on RN ships more or less unchanged from its wartime predecessors, Transistor circuits had replaced the valves at sometime in the 60s otherwise it was the same.
 
Last edited:
Norman Alexander said:
RDF was simply direction-finding using radio signals from a target. The target had to transmit a constant signal to home in on. They would literally turn the aerial of a receiver until the incoming signal was strongest to get a bearing. Another receiver would be used for basic triangulation. It was limited by the accuracy of determining signal strength and its direction. Over long distances with low strength signals, accuracy was quite low. If the signal was intermittent, even worse.
Click to expand...

While rotating a loop antenna to give the strongest signal is the easiest mode of operation, better angular accuracy is achieved by rotating it to give a null signal. Since rotating for a maximum and rotating for a minimum give directions that differ by 90 degrees, there is ample scope for confusing one's bearing if one is inexperienced. There is also a 180 degree ambiguity between the direction the antenna is pointing and the bearing to the transmitter.
 
Slowvehicle said:
Ianto's expertise (and smouldering good looks) claim another victim!
Click to expand...
Sorry but I don't think Ianto will be appearing in TimeWatch, though he's in AITAS.
I must get around to writing up Amelia for AITAS sometime.
 
Didymus said:
While rotating a loop antenna to give the strongest signal is the easiest mode of operation, better angular accuracy is achieved by rotating it to give a null signal. Since rotating for a maximum and rotating for a minimum give directions that differ by 90 degrees, there is ample scope for confusing one's bearing if one is inexperienced. There is also a 180 degree ambiguity between the direction the antenna is pointing and the bearing to the transmitter.
Click to expand...
Yep! :thumbsup:
 
Segnosaur said:
Well, there was the one where Captain Janeway punishes 7 of 9 with a spanking for her insubordination.

Or maybe that was a dream I had.
Click to expand...


Sheesh, if I ever had a dream about Seven of Nine, "spanking" wouldn't be the first thing that comes to mind.

As far as "Trek" women go, T'Pol is more my cup of tea anyway!
 
smartcooky said:
Well, yes, but not quite.

The primitive radar system you are talking about was called CRDF (Cathode Ray Direction Finding). Rather than a system using a rotatable antenna that was swung around to maximize a signal, it used a fixed Bellini-Tosi crossed loop antenna operating the deflecting plates of a cathode-ray tube. The bearing was displayed as a trace on the CRT giving a direct reading.

Of course, it still required the target to transmit, so it wasn't a primary radar, but more like a form of secondary radar.
Click to expand...
That was one system prior to actual "radar" using reflected signals. Watson-Watt had a primitive system going in 1935, with fixed aerials. Wiki is reasonably OK with some details.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radar#United_Kingdom
 
Norman Alexander said:
That was one system prior to actual "radar" using reflected signals. Watson-Watt had a primitive system going in 1935, with fixed aerials. Wiki is reasonably OK with some details.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radar#United_Kingdom
Click to expand...

Right, but I don't believe for a second that any kind of primary radar was in use in the Pacific in 1937, and especially not tracking Earhart & Noonan's Electra.

When the articles say the aircraft "disappeared off radar", they will almost certainly be talking about CRDF, HFDF or some other variant of that system.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom