|
jlf1961 -> RE: Amelia Earhart: Does photo show she died a Japanese prisoner? (7/8/2017 1:17:32 PM)
|
Given her estimated position by the US Navy ship that received her last radio calls, and the fact the woman refused to equip the aircraft with a trailing antenna for her radio, and her statement of what she was doing in search of land, the only appreciable land mass she could have possibly crashed on (which was searched) was a small atoll that no body even wanted.
Now, addressing the point about the antenna.
The antenna routinely equipped on the lockheed electra aircraft that she was flying would have limited her maximum transmission range to a 120 mile radius.
This means that the Navy ship picking up her transmission would have been 120 miles from any point along the north south line she said she was flying looking for Howland island.
The navy ship was at a position that was 80 nautical miles north east of Howland island, and their radio operator estimated she was at a point west of the island, and not getting clear reception of his signals.
Therefore, she would have been flying north and south along a line 40 to 60 miles west of the island she was looking for.
There are three atolls along that line, none of which had wreckage of her aircraft. A air search was out of the question since the US (and Japan) for that matter had no long range aircraft in the area to conduct an extensive search.
Of course, if she were flying low enough, the radio phenomena referred to as 'skip' could have come into play which means her aircraft could have been as far as 500 miles from the ship receiving her transmission.
However, since her antenna would have broadcast her signals unidirectionally, and no other ship operating in that part of the ocean at the time reported hearing her radio calls, that possibility is remote.
I would also point out that her planned flight path did not take her over any Japanese held islands, and she was renowned for her navigation abilities, which means one of two things:
1) she was getting a false reading from her compass (possible, but that means a large chunk of metal near the device)
2) she was getting conflicting readings from her radio compass and her magnetic compass causing a type of instrument induced vertigo.
I am inclined to believe the second.
She was receiving a weak signal from the navy ship, and decided that the radio compass (a device that tells you what direction a radio signal is coming from) was in error.
Now, for those who would dispute my opinion, I would like to use the disappearance of flight 19 as an example.
In that incident (well documented as a mystery of the Bermuda triangle) the flight leader claimed his magnetic compass was in error in radio transmissions received by land stations. He also disputed the accuracy of the radio compass with land stations and other pilots in flight (interplane communications were monitored) and refused to allow another pilot to take over navigation.
As a HAM radio operator, I routinely use a radio compass to determine the direction of an incoming long distance transmission on a ground plain antenna before switching to a directional to respond to the signal.
Now the Electra had a crude (by today's standards) directional antenna for locating the source of a radio transmission. This had to be manipulated by hand, physically turning a wheel to aim the antenna.
Directional antennas can and do receive on the back side of the antenna, so it is possible she was convinced the signal she was receiving was on the back side of the antenna, and the gauge on her instrument panel was in error.
While I was not in the cockpit, this seems a logical deduction, when you consider that even today, most aircraft mishaps that are listed as pilot error while in flight are due to the simple explanation that the pilot refused to believe what his instruments were telling him/her.
Pilots are not the only ones subject to such problems, it has happened on ships operating close ashore, and even with the advanced electronic navigation aids that are in use today.
As for the photo, I do not completely rule out that it is possibly of Amelia Earhart, but considering the number of christian missionaries on those islands, the chances are that it is of someone else.
Furthermore, the Japanese were meticulous record keepers.
They kept records of the Americans who died on the Bataan death march, complete as to cause, and if the prisoner was killed, in many cases the name of the Japanese soldier who performed the execution (which led to a large number of post war prison sentences.)
There are no Japanese Imperial war records of Amelia Earhart, and considering that at the time she would have been found by the Japanese, they were trying to curry favor with the US since the US was against their war in China, turning over her body or even her would have gone a long way diplomatically.
Even if they did suspect her of spying for the US.
Of course, there is the theory that she was in love with her copilot and they staged the 'disappearance' in order to live a life together.
And I must also point out that there was the crash of the plane during her first attempt, and even after repairs there were some issues.
She made a wheels up forced landing in the aircraft, which caused structural damage to the air frame. While some of the damage was repaired, the extent of the damage was not fully determined.
Now, addressing this, I will point out that the 8th Air Force, even in the early days of daylight bombing over Europe when replacement aircraft were in short supply, scrapped B17's that made wheels up landings out of concern over possible damage to the wing strut assemblies (when wings fall off aircraft, it tends to ruin the day of the crews.)
Lockheed offered to replace the Electra damaged in the wheels up landing and Mrs. Earhart declined the offer, pointing out that the necessary modifications to the new aircraft would take to long and set back her timetable.
And while her disappearance is indeed the most famous, I would point out that others attempted the same endeavor, including 2 French, 6 British and one other American. All failed and a large number never heard from again, and all on the same leg of the flight.
Proving the common thought of the time, civilian aircraft available at the time were not up to the challenge. Military aircraft on the other hand had done the flight, including a flight of B17 C's, without any modifications.
|
|
|
|
