Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Landing near the Norwich  (Read 80205 times)

Tom Swearengen

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 818
  • earhart monument, Hawaii
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #30 on: October 28, 2012, 09:47:10 AM »

Alot of pilots and non-pilots on this Forum. And it seems that everyone has an opinion on whether landing on the reef, or the lagoon, was a good idea. Seems to me either you are right or wrong, you are both right.
Tom
 
Tom Swearengen TIGHAR # 3297
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #31 on: October 28, 2012, 09:53:01 AM »

And it seems that everyone has an opinion on whether landing on the reef, or the lagoon, was a good idea.

And none of the opinions mean a darn thing.  All of the available evidence (and there is lots of it) strongly suggests a landing on the reef.  Whether it was a good idea or a bad idea is immaterial to finding whatever is left of the plane.
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #32 on: October 28, 2012, 10:38:34 AM »

Ric, speaking of finding the plane, might I respectfully call your attention to the following frames in the Niku VI HD video:

(1) 13:43:14 frame 14 shows the underside of the wingtip of the left wing, with the clear line (pointing directly at the camera) dividing the wingtip from the inboard portion of the wing and the bottom of the left aileron; in addition, the bottom of the digit "0" can be seen to the right of this line. Compare, for example, to the photo of AE standing in front of the aircraft that shows the N-number on the bottom of the left wing.

(2) 13:43:44 frame 9 shows the large lightening holes identified by John Balderston, but in addition shows the tubes attached to the underside of the top of the leading edge of the wing that were used to strengthen the leading edge. These tubes are shown in the cross-section of the wing in the set of drawings in the limited edition (Ric, please explain "limited edition").

(3) 13:43:24 frame 6 shows what appears to be a flap hinge that has been bent back on itself. Perhaps the wire shown was used to control the flap position.

(4) 13:43:20 frame 20 includes what looks to me like the Lockheed logo on the fixed portion of the left rudder.

(5) Not to forget the "0" and "2" from the top of the right wing previously identified by John Balderston. These can be found at 13:43:20 frame 21.

(6) 13:43:12 frame 18 at the very top about 3/4 of the way from left to right appears to be the open pilot's hatch seen from above and behind. The sliding pilot's window is to the left. On top of the fuselage behind the hatch appears to be the cover for the two forward tank fueling ports. Perhaps it is just my imagination, but I think one can also make out portions of the pilot's steering wheel through the open hatch.

Please pass these references on to Jeff Glickman. Thanks.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: November 04, 2012, 02:17:09 PM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #33 on: October 28, 2012, 10:43:16 AM »

Please pass these references on to Jeff Glickman. Thanks.

Will do.   I've already forwarded earlier forum postings on this subject to Jeff and asked him to look at the video.  This summary should be helpful.  Thanks.
Logged

Bill Roe

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #34 on: October 28, 2012, 07:36:38 PM »


With all respect Tim, I have seen some interesting items on the 2010 film, I have yet to see a "2" or any other number.  The frame where you see numbers I see shadows and nothing else.


You know Tom -

Someplace in this maze of threads and comments I've seen (what I remember as) expert opinion relative to the aluminum skin corroding or deteriorating, over 75 years, so that the aircraft numbers would be gone.  Just can't find it.  I doubt that anyone will find the aircraft identification numbers let alone any identifiable piece of aluminum skin.

I could be wrong right, you know.

Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #35 on: October 28, 2012, 08:02:30 PM »

Someplace in this maze of threads and comments I've seen (what I remember as) expert opinion relative to the aluminum skin corroding or deteriorating, over 75 years, so that the aircraft numbers would be gone.  Just can't find it.  I doubt that anyone will find the aircraft identification numbers let alone any identifiable piece of aluminum skin.

How well aluminum skin survives in salt water seems to depend upon the particular environment.  A few of the skins on a Douglas TBD-1 Devastator at a depth of 500 feet off Miami have corroded away.  The skin of a Grumman F3F recovered from a similar depth off San Diego was in good shape and the markings were still visible after recovery.  The skins on the TBD-1s in Jaluit Lagoon in the Marshall Islands - depths 50 and 125 feet - are in great condition after 70 years.

Logged

Bill Roe

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #36 on: October 28, 2012, 08:13:44 PM »

...environment.

Or the alloy?  I have little knowledge relative this industry except I have anti-corrosion stuff on my boat.  And it's on Lake Ontario.

I'm wondering if a military aircraft would be manufactured with a superior alloy - stronger/heavier for pilot protection?  My A-1 weighed 12,000.  The standard A-1 was 11,000.  Even though the Skyraider was a larger plane, I wonder what the weight difference is. 

Wait a minute - don't make no never mind noways.  My single 3400hp weighed more than her two 550hp.  And i had more electronics.
Logged

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #37 on: October 29, 2012, 12:12:23 AM »

Bill, I think while there are documented planes pulled up decades later and show paint, it seems those are in relatively protected areas compared to this reef face. It would face a lot of movement for a time, and almost constant sand blasting from coral sand beating it. Throw in a typhoon or two, and  I would be shocked if wing paint survived, especially whole numbers.
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #38 on: October 29, 2012, 12:37:25 AM »

 
....  I would be shocked if wing paint survived, especially whole numbers.
.         

They have. I've seen them.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #39 on: October 29, 2012, 03:13:21 AM »

Too many variables to be able to determine how aircraft wreckage will deteriorate over time, as Ric and others have pointed out.
Feel free to add to the list...
Environment
Location
Depth
Quality of materials used in construction (1930's)
Quality of coatings on surfaces, paint etc (1930's)

It's only my opinion but, the Electra didn't have a lot of paint on it to start with in comparison to say, a Corsair, Avenger or Devastator etc... and, the location of the debris field isn't exactly ideal for preserving features like paint, or even aluminium for that matter. Yes, aircraft have been found with paint jobs intact but, under more favourable conditions, lagoons, flat sea beds, shallower water etc...
IMHO of course

This must be the place
 
Logged

Bill Roe

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #40 on: October 29, 2012, 06:00:51 AM »

Too many variables to be able to determine how aircraft wreckage will deteriorate over time, as Ric and others have pointed out.
Feel free to add to the list...
Environment
Location
Depth
Quality of materials used in construction (1930's)
Quality of coatings on surfaces, paint etc (1930's)

It's only my opinion but, the Electra didn't have a lot of paint on it to start with in comparison to say, a Corsair, Avenger or Devastator etc... and, the location of the debris field isn't exactly ideal for preserving features like paint, or even aluminium for that matter. Yes, aircraft have been found with paint jobs intact but, under more favourable conditions, lagoons, flat sea beds, shallower water etc...
IMHO of course

Jeff -

Isn't there something about increased and quicker deterioration if aluminum is fixed to another material - say, steel?
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #41 on: October 29, 2012, 07:16:43 AM »

Jeff, when you look at the debris field it has a lot going for it.

a) It's where Emily remembered plane wreckage
b) It's where 'Nessie' was photographed
c) There were a max of 3 planes reported missing in this area, AE's being one
d) It isn't coral reef

Norwich city? I doubt it, too flimsy, too far away, steel is heavy, it goes down not along reef slopes

IMHO of course
This must be the place
 
Logged

Ken Nielsen

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #42 on: October 29, 2012, 07:22:07 AM »

Ric, speaking of finding the plane, might I respectfully call your attention to the following frames in the Niku VI HD video:

(1) 13:43:14 frame 14 shows the underside of the wingtip of the left wing, with the clear line (pointing directly at the camera) dividing the wingtip from the inboard portion of the wing and the bottom of the left aileron; in addition, the bottom of the digit "0" can be seen to the right of this line. Compare, for example, to the photo of AE standing in front of the aircraft that shows the N-number on the bottom of the left wing.

This sounds intriguing, but I'm not aware of any Niku VI HD video. Are you referring to the familiar 2 min. Niku VII clip, and if so, what do the time markers such as 13:43:14 refer to?
Logged

Tom Swearengen

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 818
  • earhart monument, Hawaii
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #43 on: October 29, 2012, 07:31:49 AM »

Ok ---for us technically deprived members that cants seen to find this, can someone post the frames that Tim is referring to?
Tom
Tom Swearengen TIGHAR # 3297
 
Logged

Bruce Thomas

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 650
  • Now where did I put my glasses?
Re: Landing near the Norwich
« Reply #44 on: October 29, 2012, 08:03:36 AM »

Tom, I'm confident (from the time markers) that the Niku VI video that's being discussed is the Wire & Rope video available on the Youtube TIGHARChannel
LTM,

Bruce
TIGHAR #3123R
 
« Last Edit: October 29, 2012, 08:06:18 AM by Bruce Thomas »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Up
 

Copyright 2021 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP