Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 70   Go Down

Author Topic: The Question of 2-2-V-1  (Read 1022932 times)

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #330 on: February 27, 2014, 02:04:47 PM »

That is an interesting find and I am a bit surprised at such light skins for the belly of a seaplane, even in the after hull.

Considering this and having looked at the Coronado example and considering the wreck of one of those in the region, I believe we should consider the Coronado carefully....

Agreed.  Following that reasoning, the PBM wreck on Howland Island should also be carefully considered. 
A large wing panel can be seen in the background of this photo

http://tighar.org/aw/mediawiki/images/c/c1/Plane_wreckage.jpg

Here's another surprise- WW2 wreckage found in 2006 in the Marshall Islands and alleged to be from a PB2Y Coronado.  Take a look at those rivets surrounding the inspection plate-  what do you think?   Could they be 3/32" or 1/8"?  AN455 or AN456??

http://pacaeropress.websitetoolbox.com/post/unidentified-wing-section-RoiNamur-6162613?trail

Interesting finds.  Can't say for sure what the rivets are - I compared visually to some AN470s and they don't seem to have the characteristic 'flat' spot on top of the head of the universal, but I really can't be certain.

Also can't be certain of scale off-hand, but that appears to be a 5" diameter inspection plate.  If so, we could be looking at a mix of #3 and #4 rivets, maybe some #5's.

Following that reasoning, the PBM wreck on Howland Island should also be carefully considered. 
A large wing panel can be seen in the background of this photo

That's a wingtip float, not part of the wing.

Here's another surprise- WW2 wreckage found in 2006 in the Marshall Islands and alleged to be from a PB2Y Coronado.  Take a look at those rivets surrounding the inspection plate-  what do you think?   Could they be 3/32" or 1/8"?  AN455 or AN456??

No way to tell scale, but I don;lt think those are braziers or modified braziers.

FWIW, I'm aware of no traffic either during or after the war between Howland or the Marshals and the settlement on Nikumaroro.

Rick,

Look in the background (way out, near shore) beyond the tip float - looks like a wing hulk.  Also a scattered field of debris that I first took to be building ruins - but looking closer I see fuselage frames and what may be corrugated bracing metal (not sure if this bird had that, like a C-47, etc. - but it was common) - also other metal that could relate to a hull.  It is badly torn.

What was the story on this loss at Howland?  Was there a fire involved?

I don't know the 'traffic pattern' for how stuff might or might not have migrated and respect if we have no knowledge of it, but it isn't terribly far away in the sense of the regional reach.  Of course I realize that Howland would have been far from an afternoon outing in the family dugout...

That said, seems like the PBM ought to be considered among the possible donors.

No matter what we find - I remain convinced that we're looking at a unique piece in 2-2-V-1 regardless of what accident of circumstances produced it: that is not production quality stuff, it is clearly a repair with some degree of overcoming bad / elongated holes and misplaced / bent or straightened stiffeners - likely with some degree of laid-in sistering behind the original flanges. 

In short, 2-2-V-1 is clearly a repair and / or alteration piece of material - so whatever ship contributed it ought to either bear or have some record of such work.  We happen to know that Earhart's Electra did have that.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3006
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #331 on: February 27, 2014, 02:20:02 PM »

What was the story on this loss at Howland?  Was there a fire involved?

"Plane wreckage on Howland Island."
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #332 on: February 27, 2014, 02:21:16 PM »

That is an interesting find and I am a bit surprised at such light skins for the belly of a seaplane, even in the after hull.

Considering this and having looked at the Coronado example and considering the wreck of one of those in the region, I believe we should consider the Coronado carefully....

[bold]Agreed.  Following that reasoning, the PBM wreck on Howland Island should also be carefully considered. 
A large wing panel can be seen in the background of this photo [/bold]

http://tighar.org/aw/mediawiki/images/c/c1/Plane_wreckage.jpg


As to the float - note a couple of things:

- fairly large sections of skin have been cut from the vertical side nearest the camera - mostly cut roughly away / between frames.  Not much in way of longitudinal stiffeners along the sides - but look through the holes where material was 'harvested' - you can see internal bracing - stiffeners - where they are gusseted to the bulkheads, or former-frames.  Sea-bearing surfaces are reinforced that way - we are seeing evidence of stiffeners running fore-and-aft along the bottom skin of this float.

ADDED: One can also see evidence of non-original repairs on the float - most clearly nearest the camera toward the front, on the side.  That is a simple doubler made fast with border rows of rivets only - and may simply cover badly dented material, or a hole - who knows.  Other areas are suggestive of old repairs as well.  One can imagine these floats may have gotten a beating now and then in service and rapid repairs may have been the case.  Had a repair been necessary on the float bottom, we can see that stiffeners would be involved as well.

Is this junk still sitting around on Howland?
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
« Last Edit: February 27, 2014, 02:35:35 PM by Jeffrey Neville »
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #333 on: February 27, 2014, 02:22:53 PM »

What was the story on this loss at Howland?  Was there a fire involved?

"Plane wreckage on Howland Island."

Thanks Marty - was about to go look as I was recalling something of this from the past - you saved me the trouble!
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #334 on: February 27, 2014, 02:54:17 PM »


FWIW, I'm aware of no traffic either during or after the war between Howland or the Marshals and the settlement on Nikumaroro.

About the PB2Y wreckage found in the Marshal Islands- I was only commenting on the 'unexpected' nature of its discovery by a beach-stroller in 2006, not that it was a likely source for 2-2-V-1.   

The PBM wreck on Howland on the other hand is - IMHO - a potential source.  The detailed story of how that PBM came to its end can be found here-

http://www.vpnavy.com/vp16_mishap.html

Scroll down to "MISHAPs: 10 JUN 44"

Here is a better view of the PBM wing [and float #2].  I'd like to think this stuff is still sitting there today, awaiting a close inspection. 

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/tinpis/images_temp_4_200809171813_1_Howlan.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-376650.html&h=600&w=450&sz=67&tbnid=kVQSTLiM7kvU3M&tbnh=259&tbnw=194&zoom=1&usg=__EhaI_N75zrJr2Xd8_QBD-75tiVE=
« Last Edit: February 27, 2014, 03:14:32 PM by Mark Pearce »
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #335 on: February 27, 2014, 03:54:51 PM »

Here's an interesting side-piece that I found on war-time aircraft repair in the Pacific while ruminating over how such stuff was done.  Sounds like the scheme included airlifting repair crews to do field repairs at the site of trouble in many cases.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #336 on: February 27, 2014, 04:53:06 PM »

The PBM wreck on Howland on the other hand is - IMHO - a potential source.

I'm trying to envision a rational scenario where a piece of the Howland PBM would end up on Nikumaoro - and not having much luck.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2014, 04:56:49 PM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Steve Lee

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • I am under moderation
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #337 on: February 27, 2014, 06:46:41 PM »

The PBM wreck on Howland on the other hand is - IMHO - a potential source.

I'm trying to envision a rational scenario where a piece of the Howland PBM would end up on Nikumaoro - and not having much luck.

How about via Canton? Could have there been US military traffic between Howland and Canton, bringing a piece of the Howland PBM to Canton, and then from there to Niku by a colonist working at Canton?...
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3006
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #338 on: February 27, 2014, 06:54:44 PM »

I'm trying to envision a rational scenario where a piece of the Howland PBM would end up on Nikumaoro - and not having much luck.

Just to flesh out the doubts a little bit:
  • The piece is not buoyant.  It's not going to float hundreds of miles southeast to fetch up on the lee shore of Niku.
  • Howland was claimed by the Americans.  It was temporarily staffed by Hawaians who received everything they needed from the U.S. (1935-1942). Then the Marines occupied the place from 1943-1944.
  • Gardner (Niku) was under British control.  There was no reason for those on Howland to visit Gardner or vice-versa.
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #339 on: February 27, 2014, 07:29:20 PM »

How about via Canton? Could have there been US military traffic between Howland and Canton, bringing a piece of the Howland PBM to Canton, and then from there to Niku by a colonist working at Canton?...

This is one of those can't-say-it-couldn't-happen things but ...   as Marty pointed out, the only people on Howland during the war were a lonely outpost of Marines. (Hard to imagine why they were there. The place is worthless.). If the Marines were ever taken to Canton, why would they bring a hunk of airplane wreckage with them?
Logged

Karen Hoy

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 91
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #340 on: February 27, 2014, 08:34:08 PM »

Great! I'm going to book my flight.

The closest hotel (less than a mile away) is the Comfort Suites-Wright Patterson. Do we want to stay there or somewhere else?

Thanks,
Karen Hoy
Logged

Steve Lee

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • I am under moderation
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #341 on: February 27, 2014, 09:36:31 PM »

How about via Canton? Could have there been US military traffic between Howland and Canton, bringing a piece of the Howland PBM to Canton, and then from there to Niku by a colonist working at Canton?...

This is one of those can't-say-it-couldn't-happen things but ...   as Marty pointed out, the only people on Howland during the war were a lonely outpost of Marines. (Hard to imagine why they were there. The place is worthless.). If the Marines were ever taken to Canton, why would they bring a hunk of airplane wreckage with them?

I was merely suggesting an possible answer for your question about how a PBM part might have moved from the Howland PBM to Niku (and, I suppose the part could have made the trip without an accompanying marine). It’s not clear to me why anybody would have bothered to scavenge parts from that particular plane, so I don't actually feel very strongly that parts from the Howland PBM made it to Canton.

But what is interesting about what Mark has dug up, if I am understanding it, is that the right thickness aluminum, and the right kind of rivets (to match 2-2-V-I) were found in some WWII-era aircraft. If that's true, then 2-2-V-I seems a lot less exotic than it did at the start of this thread.

 I should sheepishly confess, should I have missed anything, that this thread is waaaay too down in the weeds for me so I'm going to excuse myself from any further posts here and wait for somebody to wrap it all up with a nice clear definitive conclusion (fat chance!!! ::))

----
note added: according to the Howland Island wiki, the PBM's crew was rescued by the USCG Balsam and transferred to a sub chaser which took them to Canton Island. Now, I'm not saying they brought a piece of their wrecked PBM with them as a souvenir, I'm just pointing out that it isn't so farfetched to think stuff from Howland could end up at Canton; and again let me say that I'm agnostic on the odds of that actually having happened.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2014, 12:01:26 AM by Steve Lee »
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3006
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #342 on: February 28, 2014, 08:26:56 AM »

Now, I'm not saying they brought a piece of their wrecked PBM with them as a souvenir, I'm just pointing out that it isn't so farfetched to think stuff from Howland could end up at Canton; and again let me say that I'm agnostic on the odds of that actually having happened.

So, someone arranges to blast a piece off of some part of the PBM, carries it as a souvenir to Canton, then decides it isn't such a good souvenir, and gives it to someone headed toward Gardner, because ... 

Uh, I don't see a great because there.

I'm not saying that this is impossible.  This is one of the kinds of negatives that can't be proven.  If you show that there is a source for the rivet pattern on the PBM in question, then I guess I'll have to give this more credence.  For the moment, it seems to me to be an extremely unlikely sequence.
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Tim Collins

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #343 on: February 28, 2014, 08:44:17 AM »

Now, I'm not saying they brought a piece of their wrecked PBM with them as a souvenir, I'm just pointing out that it isn't so farfetched to think stuff from Howland could end up at Canton; and again let me say that I'm agnostic on the odds of that actually having happened.

So, someone arranges to blast a piece off of some part of the PBM, carries it as a souvenir to Canton, then decides it isn't such a good souvenir, and gives it to someone headed toward Gardner, because ... 

Uh, I don't see a great because there.

I'm not saying that this is impossible.  This is one of the kinds of negatives that can't be proven.  If you show that there is a source for the rivet pattern on the PBM in question, then I guess I'll have to give this more credence.  For the moment, it seems to me to be an extremely unlikely sequence.

I would think re-purposed item or adapted material source would be a better way to look at it than souvenir. 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #344 on: February 28, 2014, 08:53:28 AM »

But what is interesting about what Mark has dug up, if I am understanding it, is that the right thickness aluminum, and the right kind of rivets (to match 2-2-V-I) were found in some WWII-era aircraft. If that's true, then 2-2-V-I seems a lot less exotic than it did at the start of this thread.

We've always known that 3/32" rivets and .032" skin were not uncommon in WWII aircraft.  What seems to make 2-2-V-1 "exotic" is the use of 3/32" rivets in a .032" skin for primary load-bearing structure. There may be examples of that combination in WWII aircraft but nobody has found any yet.  Maybe we'll find examples when we visit the Air Force Museum.

To find an alternative source for 2-2-V-1 we need to find 3/32" brazier rivets in a .032" skin in a pattern that matches, or even comes close to matching, the pattern on 2-2-V-1.

I should sheepishly confess, should I have missed anything, that this thread is waaaay too down in the weeds for me so I'm going to excuse myself from any further posts here and wait for somebody to wrap it all up with a nice clear definitive conclusion (fat chance!!! ::))

You've hit the nail (or rivet) on the head.  2-2-V-1 is an extraordinary artifact that, to several of us, at least approaches smoking gun status - but the "why" is, as you say, waaay too down in the weeds for most people.  Our hope is that we can document the artifact's "exoticness" by showing that it meets guidelines that were obsolete by the time WWII aircraft were built and repaired.  Failing that, we'll have to show that criteria for being a source for 2-2-V-1 do not exist on any aircraft that served in the Central Pacific region.

« Last Edit: February 28, 2014, 08:55:28 AM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 70   Go Up
 

Copyright 2024 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 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP