Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 85   Go Down

Author Topic: 2-2-V-1 - patch?  (Read 762677 times)

Ted G Campbell

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 336
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #405 on: September 02, 2014, 09:06:13 PM »

Ric,
Isn't this a picture at Miami?  Hence the damage is still there after the CA repair?
Ted Campbell
Logged

Jerry Germann

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 413
  • Go Deep
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #406 on: September 02, 2014, 10:00:18 PM »

<a href="http://s1295.photobucket.com/user/muledeer5/media/skin-separation_zps7136b411.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b631/muledeer5/skin-separation_zps7136b411.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo skin-separation_zps7136b411.jpg"/></a>

Could the area with the suggested damage , be a result of shading? , as per the area outlined in yellow.

« Last Edit: September 02, 2014, 10:58:39 PM by Jerry Germann »
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #407 on: September 03, 2014, 07:28:14 AM »

<a href="http://s1295.photobucket.com/user/muledeer5/media/skin-separation_zps7136b411.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b631/muledeer5/skin-separation_zps7136b411.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo skin-separation_zps7136b411.jpg"/></a>

Could the area with the suggested damage , be a result of shading? , as per the area outlined in yellow.

My thought is that this is normal 'shading', not damage.  This doesn't look like a big deal to me, but a result of the natural 'step' and minor deformations (normal in light stress skin birds) where the skin lap joint occurs.

Had there been visible damage from a hard landing, I'd expect to also see evidence of diagonal wrinkles in the open-field areas of skin between inner bracing - that is a common failure mode in semi-moncoque designs where bending loads were excessive - especially were the forces large enough to cause what has been speculated here (a 'gap' at a lap joint).  All MHO, of course - but I don't agree that we're seeing 'damage' here.  I also doubt Earhart would have permitted a cameo shot involving any hint of a damaged Electra, somehow, at least in that situation; the Luke field photos were unavoidable - but the 'hard landing' in Miami surely wasn't much publicized (or desired to be, logically).

None of that takes away from 2-2-V-1's potential, as I see it, either.  We really don't know why the window was covered.  I recall (but cannot find reference) something about 'not needed and concerned with airplane security', i.e. too easy to get into airplane via this portal, which was large and relatively low to the ground.

The 'vertical bracing' evidence just found on 2-2-V-1 (with no fastener holes - odd) is peculiar.  The skin had to have been pressed fairly hard against some sort of a flange to get that 'mark' - doable by any number of means of applying broad, blunt force which wouldn't necessarily create a major crease if broad and blunt enough, but enough leave this tell-tale evidence, I suppose.  It is very odd that no fasteners were used here - what was the point of the mystery brace, if not attached?  IF 2-2-V-1 is of NR16020 as is hoped, did the mechanics re-establish the vertical member, but simply run out of time before fastening?  Did someone later lean on this area (or other forces apply pressure) to make this tell-tale crease?  One more mystery in this part it seems.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 07:36:34 AM by Jeffrey Neville »
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #408 on: September 03, 2014, 10:40:19 AM »

This observation of structual problems tells me that this patch job is way beyond an A&P quick fix.

Pan AM is involved some how, maybe by their factory rep from lockheed there in Miami.  Most airlines have mfg reps on site - we did at United in the '60s.

Ted Campbell

Unfortunately, there is nothing in the Pan Am archives at the University of Miami about any of this. That has been checked.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #409 on: September 03, 2014, 10:48:50 AM »

I'm glad that was checked, but have always had doubts about whether this would have been well documented at all anyway.  It looks more like a moonlight special to me - maybe done out of Pan Am's scrap bin by a couple of their guys for a hundred bucks under the table or something.

How much do we really know about the 'hard landing'?  Might have had a scare, but I'm not seeing anything that convinces me that she damaged the ship, IMHO.  Somehow I think they just wanted to cover that stuipid oversized window as useless and a nuisance so as to keep curiosity seekers out, etc.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5333
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #410 on: September 03, 2014, 11:23:12 AM »

My thought is that this is normal 'shading', not damage.  This doesn't look like a big deal to me, but a result of the natural 'step' and minor deformations (normal in light stress skin birds) where the skin lap joint occurs.

