AMELIA EARHART Mystery solved -- finally !

Joe Lodrige's explanation on where Amelia Earhart went missing.
Joe is a 25K+ hr military & commercial pilot dual rated as both a Pilot & Navigator who retired as a Major, USAF, from the 89th Squadron, Andrews AFB. Joe has unique qualifications almost unknown in today's flying community. Joe won the first USAF Flying Rodeo for USAF Air Drop delivery. This is a video he made of his speech at the Order of Daedalions, Flight 60 ( Flying Tigers) -- yes, Those Flying Tigers, in Alexandria, LA on 20 April.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Thanks for your comments. Based on your feedback, I want to better explain some parts of my theory.
Lets start at the 07:00 GMT fix, on course. Due to weather and darkness, he had two methods
to maintain course: (1) use forecast winds, with no mathematical errors in applying drift correction,
variation and compass deviation to his true course to obtain a compass heading. With the actual winds being easterly,
he should have remained close to his desired track. (2) take a star fix , weather permitting, to provide
a more accurate course line.
In either case he would have a course line to cross with his sun line to get a Most Probable Position (MPP).
Either method would have provided them two options : (1) " Land Fall", by advancing the sun line to fall over Howland, then turn off
course 20-30 degrees to definitively know from which side of the island they were approaching, then turn
on the sun line toward Howland. (This is what I believe he did). (2)or Dead Reckon from his MPP or Fix to destination
Then accomplish a square search if the island was not visual at ETA.
Due to fuel considerations, I believe he chose the land fall procedure because he thought it was the fastest way to find the island.
The most probable reason they missed the island was due to an error in the sun line. Certainly, the lack of radio direction finding was
an additional contributing factor. However, accurate celestial navigation should have allowed them to arrive overhead Howland Island. I consider
an erroneous sun sighting was a critical factor. The aircraft configuration, sun low on the horizon and weather conditions
would have made it difficult to obtain an accurate celestial sighting.
I hope in the near future some interested citizens will finance an organization, like Nauticos, to undertake
a concentrated sea bottom search that includes the area I predicted.
Sincerely,
Joe Lodrige

[@owenmerrick2377]

This is still (as of 2019) one of the sanest and simplest explanations, from an actual navigator, of what most likely happened out there. Thank you, Major.

[@bertcochran1770]

Yep!

[@cessaly100]

Yep! I’m all ears!

[@hollywheeler3085]

You are the most correct person to date on the whole thing around this subject Thank you

[@noahbianchi1920]

I agree. The fact that the story is not sensational. It’s just that they made minor errors and ran out of fuel is why I think it’s most likely.

[@marhawkman303]

yeah he makes a good case for his conclusion. Noonan's methods of navigation are something that's very important to this as without the RDF, Noonan's pathfinding was the only way to find anything.

[@dlkline27]

I was an Air National Guard avionics technician for many years and as such familiar with various types of electronic navigation equipment, how they work and how they are used. I never dreamed celestial navigation is so complex. My hat's off to Mr. Lodrige for his thorough analysis and lucid presentation. Thank you for your service Major.

[@marhawkman303]

oh yeah, Celestial Navigation is GREAT, but it takes a lot of knowledge and carefully selected tools

[@thomaspick4123]

The Arabs are good navigators. With their camel caravans, they navigated the desert, mainly by the moon, traveling at night, with no sextant, no compass, no time piece, no tables.

[@hyacinthlynch843]

@@thomaspick4123 Amelia should have had an Arab onboard instead of Noonen.

[@351974gordon24]

I always love listening to my elders because they have been where I have not. My dad was right calling men like these the "greatest generation." God bless you, sir.

[@paulmetcalfe1821]

100% 👍

[@budbundy4014]

Amen. These guys are the hero’s who saved the entire world.

[@tordarbast]

Yes! Respect to the elders, they have a lot more experience than any young arrogant know it all..

[@alvanordstrom8025]

God bless you jo

[@zeebest1004]

This was also the RACIST generation but “certain people” don’t care about that. Theirs was a segregated military where blacks generally didn’t even get to fight. America had yet to pass the needed LAW to stop lynching…

[@lawrencequave7361]

I remember from my Navy flight training that a position report was given as, "TIME (note time), TWIST (set new course), TURN (to new course), TRANSITION (make adjustments in altitude, etc., as necessary), and TALK (make the report)"--keeping in mind the cardinal rule was always "Fly the airplane FIRST." TALK meant reporting your position in the format "who you are, time (zulu, as noted earlier), position (location and altitude), airspeed, fuel remaining, next reporting point, ETA there, and anything else you deemed important. Without a co-pilot, this meant you had to do a lot in a very short period of time. Joe makes the point that there were a lot of omissions and inconsistencies in Earhart's position reporting. Perhaps Earhart's disappearance is what lead to a concise com format for position reporting. It took two Boeing 747s colliding on a runway on Tenerife on March 27, 1977, for the international aviation community to finally see the need for and subsequently agreed upon a common communication language (English) and precise ATC terminology. God bless all those who, oftentimes by fatal accident, contributed to the betterment of aviation safety.

[@raoulcruz4404]

Can’t say whether her disappearance prompted formal comm verbiage. One thing that did come of it was the use of Zulu time or UTC. There were 3 different time zones in effect being used by 3 different entities, simultaneously, for the flight to Howland.

[@tomhenry897]

You got training for years of experience and made into a standard format Aviation was still developing back then No or little standards, each country different and she was a daredevil

[@lawrencequave7361]

@@tomhenry897 Wasn't intending to put her down in the least. Just the OPPOSITE! It was from her daring and experiences (and those of OTHER early aviators) that sometimes resulted in their death that aviation gained all the experience that made MY flying easier and safer. May God rest your souls.

[@WascallyWabbitt]

You make an excellent point about solo pilot procedure, especially in this case. One can only imagine how difficult it would have been with the limited vision she had to actually "look" for the island. The small windows and wing configuration was definately a handicap. If this gentleman is correct, they would have just almost been in a position to see it at 30 miles. Then, of course, panic may have played a part in the end. I have experienced being lost when I thought I knew exactly where I was....It's a true fearful feeling.

[@wes326]

"Aviate, navigate, communicate" is what I was taught.

[@stevemadison7895]

This is a good man with a solid grasp of the available data who demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge of aerial navigation. Cheers for this significant presentation and the man who put it together!

[@comm2531]

Good man but he is wrong. Just his educated guess. No tangible evidence

[@brandons9398]

From the many documentaries and stories, I have read and watched on her flight. This seems to be a most reasonable explanation. Many of us don’t want to admit that we can make an error, however, as good pilots know, this is frequently the case, unfortunately.

[@gregmaggielipscomb9246]

Major Lodridge: No doubt you have forgotten more than most of us will ever know about aerial navigation, God Bless You in your future and thank you so much for sharing this presentation of your "best guess" on her ill-fated flight.

[@StevenViets2006]

*HOW IS THIS NOT VIRAL YET?!?!?* Also, thank you for your service!!!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Well put Roger, by the same token, I didn't shoot very well. We were a necessary team. Thanks, Joe

[@Susan70003]

@@josephleroylodrige8033 kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXrUhq2ZiKlmrtU

[@peanutbutterisfu]

Because it’s not some crazy conspiracy that everyone wants to believe.

[@radiotruck8135]

Good topic....even worse I know the wheels came in contact with sand after No fuel..for over a year I had the info, but no response from anyone much

[@thelostboyscout1489]

@@peanutbutterisfu Like all those crazy conspiracies coming true?

[@aldenunion]

When these guys speak,I listen.Respect and honor to him..

[@aldenunion]

This gentlemen forgot more than most flyers know.lol.I am amazed and believe they should listen to him.Including the view out of the windows,wind blowing smoke,how fast they could of over shot and missed visibility.Weakness of radio signal.I bet he is sure close when they finally find her wreckage.This presentation is believable..

