Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1  (Read 34897 times)

Diego Vásquez

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #30 on: October 31, 2014, 11:23:04 AM »

I have to say the C's remain invisible to me - can one of you mark them out and post them?

Bessel - In the attached photo, I have circled in red what I believe to be the two C's that Tom is referring to.  I also circled the large blob of what appears to be the same residue/stain/whatever but does not appear to be a letter.  Hope this helps.


Diego

p.s.  I have noticed that although the red circles identify where the Cs are, they also seem to make the C's a little less apparent (maybe my red line cut a little of them off?).  I suggest you use the photo with the red circles as a finding guide and then look at them again in the photo without the circles where they actually seem to me to be a little more apparent. 
I want to believe.

Diego V.
 
« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 03:17:55 PM by Diego Vásquez »
Logged

Friend Weller

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #31 on: October 31, 2014, 12:19:33 PM »

By 'window' in this sense I mean 'aperture', or the opening within the metal framing.....

Should we call it a fenestration?  An aperture is the opening which limits the amount of light that can pass.  A fenestration is an opening in the wall of a structure such as a window or door.

Just don't defenestrate me (the act of throwing someone out of a window)!!  I just wanted to use the word "fenestration" in a sentence!    ;D

LTM,
Friend
Friend
TIGHAR 3086V
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #32 on: October 31, 2014, 01:00:02 PM »

By 'window' in this sense I mean 'aperture', or the opening within the metal framing; I do not mean the 'transparency' material.

The transparent material was held in place by the aluminum frame we see in the "AE & Nilla" photo.  To remove the transparent material it was probably necessary to remove the frame.  It would make no sense to reinstall the frame and then put a patch on top of it.  The patch was probably riveted to the same underlying structures the frame had been riveted to, with the apparent addition of an additional stringer along the bottom edge.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #33 on: October 31, 2014, 02:20:10 PM »

By 'window' in this sense I mean 'aperture', or the opening within the metal framing.....

Should we call it a fenestration?  An aperture is the opening which limits the amount of light that can pass.  A fenestration is an opening in the wall of a structure such as a window or door.

Just don't defenestrate me (the act of throwing someone out of a window)!!  I just wanted to use the word "fenestration" in a sentence!    ;D

LTM,
Friend

Heavens to Jezebel (a biblical case of defenestration), let us get it right - while the purpose was definitely to allow optical light in for navigation, obviously we are not concerned particularly with how collimated the rays were.

Henceforth I shall refer to the window opening as 'the hole'.  ;D
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 09:52:48 AM by Jeffrey Neville »
Logged

Doug Ledlie

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #34 on: October 31, 2014, 03:18:26 PM »

From Jeff's post on page 2...
Quote
The stuff they used to mark this kind of material apparently had some effect of 'etching' or leaving a permanent trace, even if buffed off: what we see on 2-2-V-1 is not ink per se, but some visual remnant of the process the ink induced, i.e. micro-pitting, etching or staining I do not know, but some residual effect in lieu of 'ink' is apparently the case.  Point here being, the outer surface might have been polished in Miami after completing the installation - that would be the norm; but wherever this 'ink' was were tiny etchings or similar that led us to what we see today.

I have a theory that rather than etching, the (ALCL)AD label remnant visible on 2-2-V-1 is simply a result of the pressure of the machine roller style stamping device that was used to apply it making a permanent impression in the soft surface aluminium cladding on the sheet. 

Lady Be Good photos indicate a depression of the characters of sufficient depth to "hold" paint and stop it from being sand blasted out...not claiming a font match, just trying to understand why the AD on the artifact is even still visible

http://www.richarddavisphotography.com/libya-2/alclad-24s-t-markings-on-the-lady-be-good/
« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 03:20:26 PM by Doug Ledlie »
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2014, 10:38:16 AM »

Doug - good find! I don't think we had considered it. There are still a LOT of things that 2-2-V-1 is trying to tell us. We just have to find the right ears to listen. And we have an awful lot of good ears on the forum!

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

jgf1944

  • Guest
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #36 on: November 01, 2014, 11:26:48 AM »

Thanks for the answers, Jeffrey.
    You mentioned the letter-like figures, about which I too have been thinking. Once TIGHAR research can show that the apparent "A" and "D" figures reflect product labelling that was used in the Earhart era, then I think that I would include the letters when describing the artifact to John Q Public. JQP is not likely to remember, IMO, technical info about rivet size and rivet rows or island names and dates, but JQP will remember, again IMO, seeing a piece of airplane aluminum bearing the letters A and D that were used to identify aluminum during the Earhart era.
     When there is a group of JQPs around the work water cooler, it is easy for me to imagine the talk turning to the piece of metal CNN showed that has letters on it from the Earhart era. That info is short and sweet and so easy to remember (encode) and easy to say. In other words, the 2-2-V-1 letters seem to me like a good addition to TIGHAR's evidence corral. 
      Again, thanks Jeffrey. Guthrie
Logged

Randy Conrad

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 326
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #37 on: November 01, 2014, 10:20:46 PM »

In light of all the comments and posts regarding this exciting topic, I find myself in Amelia's shoes and wondering what she was doing at the time of this event. We all know that according to the post-loss signals that Amelia and Fred were on the island for a couple of days. I believe that when they landed it wasn't a cake walk, but a rather very hard landing. I believe with her landing and tailspin...it caused Fred to be injured. Even though the plane remained upright...there had to be some significant damage underneath the plane...possibly damaging the outter shell. During the next few days....water kept rising and eventually pushed the Electra into this trench that everyone knows about. When the plane falls into this trench...it rolls over onto its side...breaking off one of the landing gears if not both of them. You have to envision now with me that the side of the plane with the door is already buried in the coral and sand of the ocean. No way to get access to the plane. Plus, the windows are intact and the pilot seat is also obstructed an no way to reach that particular side of the plane where Amelia enters/leaves the pilot seat. The only way to get access is the Miami artifact patch!!! ...which is now the only part of the plane that can be seen from top of the water. By now, Amelia and Fred are desperate to obtain special equipment  and gear needed for survival. I believe that this patch at the edges was pried off with some sort of prying device to gain access to the plane. During this time, I believe that Fred entered the Electra and was throwing certain things out to Amelia, when the plane finally slid down the trench and over the edge of the reef. I think this is why we only have this artifact in our possession. As for Fred, I believe he was trapped in the interior of the body of the aircraft and couldnt get out as it went over the edge. Anyway, either which way you look at it or have your own theories, I'd hate to be in her shoes as she was dealt the final hand and eventually perished a terrible death on Niku! Overall, this patch has a story to tell, and we are embodied as a group to tell her final chapter. I think we all owe this to Ric and those who have stood beside him all these years. Eventually, in the coming days and weeks, that final chapter will take shape and then June will roll around and we will all anticipate the finale!!!
Logged

Robert John Mills

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #38 on: November 01, 2014, 11:56:57 PM »

If you look at the patch you will note that generally most of the contours are smooth.  If someone was trying to remove the patch with crude tools there would be more abrupt bends from someone prying or pounding at one rivet site, then the next, then the next and so on until it was removed from the plane. The patch was on the wall which makes it difficult to kick it out seeing as how the stringers were in the way as well.  I believe the patch looks like it was forced off of the fuselage by the pressure of wave action entering the man door on the plane (hence the smooth contours).  Several big punches to pop most of it off the fuselage, then subsequent wave action to bend it back and fourth to fatigue the metal and finally break it off.  Washed out onto the reef, then tossed back or otherwise exposed during a storm for Ric to find later.  My guess!

I do agree that removing the patch would aid in cross ventilating the fuselage while on the reef that would reduce the temperature inside making radio operation more bearable in those temperatures.  But like I mentioned, there is an absence of crude tool marks.

Just an opinion.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #39 on: November 02, 2014, 09:59:07 AM »

From Jeff's post on page 2...
Quote
The stuff they used to mark this kind of material apparently had some effect of 'etching' or leaving a permanent trace, even if buffed off: what we see on 2-2-V-1 is not ink per se, but some visual remnant of the process the ink induced, i.e. micro-pitting, etching or staining I do not know, but some residual effect in lieu of 'ink' is apparently the case.  Point here being, the outer surface might have been polished in Miami after completing the installation - that would be the norm; but wherever this 'ink' was were tiny etchings or similar that led us to what we see today.

I have a theory that rather than etching, the (ALCL)AD label remnant visible on 2-2-V-1 is simply a result of the pressure of the machine roller style stamping device that was used to apply it making a permanent impression in the soft surface aluminium cladding on the sheet. 

Lady Be Good photos indicate a depression of the characters of sufficient depth to "hold" paint and stop it from being sand blasted out...not claiming a font match, just trying to understand why the AD on the artifact is even still visible

http://www.richarddavisphotography.com/libya-2/alclad-24s-t-markings-on-the-lady-be-good/

You may be right - but somewhere on this site here are images of hand-rollers being applied, which wouldn't impart so much force in my belief.

Would 'depth' really have that effect?  We'd be talking a very shallow amount of 'depth', if any, I'd think.  I don't know the exact mechanism, but it appears to be something other than simply 'ink left behind', for sure.  Maybe in time we can learn - is it micro-etching or a similar process that causes paint and growth or corrosive by-product to adhere better? 

I suspect that - that some chemical effect of the ink may have done it: not enough to 'harm' the metal, but enough to give an adhesive effect.  It grows a bit more interesting in my mind now that so few characters survive on 2-2-V-1.

In looking at 'Lady Be Good' here, the characters appear more bold (thicker) than on 2-2-V-1.  Is this another variation in the printing of characters, or is that an illusion?
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 01:03:50 PM by Jeffrey Neville »
Logged

Leon R White

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 160
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #40 on: November 02, 2014, 11:25:02 AM »

For comparing the artifact to other pieces of material, would it help to look at PAN AM aircraft, repairs, etc.  if any known examples exist? 
L
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #41 on: November 02, 2014, 12:38:38 PM »

I believe it would help, one way or another.

- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #42 on: November 02, 2014, 01:15:04 PM »

I believe it would help, one way or another.

To be relevant it would need to be a photo showing a patch on a Pan Am aircraft circa 1937, preferably an aircraft based at the Dinner Key seaplane base.  Tall order.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #43 on: November 02, 2014, 03:34:24 PM »

That - or more likely (and what I had in mind), to provide more information on the much belabored 'fonts', says he who has been digging through Alcoa, Reynolds and other information...

The world of corporate-anything like that gets more complex than a plethora of WWII photos would suggest...

Somehow 2-2-V-1 doesn't suggest 'Pan Am flying boat' patch to me - again, *IMO* (LOL!!!) the way it is braced is more suggestive of an airplane along the lines of a... Lockheed Electra.  It also grows more odd to me by the day that the size of the thing is somehow just very, very right.

I know, I'm a hopeless romantic, and now I'm 'channeling' some poor long-dead mechanic just like LaPook used to channel Noonan here, but...
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: Potential causes of damage to 2-2-V-1
« Reply #44 on: November 02, 2014, 06:14:51 PM »

... and now I'm 'channeling' some poor long-dead mechanic just like LaPook used to channel Noonan here, but...

We are sooooooo not going to go there. And Jeff knows why I say that so adamantly.

Besides, I've already solved any mysteries regarding Noonan's navigation. See the relevant post in Celestial Choir.

LTM, who tries not to see dead people on a regular basis,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR no. 2189 ECSP
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   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