It seems that Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for TIGHAR is to put out a press release touting their new find first, and then start an investigation. Not surprisingly many of their press releases have been proven wrong; many of their assumptions have turned out to be wishful thinking. But Ric Gillespie continues to crank out publicity that endeavors to make the general public believe that anything found on Gardner/Nikumaroro Island that isn’t a coconut, a crab or a bird, came from Amelia Earhart’s Electra.
Thanks to Tom Pochick from West Virginia it looks like another bit of TIGHAR’s “research” is about to be turned against them. TIGHAR claims that there was aircraft wreckage on the reef near the SS Norwich City when the first settlers arrived on December 13, 1938. The native population talked about this aircraft in interviews, all of which are available on TIGHAR’s website. TIGHAR, of course, takes these remembrances as “evidence” that there was aircraft wreckage on the reef, and of course any aircraft on Gardner before the US Loran Station was built had to be the Electra. Naturally the eyewitness testimony advances their hypothesis that Earhart landed on Gardner. (We wonder why the eye witness testimony of the Gardner Islanders is believed while the accounts given by witnesses on Mili Atoll and Saipan are termed unsupported, most likely mistaken.)
On March 21, 2012 Tom Pochick sent Ric Gillespie the pictures shown here. Tom had indicated that the photos reveal a plane sitting in the surf off Gardner Island. Gillespie emailed a response: “I guarantee you, that is not her plane”. We are glad that Gillespie is so sure this isn’t her aircraft. We agree with Tom. We also understand why another aircraft on Gardner Island isn’t what Gillespie and SOME OF HIS FOLLOWERS want to hear anything about.
A BIT OF LOGIC
We can assume that there was no aircraft wreckage on Gardner Island when the three aircraft from the USS Colorado performed their aerial search on July 9, 1937. If, as the islanders testify, the aircraft was easily visible at low tide and the water only rises 5 feet at high tide, that means that a fuselage about four feet in diameter would be, at most, a foot underwater. Isn’t it ludicrous to think that in water as clear as it was then, an aircraft one foot below the surface would be missed by the six men in the search planes, specifically looking for an aircraft?
The Maude-Bevington Expedition of the 13th-15th in October 1937 searched and carefully documented their entire visit to the island. They took a photo of the ship, SS Norwich City, shipwrecked on Gardner since 1929. (The photo contained an object which has been identified by Photek as possibly one of the Electra’s landing gear.) Eric Bevington documented everything he saw, including the fish and octopi in the hold of the derelict ship. We find it unbelievable that Bevington would have failed to mention the landing gear of an airplane sticking up on the dry reef flat.
Later, the New Zealand Expedition took place on November 30, 1938 and failed to find airplane wreckage (or failed to mention it). But, on December 15, 1938 settlers were brought to the island; they lived there until 1964. During that time no aircraft was reported to have crashed on or near the island. The islanders reported there was an aircraft on the reef near the ship. From the looks of the “artifacts” recovered by TIGHAR they salvaged what they could use from the wreckage.
In conclusion, we can assume there was no aircraft wreckage present before October 15, 1937 and there was aircraft wreckage there on December 15, 1938. Logically it would lead one to the conclusion that the aircraft that the villages saw and salvaged arrived between those dates. If an aircraft crashed or landed on Gardner Island between those dates who did it belong to?
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
All photos courtesy of Tom Pochick
Are the two white dots located in the square engine nacelles?
Tom did some contrast work on this image. If it’s not an aircraft, what is it?
This image shows that the wreck is 347 feet from the tide line. What kind of investigator wouldn’t want to take a look at this up close and personal?
This is the same area on Virtual Earth.
These images are 4 degrees 41 minutes 31.49 seconds south and 174 degrees 30 minutes 16.78 seconds west. They are 347 feet from the shore. It appears that the engines are still attached to the wing. If this is the aircraft that the villagers salvaged, it is conceivable that in the 70 odd years it has been there that it has migrated to the present location. According to experts, coral has a very difficult time growing on an aluminum aircraft that is subject to wave action. The aluminum is too flexible and won’t allow the tiny animals to hold on. Steel and iron, because of its rigidity, is perfect for the formation of coral. So an aircraft near the surface would not become encrusted in coral and therefore would look much like it did the day it sank.
It would seem that Gillespie isn’t interested in investigating the presence of an aircraft on Nikumaroro. His interests seem to lie in keeping the mystery of Amelia Earhart alive and producing income. Time after time, when it seemed he had failed in his mission to find AE’s Electra “something” is found to revive the public’s interest.
MIKE.
It’s amazing what your imagination “discovers” if your mind is not biased. It’s also interesting how one can see faces in the clouds or the “man in the moon”
Looking at the photo outlined in the square I can see the entire plane with the left side wing sheared off. The two white areas appear as the engines with the propellors running and the rear section of the fuselage is present including the tail, all sitting as if nicely landed on the sea floor, that is if that is the sea floor.
Cheers
Hello Bob,
I’m still new to this Amelia Earhart search but do have 38 years as an imagery analyst with the DOD. To me, the 2012 imagery shows nothing more than two small waves crashing over a probable reef. If these were mad made, they should show up before the image was taken and possibly after also, depending upon various environmental factors. Of course there needs to be collection to exploit. Using the top of the image as North, you can see a darker thin line running parallel to the coast in a southeasterly direction. Just as you would think a reef would naturally flow. Further SE along that same probable reef line you can see other waves breaking. I annotated what I believe to be the reef line and also three points on shore that to me are the same spots, when compared to the 2020 google image on the left. So in this one instance, I tend to agree with Ric Gillespie, only that what is shown in the box above is not the plane. This is my first post here, so unsure how to attach an image. Please contact me if you’d like to see it. I cut/pasted the image, but we’ll see if it works.. /Users/edbauer 1/Desktop/Screen Shot 2020-04-15 at 15.47.11.png
Thank you very much for your input, Edward. I will email you to see about getting the shot and then up load it to the site. Your email leads me to believe that you have an impressive set of credentials to bring to the search. There are several things that need to be addressed by an expert. The reason we posted this was NOT that we believe there is an aircraft in that location but we feel that a real investigation of anything should include items that aren’t, as Mr. Gillespie states, the “any idiot artifact”. Investigators are suppose to eliminate or confirm all possibilities. Mr. Gillespie dismissed Tom Pochick out of hand. What problems would a cursory search of a site just below the surface 347 feet from shore? At this time we can assume that Robert Ballard’s search of the island didn’t turn up any aircraft or the remains of an aircraft. So this is probably what you stated in your comment.
Ebauer, I am also new to following the AE search more closely. With your background, I would love your opinion on a portion of the photo with the landing gear that I am fixated on. There seems to be reflections in the lower right area of the photo – not on all copies of the photo, but on some. Curious if this could be the aircraft, or just the pattern of the waves breaking &/or cloud shadows. I found the photo on the National Geographic site; I’ll attempt to include the link. 7th photo down. Thanks in advance for your response! https://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/history/amelia-earhart-search-crew-shares-personal-theories-on-her-disappearance.aspx
Whoever wrote this, I wouldn’t do much as buy them a cup of coffee. It oozes obvious dislike, and it is both condescending and insulting. So if you believe the man, who has a mountain of evidence, then you are a “minion?” Of his? How ridiculous.
Mr Gainer, I am answering for Bob Wheeler as he has been tied up on another project. We apologize for any insult that may have been inferred to TIGHAR”S followers, as well as our delayed response. I changed the word “minions” in the 3rd paragraph of our article to read “SOME OF HIS FOLLOWERS”. We, as well as other historians, have been verbally debased by some of TIGHAR”S followers when discussing other ideas about AE’s mysterious disappearance.
Bob Wheeler’s point is that we are open to ALL theories about the Earhart mystery and we resent anyone who is so wedded to their own theory, that they totally discount and insult, yes insult, others who have different ideas. We attended the 2018 AE Festival in Atchison, Kansas and were so thrilled with the Chasing Earhart Discussion Panel of experts. It proved that people can agree to disagree. Also, maybe we should all focus on how Amelia lived and contributed to society as a whole, rather than keep focusing on her death. Amy Wheeler
Well, it’s not like there were a lot of airplanes flying around in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, with no flight plans, that nobody ever heard of, in the 1930s. If you think there was a aircraft there, that crashed sometime after the Earhart flight, regardless of the valididty of TIGHAR’s theory, identify it. What airplanes disappeared in mid Pacific, within, saymiles of Gardner’s, between October 1937 and December 1938? Either there are any, or there aren’t. For my money, those two blobs in the fuzzy photo look nothing like parts of an airplane.
I meant, “say, 500 miles of Gardner’s.”
Speaking of Mr. Gillespie’s “interests”, I see that he has just announced a campaign on the web from which he hopes to gain $1.2 million(!!) in only two weeks(!!!). See:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/we-can-find-amelia-earhart
Not sure I need a t-shirt that badly . . . the reaction to this may be quite interesting . . .
Good thought, Mr. Anon y Mous! We don’t need the T-shirt either 🙂
Bob, not to worry! He has now updated the funding site with all sorts of Amazing Stuff besides T-shirts, surely you can find something there! . . . Actually it now looks like the souvenir shop at a Gator World or something.
Meanwhile, funding has zoomed all the way up to almost 0.25% (1/4 of one per cent) of the goal!
And now the time is up for funding, and TIGHAR received the amazing total of . . . wait for it . . . $4106. Maybe not too bad for a T-shirt store, but not too good for funding another Pacific ocean jaunt. It is about 0.3% of their ambitious goal. Actually not even very helpful paying Gillespie’s $100K annual “salary”. Is TIGHAR’s charmed life finally heading for some hard times ahead? I see also that Tim Mellon is appealing the decision on his lawsuit, there go some more legal fees out the door . . .
I find it very interesting that a comparatively unknown “crashed and sank” proponent, Dana Timmer, did much better a few months ago with his fundraising on Kickstarter, over $33,000 was pledged. (If interested see https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1079283639/expedition-amelia-finding-and-documenting-amelias)
Anon, sounds like his ship has sailed.