[@margiepargie1982]

I love how he backs up his theory with facts and experience. All the thought that went into this is amazing. I hope that someday your theory is validated.

[@nakinajay]

Hello from Nakina Ontario Canada Joe. Thank you for your service. This little Canadian really appreciates the freedoms that you helped fight to keep. Thank you.

[@kennykeleher4128]

Jay Dirt - I will be back in Nakina in July, Another fly in for those fat Walleyes. Like your videos, but think I will stay off the Blueberry road.

[@lisaharrod8386]

I thoroughly enjoyed this man's talk! His calculations, conclusions and summation make more sense than all the bells and whistles documentaries I've seen. And there are hundreds of them... He could be my navigator any day!

[@midlanddisplay]

Simple, straightforward, logical presentation by an individual who knows his stuff….. This all makes total sense, using known information for the most accurate conclusion possible.

[@richardheninger8278]

Bob When I said "Joe's explanation is spot on" I meant that I think she crashed in the ocean not necessarily the actual predicted coordinates. Logically speaking, there will be some deviation as to the exact location of the crash. Even Joe said here are the coordinates and when they find the wreckage you can see how far I am off. Also, Joe's credentials are pretty impressive.

[@Mark16v15]

After watching this vid, I’m now convinced that Amelia Earhart may be the earliest known example of the renowned aviation proverb, “There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots”. Speaking as a former B-52 aircraft commander, it seems obvious to me that as her experience and aviation feats increased, so did her hubris and arrogance, to the point that she actually decided to fly 2,500 miles over open ocean to a speck of land in the middle of nowhere, with known navigation avionics and instrument problems, and apparently with no backup survival plan, not even a couple of life preservers and flares. Not to be mean, but for the sake of young pilots reading this, I wouldn’t really call her piloting “bold”, but rather “absolutely stupid”, at least in this case.

[@craigd1275]

Her navigator, Fred Noonan, was a 44 year old alcoholic. He was either drunk or going through withdrawals. He should have been on the radio, not her. .

[@Mark16v15]

@@craigd1275 Interesting info. You're probably aware that after their first attempt, two passengers decided to get off the historic flight, citing a reasonable reason, but now I wonder if the real reason may have been the realization that they were putting their lives into the hands of a drunk, but obviously couldn't say that publicly. One of those passengers was the only one who knew Morse code, which provided better communication over long distances compared to vocal radio transmissions at that time. And Amelia still decided to go on without that communication advantage (with a man too often sloshed to recognize the mistake), which contributed to her demise. It could be, that if truth be known, it was Noonan's alcoholism that in the end actually was the primary cause of the journey's failure.

[@davidtaylor351]

​Amelia was the pilot in Command! And neither she, nor her backers wanted anybody else in control. As it was "Amelia's flight - Amelia's show". "If there were" drinking issues with Noonan, that comes back to the pilot in command. And, in this case, possibly also her backers. The people who left after the first flight attempt, left after the plane, which Amelia was pilot of, crashed in Hawaii! It's pretty obvious there was questionable planning and prep behind this flight. Which was exacerbated by the pressure to get it done!! And that included the hype and hoopla. Not just to be, the first person, but, for a woman, to be the first person to do this flight!

[@savecolaclibrarynow]

Thank you Mr. Lodrige for taking the time to share your theory with the public, your experience and knowledge is very valuable, good on you for putting that presentation together.

[@jimwarfield8411]

Amelia's Parents are buried in the grave yard just out my West window here in Mount Carroll, ILL> Amelia's Father had a farm just north if town, he was said to have inspored her to fly planes by her Father giving her fast car rifrd over the steep, holly roads there (Belly-ticklers) In 1940 a new Post office was built, her Parent's house in town was then preserved, moved diagonally across the same block the house was orignally built.. but right now that house is not in good shape. There is a plack telling about this snippet of local History of a famous person.

[@oumealso-mb3sv]

Thank you sir! It's a absolute pleasure listening to you. Greatest generation absolutely NO DOUBT!

[@MsrkTakach]

My father landed on and was stationed on Saipan during WW2, he was a medic. During his time there he became friends with some of the natives. One day one of them asked him if he wanted to see where the Japanese killed the blonde woman before the war. Also saw her plane below one of the cliffs on Saipan. My dad took that story to the grave.

[@richardmclaren8549]

Saipan is north of Lae and How land Island is East of Lae. Surely they were better navigators than that. 🐟

[@kennethferland5579]

Literally every group of natives in the South Pacific claim that same story. It's a rather transparent attempt to ingraciate themselves to American service men of WW2, which is why the Japanese are always blamed.

[@jguillot72]

If I had a nickel for everyone who has put out this story or a variation of it...sheesh!

[@Frankie5Angels150]

Umm, no… if he’d taken it to the grave you wouldn’t be pushing that B.S. on us now. 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@reggiebenes2916]

If your father took it to the grave, then you've obviously been discussing these things in the afterlife. So could you possibly make an "Afterlife Phone Call" to Amelia to verify these claims?

[@FreezeGopher1]

Joe, it’s nice to hear from someone who knows what they’re talking about. This was a very well put together presentation, well done.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Thanks very much. I believe it to be an aviation minded, educated theory as to what probably happended. Sincerely, Joe

[@rolandashurst5843]

It's always good to hear from someone who has actually done what they were trying to do. Very good chance he's got it right.

[@sueskeie4627]

I think he is right, they are probably there. They should look there.

[@koralrescue1893]

Major Lodrige, I first want to thank you for your service to this country. It was a pleasure listening to your presentation and explanation from the point of view of someone who has the right experience and insight, as well as passion and appreciation of this historical "mystery." I must say, your explanation is the most logical and well analyzed version of events. Your charts were very helpful. Thank you sir, and wishing you the best, including much health.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Thanks for your kind words. They were great American and aviation pioneers. Sad that they failed in their mission; hopefully they will be found. Regards, Joe

[@pamdillon4929]

Koral Rescuers

[@daisywomack7587]

@@trainman1209 --thank you for such an intelligent comment--

[@daisywomack7587]

What an analysis :)

[@trainman1209]

@@daisywomack7587 I don't know why there's a line through your post. Can't seen to tap it into view.

[@collenfisher3635]

I like Joe's approach. Everybody else is doing the same thing over, expecting a different result.

[@wes326]

From a former navigator, I like your analysis. The Gardener Island theory never made sense to me either. Thanks for sharing.

[@kennethferland5579]

Garderner island is only popular as a theory because it allowed for the possibility of her surviving, so people clung too it for emotional reasons.

[@coryhoggatt7691]

Pam Am had DF stations in the Pacific used for tracking commercial flights. Earhart had radio equipment that broadcast on frequencies that were not used outside the continental US. Those stations triangulated distress calls on those unique frequencies to the Gardner island group. More than wishful thinking, this is proof positive that she was on land in that area.

[@richrdfieroii]

@@coryhoggatt7691 YOU are Barking up the WRONG TREE ! she never got within 300 MILES of Gardner.

[@allybally0021]

Incredibly intelligent and sharp man. These old school navigators crossed the globe using methods that were art and science combined with incredible judgement and situational awareness.

[@marhawkman303]

yeah trying to guess where the plan ended up need you to understand HOW it's course was being plotted.

[@hawaiib8]

Full of shit no one found her or his body, or even no airplane debrie none zip so screw you procrastinator thinking you know it all where the proof of voice records where are they the voice recording all bull shit always come up with an idea no facts all bull shit

[@PuckerFactor10]

This gentleman, like his brothers, is a national treasure!

[@MJKarkoska]

The Pacific is much more difficult than the Atlantic where navigation is concerned. In the Atlantic you know that east and west will get you across if a straight shot, and hopping islands in the north is easy because of the size of the landmasses. It's so different from hitting a speck in the ocean by comparison, and as mentioned the clouds can cast a dark shadow that makes seeing a small island much more difficult. I also can't imagine having one person looking and flying the airplane. They were likely below the clouds but maybe not, and when entering clouds you could miss the island. The dead battery on the transmitter sealed their fate imo.

[@pamshewan9181]

Truth! They were not well prepared

[@jamesbreeden3061]

All of the Amelia Earhart theories are very fascinating.

[@matte7189]

I could listen to this man for weeks... this is wisdom

[@themittonmethod1243]

Thank you for this analysis, Joe. These days there are so many keyboard "experts" who have absolutely no idea of how easily errors can creep in, when doing either celestial navigation or RDF in those days. One question I have always had is IF the navigational compass onboard was accurately adjusted on leaving Lae. Over such a distance, even an error of half a degree would put the course significantly off projected track. In general agreement with you, I think a likely crash site would be north of Howland Island, by as much as 100 miles.. close to your projected 1856 plot at the top of your chart, and if heading north on the 157/337 line, by the time any vessel or search plane got to that area, no wreckage would likely be found. I hope that one day, this mystery will be solved.

[@philipgiacalone5605]

Excellent. I always like it when thoughtful, disciplined logic is applied to difficult problems.

[@brynwayt7863]

I’ve written to you before Joe, but here’s my latest. It was a long listen, with most of the hypothesis offered was food for UFO hunters, and floggers of theories. Let me start by saying that I wish both AE and her brave navigator total RIP. The one thing I want the panel and followers to understand is, "you cannot fly "north and south" on a position line if you have NO radio aid/s ahead or behind you" ! It's IMPOSSIBLE. I am talking from my experience of about 25,000 hrs flight time, with roughly 95% as Pilot-in-Command as accumulated from MILITARY (RAF) and civilian airline experience. I was the Squadron Flight Safety Officer on every squadron I was on, and a CAA (UK) Approved Safety Training Instructor. More than 3,000 hrs was spent over the world’s oceans at less than 1000’ on the Avro Shackleton Mk2.2 and Mk3.3 (14 hours airborne was par for the course) and more flying hours doing roughly the same work on the HS NIMROD maritime four-jet. That infamous Position Line so calculated by Mr Noonan (some say in his bedroom on LAE) as 157/337 degrees (true) is all well and good IF it were accurate. Taking a "sunshot" as the sun comes up first thing in the morning is NOT a recommended time ! So it was NOT accurate. A considerable amount of Errors were inherent and were NOT accounted for 1.Acceleration error 2. Index 3. Operator 4. Refraction (in 1937 as it was not accounted for ! Only sun angles above 6 degrees). US Navy demanded using > 10 degrees 5. DIP - not used on a bubble sextant 6. Height > MSL. (at 10,000’ Sun Rise is 10 minutes earlier than a person at sea level would see it). To legitimately use a position-line one must have been 'on' that line at some point during flight - where exactly is not established until you get at least a second position-line with a good 'cut' across that first PL . Moving the first PL along the assumed track MUST involve an accurate GROUND SPEED. I do not think Mr Noonan ever had an accurate enough GS to do that. It has been said he pre-calculated that infamous PL back in his hotel room on LAE. That’s fine, but when it comes to the actual flying on the day with fuel running out, it’s no use flying up and down this invisible line - as it is not a feature on the surface of the sea, nor is it a line of boats on the surface, nor coloured dye, nor a line of buoys showing the way. Unless there’s a tracking aid either ahead or behind when you reach this vital PL you are wasting your time trying to track up and down that PL merely by turning onto 157 degrees or 337. Wind will take its toll on anything you think you have covered ! The ONLY way Mr Noonan could assume he was "on the line" was to have an accurate Ground Speed since his last accurate one derived from a viable 'fix' and then have an ETA for the 157/337 PL which had it’s datum engineered through Howland Island. If the last 'fix' was inaccurate, his G/S was at best a rough estimate; then the move to fly down that PL was NEVER going to work. It’s an IMPOSSIBLE task, ask any certified Pilot who has passed the written plotting exam; better still, ask one who has an Instrument Rating which involved a flying test to prove you can do that job. "Circling" as reported by AE would make any "Airplot" the nav was keeping a complete joke. Flying at 1000' as she reported was purely "eyeball" as she had no Radio Altimeter nor a local QNH to set her pressure altimeter. There are no consistently reliable "fixes" in any of the chart work we know of, nor R/T exchanges, and having flown for 23 hours plus the area where you think you has become ever larger (10% of distance flown). It was suicidal NOT to have planned this properly. Ms Earhart let her sponsors down very badly. I’m afraid both Amelia and Fred were grossly un-prepared for this enormous navigational/endurance task. 1. Rubbish communication planning. 2. Rubbish R/T between air and ship/s. 3. Not having reliable on-board radio aid equipment to get bearings from land bases cost them dearly. 4. Neither crew member knew enough morse code to read simple messages. That’s really stupid. There are so many disturbing facts it beggars belief. Show me hard written evidence that the aircraft completed a proper "Compass swing" after it had its two engines changed at Miami. The whole team overall could not even get a common time base to work from ! It should have been GMT through out, but even the ITASCA radio room was working "local" and not GMT/UTC and AE always used the local time and the nav GMT. Madness. It’s one hellish shame it all turned to worms, so if you are thinking of doing anything like that remember the 6 "P's". Perfect Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance. Miss Earhart had a bad habit of turning in some Piss Poor performances. 1. No reliable compass swing after that Hawaii crash and the disassembled aircraft taken back to the USA. "The tailwheel of the Electra was raised up onto a wheeled 'dolly' so the 'plane would be in the flight attitude as it was rotated during the compass swing. NO mention the engines were running - which is essential for a correct and proper compass swing. 2. She missed the planned destination on that Hawaii to the USA flight (correct airfield eventually !). 3. She used two-way radio on the above flight, so why did she not realise that was her life-line ? 4. She let her pilot’s licence expire ! 15 Oct 1936 - sorted it out, but how silly and unprofessional. 5. She missed their intended landing site at Dakar on the Natal flight, landed 116sm NORTH at St. Louis. She summarised this significant error by saying, "My navigator indicated that we should turn south. Had we done so, a half hour would have brought us to Dakar. But a left turn seemed to me in order and after 50 miles of flying along the coast, we found ourselves at St. Louis, Senegal." That’s the sort of very gash piloting that gets you in deep trouble. She also compounded confusion by using "local time" when GMT was used by her professional navigator. Her ASI was in MPH whilst Fred Noonan was using knots. 6. No chance of D/F on the night/day frequencies (or any in fact !). Horrible decision. 7. No dinghy despite a long over-water flight ! Tch Tch. Inventory List, 26 March 1937 Luke Field, Hawaii. 8. No Intercom, just a bamboo rod and string pulley - madness. 9. T/O from LAE says it all, the aircraft was skimming just above the water till out of sight and never climbed >100’ according to witnesses. Mr JA Collopy - District Superintendent (Civil Aviation). 10. Doing an Airtest and knowing the D/F was not working was unforgivable. 11. How on earth did nobody locate that "lost" trailing aerial on LAE ? Not that it would achieve anything ! 12. The MAP position of Howland was not accurately portrayed: 6 miles west and 1 mile north of true position ! Say no more. 13. She did not even submit an "Accident Report" (Form 87) to the Bureau of Air Commerce after that failed T/O. A month after that crash the Bureau wrote to her (19 April 1937) and reminded her about the $500 fine that could be actioned. A kind "Supervising" Inspector, Mr Emil Williams in Honolulu recommended, "no action should be taken in this instance". Politics ! She had not even thought of taking off during daylight that morning and "delayed take off until there was sufficient light to see clearly". At 05.40 (local) the wx was, ceiling 3000’ wind

[@wes326]

Publicity stunt gone bad. Ironically, she gained more fame for failure than success.

[@bill-2018]

Thanks for this info. I saw another video which said she had the trailing aerial and winch removed at Miami. To save weight maybe? It said she got wavelength and frequency mixed up for d.f. so only one was correct at 400 kc/s, one at 900 kc/s which was in the medium wave band and one at 7.5 MHz. Another video stated Noonan made a previous error in navigation by 200 miles and was sacked before his flight with Amelia. The pilot took the airports d.f. as accurate and arrived safely. With bad navigation they could have ended up on Gardner island. I believe there was a storm, could it have pushed them more southerly and did they think Gardner island was Howland or an island close to it? What I have not heard before are no life raft. Did they have any flares? Saving weight again? Too confident in thinking they didn't need them? Many sailing ships ran aground using Sun and star navigation so how accurate is it? Without d.f. it seems a very hit and miss affair finding a tiny island in a vast ocean.

[@richrdfieroii]

@@bill-2018 listen very close, to what I am about to say. They spoke on voice to the coast guard at HOWLAND ISLAND, this means by FACT they were VERY CLOSE to HOWLAND island. now, CHECK there fuel supply. with 11 Gallons of fuel left. HOW could they make it 300 MILES to GARDNER ISLAND ?

[@bill-2018]

I'm not saying they did land on Gardner island but could have been blown off course by the forecast wind if he didn't take it into account and ended up there. This guy is saying they could overshoot Howland so why is it not possible they went to Gardner island. Apparently no life raft. A failure. One video said Noonan had been on a flight and was 200 miles out with his navigation and was sacked. Did the two beacon ships actually report seeing her plane? Did the crew not want to see her historic flight? There seems to be a lack of communication on her part. Another failure. No reception from any ships. Did she not wonder why? Another failure. Batteries dead on Howland island? Another failure. Why did people say they heard distress calls for five days? Betty Clint heard New York City which was supposedly Newark City. She is still adamant she heard it. Other people reported hearing calls as well. Or misheard it: maybe ships saying they were at Gardner island looking for Amelie Earhart. We don't know. But how many ships would have a woman radio operator in those days? However radio propagation can make local signals weak yet strong at a distance. Study radio and you will find this out. There's a dead zone where signals are not heard. It's entirely possible they could be 300 miles away. I can't rule it out IF they did land. I assume the radio op. on board Itasca stopped listening when they thought they had ditched into the sea. D.F. on 7.5 MHz was not good and they couldn't null out the signal, we have already been told that. Did they not check it a few miles out of Lau? She put it down as too strong. How did she expect it would it cope at Howland. Very foolish to go on. Why did they let her choose that frequency? Another failure. We may never know where the plane went. It was ill planned. I seem to have my dead zone at about 60 miles as I've had contacts from 70 miles to 284 Miles on 5.262 MHz using only 2 Watts. I can't hear myself at 40 miles at Hack Green receiver online. Night time would allow signals to travel further. FACT.

[@richrdfieroii]

@@bill-2018 did I mention I am a Ham Radio Operator for the last 30 YEARS ? did I also Mention that EARHART had ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, none as in NO HF capabilities on her AIRCRAFT ? did I mention the ONLY working RADIO she had was in the 122 MHZ Aircraft Band ?on AM ? Where do YOU get this 5.262 MHZ from ? They did NOT bring an HF antenna, they LEFT it at LAE everyone knows this INCLUDING her husband. the Navy the Coast Guard & the Board of Inquiry.

[@brianw612]

A real stick and rudder guy and a true patriot.

[@dmorgan28]

A very excellent presentation Sir. I believe you are spot on. The best to you and thank you for your service.

[@frankflstf]

Thank you Joe for your service and presentation

[@heatherstergos8003]

Thank you so much for this presentation. What a fantastic resource for subsequent generations of Earhart enthusiasts. Major Loridge, you have my respect for your respectful presentation. It is one of the most sensible, well thought out, well explained analyses I have heard. It is much appreciated, again, thank you so much.

[@okrajoe]

Fascinating navigation analysis. These videos are what makes KZbin great!

[@pepp4560]

This explanation, like most, naturally puts a great deal of emphasis on the strength of the radio signal read by the ITASCA but not on the garbled radio messages earlier in the flight. Howland Island had little cloud cover that day, with clouds only to North, which is why so much of the SAR effort focused on that direction. Bill Snavely's Project Blue Angel alone offers a sensible explanation, which is that Earhart and Noonan ascertained after overflying Nauru that their fuel would be too insufficient to make it to Howland, given the headwinds they were encountering. So they did the only logical thing, which was to turn around and fly back to the nearest airfield. That would have been in Buka, now Autonomous Bougainville. In fact, that is where Project Blue Angel has found under 100 feet of water what many of those involved believe is her Lockheed Electra 10-E. A native fisherman witnessed it plunging into the water during a rainstorm in 1937. In her garbled messages, Earhart may have advised she was turning back, but the ITASCA never heard it. Her messages about being 200 or 100 miles out may have been to the airfield at Buka, which was not expecting a flight and so was unmanned. The louder strength of the signal reaching the ITASCA may have been a matter of radio skip, depending on atmospheric harmonics, sun activity, the time of dat in Buka, etc. Snavely's theory is the most compelling and exciting theory today, not least because it alone might actually have a plane.

[@marhawkman303]

That is an interesting one. It certainly has logic to it and evidence.

[@kennykeleher4128]

Any planes to attempt a physical locate? 100 feet of water should be easy

[@pepp4560]

@@kennykeleher4128Project Blue Angel has mounted two expeditions, involving many dives each. The first was led by a retired U.S. Foreign Service officer experienced in the POW/MIA search effort in Vietnam and an expert on the Pacific. The second was led by an engineering type. Unlike other Earhart searchers, project members are being very closed mouth about their efforts. A local who was expelled from the project told a newspaper that they've located the plane and even recovered a few human remains. I'm told funding isn’t flowing, though, because TIGHAR's Nikumaroro theory and the History Channel "Lost Photo" documentary have pretty much discredited the whole genre.

[@kennykeleher4128]

@@pepp4560 - Thank you! That explains it, geez would like to see it salvaged

[@mydasdivecenter5798]

@@pepp4560The B3A database of known crashed Electra's in the Asia Pacific region resulted in only one 10E which belonged to Amelia Earhart's. So if this find is a 10E then it has to be AE's. Question 1: Is the plane 38' 7" long with a wing span of 55'? Question 2: My understanding is that that the last time AE reported her actual coordinates it was 7-16S, 150-7-19E when she was traversing round heavy cloud cover. She rejoined her flight path to Howland at a location over Buka Island. So this is indeed an interesting way-point as it is the largest land mass between this way-point and Howland and probably the last known way point to the flight. There does not appear to be any radio transmissions from the 10E that definitively locates the 10E. In the absence of being able to position the aircraft, and with knowledge of their fuel, turning back may seem logical. The question remains though, why did she not say that she was turning back? Also, how do we explain all the subsequent radio message and do we have a fix on the point at which AE turned back?

[@JAG312]

At 33:00, I believe her exact words were "half hour fuel left". During the time period, my mother's boyfriend was Earhart's mechanic, and he also taught my mother to fly. He believed that she used up her fuel looking for Howland and crashed into the ocean.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

My research indicated that radio logs are indecisive ; did she say " low on fuel" or " half hour of fuel left" ? Boyfriend was probably correct. Thanks, Joe

[@tracyd4774]

Very well done. Now who is going to go find her. I believe he has the best explanation and presentation ever done. Someone who has sea exploration means and financing needs to see this and solve this mystery.

[@toddlerhumour5086]

Great presentation! Thanks for putting your valuable experience to work in helping to very likely solve a long standing mystery. Much like Occams Razor, or the quote attributed to Einstein ("Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."), the simplest explanation of a navigational error from a wind overshoot and thus sunline error makes perfect sense, matches the available facts, and much more likely than the Nikimaroo or Marshall Islands theories. Anyway thanks again and great work!

[@bonniemoerdyk9809]

Thank you for all your hard work Mr. Lodrige! I really enjoyed this video as I have been interested in the Amelia Earhardt flight for many decades. I remember my mother telling me about it back when I was very young (late 50's), most kids learn about stuff like this in school, but my mom would tell me before I even started school. I love History and I love research, so I generally spend my time on the internet with things like what you have presented to us. God bless you sir!

[@johnjon1823]

That guy was old enough and experienced enough in all the needed areas to make a very reasonable and good analysis which people today would likely be unable to do, since the techniques and methods of that day are not widely understood today nor are there people proficient in the practice of such things. Based in my zero knowledge of such things, I say that guy has come up with an excellent hypothesis worth looking into. He should be congratulated for having used his time an talent in this endeavor and people should be grateful for such actual men.

[@tortugabob]

Sounds very reasoned and well thought out.

[@haroldhuddleston6585]

I too am an old retired AF Navigator (90). TIGHAR has given credit to the research conducted by two old navigators, Tom Gannon and Tom Willy who lived in NW Florida. I knew Tom Gannon very well and we were both experienced in the techniques of navigation used in the 1930s and long experienced as ham radio operators (members of the same club). In the mid 80s Tom asked me to come to his house where he showed me the results of their five years of data retrieved from the National Archives. We went over this material which took several hours at which time I agreed that they should contact TIGHAR. While I will not disagree with the presentation, there are several facts which the presenter did not consider. Most of all there were several weather reports from ships in that part of the Pacific which reported NW winds which would have resulted in them being south of course. It is part of the reason that TIGHAR has been searching where they have. We may never know the true facts, but I believe in the research Tom Gannon and Tom Willy presented to TIGHAR. Remember, I saw the material before it was presented to TIGHAR. By the way, Tom Gannon went on the first TIGHAR trip.

[@richrdfieroii]

Hello Ham Operator, DE W5TFW

[@rickyallanmcbride4380]

I believe your theory is correct, as your knowledge of flying is obvious. Well done.

[@bushelfoot]

A combination of small errors can have big consequences.

[@nomorewar4189]

Ben Kool - in accident investigation they are referred to as contributing factors and you are correct there are often a number of contributing factors in any incident / accident. Those who are unfamiliar with the process of looking for root cause often mistake a contributing factor for the cause. Like saying the slippery road conditions caused the accident - no slippery roads don’t cause accidents - drivers not adjusting speed to the conditions cause accidents.

[@radiotruck8135]

For me... the radiolog tends to point out to me this.. The report from the end of 157 never came.. and put down On the ginormous beachy sandbar halfway to phoenix

[@AudioAndroid]

I could sit down and listen to this mans stories all day.

[@noreenfarrell7475]

This was an amazing presentation ,Mr. Lodrige. I really enjoyed this and I know nothing about aviation or navigation,but I felt that it was a compelling theory as to what may have led to the disappearance of this aircraft. Assuming that there were land masses in the area where you postulate that they ended up, perhaps there is some slight hope that the mystery will one day be solved incontrovertibly. I hope that may be so.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Hello Noreen, Thanks for your comments. I believe what I presented is the most probable theory available .Mr. Robert Ballard is in the Pacific now. I hope he will find some of the Earhart remains. Regards, Joe

[@PaulanthonyBridge-kt4eg]

Well, if Ballard is "in the pacific" then he may well see her remains. Especially if he is on the BOTTOM of the pacific.

[@bigdmac33]

Hell of a Job, sir. I feel that anyone that ignores the data presented here, does so at their peril. Honour and respect to you, sir.

[@livingadreamlife1428]

Excellent analysis. The Major has a good grasp on the navigational technology and protocol used at that time.

[@DrFrankensteam]

This guy knows where he’s at with just using the sun? Level: EXPERT!

[@johnvorres4351]

1000 feet over the ocean in a twin engine airplane sounds crazy to me

[@Pootycat8359]

No, 1000 feet over the ocean in a SINGLE engine airplane may be a bit crazy, though Lindbergh and "Wrong-Way" Corrigan didn't think so.

[@johnvorres4351]

@@Pootycat8359 1000 ft agl is what we call in normal flights for a cessna 150 is patern altitude ! And Dont bring up my relitive in your defence

[@Pootycat8359]

@@johnvorres4351 Your relative? Also, I was being slightly, though not entirely, humorous. And (there are exceptions) you usually enter "downwind" at 800 ft, descend to 400 ft for base to final.

[@12floz67]

Thank you for your service sir.🇺🇸 This was done very well.

[@terriecotham1567]

Thanks for posting this for history has so many events and answers are not easy to find at times. Thanks to all who tried and make the world a better place for those too come

[@barbaratozzano6364]

Thanks for the explanation. Using actual facts instead of baseless hearsay, conspiracy theories, and imagination to come to a more likely, though perhaps less intriguing solution. No one ever wants it to be simple pilot or navigator error, they prefer the grand mystery.

[@ronslaughterandalice1018]

numbers don't lie. I think this gentleman has enough past experience in his career to put this together.And I think they might find something in that area he points out.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

THANKS, hopefully someone will go look there.

[@lcagee]

I think the ocean depth in that area is about 20,000 feet. If so, the search would be very difficult.

[@JoeLinux2000]

@@josephleroylodrige8033, my opinion is that you got it right that she is not on any of the islands on which they have been searching, However your conjectured fix could be off by many miles. I agree with you that it was a very ill conceived flight. That's a huge distance with very limited navigational certainty. Advancing a line of position is an estimated guess at best.

[@radiotruck8135]

@@josephleroylodrige8033 Hi Joe, the fuel ran low around an apreciable sandmass,where you suggested .it's about five miles across,

[@chrisabraham8793]

Great presentation, good to hear about old school navigation and to look at this mystery in a different logical perspective. Would be great to see a follow up on this video if Joe was right or if anyone today has looked at the island in question or a rough estimate of the ocean she landed in.

[@ccchhhrrriiisss100]

This is a brilliant explanation. It meets all known variables from the flight and radio communication. For a while, I researched TIGHAR's theory. However, there were quite a few holes in the TIGHAR theory. I just don't think that Earhardt and Noonan would divert along a line that took them so far away from Howland. Following a line for 400 miles to the southeast of Howland defies all reason -- and it makes both Earhardt and Noonan out to be completely incompetent. It just makes very little sense. I don't think that Rick Gillespie (the CEO of TIGHAR) even truly believes that theory. They have even created "evidence" from spots on old photographs.

[@jguillot72]

Gillespie is a fraud and a charlatan. He makes his living bilking people.

[@coryhoggatt7691]

You’re talking about the Earhart who landed in a field in Ireland instead of the airfield in France to which she was flying.

[@jodyguilbeaux8225]

to be at flight over a vast ocean at night not knowing your whereabouts , running out of fuel , must have been terrifying .

[@michaelpryor2981]

Thank you for helping find her sir thank you for your service sir

[@maryellenshock]

I confess I have no clue what this honored gentleman is talking about - THANK YOU FOR YOUR Service!

[@johnhudak3829]

I never bought the "castaway" theory. I think the professional aviators, like this gentleman and men like Elgin Long, have the answer. When all else fails, trust the professionals.

[@ruppertale3319]

This is sensible and persuasive. The coordinates he provides are a good place to start looking. It's hard to know what direction she turned in the last minutes of her flight, and even with those coordinates there would be a LOT of ocean floor to search. The biggest guess is whether they traveled past the island before turning or not. If they made the turn before reaching the island and it was on her left, that's a completely different area to search. I think his guess is reasonable, but she might have been short and not seen the island. Either way, it's hard to see how she could have made it to Nikkamauro.

[@markprange238]

31:00 Maj. Lodrige is right that once turned onto the Sun line more Sun sights would tell about how far the plane was from a Sun line crossing over Howland. If the Sun's height had been precomputed, it would have been an easy procedure of comparing the observed height with the precomputed height, and subtracting to find the difference in arcminutes.

[@McIntyreBible]

This man knows about aviation flying; there's no doubt about it!

