TIGHAR

Amelia Earhart Search Forum => Alternate Lines of Inquiry => Topic started by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 07, 2012, 11:35:00 AM

Title: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 07, 2012, 11:35:00 AM
Has anyone got any ideas as to what this is?
Another image is further down in this post
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 07, 2012, 12:22:35 PM
Has anyone got any ideas as to what this is?

Looks like a rope of some kind to my decidedly untrained eye.

We have to remember that Niku was an inhabited island from 1939 to 1963 (http://tighar.org/wiki/PISS).

It is visited routinely by both official and unofficial expeditions (including TIGHAR's, of course).

Many things could get dropped or thrown overboard by all kinds of boats near the reef.

The picture shows that there are "things down there" that might be worth looking at.  We don't know the depth of this item, nor its size or length or composition. 

I imagine that the Electra was equipped with tie-down ropes because I think I've seen other airplanes similarly equipped.  I don't suppose that we can immediately rule out any rope as "not from the Electra," unless we can tell by visual inspection that it is too old or too modern.

From this standpoint, "what it is" is a reason to go do some more looking.   8)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 07, 2012, 12:23:52 PM
Jeff, is this the item you were describing in the other thread or something new?

Initial thoughts are just a tangle of rope/wire, like discarded shoe laces (but not actual shoe laces). However it also reminds me of something organic that I have seen on TV or in a book to do with coral reefs.  I'll get my brain working on it overnight and see if anything gets shaken from my deminishing grey matter.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 07, 2012, 12:46:43 PM
Jeff, is this the item you were describing in the other thread or something new?

Initial thoughts are just a tangle of rope/wire, like discarded shoe laces (but not actual shoe laces). However it also reminds me of something organic that I have seen on TV or in a book to do with coral reefs.  I'll get my brain working on it overnight and see if anything gets shaken from my deminishing grey matter.

Chris, it's not the black squiggly thing that I want you to look at. It's what it is wrapped around, under and in that interests me. Take a closer look you will see a tube heading north from the black squiggly thing which divides into two forks. I have no idea what the black squiggly thing is but it's what it is caught up in that interests me. Yes it's the same object that I mentioned in the wire and rope video. You have to step through that part of the video one second at a time, I think the old phrase was one frame at a time.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 07, 2012, 01:13:58 PM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Alfred Hendrickson on January 07, 2012, 08:53:58 PM
You don't s'pose? Is that a landing gear fork?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 07, 2012, 09:25:34 PM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.
(http://)

Sorry Jeff. I can't visualize it. Any way to outline it for clarity? 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Phil T Martin on January 07, 2012, 10:21:45 PM
Could it be Nessie in her final resting place???
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 05:38:35 AM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.


Sorry Jeff. I can't visualize it. Any way to outline it for clarity?

Irv, here's the outline of whatever it is. I'll try to enhance the image when I get back to work 2moro.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 05:41:22 AM
You don't s'pose? Is that a landing gear fork?

Well if it isn't Alfred it could certainly be used as one  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 06:06:31 AM
Has anyone got any ideas as to what this is?

Looks like a rope of some kind to my decidedly untrained eye.

We have to remember that Niku was an inhabited island from 1939 to 1963 (http://tighar.org/wiki/PISS).

It is visited routinely by both official and unofficial expeditions (including TIGHAR's, of course).

Many things could get dropped or thrown overboard by all kinds of boats near the reef.

The picture shows that there are "things down there" that might be worth looking at.  We don't know the depth of this item, nor its size or length or composition. 

I imagine that the Electra was equipped with tie-down ropes because I think I've seen other airplanes similarly equipped.  I don't suppose that we can immediately rule out any rope as "not from the Electra," unless we can tell by visual inspection that it is too old or too modern.

From this standpoint, "what it is" is a reason to go do some more looking.   8)

Marty, the ROV video, and its title 'wire and rope' invites the viewers attention to focus on, well, wire and rope. Of course wire and rope could come from numerous sources and, they look very impressive which of course they must be to survive 75 years under the sea.
The excersise in analysing the video was to not be distracted by wire and rope and, use the footage as a valuable tool into exploring the suspected wreckage site. So looking at everything else except the wire and rope led to the reef shelf with the object lying on it. Obviously there is 75 years worth of coral residue sitting on top of it but, the outline looks promising. Of course it could be something quite innocent like a new type of ships anchor, part of a UFO or something dumped by the loran team, who knows.
There are other objects playing supporting roles to the wire and rope in the video which I hope to be able to enhance in the future. Looking outside the box is just as valuable as thinking outside it. Shame the GPS coordinates for this location are not available.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 08, 2012, 06:28:56 AM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.


Sorry Jeff. I can't visualize it. Any way to outline it for clarity?

Irv, here's the outline of whatever it is. I'll try to enhance the image when I get back to work 2moro.
(http://)

Thanks Jeff. Now it's leaping off the page. That's very interesting.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 06:30:46 AM
Could it be Nessie in her final resting place???

Possibly Phil, this footage is different to the nessie photograph. It was recent, it was where the wreckage was expected to be, it is caught on 21st century video instead of a 1930's camera. Pity the ROV operator missed it but I suspect the current was making life difficult for them and, we wouldn't want them to lose an expensive ROV. So close yet so far.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 06:44:31 AM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.


Sorry Jeff. I can't visualize it. Any way to outline it for clarity?

Irv, here's the outline of whatever it is. I'll try to enhance the image when I get back to work 2moro.
(http://)

Thanks Jeff. Now it's leaping off the page. That's very interesting.

Thanks Irv, Its easy to get distracted by the black squiggly thing, whatever that is. It's the object that its trapped under that is of interest. I could have a guess as to what it is as some people have already. Whatever it is it looks substantial and heavy. We'll see. The object is lying on a reef shelf and is only prevented from sliding further down the reef slope by lumps of coral to the left of it and probably its weight.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 08, 2012, 07:31:56 AM
Marty, the ROV video, and its title 'wire and rope' invites the viewers attention to focus on, well, wire and rope. Of course wire and rope could come from numerous sources and, they look very impressive which of course they must be to survive 75 years under the sea.

What I'm trying to suggest is that we don't know for sure whether the things pictured in the video are 75 years old.

They could be from some yacht that visited any time in the last decade.

Or tuna trawler (see this post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,381.msg4029.html#msg4029) for a list of types of visitors to Niku).

Quote
Looking outside the box is just as valuable as thinking outside it.

That's true if and only if the thing you seek is outside the box.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 08:46:11 AM
Marty, the ROV video, and its title 'wire and rope' invites the viewers attention to focus on, well, wire and rope. Of course wire and rope could come from numerous sources and, they look very impressive which of course they must be to survive 75 years under the sea.

What I'm trying to suggest is that we don't know for sure whether the things pictured in the video are 75 years old.

They could be from some yacht that visited any time in the last decade.

Or tuna trawler (see this post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,381.msg4029.html#msg4029) for a list of types of visitors to Niku).

Quote
Looking outside the box is just as valuable as thinking outside it.

That's true if and only if the thing you seek is outside the box.

Outside the box again Marty ;) The black squiggly thing was getting on my nerves. Trawling through youtube looking for anything on tyre (tire) construction there are numerous videos showing how they are made, even some from the 1930's. Part of the process is to use long thin strips of black rubber in the plying process. These are applied to the structure of the tyre (tire) from huge reels.
At the start of the ROV video we have the circular wire, also part of the tyre (tire) construction process.
Now, I am not saying that these objects are definately part of a tyre (tire) but, the wave action, tides and storms have made short work of the SS Norwich city, what chance would a tyre (tire)on a wheel have?

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Brad Beeching on January 08, 2012, 11:32:38 AM
In the video when the camera first picks up the "wire or rope", deeper down on the cliff face right on the edge of the light field there appears to be what could be more debris.
Also, in looking at the "wire" in the video, without some sort of scale to estimate diameter the best we can do is guess as to what it may be. I realize that alot of folks think the wire is from a tire, but just how likely is a tire to be shredded like that by sea action? Tires are very hard to tear apart unless it was done manually.
If AE/FN ended up there, and what we think we see is what we think it could be, it was once attached to the airplane under the engine. Could the wire be the remains of a flexable duct that maybe was part of the engine accessory section? The ducting of which I speak is treated canvas with a spiral wire inside, if you have ever cut any of this type ducting it would make a piece of wire very much like what appears in the film.
I had the opportunity one time to help out doing some work on a B-25. Inside the nacelles there were several flexable ducts like that, could the Electra had had simular ductwork?

Gums
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 08, 2012, 11:38:06 AM
In one of the frames there is a bi valve shell clearly visable next to the 'object'.  OK that dosn't give a diffinitive scale but does give a rough idea as its not one of those leg clamping monster shells so popular in 'B' Movies.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Andreas Badertscher on January 08, 2012, 12:46:02 PM
Very intersting.
Could it be that part of the tire got disentigrated during the harsh landing hence the black rope thingy? Just a guess.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 12:54:11 PM
Like Marty said there has been a lot of activity around Niku since 1937 so it's probably to early to jump to conclusions. However it does look quite promising, if only we had the GPS coordinates for the location!
There are a lot of things of interest in the wire and rope video so, the more eyes that step through it one second at a time the better. It helps to look at the whole frame of each second, not just the leading character in it or, as the kids shout out during the panto 'it's behind you' :)
Not saying it's part of the missing plane but, it's the closest I have seen so far. There are more 'objects' that I don't recognise so I will post them for those more familiar with airframe structures.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 08, 2012, 12:59:00 PM
Very intersting.
Could it be that part of the tire got disentigrated during the harsh landing hence the black rope thingy? Just a guess.

Hadn't considered that before Andreas, good point. The Electra would still be above water (just) able to transmit with a shredded tyre (tire) I would have thought.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 09, 2012, 08:00:44 AM
Ok --wishful thinking on my part--but try this. invert the pic 180*. Without knowing the distance from the ROV to the target, it 'could' it possibly be a main strut and the black 'rope' is the Aeroquip 303 brake hose that runs along the gear to the brakes.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 09, 2012, 09:01:09 AM
Ok --wishful thinking on my part--but try this. invert the pic 180*. Without knowing the distance from the ROV to the target, it 'could' it possibly be a main strut and the black 'rope' is the Aeroquip 303 brake hose that runs along the gear to the brakes.
Tom

Right I know nothing about planes/mechanics and engineering but jumping on the bandwagon have 2 photos.

No1 is of someones plane My Bearhawk patrol (http://www.mybearhawkpatrol.com/fuselage/braklines.html)

No2 is a still from the ROV

See the right angle bend.  More wishfull thinking I fear.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gus Rubio on January 09, 2012, 09:03:58 AM
I can see the strut shape, but I'm not sure brake hose would be flexible enough to assume such a contorted shape.  Then again, decades under salt water messes with stuff.  There does seem to be an awful lot of "hose" there, though- without looking at pics of the intact landing gear (which I believe are available here on the site), I would imagine there would be only a short length of brake hose on the strut. 

Is there a way to pinpoint where this image was shot, for future visitation?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 09, 2012, 09:12:50 AM
another 'possibility' is that it might be the tailwheel fork. If the empenage assembly broke loose at the rear bulkhead, then it could possibly be part of that. The wire, then could possibly be part of the rudder cables torn loose. The close up in the video slearly shows a wire rope (cable). Whether its aircraft or possibly from something else ( the shipwreck), is anyones else's guess. But it soes seem to have the consistancy of cable, and the lengths possibly indicate control cables of some sort.
It would be interesting to know the ROVs coordinates when these were taken, in relation to the shipwreck and what we think is the landing area.
tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 09, 2012, 09:49:34 AM
I can see the strut shape, but I'm not sure brake hose would be flexible enough to assume such a contorted shape.  Then again, decades under salt water messes with stuff.  There does seem to be an awful lot of "hose" there, though- without looking at pics of the intact landing gear (which I believe are available here on the site), I would imagine there would be only a short length of brake hose on the strut. 

Is there a way to pinpoint where this image was shot, for future visitation?

I believe the GPS system wasn't working so there's not much hope of finding the exact location again Gus :(
The black squiggly stuff has the appearance more akin to tape rather than hose or rope and it seems to be trapped underneath the object.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 09, 2012, 09:54:31 AM
another 'possibility' is that it might be the tailwheel fork. If the empenage assembly broke loose at the rear bulkhead, then it could possibly be part of that. The wire, then could possibly be part of the rudder cables torn loose. The close up in the video slearly shows a wire rope (cable). Whether its aircraft or possibly from something else ( the shipwreck), is anyones else's guess. But it soes seem to have the consistancy of cable, and the lengths possibly indicate control cables of some sort.
It would be interesting to know the ROVs coordinates when these were taken, in relation to the shipwreck and what we think is the landing area.
tom

It seems to be fork shaped Tom for sure. I had a look on the internet for images of the tail wheel assembly but no luck so far.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 09, 2012, 10:13:58 AM
Hadn't noticed it before but, reading your posts regarding brake hose/cables on the landing gear strut...


Whatever that is pointed out seems to follow a very similar track to...

(http://)

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 09, 2012, 10:15:57 AM
This one
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 09, 2012, 11:42:02 AM
I also have been looking around for some pics of the gear on a 10E. The drawings of the Electra may show them---But like Jeff said, there is alot of plumbing and other harnesses in engine nacelles, and gear housings. Sure would be nice to take a close look at an Electra and not things like this. Control cables, hydraulic hoses and rigid tube assemblies for the gear, electrical harnesses, etc.
This part in the video certainly looks like a piece of gear hardware, and may even be apart of the gear pivot point in the wing. may be the tailwheel assembly, that would also pivot for ground steering.
I'm with Jeff, and will get out the CC to donate. I want to see this project succeed!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 09, 2012, 12:12:22 PM
A queston for all you aircraft types out there.  Would the gear fork have a serial number that could be matched to this object if it is a wheel fork?  TIGHAR has the parts manual for AE's Electra.  How small an item on the Electra would have a serial number? 

It could be a wheel fork but is it one from the Electra?  We know no aircraft crashed on or near Gardner but aircraft parts from a Liberator were found to be used by the natives who brought them from Canton Island.  Could this also be from that bomber?  Seems like recovering that object, if it isn't coral or our imaginations, would be worthwhile.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 09, 2012, 01:17:21 PM
I seriously doubt that any serial number would be legible after 76 years, especially under water. most were on aluminum ID plates, and are probably gone now. Interesting question though, if TIGHAR has the build documents on the Electra as to the parts used to build it. Dont recall that.
If anyone is around an Air Museum with an Electra, I think it would be good to have some pics take from UNDERNEATH the engine/landing gear bay, to see how those parts interfaced. Same goes for the tailwheel---and its connection to the rudder. I know how its done now, but that was 76 years ago.
Tom

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 09, 2012, 03:07:07 PM
I seriously doubt that any serial number would be legible after 76 years, especially under water. most were on aluminum ID plates, and are probably gone now. Interesting question though, if TIGHAR has the build documents on the Electra as to the parts used to build it. Dont recall that.
If anyone is around an Air Museum with an Electra, I think it would be good to have some pics take from UNDERNEATH the engine/landing gear bay, to see how those parts interfaced. Same goes for the tailwheel---and its connection to the rudder. I know how its done now, but that was 76 years ago.
Tom

Sorry Tom.  I did read in a TIGHAR document that they had the serial numbers.  I will find that info and post unless anyone else knows the answer.  I'm also pretty sure there was some discussion that involved knowing part numbers after the ground loop in Hawaii.  An issue about whether documents were properly updated.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 09, 2012, 03:26:40 PM
Hi Tom

I think this is the answer I had read before that made me think TIGHAR has serial numbers.  It is a reply from Ric in Reply 8 of "Nessie Photo and Emily"

"We have serial numbers for the engines, propeller hubs and propeller blades. There is apparently no surviving record of serial numbers for instruments, radios, gear motor, flap motor, etc."  Thats a shame. But its really only the bigger parts that likely survived anyway.

Ric goes on to say...  "On the other hand, there should be no airplane wreckage of any kind in the water near Nikumaroro unless it's the Electra and all we really need is something that can be conclusively identified as being from a Lockheed 10 (I'd like to hear anyone's theory of how a Model 10 other than c/n 1055 got to Niku)."

That fits in with Jeff's comment on the wheel fork.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Bruce Thomas on January 09, 2012, 03:36:40 PM
Shame the GPS coordinates for this location are not available.
Jeff

Is it certain that this sequence was shot after the GPS of the ROV was damaged?  Might it have been shot before that point?  Hmmmmmmmm.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Richard C Cooke on January 09, 2012, 04:40:37 PM
The GPS situation for the ROV is unfortunate and could complicate finding this again - that is some kind of 'terrain'.
Is there no estimate from logs of where the ROV was, and how deep it was, when it was shot?

rc
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: James G. Stoveken on January 09, 2012, 09:38:26 PM
In a previous discussion Marty had posted a link to photos (http://picasaweb.google.com/113745695815582491141/Auckland2003?gsessionid=R7xpMD29uxfzay_SsP12ng#) he took while doing research in New Zealand.  There are some excellent pictures of an Electra's main gear. 


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 09, 2012, 10:13:18 PM
Awesome post James!! I had missed the pics that Marty took in NZ of the Electra. I found the main gear attachment under the engine nacelle VERY enlightening. But---not wanting to put too much hope into the video pic, but if you compare it to pic 7 of 13 of Marty's album, it certainly looks like the main gear of a Electra to me.
I was also amazed by the submerged coral reef in the video. We know what coral does to humans when you step or fall on it. Imagine an aluminum skinned airframe being pounded by wave action against it, then dragged by the currents on it. The skin didnt stand a chance. The reef would have opened it up like a can opener. But, as it was shedding the skin, perhaps heavier parts of the engine mounts, or fuselage were caught and hug up on the reef for a period of time.
Just for giggles: anyone want to bet that the position of the "target" in the video is close to the area of Nessie, and after it was dislodged from the surface, it was captured in a subsurface reef trench that we can now see in the video?
I think we all can agree that there is an anomoly there. That in itself is nt a reason to return, but it sure does present a good argument as to an airplane being on Nikumarro. The only one we know of was AE's 10E Electra.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 06:28:28 AM
Ok --wishful thinking on my part--but try this. invert the pic 180*. Without knowing the distance from the ROV to the target, it 'could' it possibly be a main strut and the black 'rope' is the Aeroquip 303 brake hose that runs along the gear to the brakes.
Tom

Tom, I am going through the video frame by frame at the moment from various angles, 90, 180 etc... To see if any other anomalies can be pinpointed. Sometimes it works as objects don't always conform to the human preference of seeing things from a horizontal upright position. That's usually how they escape detection, by being in a position that is alien to normal methods of human recognition, but they're there.
Jeff

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 07:03:50 AM
Jeff---let us know what you see----I tried that couldn't make it stop with enough clarity to firure out what it might be.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 07:27:12 AM
(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/58_NessieHypothesis/07tankchange.jpg)

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/rimdiameter.jpg)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 07:33:36 AM
Jeff---let us know what you see----I tried that couldn't make it stop with enough clarity to firure out what it might be.
Tom

Yes, it's not easy Tom. A combination of factors combine to make it difficult, the motion of the ROV, YouTube quality video, PC speed etc... It's a struggle to find a frame that's going to be clean enough to enhance but, there's a lot of them!
There's something of interest about 18.5 inches from the first anomaly which I will try to enhance today and post. Not being a structural engineer I can only guess as to what it, or they, could be so any suggestions would be great.
The reef shelf that anomaly1 is resting on is, as theorised by Tighar, a collection point for junk falling down the reef slope. So I would hope and expect to find more anomalies in this area. Bearing in mind that there is a number of years of coral residue sitting on top of whatever is there, unless of course it arrived there more recently.
Jeff




Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 08:13:20 AM
great pic Richie---as you can see there is ALOT of plumbing aroung the gear bay and the engine nacelle. The brake hose is clearly visible, and is pretty long to accomodate the strut extension. One thing to keep in mind about the hose, if it is in fact Aeroquip 303 or an earlier variation: you have the black outer cover with is generally a woven cloth/textile braid. under than is a STEEL braid reinforcement (not stainless), with a cloth fiber reinforcement barrier, then the hose liner, which is rubber or neoprene. I actually DONT know what was on the Electra, so i'm going to theorize here a minute. Having been submerged in the ocean for 76 years, the cloth other cover has desinegrated, as well as the steel reinforcement, leaving the cloth barrier and the rubber liner. If you have just the rubber liner which would be about .350 OD and .188 ID (by todays standards), it may appear to be a 'squiggly' piece of hose like we see in the video.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 08:26:08 AM
UPDATE---it isnt Aeroquip 303 or derivitive---aeroquip didnt become a company until 1939. I'll continue the search! But--same theory applies.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 09:30:54 AM
Ok, as promised here's another still from the reef shelf. It's about 18.5 inches from the first anomaly. We are inverted 180 degrees as you can see from the ROV video clock. There is one picture without any hints and another with.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 09:33:34 AM
Here's the other one
(http://)

looks as though it could quite possibly be a couple of man made objects, one circular in shape and the other appears to be able to come apart in two bits and has two holes that might have once held something in place. Could of course be a freak coral formation but, it's doing a good impression of human manufacturing.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 09:56:20 AM
Jeff---look at the resolution at the fork---the dark area at the fork----a tire deflated? Is it me or wishful thinking?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 10:09:59 AM
Jeff---look at the resolution at the fork---the dark area at the fork----a tire deflated? Is it me or wishful thinking?
Tom

I thought along the same lines Tom when I posted the first pictures of the anomaly. When fiddling around with the enhancing of the first anomaly image I couldn't quite get the dark bit in the middle to leap out. I'll go back and see if I can get a better still.
Any how, if you want a tyre (tire?) or wheel to look at there's something in the latest picture that might just tick all the boxes. A nice circle with something probably engineered attached to or lying on top of it which is a shame as it obscures the completeness of the circle. Unless of course it's part of the same assembly?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 10:21:31 AM
Jeff---I've been known to be crazy before---just ask some on this forum---but it certainly looks man made to me. The dark spot isnt consistant with anything else there. With the numbers at the top left of the screen, you have the 'fork target' with the 'black squiggley'. To the left you have what looks like a coral boulder sitting on 'something'. Tha t 'something' has a coral color to it, but maybe just sand and coral dust from the ROV. Now I dont want to make conjecture here, but it looks like an inviting target.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 10:30:04 AM
Here's another strange anomaly. It appears to be very thin, it is totally different to the coral surrounding it, it appears to be sitting on the coral, it is a different colour, it's shiny when the ROV lights hit it, it has a curved surface and some torn edges.




(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 10:35:05 AM
Here's the other
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
Jeff---I've been known to be crazy before---just ask some on this forum---but it certainly looks man made to me. The dark spot isnt consistant with anything else there. With the numbers at the top left of the screen, you have the 'fork target' with the 'black squiggley'. To the left you have what looks like a coral boulder sitting on 'something'. Tha t 'something' has a coral color to it, but maybe just sand and coral dust from the ROV. Now I dont want to make conjecture here, but it looks like an inviting target.
Tom
I know the feeling Tom, I just feel frustrated that I simply can't hoover all that crap away and see just what is there as opposed to having to second guess what's underneath all that crap. Still, what do we expect, it's been a long time to say the least.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 11:22:29 AM
Just to summarise all the strange anomolies on the reef shelf into one image.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 11:31:51 AM
To view the images in different sizes you can save them and fiddle around in your image editors or, simply click on view in your browser menu bar at the top of the screen and select zoom 50%, Remember to reset it back to 100% when finished viewing.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 11:33:20 AM
Jeff---zzom in on the center target, and the top left----really interested in the top left
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 11:37:48 AM
It's a strange world thinking outside the box, boxes are for keeping things in, when you open them up, well...
jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 11:44:45 AM
Jeff---zzom in on the center target, and the top left----really interested in the top left
Tom
Tom it's a man made object but I have no idea what it is. It pays to look at things from different perspectives, remember we're 180 degrees inversed on this still. Seems to be about 4 or 5 different anomalies on this reef shelf so far. look at the alloy shape, see the curvature on the edge nearest to the two pronged anomoly? it seems to have a pattern on the edge as well. Lots of mysteries to solve here!
Images best viewed at 50% zoom on your browser.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 10, 2012, 11:46:58 AM
I've been resisting posting on this serious post but anyone else see the pigs head in the top left quadrent.

Sorry  :P
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 11:52:43 AM
I've been resisting posting on this serious post but anyone else see the pigs head in the top left quadrent.

Sorry  :P

Yes I can, well done Chris, minus its right ear?
Jeff :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 10, 2012, 12:29:16 PM
I've been resisting posting on this serious post but anyone else see the pigs head in the top left quadrent.

Sorry  :P

That's a 'pig's eye', Chris...  ;D


Point is well made we could be seeing all kinds of stuff in this jumble...
But this IS a most interesting picture.  Maybe a rich one for re-visit, time may tell.

LTM -

Wish I could claim that that was what I was aiming at but i'll take the plaudits  ;D

I first saw a scull within the pigs head, crossed my eyes and hay presto 'the lord of the flies' jumped out and stuck in my own head.

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ted G Campbell on January 10, 2012, 01:10:16 PM
What type brakes did the Electra have?  The picture almost looks like it could be a brake caliber.
Ted Campbell
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 01:21:54 PM
Yes sir, I think so----would like to see another pic to verify that.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 10, 2012, 02:22:52 PM
That piece is tough for me to make out. But, like Jeff said, there does seem to be some unnatural things there.
Does anymore of this video-or others exsist?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 02:23:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=9tvHm3jZcME#t=73s

soon as it starts pause it an directly behind the time bottom centre middle there is a round object see if u can zoom in on it
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 02:35:16 PM
also the metal ring at start of video cud that be from the hoop antenna ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 02:58:33 PM
stop video at 13:37:57;09

its a wheel attached to somethink buried  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 03:02:15 PM
That piece is tough for me to make out. But, like Jeff said, there does seem to be some unnatural things there.
Does anymore of this video-or others exsist?
Tom

Yes, the youtube footage is very low quality. Ric allowed me to have one frame from the actual footage, quality x100 better than youtube. That's where I have been able to ge the best images from, one still from the original.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 03:44:55 PM
also the metal ring at start of video cud that be from the hoop antenna ?

Do you mean the loop antenna for the DF Richie?
Like this one from the Nessie photo?
It's a bit too thin for that I suspect

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 03:54:55 PM
i dont mean its actual hoop but lookin at size it cud av been a part ov it, av u had chance to get a still on other object ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 04:01:12 PM
stop video at 13:37:57;09

its a wheel attached to somethink buried  :)

Could be Richie, there's a lot of junk here that shouldn't be here, unless...
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 04:09:00 PM
yer i agree really need to sort membership out so can see more footage get a better idea of wat else is down there  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 10, 2012, 04:46:03 PM
i dont mean its actual hoop but lookin at size it cud av been a part ov it, av u had chance to get a still on other object ?

Is this what you mean Richie?

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 10, 2012, 05:47:23 PM
yep looks to circle like to be not man made  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: James G. Stoveken on January 10, 2012, 09:53:37 PM
Ok, as promised here's another still from the reef shelf. It's about 18.5 inches from the first anomaly.

Jeff, Thanks for this thread and the research you're doing on the video.  Very interesting stuff.  I'm curious as to how you came up with that rather precise measurement of 18.5 inches? 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 05:12:23 AM
Ok, as promised here's another still from the reef shelf. It's about 18.5 inches from the first anomaly.

Jeff, Thanks for this thread and the research you're doing on the video.  Very interesting stuff.  I'm curious as to how you came up with that rather precise measurement of 18.5 inches?
On the Tighar website there is a photo in the 'Nessie hypthesis' page of the landing gear of the Electra with, convinently, an extended measuring tape. Using that as the basis for measurements of size of first anomoly and therefore distances on the reef shelf.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 05:21:43 AM
That piece is tough for me to make out. But, like Jeff said, there does seem to be some unnatural things there.
Does anymore of this video-or others exsist?
Tom

The original video is of higher quality than the youtube version and is therefore of more use. I suspect there is more in the original footage but probably not of the reef shelf that collects all the junk. The ROV seems to concentrate on the 'wire and rope' despite the Tighar hypothesis of stuff falling down the reef slope and getting caught on ledges. Still, the currents around reefs are pretty strong and unpredictable so, I don't blame them for playing it safe.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 11, 2012, 06:46:53 AM
A note of caution.  "... Using that as the basis for measurements of size of first anomoly and therefore distances on the reef shelf." ...assumes the shape is a particular size.  Be very cautious when making that sort of assumption.  We can't tell from the video what size anything is.  The "landing gear" feature may be a foot tall, or 5 feet tall.  The circular wire might be a 6-inch circlip (Richie suggested a retaining ring), or a tire bead (14 inch diameter?), or a barrel hoop (20 inch diameter), or a biological growth (how big is that?).  Keep the unknowns in mind when studying the video, .
The obvious danger of assuming a particular size to any feature is in applying that assumption to other features, then use those features as proof of the size of the original feature.  Until TIGHAR gets another ROV down there to examine the feature (assuming it can be found again), we won't know how big it is.
From the few stills I've seen, the cable and rope are the only features with anything like a known size, and even then it's hard to tell.  What are their diameters?  We can make assumptions, then apply thosee assumptions to other features that are in the field of view, but when the camera moves to some other part of the reef, the previous dimensions become assumptions again.
I love to read about people noticing things in the videos - getting lots of eyes to review what we already have can lead to important discoveries.  Just remember the assumptions that support those discoveries.  If and when any of those assumptions gets changed, then the whole argument based on the assumption will need to be revisited.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 06:55:58 AM
A note of caution.  "... Using that as the basis for measurements of size of first anomoly and therefore distances on the reef shelf." ...assumes the shape is a particular size.  Be very cautious when making that sort of assumption.  We can't tell from the video what size anything is.  The "landing gear" feature may be a foot tall, or 5 feet tall.  The circular wire might be a 6-inch circlip (Richie suggested a retaining ring), or a tire bead (14 inch diameter?), or a barrel hoop (20 inch diameter), or a biological growth (how big is that?).  Keep the unknowns in mind when studying the video, .
The obvious danger of assuming a particular size to any feature is in applying that assumption to other features, then use those features as proof of the size of the original feature.  Until TIGHAR gets another ROV down there to examine the feature (assuming it can be found again), we won't know how big it is.
From the few stills I've seen, the cable and rope are the only features with anything like a known size, and even then it's hard to tell.  What are their diameters?  We can make assumptions, then apply thosee assumptions to other features that are in the field of view, but when the camera moves to some other part of the reef, the previous dimensions become assumptions again.
I love to read about people noticing things in the videos - getting lots of eyes to review what we already have can lead to important discoveries.  Just remember the assumptions that support those discoveries.  If and when any of those assumptions gets changed, then the whole argument based on the assumption will need to be revisited.
Agreed John, the only reason I made that assumption is to give me a scale to compare distances and possible sizes of anomalies. It isn't definately the 'correct' scale  but, it keeps all objects and distances in the same scale, be it the right one or the wrong one. So yes, good point John.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 07:14:12 AM
This anomaly is the one that just shouldn't be there. It doesn't jump of the screen like the two pronged thingy but...It appears to be part of the coral reef at first glance.
1. It's an awful lot thinner than the rest of the coral, too thin?
2. It's curved
3. The edge nearest the the red line, two pronged thingy is serrated/torn
4. The edges at the opposite end are torn apart
5. There seem to be lines running along it from front edge to back edge
6. There are dots along these lines
7. It's a different colour/hue to the rest of the coral
8. It's got that annoying black squiggly stuff lying in it confirming the concave appearance of the object (what is that stuff?)
9. It casts a shadow onto the surrounding coral from the ROV lights

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 07:59:45 AM
That black suiggly stuff is annoying me! In the paras we all used to carry a roll of black insulating tape to wrap around stuff that rattled a lot, mainly on night patrols. Is there any evidence of a roll of black insulating tape being aboard the Electra? Any photographs that may show a roll of black insulating tape inside the Electra, Richie? You have posted loads of photos recently, any sign of a roll of black insulating tape in them?
Its composition gives it a good chance of survival underwater. Apparently there's a huge raft of plastic junk floating around in the pacific.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 08:59:21 AM
IF anyone is near a museum with an Electra, and can take pics of the gear and the gear bay/engine nacelle area with the plumbing, I think that would be fantastic.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 09:16:47 AM
Here's a better picture showing the curved/concave thing
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 09:24:04 AM
I can't get anymore from the 0.5 seconds of video footage so that's it from me on the posting stills from it. Will keep searching though :)
Trying to find evidence of black insulating tape on board the Electra (that damn black squiggly stuff is everywhere) so will be scouring all the photos of AE and FN in or outside the Electra for evidence. Seems like something that might be useful to have aboard on a round the world flight ;)

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Austin on January 11, 2012, 09:35:22 AM
Electrical insulating tape from that period would have been cloth based, not plastic and is likely to have rotted away long, long ago.

My eyeballs have pretty well expired trying to make out shapes in the coral. ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 10:16:02 AM
Electrical insulating tape from that period would have been cloth based, not plastic and is likely to have rotted away long, long ago.

