Print

[Ted G Campbell]

Ric and all,

Ref. reply # 942

When you look at the picture that Ric has supplied you will note there is an extrusion of aluminum of approximately 1 ¼ inches (to the right side of the picture) where there is a tear along the length of the sheet.  Also note there are no clear indications of a rivet line along the torn edge of the extrusion.

Does the above suggest that this piece was either under an adjacent panel or the placement of another row of rivets out beyond the 1 ¼ inch shown?

What comes to mind is, somewhere along the keel of the plane where rivet lines might be greater then 1 ¼ inch between rows or up under a reinforcing sheet such as a doubler under the doorway.

Ted Campbell

[JNev]

Wasn't much of the original construction done on sawhorses?

http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=529&CISOBOX=1&REC=4

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/pix/gyi/future/186660.htm

Not sure - certainly the assembly / joining happened there, as we see - but as to fuselage build-up itself, it isn't clear.  My guess is that was done in a fixture, then the fuselage would be moved to the 'horses' for wing joining and other finisthing details.

Any other production pictures that might tell us more?

[Ric Gillespie]

Wasn't much of the original construction done on sawhorses?

The frame of the fuselage was assembled in a jig.  Seems like it would have to be skinned while it was in the jig. I don't think the "skeleton" would hold its shape otherwise.  That's kind of the point of "stressed skin" construction.  The skin, rather than the frame, carries the load - as opposed to a fabric-covered airplane with a rigid steel tube frame.
Maybe the jig could be rotated to provide easy access to all the areas to be skinned.
The skinned fuselage was then lowered on to the assembled Center Section.  The photos you reference seem to be associated with the next step (engine installation?). 

[JNev]

The two pictures Ric shared clarify the process very well - and the industry hasn't changed much in that regard since the thirties:

The fuselage is framed-up and skinned in one fixture, then moved to wing joining.  I am fully confident there is no way you'd move that flimsy skeleton without skinning it, as Ric pointed out already as likely: that shape is dependent on the jig until the skin is substantially 'tacked' on. 

What we see on the sawhorses is a continuation of the final assembly phase that happens after the fuselage is joined to the wing - including no doubt nacelles and engines going on, gear, systems installation, etc.

From this it is very clear to me that the fuselage is not skinned on the sawhorses during original construction.  We do have pictures showing that Earhart's repairs were done on sawhorses - a natural compromise as a return to the jig with the wing joined is not possible.

And a compromise that leads to all the neck-craning and arm straining I mentioned up-string - it is just no fun drilling out old skins and back-drilling / installing new skins over-head from a sitting position.  At least in a lower-situated airplane arrangement where one may work on one's back, one typically gets only a bit of indigestion...

That's not proof that 2-2-V-1 was the product of neck-craning and arm straining, but the point is it does bear some signature of 'repair' including that kind of awkward possibility, to me.  Take or leave that - it is merely an impression I have gotten from looking at the piece, including the oddly formed rivet tail that survives (sometimes they are just a bitch in some corner or other...) and I've done many such skin repairs - lying down, sitting, and up on scaffolding, etc. - so take your pick (I'm sure I was likely a 'million rivet' guy by the time I stepped away from that kind of work some years ago), reader's choice.

I wonder what the fonts are in that fuselage jig picture?  Wish we could get better resolution on that one, may be one for the catalogue.

[Jerry Germann]

Jeff,
 This is just speculation on my part .....In looking at the skeleton in the jig, it appears as if the nose is attached at four  points ( the top and bottom ones holding it vertically and the side bolts preventing it from rocking back and forth .....holding it secure in the support frame)....I also see what looks like other attachment points along the way, as of yet I can't locate any pivot points whereby one could rotate the jig to access the belly... It appears some jig posts are bolted to the floor......What I think I see is a cord ( highlighted) that seems to drape down into a concave area of the floor ....this area appears to have a covering over it at the moment ....my guess is to prevent tools/etc from falling into it......is this a covering over a walk in floor pit? My father spent many a day in one of these during his mechanical career , before the introduction of floor hoists. It may just be an illusion though?, ....as the panels that the cord lies on seem to be somewhat propped up.

[JNev]

Jeff,
 This is just speculation on my part .....In looking at the skeleton in the jig, it appears as if the nose is attached at four  points ( the top and bottom ones holding it vertically and the side bolts preventing it from rocking back and forth .....holding it secure in the support frame)....I also see what looks like other attachment points along the way, as of yet I can't locate any pivot points whereby one could rotate the jig to access the belly... It appears some jig posts are bolted to the floor......What I think I see is a cord ( highlighted) that seems to drape down into a concave area of the floor ....this area appears to have a covering over it at the moment ....my guess is to prevent tools/etc from falling into it......is this a covering over a walk in floor pit? My father spent many a day in one of these during his mechanical career , before the introduction of floor hoists. It may just be an illusion though?, ....as the panels that the cord lies on seem to be somewhat propped up.

I'd say you are right concerning how the fixture is 'fixed' - I don't see a means of rotation.  It is very possible that the bulk of skinning was done in this fixture, then when enough rigidity was built-in, the fuselage could be extracted and rotated by some other means.

Or possibly they did the work 'overhead' - but that seems to be a bit of a reach to me when there was some means of moving this stuff around.  Even rudamentary time-motion would suggest taking advantage of that mobility, after the top and side skins were attached, to drive a few thousand rivets into the belly.

And, it is not at all clear to me that the belly is all that accessible in this photo - it appears that there is substantial supporting stuff beneath the belly that is part of the fixture arrangement.  That too suggests removal from this fixture before belly skins installed - but one simply would not likely do that until the shape given the framing by the fixture was locked-in by side and top skins, at least.

[Jerry Germann]

It seems all four nose bolts are bolted to blocks that just touch the framework .....seems the bulk of the nose/cabin part of the airframe is supported via the iron highlighted in yellow.

[Ric Gillespie]

I knew I had more factory photos.  I dug these out.  We got them from Lockheed very early in the project.  Excuse the ink from the date stamp.

In the first one you can see two jigs in the background - one with framing just getting started and the other with skinning nearly complete.  So it's clear that the skinning of at least the sides and top of the fuselage was done in the jig.  Still not clear how they did the belly.
The second photo must have been taken very early in the production run.  Note that the airplane in the background has the old forward-sloping windshield.  Only the first few Electras had that feature.

[Ric Gillespie]

Couple more.

[Brad Beeching]

I knew I had more factory photos.  I dug these out.  We got them from Lockheed very early in the project.  Excuse the ink from the date stamp.

In the first one you can see two jigs in the background - one with framing just getting started and the other with skinning nearly complete.  So it's clear that the skinning of at least the sides and top of the fuselage was done in the jig.  Still not clear how they did the belly.
The second photo must have been taken very early in the production run.  Note that the airplane in the background has the old forward-sloping windshield.  Only the first few Electras had that feature.

Notice the fuselage in the forground in #3. notice how the skinning under the tail plane attachment point has been wrinkled, bent and then straitened... I guess there was a certain amount strong-arming goin on to assemble the aircraft. Or could there have been a shop floor accident which caused damage? is there a way to tell WHICH airframes we are looking at in these photo's? Be neat to find out if any are Amelias!!

[Jerry Germann]

#1 jig ......It seems the area in this photo, is an assembly area that had to be well lit, ...look at all those lights.....( drilling/ riviting)? I don't note too much overhead equipment, for moving things around, ....seems to be a block and tackle just above the plane in #3.

[Ric Gillespie]

Notice the fuselage in the forground in #3. notice how the skinning under the tail plane attachment point has been wrinkled, bent and then straitened... I guess there was a certain amount strong-arming goin on to assemble the aircraft. Or could there have been a shop floor accident which caused damage?

I would say the latter.  Looks like a dent.

is there a way to tell WHICH airframes we are looking at in these photo's? Be neat to find out if any are Amelias!!

In #2, NC3138 was c/n 1012 (the twelfth Model 10), a 10A delivered to a Walter P. Inman of Somerville, NJ on 3/15/35

[Bessel P Sybesma]

And, it is not at all clear to me that the belly is all that accessible in this photo - it appears that there is substantial supporting stuff beneath the belly that is part of the fixture arrangement.  That too suggests removal from this fixture before belly skins installed - but one simply would not likely do that until the shape given the framing by the fixture was locked-in by side and top skins, at least.

Circled in red is what appears to be a rivetting tool or drill lying underneath the fuselage - this appears to me to show that work could be done on the belly with the structure in the jig like this.

[Dale O. Beethe]

I could envision the workmen skinning and riveting everything on the underside not actually covered by the jig framework and then going back to fill in those areas once the fuselage was out of the jig.  I don't know how else you'd do it.  (I would guess you'd get pretty good at that after doing it once or twice.)  How long did it actually take to build one of these?  What is that symbol drawn on that bulkhead in the lower right hand of the photo?

[Jay Burkett]

That is one thing that has changed!  I cannot recall ever seeing an electric drill being used around an aircraft either in production or heavy check.  The possiblity of electric shorts and the resulting shock hazard to too high.  Usually air powered drills are used.  Line maintenance prefers battery powered drill motors.  Great photos. 

Something else that is insteresting.  Look at the relatively low working height beneath those trusses!