Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 70   Go Down

Author Topic: The Question of 2-2-V-1  (Read 732324 times)

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #60 on: February 09, 2014, 07:59:16 AM »

Is there a reasonable limit to the distance over which a piece of aluminum might be imported to Gardner/Niku Island?  Canton Island has already been suggested, but what about more distant places? .........

Importation of aircraft aluminum from distant places as you describe, although arguably highly unlikely, was certainly possible.  That's not the issue.  Cast the net as widely as you please but to come up with an alternative source for artifact 2-2-V-1 you need to find an American aircraft (the sheet and the rivet are, beyond question, American) that used #3 brazier rivets in .032 skin. If you can find such an aircraft, you then have to show that there was someplace on the aircraft that could have been repaired in such a way as to result in a rivet pattern at least similar to that seen on the artifact. 
I think you'll find that the aircraft you're looking for had to have been a Lockheed Model 10 - so what you're really asking is whether it's possible that another Electra (in the U.S., Japan or Australia) was damaged and repaired in a fashion similar to Earhart's and that aircraft was then involved in an accident that resulted in damage like we see on the artifact. Possible?  Sure.  If you can find records of such an airplane then you can look for some reasonable for a piece of wreckage from that airplane to have been imported to Nikumaroro.

In short, the first question that must be answered is not how the artifact got to Nikumaroro.  The first question is what kind of airplane the artifact could possibly have come from.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #61 on: February 09, 2014, 08:15:21 AM »

I'm not sure the public, or even many aviation specialists for that matter, really appreciate how unique 2-2-V-1 is as to how the stars cross on its markings and fasteners, right down to a grip length indicated on the surviving brazier rivet that it was tacked onto .060" of underlying structure, consistent with what we see in the museum shots of the L10 belly.  We have a very unique piece of aviation metal on our hands - found on Niku, and with no really good explanation for it finding its way there short of having flown in on an intact ship that never left that way.

Therein lieth our problem.  The extraordinary complexity of the artifact is both its strength and its curse. To understand how vigorously this gun smokes requires a familiarity with historical aircraft materials, structures and procedures that few possess.  The irrelevancy of many of the questions raised here is testament to that fact - not to fault the questioners - this is, after all, a forum for the general public. The challenge is to make the argument for 2-2-V-1 accessible to everyone.

« Last Edit: February 09, 2014, 08:17:37 AM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #62 on: February 09, 2014, 08:25:23 AM »

Testing the Hypothesis once more ….Would you have a photo of the Electra… pre/post luke field repairs that gives evidence of a remaining al-clad print?

I'm aware of no such photo, but neither is the labeling apparent on the artifact unless you look closely and catch the light just right.
 
The following statements by Earhart seemly describe at least a fair amount of attention to it’s appearance.

Yes, she liked her airplane to look nice, but these statements in no way bear upon the question of whether the artifact came from NR16020.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #63 on: February 09, 2014, 08:33:10 AM »

Have been searching for pre-WW2 civilian aircraft which flew around the vicinity of the Phoenix Islands, apart from the obvious Pan-Am flying boat activities at Canton Island 1937-1942. Came across this aircraft loss over Pago Pago, about 600K from Gardner?

Not a candidate for 2-2-V-1.  Heavy flying boat structure, only floating debris recovered, 618 nm away, etc., etc.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #64 on: February 09, 2014, 09:06:11 AM »

It strikes me that 2-2-V-1 presents us with a unique opportunity.  Our other physical artifacts  - the pocket knife, the freckle cream jar, the zipper, the plexiglas, etc. - may fit neatly into the Earhart/Niku hypothesis but we're always left with the possibility that there is another explanation.  Any of the objects found at the Seven Site COULD have belonged to a Coastie (who can say it is impossible?).  The plexi matches the cabin windows of an Electra but MIGHT also match some WWII airplane window or turret (we can't check them all).

BUT if it is true that the materials and the structure of 2-2-V-1 conclusively identify the artifact as being from a relatively small, pre-war American stressed-aluminum aircraft we have a very different situation.  Unlike jack knives, freckle cream jars and zippers - we have an excellent record of what aircraft were damaged or lost in the Central Pacific from pre-war days right up to today.  We can say with great certainty what is and is not a possible source for the artifact.

'It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.'
Sherlock Holmes, The Beryl Coronet

Logged

James Champion

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 69
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #65 on: February 09, 2014, 10:26:20 AM »

Forget completely about Amelia and Fred for a moment.

The presence 2-2-V-1 on Niku makes no sense. Flying the Pacific requires large, heavily-built airplanes. Aircraft pre-or-post WW2 build with light skin and small rivets have no reason to be found so remotely in the Pacific. Smaller planes have no reason to ever be in a area so remote on the Earth. Even Islanders would unlikely have access to scrap of this construction on nearby or far-away islands.  Had such a piece of aircraft been found in Nebraska there would be no question.

Rather than 2-2-V-1 pointing to the presence of AE/FN, only AE/FN can point to the existance of 2-2-V-1.
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #66 on: February 09, 2014, 11:29:47 AM »


Rather than 2-2-V-1 pointing to the presence of AE/FN, only AE/FN can point to the existence of 2-2-V-1.

James, I would submit that the same thing is true of the Bevington Object: rather than the Bevington Object pointing to the presence of the Electra, only evidence of the Electra can point to the validity of the Bevington Object.


Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #67 on: February 09, 2014, 03:56:52 PM »

Forget completely about Amelia and Fred for a moment.

The presence 2-2-V-1 on Niku makes no sense. Flying the Pacific requires large, heavily-built airplanes. Aircraft pre-or-post WW2 build with light skin and small rivets have no reason to be found so remotely in the Pacific. Smaller planes have no reason to ever be in a area so remote on the Earth. Even Islanders would unlikely have access to scrap of this construction on nearby or far-away islands.  Had such a piece of aircraft been found in Nebraska there would be no question.

Rather than 2-2-V-1 pointing to the presence of AE/FN, only AE/FN can point to the existance of 2-2-V-1.

Yes. Two sides of the same coin.  If there is no rational null hypothesis then the hypothesis is correct.

The Bevington Object is an example of another piece of evidence for which there is no apparent rational null hypothesis, but it does not have anything like the potential of 2-2-V-1. All we know about the Bevington Object is what we can tease from a photographic image the size of a grain of sand. Because we cannot confirm or deny our interpretation of the image we cannot draw firm conclusions - only probabilities.  Likewise with images of things seen in underwater videos.  Electra parts and body parts or camels in the clouds?  The stuff of debate, conflicting opinion, and - sadly - even legal action.

By contrast, 2-2-V-1 is a physical entity. I can (and often do) hold 2-2-V-1 in my hands.  We can examine it, measure it and test it.  We can ascertain its properties.  we can compare those properties to other known proprieties.  We can draw conclusions that are unassailable. In our efforts to verify what we believe to be true we might find something that disqualifies the artifact as being as unique as we now believe it to be. If so, so be it.  But if we can confirm what we now believe to be true then we have reached a heretofore unprecedented level of confidence that the Earhart/Niku Hypothesis is correct.
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #68 on: February 09, 2014, 05:59:43 PM »

Likewise with images of things seen in underwater videos.  Electra parts and body parts or camels in the clouds?  The stuff of debate, conflicting opinion, and - sadly - even legal action.


Ric, in January 2013 you said:

Funding permitting, Niku VIII will have the capability of checking out the area you believe holds the wreckage of the plane.  If half of what you've identified is really there it should be a piece of cake to find and recover an armory of smoking guns.  Your observational ability will be vindicated and we will look like blind idiots.  Until then, I think the forum is best served by discussions and debates like the ones we've been having recently.

139 posts in less than four hours says that you are ignoring reality. I'll now sign on at least to the "blind" part of your opinion. The picture of the fuselage you have had in your possession for over a year and a half now. I was able to find the capture in less than two days. And there is plenty more.

John Lanz advised you that, in his opinion, there would never be a Niku VIII. I now concur.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: February 09, 2014, 06:06:12 PM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #69 on: February 09, 2014, 09:03:07 PM »

The nearest aviation repair shop to Gardner island circa 1930's I can find so far is this one.

"May 1939: Pan American World Airways arrives on Kanton Island to build a service station for a flying boat service to New Zealand. The service starts in July 1940."

Does artefact 2-2-V-1 have to be from a missing or crashed aircraft if it isn't from the Electra?
This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #70 on: February 09, 2014, 09:32:04 PM »

It might be a bit off topic, or not, but you could have knocked me down with a feather when I read this. I know Canton was within range of big four engine planes but imagine my surprise to find 20 or so Bell P-39 Airacobras stationed on Canton Island in 1942. No, they didn't fly there, they were boxed up and shipped there...

"The 333rd was dumped on Canton in September, 1942. Things hadn't improved much. If the US sent prisoners to such a place today, they would sue the government. The 333rd  settled in. The first thing you did there was trade your  helmet for one that was painted white to match the coral background. There were 4 P-39s: the other 15 came in big crates. Each had to be wrestled ashore and assembled. Planes were refueled by hand and facilities were very primitive. There were still millions of rats. There was a rat killing contest, no firearms allowed, with a bottle of scotch as a prize and a Sergeant named Warburton killed over 500 in a week on his spare time. There was dysentery and the bad diet did nothing to help it.  For fun, one could periodically forage on the wreck of the transport SS President Taylor, which had grounded months earlier, losing 80% of it's needed supplies in the process. (On the other hand, working in the flooded holds under equatorial sun attempting supply salvage was no fun at all.)  A 10 foot high seawall had been bulldozed around much of the island so enemy submarines couldn't see anything to shoot at. Drums of water and gasoline were stored in it. Until some industrious 333rd soul borrowed a bulldozer and successfully dug a well, everyone was bathing in sea water. The well was a big improvement. It wasn't drinkable, but at least it wasn't salty. Porcelain fixtures and mirrors from the President Taylor went into the first permanent shower and latrine. The planes went on alert or on patrol around the clock."

http://home.earthlink.net/~atdouble/~318thFighterGroup.Canton.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-39_Airacobra


This must be the place
 
« Last Edit: February 09, 2014, 09:34:09 PM by Jeff Victor Hayden »
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #71 on: February 09, 2014, 09:35:02 PM »



By now, the main focus of the fighting was in the Guadalcanal area; about 2,000 miles away from Canton. Still, Canton knew they were in a war. Canton was a key link in the supply line. The enemy kept Canton under surveillance with long range flying boats out of the Gilbert Islands to the west. Around January 1943, enemy submarines put a blockade on, and food and supplies got scarce. Everyone's shoes wore out. Coral is a living thing, so you couldn't just walk about with holed shoes as coral would grow in any cut on your foot. Or anywhere else with moisture including the ear canal. Chunks of old inner tubes were used as shoe liners. The food situation went from bad to worse; the once discarded bread with grubs became part of the diet. Everyone's clothing was falling apart and there was barely gas for the planes to fly patrols. The Navy finally broke the blockade, but things got tight before they did.
On January 30, 1943, a Japanese sub surfaced before dawn and shelled the island for 30 minutes. It did no damage, but 333rd  planes that scrambled with depth charges didn't sink it either. There were night raids by Japanese patrol bombers on March 19th, 22nd, and 26th, 1943. The 333rd scrambled planes, but the enemy came in at high altitude  in ones or twos and, without radar, interception was a long shot. Only the last raid caused any real damage including 3 destroyed barracks, a Navy PBY Catalina, and holes in the water tank the 333rd had built. (Contrary to one published account, the mess hall was not hit.)  But everyone got a good laugh as Tokyo Rose claimed great damage, including 2 hits that "sunk" the rusting derelict  SS President Taylor.
This Canton photo was probably taken from the palm tree.
Note the army cot and fuel drums by the wing shadow. The plane's engine was
kept warmed up, the tanks topped off, and the pilot slept by his plane.
If there was an alert, he was flying in about 60 seconds.

This must be the place
 
« Last Edit: February 09, 2014, 09:39:03 PM by Jeff Victor Hayden »
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #72 on: February 10, 2014, 05:54:38 AM »

Likewise with images of things seen in underwater videos.  Electra parts and body parts or camels in the clouds?  The stuff of debate, conflicting opinion, and - sadly - even legal action.


Ric, in January 2013 you said:

Funding permitting, Niku VIII will have the capability of checking out the area you believe holds the wreckage of the plane.  If half of what you've identified is really there it should be a piece of cake to find and recover an armory of smoking guns.  Your observational ability will be vindicated and we will look like blind idiots.  Until then, I think the forum is best served by discussions and debates like the ones we've been having recently.

139 posts in less than four hours says that you are ignoring reality. I'll now sign on at least to the "blind" part of your opinion. The picture of the fuselage you have had in your possession for over a year and a half now. I was able to find the capture in less than two days. And there is plenty more.

John Lanz advised you that, in his opinion, there would never be a Niku VIII. I now concur.

I guess my underwater observation skills reveal me to be a blind idiot - I see a giant frog (broad, smiling but still-closed mouth at center, right eye peering with heavy 'brow') bearing down on a 'monkey face' that is looking upward from seafloor (looks rather like 'Curious George' with blank stare and long face).  Is that it?
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #73 on: February 10, 2014, 06:12:25 AM »



By now, the main focus of the fighting was in the Guadalcanal area; about 2,000 miles away from Canton. Still, Canton knew they were in a war. Canton was a key link in the supply line. The enemy kept Canton under surveillance with long range flying boats out of the Gilbert Islands to the west. Around January 1943, enemy submarines put a blockade on, and food and supplies got scarce. Everyone's shoes wore out. Coral is a living thing, so you couldn't just walk about with holed shoes as coral would grow in any cut on your foot. Or anywhere else with moisture including the ear canal. Chunks of old inner tubes were used as shoe liners. The food situation went from bad to worse; the once discarded bread with grubs became part of the diet. Everyone's clothing was falling apart and there was barely gas for the planes to fly patrols. The Navy finally broke the blockade, but things got tight before they did.
On January 30, 1943, a Japanese sub surfaced before dawn and shelled the island for 30 minutes. It did no damage, but 333rd  planes that scrambled with depth charges didn't sink it either. There were night raids by Japanese patrol bombers on March 19th, 22nd, and 26th, 1943. The 333rd scrambled planes, but the enemy came in at high altitude  in ones or twos and, without radar, interception was a long shot. Only the last raid caused any real damage including 3 destroyed barracks, a Navy PBY Catalina, and holes in the water tank the 333rd had built. (Contrary to one published account, the mess hall was not hit.)  But everyone got a good laugh as Tokyo Rose claimed great damage, including 2 hits that "sunk" the rusting derelict  SS President Taylor.
This Canton photo was probably taken from the palm tree.
Note the army cot and fuel drums by the wing shadow. The plane's engine was
kept warmed up, the tanks topped off, and the pilot slept by his plane.
If there was an alert, he was flying in about 60 seconds.

Fascinating piece of history, Jeff Victor.  Can you provide anything about P-39 structures?  Not sure they were braced similar to the L10 (stringer locations, etc.) but considering this presence it seems it would be worth looking at the Airacobra as a potential source for 2-2-V-2. 

That said, I doubt it is likely.  It did first fly in 1938 and was introduced in 1942, but its construction - by what I've found so far, appears to be more typically flush, heavier military.  I found a few pictures on Wiki so far - lots of flush rivets on outer skin

It did have lovely lines despite other challenges to its performance.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 735
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #74 on: February 10, 2014, 08:04:56 AM »

Can painted planes be eliminated as donors?
3971R
 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 70   Go Up
 

Copyright 2019 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