The final flight of the metal-bird Electra

                                                                             The final flight of the metal-bird Electra
 



Adequately, successfully driving a vehicle - any vehicle - requires such harmonious cooperation between the two sides included (the vehicle, and the faculty operating it) so that each functions to its utmost-best in accordance with its own nature, within the circumstances of a given environment; this is the core process depict-expressed, in the primary Vital way, by the Proto-Indo European verbal root form *yewg-, “to harness, join”, the later above-the-surface development and further refract-reflection of which we see in the concept of “ehwaz” (“ehwo”, or “eh”) within the Germanic lore. 

The best drivers do not perceive the vehicle they’re operating as a thing, but the approach is that of a Loving-Presence to what the other-side Is; the other side, vehicle itself, is not seen as an own-tool, it is approached as a vital-otherness, the relating with which is based on a collaborative-respect. (The best-functioning vehicles, thus, come to be those which not solely are qualified by one or another set [or the whole of it] of their operational-capacities as highly-developed, but they can in truth be considered as such -- the actually, practically utmost-best-functioning-vehicles -- exclusively within the context of the exact nature & quality of their relation with the driver.)

These “secrets” are intimately known to well-experienced horse-riders, solo-flight pilots, the most-skillful car-drivers and other drivers of such vehicles where a Pairing, in specific, is what essentially functionally defines the riding-process. There is no heart-beat, a sound, any kind of frequency whatsoever, that transpires within the one side of the Duo which is not in immediate-attunement of connection with its other side; the vehicle may indeed for everyone else look like “a machine”, but for the driver, it is a Living-otherness, in mutually-enjoyable togetherness with which the given peculiar kind of moving is happening.

And the situation is quite different with those “rides” where the vehicle’s driving faculty isn’t a single individual, but a team (be it only two, or more) of people; in these cases, the whole team functions as a single-unit, which, as such -- a greater complexity-based composure of multiple “factors” -- operatively Pairs with the vehicle; and this complex-composure which is the driving-faculty must function  perfectly-harmoniously within itself as-a-single-whole, in order for the entirety of the process to be transpiring smoothly & successfully.

For a very long-distance journey requiring a refined, high-degree of skill, and especially if it’s of an into-the-yet-unexplored kind of venturing, two factors are of primary importance:
>> that each member of the driving-side team is as closely and as deeply as possible, experientially familiar with the particular vehicle to be used, in its operative-mode; and
>> that all the members composing the driving-faculty team are capable of such perfect-pitch mutual alignment that at-all-times during the drive they functionally operate as-One, in relation to the vehicle itself.

The teams for long journeys of this sort, therefore, take their own time to be formed, and when it is a well-organized venture, whatever effort may be needed for it is put into ensuring that this driving-team is superbly-well composed; it is a matter of at least equal importance as is the proper full functionality of the vehicle as such. 

 
With simple practical awareness of these ”technicalities”- dynamics, it is easy to see the basic, built-into the project at its very onset, weaknesses of the flight-around-the-globe-at-equator venturing attempted with the Lockheed Electra 10E Special in 1937:

> the journey was undertaken in a new, just-built aircraft, and not actually properly (i.e. fully adequately for the context of this specific kind of journey) attested-in-use before;
> the whole process was put into motion within less than a year of planning and organization;
> and the two-membered team was so composed that the person in position of the pilot didn’t actually have experience of successful long flying journeys functioning as a pilot flying-member-of-a-team, only the experience of successful solo piloting.

-- That in March 1937, just before the 1st leg as intended was to begin, the two flying-members of the team, Earhart & Noonan, were at the Oakland airport “spending hours scribbling [their] autographs across souvenir covers” in order to collect money for the trip -- speaks more than just a little of the conditions within which the whole project was being set forth!

It, in brief, came to transpire not as an authentic venture-of-Joy, but primarily a venture of Fight, an endeavor of beating-the-odds against not-succeeding: a daring movement not nearly as well-prepared as the nature of such movement requires it to be - a hasty gulping-grasp of reaching-for more, rather than a harmonious expanding-motion arising from the factual mature-readiness for it. -- And, consequently, so did the “fruits of the labor”, in due time, unfold themselves accordingly.


                                           ___________________________________


What can astrology reveal to our sight about the events of June of that year, and the very first days of July, together with culmination of the process in the disappearance --- never-thereafter-to-be-found, nor further anything about it to become known --- of the aircraft & its flying-crew?


The data with which we can work here is limited; Fred Noonan’s birth time isn’t available to be found online, so what we’re left with are Amelia Earhart’s charts (data available via astrodatabank).  

To check the accuracy of what’s been recorded as birth-time for Amelia, 23:30 CST, I did a detailed look-up into seven other periods of her life - those with well-recorded events, and with info about her locations relevant for this astrological inquiry available to be found; based on this, I am confident this given round half-hour is the actual accurate birth time.

One of her period charts pertinent to the disappearance time has un-determinable location ( the LS 6/11/1937, which set while they were flying from Gao, Mali toward the Fort-Lamy, Chad -- the Leg 13 of flight, taking about two days in whole ), but fortunately,  for the rest of it -- the pertinent annual chart, SL 6/3/1937 and the biweekly dLS 6/26/1937 -- we do have workable information.

We also have information about the precise timing of when the whole project begun - the first flight which has officially set off this around-the-globe-at-equator journeying venture: the “Leg 00” flight from Oakland to Honolulu; albeit it didn’t get to proceed as intended from thence on, and its direction thereafter was decided on being changed, this is the de-facto chart of the practical Beginning of the whole travel-undertaking, the initial movement analogous to the moment of a biological being’s emergence-from-womb, so, after examining Amelia’s own charts, it’s worthwhile taking a look at what this chart has to reveal, as well.

                                                  _________________________________


AMELIA’S CHARTS


On the very morning when the pertinent annual, SL period, commenced, exactly 14 minutes of clock time before the chart was to set, Amelia and Fred entered the Electra, on their departure from Caripito, Venezuela; they were moving South-West, and at 07:02:16h VET were in the area above Maturin, Venezuela. With them in motion and the precis coordinates of their position shifting from one clock-minute to the next, we can not rely on the to-the-minute-of-arc exactness of the angular planets’ positions here, so are simply looking at the what’s the angular combination present --- which planet are being focalized by their position in the area of Angles, and what is their mutual interrelatedness.

The SL angularities listed with orbs for 09*N45’, 063*W11’, Maturin, Venezuela:

t Eris ZN 57’
t Saturn MC 2*48’
t Moon MC 4*58’
(Er cnj Sa 39’ ecl.)

r Eris MC 8*01’
r Sedna MC 9*49’
(Se cnj Er 1*48’ mun.)


The configuration of this SL Moon, itself focalized by being on the Angle:
oct rx Mercury 10’ s

Aside from this single aspect, the very sharp by orb dynamic aspect-of-the-cross with the natal Mercury, this Moon is not tied via aspect with any of the SL planets, nor in a direct manner connected with a SL Midpoint, and has solely one additional tight-orbed connection:
opp rx Sun/Saturn direct Midpoint 30’ !


The angular planetary combo communicates the central experiental-tone of the year is that of turbulence and dispersion/disruption; there is heaviness-of-vexing-tension, emphatically present in the whole of the main themes of quality of the tides, and there is nothing of agreeable, or otherwise easing or smoothing nature to go with it, in the picture.
And the specific SL Moon’s configuration shows the internal details:
by aspect, its position brings forth into focus the Mercury-ergie of Amelia’s natal: it’s the tense-and-dynamic expression of the Representation-function of herself as an individual being (rx Me), that which she in whole symbolizes/represents for her environment, by her existence (including all the verbal and intellectual capacities of her psyche);
and by the direct Midpoint contact, we see the further, deeper-in, “background” of this: it’s about what her Presence as such (as an individually-living being) is structuring/organizing [s Moon = rx Sun/Saturn].


The bi-weekly chart pertinent to the disappearance time, dLS 6/26/1937 has set in Bandung, Indonesia ( -- for those who want to look further into the details about the whole journey, I recommend the website “This day in aviation” - an excellent online source searchable by dates and key-words, and providing a lot of informative & interesting data, including Amelia’s travel-log notes from this trip).

 Given that this is the very final chart of what is known about them, it is highly fortunate, from astrologer’s perspective, that they were on the ground, between flights, when it has set, thus allowing for greatest possible reliability of precision when it comes to the Angularity orbs.
The planetary picture of this chart:

t Eris IC 2*59’
t Sedna IC 3*47’
t Jupiter AC 6*02’
t Pluto DC 9*21’
(IC = Er/Se)

r Sedna IC 6*57’
r Eris IC 8*52’
(Er cnj Se 1*55’ mun.)

dLS Sun’s configuration:
sq t Eris 08’
sq t Saturn 21’
opp t Jupiter/Node 28’
sq r Mercury/Saturn 29’
sq r Mercury/Uranus 03’




Among the 17 charts (not counting the two that we’re looking at here) that I examined for Amelia’s life-periods and various events, there were only 2 other charts bringing forth into focus, by their Angularity, the Eris-Sedna combo:
- the quarterly dSL 12/4/1920 -- which is the period when she “took her first ride in an airplane, with pilot Frank Hawks” [A.E.’s online biography on Purdue website];
- and the qSL 3/3/1937 -- the quarter during which this around-the-globe adventure itself begun!!
 
Yet: in each of those two the Er-Se presence is emphasized in a different way within the combo-clustering of the whole, than what is the case here, and: neither of them features the rx Sedna-Eris duo mutually configured by aspect as the sole angularity factor from the Natal side, nor is there in any of them included the doubled-presence -- of both transiting and natal -- Eris-Sedna, coming-forth angular mutually-configured, as a pair (either by mundane “aspect” or by forming a MP with the Angle) as it is in this dLS.

With that being said -- for a wider perspective of the “working” of the Er-Se planetary duo as a combo in relation to the period-charts of this Nativity -- we’re taking note of the fact that the unique presence of this particular duo within the Angularity picture here is:
> the primary, very-central theme of the period; and:
> within this as the context, there is a specific focus of emphasis on tr Eris: not only is it the-closest-by-orb among all of the included angularity-factors, but is also additionally emphasized via the LS’s Sun “touching” on it with the 08’-orbed square.

--- That exactly this duo, Eris and Sedna together as a planetary combo, keeps showing up as prominent in one or another way in period charts for events which get to be - either in whole, or regarding some of their most important aspects - referred to as “under mysterious circumstances” after they’ve transpired, indeed is a fascinating phenomenon, for the astrologer witnessing the appearance of it as a pattern! -- But, what is it that this may mean!? Can we discern something about these processes & events, otherwise hidden from immediate sight, with having this astrological information?

It would be ungrateful to attempt to come up with an one, simplified, formula-kind of verbal composition, intended to be applicable in some “universally defining” manner to what is a richly and uniquely nuanced diversity of how the processes of Life bring into expression a single pair-combo (any of them, this one included) of planetary ergies. -- What we certainly can do, thus approaching without defile-damaging our ongoing learning process, is: start with attention onto the essential dynamics pertaining to each of the two “sides” of the pair of planets included, and then consider the whole of it - whilst keeping in our perspective the context of the given combo’s appearance, both the most relevant factors of the pertinent astrological context, as well as the context of the known Life-manifested actualities.

The key-words that emerged from my observation & practical experience, as verbal notes “capturing” the central themes of the functionality-wholes (the “organs” of the Solar-system suite’s body) known as the astrological planets Sedna and Eris, are:

> Se:
Rectification;
Precision-exactness in Justice-execution;
the movement of Root-based Balance;
the primordial-memory function

> Er:
Dispersion;
Fractalization;
the multiplication-of-one-factor as its own self-propagation;
discord and/or disruption tendency


For the Midpoint of these two, phrasing the combination, for practical purposes of analysis, generally as “dispersion of rectification” or “rectification of dispersion” has shown itself applicable across wide range of chart-types and peculiar “scenarios” where it appears - be it Natal astrology, the period-charts, the progressions, or the Synastry.  
 
With the Midpoints, we have the specific situation of Mutuality between the two factors present forming the given MP, so that the essential quality of the inner dynamic, at the base of each such a composition, includes in itself the what we can call “both-ways stream”; this function-of-pairing is then observed as it gets to be focalized via the Third: the planet whose position focalizes exactly the “mutuality-point”, the “simultaneity of working-in-togetherness” of the given two --- and it is via this, and with consideration of everything else compositionally included in rest of the structuring within a given chart, that we get to more clearly see the How, the in-what-way, does the Pairing primarily “lean toward”, tending to be practically operative (expressed) with the strongest inherent direction-orientation. -- In some cases, we do encounter such operation-tendency which does, actually, show itself in working with equal strength of expressivity “both ways” as its primary-dynamic-orientation; but these show up rarely, coming more often as an exception, rather than a rule; also, which exactly are the Two planets included naturally “colors” this operational-orientation-quality of the whole pair; and, lastly, the astrological context itself - whether it is a Natal chart, or it’s Synastry, etc. - must be considered, for the adequate approach to the analysis.

When it is the via-aspect pairing of a planetary duo, instead of the Midpoint, the situation is slightly different, making it practically much easier to discern what is the inherent-tendency of operational expressive-functioning in each given case; the specific type of aspect as such is already informational, in this regard, and how the Angularity and the aspect-connections of each side of the pairing “affect” (speak of the “coloring” of) the composition in a rather direct way further clarify the conditions.


In the Amelia’s dLS observed here, we see both of the above: the transiting Se-Er duo is a MP pairing, focalized by the chart’s Angle, whilst the natal Se-Er comes up as a conjunction, within the mundane-distribution framework; and here, it’s within the whole of the picture such that it’s fairly easy to discern the finer-point nuances: with just a simple look at the listed central factors of the chart as they are, we see it is Eris, and in specific, Eris from the transiting side, carrying-forth the focalization-spin of the combo. -- In other words: it is the disruption/dispersion/fractalization “side” of the Se-Er duo “taking the lead” in expressiveness here, and, in practical sense, for the experience of the Natus, the whole clustering-combo depicts something that is primarily a dispersion/disruption process, of the root-level rectifying/balancing quality -- coming to transpire as a “working” of deeper mutual alignment between environmental-tides and Natus’ own internal tides, and with the disruption-initiative in it (while fundamentally, essentially equally-present from both sides) being stronger in its tendency-to-manifest from the environmental, than from the Natal “wholeness-unit”, in their interplay-of-presence.


On the day of disappearance, July 2nd 1937 during which the last radio-contact between Electra’s crew and the rest of the team was recorded, at 10:00 h local time of Lae, Papua New Guinea, where they took off, the progressed Moon of Amelia’s SL - from the position 4*29’ Pisces in the chart itself and being configured solely with the Natal Mercury and the Sun/Saturn Midpoint as mentioned above - came to 5*34’ Pisces, forming the following configurations:
qnt s Sun 60’ a
cnj r Sedna/Eris 60’ a
opp r Sun/Saturn 35’ s
opp r Sun/Uranus 09’ s

While the transiting Uranus came to directly ‘activate” by octile the SL Moon itself: orb 37’ applying, at 10:00h AEST.


Transits to the SL chart on the day and at this time, list of the operative dynamic aspects within 1*, which as such were not present in the SL chart -- take note especially of the first three, by orb (excluding the Mercury-to-angle, the orb of which we can’t be sure about)!:

Mars oct Eris 26’ s
Mars opp Mercury 32’ s
(Mercury sq MC 37’ s)
Mercury qnt Sedna 45’ s
Chiron oct Uranus 42’ a
Venus opp Mars 50’ s


I will skip here the exhaustive listing of Transits to the Natal on the day - not in the slightest as something “irrelevant”, but something I’m sure you can easily look up on your own; don’t miss to include the quintiles and the Lunar Node in this observation, to get the full richness of the picture from it (- and especially in light of that one 50’-orbed transit-to-SL in the listing above) ! -- With that said, the specific combination of the four transit-to-Natal aspects peaking on this day, all of them within under 05’ of orb at the hour of departure from Lae, does require a highlighting mention in this preview:
Node opp Pluto 02’ s
Sedna sq MC 04’ a
Sedna qnt Uranus 05’ a
Sun oct Saturn 05’ s


Amelia’s Natal chart as such has four angular factors:
Chiron (DC 4*01’),
Sedna (AC 4*51’),
Sun (ND 1*03’) and
Lunar Node (Caput on ZN 2*33’),
with the Sun-Chiron, Sun-Node and Chiron-Node being connected by aspects (ecliptical T-square), forming thus one of the most important configuration-clustering within the chart [ = all three are angular, and these aspects are with the Sun itself].

What is not immediately visible at first glance is the further aspect-interconnectedness of these two, Chiron and the Node, with the rest of the chart factors:
> Chiron’s closest dynamic aspects, by orb, are:
qnt Pluto (22’), oct Eris (52’) and then square Node (1*50’), while
> the Lunar Node’s closest dynamic aspects by orb are:
qnt Saturn (02’), oct Neptune (28’), qnt Uranus (56’) and oct Eris (57’).

Summarized, we see the Node here tightly dynamically related with the Saturn-Uranus, by the star-based aspects, and with Eris-Neptune and then Chiron, by the cross-based aspects; and it is not just the Chiron-Node-Sun trio, nor the four of the angular factors together (these three, plus Sedna), but the whole of this, within the internal structuring of the chart, together with Sun/Moon sq Sedna (32’) and the Eris/Uranus sq Sun (30’), Pluto/Eris sq Sun (41’) configuration of planets with the Direct Luminary-related Midpoints, that makes for the primary “skeleton” of the unique composition of this Nativity.

Taking this into consideration makes it easier to see in what way have had the factors which were brought to the fore and emphasized by the Period charts, together with the related progressed-Moon of the SL configurations on 7/2/1937 as the specific day - layer by layer - come into clustering together, to bring-to-a-head the interwoven threading of what at superficial glance may seem as some extremely-complex, chaotically-looking multiplicity, but is, at more careful observation, revealed to be a relatively simple single one, river-akin, process-threading operative during this particular period.

The Progressions of the Natal add to this one same, singular central process-picture simply additional bits of focalization detailed-info:

>> the Secondary Progressed Moon of Natal on 7/2 came to 6*55’ Scorpio, dynamically getting position in-between, i.e. within the degree of the direct Midpoint of, these two - specifically these, and without such contact-connection with anything else from the Natal chart - natal direct Midpoints:
r Moon/Chiron and r Eris/Node!

>> and, on the day, listed by orb, the following three - and nothing else aside from these - planetary dynamic-aspect combinations came to be formed within 30’ of orb between the Solar Arc directed planets and the Natal planetary positions:
d Mercury oct r Node 02’ a
d Node sq r Pluto 11’ s
d Mercury oct r Neptune 30’ a
--- with the d Mercury having, just five days prior, entered orb opp r Eris, and at 59’ applying on the date itself.


                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------

THE VENTURE-CHART


The whole adventure of this around-the-globe-at-equator trip begun on 3/17/1937 at 16:37 PST, in Oakland, CA.  As they took off from the ground, thus setting the process in motion, the following combination of planets came into focus by their angular position:

Mars IC 2*34’
Moon MC 3*40’
Neptune AC 9*34’

Within the 60-degree-dial, which I find practically most useful for this kind of observation, the Midpoints picture of the chart includes no contact of either Mars nor Neptune with a planetary Pairing-combo, solely the Moon --- of these three angular factors -- is thus compositionally involved with the rest of the chart; the full list of its Midpoints:

Moon =
Sun/Node 00*00
Sun/Sedna 04’
Pluto/Node 12’
Pluto/Sedna 16’
Saturn/Node 46’
Saturn/Sedna 50’

--- with the first one of these, Mo=Su/No, being the only one at 00*00’ within the whole of this MP-compositional picture, and the next one, Mo=Su/Se, the first-next after it by the tightness of orb such that in any manner includes in itself a Light.

After seeing what Amelia’s charts show, and especially with retrospectively knowing the quality of the general development, all with the initial, right-after-the-onset, turbulence of it, and subsequent maturation into its own peculiar finis, of this venturing project, neither of these planetary sub-pictures -- what the Angularity shows and what the Lunar Midpoint compositional configuration shows -- nor the whole of it taken together, comes as much of a surprise.

This is not the kind of “entity” for which the Period-charts can be utilized; so, it’s a simple inquiry into what the -- pertinent to the disappearance-time -- Secondary Progressed Moon and the transits-to-Radix as such, might have to say.

Transits to radix -- full list of all dynamic within 1* orb on 7/2/1937, at 10:00 AEST as the reference hour, and for keeping it timely aligned with what’s been previously examined:


Jupiter qnt Chiron 00*00’
Eris qnt Jupiter 03’ s
Uranus qnt Node 05’ a
Chiron sq Saturn 17’ s
Saturn qnt Jupiter 33’ s
Uranus oct Sun 44’ s

Of these, only the Eris-Jupiter exists - and is also within 1* orb - in the Radix itself; it was at 54’ separating there, and with Eris’ moving rhythm & pace, at this time we see it having come into the sharp focalization of 03’ orb.

In this whole list - with only 6 planetary dynamic-aspect active-touch pairings - four of them are the star-based aspects, the quintiles, two the cross-based ones (a square and an octile); and, within this, all of the very-closest by-orb ones are the quintiles.

With awareness of the key-words for Jupiter: accrual; established-circularity; cult[ure]; quantity/size-as-value; enclosure/”box”; and those for Chiron: skill; pride-of-honor; the-overarching-aiming, from the aspect culminating precis to 00*00’ on the morning of this day, tr Jupiter quintile rx Chiron, if we’d be looking at these in-advance, prior to the events transpiring and without knowing what kind of eventitude in specific may come to be happening, we would not miss to note that:
>> for the given Radix for which the transits are examined, this is the day which specifically focalizes the utmost-fullness-of-circularity-condition related to the skillfulness/overarching-function of the “nativity”;
and that this is immediately followed, via tightness-of-orb, by:
>> the transiting Eris (dispersion/fragmentation/disruption) in the instantaneously-creative manner being tied with the Jupiter of the Rx (accrual, enclosure, etc), and then,
>> by the same kind of aspect-type, both of those followed (via strength-of-orb focalization) by the relation between tr Uranus (freedom/renewal/opening-up) and the Rx vitally-important connection-link (Lunar Node);
>> AND that, together with this, within the whole tr-to-rx picture, the sole two abruptness/breaking-type-of-cresting operative aspects present are: one (in this peculiar aspect-type way) skillfully “touching upon” the “bone level”, structural-condition of the Radix (Saturn, “squared” by tr Chiron) and the other which with the quality of renewal/opening-up/freedom “crestingly”/abruptly affects the very life/presence-itself as such of the Radix (the Sun “touched”-via-octile by the tr Uranus).

There is no transiting Mars touching with a cross-based-aspect some of the Rx factors, so a sudden sharp/intense release-of-energy characteristic for this kind of Mars’ transiting presence ( -- for example, something that would come as attacking/violating, in experience from the Nativity’s perspective) isn’t something to be expected; there is unequivocally a structural-level-related (over)turn of the thus-far-established conditions portrayed by the whole combo and the aspects’ orbs, yet this is something coming to transpire on this day primarily with a smoothness-quality, rather than with the explosiveness, to it.
--- By looking only at these astrological factors as such, and without having any other information whatsoever about the practical actualities of the given “nativity”, we would, of course, not be able to say based on this alone by what means/specifics exactly these “experiences” for the Radix would to come to unfold.

But, with the simple honesty of astrological-factors-only based perspective, we would not -- for we could not -- exclude the potential for the Radix “expiring” within the time framework of the few days on either side of this date: along with these peculiarities of the tr-to-rx combinations of factors operative, and including the specific ones peaking on this day, the Secondary Progressed Moon of the chart was, on July 2nd: at 27’ separating of octile with the Rx Pluto, and 44’ applying octile with the transiting Pluto; during those about 7 weeks of the emphasized Plutonian presence via octile-connection with the progressed Moon, it’s easy to mark the period of days when this Moon is simultaneously within 60’-of-arc orb with both, and within this, to note the enter-exit moments of the 30’ orb with each, as well as then, with consideration of this, mark the shorter-timeframe tides, such as the daily-level focalization of transits, and to thus get to “pinpoint” the days during which the definite promise of the transformative-self-annihilation of the Plutonian in experience for this Radix -- having been “set-up” to come to unfold during this time from the very moment of themselves as a “natus” having emerged-into-existence -- will go through exactly those kind of experiential peaking-wave phases which, by their qualities and their unique combination-compositions, allow for the utmost-possible-fullness of practically “delivering” on this promise.  

*************************

NOSCE TE IPSVM
~ Know Thyself! ~