If the plane had been subjected to 22 Gs when landing on the reef it would not have ended up standing on its own legs so no running engines and no radio messages. It would also take more than 22 Gs from wave impacts to tear the tanks loose so that is not too likely either.
But if the wave action ripped at least one of the landing gear struts and wheel assemblies off the electra (the theory has one stuck in a reef groove, later believed to be nessie) would'nt the suspected damage to the underbelly and substructure have to be figured (or at least considered) into this equation as to whether that type of damage would have weakened the area of the attaching points?
I think Ric with his aircraft accident investigator experience could provide a fair estimation of whether the stresses caused by that action would or would not weaken that area enough so as to lessen the amounts of force you propose OR is there not enough informatiion as to how they were attached to completely nullify this as part of the equation?
LTM,
Don
------------------------------------
I've spent 22 years investigating and litigating airplane crash cases, attended very many wreckage inspections accompanied by my metallurgist, my accident reconstructionist, my aircraft mechanic, engineers, and other appropriate experts and I've looked though many electron microscopes at fracture surfaces. My first college major was Aeronautical Engineering and I also took a course in aircraft accident investigation given jointly by the University of Illinois and the Air Force at Chanute AFB (I got an "A", BTW.) I've cross-examined many adverse expert witnesses on all of these issues and taken the depositions of many NTSB investigators. I'll match my credentials and experience on this against Ric's anytime.
---------------------------------------------
As a humorous side story, I had an experience that only comes along once in a lawyer's lifetime. Many years after taking his course, my accident investigation professor was hired by a plaintiff's attorney as an accident reconstructionist expert (my prof was also an A&P and an IA) so I had to take his deposition in San Francisco. After I got his "creative" sworn testimony recorded by the court reporter, I reached into my briefcase and took out a blue covered book, I still have it
.
"Do you recognize this book professor?"
"Yes I do."
"Its title is 'Aircraft Accident Investigation, Aviation 355,' isn't it?"
"Yes."
"Who wrote this book?"
"I did."
"Look at the last paragraph on page 314."
"O.K."
"Did you write that paragraph?"
"Yes."
"Please review that paragraph."
"O.K."
"That paragraph contradicts the testimony you just gave here today, doesn't it professor?"
"Uh, yes."
"Thank you, no further questions."
The case went away.
I ran into him at Oshkosh the next year.
"Remember me professor?"
"Oh yes, you took my deposition last year."
"I guess that you didn't recognize me then because the last time you had seen me I was wearing shorts and sandals when I took your course several years ago."
"Oh, now I remember you, I wondered how you had gotten my book."
----------------------------------------------
It would take a whole lot less than 22 Gs to tear off the landing gear, so such damage (if it happened) doesn't indicate any likely damage to the fuel tanks.
gl