Quote from: Jerry Stalheim on November 26, 2019, 02:23:54 PM
What are the next steps than how can a single piece of the plane not be found at least one of the engines (I know one may have been taken to Kanton) but what of the other?
The story that one of the engines was taken to Kanton appears to have been a case of Saipan Syndrome (false memory). Whether further underwater searching at Nikumaroro is warranted is a decision we'll only be able to make after we know exactly where and how Ballard conducted his search. We do not yet have that data.
However, it is looking increasingly like we already have a piece of NR16020. I just spent two days in Seattle with Jeff Glickman at his forensic imaging laboratory. Getting all of the variables and parameters identified and resolved to get the best possible super-resolution of the patch in the July 1, 1937 16mm film imagery is a complex and time consuming process, but Jeff now has most of them nailed down. For example, it was essential to know the lens, f-stop and film speed used to shoot the original footage. Getting that information required determining exactly what camera was used. Using clues in a 1937 letter written by the photographer, information in historical Kodak sales material and owner's manuals, and coding markers on the film itself, Jeff was able to identify, and actually acquire an example of, the camera used to shoot the film (see photo).
Jeff has now been able to use super-resolution software to produce a far more detailed image of the patch than we've seen before. I've now seen the latest version and I can see individual rivets along the bottom edge of the patch. They are large and irregular in pitch, just as we see on Artifact 2-2-V-1. We cannot, however, yet see the lines of small (AN 455 3/3 brazier head) rivets on either the patch or the rest of the airplane. So far, Jeff has been working with jpegs to do this proof-of-concept work because they're easier to use. He's now ready to start using NEF images which are more complicated but deliver much greater resolution. He feels confidant we'll ultimately be able to see all the rivets.
The way you identify an artifact is to compare the unknown object to a known object. If the two objects are identical in all respects, they are the same kind of object. For example, the pocket knife found at the Seven Site is an Imperial Cutlery Company, bone-handled, double-bladed "Easy Open" jacknife. In this case, the known object - the patch - is absolutely unique. It is safe to say that no other aircraft ever had a patch exactly like the one on NR16020. If the artifact and the patch are identical in all respects, they are the same object. QED (quod erat demonstrandum).
Quote from: Jerry Stalheim on November 26, 2019, 02:23:54 PM
Has the Fiji museum's let Tighar examine all the human remains in their museums like "Expedition Amelia" was able to do in Tarawa?
Yes, and we've gone far beyond that. We've done a physical search of the entire hospital where Hoodless worked.
Quote from: Jerry Stalheim on November 26, 2019, 02:23:54 PM
How do we find the smoking gun evidence to finally solve this case, and "Now what" needs to be done to have a firm answer?
The smoking gun(s) are the post-loss radio signals, in particular the Pan Am and Coast Guard radio bearings. The Electra landed at Gardner. What we're talking about is public perception - a different issue made more difficult by an increasingly fact-free information environment where "firm answers" are whatever you want them to be.