[@mydasdivecenter5798]

I have been following all attempts to explain Amelia Earhart's flight path. Joe Lodrige's analysis is by far the clearest and honest analysis that points in the direction of a navigational error. I have one question about Noonan's chronometers being 3 seconds out though: According to the Chater report, before takeoff at Lae, the Adelaide time signal check (July 1 @ 10:20 - 10:30 PM) showed that the chronometers were 3 seconds slower. As Amelia Earhart delayed her take-off pending an accurate time-signal check, it seems to me that, once detected, Noonan would have corrected this before take-off. Therefore I am not sure whether the 10 mile / second discrepancy can be a factor in the overshoot of the 157 - 337 turn-point. I think therefore, Noonan's chronometers were accurate.

[@Treefallensprout]

A very dear friend of mine, Mr. John Caldwell was a Flying Tiger. I can hear him (explaining things as a Flying Tiger Pilot, like Joe Lodridge explained - about his research findings - as a Navigator). Mr. Caldwell has passed away - it was an absolute pleasure listening to Joe - I am not a pilot.

[@kevingreer7877]

I very much lean towards the Gardner Island solution, because of the post 'crash' radio signals, which I think have a little better provenance than is stated here... but if they're truly hoaxes or mistaken signals, then this is a very big reasonable possibility. Much better than Amelia Earhart, Super Spy (who crashed her aircraft with alarming regularity, wasn't up to speed on radio comms, but was chosen to spy the Japanese islands?) theory. This was very sensible, presented by someone who knows what they're talking about. Glad I saw it.

[@lisaharrod8386]

This gentlemen's generation was there, and I'm in awe... They flew the planes, used the current technologies, and had mastered the navigational practices of the time. They had first hand experience of the inherent dangers, and pitfalls that early aviators faced everytime they left the runway. Beyond that...they were honest! They believe in facts and empirical evidence. An amazing generation. They are to be thanked for their service, and revered for sharing their knowledge and experiences. @35197...you're so right! God bless this man and his generation!

[@dontrotter1099]

Great work Sir!. I always thought that noone ever did the fuel calculation like you did here. The whole "spy" thing would only work if they had the gas to get there, which they didn't have. The same for this new stuff. There was no reason for the Japanese to take them to Saipan if found at Joloit. they could have just radioed her location and no problems. I really think you hit this on the button. Hopefully someone goes and looks. It would be awesome if they did.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Thank you, I believe it is a good educated theory.

[@daniellong8083]

GE stock price

[@mikebronicki8264]

I don't know enough about navigation to comment, but I always believed it was *much* more likely that the wreckage is located in deep ocean than on a "needle in a haystack" island.

[@BradHartliep-kn9ud]

I don't recall the exact numbers, but from my understanding, the Headwinds were significantly higher than predicted - something like 20 mph stronger - meaning her Ground Speed [ NOT Indicated Airspeed ] was significantly slower than anticipated .. meaning she would have A] Burned More Fuel .. and either: B] Covered Less Ground in the same time frame .. or C] Taken LONGER to get to the same spot .. If I remember correctly, some people claimed she was "an hour late" "arriving over Howland" - although I also believe there is a discrepency in this as well, because of the time change calculations - so no one is quite exactly sure whether she was actually late .. or just the clock times were miscalculated .. I believe the more likely scenario is that, because of the stronger headwinds - which Fred DID NOT Know About - that they were still WEST of Howland and Baker when they thought they were "over Howland now" .. and not close enough to see either Island - at 1,000 Foot Altitude that means a minimum of 38.7 miles away, but probably farther - I seem to remember the calculations put them 100 - 200 miles West of Howland when they thought they were "over Howland now" .. They maybe flew for 15 to 30 minutes Southeast along heading 157 , turned Northwest along 337 Degrees for 15 to 30 Minutes .. and either ran out of fuel .. or turned back West and headed for either Tarawa, Nauru, or New Britain [ there's at least one "investigator" who claims she had enough reserve fuel to return to Lae, as there were no Runways on any of the Gilbert or Solomon Islands, requiring her to ditch in the ocean along a beach ] .. Some claim Amelia flew using a Lockheed-designed climb and descend technique that MAXIMIZED Fuel Efficiency, extending her range to something like 5,000 miles / or double the distance to Howland .. this entails climbing or descending at a VERY SHALLOW Vertical Rate - 50 Feet per minute or less -- maximizing Forward Momentum and minimizing Drag created by Lift -- meaning with a tailwind [ on her return flight ], she would have had enough fuel and range remaining to reach New Britain Island - where a "crashed civilian twin engine airplane" was discovered during WW2 - but the Army Servicemen who found it did not make any connection to it being Amelia's Airplane .. and a decade or so later it was buried and is now impossible to find .. no proof other than the reports by the Servicemen a few days after they found the plane exists - except for a metal tag off of one of the engines that one of the Troopers recovered and put in his pocket - a Tag that traces back to the same type of engine that Amelia had .. So far no one's found the wreckage on New Britain despite 20 years of searching .. So a crash on or near New Britain, Bougainville, the Solomons or the Gilberts is not out of the question ..

[@geoffroberts1126]

Probably the most well reasoned analysis I've seen. Particularly since this man was an almost contemporary navigator - he knew and used the same techniques, clearly knew the business and importantly, not only where mistakes could be made, but where those mistakes would put the aircraft. He's obviously had to make some assumptions, but the methodology, both his and his understanding of what Noonan would have been doing and how he would have instructed Earhart to fly the aircraft are pretty likely to be correct. Good chance she wound up in the drink at least somewhere near where he said.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

I believe it is a good theory, based on actual experiences in like situations. Thanks, Joe

[@raoulcruz4404]

Geoff, some of the assumptions Mr. Lodrige had to make, do have some basis in fact. As Earhart flew around the world she would telegraph here notes home to husband , G.P. Putnam. He was selling the story to The Tribune newspaper. So there is a written record of what she was doing up to the day they left Lae. Keep in mind the navigation error was a known fact to Noonan. This is caused by the refraction of the atmosphere. His job was to get the aircraft within a 10 miles or so. He was not nor could not expect to navigate strictly by a celestial fix. The final navigation to the island would be with a DF steer and visual.

[@geoffroberts1126]

Raoul Cruz Yes I'm aware of that, on such a long over water leg to be within 10 miles or so would be difficult at best and the aircraft was not well setup for celestial nav, at a minimum it should have had an astrodome.

[@raoulcruz4404]

That would have helped but, still required the DF steer for the final run in to the island. Earhart misused her DF equipment. She didn't understand it. The previous navigator selected for the trip, Manning, did understand how to use it. I agree, Mr. Lodrige's presentation is a well reasoned analysis. P.S. If I sound contentious, that is unintended. Just trying to fill in some blanks that people may not be aware of.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Raoul, Your comments have been very valid and realistic. However,I have had missions where you had to find destination, solely by celestial. You could get a star fix at night; daytime more difficult;necessary to cross a sun line with DR; ( better keep good DR) for an MPP. I always planned to do a square search if destination was not visible at ETA, but I always had plenty fuel; with low fuel, I believe Noonan chose the proper procedure. Thanks f or your interest. Joe

[@jerrypolverino6025]

As a career pilot this makes the most sense to me.

[@lucvinet2166]

Very good . The logic your using is exactly the way to do it right . I Bravo. You sir for this great work . Luc Montreal Qc Canada

[@tonycruse3648]

Fantastic and logical. Thank you Joseph for a very clear and polite presentation.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Thanks Tony, I believe it is the most probable theory put forth. Joe

[@teodelfuego]

@@josephleroylodrige8033 Good research, good presentation. Thank you

[@rebelbelle62]

I sure hope someone goes to his coordinates and really gives them a thorough and hard look to see if anything could be found after all this time.

[@kpd3308]

I believe that Mr. Lodrige's vast experience and rational approach makes his scenario not only feasible, but probable. It's too bad the ocean is so deep there that exploration is arduous and expensive. Maybe someday...

[@PaulDostie]

Dr. Colleen Fitzpatrick, founder of Identifinders, has a DNA match from a relative of Fred Noonan, in case he is found. She found the relative in Ireland using Forensic Genealogy. As she likes to say, "I have Fred Noonan in my freezer."

[@fredjensen1683]

Great, logical presentation..I think they will discover the aircraft near your coordinates. You are the best.

[@SimonElenor]

First off I thank you for your service sir. Second the mystery is not solved until undeniable proof is found. It is a very viable theory. But until proven it is a theory.

[@flyingphobiahelp]

Such a stupid comment. It was their fucki$ job-got to be a Yank

[@Redman680]

@@flyingphobiahelp Job or not, it is only a theory. You're obviously too stupid to have realised that

[@jlvandat69]

Excellent analysis and presentation. I hope someone with the right technology searches the coordinates Joe determined. Ocean depth is over 3 miles in the area, so it won't be easy.

[@Doamino41]

Until we find the plane or DNA proof, the mystery of Amelia Earhart will always live on and remain one of my favorite mysteries of all time.

[@randyhutchinson9910]

Doamino41 they found her remains

[@WG-tt6hk]

@@randyhutchinson9910 Really? That would have been all over the news and a major announcement. Please provide the source and reference.

[@Slayerjane61]

@@randyhutchinson9910 Not proven. Only guesswork.

[@randyhutchinson9910]

TruthB Told only thing I remember about the announcement was a group of prisoner of war hunters, accidentally found her & Fred, because the local villagers led them, maybe mail geographic

[@nelliebly6616]

@@randyhutchinson9910 yes,I heard that too...her makeup box, her radio , her shoeheel etc😉

[@carnageq8976]

A Great Presentation Joe Finally The truth about Amelia Earhart Disappearance

[@tylersmalley292]

This guy is sharp. And experienced. And polite. And doesn't need money or fame. Can some of you smart people help me with this... Why didn't she radio in again? According to this, if I understood him correctly, she may have tried to call "Mayday" "out of fuel" etc but the batteries on the Itasca's receiver were dead? Was Baker Island occupied? Was there radio equipment on Howland? I haven't heard anywhere that they were unable to hear her any more because their batteries died. And we have others who claim post-crash transmissions came in loud and clear that following week...thousands of miles away. So maybe there's no such thing as flying out of range. Did she fly too far south of the only receivers? Was distance the issue or battery life? Or both? Either case debunk's TIGHAR's faith in the post crash calls. Why not shoot straight for the island? Especially if fuel was limited. Aiming for a particular sides cuts your chances of finding it in half. Which direction was the wind pushing? From the SE I thought. This just one angle on the story and multiple angles need to be kept in mind. The real answer to this mystery will agree with testimonies, official reports, archaeological finds, and what a pilot/navigator should do in her circumstances. Don't rely too heavily on only one perspective. And definitely don't put all your chips on fuzzy photos.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Hi Tyler, Will try to answer some of your concerns : 1. The dead battery was on a high frequency (DF) transmitter that Itasca set up on Howland. Itasca failed in that effort. 2. Far as I know, Baker Island was occupied at that time. HF radio transmissions can be short or long range. Evidently Itasca heard her on short range which was receptive, at 1000 ft , for not much over 50 miles. 3. Appears Noonan chose a LOP approach to the island. He should have continued to take sun sightings to make sure he stayed on course. 4. It was very difficult to get accurate celestial sightings from that aircraft, for several reasons; a one second off in time would be about a ten mile error. I believe an error in his LOP was the primary reason, plus difficulties in their search operation, that they missed the island. Thanks for your comments. Joe

[@davidbostock6776]

Things I would want to know is what they had with them for ditching in water. Sea conditions at the location and time of likely ditching. Would the craft have landed smoothly gear up. How well would it have floated with all the large empty gas tanks. Likely hood of Japanese fishing or other craft when / where the plane went down. If you look on Google Earth, judging by the shore proportions. Baker was maybe 1/3 size of Howland. Howland was just barely big enough for a strip, See Wikipedia on Howland Island. What would have been takeoff distance with required fuel on grass field. Current Google Earth image just barely shows there may have been improvement for a strip 80 years ago.

[@raoulcruz4404]

David Bostock They had nothing for water survival. No life vests or raft. AE and Noonan stripped the aircraft bare. Personal items, previous charts, etc were removed at Lae. The flight to Howland was at near maximum range. As for ditching, that is much speculation as to survivability. The propellers could not be feathered so that drag would make a steeper glide angle. Those big round cowlings would scoop in water and slow it down quickly. If the ditching went ok, some say that with empty tanks the airplane would float as much as 2 or 3 hours. Sea conditions were fairly calm. With no white caps as reported by the Itasca off Howland island.

[@lcagee]

If the wind speed was 23 knots, I would expect whitecaps. Maybe the tailwind was less than they thought. Maybe it was 23 at altitude of 7000 feet.

[@raoulcruz4404]

lcagee winds at altitude were slightly stronger. Morning weather report aboard Itasca was a calm sea with no white caps.

[@dragdragon23]

So! Has there been a group set up to go out there to see if any wreckage? I thank this man for his service and His work on this subject.

[@aaacomp1]

It's the middle of the ocean. There wouldn't be any wreckage.

[@dragdragon23]

@@aaacomp1 that's drones are for!

[@aaacomp1]

@@dragdragon23 The water there is 16,000 feet deep. You're gonna need some pretty high tech drones that can fly underwater for that :)

[@dragdragon23]

@@aaacomp1 they found the titanic didn't they?

[@aaacomp1]

@@dragdragon23 yup because they knew within a few miles where it went down. Nobody knows where AH's plane went down. The search area is absolutely huge and the depths are insanely deep.

[@thepheasantman]

I think he is correct..he knows navigation.. very good presentation

[@lisaharrod8386]

This is one of the only pieces I've ever heard that mentions the fact that radio operators on the Itasca run the battery down on their receiver. Earhart is accused of not using and not knowing how to use radios. No argument here, but what difference did it make given the Itasca's dead receiver. This speaker is absolutely correct. The whole debacle could have been avoided with just a little better planning, and preparedness. My point is that while Earhart was decidedly at fault in many ways, so was the Navy.

[@richrdfieroii]

NOT that it matters, but you are a BIT confused. there are more than 1 type of radio involved here. 1st. there is AIRCRAFT VOICE, which is AM. this EARHART could use. & what was run down on the island, 2nd There is CW / HF. ( MORSE CODE ) which she nor her Navigator knew or understood. had she or her Navigator either one or BOTH been fluent in CW, & Had they insisted on bring the HF antenna with them. they would MORE than LIKELY be alive today, ( I should also ADD that they were STUPID for not bringing a RAFT ) Apparently, there was No governing Agency to prevent her from going out there so UNPREPARED & stop her from killing herself.

[@tomasbengtsson5157]

@@richrdfieroiiI share your view. There are communication logs from the Itasca. They could hear her. As in most cases when accidents happen, she stacked the odds against her self. No proper clear communication plan. Left the long antenna home Left the CW equipment home and didn’t learn how to use it in any case. Discovered the radio direction finding equipment faulty but instead of fixing it, rationalised that she was too close to the transmitter Receiver antenna damaged on take off or receiver incorrectly configured. They didn’t establish two way communication on the route. All this could have been easily fixed. A simple thing like a comms check on the way out from Lae and a test fix with the RDF, and then turning back when you realised you had neither.

[@martyb6903]

Awesome presentation and an amazing individual to retain that knowledge and apply it flawlessly Thank you and i hope your correct to help solve the mystery!

[@Navigator001]

Is it at least possible that the navigation error was in the opposite direction like Major Lodrige said is possible? the radio man thru off his headset and ran out on the deck because she was so loud and clear that he thought she must be getting ready to land. The picket ship was 5 miles west of the island, then she passed the picket ship about 15+ miles to the west of her position. Her voice would be loud and clear. What I don't know is if being south of the island, would allow her to have enough fuel to get to Gardner island, as she was running on a line that would nearly intersect Gardner Island. Very interesting presentation.

[@richrdfieroii]

Gardner is 400 MILES from Howland island, Earhart reported 30 minutes of fuel left at HOWLAND, NOTHING short of GOD ! was gonna get her to GARDNER IS.

[@james5460]

Good analysis. The idea that she suddenly started flying off in some wild direction to Gardner Island or the Marshall Islands (or back to New Guinea, that one takes the cake) when she had no idea where that was, either, is just completely cuckoo. Earhart said she was basically at Howland and at the same time said she was almost out of fuel. Why would she say she was around Howland when in fact she was already flying somewhere else? Plus, how could the guys at Howland hear her so well if she was actually flying hundreds of miles away. The alternate theories make no sense. She crashed into the Pacific.

[@raoulcruz4404]

James Exactly. Chief Bellarts on the Itasca said the radio signal strength from Earhart was so loud he expected her “ to fly through the rigging at any moment “.

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

James, Thanks for your comments. Your reasoning fits my theory. I hope someone searches in that area. Joe

[@arthurmiller9434]

James: When you say “crashed into the Pacific”, do you have an opinion as to the type of crash? Would sea conditions allow for a controlled landing, or was it something other than a controlled landing? Thanks

[@james5460]

@@arthurmiller9434 Controlled crash? A crash is a crash. The sea was fairly calm, I suppose, but the Electra would have plowed into the sea and probably either wound up nose-down or maybe flipped. Either way, they wouldn't last long. Incidentally, when you get lost with no reference points, the tendency is to think you should continue heading in your original direction, not go back. That's why Mr. Lodrige's theory that they overshot sounds so true - they would have been completely disoriented and had no idea which way to look.

[@JoeLinux2000]

@@james5460 If the island was behind them it would be absolutely impossible to see.

[@jimmorrison5493]

A wise and considered opinion put forth in a clear manner. Thank You Sir.

[@owenmerrick2377]

A very simple, good and interesting presentation! You've confirmed what I watched on a documentary made a few years ago, featuring a couple of ex-PanAm navigators, one knew Noonan personally. They maintained that the Electra was on the line of position that crossed Howland ,and the aircraft is within a few miles of the island. The one navigator also stated that on the leg across the Atlantic (Brazil to Senegal), Noonan confided that he had plotted the route to hit the coast south of the destination, where all you have to do is head north until you run over your next stop. Apparently there was a disagreement; Earhart's 'instinct' told her to head south, so they wound up heading north after not seeing much, and had to land short of wherever they were going, short of fuel. These navigators wondered if another disagreement took place. But like you, I'm sure that airplane is not far from Howland, and could not have gone much further. Thank you for your presentation!

[@josephleroylodrige8033]

Research indicated to me t hat Miss Earhart was a little over confident, complacent and may not have readily accepted instructions. Also, its possible the navigator was not in the cockpit during the last hour of flight. Consequently , added to their failure to sight the island . THANKS, Joe

[@dwv6977]

The navigator was not in the cockpit he was in the rear of the aircraft.

[@raoulcruz4404]

I'm not so sure. From the film footage you can see him climb into the cockpit. Obviously, he didn't stay there but, climbed in the back to perform navigation. I'm thinking that he climbed back into the cockpit to make his sunrise observation as the sun was only a few degrees off the nose.

[@w5cdt]

Rod Blocksome, an engineer at Collins Radio, did an excellent radio forensics analysis of Earhart’s transmissions. His conclusions based on actual flight tests with an identical radio to Earhart’s, suggests that she was closer to Howland than what the TIGHAR expedition claims.

[@PhilinWaterloo]

As of early 2024, this presentation is very interesting. Recently a deep sea exploration team has sighted an image of what could be her Electra at approx 100 miles from Howland island. Unfortunately it's 16000 feet deep. A second visit is scheduled to the site to further explore the possibilities that this is in fact where she finally ended up. If so, Joe's presentation here could be pretty spot on.

[@snowbird29803]

Fascinating presentation. Apart from the technical navigation info...like the Titanic disaster, it boils down to several IF-only. Like if the navigator had better visibility. Like if the ceiling was higher. Like if the island crew hadn't begun their radio operations too soon and exhausted their battery power, or if they had more battery capacity for longer ops. Like if AE might have been more proficient on radio ops (and navigation). And maybe if the picket ship was East of Howland instead of West and so-on. Also, has anybody ever confirmed that her airship lost an antenna on takeoff from her last location? I once saw a video of the takeoff and it appeared an antenna on the belly of the craft broke off. This could certainly account for poor radio ops.

[@Eternitynoteskevinwwalton]

Excellent presentation. Most realistic and most probable likelihood of truth of any related information of what happened to the flight. Agian most excellent & finally thankyou.

[@johnnash5118]

When I projected the proposed crash site location to its heading and elevation of @1,000' on Google Earth, it's not possible to see any island due to the island's

[@MonkPetite]

What a character.. an awesome man.. This is the most plausible case ever.

[@gmccord1970]

Very good presentation Joe. Occam's razor at its finest. The simplest conclusion that satisfies all the variables must be the right explanation. I like how you presented Amelia in a very good light but at the same time was very forthright about her capabilities or lack thereof. I personally believe that Amelia was not the best pilot either. I don't think she was a poor pilot but I think that psychologically her brazen personality might have gotten in the way of her decision making. You know what they say there are old pilots and there are bold pilots but there are no old bold pilots. I completely agree 100% the mission was poorly planned. I mean who in their right mind would fly over 2000 nautical miles over open water to an island about five or six miles wide which is the proverbial needle in a haystack without bringing a life raft.

[@raoulcruz4404]

I think Howland is about 1 1/2 miles wide. She was a pioneering aviator, they took risks. Perhaps the no life raft was an unnecessary risk.

[@wesleytillman9774]

Holy crap! They didn't even have a life raft! They were giving the finger to the grim reaper.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

Respectfully, sounds like you know nothing about her, or her plans. She was no "bold" pilot, she was calm and shy - she lost races because she slowed down for safety reasons, and quit that game. She didn't care about winning, she cared about living. She was a meticulous planner, capable, and skilled. Only took the around-the-world trip on after securing massive funds to upgrade her plane, and to secure the very latest in radio technology. She knew everything could be lost if her navigator made an error - so she took extra precautions. Having a ship in the area to guide her in via radio during the most dangerous leg. It was just a freak accident that doomed them. Similarly to the Concord crash, on takeoff - disaster struck. A poorly maintained runway full of potholes and debris shook the plane, damaging the radio equipment. Critical antenna pieces fell off and were found on the ground. She never knew it - from the moment she took off she was deaf to all transmissions. Her own transmissions were weak. When it was critical she spoke with the Itasca crew to correct the course - she heard nothing. If they could have told her when she grew fainter she was heading away, stronger meant heading the right direction...better yet, triangulated her position - she'd be alive today. But, she had none of that, and no way to get weather updates critical to navigation either. Also - The weather conspired to make visually spotting Howland nearly impossible. A disaster perfect storm. She was calm and confident - a great candidate to complete a very reasonable, possible goal. But one still dangerous because of the technological limits of the day. She thought the radio and ship support overcame those obstacles and proceeded rationally. Sometimes the greatest disasters happen because of the most trivial equipment failures. I think this presenter is unaware entirely of the radio failure...he speculates and scratches his head over her lack of communication, and seems to conclude that made her less capable. The sad truth - most of what she said couldn't be heard locally.

[@moyadapne968]

@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking She probably wouldn't 'be alive today' at 122.

[@markprange238]

Kathryn Davidson: --Might have been advantageous to arrive before twilight.

[@THEBOSS-vn2ky]

Thank you Sir. We all love you, Thanks again for your time. God bless you sir.