Summary:<p>“Amelia Earhart went missing in 1937 during her attempted circumnavigation of the globe when she failed to find Howland Island, as intended radio navigation assistance from the Itasca ship was compromised by issues with her plane's radio equipment. Specifically, Earhart had mistakenly designated 7.5 megacycles as the Itasca's beacon frequency, which was too high for her plane's direction finder to get a bearing from. This prevented her from coordinating with the Itasca. Intriguingly, radio signals later intercepted by stations in the Pacific showed Earhart's plane was still operational for hours after she went missing, suggesting she survived the initial landing but could not be reached due to radio problems. Unfortunately, no definitive evidence of her final fate has ever been discovered.”
The article makes no mention of a receive-only antenna mounted on the underside of the aircraft. One source [1] says "...there was a second “V” antenna mounted on the underside of the fuselage and connected in parallel with the top “V” antenna. If so, it was removed or disconnected before the plane left Miami." Note TFA does say the 250-foot antenna was removed in Miami, but does not mention the second V-antenna<p>More recently there was a lot of speculation the underside antenna broke during takeoff from LAE New Guinea, this being the explanation of the puff of smoke seen in the film [2] of the takeoff. The TIGHAR folk [3] are convinced the underside antenna was present on the aircraft and broke off during the takeoff.<p>[1]. <a href="https://earharttruth.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/pan-am-radio-pioneer-capt-almon-gray-amelia-didnt-know-radio/" rel="nofollow">https://earharttruth.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/pan-am-radio-p...</a><p>[2]. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntkOyDanuRw" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntkOyDanuRw</a><p>[3]. <a href="https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/20_LostAntenna/20_LostAntenna.html" rel="nofollow">https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bullet...</a>
We know enough about Amelia Earhart at this point that we really should spend more time on other woman flight pioneers, and there are many that deserve to be remembered.<p>- Earhart was a bad pilot and was considered dangerously incompetent by some who worked with her<p>- She didn't understand how her equipment worked, and would fail to learn how to operate the equipment even after incidents that should have made her take the time to learn<p>- In many of her 'firsts' she was little more than an observer, with her mechanic or others flying the plane while she rode along<p>- She had a super wealthy husband who owned media companies, and he would greatly amplify her supposed achievements. This, more than any other fact about her, is why she is so well remembered.
> Earhart did not understand the relationship between wavelength and frequency nor how to convert from one to the other.<p>Is this true? Even the most incompetent pilot should know at least these basics.
Some of these comments are funny. I am sure there are plenty of mistakes made by plenty of competent people as I read the next article about Boeing. Good to analyze root cause ….to a point. Some of you hate brave women, who probably would all be classed as reckless and less trained in much but cooking/laundry in that era, and it shows.<p>Now clean up the mud from the reckless 4 wheeling you did before lunch.