I received the attached photo of the Electra at Darwin (in hangar) from David Billings (East New Britain hypothesis). David felt it was of interest as to what might be oil canning in the skin, and that some qualified observers belive that this proves an attending 'absence of stiffeners'. This would be, of course, disqualifying of 2-2-V-1's possible provenance to the Electra - that artifact has evidence of stiffeners having been attached.
David was eager for me to see and consider the import of these images and I appreciate the opportunity to critique the critique. We may have seen this shot before, but it was not clear to me that we've seen the same one. I do recall that there is a post here somewhere of the hangared bird in Darwin. This may be a slightly different angle of view than the other, if so - I'm not sure (should have found it but eyes are tired).
As to what is shown, the idea among those critiquing 2-2-V-1 is that
if bracing were present on the Electra's window covering, as some of us believe was the case, the deformity we see
should not be there. I can respect that, but do not agree with that as an absolute 'must be'; I can easily visualize lots of reasons that a lightly braced structure might behave this way. I hope that we who disagree can respect each other, but won't shrink from my own views.
The asserted 'deformity' appears as a somewhat 'flattened' area, as I'll call it, near the upper edge of the covering. It can be seen as the line of light that is clearly distorted near the top of the covering. This distortion suggests a somewhat broad, flattened area where a more continuous curve might be expected. What is suggested to me visually is that a somewhat flattened area does show up - maybe even as slightly concave - but I am reserved as to its real degree and significance. This 'anomalous' area roughly follows the edge of the window opening underneath, at its upper limit, and is visible as it transits across the sheet toward the middle 'waterline' area, somewhat. You look - a picture is worth a thousand words (not that I can't find them...
).
To explain my own view a bit further -
Many may recall that I have offered the idea here before that the panel may have been
lightly braced. As such, it is quite as possible to me that a distortion such as we see suggested by this picture could result with light bracing. A blunt force might do that, in my opinion - light, improvised bracing could easily deform with the outer sheet well enough to give such a smooth transition. I've seen that in very similar respects before. Or, we could still be looking at some of the residual 'puckering' effect I've spoken of as a possibility. It is hard to say - we were not there and do not have first-hand, certain knowledge. I believe it is also hard to say how much 'deformity' is there - although I do believe it is real (and a good visual catch).
So much for my thoughts. I hope by sharing this information on the forum I've essentially helped the critics subject their own conclusions to more scrutiny, as we all must submit to. So, in that spirit I hope, have a look at this photo - one version showing the window covering enlarged with some attending notes.
It occurs to me that while light doesn't 'lie', it might exaggerate - but I leave that judgment to those who know photo-imagery better than I. That others differ with my view of that does not bother me, so long as it is in honest disagreement. I think we'd all do well to avoid the now all-to-common condemnation of other's ideas that we see. Wishful thinking, I guess - but I have grown to have hopes for a more positive Earhart search community nonetheless: the negatives flying around do not help any of us look more favorable in the public eye.
Anyway, I hope this picture is worthwhile for review. I found it interesting, but contrary to the views of some others, simply don't see it as conclusive as to the absence of bracing on the window covering on the Electra. Just my view - I hope you all will consider it carefully.
ADDED -
I'm having trouble loading the full image / or the second of two images: the close-up isn't copying. For now, examine the obvious 'patch' area and you should see the light distortions I've tried to describe. I'll load the balance ASAP.
UPDATED:
see attached Word doc for details. Conversion didn't work - will try another method tomorrow, sorry.