Had there been visible damage from a hard landing, I'd expect to also see evidence of diagonal wrinkles in the open-field areas of skin between inner bracing - that is a common failure mode in semi-moncoque designs where bending loads were excessive - especially were the forces large enough to cause what has been speculated here (a 'gap' at a lap joint).  All MHO, of course - but I don't agree that we're seeing 'damage' here.  I also doubt Earhart would have permitted a cameo shot involving any hint of a damaged Electra, somehow, at least in that situation; the Luke field photos were unavoidable - but the 'hard landing' in Miami surely wasn't much publicized (or desired to be, logically).

The "damage," if that's what it is, is not particularly apparent to the layman.

The 'vertical bracing' evidence just found on 2-2-V-1 (with no fastener holes - odd) is peculiar.  The skin had to have been pressed fairly hard against some sort of a flange to get that 'mark' - doable by any number of means of applying broad, blunt force which wouldn't necessarily create a major crease if broad and blunt enough, but enough leave this tell-tale evidence, I suppose.

However the imprint happened and whatever the reason the underlying structure wasn't riveted to the sheet, it's presence is significant.  Follow me on this.

First:  So far, Jeff Glickman has been able to confirm the presence on the patch of four of the five rivet lines on 2-2-V-1. Three of the lines (1, 3 and 5)  align with known stringer.   locations. Line 2 appears to be an added stiffener.  Line 4 falls within a dark area of reflection on the patch and is much harder to see. If it's there, it's another added stiffener.  In any case, 4 out of 5 ain't bad.

Second (and this is really neat):  We know that one edge of the artifact failed from metal fatigue after cycling back and forth against a rigid underlying structure. Let's call it the "straight edge."  With the artifact accurately scaled and overlaid on the photo of the patch so that the rivet patterns line up we can position the artifact so that the straight edge is up against the underlying structure that the window was riveted to. (Note that the window was not riveted to the bulkhead at Station 293 5/8 but to a structure about an inch or so aft of that bulkhead.) If we place the artifact there the mysterious vertical imprint lines up exactly with Station 307 where there was once a vertical structure before it was cut to make the hole for the window.  The skin around the rivet at the top of the imprint tore when the rivet failed, possibly because the rivet was attached to the circumferential structure at Station 307.

Of course this could all be coincidence. ;D

It looks like the patch was an attempt to restore the structural integrity of the fuselage in that area.  Why the vertical member never got stitched to the patch is a mystery.  Maybe they just ran out of time. I've been able to establish that the photo of the airplane in Miami with the window still in place was taken on Saturday, May 29.  The window was gone and the patch was in place by the time AE and FN left early on the morning of Tuesday, June 1st - so the modification to the airplane was done sometime on Sunday or Monday (Memorial Day). 

 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5333
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #411 on: September 03, 2014, 11:35:36 AM »

I'm glad that was checked, but have always had doubts about whether this would have been well documented at all anyway.  It looks more like a moonlight special to me - maybe done out of Pan Am's scrap bin by a couple of their guys for a hundred bucks under the table or something.

I think the logical patch-maker is Earhart's own mechanic Bo McKneely with some assistance from the FBO at Miami Municipal, Karl Voelter Inc.
The Pan Am guys had to come all the way from Dinner Key, about a half hour away, and they were instrument and radio techs, not metal benders.
Turns out Karl Voelter kept scrapbooks of his aviation career.  The scrapbooks are now in a Miami archive.  We're making arrangements to have a look at them.

How much do we really know about the 'hard landing'?
A Miami Herald reporter was apparently there to witness it.  He said the screech of metal could be heard all over the airport.  Bo McKneely was so concerned that he put the plane in the shop the next day to check the gear for damage.  He didn't find any but he did discover that some clown had scratched his initials in one of the gear struts.  They were worried that they might have to replace the gear leg.  They called Lockheed. Lockheed techs said that if the initials could be buffed out it should be okay.  The initials did buff out so nothing further was done.  All of this is according to Elgen Long's book.  Elgen has a whole chapter about Miami but no mention of the patch.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5333
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #412 on: September 03, 2014, 11:55:51 AM »

This just in.

"Please see the attached image from Miami.  This is a false color image which aids in the visualization of the gradient in and around station 293 5/8.  In the detail inset, the color gradient appears to show a shadow underneath the lower right-hand skin.  My interpretation of this image is that the lower left-hand skin has separated from the lower right hand skin.
 
Thanks,
Jeff"
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #413 on: September 03, 2014, 12:20:51 PM »

All of this is according to Elgen Long's book.  Elgen has a whole chapter about Miami but no mention of the patch.

Of course he doesn't. Why should anything about The Earhart Project be slam-dunk easy?

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP

Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

Dan Swift

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 347
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #414 on: September 03, 2014, 01:18:09 PM »

This may be a stupid question.  If so, won't be my first...or my last. 
Is it at all possible, that in the emergency of the situation (meaning they didn't have a whole lot of time and wanted to stay on schedule), the patch could have been made from a previously used, or removed piece from another repair job?

If a piece of skin had been cut wrong or shaped wrong, couldn't be used for some reason on a repair, it may have been stored for some future use.  It may have had some rivet holes that didn't fit exactly but was substantial enough for this quick fix...to cover a window opening. 
TIGHAR Member #4154
 
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 721
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #415 on: September 03, 2014, 01:24:10 PM »

This just in.

"Please see the attached image from Miami.  This is a false color image which aids in the visualization of the gradient in and around station 293 5/8.  In the detail inset, the color gradient appears to show a shadow underneath the lower right-hand skin.  My interpretation of this image is that the lower left-hand skin has separated from the lower right hand skin.
 
Thanks,
Jeff"
What is interesting to me about that picture is the sun is behind and above the plane. That area of suspected separation is already in the shadow of the direct sunlight.

I don’t believe accentuation of a shadow from direct sunlight there is possible. Instead I believe it is dark because even indirect light cannot reflect back to the camera. Something more like a "cave" made at skin overlap that has been separated. If this happened wouldn’t the rivets be compromised?  I wonder if Mr. Glickman can tell if there are rivets or rivet holes at the possible separation?
3971R
 
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 721
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #416 on: September 03, 2014, 01:33:47 PM »

I've forgotten who it was on the Forum that first noticed a gap in the skins at Station 293 5/8 in the photo taken in Miami before the patch was installed.  That sharp-eyed person wondered if it was caused by fuselage flexing in the area weakened by the window being almost opposite the area weakened by the cabin door (too many cut stringers).
Thanks Ric! My eyes aren’t that sharp but I was looking for something there because it is where I suspected possible damage might be from previous speculation and study sketches before your newly discovered Miami picture was posted.
Edit:"Thumbs firmly planted under suspenders" ;D
3971R
 
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 01:43:01 PM by Greg Daspit »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5333
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #417 on: September 03, 2014, 01:41:30 PM »

Is it at all possible, that in the emergency of the situation (meaning they didn't have a whole lot of time and wanted to stay on schedule), the patch could have been made from a previously used, or removed piece from another repair job?

I won't say it's impossible but I've never heard of that being done.  You don't fix airplanes like you fix cars or the back porch.

It may have had some rivet holes that didn't fit exactly but was substantial enough for this quick fix...to cover a window opening.

The point of my recent explanation is that four of the five observable rivet lines on the patch exactly match the rivet lines on the artifact.  In other words, the artifact matches the patch in terms of vertical placement. In addition, the distance from the "straight edge" on the artifact to the imprint of an underlying structure (12.5 ") matches the distance from the window edge to Station 307. In other words, the artifact matches the patch in terms of horizontal placement.
We have two observable and independent complex correlations between the artifact and the patch - and no disqualifying features.  The probability that 2-2-V-1 is the Miami Patch is approaching certainty.  We're not finished yet but we're way past the "threshold of coincidence."
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 01:45:03 PM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5333
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #418 on: September 03, 2014, 01:43:54 PM »

Edit:"Thumbs firmly planted under suspenders" ;D

And deservedly so.  Sorry I couldn't remember/find who it was who first blew that whistle.  Well done!
Logged

Dan Swift

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 347
Re: 2-2-V-1 - patch?
« Reply #419 on: September 03, 2014, 02:08:20 PM »

 You don't fix airplanes like you fix cars or the back porch.
I bet there was a lot of 'shade tree' quick fixes going on back in 'those days'.  Bailing wire and bubble gum.
The probability that 2-2-V-1 is the Miami Patch is approaching certainty.  We're not finished yet but we're way past the "threshold of coincidence."
That is music to my ears!  I certainly hope so! 
TIGHAR Member #4154
 
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 02:48:01 PM by Bruce Thomas »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 85   Go Up
 

Copyright 2018 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP