"...what we can observe speaks strongly of 'not original', e.g. hobbed-over rivet tail, irregular rows, odd rivets sizes indicated numerous over-sized rivets installed where original holes were likely egged-out, etc."
"The 'rivet placement' on this piece tends to be 'very poor' and does not come close to Lockheed production patterns on the L10 - it is distinctly 'hand craft' as if done in a pinch."
http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,717.msg17867.html#msg17867
I have a very hard time believing the people at Lockheed would be responsible for this type of work.
"Besides advanced design, Lockheed aircraft were known for their high quality of construction and finish."
http://aircraft-in-focus.com/lockheed/
Funny, you didn't seem to have a problem with that kind of work coming out of Canton...
...and perhaps my words about the repair are unfairly harsh, given that time and exposure have so weathered this part.
Let us just say it is clearly 'repair / alteration / other-than original' because Lockheed's known original work would not have so many irregular features. Those things are NOT unusual in repair work where one is trying to match to existing, damaged structure that may have been straightened to some degree, etc. You work with what you have.
As to the bent shank - can happen anywhere, but especially in a relatively rushed repair job where the owner is in the front office pushing for attention on her bird...
Yes, exactly, it is clearly "...repair / alteration / other-than original' because Lockheed's known original work would not have so many irregular features."
On the other hand, that's exactly what I'd expect to see in a field repair done at Canton Island, or at any other repair station operating in a war-zone. [The Japanese bombed the place from the air, and shelled it from submarines.] But it's not the kind of work I'd expect to see from Lockheed employees, working in the safety of the Calif. factory, with every proper tool at hand, and with AE looking over their shoulders. She was probably highly anxious to have the job done correctly, and hoped the repair could hide every trace of the accident at Luke Field. The work had to be done thoroughly and properly - not "in a pinch" as you said. The repaired plane's structure was even X-rayed!! To seek out flaws in the structure!!
What is your experience with this sort of work, Mark? Great for you to have all these 'expectations' but I don't sense much background here backing that up - you don't seem well acquainted with hands-on repair work, field, factory or otherwise but argue in absolutes that aren't, IMO, well founded.
The x-rays would have been done to determine if hidden damage / cracks, etc. were present out of sight and to minimize the need to remove structure for the purpose of exploration or precautionary replacement, no mystery there. It says nothing about what might have happened in terms of over-sized fasteners being needed or the finished quality of every rivet, etc.
[Everything I see here screams- WW2 repair job patch- later scavenged at Canton Island and brought back to Gardener Island.
Well, a scream is hard to ignore and I'm sorry you are being screamed at. So if canton is it, where is the matching structure that it came from? You have thrown a few 'possibles' on the wall - which are going to be looked at, so what is your point other than sharing that you hear screams?
http://www.sff.net/people/brook.west/arc/abdr.html
"Aircraft battle damage repair (ABDR)... the "quick fix and get it in the air again" brand of aircraft repair."
http://navyaviation.tpub.com/14018/css/14018_562.htm
"...certain skin areas are classified as highly critical, other areas as semi-critical, while still other areas may be classified as non-critical."
http://navyaviation.tpub.com/14018/css/14018_546.htm
"5. Rivets less than three thirty-seconds of an inch in diameter should not be used for any structural parts."
...and item 4 just before that last item 5 includes that protruding head rivets should be replaced with MS20470 / AN470 universal head rivets, nary a brazier mentioned...
All nice - and anecdotal / non-specific to Canton / real events / disproves nothing about Lockheed, etc.
--------------------------------------------------
"When Amelia Earhart's big plane was placed under a newly developed X-ray machine recently, several flaws were discovered which might have forced down the aviatrix at some point on her round-the-world-flight if they had not been corrected..." Popular Mechanics, Aug. 1937, Page 178.
"Aviation experts recently utilized a new portable X-ray machine to locate possible structural defects in the huge transport plane in which Amelia Earhart, world famous woman flyer, recently crashed at Honolulu, Hawaii, while on a attempted flight around the world. Rays developed by the apparatus were said to be strong enough to penetrate eighteen inches of solid aluminum and reveal motor or framework flaws as small as one millionth of an inch. More than 1,000 X-ray snapshots were required to complete the examination." Popular Science, August 1937, page 58