Electra on New Britain theory - pros & cons

[xb70]

I was hoping to not start yet another Amelia Earhart thread, but this was specifically requested to branch off the lengthy TIGHAR at it again discussion. I believe the point of divergence came here...

As I believe I stated earlier, I and many others are put off by the constant sniping and belittling that goes on among rival Earhart theorists. It's very easy to dismiss criticism when it's all a critic has to offer. It's harder to ignore when someone provides a fair and balanced mix of praise and criticism where each is warranted. TIGHAR certainly has its flaws and mistakes, but so does every one of Gillespie's rivals promoting his or her own theories. To single-mindedly bash one group strikes me as a double standard.

To which David Billings, leader of the theory that Earhart crashed near Rabaul on the island of East New Britain, made the following request...

In respect of that statement, therefore, would you be so kind as to make it perfectly clear to me where the East New Britain Project has contained "flaws and mistakes" so that I can get down to the task of rectifying these same flaws and mistakes. Please go right down to the wire and nitpick as much as you like.

Please write down each Flaw, each incorrect Statement, each Mistake and anything else you would like to comment on. If you find any outright lies, please point those out also, I wouldn't want any lies floating around in my Project, No Sirree Bub....

For one who does not actually put boots on the ground Mr. Scott, you have a funny way of assisting those that do, whatever the colour or shape of their stripes. For instance, you are an Aerospace Engineer, I understand; where was your comment about the obvious misfit 2-2-V-1 ? I can't recall any.... You can say what you like within reason here, I would understand your reluctance in the face of autocratic bullying, but you were free to comment here.

I will therefore, be grateful for whatever assistance you have to offer, to put the East New Britain Project on the straight and narrow path of correctness. Thankyou in advance...

Further discussion to follow...

[xb70]

Initial response...

Thank you, Mr. Billings. I would be happy to offer constructive feedback. Though your question presupposes I would focus on technical issues, most of my comments will concern the general subject of publicity and methods of building popular support for your investigation.

I'd hoped to combine all my comments into a single post, but have lacked the time to write them all up. I will have to make multiple installments for your review and comment. Here is the first...

Electra Range

I consider the strongest evidence for any theory to be the physical evidence in hand. In the case of the New Britain theory, that physical evidence is the map. It is clearly an intriguing item containing details that appear to be strongly connected to Amelia Earhart's Lockheed Electra. The biggest weakness of the theory is whether she could have flown as far as a crash on ENB would require. In short, the vast majority of Earhart researchers do not believe her plane had anywhere near the fuel to fly that far. I think you'd readily agree this is the most obvious critique judging by the amount of space you use to address it on your site. I wouldn't call it a "flaw" or mistake," but this issue is certainly a weakness that perhaps additional research could bolster. Have you considered either of these options?

1) There are still two flyable 10E Electras left--C/N 1015 (modified from a 10A) owned by Museum of Flight in Washington and C/N 1042 owned by Grace McGuire in California. Have you attempted to contact the owners of either plane to see if they can confirm your beliefs about the true fuel consumption rates of the R1340 engine? This is probably the only way to ever obtain hard evidence whether the reported consumption rates used to estimate the Electrea's range are total or per engine, a major assumption on which the New Britain theory rests.

2) A group has built a high-fidelity flight simulation of Earhart's final journey (http://www.theelectraproject.com/), and used it to prove (in their minds) that she had insufficient fuel to reach anywhere but Howland (forget Gardner, the Marshalls, New Britain, the Gilberts, etc.). Since my expertise is in flight simulation, I'm sure their model relies on assumptions that may or may not stand up to scrutiny. Nevertheless, simulation is a tool to explore not only how something works but how sensitive it is to changes in assumptions. I believe it would be worthwhile to contact the developers and suggest modifying the fuel consumption values to assess whether the aircraft really could turn around and reach where you believe it did. They may not be willing to help, but it couldn't hurt to try. Such a study may at least provide insights into sensitivity of the plane's performance to different assumptions about fuel and winds.

Without more definitive data, the range issue will always be a weak point of the New Britain theory that the community at large will use to dismiss it.

Mr. Billing's reply:

"Flaws and Mistakes and now add Weaknesses"

Thankyou Mr. Scott.

First off.... this should be discussed in a separate topic, for it is off-topic.

The matters you refer to are "Technical" and you have said "publicity and methods of popular support" are your bag, of which subjects I am not in a hurry to pursue.

For the ENB Project there are two facets:

1. The Facts, which is the map and the visual descriptions given by the Army Veterans of the engine and the airframe.

2. The Hypothesis, of "how" it could get there an this includes the fuel, the operation of the Electra, the weather, the distance flown and radio calls which support the hypothesis.

If Item 1., is not believed but is merely "intriguing" and only "appears to be connected to the Electra", then there is no point in discussing item 2., which I will discuss, but only by reference to subjects which you must study. I am certainly not going to sit and write 50,000 or more words for the satisfaction of "The Chief" (Chief of what ?).... but please continue producing my "Flaws and Mistakes" and add more weaknesses if you will.

C/N 1015 is not likely to fly again and McGuire's is also not airworhy as yet without a large injection of money.

No, I have not tried that simulator model you mention but I have tried the German one and the low power, low fuel flow result was comparable to what Earhart wrote in "Last Flight. Data in, Data Out.

So, you are a Simulator Engineer, not an Aeronautical Engineer. Please take this subject off to another Venue on WIX under Vintage.

David Billings
"Must be Noonan's, then.."

[xb70]

The matters you refer to are "Technical" and you have said "publicity and methods of popular support" are your bag, of which subjects I am not in a hurry to pursue.

The main point I wish to get across is I think the New Britain theory has merit, but I believe it can be presented much more effectively. I will state up front that I am not convinced it is right. But I am equally unconvinced by the other theories as well. My hope is that the feedback I (and perhaps others) provide is constructive and allows you to strengthen your case as well as attract more attention from the world at large. I do not intend, nor do I want, this to become a bash-fest on the New Britain theory, Mr. Billings, or any of the opposing theories and their proponents. Please keep comments positive!

If Item 1., is not believed but is merely "intriguing" and only "appears to be connected to the Electra", then there is no point in discussing item 2., which I will discuss, but only by reference to subjects which you must study. I am certainly not going to sit and write 50,000 or more words for the satisfaction of "The Chief" (Chief of what ?).... but please continue producing my "Flaws and Mistakes" and add more weaknesses if you will.

I used words like "intriguing" and "appears to be connected" because of my inherent skepticism. As indicated, I do not reject your theory out of hand (as TIGHAR does), and I believe it worthy of investigation. (I want to know what that plane is, whether it's Earhart's or not.) Yet I am not a "true believer" either and question assumptions underlying the theory. Nor do I wish for either of us to write 50,000 word essays as neither of us has the time. I will try to keep points direct and with actionable suggestions for improvement. Fair?

C/N 1015 is not likely to fly again and McGuire's is also not airworhy as yet without a large injection of money.

True, but has an attempt even been made? C/N 1015 flew quite a bit in its day--do Linda Finch or the fellow who owned the plane after her have any data that would help make your case? Has any effort been made to ask? I'm never quite sure what the status of 1042 is, but again, has any effort to reach Ms. McGuire been made?

No, I have not tried that simulator model you mention but I have tried the German one and the low power, low fuel flow result was comparable to what Earhart wrote in "Last Flight. Data in, Data Out.

"The German one"? Any additional information to clarify what that is and what you learned from it, if anything?

So, you are a Simulator Engineer, not an Aeronautical Engineer.

I am an aerospace engineer who has worked in flight simulation for much of my career. This isn't "computer game" kind of simulations, but high fidelity 6 degree of freedom flight models of aerial vehicles used to verify flight performance and system requirements. My educational background is primarily in aerodynamics, but developing and using these simulations also requires familiarity with physics, propulsion, control systems, onboard sensors, navigation, flight software, environment models (gravity, atmosphere, wind), and methods of validating the simulation and its constituent parts represent the real world with sufficient accuracy for the intended purpose.

[David Billings]

Your ENB Questions

There will be no long discussions because I do not positively have the time. That is not an excuse, it is a fact. I have spent seven months away and I have a lot to catch up on here.

Firstly, I would like find the wreck but it is not an all consuming thing for me. Too much crap has been thrown my way and as far as I am concerned, I will not spend another cent on it and the responsibility for the money necessary, rests with the U.S.. It may be necessary for a housing estate to be built there in 2215 before metal is found.

1. It has been stated by the Museum that C/N 1015 will not fly again. McGuire is known to be "unapproachable" unless you have benefits for her. Best of Luck.

2. Linda Finch is similarly undisposed to give out information. Prymak tried that. I spoke to her (briefly) in Moresby in '97. Not interested in talking about Earhart. She was using100/130 AVGAS anyway, but you can try..... Best of Luck.

3. It was a "Computer Game" called Round the World. The Electra model had spinners.

4. I meant Aircraft Simulator (which are heavily computerised) not "computer aircraft simulation".

Things to do:

5. Read: The works of Oscar Boswell, Carrington's book, "Last Flight", the Lockheed Long Range Study for the Electra 10E.

6. Look in the Uni of Texas for weather records from WWII for the Pacific.

7. Speak to Ron Bright in Washington State and ask him for the reference to the Contingency Plan, which nobody seems to believe.

8. Study what is known about the Electra flight from SFO to HI in March 1937 and incorporate the preparation for the HI to HOW Flight.

9. Do a Flight Plan from LAE to the USCG ONTARIO at the levels AE flew at and with known wind and Wx parameters.

10. Incorporate your FP from 8,. above into a MS Excel "Time and Distance" table making the targets the known dep. and arr. times (?). Let know what wind you get overhead the ONTARIO.

11. Explain why the Electra ended up West of NUKUMANU Atoll, and confirm or deny the wind reported.

Regards,

David Billings

[Ghost of Itasca]

If finding Earhart is primarily a U.S. concern then it is interesting that we see so much international interest in her loss.

ENB is very interesting but difficult to see due to the range and apparent placment of the flight well to the east, that's all.. That you are unable or unwilling to continue to press the point probably means more will dismiss it quietly and accept that it must be another wreck out there in that place after all, I think.

Last edited by Ghost of Itasca on Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Courier Sportster]

OLD RUT RE-DEEPENING Chapter Number 1055:

No new pros or cons from this dummy but I will tell you this, I'm unflappable in my utter devotion to DB. Because where else would those letters and numbers on the map have come from? The whim and pure chance of that map being retained as a souvenir, it being shared decades later--why it almost appears the hand of God is at work here. In my idealistic world, what I'd like to see, is all the rival theorists, the major players, to put a pin in their plans for a year and throw-in on ENB, until it pans out. Good-naturedly admit that, dang, Billings seems to have it, so let's see where this goes (and it's gonna go!). The ENB disparagers, well, they seem like the modern-day equivalent of flat-earthers to me, unable to grasp the simple reality of the situation. Temporarily chuck out all the competing searchings, until this, the only solid clue yet, gets it’s day. The deemed-impossible is sometimes the answer. I’m only 4 years in on this, so I’m fresh and a bit manic about it! I’m so sold on the total lock of the Electra resting on ENB that, I’m sadly robbed of the romance and the mystery, but not the drama (alive and well here!). To those who believe, it can be somewhat anticlimactic. It simply remains to go get her. There will be more crow lunches to go around. Hopefully in our lifetimes. Hopefully in 2015!

[Ghost of Itasca]

Yes, Courier Sportster, the map, margin writings and story are all moving and I also do not doubt the sincerity of those who've touched this and brought the story to us. Those things do all seem to point in one direction.

Those aggravating things like the radio record and Electra's range just foul it all up for me, sorry.

Last edited by Ghost of Itasca on Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Eagleflight]

OLD RUT RE-DEEPENING Chapter Number 1055:
The deemed-impossible is sometimes the answer. I’m only 4 years in on this, so I’m fresh and a bit manic about it! I’m so sold on the total lock of the Electra resting on ENB that, I’m sadly robbed of the romance and the mystery, but not the drama (alive and well here!). To those who believe, it can be somewhat anticlimactic. It simply remains to go get her. There will be more crow lunches to go around. Hopefully in our lifetimes. Hopefully in 2015!

I really hadn't thought I would weigh in on this, but after your comments I have some observations. So being 4 years in on this, it is assumed that you have read most if not all of the competing 'hypotheses' (no typo, plural noun) and you are thoroughly convinced; is that about it? And, that you have read more on the subject in books, publications, forums and the like.

So other than what you have read from Mr. Billings, can you explain to this audience how and in what time frame C/N 1055 ended up in East New Britain? Please give us your timeline from Lae New Guinea and beyond as to the circumstances and happenstance where Earhart landed or crashed in ENB. Please include in your treatise, winds, fuel consumption, direction, radio propagation and all pertinent information to convince this audience that is the final destination of NR16020.

I am not saying you or Mr. Billings are wrong because I don't know or can't know where that bird is today. That said, anymore than anyone else has in the past 77 years now can either.

I am sorry you have been robbed of the romance and the mystery because for 77 years that is all it has been about, especially on the part of TIGHAR for 30 of those years. You are missing out there Bub. As far as the drama is concerned, I will leave that to those who are engaged in it.

If it is that anticlimactic, and all that is needed is to go get her, are you prepared to step up and fund Mr. Billings so that you can serve up your epicurean delight of crow to the non believers? Or are you just paying lip service for the benefit of ingratiating yourself to Mr. Billings?

I applaud your faith, but,

[Courier Sportster]

No, sorry, I can't go toe to toe with the WIX braintrust. I claimed to be a dum-dum and I will not argue with myself on that point. I knew nothing on this topic until I started lurking here at WIX. I've read everything offered here, not just the writings of DB, however nothing outside of WIX. Plenty of information-laden divergent viewpoints here to ingest, so I'm not drinking just one flavor of kool-aid. About radio signal strength, I suppose the emphasis on those all-important details are what I am willing to set-aside, what with the Australian patrol accounts, and the writing on the map. Not very scientific, eh? I've been overdue to provoke some kind of reaction other than supportive. Where is Sabremech or JBSavage when I need 'em? I wonder if The Inspector would have had anything interesting to say on this controversy. Maybe fan-boys like me should pipe down, and leave it to the aeronautical engineers. It's hard to do. I'm very excited!

[Ghost of Itasca]

Oh heck no don't go quiet - mixin' it up is where it's at!!!

Bob's yanking you back from the Kool Aid tank because you swore blind fealty, not because you support Billings, doncha see?

But, to each his own.

Last edited by Ghost of Itasca on Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Sabremech]

Are you looking for me Courier? I would like for Mr. Billings to complete his search. His search has the most compelling evidence to me. After Mr. Billings search I'm compelled to believe in crash and sank.
I in no way shape or form believe in the Nikamaruru hypothesis. Thirty years of nothing still equates to nothing.
I don't claim to be an expert on anything Earhart, just intrigued by the search by everyone but TIGHAR.

David

[Ghost of Itasca]

It's so appealing to get into these things, so much to attract.

Other things are more troubling, like -

Range.

Itasca log of radio traffic near Howland.

Time / place of sunrise (celestial navigation).

What can one say?

Ah, well - it is not only a big ocean, but a very large and perplexing world, I grant you that.

[gari]

Your ENB Questions

There will be no long discussions because I do not positively have the time. That is not an excuse, it is a fact. I have spent seven months away and I have a lot to catch up on here.

Firstly, I would like find the wreck but it is not an all consuming thing for me. Too much crap has been thrown my way and as far as I am concerned, I will not spend another cent on it and the responsibility for the money necessary, rests with the U.S.. It may be necessary for a housing estate to be built there in 2215 before metal is found.

1. It has been stated by the Museum that C/N 1015 will not fly again. McGuire is known to be "unapproachable" unless you have benefits for her. Best of Luck.

2. Linda Finch is similarly undisposed to give out information. Prymak tried that. I spoke to her (briefly) in Moresby in '97. Not interested in talking about Earhart. She was using100/130 AVGAS anyway, but you can try..... Best of Luck.

3. It was a "Computer Game" called Round the World. The Electra model had spinners.

4. I meant Aircraft Simulator (which are heavily computerised) not "computer aircraft simulation".

Things to do:

5. Read: The works of Oscar Boswell, Carrington's book, "Last Flight", the Lockheed Long Range Study for the Electra 10E.

6. Look in the Uni of Texas for weather records from WWII for the Pacific.

7. Speak to Ron Bright in Washington State and ask him for the reference to the Contingency Plan, which nobody seems to believe.

8. Study what is known about the Electra flight from SFO to HI in March 1937 and incorporate the preparation for the HI to HOW Flight.

9. Do a Flight Plan from LAE to the USCG ONTARIO at the levels AE flew at and with known wind and Wx parameters.

10. Incorporate your FP from 8,. above into a MS Excel "Time and Distance" table making the targets the known dep. and arr. times (?). Let know what wind you get overhead the ONTARIO.

11. Explain why the Electra ended up West of NUKUMANU Atoll, and confirm or deny the wind reported.

Regards,

David Billings

I've always wondered why someone has never done a proper fuel analysis of a 10E using the profile AE is assumed to have used, or alternative ideas. I guess it would be hard to be precise, needing the fuels and oils of the day, and of course the Cambridge, it seems IF the Cambridge was working, she could lean of pretty good, but it seemed problematic.

Similarly, I think in this day and age of people throwing data into algorithms to derive all manner of flight characteristics and structural strengths and weaknesses, we forget that Report 487 was achieved not by throwing data at a computer, but by flying the plane in various scenarios and weights to 'simulate' flight conditions, and then extrapolate that data into tables and graphs. I can remember looking into this a while ago and derived a few functions graphically and by a bit of maths that showed with the relevant SFCs ranges and endurances longer than many accept, were available to the Electra -the team were aware of this due to the planning of that long African flight in the first attempt.

I'm not at home ATM and so have no access to my 'research' thoughts and fairy-tales' lol

I have no idea if NR16020 could have got to ENB, but all of the thinking I've seen relating to its range/endurance seems to be conclusion/outcome led by proponents of crash-and-sank near Howland. Report 487 isn't perfect, we can all see flaws and errors, what I can't understand is why people only accept as right the errors that support their hypothesis?

I'm pretty old-school, I don't trust computers despite being involved with them professionally for a long time, they rely on humans to write the program and to input the data, I look back to the good-old days of real engineers, and when crash investigation was in its infancy, I look back in admiration of guys like Hall who had that water-tank built to stress test a De Havilland Comet, to find out why they were falling from the sky -and we all know today they'd be using the same software that deigned the thing to test the thing today smdh

[gari]

No, sorry, I can't go toe to toe with the WIX braintrust. I claimed to be a dum-dum and I will not argue with myself on that point. I knew nothing on this topic until I started lurking here at WIX. I've read everything offered here, not just the writings of DB, however nothing outside of WIX. Plenty of information-laden divergent viewpoints here to ingest, so I'm not drinking just one flavor of kool-aid. About radio signal strength, I suppose the emphasis on those all-important details are what I am willing to set-aside, what with the Australian patrol accounts, and the writing on the map. Not very scientific, eh? I've been overdue to provoke some kind of reaction other than supportive. Where is Sabremech or JBSavage when I need 'em? I wonder if The Inspector would have had anything interesting to say on this controversy. Maybe fan-boys like me should pipe down, and leave it to the aeronautical engineers. It's hard to do. I'm very excited!

I know what you mean, friend!!!

All over the Internet if you don't subscribe to the hypothesis of the website or thread concerned, you rapidly get used to having new behinds being chewed into you...

The topic is full of 'experts' -none of whom have ever found the plane- often using the logical fallacy the appeal to authority; using the "I'm a *lawyer/*navigator/*engineer/*author/*other professional [state] {*delete as appropriate} ..." argument to make their thinking superior/more correct than yours...

All this thinking does, to me, is alienate the 'ordinary' guys and gals, I'm as thick as a whale omelet, but if I came into a few millions of inheritance I wouldn't give a red-cent, Shekel or Drachma to most of these people to feed their ego.

[gari]

It's so appealing to get into these things, so much to attract.

Other things are more troubling, like -

Range.

Itasca log of radio traffic near Howland.

Time / place of sunrise (celestial navigation).

What can one say?

Ah, well - it is not only a big ocean, but a very large and perplexing world, I grant you that.

I don't think that range is cut and dried, we have the dogma of 'experts', and not one of them flew that plane, in that configuration, ever. Thinking for myself, I do think that elements of Report 487 do suggest a range much longer than Howland.

The radio log, well it contradicts itself in several places, and for sure has had interpolation, the whole thing is subjective, all we have is the subjective thinking of what the guys in the room thought they heard her say, and certainly they were transmitting over her so we have no idea what she may have also have said; people have said about her emotional state, how it seemed she was near to breaking down, but they were tired before the flight, there is no doubt they wanted the flight over after 20+ hours darn right she was upset she couldn't land, most people would be upset even IF they had another 20 hours flying time to get back to Lae...I know I would. Sure, it is special pleading, but we have no idea what happened in or to that plane, can w even be sure how far away she was? S5 is subjective after all.

Navigation is a weird one, FN had the moon available, unless he was in cloud, but what happened overnight? They must have been aware of the point of safe return, so must have had good indications of being on course and with efficient fuel burn for the first half of the flight. I guess if they had had no more fixes after this, they'd be in a sticky situation, unable to return and the Dead-Reckoning error of 10% putting them up to possibly 130 miles north or south of Howland...AE did seem to think she was near to Howland...

I do think that too much time has passed, and if she is in the water, AE, FN and the plane will never be found...