This thread has more twists and turns than an early M. Night Shyamalan movie.
If I understand it, we started out with the idea that the lettering on 2-2-V-1 indicated it to be special stock, pre-war, Alclad. But now we know the slant and san-serif ‘D’ are seen on WWII-era Alclad. We have one example of an Electra — Earhart’s, in fact — on which we can see a different typeface than seen on 2-2-V-1. Do we know of any examples of pre-war Alclad with the same typeface we see on 2-2-V-1?
At this point, what, if anything, about 2-2-V-1 suggests it is a pre-war airplane skin? It’s not the typeface on the ‘D’, and apparently the thickness of the aluminum and rivet type we see on 2-2-V-1 were also employed in airplane types that crashed at Canton. Is there still a reason why it is preferable to believe that 2-2-V-1 is from the Electra rather than a piece of a WWII airplane?
Yes, it has taken some twists and turns, Steve. I think it has been most educational.
I still find it 'preferable to believe' that it came from the Electra - the challenge will honestly be 'can it be shown to be such', and many possibilities have been thrown onto the wall in these 'twists and turns'.
But to me, to accept the other possibilities without investigation just because there are other possibilities would be to toss 2-2-V-1 onto the 'could be anything' heap without further investigation. Does 2-2-V-1 fit another regional type better than the Electra? That seems to be the long-standing question, and a bunch of us are descending on Dayton Ohio later this very week to do our best to see what can be learned about that.
Each can make of that what they will, of course. For me it's a quest to investigate as I might and to learn something.
Is 2-2-V-1 still a candidate for the Electra? I believe it remains so - and that it remains an oddity even among the other airplane artifacts found at Niku. These other possibilities are not enough to dissuade me from going and looking further.
I can also understand where many might glaze over at the prospects that have bubbled up through the twists and turns you describe and fall away into 'could be anything' - just like I understand why a well-to-do but naive pilot / owner of a Bonanaza once didn't understand why I had to take such care to install an ELT for him when "some barn roofing would have done, I coulda bent that with a hammer and pop-riveted it in..." He never could see the difference in his notion and a well-formed and braced bracket carefully attached to solid framing in the tail of his shiny bird; I was never able to help him see the difference in 2024 T and 'barn roofing tin', never mind the difference in 'pop rivets' and well-bucked AD solids.
Which is a bit of a gross example, I concede - you are smarter than what I had to deal with and actually I accuse none here of not 'getting that'. But my point is, 'where is the better fit, not just the broad possibility' - and so far I still don't see a better fit: the PBY's are still too heavy by all I've been able to learn; the B-17 has a very regulated rivet pattern where #3 brazier AD rivets attach .032" skins over waffle plating (corrugated underskins); 2-2-V-1 is very clearly a 'repair' article to my A&P / IA eyes - eyes that have watched over the fabrication and installation of many doublers and skins for repairs and alterations, and that have inspected all-too-many repairs that were firm, but not so pretty - so which of those wrecked birds at Canton, etc. had such an existing piece?
It is approaching 77 years and many in the world still look for Earhart; the clues that may remain are thready and hard to find. In my heart and soul, 2-2-V-1 deserves the very best attention I can give it. If another would choose to walk by, that's their choice. At what point someone chooses to walk by, or to dig in and look more closely, is up to the individual. 2-2-V-1 remains a strong draw for me - it is 'consistent with' so much that is known about the Electra, still; it also has some characteristics that suggest other installations. But I've seen nothing specific enough to create a bigger draw among those so far, despite all the good information Mark and others have shared here.
Thanks for an insightful thought - I don't disagree; I merely have my own view and wish to continue the pursuit as I believe 2-2-V-1 still may have much to tell us.