A Systems Engineering Approach to Creating a Search Strategy for Locating the Lockheed Electra Model 10E Aircraft, Registration

NR16020

George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds
Email: Report@NR16020Report.org Web site: NR16020Report.org

July 6, 2012
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Executive Summary
Systems Engineering processes are applied to the problem of searching for Amelia Earhart’s Lockheed Electra model 10E aircraft, Bureau of Air Commerce registration number NR16020 that failed to arrive at Howland Island on July 2, 1937. We are aware of at least five searches that have been conducted both on the sea bottom and on islands in the vicinity of Howland Island and are impressed with the overall dedication, professional execution and significant costs incurred by volunteers, private foundations, commercial sponsors, and the U.S. Government. Our goal in this paper is to define the search area and describe a Systems Engineering process that can be used in the future to conduct an ordered and continuously updated set of search priorities. Many of the fundamental search techniques, including the use of scenarios and Bayes Theorem are reasonably established methods that have been used by the U.S. Navy to locate lost submarines. The Waitt Institute recently located the Air France Flight 447 aircraft wreckage using Bayesian methods. All of these past successes, however, had an initially smaller search area than what will be recommended for the Lockheed Electra. A concept map of the mission is developed to present our analysis of the flight mission participants, equipment and environment. We suggest that this is a necessary tool to communicate system complexity and provide a framework for evaluating the completeness and fidelity of scenarios. A search grid methodology is presented that converts scenario information into relative search priorities among a group of grid cells in the search area. To demonstrate our systems engineering based process, we present a candidate scenario based on our study of the NR16020 concept map. Creating it was a major task that involved reading thousands of pages of research and analysis. We have concluded that: 1. There was no complete position report received from the crew during the entire flight.

Search Strategy for NR16020 2. The pilot and navigator were lost and did not know where they were shortly after they announced their arrival near Howland Island. 3. It is possible that the crew was not only lost but badly off course, to the right of track and over 155 NM from destination. 4. The crew may have increased their distance from the island in subsequent searching. 5. The amount of fuel on board is not a critical factor in our analysis. 6. The weather and its effect on navigation play a minimum role in our analysis. 7. Any attempt at fixing the aircraft location by reported weather conditions appears to be limited by a lack of specific weather data. 8. The crew was competent and qualified to undertake the flight but suffered from physiological stresses due to time zone fatigue and a cabin environment that would have affected their judgment and performance at the end of their estimated 28-hour crew duty day. 9. Assumptions about aircraft radio signals propagation may provide the only method of establishing a maximum search distance from Howland Island. 10. Assumptions about aircraft minimum distance from Howland Island are based on the negative search results of modern sonar expeditions. 11. The search area is much greater than previously reported by many of the researchers. 12. Systems Engineering developed concept mapping provides an excellent tool for capturing expert knowledge and creating and evaluating scenarios.

Page | 3
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Table of Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 7 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 12 Purpose................................................................................................................................................... 13 Objective ................................................................................................................................................ 13 Scope........................................................................................................................................................ 14 Document Organization ................................................................................................................... 14

History of Previous Undersea Searches .............................................................................................. 15 Systems Engineering and CMAP ............................................................................................................ 17 Limiting the Search Area........................................................................................................................... 19 Current Undersea Search Technologies ............................................................................................. 28 Bayes Theorem ............................................................................................................................................. 29 Scenario............................................................................................................................................................ 30 7.1 7.2 7.3 The Process ........................................................................................................................................... 30 Possible Factors .................................................................................................................................. 36 The Navigation Dilemma ................................................................................................................. 38

8 9

Developing the Search Grid ..................................................................................................................... 44 Applying a Bayesian Probability Distribution.................................................................................. 45

Page | 4
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 10 Summary.......................................................................................................................................................... 51 11 Conclusions..................................................................................................................................................... 51 12 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................... 52 13 The Authors .................................................................................................................................................... 53 14 Tribute to Researchers .............................................................................................................................. 55 15 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................... 56 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 15.10 15.11 15.12 15.13 15.14 Appendix A - Concept Map Description .................................................................................... 56 Appendix B - NR16020 CMAP ....................................................................................................... 58 Appendix C - CAA Aircraft Registration: NR16020 ............................................................. 67 Appendix D - Search Grids .............................................................................................................. 69 Appendix E - Bayesian References .............................................................................................. 72 Appendix F – Modern Mission Fuel Planning ......................................................................... 73 Appendix G - U.S. Navy Superintendent of Salvage Report ............................................... 74 Appendix H – Destination Expanding Square Search .......................................................... 76 Appendix I - AERO DIGEST August 1938.................................................................................. 78 Appendix J - Where is Amelia Earhart? ................................................................................ 81 Appendix K - Hughes Around the World Flight, July 10-14, 1938 ............................ 82 Appendix L - The Peloris Drift Sight and Drift Bombs.................................................... 84 Appendix M - Radio Propagation ............................................................................................ 89 Appendix N – International Civil Aviation Organization Units of Measure ........... 92

Page | 5
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 15.15 15.16 Appendix O – From the Desk of a Systems Engineer ...................................................... 95 Appendix P – From the Desk of an Aeronautical Engineer .......................................... 97

16 References.................................................................................................................................................... 102 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 Books .................................................................................................................................................... 102 Equipment Manuals and Data .................................................................................................... 103 Navigation References................................................................................................................... 104 Videos ................................................................................................................................................... 104 Articles ................................................................................................................................................. 104 Maps...................................................................................................................................................... 105 NR16020 Flight Reference Documents .................................................................................. 105

17 Index ............................................................................................................................................................... 107

Page | 6
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Table of Figures
Figure 1-1 Mission of NR16020 Concept Map ........................................................................................... 11 Figure 1-2 Finding Amelia Symposium ........................................................................................................ 12 Figure 2-1 Nauticos and Waitt Completed Search Areas ...................................................................... 16 Figure 4-1 NR16020 Track from Lae to Howard Island ........................................................................ 22 Figure 4-2 Search Boundaries .......................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 4-3 The Propagation "Donut" in 3D ................................................................................................. 24 Figure 4-4 Example of a Navigator’s Dead Reckoning Log ................................................................... 25 Figure 4-5 Navigation on 1933 Lindbergh Flight ..................................................................................... 27 Figure 7-1 South Pacific Current Flow .......................................................................................................... 38 Figure 7-2 Bayes Theorem Applied to Terminal Navigation ............................................................... 40 Figure 7-3 The Five Destination Search Options ...................................................................................... 41 Figure 7-4 Terminal Navigation Scenario ................................................................................................... 43 Figure 9-1 Probability Distribution ............................................................................................................... 47 Figure 9-2 Search Grid Frequency Analysis ............................................................................................... 48 Figure 9-3 Final Probability Distribution .................................................................................................... 50 Figure 15-1 Mission of NR16020 Concept Map ........................................................................................ 59 Figure 15-2 Program Manager Mission Concepts .................................................................................... 60 Figure 15-3 Planner Mission Concepts ......................................................................................................... 61

Page | 7
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 Figure 15-4 President and First Lady Mission Concepts....................................................................... 62 Figure 15-5 Crew Preflight Mission Concepts .......................................................................................... 63 Figure 15-6 Navigator Mission Concepts..................................................................................................... 64 Figure 15-7 Radio Operator Mission Concepts ......................................................................................... 65 Figure 15-8 Pilot Mission Concepts ............................................................................................................... 66 Figure 15-9 Aircraft Registration NR16020 ............................................................................................... 68 Figure 15-10 Monte Carlo Probability Assignment ................................................................................. 69 Figure 15-11 Bayesian Grid Calculation Spreadsheet ........................................................................... 69 Figure 15-12 Probability Distribution .......................................................................................................... 70 Figure 15-13 Ranking the Cells ........................................................................................................................ 70 Figure 15-14 Cell Ranking Distribution ....................................................................................................... 71 Figure 15-15 Fuel Requirements .................................................................................................................... 73 Figure 15-16 U. S. Navy Commercial Aircraft Salvage Operations Report (Cover) .................... 74 Figure 15-17 Executive Summary From the Commercial Aircraft Salvage Report .................... 75 Figure 15-18 Fixed Square Search (1/2) ..................................................................................................... 76 Figure 15-19 Fixed Square Search (2 of 2) ................................................................................................. 77 Figure 15-20 Aero Digest August 1938 (cover) ........................................................................................ 78 Figure 15-21 Orientation and Landfall by Means of Precomputed Curves (1/2)....................... 79 Figure 15-22 Orientation and Landfall by Means of Precomputed Curves (2/2)....................... 80 Figure 15-23 “Where is Amelia Earhart?” Panel Discussion Report ................................................ 81

Page | 8
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 Figure 15-24 Hughes Flies Around the World (1/2) .............................................................................. 82 Figure 15-25 Hughes Flies Around the World (2/2) .............................................................................. 83 Figure 15-26 Pelorus Drift Sight ..................................................................................................................... 84 Figure 15-27 Night Pyrotechnic Drift Bombs (1/2) ................................................................................ 85 Figure 15-28 Night Pyrotechnic Drift Bombs (2/2) ................................................................................ 86 Figure 15-29 AN-Mk4 Night Pyrotechnic Drift Bomb ............................................................................ 87 Figure 15-30 AN-Mk 1 Day Drift Bomb Description (Version 1) ....................................................... 87 Figure 15-31 AN-Mk 1 Day Drift Bomb (Version 1) ................................................................................ 88 Figure 15-32 AN-Mk 1 Day Drift Bomb (Version 2) ................................................................................ 88 Figure 15-33 6210 kHz Day Propagation .................................................................................................... 89 Figure 15-34 3105 kHz Night Propagation ................................................................................................. 90 Figure 15-35 Readability of Aircraft Signals Along Track From Lae to Howland ....................... 91 Figure 15-36 Units of Measurement to be Used in Air and Ground Operations (cover) ......... 92 Figure 15-37 Standard Application of Specific Units of Measure ...................................................... 93 Figure 15-38 International Standards and Recommended Practices, Definitions ..................... 94

Page | 9
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

1 Introduction
Facts, scenarios and studies associated with the last flight of Amelia Earhart, her navigator, Fred Noonan, and their aircraft abound. Since her disappearance on July 2, 1937, countless individuals, groups and organizations have speculated as to how and where her flight ended.1 The problem has been addressed from every conceivable direction using myriad disciplines and resources. Overall, many individuals over the last 75 years have attempted to obtain enough clues from the historical record to create scenarios of what went wrong. Some of these scenarios have been used to guide expeditions to search underwater for identifiable aircraft parts of the Lockheed Electra Model 10E, Registration NR16020. This year, 2012, marks the 75th anniversary of the flight and we are aware of at least five major search expeditions that have made attempts to find the aircraft and have published reports of their efforts. We used the scenarios and search results of these reports as inputs to our process. This paper does not seek to add to the already rich factual and speculative literature available surrounding this flight. Instead, the focus is on applying a process framework that will inspire, focus and guide persons that in the future may have the opportunity to plan and organize suitably funded and equipped search expeditions. To further our goal of keeping the attention on finding the aircraft, we have chosen to omit routine references to mission participants by name. Some will recognize this as a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) convention and we believe it is especially appropriate to use here. In formal aircraft accident reports, only crew position or other generic titles are used in order to avoid as much as possible diverting the discussion with speculation that is always associated with newsworthy events and celebrities.
2

1
2

See Appendix J - Where is Amelia Earhart? Nauticos 2002; Nauticos-Waitt 2006; Waitt 2009; TIGHAR 2008, 2010

Page | 10
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 From past experience, we have come to view the aircraft and its mission as a system. By creating a credible systems view, we hope to offer new insights into what has already been examined in detail by many researchers. As we created our systems view of the Mission of NR16020, we were surprised to discover that we gained more insight into the system and its elements than we had originally sought or anticipated. A concept map (CMAP) was used to visually display the relationships and became quite complicated as we decomposed the various mission threads. A thumbnail view of the CMAP is shown in Figure 1-1 and full size views are located in Appendix B-15.2. The best readability is obtained with print sizes of 11”x17” or larger. For scenario working groups we recommend printing wall charts of 33” x 48” or larger using a color plotter. Figure 1-1 Mission of NR16020 Concept Map

We also recognize that the issues being studied involve at least three different professional disciplines. These are the seaman, the aviator and the forensic scientist. The different language and customs of these groups creates an interesting challenge in communication when building a search process. While much has been written about the aviation portion of this task, we believe that the seaman is an increasingly critical resource - especially those who venture into the depths of the sea and employ sonar, magnetometers, and remotely operated vehicles to locate and retrieve man-made objects. As for forensic scientists, they are typically associated with the accident investigation community and provide expertise in: radio signals, electronic systems performance, aircraft performance, weather forecasting, and many other subject areas.

Page | 11
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

1.1 Background
The genesis of this paper was a November 20, 2010 Joint AIAA/INCOSE Symposium, entitled, Finding Amelia, A Challenge in Systems Engineering3, refer to Figure 1-2. The audience’s enthusiasm for the speaker, Ric Gillespie, Executive Director of TIGHAR4, resulted in the session running overtime and it was clear that there was significant public interest in the progress of finding the aircraft. We even met two ladies there who had been named in honor of Amelia Earhart. This event encouraged us to take up the challenge and discover where Systems Engineering insight and processes might help to locate and determine the fate of NR16020. The two authors5 are Systems Engineers who bring training and a combined 80+ years of professional experience to the task of developing process frameworks that can make Figure 1-2 Finding Amelia Symposium

http://www.incose-cc.org/2010/11/november-20-2010-finding-amelia-a-challenge-in-systemsengineering/
3

4
5

The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery Section 13 The Authors

Page | 12
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 efficient use of the existing information. The systems engineering (SE) approach can also provide new insights into a problem - especially when there is a shortage of factual data.6 It is also appropriate to mention why we decided to team on this paper. Both authors have been drawn to this mission over a period of years and have a reasonable amount of knowledge about the data, literature, and subject matter. We have also discovered and read the unpublished manuscripts of Navy Captain Laurance F. Safford, USN, located in the library of the National Cryptologic Museum near Annapolis Junction, MD.7 We believe that our effort places a focus on success by using appropriate engineering tools. We do not claim to have created the approaches nor do we claim to be the first to apply statistical methods to underwater searches. We do, however, believe that this combination has not yet been made available to potential searchers of NR16020 in a focused and persuasive manner.

1.2 Purpose
The primary purpose of this paper is to develop a search methodology based on Systems Engineering processes that will improve the probability of success in a shorter time frame while recognizing the sizable scope of the problem. A secondary purpose is to contribute to the art of scenario building by introducing a concept map that depicts the mission of NR16020 in a complete and logical view.

1.3 Objective
The objective of this paper is to motivate future researchers to solve the 75 year-old mystery of the location of NR16020 by applying a Systems Engineering perspective. The components of the aircraft are somewhere waiting to be located and retrieved. When the

6
7

Appendix O – From the Desk of a Systems Engineer http://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic_heritage/museum/

Page | 13
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 “Mystery is solved” we hope that the ultimate destination of the artifacts will be to the Smithsonian beside Earhart’s Lockheed Vega.

1.4 Scope
The scope of this paper encompasses Systems Engineering process analysis techniques that will contribute to locating artifacts and understanding the circumstances related to the last leg of the world flight of NR16020.

1.5 Document Organization
This document includes the following sections. Section 2 History of Previous Undersea Searches presents a short review of the searches conducted by: TIGHAR, Waitt, and Nauticos. Section 3, Systems Engineering and CMAP introduces a definition of Systems Engineering and its application in providing guidance for future deep sea searches for this aircraft. The concept map (CMAP) created to serve as the mission system framework for developing and evaluating scenarios is presented. Section 4, Limiting the Search Area depicts the search area on a suitable chart of the South Pacific area that covers the route of flight from Lae, New Guinea to Howland Island. The boundaries are given as a 16 degree circle segment with a radius of 2250 nautical miles (NM). The primary search area within this segment is limited to a semicircle of 300 nautical miles radius south west of and centered on Howland Island. Section 5, Current Undersea Search Technologies presents the use of towed sonar arrays combined with remotely operated vehicles. These are described and the rate of search identified as a major limitation. Section 6, Bayes Theorem develops the basic concepts of two procedures that will be employed. These are the concept of user defined probabilities and the iteration of search probabilities to account for ongoing search coverage. Page | 14
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 Section 7, Scenario presents the development of a last flight scenario that is based on our study of the CMAP and synthesis of our research and experience as systems engineers, pilot, aeronautical engineer, and aircraft accident investigator. Section 8, Developing the Search Grid simplifies the assignment of probability values to each grid cell. Their size and geometry is chosen solely to facilitate a simple example and is understood to be larger than those used for conducting the actual search operations. Section 9, Applying a Bayesian Probability Distribution is the selecting and placing of numerical weights or probabilities on the grid system that is consistent with the developed scenario. To simplify this process, some areas that have already been searched with sonar are excluded. Section 10, Summary restates the value of using a Systems Engineering perspective to create a more transparent and efficient method for developing scenarios and applying them to guiding future deep sea searches. Section 11, Conclusions lists our results that were reached after completing the Systems Engineering process, creating a scenario and setting up a system of determining search priorities. Section 12, Recommendations state that the U.S. Government should take a leading role in recovering NR16020 artifacts.

2 History of Previous Undersea Searches
Nauticos performed undersea searches in 2002 and 2006. The Waitt Institute assisted them as a sponsor in 2006. In both expeditions, towed side scanning sonar was the selected method of search. The concept of operations was to search as much of the sea bottom as possible and later return with a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to visually inspect possible wreckage sites. Mr. David Jourdan documented both searches in his book, The Deep

Page | 15
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020
8

Sea Quest for Amelia Earhart. Jourdan is credited in this book as stating that they were able at times to image as much as one square nautical mile per hour when all systems were operating properly. Perhaps this number can provide a baseline measure of search capability when future systems are evaluated. The Waitt Institute returned in the spring of 2009 using new technology. Dubbed the CATALYST 2 expedition, this search was the largest, continuous deep-water seafloor mapping effort ever undertaken, and introduced two new hi-tech Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) to the ocean science community. Over 2000 NM2 was searched using a close to Howland Island scenario. Figure 2-1 depicts the three search areas completed by Waitt and Nauticos. They appear to extend at least 50 nautical miles to the west oriented at right angles to the original planned course of NR16020.

Figure 2-1 Nauticos and Waitt Completed Search Areas9

8Jourdan 9

David W., The Deep Sea Quest for Amelia Earhart, 2010, Ocellus Productions.

Waitt Institute, http://searchforamelia.org/final-grid

Page | 16
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) organization’s Executive Director, Ric Gillespie of Wilmington, Delaware, has conducted at least two expeditions in which undersea surveys were made or attempted. These efforts were centered on Nikumaroro Island (named Gardner Island in 1937) where they have conducted archeological exploration to follow up on a number of artifacts and testimony of islanders that could be related to NR16020. Their primary scenario is that the aircrew sighted Nikumaroro Island in the final stages of flight, landed and died on the island. In spite of resistance on some quarters to this scenario that NR16020 reached Nikumaroro, there is nothing in the record which rules out the ability to fly from the Lae departure point to Nikumaroro using a number of assumptions. Critics of this scenario invoke the requirement that the aircraft must proceed first to the vicinity of Howland Island and then fly to Nikumaroro Island. This is a very unconvincing condition since one cannot navigate from an "unknown" position to a "known" position. The TIGHAR10 non-profit group will proceed this summer for their first off shore ocean floor expedition with assistance of the State Department, U.S. Navy Superintendent for Salvage (SUPSALV) and others. A newly developed Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) with side scanning sonar will be used. The area to be searched by TIGHAR during the “Niku 7” expedition in July 2012 could include some of our scenario grid cells.

3 Systems Engineering and CMAP
Systems Engineering can be defined at its most fundamental level as the management of complexity. Modern systems, however, have influenced the concept until today there are a number of definitions that relate to the total life cycle management of man-made systems. General guidance for creating processes has been available for over 10 years from the International Standard ISO/IEC 15288:2008.11 IEEE also adopted this standard in 2003.12

10
11

tighar.org International Organization for Standardization

Page | 17
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 The standard is entitled, System and Software Engineering - System Life Cycle Processes, and forms the basis for the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) Systems Engineering Handbook, A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities.13 While most system engineering problems place a priority on the early stages of a product life cycle, we are most concerned in this investigation with the Verification, Validation and Operational technical processes. ISO/IEC 15288:2008 provides clear guidance as to how our process should be created, implemented and evaluated. In our case, the system of interest is the search operation. In order to effectively execute this, however, we must analyze and understand the system comprised of the missing aircraft, its crew and supporting entities and activities. A description of our approach in developing information and the Systems Engineering processes used is documented Appendix O. To accomplish this task, we have developed a concept map (CMAP) that provides a visual depiction of the participants, objects, and services and how they relate to the system. According to the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition14 the developer of the CMAP organization, one of the uses of concept maps is to capture the knowledge of experts. A background paper on CMAP is included in Appendix A - Concept Map Description The CMAP entitled “Mission of NR16020” is located in Appendix B, Figure 15-2. The CMAP was created by first placing all the participants on the chart. Next, the participants were connected to those services that they used or provided and to the objects that they controlled or used to perform an operation. The final step was to add further concepts and to decompose those objects that had subsystems or complexity that required clarification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_15288, International Engineering Consortium http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=43564
12 13 14

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers incose.org Institute for Human and Machine Cognition

Page | 18
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 For instance, the concept of a skywave in radio transmission is related to the ionosphere and its inclusion is helpful in understanding one mode of communication and its vulnerabilities. The finished CMAP is truly a product of expert knowledge and considerable research. The complexity of the relationships and distribution of workloads is one pattern that is easy to see. Other areas are the duties, preparations and training that if accomplished could have reduced the risk of the last flight. Risk identification is a systems engineering process that the CMAP does an excellent job of enabling. While not fully exploited here it might be an area of future study. The CMAP was created to perform two functions. The first function was to serve as the inspiration for our own scenario. The second was to serve as a process framework for creating future scenarios. It could also become a model for evaluating other existing scenarios for adequacy. The CMAP will be discussed further in Section 7.

4 Limiting the Search Area
One of the more vexing aspects of studying the maps of the Lae, New Guinea to Howland Island flight is establishing a sense of distance between the scattered islands and atolls. Distances are stated in statute miles (sm) and nautical miles (NM) in documents of the 1937 period and even today there is a curious reluctance to settle on one system or the other when describing distances. For all modern discussions, NM must be the standard to use. This is based on the fact that virtually all air navigation today is conducted using nautical miles and is included in the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 5, Recommended Units.15 It is also the unit distance derived directly from dividing the degrees and minutes of longitude into

See: http://www,eurocontrol.int/care-asas/gallery/content/public/docs/CA-04-065(1.1).pdf and Appendix N
15

Page | 19
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 the circumference of the earth at the equator. It is true that NR16020 had an airspeed indicator that displayed in statute miles per hour but that instance hardly serves as a reason to burden the charts, navigation procedures and discussions with a constant need to convert units. Added to the above problem is the use of several different map projections that can distort the relative size, and shape of island features and the distance between them.16 For the purpose of setting the limits of the NR16020 search area, we will sacrifice (less than five percent) accuracy for the ease of transfer between large scale and small-scale charts. The planned route of flight was a great circle path on the earth’s surface.17 As it is shown on the most common Mercator projections,18 the constant changing of True Course required to maintain this path is hard to see and is often ignored by persons casually inspecting a chart. Putting boundaries on the search area requires that one define the fundamental physical limits of the mission and apply expert judgment to compute how these would appear on a suitable chart. We have chosen to include the following criteria to create our search area. These are:   The max range of the aircraft assuming 25 knots19 headwind and limited by the crew’s declaration of low fuel by radio. Adopt an increasing lateral navigation error as the mission progresses from departure.20

Air Force manual, Air Navigation, Flying Training, AFM 51-40, Volume 1, 1 august 1968, page 3-1 to 3-40
16 17

http://home.hiwaay.net/~jalison/

18en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercator_projection 19

A nautical mile per hour is commonly referred to as a knot, see Appendix N, Figure 15-38 Air Force Manual, 51-40, Air Navigation, July 1951, page 150.

20

Page | 20
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020   For simplicity, this is shown as a planar circle segment of 16 degrees width, bisected by the flight plan course from Lae, New Guinea to Howland Island.21 Two circles around Howland Island resembling a torus or donut. Refer to Figure 4-2. o o o   The inner circle being defined by sonar bottom searches with negative results. The outer circle being fixed by the nominal maximum range of radio transmissions on 3105 kHz [typically used during night]. The radii of the circles are 50 NM and 300 NM respectively. Assumption of a negligible probability of flight beyond Howland in the areas not already searched either recently or in the 1937 Navy/Coast Guard22 effort. The area within the donut is further limited by a search grid of 480 x 210 NM (889 x 389 km2), and is an area of 100,800 NM2 (186,682 km2). The course from Lae to Howland Island with lateral boundaries was drawn using eight degrees as shown in Figure 4-1. The surface area enclosed by this circle segment provides an estimate of worst-case errors for the entire mission. While we will further limit the search area using evidence from the radio transmissions, it is important to accept that errors that might have occurred earlier in the flight could have an impact on establishing the aircraft’s present location.

21

Computing the chord of the circle at Howland Island using right angles: tan 8o X 2250=316 X 2=632 nm.
22

Extensive sea and air searches were conducted in the weeks following the failure of NR16020 to arrive at Howland Island.

Page | 21
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 4-1 NR16020 Track from Lae to Howard Island23

A larger scale view of the final search area is shown in Figure 4-2. As introduced in the criteria listed above, the radio reception on 3105 kHz was used to bound the search area. The power output of NR16020’s transmitter was limited by an antenna impedance mismatch to a reported ½ watt. Other considerations are the uncertain propagation conditions existing at the transition time (local sunrise) between night and day. We referred to Paul Rafford’s24 and Assen Jordanoff’s transmission range charts25 to conclude that any strong signal strengths received from NR16020 were the result of skywave propagation. Refer to Figure 4-3. Ground wave communication would have required the

National Geographic Family Reference Atlas of the World, National Geographic Washington, DC, 2002, page 194
23

24

Rafford, Paul, Jr. Amelia Earhart's Radio - Why She Disappeared, Page 18, radio propagation sunset to sunrise, refer to Appendix M for figures. Jordanoff, Through the Overcast book, the weather and art of instrument flying, Funk and Wagnalls, New York, 1938-39, 1940-41, 1943., Refer to Appendix M for figures.
25

Page | 22
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 aircraft to be at or within the inner circle where searches have been made. Appendix M has detailed views of the radio propagation distances on 3105 kHz.

Figure 4-2 Search Boundaries26

26

National Geographic Family Reference Atlas of the World, National Geographic Washington, DC, 2002, page 194

Page | 23
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 4-3 The Propagation "Donut" in 3D27 Before discussing the size of our search area, we wish to explain further the concept of a diverging navigation error. This concept arises from the complexity of identifying and weighting the probability of the many possible errors on a mission of this length. The overriding factor can be the inherent unpredictability of the dead reckoning method of navigation.28

27
28

Jordanoff, A., Through the Overcast, Funk and Wagnalls, New York, 1938-39, 1940-41, 1943. Dead reckoning error can be up to 10% of distance flown. AFM 51-40 (1951 edition) page 150

Page | 24
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 Consider the navigator’s method of guiding the aircraft over ocean tracks with few land checkpoints. He cannot follow the flight plan course closely. When using celestial and dead reckoning procedures, a series of legs are flown that deviate left and right of intended course to varying degrees. Refer to Figure 4-4 and Figure 4-5. This is to be expected since after each fix, the navigator computes the previous leg wind direction and speed and applies it to calculating and plotting the next leg on his chart. Because actual winds vary from leg to leg, errors in track place the aircraft off the plotted course and ahead or behind the estimated time of arrival at a waypoint. Most completed navigation charts show a series of navigation legs that may zigzag across or near the original planned course unless intentional off-course legs are deliberately flown as presented below.

Figure 4-4 Example of a Navigator’s Dead Reckoning Log29

29

Air Navigation, Air Force Manual 51-40 Volume I and II, Department of the Air Force, 1 August

1968, Dead Reckoning chapter, page 241.

Page | 25
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 The navigator has the ability to measure airplane drift due to winds by using the Pelorus drift sight system. The drift sight also enables him to calculate the wind speed and direction by performing a double drift maneuver.30 An essential part of the Pelorus drift sight system, however, was the ability to track an object on the water’s surface. During daylight, drift bombs containing metal flakes were used.31 At night, pyrotechnic flares containing magnesium powder were dropped and ignited upon contact with the water.32 It is important to note that without wind information, the navigator could not accurately estimate his position between celestial fixes. This would be especially important if the only celestial sighting were sun lines of position (LOP). Missing accurate wind information, true course could not be maintained in following a sun line LOP. There are some reports that the crew did not carry drift bombs on the last leg of the flight.33 A contributing problem is the accuracy of a fix. Celestial is not always accurate and the stars are not always in view. If an hourly fix is missed, errors accumulate until they are resolved by a future fix. If we add to this process the necessity to deviate significantly from the flight plan course for severe weather, we have a better appreciation of how large the error budget could be after 20 hours of flight even with no malfunctions or human error.

The U.S. Navy Aircraft Navigation manual, Revised 1942, Pages 32-36 http://fer3.com/arc/img/110700.double%20drift,%20ho%20216,%201941.pdf
30

The daylight drift bombs (Figure 15-30) were made of compressed paper that when dropped from the airplane fell to the surface and burst open. Inside were metal flakes, usually brass, that created a contrasting reflective area that was tracked by the navigator. Hardware examples are shown in Figure 15-31 and Figure 15-32.
31

Two types of night pyrotechnic drift bombs burned for 3 minutes (AN-Mk 4) or 15 minutes (AN-Mk 5). For descriptions see Figure 15-27, and hardware illustrations refer to Figure 15-28, and Figure 15-29.
32

Letter page 116, Safford, Laurance F, Warren, Cameron A., Pyne, Robert R., (2003) Earhart’s Flight into Yesterday; The Facts Without the Fiction, Paladwr Press.
33

Page | 26
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 One possible example is that the navigator has a good fix after several unsatisfactory ones and finds the aircraft 100 nautical miles right or left of course. Normally, a course will then be plotted directly to the destination. This can mean that the angle of arrival must be considered along with further errors in the final dead reckoning calculations before estimating where an aircraft’s actual ground track could have been. We will address further assumptions in section 7.

Figure 4-5 Navigation on 1933 Lindbergh Flight34

34

Air Navigation, P.V.H. Weems, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York and London, page: opposite title page- no page number, 1938.

Page | 27
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

5 Current Undersea Search Technologies
Current undersea search technology capable of reaching the required depths near Howland Island (estimated 12,000 to 20,000 feet deep) is impressive and new technologies are being developed. The Navy’s Superintendent of Salvage has an impressive record of locating and recovering artifacts from both ships and aircraft. Appendix G Section 15.7, contains an annual Navy report describing some of their most high profile missions. One author participated in the extended investigations of both the TWA800 air disaster (1996) and recoveries involving the fatal ditching of the USAF C-130, KING 56 (1996). Non-technical barriers to success are already present because of high costs and the risks associated with working in a very remote area. The primary technical risk is clearly the search rates available with current equipment. The search area developed in the previous section is approximately 100,800 NM2 (186,682 km2). At current rates of sonar search, it would take over twelve years to survey the whole defined sea bottom. Added to this would be considerable overhead for down time, turns, travel, weather, emergencies and most importantly, launching remotely operated vehicles (ROV) to check out suspected sonar images. Consider fifteen years a better figure using what we assume is the current sonar search rate of around one NM2 per hour. Although this search area is much bigger than admitted by many researchers, it is most important that it be considered as we discuss Bayes theorem in the next section.

Page | 28
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

6 Bayes Theorem
The mathematical contributions of Clergyman Thomas Bayes
35

(1702-1761) as developed

and refined by other scholars long after his death form the basis of the process that we will use to convert a scenario into a prioritized search plan using a family of grid squares or cells.36 The applied mathematical and logical development is appropriately called Bayesian search theory. It has provided the basis for a number of successful searches for lost objects. These include a lost Hydrogen Bomb from an Air Force B-52 crash in the Mediterranean Sea near Spain (1966), the USS Scorpion (1968), USS Thresher (1963), Air France 447 (2011) and the SS Central America (1987). The U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Air Force Search and Rescue units and various auxiliaries have instantiations of Bayesian Theorem either in written processes or computer software. The Coast Guard software called Computer Assisted Search Program (CASP) is representative of many others developed over the years.37 The most important element of Bayesian Search theory is the concept of evidential probabilities.38 Unlike the more familiar statistical mathematical probabilities that involve multiple trials and discrete outcomes, the Bayes concept describes a system of continuous probabilities based on what we would term expert judgment. Unlike the toss of a die where

35

The term Bayesian refers to the theory of Thomas Bayes, which proved a specific case of the now

eponymous theorem, published after his death in 1791. The Bayesian interpretation of probability can be seen as a form of logic that allows for analysis of uncertain statements. To evaluate the probability of a hypothesis, Bayes’ theorem compares probabilities before and after the existence of new data. Unlike other methods for analyzing hypothesis, which attempt to reject or accept a statement, the Bayesian view seeks to assign dynamic probabilities that depend on the existence of relevant information. Definition from: The Invisible Hands: Hedge Funds Off the Record – Rethinking Real Money, By Steve Drobny, Jared Diamond, (2010) John Wiley & Sons.
36 37

Section 15.5, Appendix E - Bayesian References http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_search_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Carlo_method

38

Page | 29
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 there are discrete mathematical probabilities derived and proven, Bayes permits any probability but its value is meaningless except when compared to another probability. This is a very different use of the word probability but is effective when dealing with single event problems such as accidents. Most accidents do not lend themselves to Monte Carlo statistical calculations because there are no large numbers of trials available to validate a probability. Three applications of Bayes Theorem will be used in this paper. Two will permit us to assign probabilities using only expert judgment and the third will employ two algebraic equations to enable the adjusting of probabilities after a grid cell is searched. The specific uses are:   Presenting the navigator's dilemma as a Bayesian decision tree. Figure 7-2. Assigning higher probabilities to grid squares that best fit the scenario's end of flight (EOF) point using an iterative process until an adjoining or continuous set of search grids is obtained. Refer to Section 9.  Computations during search, Appendix D - Search Grids.

7 Scenario
Scenarios created by researchers over the years are not in short supply. Many have sought to reason their way to a direct solution for finding NR16020. Our position is that this is not possible because the last reported position of the aircraft is not known within a range of over 100,800 NM2 (186,682 km2).

7.1 The Process
We wish to restate here that the purpose of this paper is to describe a process for conducting an efficient ocean bottom search for NR16020. So far, we have described the use of a Systems Engineering framework, limited the search area, reviewed current search technology and introduced Bayes Theorem. In the remaining three sections we will employ the System Engineering framework and a single scenario to create a prioritized search grid.

Page | 30
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 The scenario and the grid created is an example and should not be interpreted as a completed hypothesis. There have been many scenarios proposed over the years but not all have included a wellsupported discussion of how the EOF point is determined. In our experience, the more successful scenario building processes involve teams and long term studies that produce many scenarios. Major aircraft accidents take years of study to determine cause and involve the cooperation of multiple expert teams. In our search for NR16020, using a single scenario to justify a search is unacceptable. There are simply too many possibilities and it is necessary to create or assemble multiple scenarios and prioritize them before a credible search could or should be proposed. An accepted Systems Engineering Process for choosing a best scenario is called Analysis of Alternatives (AOA).39 Although AOA is a difficult task involving documentation and detailed justification, we believe it to be essential when sponsors are depending on responsible guidance for making commitments involving tens of millions of dollars in search costs. The scenario that we develop is just one of many that could and should be created using the information available. It is based on historical documented failures and considers the relative occurrences of human vs. mechanical error. Since we know that human error is by far the highest percentage contribution to aircraft accidents, we would expect to see it included in any responsible scenario. There should be none of the perfect pilot or navigator assertions in our scenarios. The following characteristics seem in our experience to be present in successful teams engaged in aircraft accident investigations that involve scenarios:

AOA Handbook, A Practical Gide to Analysis of Alternatives, July 2008, Office of Aerospace Studies, Air Force Materiel Command.
39

http://www.ndia.org/Divisions/Divisions/SystemsEngineering/Documents/Committees/Mission% 20Analysis%20Committee/Support%20Documentation/AoA%20Handbook%20Final.pdf

Page | 31
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020       Subject matter experts are part of the team and there should always be more than five members. Multiple teams may cover specialty areas such as crew performance and aircraft records and periodically combine their knowledge. The team must produce multiple scenarios that are coherent with the known facts, timelines and physical laws. Witness testimony is carefully evaluated before being used as major support for a scenario. Reports of conversations, and observations such as hearing radio broadcasts are historically unreliable. No scenario that has been found coherent with facts can be discarded or omitted from the process.40 Considering the above observations, we now describe how to develop a scenario on NR16020. It is tempting to start out by describing speculative details of the flight that catch our attention and combine these into a scenario. This is fine for writing a dramatization but not for producing a search grid. The scenario process first involves asking and answering a few questions prior to discussing specifics. These are:    Given all the information on the flight and the expert knowledge available, what are two failure areas that seem most probable? Are these failure areas capable of creating the end result of not reaching the destination? Can describing these failures, provide information that will suggest EOF locations?

To begin this process, we assume that the crew was lost and made two navigation errors. This resulted in placing the aircraft in a position that was too far from destination for the

40

During the NTSB TWA 800 Public hearing, a scenario involving a meteor strike was included and

experts testified on its probability, http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/WA800

Page | 32
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 remaining fuel and the terminal search method to be successful. We will now use a discussion of the events to address the remaining questions. Instead of including the entire flight area of where the fuel load could have taken the aircraft, we must try to reduce its size by making simplifying assumptions and picking scenarios that explain anomalous results. For instance, it has been pointed out by several researchers that the headwinds were higher than forecast for the flight by approximately ten knots.41 This is based on surface observations so cannot be taken as fact. What is factual is the first radio transmission that communicated the information: “we must be on you, gas is running low.”42 This was logged at 1912 GMT or after 19+12 hours of flight.43 Since the original estimated time of arrival was 1+48 later at 2100 GMT, we are faced with an anomaly that cannot be explained by applying the opposing variables of the higher headwinds and a higher than planned cruise speed.44 Another possibility is that the weight and balance was out of limits. A significant discrepancy in the cruise center of gravity (CG) can affect fuel consumption.45 As far as we have been able to determine, this airplane had never been flown at this gross weight or fuel loading.46 This could account for a significant part of the fuel anomaly.

41

Captain Safford’s factual observation: Safford, Laurance F, Warren, Cameron A., Pyne, Robert R., Earhart’s Flight into Yesterday; The Facts Without the Fiction, Paladwr Press 2003. page 100
42
43

Reference original Navy report on radio transmissions

Modern aviation convention is to express flight times in hours and minutes using the shorthand shown (19+12) Captain Safford’s factual observation: Safford, Laurance F, Warren, Cameron A., Pyne, Robert R., Earhart’s Flight into Yesterday; The Facts Without the Fiction, Paladwr Press 2003. page 100.
44

45

Aircraft flying with an out of CG condition require pitch-trim inputs that create higher than normal drag forces. The drag forces require higher power settings to maintain a given cruise airspeed.
46

The highest previous fuel load of only 900 gallons was recorded when departing Hawaii on the first attempt to Howland Island flying in a Westerly direction.

Page | 33
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 If we consider the aircraft’s difference in actual versus planned arrival times, we can understand two points. One is that higher power settings were the most likely reason that the pilot was declaring low fuel long before her likely planned endurance of 22+30 (or more depending on the exact fuel load departing Lae). The second point we can understand is the crew's possible attitude towards the destination fuel reserve. They knew that if the island was not found on arrival that it mattered little if there were one or two hours of fuel remaining. The crew would be lost and have no way of knowing immediately which direction to search. There were no alternate airfields within the range of the remaining fuel on board. Some have postulated that the high-speed cruise was in response to the higher headwinds and represented optimum fuel consumption. If so, events would suggest that it was ineffective in saving fuel for searching at destination. It is more likely that the pilot planned the fuel load to accommodate both a heavy takeoff47 and have an “adequate” reserve at the end of the mission. Today, a flight of this nature would plan to carry a 10% en route reserve not to exceed one hour.48 This would mean in terms of flight time a total of 21+00 hours plus one hour or 22+00 plus the holding fuel of 1+15. Thus, total flying time at cruise power settings would be 23+15. Although a local search would result in a slightly longer flying time profile, few of the researchers put the calculated flying time this high. Therefore it is very likely that the pilot was comfortable with the 1+15 holding fuel at destination and would risk not needing the one hour en-route fuel reserve. To further explore issues that may have affected fuel consumption see Appendix P. This makes sense if one observation is introduced. This is the crewmembers’ attitude towards terminal navigation. In short, they were betting their lives on radio guidance. Given what we know about the preflight preparations, it seems clear that they felt that there was adequate redundancy in the radio communications and direction finder (DF)

47

The aircraft takeoff weight was limited by the required takeoff performance. This is affected by several variables including available engine horsepower, runway length and its condition.
48

US Air Force Regulation 55-2, 17 Aug 1983, Page 34, Fig 6-3, refer to Appendix F.

Page | 34
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 navigation equipment to give them this essential service. Either, they would direction find the USCGC Itasca49 or the ship’s radio watch would DF them if the aircraft receiving equipment failed. If they had a plan for failed radio communications or DF equipment, it has yet to be mentioned by any researcher. The casual and seemingly improper use of the radio is a failure that can only be ascribed to lack of training and experience. If we compare the world flight with that of Howard Hughes a year later, the role of radio is given much higher priority as noted by the use of a dedicated radio operator.50 See Appendix K. It is also true that the crew of the USCGC Itasca did not do much to help although not through lack of professionalism. The mission planners did not inform them as to what frequencies and equipment were available on the aircraft. The direction finder on Howland Island was ineffective but preserved one clue for investigators. The operators were unable to get minimum signal strength on transmissions from NR16020 at the same time that the ship was documenting maximum radio signal readings of S5. The Howland Island DF was also not able to measure the aircraft bearing because of short transmission times and low signal strength. It is unfortunate that this equipment fell short of expectations but as it was an unofficial part of the operation, it cannot be considered as being part of the agreed upon communications plan. Radio communications and the DF capability on board the aircraft were the keys for the crew’s terminal navigation and had to work. They also had to work if they failed to reach the island and needed to request a rescue ship. There are no shortages of scenarios to choose from. Many people have put forward excellent reasoned scenarios starting from many different initial assumptions and while some may be more popular than others, almost all the ones we have read deserve respectful consideration. Even many of the clairvoyant and radio reception inputs made in the weeks

49

U.S. Coast Guard Cutter (USCGC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USCGC_Itasca_(1929) Two trailing wire radio antennas were employed for the Hughes mission

50

Page | 35
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 after July 2, 1937, have an authentic sounding basis even if missing some of the later known details.51 Our method for establishing the search priority is to abbreviate the scenario creation process by using only four assumptions and including two additional factors. The additional factors will not be immediately applied but may prove useful in the future. The assumptions are:  The pilot and navigator believed that they were near their destination of Howland Island at 19:12 hours Greenwich Mean Time, 8:44 AM Local Time. Their actual location could have been anywhere within the aircraft range limits.    Radio reception signal strength was such as to place the aircraft within a range of 50 to 300 NM of the USCGC Itasca. Figure 4-2. We exclude the area up to 50 NM based on the negative search results by the Waitt Institute in 2009. Figure 4-2. That after 19+12 hours elapsed flight time, the crew made only a local search for Howland Island until fuel exhaustion or controlled flight into terrain CFIT52 occurred.

7.2 Possible Factors
An electrical or other aircraft emergency made further transmissions from the aircraft impossible. Consider that what is normally a benign inflight failure such as a blown radio53 or direction finder54 fuse was at this point in time a life threatening event.

Refer to 125-127, Dwiggins, Don, Hollywood Pilot; The Biography of Paul Mantz, Doubleday & Company, 1967
51

Controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) describes an accident in which an airworthy aircraft, under pilot control, is unintentionally flown into the ground, a mountain, water, or an obstacle. The term was coined by engineers at Boeing in the late 1970s. The pilots are generally unaware of the danger until it is too late. Accidents where an aircraft is damaged and uncontrollable are not considered CFIT., Source Wiki
52

Page | 36
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 It is also important to consider other unusual factors that can affect the aircraft after it enters the water. An area of investigation not considered in our provisional ranking of the search areas was the concept of a neutrally buoyant aircraft or major components floating submerged for weeks or months. The basis for this possibility has been eloquently described by undersea expert David Jourdan in his book Never Forgotten, the Search for Israel's Lost Submarine Dakar.55 The scenario is invoked to explain the travel of a rescue buoy belonging to the sunken submarine that may have traveled underwater an unusually long distance before finally washing up on shore. This discovery provided a closure for years of speculation driven by the unlikely location where the buoy was found. While an aircraft is more complex than a buoy, components such as wing sections or fuel tanks that are separated upon impact are a demonstrated possibility. In 1996, the center wing section from a USAF C-130, King 56, that ditched in the Pacific floated for weeks before sinking to the bottom. Another variation also seen in the C-130 accident is the separation of the engines after a violent impact with the water. This permits the engine positions on the sea floor to mark the initial point of contact and other wreckage would provide either a debris field down current or be carried out of the area. For typical current flows around Howland Island refer to Figure 7-1.

At the termination of the Oakland to Hawaii, a fuse was replaced that supplied power to the transmitter. Refer to page 102 where it states generator burned out (actually just a blown fuse) Dwiggins, Don, Hollywood Pilot; The Biography of Paul Mantz, Doubleday & Company, 1967
53

DF Receiver fuse replaced in Darwin Australia, http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Letters/Abbott8_3_37.pdf
54

Jourdan, David W., Never Forgotten, the Search for Israel's Lost Submarine Dakar, 2009, Naval Institute Press
55

Page | 37
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 7-1 South Pacific Current Flow56

7.3 The Navigation Dilemma
Our scenario puts the aircraft at a pilot reported indicated altitude of 1000 feet above sea level and in a visual search mode for Howland Island.57 It matters little whether they used

General Surface Current Chart of the World, July, August, September data provided by the United States Navy Oceanographic Office and published by the Defense Mapping Agency, September 1979. Founded on the researches in the early part of the nineteenth century by Matthew Fontaine Maury while serving as a lieutenant in the United States Navy. Mercator Projection, SCALE 1:15,700,000 at LAT 45 degrees N.
56

Ref 1912 GMT radio transmission from NR16020 using call sign KHAQQ ”we are on you but cannot see you, fuel is running low”
57

Page | 38
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 a sun line of position to measure their distance traveled along course because it would give them no information about how far off course they were.58 If the landfall method of navigation was used initially, then one could safely assume that it was in error by at least 20 nautical miles given the fact that the USCGC Itasca was making smoke at the time. It is really not important to our scenario if the landfall technique was used or not. At the end, we would assume that the search for the island would take the form of a local search pattern. The navigator knows that the island must be found by local search. After slowing to maximum endurance speed and the engines powered down to a miserly 28 gallons per hour at 110 knots True Airspeed (TAS), the search begins.59 The object is to expand the search in the area most likely to contain the destination. Consider now what the navigator may know at this point. He does not know his exact position or he would be already in the landing pattern. By definition, the navigator is temporarily disoriented or lost. To recover, he evaluates his best information. Is it distance traveled or deviation right or left from planned course? We can appreciate the nature of this decision process by following the Bayesian decision tree analysis in Figure 7-2. While the navigator would not have used this exact method, his reasoning would have employed a similar process. The diagram depicts the terminal area around Howland Island as being divided into quadrants. These are labeled in a clockwise direction as Q1 through Q4. A decision tree begins at the top of the figure and branches down into the quadrants. To reach each of the four quadrants, through the decision tree, two branches with their associated probabilities must be traversed. To compute the Bayesian probability of all four paths, multiply the two probabilities in each path to obtain an overall probability for that quadrant. The highest probability value, in

For a 1937 discussion of using sun lines see: Lt. C. Bentley, Orientation and Landfall, Aero Digest, August 1937, Appendix , pages 60-61
58

This is a typical speed and fuel consumption combination for this class of aircraft and is included to suggest that the aircraft is flying slower than the normal cruise speeds.
59

Page | 39
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

this case Q4, is the one likely to be chosen by the navigator. The same effect could be achieved by asking questions about the state of the navigator’s charts and making an objective choice.

Figure 7-2 Bayes Theorem Applied to Terminal Navigation We believe it is possible using hindsight that the navigator thought that he had the distance traveled better identified than lateral deviation. We assume that he believed himself short of destination. This would cause him to choose a search pattern either to the left or right. There are five patterns of terminal search that they could have used. See Figure 7-3. The panic mode would have been to fly an expanding box pattern with 10-NM separation between flight paths until sighting the island, ship or ship’s boiler smoke. This would limit the range traveled from the initial point but would be highly likely to be successful if the destination was within 50 to 75 NM.

Page | 40
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 7-3 The Five Destination Search Options It is more than likely that there was no panic initially and the navigator chose to fly a rectangular search pattern that covered an area either to the left or right of the departure flight planned course. The explanation for this is straightforward and applicable to any navigation to an island destination even today. For this scenario, we have chosen to believe that they turned right and began a rectangular search that unlike the box pattern would extend in a southerly direction. If they were, unknown to the navigator, already right of course in Q3, the search would take them further from destination before fuel exhaustion. The distribution of possible end of flight (EOF) locations extends further south if more fuel was on board than our assumed 1+30 to 2+0O hours. Certainly unless other assumptions were injected into the scenario, no intentional navigation to another island was undertaken since they were lost and would not have known what compass heading to fly. To visualize the final flight path of NR16020 vs. what the navigator may have believed, refer to Figure 7-4. Page | 41
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 The errors made by the navigator are best explained by referring to the two flight paths depicted. The flight path shown by the red dotted lines is the navigator's updated planned course and is the one that he believes is essentially correct. He believes this because he has earlier taken a sextant shot of the rising sun and plotted a line of position (LOP) perhaps at an assumed 200 NM from Howland Island. He advances the LOP using estimated wind information until it coincides with the map position of Howland Island. We depict in the Figure 7-4 that this plot is in error by an amount greater than 50 NM. This can be due to wind changes, sextant errors or a combination of both.60 The actual track of the aircraft is shown by a solid blue line. Obviously, this track will mirror all the maneuvers that the navigator is plotting on his chart.

If the aircraft center of gravity is out of limits, aircraft accelerations (phugoid mode) can affect the bubble level in the sextant. The consequence can be larger errors in celestial fixes. The phugoid mode is a periodic motion about the aircraft pitch axis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phugoid
60

Page | 42
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 7-4 Terminal Navigation Scenario There is a second error required to place the aircraft in Q3. This is an early turn based on one of several possible errors. Early turns are common causes of accidents especially those ending in CFIT. They can be caused by confusion induced by fatigue and distraction or by errors in plotting or calculating times of arrival. Figure 7-4 also shows the LOP being intercepted and followed toward what is believed by the navigator to be the direction of Howland Island. When the island is not sighted shortly after 1912 GMT, the navigator enters a local search believing the island to be to the southeast. This scenario takes NR16020 from a planned track to destination to a position that is initially more than 50 NM in error and subsequent maneuvering takes the aircraft even further from Howland Island.

Page | 43
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 In the next section, we will explain the search grid and in section 9, we will apply the elements of our scenario by selecting those grid cells that have the highest probability of containing the EOF location.

8 Developing the Search Grid
Statistical methods are commonly used to reduce randomness in choosing a course of action when factual data is not available. In the search for NR16020, we have few facts that are useful in determining the EOF position or the location of any remaining wreckage Statistical approaches are most applicable to situations involving a large number of events. In finding a lost airplane today, we would look close to the planned track or airways assigned and have data available on average deviation from course over a large number of flights. In our case, there is only one event with no factual knowledge of the aircraft location within the hours leading up to and including the time of the last aircraft radio transmission. In spite of this, we can use Bayesian derived methods if we provide scenario generated probabilities and apply them as initial conditions. Bayesian statistical approaches attempt to infer probabilities by logically linking prior events to specific later ones and then use actual outcomes of the later events to adjust the numerical probabilities assigned to the prior events. For example, in the successful searches for the submarines Scorpion61 and Thresher, probabilities were assigned to a series of grid cells placed in an overlay of the search area. Using several scenarios, based on expert opinion, these probabilities were adjusted relative to how the scenarios would have affected the vessel path. Using these initial values, the search begins at the grid cell with the highest probability. If this search is unsuccessful, then its value is reduced and the remaining squares probabilities are increased. The search continues by selecting the next highest probability square.

61 See Appendix E - Bayesian References

Page | 44
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 We suggest that the process for creating a search grid for NR16020 should be different than those used for other events where more accurate information is available. The pilot apparently did not transmit hourly position reports and certainly did not give enough information to place the aircraft at definite positions and times.62 This is unfortunate and notable since the navigator for the most of the mission was supposed to be determining position by hourly celestial three star fixes. These would be reduced to a chart location that would be described by a latitude/longitude entry. Our search grid is sized to show the statistical reality of the search. We have chosen a grid area of 480 by 210 NM (889 by 389 km) that is positioned 50 NM west of Howland Island. The area encompassed by this grid is enormous measuring 100,800 NM2 (186,682 km2). We believe this is the very minimum area that must be considered given the total lack of factual information. In our reading of other theories, we note that the search area is seldom described as being this large.

9 Applying a Bayesian Probability Distribution
In section 7.3, we presented a scenario that places the suspected position of the aircraft to the south of the original planned course and on a local search for Howland Island that assumes wrongly that they are left of course and are therefore expecting to find Howland Island to the right. The variables that can be assigned probabilities are:

A complete FAA/ICAO position report includes: Identification, Position, Time, Altitude, Estimated time to next reporting point, Name of next reporting point, succeeding point. Other information a required and prudent such as: Endurance, and weather conditions and any degraded condition such as equipment failure or uncertain navigation errors. FAA, Aeronautical Information Manual,2012, Page 5-3-2
62

Page | 45
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020    The actual position of the aircraft at the time local search began, Probabilities of varying fuel endurance, Significance of the last transmission of NR16020 to continued flight.

We first exclude all successful underwater search areas and then using a rectangular area template, proceed to apply that part of Bayes theorem that permits probabilities to be assigned by expert judgment. We chose a grid with rectangular cell dimensions of 30x40 NM (56x74 km). These cells were chosen to make the grid easier to visualize. An actual search would likely choose a smaller grid cell. The procedure to convert our scenario into a grid square search plan is shown in Figure 15-10 in Appendix D. It presents the process of creating the grid and providing an initial probability for each of the cells. There are 84 cells in a rectangular area of 480 x 210 NM2 (889 by 389 km2) or 100,800 NM2 (186,682 km2). All cells have an equal probability of containing the aircraft of 1/84 or 0.011905 (1.2%) on a scale of: 0.0 to 1.0.63 The need for better readability leads us to create a color-coded version of the search grid that is based on a numerical ranking of each cell. See Figure 9-1. The cells are numbered from 1 to 8 indicating their order of search priority. Figure 15-13 in Appendix D depicts the range of probability values assigned to each of these numbers. These numbers cover a range that is set by the highest value of probability assigned to the grid cells and the resulting recomputation of the other cells. The absolute values of probability are not shown further in the final search grid but are retained to be used in further iterations of figure 15-11 as a search proceeds. The color codes provide a search team with an intuitive snapshot of priorities and are easily adjusted after each grid search is completed.

This is our only use of Monte Carlo probability and is equivalent to tossing an 84 sided die. Its only purpose is to demonstrate the low values of probability that we will be working with as a consequence of selecting the large grid.
63

Page | 46
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 9-1 Probability Distribution

The destination may be either included or offset as we have done to exclude the area within 50 NM of Howland Island. We suggest that sonar searched areas not be included in the grid or the calculations because it does not change the relative probabilities and would not normally be considered in future scenarios.64 It is important to emphasize that only two self-imposed rules govern the values assigned.

64

The reason for this is that the previous sonar searches have presumably been stored on computer media. As such they may be reviewed and studied without need for being ranked in the active grids. If a return to these grids is needed it will be because a suspected object has been located that warrants a closer look with a Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV).

Page | 47
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 First, we wanted the cells to have a continuous boundary and, second, have the probabilities be smoothly distributed from highest to lowest value. This is consistent with a scenario that has a single best grid accompanied by some margin of error. It is also important to rank only one cell highest and to recognize that the search as it progresses will always maintain the same relative priorities among cells. We used a frequency distribution graph to vary the number of cell values in each range as shown in Figure 9-2. This was done after the cells had been distributed in a pattern on the grid and served as a check on our selections. The best distribution is a asymmetric probability distribution with the lowest cell rank always being the highest value. The more efficient scenarios would also have fewer high value cells. Figure 9-2 Search Grid Frequency Analysis

What does our scenario reveal? In Figure 9-1, the red cell with the highest value is just south of centerline and approximately 155 NM from destination. This position was selected based on the navigator’s dilemma and our assumption that skywave propagation was providing the reported signal strengths. From there we chose to move the end of flight point to the south in an arc curving to fit as much as possible an area 50-300 NM distant from destination to preserve our skywave assumption in Appendix M. The adjoining cells simply reflect an error in estimating the target location. The final step in visualizing the search priority is to place the grid on the previously bounded search area. Figure 9-3 shows our selected probability distribution located on an area map of Howland Island. The use of color greatly enhances interpretation of the search grid cells.

Page | 48
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 We have created a scenario, plotted it on a grid template, and prioritized the grid cells. The key elements of our scenario are:       Prior to reaching destination the navigator made a course correction early. The navigator’s estimated time of arrival on the sun line LOP was in error by at least 50 NM. The aircraft was actually right of course and had not yet reached a position abeam65 or adjacent to Howland Island The navigator was lost and assumed his position was abeam and to the left of the original planned course approaching Howland Island The navigator turned south when he thought he was abeam the island and after flying a short distance began a local search The local search ended in quadrant Q3 at a point where fuel or other emergency caused the EOF.

off to the side of a ship or plane especially at a right angle to the middle of the ship or plane's length, Definition from Merriam-Webster
65

Page | 49
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 9-3 Final Probability Distribution66

66

National Geographic Family Reference Atlas of the World, National Geographic Washington, DC,

2002, page 194

Page | 50
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

10 Summary
We have applied elements of the Systems Engineering discipline to build a process framework for the purpose of determining the location of NR16020. Accordingly, a concept map was created that depicted the complexity of the system that placed the aircraft on a flight to Howland Island on July 2, 1937. We used the insight provided by studying this map along with research to provide a scenario that in turn was used to populate and prioritize a search grid. The scenario created depicted that the crew was lost and at a much greater distance from destination than they or most researchers over the years have concluded. We also assumed several decision errors that would place them further away from destination but not immediately out of radio communications with the USCGC Itaska.

11 Conclusions
We have concluded that: 1. There was no complete position report received from the crew during the entire flight. 2. The pilot and navigator were lost and did not know where they were shortly after they announced their arrival near Howland Island. 3. It is possible that the crew was not only lost but badly off course, to the right of track and over 155 NM from destination. 4. The crew may have increased their distance from the island in subsequent searching. 5. The amount of fuel on board is not a critical factor in our analysis. 6. The weather and its effect on navigation play a minimum role in our analysis. 7. Any attempt at fixing the aircraft location by reported weather conditions appears to be limited by a lack of specific weather data. 8. The crew was competent and qualified to undertake the flight but suffered from physiological stresses due to time zone fatigue and a cabin environment that would have affected their judgment and performance at the end of their estimated 28-hour crew duty day. Page | 51
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 9. Assumptions about aircraft radio signals propagation may provide the only method of establishing a maximum search distance from Howland Island. 10. Assumptions about aircraft minimum distance from Howland Island are based on the negative search results of modern sonar expeditions. 11. The search area is much greater than previously reported by many of the researchers. 12. Systems Engineering developed concept mapping provides an excellent tool for capturing expert knowledge and creating and evaluating scenarios.

12 Recommendations
The scenario development process described in this paper is one way but not the only way to create a search procedure. We recommend that scenario-building activities consider creating a Concept Map as a primary tool to visually display the complexity of the system. This activity can capture much of the knowledge provided by subject matter experts. We recommend that researchers emulate the vision of the early aviation pioneers and think big. The mission to circumnavigate the world was to be a record making event and the U.S. Government was asked to be a partner. Once again, the Government needs to take a leading role in recovering a national treasure. Some possible contributions:  Declaring a U.S. National undersea test range in the vicinity of Howland Island and directing that the initial capability testing of Government developed deep-sea surveillance vehicles take place there.    Develop a U.S. National long-term deep sea search plan for the area. Obtain U.S. National ownership of the NR16020 aircraft. Declare a reward for factual information leading to successful location and recovery of the aircraft or artifacts thereof.

Page | 52
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

13 The Authors
Gundars Osvalds67 has over 40 years as a practicing systems engineer with experience in systems architecture and their process. He has participated in numerous projects where he was able to succeed in environments that lacked structure or adequate information. He has presented over 20 papers at systems engineering conferences worldwide, some are listed below:

“Architectural Design, Simulation and Visualization Using SysML,” NASA, Goddard, 2011; “Architectural Visualization and Execution to Validate User Requirements,” IBM Rational Software Conference, 2010; “The Enterprise Architecture Reference Cube,” Journal of Enterprise Architecture, 2008; “Use of Processes and Modeling Tools for Enterprise Architecture-Centric Models for the Systems Engineer,” International Council on Systems Engineering Symposium, Melbourne, Australia 2001; “Benefits in Using Object-Oriented Methodology for Architecture Definition,” International Council on Systems Engineering Symposium, Toulouse, France, 2004; “Use of Architecture for Engineering Systems; The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly,” International Council on Systems Engineering Symposium, Orlando, FL, 2006; “Bridging the Zachman Framework with Object Oriented Models,” Zachman Institute for Framework Advancement Forum, 2001.

Certified The Open Group Architectural Framework (TOGAF) Practitioner: The Open Group
67

Certified Systems Engineer: LITTON/TASC Institute for Learning and Development Certified Systems Professional: Institute for Certification of Computer Professionals

Page | 53
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 His fascination of the Earhart flight goes back at least 20 years and he has been an avid student of aircraft accident investigation since an Air Force plane crashed near his back yard scattering debris in it. His recent systems engineering principles have been influenced by the enterprise architecture concepts developed by John Zachman in the early 90’s. The process uses the interrogatories of: WHAT, HOW, WHERE, WHO, WHEN and WHY to establish description of any object. Thus these interrogatories can be applicable to evaluating the flight and location of the aircraft.

George W. Anderson, CSEP68 is a systems engineer who has recently worked with enterprise process development, international standards and creating architectural descriptions of complex information networks. His earlier careers in aviation included: 20 years as an Air Force transport pilot and 4 years as an aircraft accident investigator for the NTSB where he participated in the investigations of the ValuJet crash in the Florida Everglades and TWA 800. Additionally, he has served as an expert aviation witness, aircraft museum curator and, program manager for aircraft systems. His interest in the Earhart flight dates back many years but certainly to the Earhart Historical Symposium held on July 23, 1993 at the Travis AFB Museum, Fairfield, CA. He has special experience in performing historic aircraft recovery having restored a C-124, C-121, B-26 and other derelict aircraft to flight status for the purpose of flying them to museums. As an NTSB investigator, he participated in a USAF conducted investigation of the USAF King 56, C-130 crash at sea off the California coast in 1996. He subsequently participated in the related salvage of evidential wreckage from the sea floor resting at a depth of 6000 feet. His formal education includes a BS from the U.S. Air Force Academy and a Masters Degree in Aeronautical Engineering from The U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)

68

Certified Systems Engineer Professional by International Council on Systems Engineers (INCOSE)

Page | 54
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

14 Tribute to Researchers
When we began this paper, it was obvious that we were not dealing with a typical systems engineering problem. Thousands of people have spent countless hours working on some aspect of the disappearance of NR16020. We could not hope to add much to this body of knowledge except by using Systems Engineering to clarify and provide insight. Accordingly, we wish to express our gratitude to everyone who has spent time researching and contributing to the public knowledge on all aspects of this subject. We believe that with near term improvements in deep-sea search technology that the timeline for ending the 75 year quest will be less than ten years. The public interest and will is there to sustain the search and the vast library of research that you have all prepared will be the inspiration and guidance so essential for what is now a multi-generational task. We would like to close this section with two questions for today’s active Earhart researchers:   Where are the remnants of NR16020 today? What is a scenario worth?

As casual followers of the Earhart saga for more than 30 years, we can offer our answers: The remnants of NR16020 do not exist until they are produced. Evidence can come from unexpected sources and locations and tell very different tales than what we have created. What we have also learned is that scenario building is essential - not to solve problems but to motivate searches. In Mr. Anderson’s experience as an aircraft accident investigator for the Air Force and NTSB, the truth would have been lost many times if scenarios that were politically unpopular had not been doggedly pursued and causes found. This implies that each problem must have multiple scenarios. In the case of this search, it would not be unreasonable to carry 25 to 50 scenarios that were determined to be coherent with known information. The scenario dictates the search area and the priority of search. Selecting a priority among the scenarios must also be done professionally using a formal process.

Page | 55
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15 Appendices
15.1 Appendix A - Concept Map Description

Following is an excerpt from a CMAP technical report: The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct and Use Them.69 Concept maps are graphical tools for organizing and representing knowledge. They include concepts, usually enclosed in circles or boxes of some type, and relationships between concepts indicated by a connecting line linking two concepts. Words on the line referred to as linking words or linking phrases, specify the relationship between the two concepts. One of the uses of concept maps is to capture the “tacit” knowledge of experts. Experts know many things that they often cannot articulate well to others. This tacit knowledge is acquired over years of experience and derives in part from activities of the expert that involve thinking, feeling and acting. Another characteristic of concept maps is that the concepts are represented in a hierarchical fashion with the most inclusive, most general concepts at the top of the map and the more specific, less general concepts arranged hierarchically below. The hierarchical structure for a particular domain of knowledge also depends on the context in which that knowledge is being applied or considered. Therefore, it is best to construct concept maps with reference to some particular question we seek to answer, which we have called a focus question. An important characteristic of concept maps is the inclusion of cross-links. These are relationships or links between concepts in different segments or domains of the concept map. Cross-links help us see how a concept in one domain of knowledge represented on the

69

http://cmap.ihmc.us/publications/researchpapers/theorycmaps/theoryunderlyingconceptmaps.ht m

Page | 56
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 map is related to a concept in another domain shown on the map. In the creation of new knowledge, cross-links often represent creative leaps on the part of the knowledge producer. When a person is creating a concept map they can use their domain knowledge. Concept map structures are dependent on the context in which they will be used to present a particular problem or question that one is trying to understand. This creates a context that will help to determine the hierarchical structure of the concept map. A good way to define the context for a concept map is to construct a Focus Question, that is, a question that clearly specifies the problem or issue the concept map should help to resolve. Every concept map responds to a focus question, and a good focus question can lead to a much richer concept map.

Page | 57
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.2

Appendix B - NR16020 CMAP

The following figures present the NR16020 mission concept map depicting the capabilities used to execute the mission of flying around the world. Following figures detail each participant in the planning and execution of the mission. These figures are extracted from the main CMAP for easier viewing; Figure 15-1 is also available as a PDF file (11”x17”, 27.9 x 43.2 cm) on the NR16020Report.org70 web site.

70

NR16020Report.org

Page | 58
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-1 Mission of NR16020 Concept Map Page | 59
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-2 Program Manager Mission Concepts Page | 60
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-3 Planner Mission Concepts Page | 61
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-4 President and First Lady Mission Concepts Page | 62
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-5 Crew Preflight Mission Concepts Page | 63
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-6 Navigator Mission Concepts

Page | 64
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-7 Radio Operator Mission Concepts Page | 65
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-8 Pilot Mission Concepts Page | 66
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.3 Appendix C - CAA Aircraft Registration: NR16020
The attached copy presented in Figure 15-9 of the NR16020 Aircraft Registration document which is instructive, but, we would add two points not often discussed. These were the age of the aircraft and the total flight experience of the pilot in the aircraft. At the time of its disappearance, NR16020 has flown an estimated total time of 363 hours while the pilot in command had logged some 332 hours in type which most if not all, was in NR16020.71

71

Courtesy of Ric Gillespie, TIGHAR

Page | 67
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-9 Aircraft Registration NR16020

Page | 68
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.4
0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905

Appendix D - Search Grids
0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905

0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 0.011905 Grey cells indicate sonar searched grids

Figure 15-10 Monte Carlo Probability Assignment

0.001205 0.001205 0.001205 0.001205 0.001205 0.001205 0.001205

0.001205 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.001205 0.007695 0.056 0.011035 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.001205 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.007695 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.007695 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.007695 0.007695

0.001205 0.007695 0.01 0.007695 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.035 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.007695 0.02 0.01 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695 0.007695

Assume that the probability of finding an object in a cell is: q =.9 Revised probability of a negative search in an individual grid square: P'= P (1-.9)/(1-.9p) Result Revised probability of all other squares due to a single grid square revision: r'=r(1/(1-.9p) Result 0.001205 0.007695

Example: all 84 squares begin with a flat probability distribution of 1/84 or 0.011905 Manually increasing a single cell by increments requires that a reduction in all other cells be made of 1/83 since there are 84

Figure 15-11 Bayesian Grid Calculation Spreadsheet

Page | 69
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-12 Probability Distribution The grid presents an overall area of 480 x 210 NM. (889 x 389 km)

0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 15-13 Ranking the Cells This figure shows the probability selection range for each grid square level.

Page | 70
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Series1

Figure 15-14 Cell Ranking Distribution Final frequency adjustment showing the number of grid cells in each probability range. This graph is updated iteratively as the grid cell probabilities are assigned.

Page | 71
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.5

Appendix E - Bayesian References

1. Bernstein, Peter L. (1996) Against the Gods, The Remarkable Story of Risk, John Wiley & Sons Inc., Pages 129-134. 2. Henry R. Richardson and L. D. Stone, (1971) “Operations Analysis During the Underwater Search for Scorpion,” Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, Vol. 18, June 1971. 3. Clemen, Robert T., (1995) Making Hard Decisions, Duxbury Press.

Page | 72
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.6 Appendix F – Modern Mission Fuel Planning

Figure 15-15 Fuel Requirements Page | 73
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.7 Appendix G - U.S. Navy Superintendent of Salvage Report72

Figure 15-16 U. S. Navy Commercial Aircraft Salvage Operations Report (Cover)

72

http://www.governmentattic.org/2docs/SUPSALV-Report_CommlAircraft_1992.pdf

Page | 74
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-17 Executive Summary From the Commercial Aircraft Salvage Report

Page | 75
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.8 Appendix H – Destination Expanding Square Search

Figure 15-18 Fixed Square Search (1/2)73

Mattingly, Charles, Chief Navigator, (1944) The American Air Navigator Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corporation Publisher.
73

Page | 76
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-19 Fixed Square Search (2 of 2)74

Mattingly, Charles, Chief Navigator, (1944) The American Air Navigator Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corporation Publisher.
74

Page | 77
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.9

Appendix I - AERO DIGEST August 1938

Figure 15-20 Aero Digest August 1938 (cover)

Page | 78
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-21 Orientation and Landfall by Means of Precomputed Curves (1/2)

Page | 79
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-22 Orientation and Landfall by Means of Precomputed Curves (2/2)

Page | 80
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.10 Appendix J - Where is Amelia Earhart?

Figure 15-23 “Where is Amelia Earhart?” Panel Discussion Report75

Disappearance of Amelia Earhart, the Mistake that Confounded the World, Michael E. Dickinson, 1993, presentation at Travis Air Force Base Museum.
75

Page | 81
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.11 Appendix K - Hughes Around the World Flight, July 10-14, 1938

Figure 15-24 Hughes Flies Around the World (1/2) Page | 82
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-25 Hughes Flies Around the World (2/2) It is interesting to note that the Hughes team used five crew members and depended heavily on radio navigation during their July 10-14, 1938 flight around the world.

Page | 83
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.12 Appendix L - The Peloris Drift Sight and Drift Bombs

Figure 15-26 Pelorus Drift Sight A Mark IIB Pelorus drift sight was carried on NR16020 for use for navigation. Refer to U. S. Navy Aircraft Navigation Manual, Revised 1942, pages 32-3676 for a description of its use for navigation.

76

http://fer3.com/arc/img/110700.double%20drift,%20ho%20216,%201941.pdf

Page | 84
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-27 Night Pyrotechnic Drift Bombs (1/2) Page | 85
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-28 Night Pyrotechnic Drift Bombs (2/2) Page | 86
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-29 AN-Mk4 Night Pyrotechnic Drift Bomb

Figure 15-30 AN-Mk 1 Day Drift Bomb Description (Version 1)

Page | 87
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-31 AN-Mk 1 Day Drift Bomb (Version 1)

Figure 15-32 AN-Mk 1 Day Drift Bomb (Version 2)

Page | 88
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.13 Appendix M - Radio Propagation

Figure 15-33 6210 kHz Day Propagation77

77

Jordanoff, A., Through the Overcast, Funk and Wagnalls, New York, 1938-39, 1940-41, 1943.

Page | 89
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-34 3105 kHz Night Propagation78 The period just after sunrise and just prior to the declared arrival near Howland Island is characterized in a combination of day and night propagation. Either condition supports our assertion that the aircraft was beyond 100 NM from Howland Island. These are side views of the “Donut” shown in Figure 4-3.

78

Jordanoff, A., Through the Overcast, Funk and Wagnalls, New York, 1938-39, 1940-41, 1943.

Page | 90
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-35 Readability of Aircraft Signals Along Track From Lae to Howland79

Our conclusions on radio propagation were influenced by Jordanoff’s “Donut” Figure 4-3 , and day and night propagation figures, Figure 15-33 and Figure 15-34 in this appendix as well as Figure 15-35 above, presented by Paul Rafford.

Rafford, Paul, Jr. Amelia Earhart's Radio - Why She Disappeared, Page 18, radio propagation sunset to sunrise.
79

Page | 91
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.14 Appendix N – International Civil Aviation Organization Units of Measure

Figure 15-36 Units of Measurement to be Used in Air and Ground Operations (cover)

Page | 92
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-37 Standard Application of Specific Units of Measure

Page | 93
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Figure 15-38 International Standards and Recommended Practices, Definitions

Page | 94
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.15 Appendix O – From the Desk of a Systems Engineer
After being reintroduced to the story of the lost flight of NR16020 we wondered if our experience as Systems Engineers could somehow be used to help in solving the problem of finding the location of the airplane. Systems Engineering’s roots are grounded in processes. These are: perform to plan, design, implement, test, and deploy many types of man-made systems. These include: aircraft, automotive, medical, electrical, electronics, and computer systems. We have used the INCOSE “Systems Engineering Handbook” as a guide in planning and developing systems in order to satisfy customer needs. We wished to identify the system that comprised the world flight. We discovered that the mission was very complex and that the components of the mission can be considered to be a system-of-systems. What SE process could be applied to the problem? Since the mission had already been implemented, our approach was to evaluate what and how well it had performed. Since this problem is not a design or development task, we selected processes that were appropriate to the problem. The INCOSE guide80 for systems life cycle processes and activities was consulted and processes that applied to the problem were employed:  Verification – confirm that the specified design requirements are fulfilled by the system and meet the performance requirements allocated to them. o  Used to verify the capabilities that were provided for performing the flight around the world. Operations – sustains systems services by applying personnel to operate the system. o Determine what qualifications and training are needed to satisfy the mission system needs.

International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) Systems Engineering Handbook, A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities, http://www.incose.org/ProductsPubs/incosestore.aspx
80

Page | 95
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020  Validation – confirms that the stated requirements were properly met by the system. o The mission requirements as documented in the CMAP were evaluated to determine that system functionality and performance met the mission needs. Typical activities to support the SE process included: internet searches, books, videos, movies, operation manuals and author manuscripts and notes. We used our extensive experience for developing SE architecture in identifying the CMAP process as the appropriate tool to use. The CMAP was developed in the following order:         Defining the duties of the main personnel. Used knowledge gained from reports of 75 years of research material. Used researched data containing radio, airplane performance and navigation data. Identified the objects used by each person. Identified inter-object relationships. Documented inter-discipline relationships between the personnel. Evaluated the CMAP to develop an architecture view. Evaluated CMAP relationships to determine critical relationships.

Using the CMAP data we developed scenarios that were used in evaluating and documenting potential search areas.

Page | 96
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

15.16 Appendix P – From the Desk of an Aeronautical Engineer
Just about every known aspect of the last flight of NR16020 has been either documented or analyzed. After studying our concept map of the mission, we began to wonder about why the weight and balance form of the final flight had not been produced. In any other aircraft accident this would be one of the first things to be reviewed. What could the weight and balance form tell us if it still existed? First, it would reveal the calculated gross takeoff weight and fuel load. Second, and much more important, the location of the center of gravity (CG) for takeoff and landing would have been calculated and recorded for every flight. This around the world flight involved planning activities and it is very hard to believe that this aspect was not examined well before the mission began and tentative calculations made. We know that the aircraft had specially modified fuel tanks but we do not know if there was a burn sequence to maintain an efficient center of gravity during flight or that the pilot was aware of a procedure to execute it. The crew off-loaded a great deal of baggage before departing on the last flight so the crew must have had some understanding of the weight and balance issue. It is curious that no weight and balance forms have been found documenting NR16020. There reportedly was one in the CAA certification files but it is now missing. There would have been one required after Lockheed rebuilt the airplane and straightened what we suspect was a bent fuselage and deformed engine mounts. We do know that airplanes can fly with their CG out of limits. It is also true that this condition creates a number of performance and safety issues. If the CG is too far forward, the aircraft may not be able to rotate to assume a takeoff attitude. More importantly, if the CG is significantly beyond the aft limit, stability and trim drag issues can be expected. Just watching the film of the final takeoff, leads one to suspect that the aircraft was loaded beyond the aft cg limit due to seeming instability in maintaining pitch.

Page | 97
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 What if the CG was out of limits? Given the aircraft configuration, it is likely that the aft CG limit could have been violated. We know that commemorative stamp covers were packed in the nose compartment to the weight of about 250 lbs. All the rest of the crew equipment probably ended up in the tail section -aft of the fuel tanks. Our best estimate of gross weight at takeoff is 15,500 to 16,000 lbs. on an aircraft certified for a max takeoff gross weight of 10,500. What is the penalty of taking off with an overload of nearly 150%? Two immediate things come to mind. There is no survival if an engine fails during the first 4-5 hours of flight or the landing gear and tires may fail during the takeoff roll. Also after getting airborne, the engines must operate a higher power levels until weight is reduced shortening the time between overhaul and increasing fuel consumption. How does the pilot know that the CG is beyond the aft limit? Anyone who has experienced this phenomenon will generally tell a scary story of an unstable aircraft that was hard to control and did not respond to control inputs in the normal way and may have exhibited random departures from stable flight. The condition is further amplified in turbulence. 81 Another penalty is the extra drag created by the control surfaces. This is called trim drag and occurs when an aft CG requires excessive trim tab deflections to maintain level flight. An aft CG is not the only cause of excessive drag. An airplane that has been in an accident and is “bent” will have more trim drag because it can have asymmetries that must be trimmed out. The accident at Hawaii prior to the world flight leads us to suspect that this condition might have been present. Assuming that some deformation still remained after repairs were made for the world flight, we would expect the airplane to fly heavy or burn extra gas because of the associated drag needed to keep the aircraft in trim.

Cessna 195 aircraft sometimes behave as if they are unstable as anyone who has flown them will attest. I can say from personal experience that landing a large aircraft with a CG past the aft limit is a life threatening experience. Un-commanded pitch changes and greatly magnified control inputs place a successful landing in doubt right up to the last moment.
81

Page | 98
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 The final concern that we have with a suspected aft CG condition is that it can and does affect airborne sextant accuracy.82 Sextant readings are significantly affected by a change to the aircraft longitudinal stability. The periodic variation about the pitch axis known as the phugoid83 mode is magnified by out of CG conditions and creates an undetectable change in periodic accelerations. These accelerations directly affect the sextant bubble and like all other accelerations experienced by the aircraft are a direct source of error in computing the altitude of a celestial body.84 Even in this early period, some corrections were made to the sightings but there would be no correction available then or today for an abnormal phugoid motion.

82

Celestial navigation provides two primary solutions for determining a location on the earth’s surface. At night, when stars are visible, three stars can be sighted and their altitude above the horizon measured with a sextant. This reading provides three lines of position that when drawn on a chart will converge to create a small triangle. The triangle defines the aircraft position at the time of observation and is called a FIX. In the daytime, only the Sun is available and the derived single line of position is not enough to establish a FIX. Instead, the aircraft is assumed to be located at any point on this line when plotted on the chart. Clearly, if the line is at right angles to course, it allows the navigator to calculate distance traveled. If it is parallel, a course line for the aircraft is established. Errors in measuring the lines of position usually result in triangles with sides larger than 10 NM. A bad fix assuming all preliminary computations were correct could reach or exceed 50-75 NM on a side. The term "phugoid" was coined by Frederick W. Lanchester, the British aerodynamicist who first characterized the phenomenon. He derived the word from the Greek words φυγή and εἶδος to mean "flight-like" but recognized the diminished appropriateness of the derivation given that φυγή meant flight in the sense of "escape" rather than vehicle flight. The use of a canard in aircraft design exploits this phenomenon and ensures that the main wing is prevented from stalling. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phugoid
83

84

The sources of this error are accelerations acting on the aircraft other than gravity. These include turbulence, control inputs, out of trim aircraft, a phugoid acceleration that is not averaged out by taking readings over a period typically lasting two minutes in sextants built later than 1937. The readings taken over this time period are mechanically averaged to a single value that is used as the uncorrected altitude of the observed star or the sun.

Page | 99
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 While the effect of CG and a bent aircraft are speculative, the absence of a weight and balance form of any kind for this aircraft is very suspicious. Weight and balance records were kept by the CAA certification service, the manufacturer Lockheed, the operator of the aircraft, and are normally filed at the departure airport prior to each international flight. It is possible that an individual acting to protect the crew’s reputation removed these documents from various files. For instance, Gene Vidal,85 the outgoing Bureau of Air Commerce Administrator was a close friend and business partner of Amelia Earhart. He or others would understand the importance of the document. This “protect the memory” motive is endemic in modern day accident investigations and is the reason for the current Public law making it a crime to remove accident related artifacts or suppress material evidence.86

“Gene Vidal is now best known as the father of famed author, Gore Vidal. But Gene Vidal had quite a life of his own. He played quarterback at West Point, making some All-American teams. He later taught aeronautics at West Point and was a pioneer in the aviation industry. He was the Director of the Commerce Department's Bureau of Air Commerce from 1933–1937, and was one of the first Army Air Corps pilots. In one of the biographies of Amelia Earhart, Vidal is described as the great love of her life. Vidal founded three American airlines during the 1920s-30s, which later became Eastern Airlines, TWA, and Northeast Airlines (founded with Earhart). He was also an investor in the Boston and Maine Railroad.” http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/athletes/vi/gene-vidal-1.html
85

“For instance, following the 2005 accident of a Platinum Jet aircraft at Teterboro Airport (in New Jersey), federal prosecutors charged managers with providing false statements to NTSB investigators during the course of the NTSB accident investigation in an effort to hide violations of certain FAA regulations. The charges included those for submitting false information about the weight and balance computations and documentation for the flight.” http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/147624/Aviation/The+NTSB+and+Parallel+Law+Enforce ment+Investigations
86

Page | 100
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

Page | 101
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

16 References
16.1 Books

1. Burke, J., & Earhart, A. (1970). Flying Solo. Sterling Publishing. 2. Dwiggins, Don, (1967) Hollywood Pilot; The Biography of Paul Mantz, Doubleday & Company. 3. Earhart, Amelia, (192-2003) 20 hours. 40 min. Our Flight in the Friendship, National Geographic Adventure Classics, ©1928 Amelia Earhart, National Geographic Society, 2003. 4. Earhart, Amelia (1937) Last Flight, Harcourt, Brace and Company. 5. Fleming, Candace, (2011) Amelia Lost; The Life and Disappearance of Amelia Earhart, Schwartz & Wade Books. 6. Gillespie, Ric, (2006) Finding Amelia; The True Story of the Earhart Disappearance, Naval Institute Press. 7. Fleming, Candace, (2011) Amelia Lost, The Life and Disappearance of Amelia Earhart, Schwartz-wade books. 8. Jourdan, David W. (2010) The Deep Quest for Amelia Earhart, Ocellus Productions. 9. Kinder, Gary, (1998) Ship of Gold; In the Deep Blue Sea, The Atlantic Monthly Press. 10. Long, Elgin M. and Long, Marie K., (1999) Amelia Earhart; The Mystery Solved, Simon and Schuster Paperbacks. 11. Nesbit, Roy C. (2002-2010) Missing Believed Killed, First published in Great Britain by Sutton Publishing 2002, revised by Pen and Sword Books, 2010 12. Roessler, Walter and Gomez, Leo, (1997) Amelia Earhart; Case Closed, Markowski International Publishers. 13. Safford, Laurance F, Warren, Cameron A., Pyne, Robert R., (2003) Earhart’s Flight into Yesterday; The Facts Without the Fiction, Paladwr Press. a. Copies of Captain L.F. Safford’s book drafts from the originals in the National Cryptological Museum Library, Ft. Meade, MD. These contain Safford’s hand written edits and material not included in the book published under his name but edited by Warren and Payne.

Page | 102
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 14. Wels, Susan, (2009) Earhart, Amelia Earhart The Thrill of It, Running Press 15. Jordanoff, Assen (1938) Through the Overcast Funk & Wagonalls Company 16. Van Sickle, Neil D. (1966) Modern Airmanship D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. Princeton, NJ. 17. Dickinson, Michael E. (1993), The Disappearance of Amelia Earhart, The Mistake That Confounded the World, self-published, (629.1309 DIKINS). 18. Goerner, Fred (1966) The Search for Amelia Earhart, , Dell Publishers, NY 19. Bernstein, Peter L. (1998) Against the Gods, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. NY (pages 130134) 20. Clemen, Robert T. (1996) Making Hard Decisions, Duxbury Press, Pacific Grove, CA, (pages 388-390) 21. Rafford, Paul, Jr. (2006) Amelia Earhart’s Radio, Why She Disappeared, Paragon Agency, Orange, CA. http://www.specialbooks.com/aeradio.htm 22. Jourdan, David W. (2009) Never Forgotten, the Search for Israel's Lost Submarine Dakar, Naval Institute Press 23. Drobny, Steve and Diamond, Jared, The Invisible Hands: Hedge Funds Off the Record – Rethinking Real Money

16.2

Equipment Manuals and Data

1. Cambridge Fuel-Air Ratio Indicator, Page 217 from Jordanoff, Assen (1938) Through the Overcast. 2. Sperry Gyro Instruments, Page 172 from Jordanoff, Assen (1938) Through the Overcast. 3. Power vs. time and distance Page 247 from Jordanoff, Assen (1938) Through the Overcast. 4. About Radio, Page 250 from Jordanoff, Assen (1938) Through the Overcast. 5. Aircraft Performance-Reciprocating and Turbine Engine Aircraft, Department of the Air Force, AF Manual 51-9, January 1, 1970. 6. Hamilton Standard Propeller Manual. Undated.

Page | 103
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 7. Details of the propeller used on NR16020, The Counterweight Propeller Service Manual, Hamilton Standard, East Hartford Connecticut, 1936 http://www.mh1521.fr/telechargement/No%20110D-%20Prop%20Service%20Manual.pdf 8. Close up pictures of the 12E40 propellerhttp://www.dustersandsprayers.com/PDF%20Files/Counterweight%20Propellers. pdf 9. Hamilton Standard Logo showing the propeller --still a company icon, http://www.notplanejane.com/hamiltonstd.htm

16.3

Navigation References

1. Air Navigation, Air Force Manual 51-40 Volume I and II, Department of the Air Force, 1 August 1968. Dead Reckoning, page 241, Celestial Navigation, page 325 2. Article on finding an island using sun lines and contemporary details of Howard Hughes around the world flight in a Lockheed Lodestar, Aero Digest, August 1938 edition, Aeronautical Digest Publishing Corp. 1938 3. The E6B Navigation Computer, http://www.scribd.com/doc/56498571/The-E6BNavigation-Computer

16.4

Videos

1. Finding Amelia, An aerial tour of Nikumaroro Island, TIGHAR DVD 2001, Tighar Production 2. The Final Hours, Amelia’s last Flight, Produced in association with The National Air & Space Museum, Smithsonian Institute, 2005, InCA Productions 3. Where’s Amelia Earhart?, National Geographic Channel, 2009, 4. Finding Amelia, Discovery Channel, November 2010

16.5 Articles
1. Re-Navigation Research, Christopher G. Nutter, Nutter and Associates, LLC. September 2009. Page | 104
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 2. Mission to Rapa Nui, George Anderson, Chesapeake INCOSE newsletter, Jan. 2011.http://www.scribd.com/doc/55910448/Mission-to-Rapa-Nui 3. Common Factors in Unsolved Mysteries, George W. Anderson, INCOSE, http://www.scribd.com/doc/55924132/Common-Factors-in-Unsolved-Mysteries 4. Department of the Air Force C-130 Broad Area Review Addendum, http://www.scribd.com/doc/54328272/C-130-Broad-Area-Review-Addendum 5. Department of the Air Force C-130 Broad Area Review, http://www.scribd.com/doc/54327304/C-130-Broad-Area-Review

16.6

Maps

1. General Surface Current Chart of the World, July, August, September data provided by the United States Navy Oceanographic Office and published by the Defense Mapping Agency, September 1979. Founded on the researches in the early part of the nineteenth century by Matthew Fontaine Maury while serving as a lieutenant in the United States Navy. Mercator Projection, SCALE 1:15,700,000 at LAT 45 degrees N. 2. National Geographic Family Reference Atlas of the World, National Geographic Washington, DC, 2002, page 194

16.7

NR16020 Flight Reference Documents

1. Lost Flight of Amelia Earhart, www.ameliaearhartmovie.com/lostflight grouplfg.html 2. Web Site Fredie Noonan http://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/discussions/navigation-to-howlandisland (pages 1, 2: “Sunrise at Howland Island was 1745 GMT and Civil twilight occurred 33 minutes earlier.”) 3. Peloris double drift meter, file:///Volumes/TOSHIBA%20EXT/Amelia%20all%20items/Amelia%20all%20ite ms/sources_references/Doubledrift,HO216,1941.webarchive

Page | 105
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 4. Finding Amelia, The True Story of the Earhart Disappearance, DVD containing reference material supplied with book by same name, author Ric Gillespie, © 2006 The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, published by Naval Institute Press.

Page | 106
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020

17 Index
12E40 propeller, 104 15288, 17, 18 Aero Digest, 39, 78, 104 Air Force Manual 51-40, 25, 104 Air France Flight 447, 2 aircraft, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 49, 51, 52, 54, 55, 67, 90, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100 aircraft performance, 11 Amelia Earhart, 2, 10, 12, 16, 81, 102, 103, 105 Analysis of Alternatives, 31 AOA, 31 architecture view, 96 Bayes Theorem, 2, 14, 29, 30, 40 Bayesian, 2, 15, 29, 30, 39, 44, 45, 69, 72 Bureau of Air Commerce, 2, 100 C-130, 28, 37, 54, 105 CAA certification, 97, 100 Cambridge Fuel-Air Ratio Indicator, 103 celestial body, 99 Celestial Navigation, 25, 104 celestial three star fixes, 45 center of gravity, 33, 42, 97 CFIT, 36, 43 CG, 33, 97, 98, 99 Christopher G. Nutter, 104 CMAP, 2, 11, 15, 17, 18, 19, 56, 58 Computer Assisted Search Program, 29 concept map, 2, 13, 14, 18, 51, 56, 57, 58 control surfaces, 98 CSEP, 54 Dead Reckoning, 25, 104 decision process, 39 DF, 35, 37 direction finder, 35, 36 drift measurements, 26 Electra 10E, 2 EOF, 30, 31, 32, 41, 44, 49 expert judgment, 20, 29, 30, 46 expert knowledge, 3, 19, 32, 52 fix, 25, 26, 27 flight experience, 67 forensic scientists, 11 framework, 2, 14, 30 Fred Noonan, 10 Frederick W. Lanchester, 99 fuel exhaustion, 36, 41 fuel tanks, 37, 97, 98 Gardner Island, 17 Gene Vidal, 100 George W. Anderson, 1, 54, 105 grid cells, 2, 17, 44, 48, 49, 71 gross weight, 33, 98 Gundars Osvalds, 1, 53 Hamilton Standard, 103, 104 Hawaii Accident Report, 68 hourly position reports, 45 Howland Island, 2, 3, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 28, 33, 35, 36, 38, 42, 43, 45, 47, 49, 51, 52, 90, 105 Hughes, 35, 82, 83, 104 hypothesis, 29, 31 INCOSE, 12, 18, 54, 95, 105 International Civil Aviation Organizations, 19 Itasca, 35, 36, 39 Jordanoff, 22, 24, 89, 90, 103 Jordanoff’s “Donut”, 91 Jourdan, David W, 37, 102, 103 July 2, 1937, 2, 10, 36, 51 knots, 20, 33, 39 Lae, 14, 17, 19, 21, 22, 34 local search, 45 Lockheed, 1, 2, 10, 14, 97, 100, 104 LOP, 42, 49 lost, 2, 3, 29, 32, 34, 39, 41, 44, 49, 51, 55 magnetometers, 11 Major aircraft accidents, 31 man-made objects, 11 manuscripts, 13, 96 Matthew Fontaine Maury, 38, 105 Mercator Projection, 38, 105 Michael E. Dickinson, 81, 103 Mission to Rapa Nui, 105 Monte Carlo, 30, 46, 69 nautical miles, 14, 16, 19 Nauticos, 10, 14, 15, 16 navigator, 3, 10, 25, 27, 30, 31, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 48, 49, 51 Page | 107
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Search Strategy for NR16020 navigator’s dilemma, 48 Navy Oceanographic Office, 38, 105 Navy’s Superintendent of Salvage, 28 Nikumaroro, 17, 104 Nikumaroro Island, 17, 104 NR16020, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 30, 31, 32, 35, 38, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 51, 52, 55, 58, 59, 67, 68, 84, 104, 105 NTSB, 10, 32, 54 ocean bottom search, 30 official accident report, 67 Operations, 72, 92, 95 Peloris double drift meter, 105 Pelorus drift sight, 84 performance, 3, 11, 32, 34, 51, 95, 96, 97 phugoid, 42, 99 phugoid motion, 99 physiological stresses, 3, 51 pilot, 3, 15, 31, 34, 36, 38, 45, 51, 54, 67 pilot in command, 67 position report, 2, 45, 51 probabilities, 14, 15, 29, 30, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 Probability, 15, 45, 47, 50, 69, 70 probability distribution, 48 Probability Distribution, 47, 50, 70 probability range, 71 process framework, 10, 19, 51 propagation, 3, 22, 48, 52, 90, 91 Propeller Service Manual, 104 pyrotechnic flares, 26 radio, 3, 11, 19, 20, 21, 22, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 44, 51, 52, 83, 91 radio propagation, 23 Rafford, 22, 91, 103 remotely operated vehicles, 11, 14, 28 Ric Gillespie, 12, 17, 67, 106 S5, 35 Safford, 13, 26, 33, 102 scenario, 2, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 29, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 55 scenarios, 2, 3, 10, 14, 15, 19, 31, 32, 33, 35, 44, 47, 48, 52, 55 Scorpion, 29, 44, 72 search area, 2, 3, 14, 20, 21, 22, 24, 28, 30, 44, 45, 48, 52, 55 search grid, 2, 30, 32, 44, 45, 51 sextant, 42 Sextant, 99 sextant bubble, 99 skywave, 19, 22, 48 skywave assumption, 48 smoke bombs, 26 sonar, 3, 11, 14, 15, 21, 28, 47, 52 sonar arrays, 14 Sperry Gyro Instruments, 103 stamp covers, 98 statute miles, 19 Subject matter experts, 32 submarines, 2, 44 sun line, 39, 49 Systems engineering, 2 Systems Engineering, 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 30, 31, 51, 52, 53, 55, 73, 95 Systems Engineering Handbook, 18, 95 systems view, 11 Thresher, 29, 44 TIGHAR, 10, 14, 17, 67, 104 time zone fatigue, 3, 51 track, 3, 25, 27, 42, 43, 44, 51 Travis Air Force Base Museum, 81 trim drag, 97, 98 U. S. Navy Commercial Aircraft Salvage Operations, 74 U.S. Navy, 2, 17, 74 Validation, 96 Verification, 95 Waitt, 2, 10, 14, 15, 16, 36 Waitt Institute, 2, 15, 16, 36 weather forecasting,, 11 Web Site Fredie Noonan, 105 weight and balance, 33, 97, 100 Weight and balance records, 100 wreckage, 44

Page | 108
©2012 George W. Anderson and Gundars Osvalds

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful