So many pictures - so many thoughts - not enough time!
Something that sticks out to me: the two rivets above the upper right corner of the window in the Miami detail. Not sure of the correct terminology, but the installer of the window added a vertical 'stiffener' at station (approx) 294-294.5? Note the small strip of metal left rearward of station 293 5/8. Not represented accurately in the Harney drawing. I do realize this was based on educated guesses and this picture wasn't available. Just noting in the interests of validating/invalidating the patch as an origin of 2-2-V-1.
The Pensacola reconstruction shows all sorts of wonderful details - especially around windows and partial circumferential stiffeners. Are the tapers at the ends of the partials a cap? A separate piece riveted onto the actual stiffener? Note the rivets attaching the 'cap' at the far right of the Pensacola picture. If the original partial at station 307 has a cap, does removing it result in a natural upper edge to the added lav window? How does this play out with the framing of the new window? Was the new window framed like an original window, with a rounded rectangular channel? Or was it just straight channel? That is, given the vertical channel that seemed to be added at station 294(ish), would there be a horizontal channel at the top edge of the new window? How is this actually constructed to hold a window. I know, these are not necessarily known details. But how does this play into the inclusion/exclusion of 2-2-V-1?
Finally, while the Purdue picture(s) don't give good indication of rivets, it does show pretty well the extent of the patch. You can count rivets in the Miami detail and see exactly where the upper edge of the new window is. From the Purdue picture this seems to coincide precisely with the upper edge of the patch. Something that I seem to notice, though it could just be illusions from the various angles involved, but is the rectangular patch out of line with the conical shape of the plane? That is, is the rear edge going farther up the plane than the front edge? The 'tapper' isn't matched? Does that have any bearing on including/excluding 2-2-V-1? Also, I wish Ric could have turned 2-2-V-1 180 degrees in the pictures he took at the New England air museum. I know that double row of rivets is trying to be matched to the bottom of the window, but it doesn't - at all. Would the upper edge of the patch have been double riveted to the upper skin of the aircraft? Does the wonky rectangle against the tapered fuselage and a horizontal stringer-cum-window-frame piece explain the odd pitch of the 2-2-V-1 double rivets?
Just things noticed that I thought I'd share.
