Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study  (Read 2125 times)

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 682
Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« on: January 11, 2017, 10:04:16 AM »

I need help to verify if Eric Bevington’s time entries in his Diary are coordinated correctly with time settings used in AutoCAD.
In 1937 would Gardner Island be under Daylight savings time?
I need to verify if the annotated settings in the attached PDF are correct (for 1937).
In his Diary Bevington writes:
“We got in by 11.30, both somewhat foot-sore – constant walking in the lagoon softens one’s feet. On return to camp, water reports were excellent, so we had a meal and pushed off to Nimanoa, having first raised the flag on the mast”
Based on this entry, I've done shadow studies starting at 11:30am but I’m not sure if Daylight savings comes into play.

Bevington seems to be at least trying to keep track of the correct time in this entry:
“ we crossed the date line this evening (180 degrees) at 6 p.m. so it will be Sunday again tomorrow as the clocks go back 24 hours. At 7 p.m. when time had really gone back to Saturday”

I also need help on C/n 1005. (For practice and test of methods) Any aerials showing its orientation? I saw someone recovered the tail section but does the wreck still show up on google earth, or archived images of google earth?
3971
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5050
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2017, 11:17:11 AM »

In 1937 would Gardner Island be under Daylight savings time?

I don't know, but I would be VERY surprised if the Gilbert & Ellice Islands Colony was using Daylight Savings time.

I also need help on C/n 1005. (For practice and test of methods) Any aerials showing its orientation? I saw someone recovered the tail section but does the wreck still show up on google earth, or archived images of google earth?

Attached are the original images I have.  I don't know where the thing is so I don't know where to look for it in Google Earth.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 12:02:59 PM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 682
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2017, 12:49:57 PM »

These exhibits show the shadows for the hard parts only and hard parts with the tire. A fully inflated tire casts a shadow on the worm gear or the left side of the fork at various times of the day. At no time are both of them in light. In the Bevington Photo both areas are in light. For the shadows of the tire to not cover those areas, the tire has to be deformed similar to the tire in the Luke Field Crash. Attached is a concept study I did last year with a big gash in the tire and exhibits for the shadow study of the inflated tire.
Edit:
The image of the tire with a gash in it is from a camera 15' away so the perspective is different than the Bevington Camera
3971
 
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 12:52:15 PM by Greg Daspit »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5050
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2017, 12:53:32 PM »

That's pretty compelling.
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 682
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2017, 04:38:36 PM »

Regarding the AutoCAD lighting study of just the hard components.
The time of the day that the worm gear is in sunlight and does not have a shadow on it cast by either the axle, hub or brake falls within a somewhat small window. The worm gear first gets sunlight at about 11:45am, although not lit brightly at all. It gets brighter and brighter afterwards as the sun angle changes, and then the brake starts to cast a shadow on it at 1:15pm. By 1:45pm the axle starts to cast a shadow. In my opinion what may be the worm gear in the Bevington Photo is well lighted except for area which may be underwater.

From his diary, the only time Bevington could have taken the picture was when they departed the island. He said he arrived back at camp at 11:30, had lunch, raised the flag and headed off. I’m not sure how long it takes to cross the reef but the ocean seems very calm in the photo.
  I would be interested to hear from expedition members on the forum regarding how much time they typically spent crossing the reef in calm waters and loading the skiff, or an estimate for loading a small boat.   What would be a reasonable time or window?
3971
 
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 682
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2017, 04:51:26 PM »

Attached is an exhibit to illustrate something interesting observed after positioning the components.
If the worm gear section has the same diagonal struts still attached like in the Luke Field Accident,  there is a physical constraint for moving that section right. A strut on the worm gear section can clash with the brake or hub on the fork section. Moving the worm gear left much starts to conflict with the tire as dimensioned in the study Mr. Glickman in the The Object Formerly Known as Nessie.
 Moving it forward conflicts with both the strut and with what may be the axle tip in front of the worm gear. Moving it back buries it in the tire. There is a very small range to position these 2 components.

Note that what is shown in the attachment has the rear part of the fender/ mud flap at the bottom. Different than the 2D illustrations in “The Object Formerly Known As Nessie” (larger part of the fender part on top).   The intent is to study the fenders in both configurations. Also note the worm gear in the 2 D illustrations is a different shape than what I have modeled in 3D based on 40650 . I suspect the 2D illustrations are based on a modified landing gear version that Mr Harney may have used as a guide in his drawings. If it helps in the future I may be able to provide graphics for these parts.

Here is where I could use some help:  It would be helpful if I had a picture of either fender part, where it is not attached to the fork. I’m interested to see if it is notched to fit the contours of the reinforcing on the fork or not. And if so how much.
3971
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5050
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2017, 05:11:28 PM »

  I would be interested to hear from expedition members on the forum regarding how much time they typically spent crossing the reef in calm waters and loading the skiff, or an estimate for loading a small boat.   What would be a reasonable time or window?

Except on rare occasions we use the landing channel so we don't have to cross the reef.  During the Maude/Bevington visit there was, of course, no landing channel. RCS Nimanoa was tied off to Norwich City.  Walking from the beach out to the shipwreck takes, at most, ten minutes but breaking camp, loading the whaleboat, and conveying stuff out to Nimanoa is going to be done by the Gilbertese, not the white guys.
Logged

Jerry Germann

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 371
  • Go Deep
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2017, 10:12:48 PM »

These exhibits show the shadows for the hard parts only and hard parts with the tire. A fully inflated tire casts a shadow on the worm gear or the left side of the fork at various times of the day. At no time are both of them in light. In the Bevington Photo both areas are in light. For the shadows of the tire to not cover those areas, the tire has to be deformed similar to the tire in the Luke Field Crash. Attached is a concept study I did last year with a big gash in the tire and exhibits for the shadow study of the inflated tire.
Edit:
The image of the tire with a gash in it is from a camera 15' away so the perspective is different than the Bevington Camera

Greg,

Really enjoy your study and images!
 In trying to grasp all that you are saying, I have a question. In your image I believe you portray the tire as having become separated or gashed to create the dark shadowed area, and reference the luke field accident.The tire would therefore appear too have differing tread heights, with each separated end,out of the norm. In the bevington image, it appears to me that there is a reflection in that shadowed area, and is similar to the reflection on either side of the remaining tire. Would there be a refection there if the tire was separated? It may be possible that a gash was cut in two places, some few inches apart and allowed that small section of tire to collapse inward and still allow a reflection from the side of the tire....but that reflective area also appears out of plane with what would be the sides of the tire. What are your thoughts?
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 10:24:03 PM by Jerry Germann »
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 682
Re: Landing Gear and Bevington Object shadow study
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2017, 11:16:13 PM »



Greg,

Really enjoy your study and images!
 In trying to grasp all that you are saying, I have a question. In your image I believe you portray the tire as having become separated or gashed to create the dark shadowed area, and reference the luke field accident.The tire would therefore appear too have differing tread heights, with each separated end,out of the norm. In the bevington image, it appears to me that there is a reflection in that shadowed area, and is similar to the reflection on either side of the remaining tire. Would there be a refection there if the tire was separated? It may be possible that a gash was cut in two places, some few inches apart and allowed that small section of tire to collapse inward and still allow a reflection from the side of the tire....but that reflective area also appears out of plane with what would be the sides of the tire. What are your thoughts?
For the sunlight to cover the worm gear and light the upper part of the fork, the part of the tire closer to the camera has to be lower than inflated height.  Dropping this section of tire down also creates a cave of darker area under the rear part of the tire. The shape of the tire needed is Very similar to the Luke Field Accident. The image attached was just a concept study to determine what was happening with the shadows. In that 1-16-16 study I just sliced the tire with a clean strait cut and lowered one section. I didn't get detailed in making it jagged. (yet) . Regarding the center arrow you annotated. The tire cut may be jagged and what your see may just be an edge, also note the inside of the tire appears light colored in the Luke Field image. It may be part of the inside tire not in shadow. I don't see that as very bright.

Regarding the left arrow you annotated. That area may be the brake or part of the fender overlapping the area of the brake. Still studying that spot.

Regarding what the arrow to the right is pointing to. I intend to model the larger fender on top. The larger fender has a brace on either side. I think with the small fender on top(the concept study I attached), there is not enough area reflecting. I also did studies where I modeled what I call the Harney fender which he drew about 2" longer than what the installation drawing showed. It was very close to matching the area reflecting but I don't think its dimensions were accurate. Preliminary studies suggest the larger fender needs to be bent down into the tire to reflect lighted area to equal that of what is seen in the Bevington Object. In the Luke Field Accident, the worm gear is holding down the tire.  I suspect that in the Bevington Object, the fender is bent down on top of the tire and the fender's brace may be holding down the tire. So what I intend to study is if the line you annotated to the right could be the fender brace.
3971
 
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 11:26:48 PM by Greg Daspit »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Copyright 2017 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 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP