Bermuda Triangle - new "methane bubble" twist?

[Attrayant]

The Discovery Channel is running "Dive to the Bermuda Triangle" right now. Initially I was not going to watch but a friend called me 20 minutes in and reported that the program was more rational than could have been hoped for.

The tag line for each commercial break says "...using science to explain the mystery of the BT" (paraphrasing). Fine, I thought... as long as they're using science, I'll watch.

I was somewhat disappointed not to hear TDC simply come right out and say that not all of the alleged reports actually happened in the BT, or to point out that this is a very high traffic area with frequent bad weather, strong gulf currents and lots of amateur flights to and from Bimini and therefore we should epxect a somewhat higher than average number of distress situations. But I didn't hear any of that unless it was in the first 20 minutes that I missed.

Then TDC presented something I'd never heard before. The methane bubble theory. Apparently there is a huge pocket of natural gas beneath the ocean floor that bubbles up through the water. Occasional mega-bubbles could be to blame for capsizing ships. A clip of a torpedo being set off hundreds of feet below a large scrap navy ship clearly shows the massive bubble lifting the hull so violently that the entire craft snaps into two. Even a medium sized bubble can apparently send a ship tossing to and fro, causing it to take on large amount of water.

As for the aircraft, apparently the high concentration of methane in the air causes engines to stall and altimiters to go all stupid, showing an altitude increase when in fact the plane's altitude is decreasing. An amateur or inexperienced pilot could easily crash his plane when trying to correct for the apparent unexplained altitude increase, when in fact his plane was already dangerously close to sea level.

It also seems that an airplane's piston engine can stall when it flies through a pocket of methane gas.

Overall I was pleased to see TDC attribute many/most of the BT incidents not to UFOs, sea monsters, mystery rays from space or wormholes, but to simple human error. But the methane gas is a new wrinkle. Maybe Flim-Flam! needs to be updated ;)

Thoughts?

[Yahweh]

I think the "methane gas" and "magnetic field disturbance" theories push the limits of the believable (although certainly a better alternative than "Residue crystals from Lost City of Alantis").

Weather, pilot error, and explosive cargo account for pretty much all of the crashings and capsizings (roughly 200 to 400 in the last 500 years) into the triangle, and that number is relatively unremarkable given its size.

If you pick 3 points elsewhere 'round the world to equal roughly the same area of the Bermuda Triangle, you'll find about the same number of crashes. Give your new area a spooky name and see people go nuts about it...

[LTC8K6]

I thought their attempt to equate the shock wave from an underwater explosion to the effects of a methane gas bubble was rather hilarious and stupid at the same time.

[DangerousBeliefs]

I like the solution I saw on a TV show... can't remember which one... they asked Lloyds of London to tell us if an abnormal number of ships sank/disappeared in the Bermuda Triangle versus other parts of the world...

Answer: No

In fact, today, the Bermuda Triangle is FULL of daily traffic... virtually none of which "disappears".

It's a case of remembering the hits and forgetting the misses.

If 100,000 planes and boats cross it safely every year, does it seem odd that 1 sinks/crashes every once and awhile?

[Peter Morris]

Originally posted by Attrayant


I was somewhat disappointed not to hear TDC simply come right out and say that not all of the alleged reports actually happened in the BT, or to point out that this is a very high traffic area with frequent bad weather, strong gulf currents and lots of amateur flights to and from Bimini and therefore we should epxect a somewhat higher than average number of distress situations. But I didn't hear any of that unless it was in the first 20 minutes that I missed.

Thoughts?

I'll go further than that - there is no Bermuda Triangle that requires an explaination. There is only one mysterious disappearance to be explained, the rest is hype and rumour.

The only mystery is Flight 19, where 5 military planes flew out to sea on a training mission and were never seen again. Precisely what went wrong is unknown, but most likely due to pilot error. No need to invoke mysterious forces, aliens, sea monsters or methane bubbles to explain it.

There have been a few ships and planes lost since then, but always with known causes.

When was the last time you actualloy heard of a ship or plane vanishing without trace? You'd think something like that would make the headlines, woudn't you. But I've never heard of it happening, at least not from a reliable source.

The methane bubbles theory is nonsense, and unnecessary.

[Nigel]

Has anybody read Larry Kusche's excellent book The Bermuda Triangle Mystery - Solved? There is no mystery even to Flight 19. The leader of the squadron was an experienced pilot, but not familiar with the waters. He thought the crew was in the Gulf of Mexico, so told them to fly due east. They were actually east of Florida, and flying due east took them farther out into the ocean. They ran out of fuel, ditched in the ocean, and were lost. That's all there is to it (in a nutshell). Kusche actually devotes quite a bit of the book to this. He went through radio transcripts, newspaper reports, the Navy inquiry, and his conclusion: the Bermuda Triangle is a manufactured mystery. The one mysterious disappearance he covers is a true mystery, the Mary Celeste. But that happened near the Azores, not even close to the BT.

I highly recommend the book, as its one of the few, if not the only, skeptical analyses of the BT available to the public.

[Tricky]

I can see quite a few holes in the "methane bubble" theory. The most obvious one is that we know (from playing "Battleship") if these giant bubbles occurred, the liklihood of them hitting a vessel is very small, considering how little of the ocean's surface is occupied with vessles. What would happen much more frequently would be that a ship would observe one hitting the surface at a distance, but I haven't heard of such things. Where are all the "near misses"? Do the bubble "aim" for ships?

Another thing is the problem with the "mega bubbles" themselves. Yes, methane does seep up from the sea floor all the time as a result of decaying matter, but the bubbles are tiny for the simple reason that the sea floor is mostly loosly consolidated sediment. It does not have enough containment strength to restrain such a large bubble. The only possible way I could see this happening is if the bubble formed at depth in more consolidated sediment. The "trap" as we say in the oil biz would have to be very tight to keep this bubble from seeping out slowly. Then the trap would have to suddenly fracture, releasing all of the methane at once. Even a fast leak wouldn't do much more than cause a spray of bubbles, and they would be much more common that complete fracture. The other notable thing that this would do is leave a big depression and a lot of shattered rock where the "megabubble" passed through the sediments. This is also unreported to my knowledge.

Oh, and another point. If there were truly such giant pockets of natural gas in the Carribean Sea, you can be sure the oil companies would know about them. ;)

Now let's talk about airplanes. Methane is a fairly dense gas, actually much denser than air (http://www.visionengineer.com/ref/physical_properties.shtml), and would not rise in the atmosphere like helium or hydrogen. To the contrary, it would spread out over the surface of the water. The plane would have to be just skirting the top of the water to encounter any significant concentration of methane from even a very large bubble. Even if it were lighter than air, what with the constant winds over the ocean, the gas would be dispersed before it could reach the altitude an airplane would be flying at.

This BT explanation is nothing but gas.

[Bikewer]

I beggars belief that this nonsense is still in the public eye. Years ago, when the original "Bermuda Triangle" book was published (Berlitz?), skeptics pointed out that many of the so-called incidents were made up of whole cloth, that very few of the facts were accurately reported, and a number of ships that had supposedly sunk were still cruising around the area, quite profitably.

[Uh_Clem]

Nigel,

Yes, I read that quite a few years ago. At the time I was pretty heavily into ufos/bt/atlantis type stuff and the book was a real eye opener. Kinda' ruined the mystery for me. What I found particularly interesting was that the author never even went there to do his research, most it was done through correspondence with Lloyds and other insurers.

[BillHoyt]

Originally posted by Uh_Clem
Nigel,

Yes, I read that quite a few years ago. At the time I was pretty heavily into ufos/bt/atlantis type stuff and the book was a real eye opener. Kinda' ruined the mystery for me. What I found particularly interesting was that the author never even went there to do his research, most it was done through correspondence with Lloyds and other insurers.

You know, the mainspring of this triangle, wound up as tight as it is, is still good for the life of the watch. And who's watching? People like you.

Welcome to the forum, uh clem. Where's Barney?

[Psiload]

Originally posted by Bikewer
I beggars belief that this nonsense is still in the public eye. Years ago, when the original "Bermuda Triangle" book was published (Berlitz?), skeptics pointed out that many of the so-called incidents were made up of whole cloth, that very few of the facts were accurately reported, and a number of ships that had supposedly sunk were still cruising around the area, quite profitably.

Or, on the rare occassions when Berlitz did bother to do his homework and cited instances that had actually occured, he still couldn't help bending the facts to suit his cause. He reported several instances having occured "for no apparent reason", on days when, "The sky was clear, and the seas were calm." when, in fact, a quick check of National Weather Service records for the dates given revealed quite the opposite... gale force winds, and treacherous seas.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by BillHoyt
You know, the mainspring of this triangle, wound up as tight as it is, is still good for the life of the watch. And who's watching? People like you.

Welcome to the forum, uh clem. Where's Barney?
LOL. Let me reinforce Mr. Hoyt's welcome to a fellow not insane person. Have you met Regnad Kcin here?

[Nigel]

I think it was Kusche who said of Berlitz: "If he told you a boat is red, you can bet your last dollar it's blue." (Paraphrased from memory.)

[Nigel]

Originally posted by Uh_Clem
Nigel,

Yes, I read that quite a few years ago. At the time I was pretty heavily into ufos/bt/atlantis type stuff and the book was a real eye opener. Kinda' ruined the mystery for me. What I found particularly interesting was that the author never even went there to do his research, most it was done through correspondence with Lloyds and other insurers.
Hi Uh Clem, welcome to the forum. True, Kusche did do a lot of correspondence with Lloyd's, but he also checked weather records, newspaper articles, and did the kind of research other bt researchers had never done before. He'd been a research librarian at the (I believe) Univ of Arizona. Goes to show what value a trail of paperwork can do for you. :)

[Attrayant]

Then the trap would have to suddenly fracture, releasing all of the methane at once.

Can we refer to this an an Aquafart? :D

Based on the responses, I am putting the BT back in the non-issue filing cabinet. I will try to hunt down a copy of Kusche asap.

[Nigel]

Originally posted by Attrayant


Can we refer to this an an Aquafart? :D

Based on the responses, I am putting the BT back in the non-issue filing cabinet. I will try to hunt down a copy of Kusche asap.
I bought my (newer edition) copy through Prometheus Books. Found a near original edition (1974) in a used bookstore many years ago. Kusche and the bt were also featured on an episode of Nova in the mid 70s. I've looked for it, but I don't think it's available.

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by Tricky
Methane is a fairly dense gas, actually much denser than air (http://www.visionengineer.com/ref/physical_properties.shtml), and would not rise in the atmosphere like helium or hydrogen.

Not to quibble, but I think your site is, well, misguided. They forgot a decimal place or something. I've always been pretty sure methane was lighter than air, or at the least not that dense. Here (http://www.airliquide.com/en/business/products/gases/gasdata/index.asp?GasID=41) is a link to a property sheet and MSDS on methane. The importnat bits:

Liquid phase
Liquid density (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 422.62 kg/m3
Boiling point (1.013 bar) : -161.6 °C

Gaseous phase
Gas density (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 1.819 kg/m3
Gas density (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 0.68 kg/m3

Looks like your link was to the liquid phase. Even though he says its the density at at 20 degrees, one can see that methane is a gas at far lower temperatures than that. And, at 15 degrees, it is MUCH lighter than air. I don't see Discovery making that obvious a mistake (at least not so repeatedly).

Now, as to the mthane theory, I also find it highly unlikely. The only place that makes me pause is that they found 5 planes, all within 1.5 miles, and all went down at seperate times. They also reported depressions or sinkholes in the area. Not saying the bubbles are it, and it is outside the area that is known for methane, but it does seem a large coincidence that all crashed into the same spot over about a 2 year period. I still don't think methane is likely, but it does seem that something is going on there. Might be social or technical (problems with that production run of planes, and they crashed at the same place because it was on the entry corrider to the airfield), but even then it seems fishy. Be interesting to delve into it a bit more.

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Peter Morris


I'll go further than that - there is no Bermuda Triangle that requires an explaination. There is only one mysterious disappearance to be explained, the rest is hype and rumour.

The only mystery is Flight 19, where 5 military planes flew out to sea on a training mission and were never seen again. Precisely what went wrong is unknown, but most likely due to pilot error. No need to invoke mysterious forces, aliens, sea monsters or methane bubbles to explain it.

There have been a few ships and planes lost since then, but always with known causes.

Indeed, as has been mentioned, there is nothing mysterious about Flight 19. They became lost and ran out of gas.

I know it sounds like an oversimple explanation, but it's true. Nigel is correct; the flight leader, Lt. Taylor, was flying in the Bahamas for the very first time on this flight, and he was in charge of a crew of trainees.

There are several things all the "Bermuda Triangle" books get wrong about Flight 19. Firstly, they all get the radio transcript wrong. The actual logs are very different, and don't invoke "spaceships" or "white water"; and Lt. Taylor never mentioned that "even the ocean doesn't look as it should". It is all manufactured hype. The real log indicates better than anything that it was simply a case of disorientation. In fact, at one point controllers had even triangulated the position of Flight 19, which turned out to be over the ocean - northeast of Grand Bahama; however they were unable to inform the flight of this because the tower's transmissions were read only intermittently by Taylor.

Secondly, don't let the power of suggestion fool you, as it tries to in the Bermuda Triangle books. They suggest that the weather was fine when this incident took place. In fact it wasn't - when the flight took off the weather was average-to-minimums, and it proceeded to get worse all day. If the flight had waited about two hours, it would not have been permitted to take off.

Thirdly, the PBM Martin Mariner rescue plane that "disappeared" after being sent after Flight 19 was not the first plane sent out, nor was it the only plane in the air at the time it disappeared. A surface vessel also noted an aerial explosion at virtually the exact location the PBM should have been at that time, and PBMs were notorious for exploding in flight due to leaky gas tanks that let fumes into the cabin.

A good place to get information on Flight 19 is this article (http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq15-2.htm).

[Hellbound]

Joshua:

To be fair, The Discovery show did touch on almost all of that, and the general conclusion was the same (Flight 19 got lost). They mentioned the explosion of the search plane (and the witness accounts and history of the planes), the radio triangulation, plotted paths on the maps to show how they could have gotten confused, etc. The main things they kept on about were the dissappearance of the Marine Sulpher Queen (I have not researched this, and can't comment...all Discovery said was they dissappeared after making a radio check near the tip of Florida, no distress signals or anything) and the new crash site found by the sub. The new site was also five Avenger aircraft, but it was not Flight 19. They traced the plane numbers and tail numbers, and all five planes crashed at different times (over a range of 2-3 years). They all landed within 1.5 miles of each other. This does seem odd. I mentioned this in my earlier post, as well :)

Now, also to be fair, Discovery failed to mention that the rate of "dissappearances" in proportion to the amount of traffic is no higher than other areas. They did, however, mention the frequent storms and other natural factors, and made a point to mention that the gulf current is known to be one of the strongest in the world.

[Nigel]

IIRC, the Marine Sulpher Queen was terribly unstable and, according to Kusche, probably listed, sending the cargo of liquid sulfer around the hold. Essentially, it was too volitile and the ship simply exploded and sank. I believe he admits there isn't absolute proof of that, but narrows the possibilities down to that being the most likely. I could be wrong, since I'm going by memory. Someone else may have either better recollection than I, or the records handy.

[Uh_Clem]

I do remember one of these TLC or Disc channel specials that talked about the methane gas being released from hydrites (sp?) as a possible explanation for sudden disappearances of ships. They did an experiment in a fairly large tank of water equiped with pipes at the bottom to release air. They put a model boat (~8' long) in the middle of it and started releasing air. It took what appeared to be about a minute for the model to finally sink. One thing that I noticed was that the model wanted to move to the side of where the gas was being released but they had it tethered in the middle. If it hadn't been tethered it looked as if it would have been pushed to the edge of where the air was coming up and just floated there.

But, has such a large relase of gas from the ocean floor ever been witnessed?

edit: Oh, and thanks for the welcome to the board!

[jj]

Originally posted by Tricky
Methane is a fairly dense gas, actually much denser than air (http://www.visionengineer.com/ref/physical_properties.shtml),

Unh, that sure looks like liquid methane there, not gaseous methane. Gaseous methane, unless it forms complexes, which would be somewhat surprising given its symmetry, is CH4, mole weight of 16, which is just about half that of air.

What's more, I've put methane (natural gas) into a balloon and you know what? The balloon floated.

[SGT]

Originally posted by Tricky


Now let's talk about airplanes. Methane is a fairly dense gas, actually much denser than air (http://www.visionengineer.com/ref/physical_properties.shtml), and would not rise in the atmosphere like helium or hydrogen. To the contrary, it would spread out over the surface of the water. The plane would have to be just skirting the top of the water to encounter any significant concentration of methane from even a very large bubble. Even if it were lighter than air, what with the constant winds over the ocean, the gas would be dispersed before it could reach the altitude an airplane would be flying at.

This BT explanation is nothing but gas.

Actually, methane is lighter than air. In normal conditions of temperature and pressure, 22.4 l of nitrogen weights 28 g, the same volume of methane weights only 16 g.
The site you gave lists the density of liquid methane.

[jj]

Originally posted by Uh_Clem
Edit: Oh, and thanks for the welcome to the board!
Welcome, Uh Clem, to tomorrowland, and I hope you're enjoying your visit.

:D

[SGT]

jj tipes faster than me

[Tricky]

Originally posted by jj


Unh, that sure looks like liquid methane there, not gaseous methane. Gaseous methane, unless it forms complexes, which would be somewhat surprising given its symmetry, is CH4, mole weight of 16, which is just about half that of air.

What's more, I've put methane (natural gas) into a balloon and you know what? The balloon floated.
Mia culpa. Methane gas is indeed lighter than air. However, I still maintain that it would be dispersed before it reached an altitude to be hazardous to airplanes. But if you assumed the gas didn't disperse much, the extent of the "megabubble" would have to be many meters across in order to affect the instruments of the plane. It might ignite, though.

Still it is a very silly hypothesis. If this happened often enough to account for several missing vessels, we would have observed it by now.

[LTC8K6]

The only place that makes me pause is that they found 5 planes, all within 1.5 miles, and all went down at seperate times.

I remember hearing somewhere that the currents down there can move some things quite a ways over time. I think it was during another TV show search for Flight 19, if I my rememberer is working.

Perhaps wreckage that is light enough is gathered up by the currents and ends up together as it is moved along?

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by jj


Unh, that sure looks like liquid methane there, not gaseous methane. Gaseous methane, unless it forms complexes, which would be somewhat surprising given its symmetry, is CH4, mole weight of 16, which is just about half that of air.

What's more, I've put methane (natural gas) into a balloon and you know what? The balloon floated.

Originally posted by SGT


jj tipes faster than me

I am beginning to strongly suspect that no one reads my posts.

*sigh*

I had a source and everything.

[Nigel]

We read your posts, Hunstman. It's just that we wish you'd get rid of that horrible avatar!! :D :D :D

(Actually, it's my posts that are ignored.)

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by LTC8K6


I remember hearing somewhere that the currents down there can move some things quite a ways over time. I think it was during another TV show search for Flight 19, if I my rememberer is working.

Perhaps wreckage that is light enough is gathered up by the currents and ends up together as it is moved along?

I thought about that. Without knowing more about the currents in that area, though, it would be impossible to say. Although it does seem to be smack in the middle of the Gulf Stream, which would seem to move then farther north. The area was first found in 1991, and was in the same place when this research was done (a decade or so later). Currents are possible, but I don't know if that explains is adequately either. Need some detailed maps of that area's sea floor.

I'm thinking along the lines of this being an area in a standard and/or well-used flight path. It's possible that this is a path taken by many planes that, for example, get caught in storms or develop engine problems (like an emergency run back to Ft. Lauderdale). It would still seem a strange coincidence that all 5 feel at the same spot, but it makes it much less of a coincidence. If this is true, I might be able to mark it to chance and let it go.

I'll have to do some research when I get the time. This is one I'd like to look into more.

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by Nigel
We read your posts, Hunstman. It's just that we wish you'd get rid of that horrible avatar!! :D :D :D

(Actually, it's my posts that are ignored.)

He's cute!!!

ANd if you call him horrible again, I'm releasing him into your bed :eek:

:)

[Nigel]

Originally posted by Huntsman


He's cute!!!

ANd if you call him horrible again, I'm releasing him into your bed :eek:

:)

Down, boy. Easy...easy...I was only referring to what *someone else* said.... :)

About the currents, possible to an extent, but like most things, I can't believe it's that simple. Maybe in combination with other explanations, such as amateur pilots/sailors, suddens storms, etc. as well as myriad made up/misremembered/inaccurate stories, etc. IMO, the bt has been so thoroughly debunked the only reason to dredge it up again is ratings.

[odorousrex]

This interested me so I researched it a bit on the web and found this explanation for the Bermuda triangle:

http://www.crystalinks.com/crystalpyr.html

Thoth my rear-end! That sounds like sunken R'yleh to me!

I've got to admit though, I love the imagination of some of these people.

[odorousrex]

IIRC it wasn't the methane "bubble" that overturned the ships, but rather the dissolved methane in the sea, lowered the density of the seawater so much that ships could no longer remain bouyant.

It still seems highly unlikely, but is very scientific sounding.

[Blondin]

I heard something about methane releases causing sinkings on a radio show some time ago. I got the impression they were talking about large volumes of gas that were released as tiny bubbles which grew in size as they ascended due to decreasing pressure. These bubbles caused large areas of water to effectively become much lower in density thereby causing boats to simply lose bouyancy. An object floats if weighs less than the water it displaces, if the water it displaces suddenly turns to foam the object stops floating (or possible just floats lower in the water).

I have no expertise in the area so I have no idea if this scenario is more or less feasible than the "one ginormous bubble" theory. It does seem more believable that this sort of event might go unnoticed unless it happened right under you.

[Blondin]

Geez, Odorousrex, you beat me to it. Do great minds think alike or do fools seldom differ?

[Nigel]

As told by Tricky: Still it is a very silly hypothesis. If this happened often enough to account for several missing vessels, we would have observed it by now.

[Peter Morris]

Originally posted by Huntsman
Now, as to the mthane theory, I also find it highly unlikely. The only place that makes me pause is that they found 5 planes, all within 1.5 miles, and all went down at seperate times. They also reported depressions or sinkholes in the area. Not saying the bubbles are it, and it is outside the area that is known for methane, but it does seem a large coincidence that all crashed into the same spot over about a 2 year period.

Sorry I don't follow, who found 5 planes where?Has the wreckage of Flight 19 been found, then? What 2-year period?

[Hellbound]

The single giant bubble would be much more devastating...in testing, the smaller bubbles just pushed the boat out of the way, while the large one swamped it.

The question is not can it sink it; we know that a large methane bubble could very well sink a ship..the question is do these large methane releases actually occur. It does seem odd that the only ones to have occured would have been either out of anyone's detection range, or directly underneath a passing ship/plane. So, IMO, while possible, this is in the "highly unlikely" category.

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by Peter Morris


Sorry I don't follow, who found 5 planes where?Has the wreckage of Flight 19 been found, then? What 2-year period?

It was not Flight 19.

In 1991, one of the researchers involved found a group of 5 Avengers in an area 12 miles east of Ft. Lauderdale. In this newer Bermuda Triangle show, he went back with a sub to identify the planes. It turns out they were not from Flight 19 (as was hoped).

However, after collecting the plane's identifying numbers and such, they found that all five planes crashed there, seperately, between (IIRC) 1941 and 1943 (maybe up to 45, can't recall exactly).

Five planes, five seperate incidents, and all ended up within 1.5 miles of each other on the ocean floor. This is, to say the least, highly unlikely.

Thinking about this more, perhaps currents do play a role. The currents might affect planes in the water within a certain region of the surface, carrying them to this location and trapping them in some sort of eddy current or backwater. Once they hit bottem, the force of the water is no longer enough to move them.

Sounds a bit better, but one would have to do some testing of the currents in the area to confirm or falsify it.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Huntsman

I am beginning to strongly suspect that no one reads my posts.

*sigh*

I had a source and everything.
I did read your post Huntsman, I just quoted the most recent one after I confirmed my mistake. You were the first to correct me.

And for the record, I think the spider is really cool.

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by Tricky

I did read your post Huntsman, I just quoted the most recent one after I confirmed my mistake. You were the first to correct me.

And for the record, I think the spider is really cool.

LOL

Thanks :) I did think that methane being a few hundred times denser than air didn't sound right ;)

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Huntsman
I did think that methane being a few hundred times denser than air didn't sound right ;)
Yeah, I am humiliated. Damned sloppy on my part.

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by Tricky

Yeah, I am humiliated. Damned sloppy on my part.

Easy mistake to make, especially when arguing quickly.

Speaking of which, in my last post on the first page, I didn't quite make my concept clear. I was thinking that currents affect the planes while they are sinking, but not after they hit the bottem. Does anyone know where to get good current maps for that area? We could at least get a general idea if that's possible.

Of course, I think the pilots of these planes were rescued (or most, anyway). They reported engine failures (engine simply died). Which brings another question...anyone know where to get copies of the crash reports from the Navy?

[Nigel]

Originally posted by Huntsman


Easy mistake to make, especially when arguing quickly.

Speaking of which, in my last post on the first page, I didn't quite make my concept clear. I was thinking that currents affect the planes while they are sinking, but not after they hit the bottem. Does anyone know where to get good current maps for that area? We could at least get a general idea if that's possible.

Of course, I think the pilots of these planes were rescued (or most, anyway). They reported engine failures (engine simply died). Which brings another question...anyone know where to get copies of the crash reports from the Navy?
Which planes? Certainly not Flight 19...

And by the way, I like the spider too (he admits, grudgingly).

[Hellbound]

Originally posted by Nigel

Which planes? Certainly not Flight 19...

And by the way, I like the spider too (he admits, grudgingly).

*sigh*

From the Discovery show. The guy found 5 Avengers within 1.5 miles of each other, 12 miles east of Ft. Lauderdale. They were not Flight 19. Going by tail numbers and crash reports, all 5 planes crashed in that same patch of ocean on seperate dates, ranging from 1941 to 1943 or 45. Further description is available on several of my posts on the first page :)

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tricky
And for the record, I think the spider is really cool.
Edited to add:

Although I thought it was a crab at first. Some of them are pretty furry too, although not this guy:

[Ed]

I might be wrong but I recall that the debris field for Titanic was a couple of miles long. I would guess that something aerodynamic like a plane would take a good long while to sink. Do you happen to have the longitude and latitude of the Avengers? My father in law is an old salt and sails the Jupiter/Bimini run a couple of times a year (at age 87 you whippersnappers) and has been doing it for ages so he might have some thoughts on the matter.

[FutileJester]

Originally posted by Huntsman
They reported engine failures (engine simply died). Which brings another question...anyone know where to get copies of the crash reports from the Navy?

I think they said two of the five were reported as engine failures. They also did an interesting test with a vintage radial aircraft engine and found that an atmospheric methane concentration of merely 1% would cause the engine to die. With the same engine they showed that there was no feasible way for methane to ignite in the vicinity of the engine. As an aside, I think that's why I liked the show more than I thought I would: some tests validated ideas, other tests invalidated ideas. It gave the sense of real investigation, rather than a demonstration of a predetermined conclusion.

Anyone know if a 1% methane concentration is feasible? I'm sure this would depend a lot on altitude of course. I think they used 1000 feet as their baseline, but that sure seems low to me. Of course these were low level attack planes, so I really dunno. As you say, crash reports would make an interesting read.

In any case, I have to completely agree with the statement made once or twice on the show that the 'mystery' of Flight 19 can be put to bed, but that the 5 'new' Avengers present an even more compelling mystery. Okay, just had to pipe in, now back to my regularly scheduled crippling workload...

[Hellbound]

Ed:

All I remember from the show is them saying they were 12 miles east of Ft. Lauderdale.

I found this:
E Fort Lauderdale 26° 4' N 80° 9' W

From what I can see on the net of longitude to distance conversions, that should put the planes at about 26° 4' N 79° 59' W. Understand that this is a back-of-the-envelope calculation, I am by no means familiar with this :)

[Hellbound]

Okay, I found a link to a blurb about the five Avenger planes. (http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/bermudatriangle/tour/panel5.html) Doesn't really say much, though. There's more info on the show.

[Nigel]

Originally posted by Huntsman


*sigh*

From the Discovery show. The guy found 5 Avengers within 1.5 miles of each other, 12 miles east of Ft. Lauderdale. They were not Flight 19. Going by tail numbers and crash reports, all 5 planes crashed in that same patch of ocean on seperate dates, ranging from 1941 to 1943 or 45. Further description is available on several of my posts on the first page :)
don't sigh at me, Huntsman....I read your posts. Most of the day when I'm on here, I'm at work, and distracted. Now take that sigh back. And I remember clearly the first time round when those planes were discovered. I'm only glad the media didn't drop it then, because they followed up with the fact that it wasn't Flight 19. What's the spidey's name, so at least when I say he's cute, I can say, "I like Boris. He's cute."
edit for typos

[Hellbound]

Alright, alright, I take back the sigh :P

Oh, and I did find a link to Navy serials, that at least gives some indication of what happened to the planes.

Navy Serials (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/navyserials.html)

I'll try and catch the show again, I know they give at least one of the BuNos, maybe more. They do give the crash dates, which I can use to search these lists for the BuNos. With the numbers, I might be able to use a FOIA to get copies of the crash reports.

You know, I never thought to give him a name. Hmmm, he is a jumping spider...how about Twitch?

[Nigel]

According to Kusche, the last known position of Flight 19 (calculated at 5:50 pm) was 29 deg 15' N 79 deg 00' W, east of central Fla and not far from Georgia.

[Chad Noles]

Tricky wrote:
Some of them are pretty furry too, although not this guy:

That looks like an emerald crab to me.A saltwater alge eater.Does he live in a tank of your's?

[Nigel]

I'd like to see what you come up with re the serials. hell, maybe someone here can solve the problem of the new planes down there. Given what Kusche has said, i think they're looking in the wrong spot for Taylor et al.

Twitch the Spider. Hmmmm.....

[WildCat]

Originally posted by Huntsman
Five planes, five seperate incidents, and all ended up within 1.5 miles of each other on the ocean floor. This is, to say the least, highly unlikely.
Could be they all crashed during training accidents. There's a bunch of WWII aircraft at the bottom of Lake Michigan, they would convert a barge into a simulated aircraft carrier and anchor it to practice carrier landings. So misses would end up near easch other.

[jpublic]

Originally posted by FutileJester

Anyone know if a 1% methane concentration is feasible? I'm sure this would depend a lot on altitude of course. I think they used 1000 feet as their baseline, but that sure seems low to me. Of course these were low level attack planes, so I really dunno. As you say, crash reports would make an interesting read.


Just for kicks, I started to try to calculate this (using my now 10-year-old college chemistry skills and somewhat older textbook), and gave up when the numbers started getting ridiculous.

Now, this is very handwavy, but if you think about it, you'd need enough methane to have made a 1% concentration on a _LARGE_ area.

- stormy conditions indicate that there was massive airflow in the region
- at even 1000 feet, the methane would have dispersed a great deal
- it there was enough methane to trigger a 1% concentration at that height, it _would_ have been noticed - the human nose can detect methane at concentrations _FAR_ below that.


(First post, by the way.)

[Tricky]

Originally posted by jpublic


Just for kicks, I started to try to calculate this (using my now 10-year-old college chemistry skills and somewhat older textbook), and gave up when the numbers started getting ridiculous.

Now, this is very handwavy, but if you think about it, you'd need enough methane to have made a 1% concentration on a _LARGE_ area.

- stormy conditions indicate that there was massive airflow in the region
- at even 1000 feet, the methane would have dispersed a great deal
- it there was enough methane to trigger a 1% concentration at that height, it _would_ have been noticed - the human nose can detect methane at concentrations _FAR_ below that.


(First post, by the way.)
Good to have you on line, jpublic (Is your full name John Q. Public?) That was pretty good chemistry stuff. I too thought about trying to remember my college classes, but it was too long ago and I'm too damn lazy. So thanks, and I think your conclusions are probably correct.

[Yahweh]

[off-topic]

Nice spider, Huntsman :)

[/off-topic]

[Hellbound]

Yahweh: Danke :)

Okay, I taped the Discovery show and got some info on the five planes. I was alble to get the BuNo and call number from one, and a BuNo from a second, and a call number that may or may not be the second.

BuNo 23990, call FT-87
BuNo 05985, call unknown
Call FT-23, BuNo unknown

Unfortunately, neither BuNo was listed on the Navy serials site I'd found. I think I'm going to try and track down an email address for the scientists that was involved with them and try to get some more info. I'll update here as I find out more :)

First update: Email request has been sent...the name of the explorer that found these items is Graham Hawkes. I sent a message to him through his website, asking him if he could direct me to any farther information. I also gave a promo to the website, and invited him to post here if he was able. Hopefully he'll be able to help us out.