My eyeballs have pretty well expired trying to make out shapes in the coral. ;D

Yes I seem to remember my dad had some as you describe, black like tar and sticky as hell it was.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 11, 2012, 10:28:24 AM

And it wasn't called "Insulating Tape", it was called "Friction Tape".  Once ya put it on something, especially if it overlapped, it wasn't coming off.  What makes ya think that it would degrade in water?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 11, 2012, 12:16:07 PM
IF anyone is near a museum with an Electra, and can take pics of the gear and the gear bay/engine nacelle area with the plumbing, I think that would be fantastic.
Tom

Does this help?  Its under license to Life magazine so you can see the larger image here:  http://www.life.com/hdgallery/35112/image/56963938/life-and-mystery-of-amelia-earhart#index/22 (http://www.life.com/hdgallery/35112/image/56963938/life-and-mystery-of-amelia-earhart#index/22)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 12:33:27 PM
Irv---actually it does because is shows some of the airframe structure-although some of that in the picture may be for support purposes until the wing and spar is in place.
Pics of the under construction, or those taken during the repair work from the Luke Field incident would be fantastic.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 11, 2012, 12:36:15 PM
Here's some great pictures from one of Richie's other threads.

Click Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4728437061/)

(http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1368/4728437061_a65af67e78_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 11, 2012, 12:40:23 PM
wow i have just logged in to re copy an paste that pic as am on flickr now  :o
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 11, 2012, 12:40:35 PM
Here's some great pictures from one of Richie's other threads.

Click Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4728433701/)

(http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1056/4728433701_d863d55ce8_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 11, 2012, 12:41:38 PM
wow i have just logged in to re copy an paste that pic as am on flickr now  :o

Great links!  Thanks to you.... :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 11, 2012, 12:44:48 PM
(http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=341&DMSCALE=15.50388&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMTEXT=&REC=11&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 11, 2012, 12:46:08 PM
(http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=335&DMSCALE=12.66624&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMTEXT=&REC=14&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 12:47:18 PM
Way to go Richie!!!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 11, 2012, 12:51:55 PM
This one is just a cutaway and doesnt show any electrical, hydraulic or control lines.  Just nice to see the overall aircraft in a "revealed" manner.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 12:54:27 PM
its a BIG help Irv!!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Alfred Hendrickson on January 11, 2012, 12:55:09 PM
These pics are GREAT! Where you guys coming up with 'em?

Nice going, Richie!

Irvine, I like that cutaway one!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 11, 2012, 12:55:32 PM
(http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=400&DMSCALE=13.28021&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMTEXT=&REC=5&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)

http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=400&CISOBOX=1&REC=5
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 12:56:35 PM
Here's some great pictures from one of Richie's other threads.

Click Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4728437061/)

(http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1368/4728437061_a65af67e78_o.jpg)

Thanks for the post Erik and Richie. I'm glad to see that the in the image you have put here shows that the wheel strut is hollow, that's the same as the forked anomaly in discussion.
cheers
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 11, 2012, 12:58:07 PM
(http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=407&DMSCALE=60.72874&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMTEXT=&REC=19&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 11, 2012, 01:00:01 PM
Thanks for the post Erik and Richie. I'm glad to see that the in the image you have put here shows that the wheel strut is hollow, that's the same as the forked anomaly in discussion.
cheers
Jeff

It's as if the black squigly stuff is coming out of the hollowed out area.  Like a grease-gun gone bad!  :o
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Alfred Hendrickson on January 11, 2012, 01:00:59 PM
Not sure how to post pics here. But here goes . . . I took this picture myself:
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 11, 2012, 01:05:56 PM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.
(http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=671;image)

Jeff, Is this from the Electra - or a look-a-like?  Source?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 01:06:15 PM
Not sure how to post pics here. But here goes . . . I took this picture myself:

Great quality picture Alfred! Do you know which plane it's from?

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 01:10:09 PM
Here's a picture from the Tighar site showing a very similar shape as to the one with the black squiggly stuff wrapped around it.
(http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=671;image)

Jeff, Is this from the Electra - or a look-a-like?  Source?

It's from the Electra and, it can be found on the Tighar website AE search, click on the silver cd section and the nessie hypothesis

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Owens on January 11, 2012, 01:12:04 PM
My uninformed opinion (amateur scuba diver) is that it's extremely unlikely that the black squiggly stuff or any of the rope dates from 1937.  After that length of time, even if a surface resisted the attachment of marine growth, I would expect it to have silt covering it.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Alfred Hendrickson on January 11, 2012, 01:17:15 PM
Not sure how to post pics here. But here goes . . . I took this picture myself:

Great quality picture Alfred! Do you know which plane it's from?

Jeff

That picture is of the few remaining bits of C/N 1024, an L10A that crashed in Idaho back in 1935. It was featured in TIGHAR's dado search about 7 seven years ago. To date, this is the closest thing to an Electra L10 that I have seen with my own eyes!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 01:28:02 PM
there is alot of similarities between the 2 pics Alfred-----
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 11, 2012, 08:07:49 PM
That black suiggly stuff is annoying me! In the paras we all used to carry a roll of black insulating tape to wrap around stuff that rattled a lot, mainly on night patrols. Is there any evidence of a roll of black insulating tape being aboard the Electra? Any photographs that may show a roll of black insulating tape inside the Electra, Richie? You have posted loads of photos recently, any sign of a roll of black insulating tape in them?
Its composition gives it a good chance of survival underwater. Apparently there's a huge raft of plastic junk floating around in the pacific.

Jeff

Me too.  What are the chances that the "black squiggly" stuff is coagulated oil from the oleo gear strut?  Being trapped for 70 years under high pressure, and then all of a sudden one day snapping a hydraulic fitting,  blam it all oozes out, leaving the unusual pattern we see in the video.  What would oil do after 70 years under pressure like that - thicken like grease?  Crazy thinking...

(http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=730;image)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 11, 2012, 08:25:01 PM
Theres something even stranger in another part of the ROV video. Sorry to bore you all :(
I'll post it up sometime tomorrow.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 08:28:40 PM
not so crazy Erik---- stranger things are happening.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 11, 2012, 08:30:19 PM
come on Jeff---I need to sleep tonite!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 12, 2012, 07:09:50 AM
Ok, this still fom the ROV video is a bit further up slope of the reef shelf. It is a sheet of that 'alloy' material again similar to the curved/concave bit on the reef shelf. It has the same oddly 'serrated' edge to it again, with some symetrical positioning of holes? rivets? black lines, and is very thin. The yellow line goes around the outline of the 'alloy' sheet and, it appears to be 'square', 'panel' shaped?. The red lines go around unusual objects lying near or, on top of it.
One has a metal ring at the end of it, one looks like part of a set of goggles, two appear to be metallic parts and the rest, who knows. Again, like Marty says there have been a lot of visitors to the island over the years and, we don't know for sure if another plane ditched near the island, maybe during WW2?
So again. It's speculation but, there is something on this reef.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 12, 2012, 07:25:56 AM
If the black substance was a hardened extruded substance would it not be subject to the effects of currents and have moved on? It looks more like whatever it is is caught on the peice of coral that it is on.

BTW its not a bad idea, when I was young we often got balls of 'Tar' washed ashore that were infact old deposits of oil from a wreck that was breaking up down the coast. Wo forbid if you got it on you.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 08:03:27 AM
Jeff---where is this last still in relation to the one with the other targets? I inveted the pic (have the numbers at the top ) to better recognize the location. I assume that inverted, the last still would be 'left' of the other objects.
tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 08:20:45 AM
Jeff---with the numbers at the bottom, the rust looking colors to the right of your red outlined objects. Can you see that in a better still?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 12, 2012, 08:43:07 AM
Jeff---where is this last still in relation to the one with the other targets? I inveted the pic (have the numbers at the top ) to better recognize the location. I assume that inverted, the last still would be 'left' of the other objects.
tom

It's uphill a yard or two from the reef shelf with the first lot of objects on it. To the right of.
Jeff
Which bit of the new still did you want to look at  Tom?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 08:45:30 AM
in the new still, numbers on bottom, to the right of the upper 2 red outlined targets. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 12, 2012, 10:49:37 AM
If the black substance was a hardened extruded substance would it not be subject to the effects of currents and have moved on? It looks more like whatever it is is caught on the peice of coral that it is on.

BTW its not a bad idea, when I was young we often got balls of 'Tar' washed ashore that were infact old deposits of oil from a wreck that was breaking up down the coast. Wo forbid if you got it on you.

Yes, I think you are right about what might be the logical case, Chris - and I see this 'fluid' thing as a very long shot.

I've seen tar balls on the Gulf coast near here (years prior to BP's 'event', in fact) - and that would be what I would expect of such stuff over time.

One key would be how such old fluid might behave: would it be a near-solid with firm consistency that might be fairly tough and 'rope like'?  Would it tend to just dissipate into smaller 'tar balls'? 
Other questions come to mind:
Why is there no silt evident (judging by the 'blackness' of it)?  Did it just happen (what a whopping coincidence that would be) and therefore no silt?  Is it still there?

I don't know these things.  I intend to learn more about how such material behaves over time, and what consistency and appearances would be reasonable if one found such a thing (old fluid being extruded in water).  It could be an explanation - or the thing could turn out to be nothing more than a rope dropped by a passing boat a few weeks before TIGHAR arrived with the ROV. 

Funny thing is, I all but 'dismissed' the squiggly at first while I tried to sort out the 'thing it was wrapped around', and as that took shape, well... - funny what 'suggestion' does to us, for sure.

I think I'll try to reach a friend or two in the materials and processes end of my business...

LTM -

.

Jeff

The lack of silt and residue on the black squiggly thing would suggest it is very flexible and is able to waft about in the currents thus throwing off anything that settles on it. All the other stuff down there is motionless therefore covered in coral residue and silt IMO. Is there any sea weed that's that colour? Would sea weed be capable of living in a hollow cylinder with just the residue of mineral oil to live on? There doesn't appear to be much else down there that could support plant life.
 
One other thing. Does anyone know if there is longer footage of the ROV video? Would be interesting to run through it even if it took weeks to do so.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 10:53:15 AM
Jeff---consider the brake hose liner--3/16 ID, 5/16 OD. This appears to be 8-9 feet long , but it may have been one piece inside the landing gear bay--
tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 11:05:56 AM
hey guys, I appologise.  I'm not trying to speculate, or sway the vision of what others may see. Like you, I've been studying the stills, and historical pics of not only the Electra, but of P&W radials. I think we can agree that there are a fw strange things on that coral. I must admit, that I got excited about a 'target'. Having looked over alot of pics this past week, ------well I dont want to speculate, ok.

I'll try to refrane from such enthusiastic outbursts!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 12, 2012, 11:20:17 AM
hey guys, I appologise.  I'm not trying to speculate, or sway the vision of what others may see. Like you, I've been studying the stills, and historical pics of not only the Electra, but of P&W radials. I think we can agree that there are a fw strange things on that coral. I must admit, that I got excited about a 'target'. Having looked over alot of pics this past week, ------well I dont want to speculate, ok.

I'll try to refrane from such enthusiastic outbursts!

Tom, nothing is out of the question and, everything needs to be considered, my sea weed one is a good example :).
Any idea on the methods of construction and materials used in the hydraulic and brake lines in the 1930's?
There's a factory near where I live called Dunlop Hiflex. They have been making these sort of things for donkeys years. I'll pop in there next week and see if they have anything from the 1930's that might shed some light on this avenue of exploration i.e how they were made and, using what materials. Don't forget though, it's the hardware down there that needs identifying as well, not easy. The stills that are of most use are when the ROV isn't being moved around, nice clean image. When it's on the move they're not much use, too much blur
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 12, 2012, 11:33:33 AM
Jeff---look at the resolution at the fork---the dark area at the fork----a tire deflated? Is it me or wishful thinking?
Tom

Tom, I had considered that and, yes it is a possibility especially when you consider the fact that the main gear wheels had mudguards which would prevent any chance of ever seeing a perfect round black tyre, be it inflated or deflated. A partial circle of black with the lighter surfaces of the hub at the centre is the best we are going to get and, that thing inbetween the forks/prongs does look inviting.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 11:44:50 AM
Jeff---been researching the hose thing a bit. Aircraft hose that we know today (Aeroquip 303, ans Stratoflex 111) has a textile woven outer cover, a steel wire reinforcement, a textile barrier, and a neoprene/nitril liner. I suspect that in 1936-37, there was something similar. Aeroquip didnt start until 1939, so I'm think Goodyear. They were involved in disc brake development for aircraft.
After 75 years, I suspect all that might be left would be the liner. Still checking on pre WWII hoses.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 12, 2012, 12:25:03 PM
The black squigle kind of reminds me of a deflated cycle inner tube wrapped round some coral.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 12, 2012, 02:03:40 PM
If, and it is a definate if at this point, this mystery object is in fact one of the landing gear struts, and if the dark area is indeed a deflated tire, then I don't think that this would be Nessie. I would sooner think it would be her twin sister. If you recall in the wheel of fortune article http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/2003Vol_19/1904.pdf, (sorry Marty, I couldn't find your post on how to insert links), Dr. Stone described what may be a wheel rim sans tire/strut. I would sooner think that that wheel, if it was, would have been Nessie. Sitting out on the reef where the colonists may have seen it and salvaged it. If this object is a strut I would believe it to have been a part of the plane carried off of the reef flat with other wreckage. I, too, think that the shape of the object is similar to a strut, possibly with the tire. I am cautious however in that, as a recreational diver, I have seen a lot of shapes underwater that appear to be man made but turn out to be natural and vice versa. Check out some photos taken of objects underwater and you'll see what I mean. I do hope that this object can be relocated and proves to be what we all are speculating and hoping that it might be. Ah, the excitement builds.....    LTM  -John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 02:25:28 PM
I agree with you too John. Under water stuff can be very decieving. One day we'll figure this out.
Historical note: talked with a long time aviation mechanic with much experience. He did some digging and found out that during the time frame of the Electra build and repair, hydraulic brake hose were in use, and made of a natural rubber liner covered by a cloth outer reinforcement. Seems our friend Allan Lockheed had founded the Lockheed Hydraulic Brake Company. Stands to reson that this most advanced airpalne would have such items as disc brakes, and most probably using Allan's own hardware. Still researching---
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 02:30:55 PM
No sermon Jeff, I was the one that got really out of control on this. I'll stay reserved-------UNTIL Ric and Co go there with the ROV, a submirsible, barge and crane, and bring the Electra home.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 06:09:57 PM
Jeff my friend, we are on the same track, looking and I think hopeing for the same thing. The excellent work by those talented enough to stop video and get a still pic from it ( i cant do it -ive tried!) has really opened my eyes on what a monumental task this project really is. Ric, I dont know how you do it, just glad you do.

Hopefully, TIGHAR can get the ROV on the next expedition. I believe the evidence is down there. I also believe that TIGHAR will get the resources to bring up the evidence.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 12, 2012, 06:59:42 PM
I told a friend the other day that this search is a bit like the story of the tortoise and the hare. The hare is the fast route to the "aha" moment with the smoking gun. The tortoise is the slow approach using archaeology in the land search. The difference here is that both the tortoise and the hare have the same goal and are on the same side. When one crosses the finish line then everyone wins.  The archaeology has brought Artifacts forward. The underwater search hasn't yet but my hope is these ROV stills can help change this. But lets keep both the tortoise and the hare in the race.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 12, 2012, 07:02:36 PM
True Irv---we are on the same team.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 12, 2012, 08:25:24 PM

Jeff
I think that Lough means Lake, not Log.  I wouldn't swear to that though.
Prhaps we should refer to the strange item as Lougheed Nessie?   hehe 8)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 12, 2012, 09:20:52 PM
"Lougheed Nessie"
OUCH! (but I laughed anyway)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 04:23:47 AM
Yet another still :(

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 04:26:59 AM
And another. These are from the ROV video near the start so, even further up the reef slope, just after the wire loop.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 05:11:29 AM
I would like to mention how difficult it is to visualise this stuff in a live situation, as in the case of the ROV operator. It's easy in hindsight to see all this stuff but when you are trying to control an ROV in difficult conditions and, home in and focus on things it's a different ball game. So I would just like to say what a good job they did being in the right place (fingers crossed) and getting some incredible footage. I just hope it helps that people have taken the time and trouble to use this valuable footage to advance the project further. The more people trying to make sense of this junk the better. good work guys, very good.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 05:29:07 AM
Well said Jeff. WE know they were lokking for something, anything. It all seems to run together down there. It's not like, oh wow, theres the Titanic. Nope the 'parts' are all pretty small, and covered up. I forgot that this region of the pacific has little things like storms, earthquakes, tsumanis,  that reak havic on not only the island, but the corresponding subsurface as well. And----notice the ROV hasnt picked up any large portions of the Norwich City. From the flight video that Ric took, we kno wtha large steel portions of the ship have been moved great distances on the shoreline. I would think the same thing has happened underwater. And---we arent sure where the bottom is.
I think on the next ROV pass, we will find not only the bottom, but parts of the NC, and the Electra.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 05:45:27 AM
Well said Jeff. WE know they were lokking for something, anything. It all seems to run together down there. It's not like, oh wow, theres the Titanic. Nope the 'parts' are all pretty small, and covered up. I forgot that this region of the pacific has little things like storms, earthquakes, tsumanis,  that reak havic on not only the island, but the corresponding subsurface as well. And----notice the ROV hasnt picked up any large portions of the Norwich City. From the flight video that Ric took, we kno wtha large steel portions of the ship have been moved great distances on the shoreline. I would think the same thing has happened underwater. And---we arent sure where the bottom is.
I think on the next ROV pass, we will find not only the bottom, but parts of the NC, and the Electra.
Tom

Well said Tom. I don't think there is much chance of finding big chunks of wreckage, just little bits and pieces, engines would be the likeliest survivors but, being the heaviest they would take some stopping from tumbling down to the reef bottom. The conditions around the reef made short work of the SS Norwich City and that was made from substantial chunks of metal designed for the sea.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 06:07:28 AM
Might have found the tail wheel assembly. Has anyone got any pics of it?

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 06:13:47 AM
yep there are alot of them(http://) . I'm not reall good at this---but this should give you a better idea.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 06:14:57 AM
oops --wrong pics--(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 06:42:41 AM
oops --wrong pics--(http://)

Right, thank's Tom. I will need more photos and if possible some schematics as I think it was quite a bit of an assembly. Richie, can you help? you seem to be able to get stuff from God knows where.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 06:53:24 AM
Ric probably has them in the harney drawings, or in the original Electra blueprints.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 06:59:39 AM
Ric probably has them in the harney drawings, or in the original Electra blueprints.
Tom

Brilliant idea Tom, the Harney drawings. I'll download them. It's diificult to make out as it's stuck in a hole, cavity, crevasse, whatever in the reef and, as usual it's not sitting at a friendly angle but, there are shapes, angles, holes and various appendages that I could match given a decent set of drawings. Good work Tom, thanks.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 07:01:38 AM
No Jeff---you are doing good work----I'm just sitting here!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 13, 2012, 07:26:44 AM
No Jeff---you are doing good work----I'm just sitting here!
Tom

No, we're all in this together, it's a joint effort. There are avenues of exploration and research going on all over this forum, navigation, artifacts etc...
Now I'm useless at navigation so I leave that section to the experts like Gary and Heath. As for digging up photos, drawings and documents Richie seems to come up trumps. He reminds me of the character James Garner played in the film The Great Escape, 'the scrounger' could come up with anything and everything :)
Every little thing makes a difference.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 08:35:11 AM
Yep---we are
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 13, 2012, 12:05:48 PM
No Jeff---you are doing good work----I'm just sitting here!
Tom

No, we're all in this together, it's a joint effort. There are avenues of exploration and research going on all over this forum, navigation, artifacts etc...
Now I'm useless at navigation so I leave that section to the experts like Gary and Heath. As for digging up photos, drawings and documents Richie seems to come up trumps. He reminds me of the character James Garner played in the film The Great Escape, 'the scrounger'  could come up with anything and everything :)
Every little thing makes a difference.

Jeff

Its the Scouse in him  ;) ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 12:08:20 PM
hey guys just logged on give me half hour an will have u sum pics  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 12:36:07 PM
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5251/5519130640_2b85d129a0_z.jpg)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 01:10:54 PM
Hey Richie----if you can conjure up some pics of the reef/ocean bottom, that would be cool.
Oh ---at Nikumaroro!
tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Bruce Thomas on January 13, 2012, 01:23:28 PM
Nice picture, Richie.  It's a Lockheed PV2 Harpoon, apparently tail number NL10PV.  Other pictures are available, including one on www.airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Lockheed-PV-2-Harpoon/1295818/&sid=cd058630a560d8dc5cf6381458685f72) that is identified as having been taken at an airport in Schellville, California.  Other pictures here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/glennfrancosimmons/sets/72157626122321385/with/5519131212/) that show the rear landing gear nicely, including the one you've posted.

By the way, those who love to spend precious time Googling things, Richie's posting without any captioning caused me to ponder, "Where'd he get that photo?"  Clever people, those folks at Google.  :D It's the first time I've tried using Google Image search with a picture instead of keywords for the description.  In a few moments, a v-e-r-y few moments, the Google results page came back with that picture listed first and the webpage it's used on.  Underneath that were lots of other "visually similar" pictures, including one of a Sukhoi T-4 (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Sukhoi_T4.jpg/1280px-Sukhoi_T4.jpg) and (what I can only describe as) a Russian picture of an automotive wingwalker (http://s2.images.drive2.ru/car.photos/5000/000/000/00c/c26/88cd1007e759bd60-large.jpg).
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
haha bruce

i logged on an said give me half hour, an will post some pics being a smart a*!s

well it took me over that to find 1 good pic ov electra tail wheel  :o

but forgot to add link sorry

BUT that picture, the tail wheel looks alot more advanced than what earharts was ric has posted an image in the past in relation to the nessie photo but can i find it NO  :(

i will tho   

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 02:45:23 PM
(http://loftyambitions.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/img_6011.jpg)

http://loftyambitions.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/img_6011.jpg

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 03:14:47 PM
(http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=284&DMSCALE=100.00000&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=300&DMY=1782&DMTEXT=%20Electra%2527s&REC=17&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)

http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=284&DMSCALE=100&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=300&DMY=1782&DMMODE=viewer&DMTEXT=%20Electra%2527s&REC=17&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 03:16:31 PM
(http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=502&DMSCALE=100.00000&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=2094&DMY=1098&DMTEXT=%20Electra%2527s&REC=16&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)

http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=502&DMSCALE=100&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=2094&DMY=1098&DMMODE=viewer&DMTEXT=%20Electra%2527s&REC=16&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 13, 2012, 03:33:41 PM
jeff as ur good wid images wat do u make ov this image

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/16_ForensicImaging/1953b_2.jpg)

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/19_Forensicupdate.html

i was messing about on cs5 highlighting diffrent area's an noticed it
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 13, 2012, 06:49:39 PM

Let's bear in mind that in taxi-ing a tail dragger that the forward progress is gained in a series of "S" turns allowing a view in the forward direction thru the side windows.  If the tail wheel were to drop into a hole or groove in the reef flat while moving in this fashion there would be side forces that could shear off the wheel apparatus and trap it in the groove.

IMHO it's hard to believe that the ROV had no backup GPS capability.  Oh well, Stuff Happens.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 13, 2012, 07:22:46 PM
"IMHO it's hard to believe that the ROV had no backup GPS capability."
That sort of redundancy costs $$.  The less expensive option is to try very hard to avoid feeding your single GPS reference antenna into your ship's propeller.
I'm sure TIGHAR would appreciate enough funds to provide redundancy for all of the single-point failures that accompany every expedition.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 13, 2012, 08:17:09 PM
----and a deep dive submirsible, and a BIG barge with a crane with alot of cable, and someone to mark the spot. I've been looking over alot of the material the past few days. Somewhere is was written that the electra was off the southern shore. Also read wher it was thought to be near the lagoon channel. Look guys. I believe its there. There happens to be a pretty big area when we are looking for a needle in a haystack. The ROV video has lifted the spirits, and suspicions of alot of us. With that, several more questions come to my mind. Obviously first,  what general area was the ROV when this video was taken? I assume it was near the shipwreck/landing site, because that seemed most probable. 2nd) approximately what depth along the reef was it, and 3rd) do we know where the bottom is? Answers to 1&2 seem pretty easy. 3 is alot harder, since the ROV only had 900+- feet of cable , and still didnt get the the bottom. But I assume it wasnt intended to go to the bottom.
A couple of other things do come to mind. I occured to me that some 'others' may just be right (by accident or by ESP) in placing the location on other parts of the reef/bottom. Thats where the search become a needle in a haystack. Niku has a pretty good sized reef, and we really dont know much about its topography. I would hope that a circumvental search of the offshore waters with magnetometer or maybe a different side scan sonar would be used to help eliminate some of these areas. The problem I see with that is, there is ALOT of ship wreckage all over the place, having been moved there by storms, ocean currents, and other forces of nature. Obviously that put alot of target out there to investigate. All of this search technology costs money for equipment, and operation time.  I think Ric has done an unbelievable job of using the assets he has to get this investigation to this point.
What we really need is for some corporations to step up with their technology and help, before some others with DEEP pockets that the information presented here and go searching themselves. Didnt take long after the Titanic was found several others we going to bring back artifacts. Anyone remenber the Glomar Explorer? Yes the assets do exsist. So, I would challenge ANY corporation to contact Ric to see how they may help in this investigation. Manufacturers of submirsibles, ROV's, side scan sonar, underwater mapping gear, computer software, salvage companies, even some Fortune 100 companies.
This is a VERY worthwhile investigation; possibly helping to solve one of the greatest mysteries of the 20th century, a story that has been passed down from a couple of generations. It is my hope that we can do that. As a team, we will.
Tom
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 13, 2012, 08:38:29 PM

John O.
Consider the following as a 5 minute stab at a backup.
A battery operated, hand held Garmin Gps device can be purchased for lkess than $300.00 at any Walmart.  A waterproff plexiglas box to house said device could be fabricated for a nominal cost.  Bingo, backup GPS.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 14, 2012, 05:55:03 AM
http://www.wc5c.org/WC5CClub/NikumaroroAmeliaEarhartHamRadioTest/tabid/570/Default.aspx

just wondering if Tighar was aware of this ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 06:20:04 AM

Let's bear in mind that in taxi-ing a tail dragger that the forward progress is gained in a series of "S" turns allowing a view in the forward direction thru the side windows.  If the tail wheel were to drop into a hole or groove in the reef flat while moving in this fashion there would be side forces that could shear off the wheel apparatus and trap it in the groove.

IMHO it's hard to believe that the ROV had no backup GPS capability.  Oh well, Stuff Happens.
Harry, I was considering this. Of the three wheels on the Electra I would speculate that the rear one would be the one that was most likely to susceptible to severe damage on the reef. It's attached to the lightest part of the plane i.e. the part that will be shunted about the most by waves, currents, tides, storms etc... So lots of sideways motion scraping the rear wheel over the reef. I would be suprised if the tyre remained on this wheel. The the tyres on the main gear had more chance of surving as they were on the heaviest part of the plane, the pivot point of forces acting on the structure. Wave action, tides, storms etc... would tend to push the plane around on this pivot point, using the upright tail fins as rudders/sails as the means of transferring this energy into sideways back and forth motion. It's a theory so is not written in stone.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 06:30:14 AM
jeff as ur good wid images wat do u make ov this image

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/16_ForensicImaging/1953b_2.jpg)

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/19_Forensicupdate.html

i was messing about on cs5 highlighting diffrent area's an noticed it

Richie, I have been looking at these early photos for months now. There are a number of limiting factors that prevent them giving up much in the way of useful information. The resolution, the altitude from which they were taken, the sea conditions etc... They are, as Ric mentions, useful in a comparison to previous photos to track any previous suspicious objects. That's the area in which I have been researching these photos.
Great pictures of rear wheel assemblies Richie, thanks for your help in this part of the search.
As I mentioned before, it's likely that all this junk originates from a plane but, is it the Electra? could a WW2 plane have ditched here? is there any record of this happening? You wouldn't be interested into researching this possibility Richie?
Great work Richie, keep going.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 07:02:50 AM
The object I have boxed has led me to search for other objects in this location that could have belonged to the same assembly. It looks like a forked appendage with a hole facing us. In the middle of it there is also an unknown object but, alas, it has coral growing on it, but I'm working on it.. To the right of the boxed in object there is a crevasse, hole, cavern, cave, grotto? The back of the sofa syndrome, it gathers junk... coins, buttons, lego bricks, m and m's etc... In it there are more objects but, they are proving difficult to identify and enhance but again, I'm working on it.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 07:12:55 AM
Is this it?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 07:40:05 AM
This montage shows a nice correlation..... with the Harney drawing embedded.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7016/6694920881_af3ab79ed0_z.jpg)



Full size image here.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 07:46:30 AM
This montage shows a nice correlation..... with the Harney drawing embedded.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7016/6694920881_af3ab79ed0_b.jpg)

Full size image here.

Excellent Erik. Of course we don't know if it's the Electra, but you have presented the theory of the landing gear strut remarkably well, brilliant!
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 14, 2012, 08:01:54 AM
jeff on the image i have attached look in the white box in corner were arrow is pointing to me it looks like a submerged plane

u have to take into account that it looks bigger because i have had to enhance light around it
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 14, 2012, 08:06:12 AM
also note the, 3 tail like surf trail as if a mono tail was protruding the surf
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 14, 2012, 08:11:21 AM
"A battery operated, hand held Garmin Gps device "
...only works on the water surface.  The ship has a better one, but it won't tell us where the ROV is , other than in very general terms (those are already known).  The ROV uses an underwater transponder system to keep track of it's location in 3-D.  A computer system combines the surface GPS location data with the underwater transponder location data to figure out the ROV location.
I don't know what sort of transponder the ROV used, other than what is in the Finding Amelia film. I'm a little familiar with two types - an acoustic one (sort of old "sonar" technology), and a variety of radio-based ones, mostly using relatively low frequencies with an underwater antenna (that's my guess on what got chopped by the prop).  The ROV picks up the signals from the antenna, in a way that resembles the way a GPS picks up the signals from satellites, but they are not the same signals or frequencies.
Later edit:  Seabotix has a nice website worth visiting to learn more about ROVs. http://www.seabotix.com/products/tracking.htm

The most obvious backup system would be to use a surface ship with a commercial sonar "fish finder", hovering over the ROV location.  That's dangerous duty in the surf visible in the video.

Finding any object on the reef that can be identified as belonging to a Lockheed might be the best way to attract investors.  Fuzzy videos without scale aren't enough.  We might be fooling ourselves when we identify tailwheel assemblies.  What if the black squiggly thing is a biological growth 12 inches tall? Then the "tailwheel " feature couldn't be the size of an Electra unit.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:22:09 AM
"A battery operated, hand held Garmin Gps device "
...only works on the water surface.  The ship has a better one, but it won't tell us where the ROV is , other than in very general terms (those are already known).  The ROV uses an underwater transponder system to keep track of it's location in 3-D.  A computer system combines the surface GPS location data with the underwater transponder location data to figure out the ROV location.
I don't know what sort of transponder the ROV used, other than what is in the Finding Amelia film. I'm a little familiar with two types - an acoustic one (sort of old "sonar" technology), and a variety of radio-based ones, mostly using relatively low frequencies with an underwater antenna (that's my guess on what got chopped by the prop).  The ROV picks up the signals from the antenna, in a way that resembles the way a GPS picks up the signals from satellites, but they are not the same signals or frequencies.

The most obvious backup system would be to use a surface ship with a commercial sonar "fish finder", hovering over the ROV location.  That's dangerous duty in the surf visible in the video.

Finding any object on the reef that can be identified as belonging to a Lockheed might be the best way to attract investors.  Fuzzy videos without scale aren't enough.  We might be fooling ourselves when we identify tailwheel assemblies.  What if the black squiggly thing is a biological growth 12 inches tall? Then the "tailwheel " feature couldn't be the size of an Electra unit.
In the case of the tail wheel stills I don't have anything to go on regarding scale John. With the first discovered object 'the main gear strut?' I had the photos from the Tighar site with the meauring tape so, could get a ball park sense of scale for the area in question. With the tail wheel area I have nothing to go on at all.
I will post up some more stills though of the junk in the 'mermaids grotto' just to the right of the 'tail wheel' thingy.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 14, 2012, 08:23:08 AM
notice on this how far out u can see the reef go

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/16_ForensicImaging/1939a.png)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:29:32 AM
jeff on the image i have attached look in the white box in corner were arrow is pointing to me it looks like a submerged plane

u have to take into account that it looks bigger because i have had to enhance light around it

I see what you mean Richie and, yes it does resemble an outline of a plane. You have to take into account though the depth of the water out there and, the fact that the photo was taken years after the plane vanished. It would be a miracle if it was still intact by then, look what the conditions in that area have done to the SS Norwich City and that was made from steel plates and built like a brick shit house :). I suspect the plane started breaking apart within weeks of being subjected to the same beating but, good detective work Richie.

jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 08:29:59 AM
"A battery operated, hand held Garmin Gps device "
...only works on the water surface.  The ship has a better one, but it won't tell us where the ROV is , other than in very general terms (those are already known).  The ROV uses an underwater transponder system to keep track of it's location in 3-D.  A computer system combines the surface GPS location data with the underwater transponder location data to figure out the ROV location.
I don't know what sort of transponder the ROV used, other than what is in the Finding Amelia film. I'm a little familiar with two types - an acoustic one (sort of old "sonar" technology), and a variety of radio-based ones, mostly using relatively low frequencies with an underwater antenna (that's my guess on what got chopped by the prop).  The ROV picks up the signals from the antenna, in a way that resembles the way a GPS picks up the signals from satellites, but they are not the same signals or frequencies.

The most obvious backup system would be to use a surface ship with a commercial sonar "fish finder", hovering over the ROV location.  That's dangerous duty in the surf visible in the video.

Finding any object on the reef that can be identified as belonging to a Lockheed might be the best way to attract investors.  Fuzzy videos without scale aren't enough.  We might be fooling ourselves when we identify tailwheel assemblies.  What if the black squiggly thing is a biological growth 12 inches tall? Then the "tailwheel " feature couldn't be the size of an Electra unit.

Good point!

We should also add that it would only be accurate to +/- 15 meters or so.  Even then, the ROV would only have 'relative' accuracy to its own self.   Not enough accuracy for a return trip.

Which brings up a good point whether or not they even established a differentially corrected base station to bring the accuracy to +/- 1 meter or so.  That gets a little more complex (and exponentially more expensive) with shifting boat movements, etc in open water.  I'm doubting they had that but is possible.  If they did have a base station, I would certainly bet that it would have had to be calibrated and collecting data on stationary land. 

Anyone know if/how open ocean GPS navigation is differentially calibrated, its accuracy, cost, and commercial availabilty?  Or if TIGHAR has been using their own base station on Niku?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 14, 2012, 08:41:18 AM
thx jeff just wanted to make sure it was nothink  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 14, 2012, 08:52:09 AM
It occurs to me that it might be helpful to start a "catalog" of objects we think we recognize on the videos, for future reference.  If/when we get an ROV back down there, with the ability to know where it is, and a scale, a catalog list would be handy.
Anyone got ideas of a simple way to begin one?

BTW, SeaBotix (http://www.seabotix.com/products/tracking.htm)has a good website
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 14, 2012, 08:57:36 AM
http://www.wc5c.org/WC5CClub/NikumaroroAmeliaEarhartHamRadioTest/tabid/570/Default.aspx (http://www.wc5c.org/WC5CClub/NikumaroroAmeliaEarhartHamRadioTest/tabid/570/Default.aspx)

just wondering if Tighar was aware of this ?

Yes.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 14, 2012, 08:59:55 AM
As I mentioned before, it's likely that all this junk originates from a plane but, is it the Electra? could a WW2 plane have ditched here? is there any record of this happening? You wouldn't be interested into researching this possibility Richie?
Great work Richie, keep going.

"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro." (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 09:01:04 AM
It occurs to me that it might be helpful to start a "catalog" of objects we think we recognize on the videos, for future reference.  If/when we get an ROV back down there, with the ability to know where it is, and a scale, a catalog list would be handy.
Anyone got ideas of a simple way to begin one?

PhotoSynth (http://photosynth.net/default.aspx) might be a great start.  I would be willing to stitch the photos together.  Its fairly easy.  Saved views would allow for easy cataloging. 

Click here for an example of one already created. (http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=8dbd27fa-2255-454c-9cbf-d89a0f80665a)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 09:02:14 AM
http://www.wc5c.org/WC5CClub/NikumaroroAmeliaEarhartHamRadioTest/tabid/570/Default.aspx (http://www.wc5c.org/WC5CClub/NikumaroroAmeliaEarhartHamRadioTest/tabid/570/Default.aspx)

just wondering if Tighar was aware of this ?

Yes.

Is there a coordinated effort?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 09:05:20 AM
As I mentioned before, it's likely that all this junk originates from a plane but, is it the Electra? could a WW2 plane have ditched here? is there any record of this happening? You wouldn't be interested into researching this possibility Richie?
Great work Richie, keep going.

"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro." (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro)

My gosh!  Not exactly the best safety record at Canton....  :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 14, 2012, 09:08:17 AM
Anyone know ... if TIGHAR has been using their own base station on Niku?

Yes (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=009580785602718212762%3Anmcmqnbv5de&ie=UTF-8&q=GPS+base+station&sa=Search&siteurl=www-open-opensocial.googleusercontent.com%2Fgadgets%2Fifr%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252Fcoop%252Fapi%252F009580785602718212762%252Fcse%252Fnmcmqnbv5de%252Fgadget%26container%3Dopen%26view%3Dhome%26lang%3Dall%26country%3DALL%26debug%3D0%26nocache%3D0%26sanitize%3D0%26v%3D838dfc00e4fe08f9%26source%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ftighar.org%252Fnews%252Fhelp%252F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg%26parent%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ftighar.org%252Fnews%252Fhelp%252F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg%26libs%3Dcore%253Acore.io%253Arpc%23st%3D%2525st%2525%26rpctoken%3D576167305#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=GPS%20base%20station&gsc.page=1).
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 09:10:43 AM
Anyone know ... if TIGHAR has been using their own base station on Niku?

Yes (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=009580785602718212762%3Anmcmqnbv5de&ie=UTF-8&q=GPS+base+station&sa=Search&siteurl=www-open-opensocial.googleusercontent.com%2Fgadgets%2Fifr%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252Fcoop%252Fapi%252F009580785602718212762%252Fcse%252Fnmcmqnbv5de%252Fgadget%26container%3Dopen%26view%3Dhome%26lang%3Dall%26country%3DALL%26debug%3D0%26nocache%3D0%26sanitize%3D0%26v%3D838dfc00e4fe08f9%26source%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ftighar.org%252Fnews%252Fhelp%252F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg%26parent%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ftighar.org%252Fnews%252Fhelp%252F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg%26libs%3Dcore%253Acore.io%253Arpc%23st%3D%2525st%2525%26rpctoken%3D576167305#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=GPS%20base%20station&gsc.page=1).

Thanks, was one used for the ROV mission?  It would have to be real-time for the data to be useful.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Richard C Cooke on January 14, 2012, 10:20:50 AM
"A battery operated, hand held Garmin Gps device "
...only works on the water surface.  The ship has a better one, but it won't tell us where the ROV is , other than in very general terms (those are already known).  The ROV uses an underwater transponder system to keep track of it's location in 3-D.  A computer system combines the surface GPS location data with the underwater transponder location data to figure out the ROV location.
I don't know what sort of transponder the ROV used, other than what is in the Finding Amelia film. I'm a little familiar with two types - an acoustic one (sort of old "sonar" technology), and a variety of radio-based ones, mostly using relatively low frequencies with an underwater antenna (that's my guess on what got chopped by the prop).  The ROV picks up the signals from the antenna, in a way that resembles the way a GPS picks up the signals from satellites, but they are not the same signals or frequencies.

The most obvious backup system would be to use a surface ship with a commercial sonar "fish finder", hovering over the ROV location.  That's dangerous duty in the surf visible in the video.

Finding any object on the reef that can be identified as belonging to a Lockheed might be the best way to attract investors.  Fuzzy videos without scale aren't enough.  We might be fooling ourselves when we identify tailwheel assemblies.  What if the black squiggly thing is a biological growth 12 inches tall? Then the "tailwheel " feature couldn't be the size of an Electra unit.
In the case of the tail wheel stills I don't have anything to go on regarding scale John. With the first discovered object 'the main gear strut?' I had the photos from the Tighar site with the meauring tape so, could get a ball park sense of scale for the area in question. With the tail wheel area I have nothing to go on at all.
I will post up some more stills though of the junk in the 'mermaids grotto' just to the right of the 'tail wheel' thingy.
Jeff
Some sense of scale must be possible based on how the ROV lights and camera were setup.  In underwater photography the lights and camera tend to be focused at some point and the ROV guys will know that its all in focus with the best light at say 15 feet.  They will also know what sort of lens angle they tended to use, so they can calculate approximate pixel size when in focus and the best light.  It wont be exact but they could work out if its nearer 12in or 4 ft.

rc 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on January 14, 2012, 10:38:37 AM
This is starting to get exciting - and yes, I'm one to start counting my chicks before they hatch!

Any idea how deep these things are? The item in post 177, I find particularly intriguing.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 14, 2012, 10:42:13 AM

In my previous post about a portable backup GPS device, the function of a waterproof plexiglas box, into which the GPS device could be fitted, would be to  then be attached to or carried inside the ROV.  Remember it is a backup system memory only to be consulted if something happens to the fancy, dancy primary system.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 11:04:59 AM
More from the 'mermaids grotto'

The object/s within the white gloop look interesting

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 11:29:53 AM
It occurs to me that it might be helpful to start a "catalog" of objects we think we recognize on the videos, for future reference.  If/when we get an ROV back down there, with the ability to know where it is, and a scale, a catalog list would be handy.
Anyone got ideas of a simple way to begin one?

PhotoSynth (http://photosynth.net/default.aspx) might be a great start.  I would be willing to stitch the photos together.  Its fairly easy.  Saved views would allow for easy cataloging. 

Click here for an example of one already created. (http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=8dbd27fa-2255-454c-9cbf-d89a0f80665a)

Good idea guys ++++
Perhaps a new thread as the catalogue
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 14, 2012, 11:32:31 AM
Harry sez "...GPS device could be fitted, would be to  then be attached to or carried inside the ROV"
Unfortunately a GPS doesn't work under water, so it won't record the ROV's location during the dive.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 14, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
Thanks, was one used for the ROV mission?  It would have to be real-time for the data to be useful.

I haven't heard about the ROV system.  I don't see any details on it on the website.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 14, 2012, 11:37:18 AM
More from the 'mermaids grotto'

The object/s within the white gloop look interesting

(http://)

Can you make out a object to the left of yours that has what looks like a streight edge to it?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 11:41:53 AM
As I mentioned before, it's likely that all this junk originates from a plane but, is it the Electra? could a WW2 plane have ditched here? is there any record of this happening? You wouldn't be interested into researching this possibility Richie?
Great work Richie, keep going.

"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro." (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro)

Thanks for that link Marty. It will help a lot. Aircraft missing in the vicinity of are the most likely suspects as opposed to ones crahed on or near nearby islands. I'll take a look at them to see if anything matches up.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 14, 2012, 01:45:26 PM
Notice the similar location off the grease fitting nipple in the photo vs where the "black squiggly" seems to be originating in the reef image.  Coincidental?

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7028/6696757479_831a3f305e.jpg)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 03:46:50 PM
Notice the similar location off the grease fitting nipple in the photo vs where the "black squiggly" seems to be originating in the reef image.  Coincidental?

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7028/6696757479_831a3f305e.jpg)

Erik
The more I see of the photo on the right the more convinced it's a deflated tyre on the wheel hub
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 04:09:22 PM
Surely does look like it, doesn't it... I'll be more amazed if it turns out to be a rock than I would be if it was a tire.

You guys are going to be keeping me up nights now.

LTM -
Jeff, it's the light coloured circle on the left of the darker circle that forces you to consider it being a wheel with a deflated tyre on it.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 14, 2012, 04:11:07 PM
Wow--you guys have been busy today!
?? about the possible submerged plane pic----How far off the shoreline do you think the target is, and is this a similiar location to the ROV pics we are looking at?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 14, 2012, 04:18:44 PM
Can anyone estimate (guesstimate) a depth for this?  Would that depth exert enough pressure to "flatten" the tire onto the ledge?  If the scale of the fork can be calculated from a real photograph then doesn't that make the black squiggly have a sizeable diameter?  I'm just worried this imagery is like what can be seen on a cloudy day. Lots of images made by clouds changing formation. The Internet is full of them. Or seeing a face in a tortilla, or piece of toast, or popcorn.  I wonder what the ROV operator thinks as he must have a trained eye for this type of work. Is there an official report from him or some professional agency on the video?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 14, 2012, 04:52:52 PM
Can anyone estimate (guesstimate) a depth for this?

The "wire & rope" video was shot at a depth of about 800 feet.

I wonder what the ROV operator thinks as he must have a trained eye for this type of work. Is there an official report from him or some professional agency on the video?

The ROV operator thought the "wire" was probably natural organic material.  He thought the "rope" was rope.  He didn't comment on the black squiggly thing.
I personally think the black squiggly thing is natural organic material and only a few inches long.  I don't see a strut.  I see some curious straight edges that may indicate a man-made object - but whatever it is, if anything, is quite small.

To answer an earlier question about knowing where the ROV is:
The control unit aboard ship includes a GPS.  The location of the ROV is computed by recording the azimuth and distance of the ROV relative to the control unit.  Unfortunately the program that does that computation was flawed.  Bottom line: we didn't know where any of the  ROV video was shot except in a general sense.  Bummer.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 14, 2012, 04:59:39 PM
guys---looking at the 'gear' pic again, it appears the black stuff is coming from around the seal, between the upper and lower halves. The black stuff, which I now think is strut oil/grease like Jeff, is on both sides of the strut, and appears to be coming out also from underneath. That would make it NOT a brake hose, but the hose may still be there under the strut,
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 06:01:19 PM
As I mentioned before, it's likely that all this junk originates from a plane but, is it the Electra? could a WW2 plane have ditched here? is there any record of this happening? You wouldn't be interested into researching this possibility Richie?
Great work Richie, keep going.

"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro." (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro)

Marty, thanks for the list of planes crashed in vicinity of Niku. I have checked out the ones on the list and none come even close to resembling the junk found in the ROV video. Either retractable single struts, double bogies, seaplanes with afore mentioned gear.
The carrier borne planes seem to prefer retractable single strut gear for obvious reasons I would guess. The heavier twin engine or four engine planes again, seem to have either a single heavy duty strut or double bogie, or both.
Is there a list of Japanese planes used in the Pacific theatre I could scroll through?
Or a list of US planes?
You never know, we have to cover every angle of investigation.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 14, 2012, 07:06:31 PM

"Aircraft lost in the vicinity of Nikumaroro." (http://tighar.org/wiki/Aircraft_lost_in_the_vicinity_of_Nikumaroro)

Quote
Is there a list of Japanese planes used in the Pacific theatre I could scroll through?

Not that I have in hand.

Quote
Or a list of US planes?

The lists that I know of are listed in the footnotes.

Ric created the original version of this list in 2001.  He may have other sources.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 14, 2012, 07:42:59 PM
Ric created the original version of this list in 2001.  He may have other sources.

Nothing new has come to light since then.

There were no Japanese aircraft lost within about 800 miles of Gardner Island/Nikumaroro.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 07:55:40 PM
Ric created the original version of this list in 2001.  He may have other sources.

Nothing new has come to light since then.

There were no Japanese aircraft lost within about 800 miles of Gardner Island/Nikumaroro.

Ok, thanks Ric and Marty. That narrows down the search a bit :)
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:10:25 PM
The object in the black box first caught my eye a few days back. It's very distracting though. It distracts you from what it is sitting on/attached to. Something large, thin, flat, torn, twisted, full of holes, some in lines, some torn, some pulled out like volcanoes, edges twisted, torn, lines, a square? holes around a square? raised up surfaces in lines and so on.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:12:31 PM
Here it is again
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:14:12 PM
And again

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:29:12 PM
Anyone notice long thin black strips of... in these photos?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:31:06 PM
And here? It's being used to protect the fuel tanks from the retaining kit.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 14, 2012, 08:33:58 PM

Is the video itself somewhere on the Forum?  If so, can someone give me a link to it or a post number to find it?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 14, 2012, 08:37:43 PM

Is the video itself somewhere on the Forum?  If so, can someone give me a link to it or a post number to find it?

Harry, it's in the forum, go to the home page it's second from bottom. Richie posted it (who else ) :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 14, 2012, 09:24:42 PM
Can anyone estimate (guesstimate) a depth for this?

The "wire & rope" video was shot at a depth of about 800 feet.

I wonder what the ROV operator thinks as he must have a trained eye for this type of work. Is there an official report from him or some professional agency on the video?

The ROV operator thought the "wire" was probably natural organic material.  He thought the "rope" was rope.  He didn't comment on the black squiggly thing.
I personally think the black squiggly thing is natural organic material and only a few inches long.  I don't see a strut.  I see some curious straight edges that may indicate a man-made object - but whatever it is, if anything, is quite small.

To answer an earlier question about knowing where the ROV is:
The control unit aboard ship includes a GPS.  The location of the ROV is computed by recording the azimuth and distance of the ROV relative to the control unit.  Unfortunately the program that does that computation was flawed.  Bottom line: we didn't know where any of the  ROV video was shot except in a general sense.  Bummer.

Thanks Ric. That all helps. It is very unfortunate about the GPS.

I believe the black squiggly is organic due to its black look. It's too consistent or uniform in colour and so different from the surroundings.  I spent time today however looking for images of coral animals and vegetation without being successful in finding anything that looked like that.  I guess we keep looking.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 15, 2012, 03:16:19 AM
Thought i'd seen something similar, turned out to be closer to home than I thought.  Image is of twisted power cable for my router.  Like ric says the 'squiggle' may be smaller than we think.  My mess of cable is just a couple of inches in size. Sorry for the dog hairs, the misses would go nuts if she knew I had posted this picture  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 06:34:24 AM
Black squiggly stuff onboard Electra outlined, rubber?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 06:36:28 AM
Black squiggly stuff onboard Electra outlined? Appears to be being used to cushion the fuel tanks from the brackets that retain the tanks to prevent damage, sparking, chaffing, rubber?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Erik on January 15, 2012, 07:40:14 AM
I'm actually having second thoughts on the objects we're seeing.  Most of this time, I had been concentrating on the still images.  But going back and looking at the video several times, it looks as though scale may be an issue here. 

Looking at the video more-and-more, it does appear that many of these objects may be less than 12" inches or so.  It is hard to tell, but especially the object that looks slightly triangular as a candidate for the tail-wheel assembly, is very close to the rope, and looks like it might be just a couple of inches in dimension.

Although, the "black squiggly" stuff may still be petroleum of some sort.  On second review it appears to may have dripped out of the longer cable/hose line in the preceding frames.  Take a look?

I'm trying to stitch together the images so relative scale may be better determined.  Give me more time for this.

For those who dont have it, here is a link to the VIDEO  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tvHm3jZcME&context=C30e36ecADOEgsToPDskKm8FkJqnGEYVT1LAQO0-ih) on youtube. 
Hint: clicking the space bar on your keyboard will pause/play the video to capture still images.


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 08:10:12 AM
More scrap metal with rivet? holes
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 09:02:26 AM
Any ideas what this object could be? It's partially buried in the coral silt.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 15, 2012, 09:37:09 AM
You guys are in Fantasy Land.  Every shape becomes a man-made object.  Every dark spot becomes a rivet hole.  It's like the folks who find the Electra on Google Earth (daily and twice on Sundays).  I want to find airplane debris in the ROV video as much as the next guy but I've learned (through bitter experience) that forensic imagery interpretation is best left to the professionals.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 10:13:43 AM
You guys are in Fantasy Land.  Every shape becomes a man-made object.  Every dark spot becomes a rivet hole.  It's like the folks who find the Electra on Google Earth (daily and twice on Sundays).  I want to find airplane debris in the ROV video as much as the next guy but I've learned (through bitter experience) that forensic imagery interpretation is best left to the professionals.
Totally agree Ric. I wouldn't waste my time on google Earth either. However, the ROV was a little closer than the satellite images from google Earth. Randomly positioned holes yes, holes in line and in semi-circles, no. Not everything down there is man made but, the fixation with 'rope and wire' led to the best still moments being of, well, rope and wire. Lamentably all the rest of the junk down there was caught on the move to find the next bit of rope and wire, shame but, that's all we have to go on. Still, no use crying over spilt milk.
If anyone is expecting to find airplane debris that can be instantly recognised as such is going to sadly disappointed. It would be in a million bits, covered in coral, coral residue etc... disguised so well it would be impossible to tell it from the surrounding scenery. I will continue to scan these images for things that look out of place on a tropical coral reef. That doesn't mean they are from an aircraft but, that doesn't matter. They are there and, there's no argument about that.
Some of the ideas and theories may seem off the wall but, that's what narrows down the options, discounting these leads to a better understanding of what is actually down there. "Forensic imagery interpretation is best left to the professionals" and I would be intersted to see what they make of some the video footage as well as you.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 15, 2012, 11:05:42 AM

IF the item could be a fork from the tail wheel, THEN could the black "squiggly" thingie be a belly antenna wire that wrapped around the tail wheel in flight?  As in a loose end roatating inthe slip stream and twisting around the wheel>
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 11:13:25 AM
More bits on coral reef that seem out of place for coral reef
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 15, 2012, 11:27:54 AM

Ric
With respect to a backup GPS underwater system for future ROV excursions, Sound Ocean Systems Inc (SOSI)  offers such units.  (www.soundocean.com) .  I couldn't find any price data.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 15, 2012, 11:30:51 AM
With respect to a backup GPS underwater system for future ROV excursions, Sound Ocean Systems Inc (SOSI)  offers such units.

Whatever system we use will be provided by the contractor we select to carry out the survey/search.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 15, 2012, 11:39:34 AM
jeff on 13:37:52;28 on video, if u look top left at reef wall what do u make of the black stuff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 15, 2012, 11:47:17 AM

Ric
I assumed that to be the case.
In my experience it is the "buyers" responsibility to specify to the "contractor" the requirements for the system.  Seems to me that the two critical components, other than the operator, are the camera and the position determiner systems and, to avoid spilling the milk, they should be backed up.  Just a thought.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 15, 2012, 11:49:55 AM
In my experience it is the "buyers" responsibility to specify to the "contractor" the requirements for the system.

We don't have the expertise to spec the system.  We spec the required capabilities.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 15, 2012, 12:23:21 PM

Ric
Let's not split hairs.
To specify that the system must have the "capability" to, for example, operate to a depth of, say 1000 feet, is placing a "requirement" on the system.  To specify that the critical components of the system be reduntantly and independently "backed up" is to "require" that the system have a certain  capability.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 15, 2012, 01:05:25 PM
jeff on 13:37:52;28 on video, if u look top left at reef wall what do u make of the black stuff

Hi Richie. I'll have a look 2moro and let you now. At the moment I am sending some images over to my sister, she is a professional photographer (35 years) and has her own business/studio. As a test I haven't told her what to look for in the images, just to see if there is anything there that is out of place with the surroundings.
Will take a look at the footage you mention.
Bear in mind though that the focus of the video is on wire and rope. Anything else is out of focus and brief unfortunately.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 15, 2012, 01:12:36 PM
cheers jeff, look forward to ur sisters input  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 16, 2012, 08:32:43 AM
Alittle off topic-- but was a depth sounding ever made from Naia to try to determine the bottom depth at the reef line? I have a feeling that it is alot more than the 1500 feet I was hoping. If Niku is actually the top of a mountain, then the bottom 'could' be closer to 8- 10,000 feet down. Not what we want to hear. So I guess my question is are there any depth charts of the surrounding area, on approach to Niku, and if so, what depths do they show?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 16, 2012, 08:43:59 AM
So I guess my question is are there any depth charts of the surrounding area, on approach to Niku, and if so, what depths do they show?

We have that data, both from sonar soundings taken during our 2010 expedition and from physical soundings taken by the U.S. Navy in 1939.  Attached is a general profile of the reef slope off the western end of the atoll showing the depths we've searched. Note: only a small portion of the reef slope has been search down to 300 meters.


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 16, 2012, 08:58:11 AM
Thanks Ric---I did find a chart , and it appears that the area off the shipwreck had the deepest area. ( it figures) 914 feet to 3200+, then to 4000. So, the stern of the NC and any large parts of the Electra that were there, could probably be in very deep water. Seems the transition from ocean bottom to the upper reef ledge (900 feet) is fairly steep, Reminds me of the Napali coastline on Kauai. If this is true, then this really is a needle in a haystack, and might prove to be virtually impossible. Any thoughts?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 16, 2012, 09:03:14 AM
this really is a needle in a haystack, and might prove to be virtually impossible. Any thoughts?

It's a tough environment but I don't think it's impossible.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 16, 2012, 09:04:15 AM
If the reef slope looks like this (excpet underwater), then it is a monumental task. But NOT impossible. I know if any one can TIGHAR can.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 16, 2012, 12:48:22 PM
(http://www.ivccorp.com/rene1.jpg)

who wants to come reef diveing then  ;D

doubt 1 of these wud last round gardner reef  :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 16, 2012, 02:09:30 PM
Thanks Ric---I did find a chart , and it appears that the area off the shipwreck had the deepest area. ( it figures) 914 feet to 3200+, then to 4000. So, the stern of the NC and any large parts of the Electra that were there, could probably be in very deep water. Seems the transition from ocean bottom to the upper reef ledge (900 feet) is fairly steep, Reminds me of the Napali coastline on Kauai. If this is true, then this really is a needle in a haystack, and might prove to be virtually impossible. Any thoughts?
Tom

Tom
Here's a graphic illustration of the terrain below sea level at Niku. As you can see it's gonna be a challenge. Just look how quickly the depth of water inreases.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 16, 2012, 02:13:43 PM
Link to website of Seamont Catalog where you can find many files on water depths around niku, although for some strange reason they still refer to it as Gardner?


http://earthref.org/SC/SMNT-047S-1745W/ (http://earthref.org/SC/SMNT-047S-1745W/)

Jeff

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 16, 2012, 03:13:40 PM
Would it be sensible to start a new thread cataloging the items that 'definately appear' to be man made as opposed to might, possibly,could etc... be. Something along the lines of the items found on the island.
Just a thought

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 16, 2012, 03:14:04 PM
yep its going to be a challenge, but thats why we're here
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 16, 2012, 05:48:41 PM
Here you go Ritchie
She found this to start with which I missed. She didn't put any pointers as to what we are looking at so I've added them.
Red: the thickness of the material
Yellow: the remainig straight edges
Blue: the square holes

(http://)
Now, I have re-run the video from before and after the time displayed in the picture and, the ROV appears to parked on the reef for quite a while so, no camera blur or distortion.
I am pretty open to ideas on this but, coral creating SQUARE holes mmmm and, why is it so thin with shiny edges in the ROV lights.
All I am saying is, this is the one of the better examples of thin metal sheeting scattered about here.
I didn't give her any clue as to what we were hoping to find here buy, that's the first thing she found. it will be a week or two before I get anything more some magazine assignment or something.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Shaw Durman on January 16, 2012, 06:30:02 PM
And again

(http://)

Is that a skull?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 17, 2012, 04:45:03 AM
i think its a anchor from a smaller boat BUT

look at these images i attached wen u reverse the colour on the rope, which i now think is metal

its got the same noise sample

also look at the end of the object in question the anchor

look just left off the shell in image on right hand side, an notice its like a claw holding somethink

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 17, 2012, 02:13:20 PM
in the picture i have added look were the arrow is pointed could this be nessie

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 17, 2012, 02:27:00 PM
if u look at this inverted image wat ever it is, there seems to be a dark outline behind it
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 17, 2012, 02:39:56 PM
Richie----i must admit that if you invert the pic, it appears that there is something on the reef. In my wildest imagination, I see a tail/rudder assembly, and blown up, looks like part of the rear fuselege. I dont think that will stand up to this forum, but what the heck!
My question might be, that is the Electra 'was' on the reef ledge, and the plane overflew it, why wasnt it seen? Parts should have been visible from the air.
Great work , by the way---again
Tom
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 17, 2012, 04:32:29 PM
tryed highlighting the out line to see if cud get better image

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 17, 2012, 04:35:38 PM
i agree its probably nothink, but its worth checkin with Admin to make sure  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 17, 2012, 05:29:02 PM
yeah---see my poor eyes have a hard time making out anything in those pics. Being cautiously opptomistic, (yep I said it!), I still would wonder why it wasn't spotted. If the water was shallow enough for a tail/rudder assy to stick out of the water, and that was still attached to part of the fuselege, then that should have been visible from the air. Granted, you would have to be low and slow, which they obviously werent. So---I'm kinda guarded with this one.

But---the location appears to coincide with the reef runway area, and far enought away from the shipwreck to possibly eliminate parts of that. I wonder if Jeff Glickman was able to clean up the picture enough to make out anything? Does anyone know? And------I would hope that the ROV was in this general area when the video was taken.

BTW---I've gotten through 53 pages of Finding Amelia---excellent work Ric. If I good get the DVD to work---
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 17, 2012, 06:00:12 PM
You guys are looking at a white cap on a wave.  It's nowhere near Nessie.  The water in that location is several hundred meters deep.
My advice is to leave the forensic imaging to the pros.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 17, 2012, 07:34:06 PM
probably good advise for me.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 18, 2012, 06:55:57 AM
Richie,  you can see where the reef ends in the picture.  The Norwich City is sitting on the edge of the reef.  All of the water beyond the reef is very deep, making it impossible for Nessie to be there.  The location doesn't coincide with the proposed landing location - that's a couple hundred yards away - on the reef, not in deep water.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 18, 2012, 01:07:12 PM
Would ditching into the sea mean the wheels would be in the retracted position, hence nestled nicely into their cubby hole under the wing, engine nacelle?. And still be in their cubby hole now?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 18, 2012, 01:34:11 PM
yep---ditching with the gear down would allow the gear to drag first, and pitch the nose down, adnd I would think, quickley submerging the plane. In this case, IF thery were to that ditched, they could NOT have run the engine for radio use and battery recharging for 3 days. I think the Electra would have sank pretty quick.
 My opinion-- some of you aeronautical engineers can set me straight.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 18, 2012, 01:52:44 PM

Re: Wheels?
Would depend on where you were ditching.
If in open water, then wheels UP. low and slow, engines off, tail down, nose up.

If near land/ reef, then same as above, then put the wheels DOWN while in the water moving to the land and sliding up onto the reef so you could run the starboard engine.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 18, 2012, 01:55:14 PM
there is alot ov deep crevices round the reef as u can see in this image so maybe nessie was caught in a shallower bit

was worth checking out  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 18, 2012, 01:58:44 PM

Richie
On a previous post with an image you asked a question about a skull.  Can you highlight the "skull" and repost that image?  Thanks
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 18, 2012, 02:16:21 PM
werent me that asked, but i think its 3 pages back on this topic
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 18, 2012, 02:22:34 PM

Richie
On a previous post with an image you asked a question about a skull.  Can you highlight the "skull" and repost that image?  Thanks

Reply 258, page before this.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Shaw Durman on January 18, 2012, 05:02:28 PM

Richie
On a previous post with an image you asked a question about a skull.  Can you highlight the "skull" and repost that image?  Thanks

Look in post 221 - 223 that Jeff posted Harry. He put a square around an object in 221 that looks like a skull.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 18, 2012, 06:43:39 PM

Re: Wheels?
Would depend on where you were ditching.
If in open water, then wheels UP. low and slow, engines off, tail down, nose up.

If near land/ reef, then same as above, then put the wheels DOWN while in the water moving to the land and sliding up onto the reef so you could run the starboard engine.

So a plane with it's undercarriage down on the reef would have a greater chance of having the undercarriage torn off than a plane that ditched into the sea with it's gear up? is that a fair statement?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 18, 2012, 06:46:06 PM
there is alot ov deep crevices round the reef as u can see in this image so maybe nessie was caught in a shallower bit

was worth checking out  :)

For sure she started in the shallows Richie but, soon migrated into deeper water in ever diminishing sized bits.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 18, 2012, 08:17:09 PM
yep looks to circle like to be not man made  :)

Richie, just had phone call from my sister at 2 in the morning! The object you thought was man made, I dismissed as being too obvious. My sister said it's ++++ and to look AROUND the object as well. She wants me to send more stills at different time frames. I've had a quick look at what she's talking about OMG!. Will send me the Image bacK 2moro.
Good work Richie! Just goes to show it's not wise to dismiss ideas, should have had more faith in you.
If that's coral then it's been to engineering school and got its PHd
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 18, 2012, 09:23:14 PM

Jeff
Yes, and if the undercarriage had got stuck in a hole or grove and the rest of the plane was being moved around by the surf, waves and wind then all the forces would be concentrated on that undercarriace, twisting it, turning it and shearing it.  Until...
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 18, 2012, 09:40:20 PM

Jeff Hayden
Can you give us a post number for the image you are talking about?  Thanks
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 07:52:38 AM

Jeff Hayden
Can you give us a post number for the image you are talking about?  Thanks
Harry it was an image Richie posted and I circled the object to see if it was the object he was interested in #77. I originally thought it was too obvious to be a wheel so dismissed it as a coral outcrop. Reply from sister saying have a look at the area around the object. Done that and, it's a wheel alright with accompanying junk. I'll post a few stills later.
Too obvious? That's why it was nearly missed, again.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 08:00:39 AM

Jeff
Yes, and if the undercarriage had got stuck in a hole or grove and the rest of the plane was being moved around by the surf, waves and wind then all the forces would be concentrated on that undercarriace, twisting it, turning it and shearing it.  Until...
Most of the 'anomalies' seem to be undercarriage related, pointing to a gear down landing by whatever these anomalies are from? Does that sound plausible? If it was a gear up ditching wouldn't the gear still be in the retracted cubby hole position, away from too much harm?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 08:11:31 AM

Jeff
Yes, and if the undercarriage had got stuck in a hole or grove and the rest of the plane was being moved around by the surf, waves and wind then all the forces would be concentrated on that undercarriace, twisting it, turning it and shearing it.  Until...
The scenario I'm trying to get my head around is that whatever this stuff is from had it's wheels down when it arrived at Niku. Now I know there were various other planes crashed and ditched on or near nearby islands, could they have drifted as far as Niku? Did another plane crash or ditch on Niku?
There isn't a landing strip on Niku so, why would undercarriage be in the lowered position?
Just a thought.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 08:55:22 AM
jeff as far fetched what am about to say is. do u think its possible

do u think that it could be the plane upside down an that rope is running over the belly ov the plane

because there is to many strange shapes along camera path to be natural in my opinion  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 09:11:50 AM
jeff have u noticed aswell that in places on the video, goin down the hill there seems to be gaps in the coral an its hollow behind them as its totally black ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 09:36:06 AM
watch this video and at 13:37:01;04 pause it

is it a open hatch or sum kind of flap

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yjeyOTFWX0&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 19, 2012, 10:52:17 AM
Glad I'm not the ROV operator because I just don't see what you guys are seeing. Not saying that it's not there or not what you think it is. I just can't see it. Any chance of an enhanced view or outlines? Ric is right in that it is easy to see what we want to see. Jeff, did your sister have any pre-knowledge of where the video was from or what might be on it? It'd be great if pieces/parts can be identified from the video. Problem is, those parts still need to be relocated and recovered and then linked to the Electra. Keep up the efforts though, it's definately keeping me and others tuned in.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 19, 2012, 11:22:03 AM
John does have a valid point. Like Ric pointed out, its a different world overthere, and underwater.
And, i've been guilty of pulling the trigger on the "OMG look at that" stuff. But, I still believe the Electra is there, and when we find it, all of Tighar can feel the accomplishment.
Back to the pics----Jeff any better clarity of the stills to show the objects you and your sister were viewing? Certainly hope so--
Tom
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 11:27:09 AM
John does have a valid point. Like Ric pointed out, its a different world overthere, and underwater.
And, i've been guilty of pulling the trigger on the "OMG look at that" stuff. But, I still believe the Electra is there, and when we find it, all of Tighar can feel the accomplishment.
Back to the pics----Jeff any better clarity of the stills to show the objects you and your sister were viewing? Certainly hope so--
Tom
Will do, at weekend. I know it looks strange but, if anyone can recognise the ss Norwich City as a ship now, I'll give them 10bucks. Don't expect a flimsy aircraft to like anything recognisable by now.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 11:34:43 AM
Glad I'm not the ROV operator because I just don't see what you guys are seeing. Not saying that it's not there or not what you think it is. I just can't see it. Any chance of an enhanced view or outlines? Ric is right in that it is easy to see what we want to see. Jeff, did your sister have any pre-knowledge of where the video was from or what might be on it? It'd be great if pieces/parts can be identified from the video. Problem is, those parts still need to be relocated and recovered and then linked to the Electra. Keep up the efforts though, it's definately keeping me and others tuned in.  LTM- John
Anyone expecting to see large chunks of clean airframe will be sadly dissappointed I'm afraid. Tiny bits of torn up metal, yes. Also covered in coral, silt, sand coral Residue etc... Heavy bits of engineering would be in one piece, engines maybe. Sister has no idea what we are searching for. Just asked her to find man made object/objects in each still.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 19, 2012, 12:01:08 PM
good approach---keeps us all on our toes---and pins and needles----
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 12:03:19 PM
just some av quickly done
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 12:05:51 PM
some pics
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 19, 2012, 12:14:54 PM

Are there any pics of the ROV itself?  Did it have the capanility to pick up anything that looked to be manmade? And take it to the surface?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 12:31:21 PM
decided to get a video down loader so jeff weren't stuck doing all the work  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 19, 2012, 02:42:56 PM

Jeff N.
Take a look at Seabotix, Inc. on your browser.
They show a unit  vLBV 300 that has what looks like a remotely  operated shearing device on the end of a short arm.  Intended to support an ROV.  With a little imagination and modification, two of them (maybe even one) could hold a "basket" and pick up an object and put it in the basket and take it up to the surface for analysis, like maybe the thingie (that looks like the fork of a kanding gear) near the black squiggly thing .   Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Looks as if there is plenty of manmade "stuff" down there, time to think outside the box and get some of it up to the surface for  inspection.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 19, 2012, 03:15:16 PM
Ok, if i rotated this image that Richie posted http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=893 90 degrees counter-clockwise, blew it up, and then sat back and looked at it I could see a wheel assembly with the outer circle running parallel to a smaller inner circle that looks like it may have a bump on it that could be the end of an axle. I also could make out what could be the strut running back to the fender. I even compared what I thought I saw to pictures of the wheels on AE's known plane. It even looks rounded in profile and appears to extend slightly out over the edge of whatever it might be on. What I saw could be one of the main gear assemblies. But then, that's what I'd like to be seeing. Could it be? Sure. It could also just be wishful thinking on my part. With my diving adventures I have seen a lot of barrel sponges that are nice and round like a wheel. Pile enough sediment around them and take a picture from overhead and it could look like a wheel. Again, I've seen alot of stuff on the bottom that looks like its something else until you get right to it and then you realize its just a rock or coral. There is also stuff that just looks like natural environment until you get right on it. This picture is curious. It does have similarity to the gear assembly, even the angle of what I perceived to be the fender strut seems to have the proper angle off of the fork so, I don't know. I'd really like to see some enhanced images. LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 03:21:21 PM
i have attached a better image of wheel object cud deffo be a wheel  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 19, 2012, 04:28:04 PM
Guys, not to burst anyones bubble, but whether the ROV has the capabilities to grasp objects or not isnt due to the ROV. Its due to the money involved to get the kind of ROV that has those capabilities. I dont know those numbers, but I bet Ric does. AND, it isnt just the ROV, but the support vessel that goes along with it.
I'm certain that Ric got the best package for the available money that TIGHAR had to do this search. And, after looking at the video and pics from it, I personally think it did an outstanding job, considering to overall limitations. We have all learned ALOT, not just about the pics and identifying stuff underwater (sometimes), but TIGHAR now has the pics that show the makeup of the reef, and most of that area down to 800+ feet. For the oceanographers wanting to know how life exsists there, in a fairly pristine environment, its great for science. So, we may or may not have found what we are looking for, but we have gaines alot of knowledge about the undersea world around Nikumaroro.
Perhaps----the funding will be available to persue the serach we all would like to see------and be sure to bring the crane and lots of cable!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 05:30:35 PM
watch this video and at 13:37:01;04 pause it

is it a open hatch or sum kind of flap

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yjeyOTFWX0&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

Richie, is this another part of the ROV video? I don't recall seeing bits of this before. Is there more?

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 19, 2012, 07:03:01 PM
me neither jeff i noticed it on tighar youtube channel

the quality off video is a bonus  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 08:20:43 PM
Here's Richies wheel outlined. Notice how the wheel is quite circular and, has wheel hub circle as well, clever coral. I will post some stills 2moro re: surroundings which are more important or, as important.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 19, 2012, 08:27:59 PM
And here inverted
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on January 20, 2012, 06:54:24 AM
i have attached a better image of wheel object cud deffo be a wheel  :)

Just how big do you think that rope is? In proportion to it, your "wheel" can't be more than a foot in diameter.  Kinda small for the Electra if you ask me.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Andreas Badertscher on January 20, 2012, 07:49:23 AM
I believe it's the tailwheel what they mean... And then the size would fit!
This thread is very interesting! Keep it up!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on January 20, 2012, 08:18:45 AM
I believe it's the tailwheel what they mean... And then the size would fit!

Maybe, I'm still skeptical though. See reply 100 - and there's even a rope in the picture.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on January 20, 2012, 10:22:10 AM
If it were a wheel, I would think it would be only the wheel itself.  The rubber tire would be gone...correct?  Therefore, a main gear wheel could even be possible??? 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Andreas Badertscher on January 20, 2012, 10:27:30 AM
 :o you'right! It really looks like it!!!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 20, 2012, 10:54:18 AM
Rubber tires don't deteriorate or dissolve in sea water.  They may outlast the metal parts  - rims, suspension, brakes, etc.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 12:10:54 PM
Can anyone see the unusual object in this still?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 20, 2012, 12:14:35 PM
i think its a cover hatch or sumthink  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 20, 2012, 12:17:48 PM
have been stitching together stills from the video to get a idea of the reef round the poss wheel will post wen am done  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 12:19:09 PM
Ritchie posted a still with the caption 'hatch'. When I looked at it it did resemble a door shape, covered in coral of course but, still maintaining a door shape. Enhanced a still from the ROV video at this point and...
The red lines point to something that would be useful on a door, a latching assembly? take a careful look...
(http://)

I suspect it's the remains of a door, besides the 'latch' there's the familiar alloy strip with parallel holes going around the edge of the door shaped coral.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 20, 2012, 12:34:56 PM

Looks to me like part of a horizontal Stabilizer with a control surface (elevator) or a vertical stabilizer with a control surface (rudder) hinged to it.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 20, 2012, 01:08:30 PM

Of course there is also the straight lined thing in the center that looks like a pencil, pen?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 02:08:46 PM
Rubber tires don't deteriorate or dissolve in sea water.  They may outlast the metal parts  - rims, suspension, brakes, etc.

Tires are a bit of a nuisance in sea water, they just won't stay put, dissolve or support marine life...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-17-florida-reef_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-17-florida-reef_x.htm)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 20, 2012, 02:24:34 PM
Rubber tires don't deteriorate or dissolve in sea water.  They may outlast the metal parts  - rims, suspension, brakes, etc.

Tires are a bit of a nuisance in sea water, they just won't stay put, dissolve or support marine life...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-17-florida-reef_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-17-florida-reef_x.htm)

Which takes me further to the point of what I was about to post...

This is all very interesting, but according to Global Coral Reef Alliance, (http://www.globalcoral.org/frequently_asked_questions.htm#Will natural corals settle and grow on Biorock structures) "Coral larvae, which are millimeter-sized freely-swimming baby corals, will only settle and grow on clean limestone rock. This is why conventional artificial reefs made of tires or concrete rarely exhibit hard coral growth."

From that it seems that surfaces like aircraft structure and rubber tires don't promote 'clever coral' growth the way that's been suggested here for all these wonderful shapes that suggest all manner of aircraft objects.  I guess 'sediment' is a likelihood, but 'rock growth' in such amounts seems very odd - I can't see these 'parts' becoming so fossil-like in 75 years somehow.

Have a look at some known underwater WWII-era wrecks  (http://tighar.org/Projects/Devastator/surveyamerican.htm) in a 'coral' environment to get an idea - while there is sediment and some growth of various types common to reefs, the basic airplane 'stuff' is clearly apparent.

This really leaves me stuggling with all these wonderful 'finds' here, but to each his own.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 03:50:25 PM
Rubber tires don't deteriorate or dissolve in sea water.  They may outlast the metal parts  - rims, suspension, brakes, etc.

Tires are a bit of a nuisance in sea water, they just won't stay put, dissolve or support marine life...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-17-florida-reef_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-17-florida-reef_x.htm)

Which takes me further to the point of what I was about to post...

This is all very interesting, but according to Global Coral Reef Alliance, (http://www.globalcoral.org/frequently_asked_questions.htm#Will natural corals settle and grow on Biorock structures) "Coral larvae, which are millimeter-sized freely-swimming baby corals, will only settle and grow on clean limestone rock. This is why conventional artificial reefs made of tires or concrete rarely exhibit hard coral growth."

From that it seems that surfaces like aircraft structure and rubber tires don't promote 'clever coral' growth the way that's been suggested here for all these wonderful shapes that suggest all manner of aircraft objects.  I guess 'sediment' is a likelihood, but 'rock growth' in such amounts seems very odd - I can't see these 'parts' becoming so fossil-like in 75 years somehow.

Have a look at some known underwater WWII-era wrecks  (http://tighar.org/Projects/Devastator/surveyamerican.htm) in a 'coral' environment to get an idea - while there is sediment and some growth of various types common to reefs, the basic airplane 'stuff' is clearly apparent.

This really leaves me stuggling with all these wonderful 'finds' here, but to each his own.

LTM -

It's definately a grey area Jeff but, like I have said on numerous ocassions the chances of finding a bit bigger than the size of a dinner plate are very slim. You have seen what the conditions on the reef did to the SS Norwich City and that was built like a brick shit house. Anything on an airframe that is held in place by clips, hinges, brackets etc... will be off first, riveted ones later. Big hefty engineered masterpieces like engines, undercarriage, main central spars will last a bit longer, they were designed to take punishment.
The gradient and depth of the reef slope at Niku is something else to take into account. Splendid pictures of majestic aircraft wrecks lying gracefully on the sea bed look amazing I agree but, that's not the case at Niku I'm afraid, it's a meat grinder and, when it's ground you up, down you go.
The wrecks of Truk lagoon look amazing after all these years but, it's a peaceful, tranquil location in comparison to Niku.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 04:58:04 PM
I'm not trying to discourage you, Jeff, but I think objectivity left with Elvis somewhere in all this...

I wasn't talking about whether the possible 'dinner plate' sized stuff is crucial so much as the 'look at that clever coral' long-shot.  The point is 'coral isn't that clever'.  I don't see 'tailwheel' - I see 'rock' - tires don't accrete that well - which is the point of the nice, tidy little wrecks I directed the reader to - not about 'size', but 'state'.

Yes, there sat N.C. in the surf line all these years, first compromised by an intense fire, then constantly bashed, bent, fatigued, corroded and eroded by high-energy surf, winds and free salt air.  I don't doubt that many of the same forces acted on NR16020 for some period of time, but as to 'size', if major chunks sank, they have been largely free from the more destructive forces of surf near or at the surface.  Whatever 'big chunks' there may be may also be hopelessly tangled or smothered by N.C. chunks, too.  I don't discount or argue the 'size' so much therefore, I DO have a problem with 'look, there's a TAILWHEEL!'  Frankly, I doubt NR16020 would succomb in such tidy parts, for one thing, and again - the 'clever coral' is an unfounded assumption in my opinion.

So, as I said - 'to each his own' - 'mine' is just a bit different from 'yours', sh-- brickhouses and all... ;)

AND I wish you luck.  IF you 'find' a chunk, you're going to have to be convincing enough to get someone to plunk down big resources to go chase it down to validate it, so you really need to be critical and convincing in your work, IMHO.  I hope you DO spot the grail - I just haven't seen anything yet, after all, that suggests it.

LTM -
Jeff, all valid points and I'm not disputing that. The descriptions are, well, just descriptions, what else to call them? They RESEMBLE but, are not indisputable evidence of. The ROV video is all I have to go on and I'll do what I can with it so, thanks for your encouragement, its appreciated. I GURANTEE there isn't a 'there it is' part in the video but, little bits and pieces all add up. Most of, if not all the stuff down there is covered in silt, residue etc... except of course the 'rope/wire'. That indicates two things, it either moves around on a regular basis or, it's just arrived i.e. it hasn't been there for a long period of time.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 05:15:47 PM
Just to give you some idea as to the difficulties facing trying to make sense out the ROV video. In this shot the ROV prop wash has almost cleared the silt from what lies beneath. Inside the black box, the lighter areas have been cleared,but there is still an awful lot of silt on it, it's a shiny metal sheet with straight edges, odd shaped holes and very thin edges. The clouds of silt can be seen on the left of the still picture. The picture has not been enhanced yet.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 20, 2012, 06:03:52 PM
I'm not trying to discourage you, Jeff, but I think objectivity left with Elvis somewhere in all this...

I wasn't talking about whether the possible 'dinner plate' sized stuff is crucial so much as the 'look at that clever coral' long-shot.  The point is 'coral isn't that clever'.  I don't see 'tailwheel' - I see 'rock' - tires don't accrete that well - which is the point of the nice, tidy little wrecks I directed the reader to - not about 'size', but 'state'.

Yes, there sat N.C. in the surf line all these years, first compromised by an intense fire, then constantly bashed, bent, fatigued, corroded and eroded by high-energy surf, winds and free salt air.  I don't doubt that many of the same forces acted on NR16020 for some period of time, but as to 'size', if major chunks sank, they have been largely free from the more destructive forces of surf near or at the surface.  Whatever 'big chunks' there may be may also be hopelessly tangled or smothered by N.C. chunks, too.  I don't discount or argue the 'size' so much therefore, I DO have a problem with 'look, there's a TAILWHEEL!'  Frankly, I doubt NR16020 would succomb in such tidy parts, for one thing, and again - the 'clever coral' is an unfounded assumption in my opinion.

So, as I said - 'to each his own' - 'mine' is just a bit different from 'yours', sh-- brickhouses and all... ;)

AND I wish you luck.  IF you 'find' a chunk, you're going to have to be convincing enough to get someone to plunk down big resources to go chase it down to validate it, so you really need to be critical and convincing in your work, IMHO.  I hope you DO spot the grail - I just haven't seen anything yet, after all, that suggests it.

LTM -

I have to agree with Jeff Neville. A compelling argument shown in the TIGHAR photos where coral doesn't adhere to aluminum. Regardless of object size.

While I too look hard at each of these stills and hope you are right, it's going to take convincing Ric and his advisory team that dollars should be spent of searching for any of these items.

I believe that the bigger targets offer a better chance of being found and recovered.

It would be good, IMHO, if the symposium had a speaker knowledgeable in ROV operations and data interpretation, to give a presentation on the intricacies of this kind of work.  Perhaps using some of the existing video that is being interpreted here. 

But, as Jeff N said, don't lose the enthusiasm. You've certainly got some good ideas floating around there.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 20, 2012, 06:26:53 PM
I'm not trying to discourage you, Jeff, but I think objectivity left with Elvis somewhere in all this...

I wasn't talking about whether the possible 'dinner plate' sized stuff is crucial so much as the 'look at that clever coral' long-shot.  The point is 'coral isn't that clever'.  I don't see 'tailwheel' - I see 'rock' - tires don't accrete that well - which is the point of the nice, tidy little wrecks I directed the reader to - not about 'size', but 'state'.

Yes, there sat N.C. in the surf line all these years, first compromised by an intense fire, then constantly bashed, bent, fatigued, corroded and eroded by high-energy surf, winds and free salt air.  I don't doubt that many of the same forces acted on NR16020 for some period of time, but as to 'size', if major chunks sank, they have been largely free from the more destructive forces of surf near or at the surface.  Whatever 'big chunks' there may be may also be hopelessly tangled or smothered by N.C. chunks, too.  I don't discount or argue the 'size' so much therefore, I DO have a problem with 'look, there's a TAILWHEEL!'  Frankly, I doubt NR16020 would succomb in such tidy parts, for one thing, and again - the 'clever coral' is an unfounded assumption in my opinion.

So, as I said - 'to each his own' - 'mine' is just a bit different from 'yours', sh-- brickhouses and all... ;)

AND I wish you luck.  IF you 'find' a chunk, you're going to have to be convincing enough to get someone to plunk down big resources to go chase it down to validate it, so you really need to be critical and convincing in your work, IMHO.  I hope you DO spot the grail - I just haven't seen anything yet, after all, that suggests it.

LTM -

I have to agree with Jeff Neville. A compelling argument shown in the TIGHAR photos where coral doesn't adhere to aluminum. Regardless of object size.

While I too look hard at each of these stills and hope you are right, it's going to take convincing Ric and his advisory team that dollars should be spent of searching for any of these items.

I believe that the bigger targets offer a better chance of being found and recovered.

It would be good, IMHO, if the symposium had a speaker knowledgeable in ROV operations and data interpretation, to give a presentation on the intricacies of this kind of work.  Perhaps using some of the existing video that is being interpreted here. 

But, as Jeff N said, don't lose the enthusiasm. You've certainly got some good ideas floating around there.

Thanks Irv, I'll stick with it :)
I am convinced there is aircraft wreckage here. I have seen enough but, as Marty said early on in the post, it doesn't mean it's the Electra. I agree on that point fully. Shame the coordinates were not recorded :(
Still, they looked where they thought it should be and... oh well, only history will tell.

jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 20, 2012, 07:06:24 PM
if anythink we are ruling out objects, that could appear on the next rov dive video in the future  which makes life easier...

also i think tighar would even admit, that when they first seen these images they must of thought wow, but then been left disappointed...

also maybe new opinions on things, that tighar have'nt noticed maybe ov help 

likes ov these pics

notice they are similar but probably not the same thing

(http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/getimage.exe?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=913&DMSCALE=10.17812&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMTEXT=%22George%20Palmer%20Putnam%20Collection%20of%20Amelia%20Earhart%20Papers%22&REC=10&DMTHUMB=1&DMROTATE=0)



Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 20, 2012, 07:15:42 PM
I agree with ALL of you. The pros and cons of this exercise have given all of us things to look at, and contemplate. I think we all want to believe that the Electra is there. I certainly do. In fact, there's always the possibility the the ROV 'just missed' an engine, or a prop, or such 'holy grail' items. Like Ric and others have said, its a big reef, and deep, and the parts we are 'seeing' are pretty small in comparison.
I encourage Jeff and others to continue their specialized search----the holy grail may be around the corner. And If you find it, beyond any reasonable doubt, the $$$$$$$$ will come.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 20, 2012, 10:23:03 PM

Richie
WOW  That certainly looks like an RDF Loop antenna and I'd bet that the one on the Electra had a serial number on it and the base also.  A shame that the ROV didn't have a capability to grasp onto it and bring it up.  Hopefully it's location can be determined from ROV time stamp and Log. and it can be retrieved on the next ROV trip.

Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on January 21, 2012, 01:01:12 AM
i have attached a better image of wheel object cud deffo be a wheel  :)
Paging doctor Rorschach, paging doctor Rorschach, is doctor Rorschach in the house?

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 21, 2012, 06:50:00 AM
Thanks for the last post, Gary. I needed a good chuckle. It's not that the objects identified on this thread aren't what they might be being identified as, but more so that most of us would love to see something identifiable in the pictures. Attached (hopefully) are two pictures taken on the wreck of the USS Aeolus, reefed in 1988 off of North Carolina. One shows a bundle of rope that I presume went down with the ship as there is a compartment that is pretty much full of the stuff and I did not see any trawl nets or other lines snagging the wreck. The other is a photo to show the corrosive effects of salt water submersion on a steel ship with a hole corroded through the decking and an example of marine life taking hold. I did not have any handy to show the utter destruction of the ship due to hurricanes. The ship lies at 110 feet and has broken into three large pieces with obvious tears in steel plating. I cannot imagine AE's plane remaining anywhere near as recognizable after being down for much longer and having passed through a surf zone along the reef before sliding into the deep. I do believe that is where the plane is. I just don't think we're going to be able to identify it without bringing something up. My $.02.   LTM-  John(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 21, 2012, 07:23:48 AM
FWIW Richie,  That could be the direction finder hoop in the photo. It could even be the cable leading out from it toward the left. It even looks like it comes out from the right location if it is indeed the hoop. Until there is a more definitive photo taken directly of it, and/or the object is retrieved, we just can't know. I do like the photos and the efforts gone into researching the video and posting them. I just wish we could go down there, grab whatever it is, bring it up and find the proof. LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 21, 2012, 07:49:11 AM
i have attached a better image of wheel object cud deffo be a wheel  :)
Paging doctor Rorschach, paging doctor Rorschach, is doctor Rorschach in the house?

gl

You just kill me, Gary  :D

Saw the 'butterfly' too, didn't you... ;)

LTM -

For those not in the know Doctor Rorschach (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Rorschach)

And it was me who saw the pigs head :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 10:28:53 AM
It's not quite Elvis but, have a look here
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 10:30:37 AM
Here it is without lines. I will get some better stills from this part of the video. I won't say what it could be but I have a rough idea.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 21, 2012, 10:56:01 AM

Might the "Loop Antenna and Base" still be attached to the Electra??
That would make it pretty difficult to raise it without breaking it.

I find it amusing that nothing is said about the expense of  expeditions  looking for bones and freckle cream jars and shoe soles, etc.  Maybe the stills from the ROV video ahould be brought to the attention of sonmeone like James Cameron of the TITANIC  effort.  He might be interested in the movie rights to produce a movie entitled EARHART.  It would prolly out gross his other movie.   Just a random thought,
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 11:04:44 AM
I thought I could see the remains of a wing spar in the still. So I followed the outline of the remains of the skin until I found the bit that would accompany it all, a control surface ( looking at it end on)
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 11:28:55 AM
funny u point that out jeff because i found this just to the right of ur still
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 11:29:57 AM
cud it be the pipe that comes from under wing ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 21, 2012, 11:42:18 AM

Might the "Loop Antenna and Base" still be attached to the Electra??
That would make it pretty difficult to raise it without breaking it.

I find it amusing that nothing is said about the expense of  expeditions  looking for bones and freckle cream jars and shoe soles, etc.  Maybe the stills from the ROV video ahould be brought to the attention of sonmeone like James Cameron of the TITANIC  effort.  He might be interested in the movie rights to produce a movie entitled EARHART.  It would prolly out gross his other movie.   Just a random thought,

I happen to have said alot about the scarcity of resources, Harry - consider the context.

It is recognized that the cost of ANY AND ALL operations TIGHAR does on Niku is high. 

Point is, what do you go BACK for?  It takes a compelling case to muster major resources like Dr. Tom King and his crew on land, Seabotics, multiple vessels for ROV work, more crew to support all, etc. -

So if you have a week or two at a time to be on station and limited resources, WHERE DO you focus your precious resources?

The land effort is no different - read Dr. King's comments  (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.com/) on that.  They found enough 'fruit' to want to go back and comb some more area, etc.  Also in re-evaluating the big picture, the Aukermaine site may beckon again.

I'm not poo-pooing those who are 'seeing things' here, really, just believing it takes a great deal of analysis to have enough confidence in what may be found in an area to direct resources back there on Niku.  Do you recover ground already looked at last year, or do you move to the next sector?  Or, do you try to make the case to a backer to cover BOTH? 

Ric and the board have got big shoes to fill when it comes to convincing the major supporters to back these things, and I'm sure he and TIGHAR are watching all developments with interest.  I think what you all are excited about is great; I also think it takes many hours of hard analysis to really 'see' what 'may' be there - none of us are magically endowed with seeing through silt, etc. to see what gives 'shape' to what may be nothing more than rock.

---

As an aside, I believe I recall that no ship wreckage was found - and I don't know that much real time was spent surveying that far to the south.  But, if we could get a view or two of ANYTHING from the ship down that slope (maybe none there - maybe all at bottom) maybe we could get a better idea of how the sediment settles and obscures things.  From that the baseline for searching might be enhanced - knowing better 'what to look for', so to speak.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 12:04:06 PM
also u av to remember wen the electra tumbled down the hill wat ever it banged into on the way down broke free an landed on top of it..

for me it's a learning curve an even thou i get a little smile wen we find somethink i know better

what i do find strange is, on the occasion the rov goes off rope an u see reef walls to left side off these images the wall's are really boring as there just flat slopes also wen u change the gradient on an image if the stuff was just reef slope it would all be same color but its not 


notice in attachment the rope running across what were analyzeing is same colour as reef floor in background now if these objects were posting were just part of the reef everythink in this image would be blue

also notice the metal bar cant tell if its part of the flap above which looks like a roof hatch door or if it's from the object underneath
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 12:12:19 PM
this dont mean it the electra i would never claim it to be

but i think it is defo sumthink that dont belong there  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 12:34:48 PM

Might the "Loop Antenna and Base" still be attached to the Electra??
That would make it pretty difficult to raise it without breaking it.

I find it amusing that nothing is said about the expense of  expeditions  looking for bones and freckle cream jars and shoe soles, etc.  Maybe the stills from the ROV video ahould be brought to the attention of sonmeone like James Cameron of the TITANIC  effort.  He might be interested in the movie rights to produce a movie entitled EARHART.  It would prolly out gross his other movie.   Just a random thought,

I happen to have said alot about the scarcity of resources, Harry - consider the context.

It is recognized that the cost of ANY AND ALL operations TIGHAR does on Niku is high. 

Point is, what do you go BACK for?  It takes a compelling case to muster major resources like Dr. Tom King and his crew on land, Seabotics, multiple vessels for ROV work, more crew to support all, etc. -

So if you have a week or two at a time to be on station and limited resources, WHERE DO you focus your precious resources?

The land effort is no different - read Dr. King's comments  (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.com/) on that.  They found enough 'fruit' to want to go back and comb some more area, etc.  Also in re-evaluating the big picture, the Aukermaine site may beckon again.

I'm not poo-pooing those who are 'seeing things' here, really, just believing it takes a great deal of analysis to have enough confidence in what may be found in an area to direct resources back there on Niku.  Do you recover ground already looked at last year, or do you move to the next sector?  Or, do you try to make the case to a backer to cover BOTH? 

Ric and the board have got big shoes to fill when it comes to convincing the major supporters to back these things, and I'm sure he and TIGHAR are watching all developments with interest.  I think what you all are excited about is great; I also think it takes many hours of hard analysis to really 'see' what 'may' be there - none of us are magically endowed with seeing through silt, etc. to see what gives 'shape' to what may be nothing more than rock.

---

As an aside, I believe I recall that no ship wreckage was found - and I don't know that much real time was spent surveying that far to the south.  But, if we could get a view or two of ANYTHING from the ship down that slope (maybe none there - maybe all at bottom) maybe we could get a better idea of how the sediment settles and obscures things.  From that the baseline for searching might be enhanced - knowing better 'what to look for', so to speak.

LTM -

well said Jeff. I wonder if a potential film backer WOULD be interested, does steven Spielberg know of the search? ;)
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 12:43:19 PM
also u av to remember wen the electra tumbled down the hill wat ever it banged into on the way down broke free an landed on top of it..

for me it's a learning curve an even thou i get a little smile wen we find somethink i know better

what i do find strange is, on the occasion the rov goes off rope an u see reef walls to left side off these images the wall's are really boring as there just flat slopes also wen u change the gradient on an image if the stuff was just reef slope it would all be same color but its not 


notice in attachment the rope running across what were analyzeing is same colour as reef floor in background now if these objects were posting were just part of the reef everythink in this image would be blue

also notice the metal bar cant tell if its part of the flap above which looks like a roof hatch door or if it's from the object underneath

Keep hunting Richie! Don't put too much faith into inverted images though, it's very deceptive. I'm getting better images from that other video you posted, hardly need any enhancing at all. Good point about looking at the background in the video, that's where things will be. Also keep an eye out for where the ROV prop wash clears away the silt and sediment, that stuff is hiding a lot from us. Sent e-mail to friend who restores aircraft at Boscombe Down as a hobby now (retired airframe fitter) asking him to take a look at some of these images. Didn't let on as to where, who or how though, probably better he doesn't know
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 21, 2012, 12:46:54 PM
Richie, what you suggest is a debries field from an object faling down the reef (whatever that object can be) I seem to remember that when Bob Ballard found the Bizmark the first clue they had was the remains of the ships slide down the sea mount that it is located on.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 21, 2012, 01:08:40 PM

Jeff N
Since you ask, I would focus on Discovering and Recovering the Electra. 
Yes, I am not unmindful of the time and resources that would require, having been involved in two projects that would dwarf the Niku project.  (Try 19 man-years of effort and 3..8 Million Dolars in expenses)
I mean no disrespect to Ric and the TIGHAR effort.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 01:09:28 PM
i use inverted images an photoshop because u can get a better idea of structure for instance

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/rimdiameter.jpg)

notice the little spoke like things on electra an wen u mess with colors in cs5 u can get a better idea if they r an u can see on 1 i have altered u can see a spoke ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 01:11:52 PM
i use inverted images an photoshop because u can get a better idea of structure for instance

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/rimdiameter.jpg)

notice the little spoke like things on electra an wen u mess with colors in cs5 u can get a better idea if they r an u can see on 1 i have altered u can see a spoke ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 01:19:47 PM
i use inverted images an photoshop because u can get a better idea of structure for instance

(http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/rimdiameter.jpg)

notice the little spoke like things on electra an wen u mess with colors in cs5 u can get a better idea if they r an u can see on 1 i have altered u can see a spoke ?

In the original still Richie I noticed also there is something in the centre of the big round object, also round, very similar to a hub but, the clarity in these images is awful so, we're only speculating. I like looking for  possible airframe components, spars, skin etc... It's there but, it's a job to make it stand out (at the moment). All objects so far could come from anything, it's airframe we need. Keep up the good work
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Brad Beeching on January 21, 2012, 01:22:12 PM
 ??? I'm sorry but could someone who speaks "richie" please translate? The gentleman is working his butt off looking at everything and anything but most of it is nearly indecipherable to me. I mean no disrespect, but I cannot make out what he is trying to say. Any help would be appreciated. Again, I dont mean to flame anybody and I appologize if it's taken wrong..

Brad
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 01:27:36 PM
no offence taken, basically we are finding objects in the reef that resemble airplane parts.... any image we have posted previously look at it closely,   then Google "Earhart Electra" an see the similarity in the objects in question  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 01:28:56 PM
no offence taken, basically we are finding objects in the reef that resemble airplane parts.... any image we have posted previously look at it closely,   then Google "Earhart Electra" an see the similarity in the objects in question  :)

an is tha cos i speak an type scouse  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Hilary Christine Olson on January 21, 2012, 01:30:38 PM
Hi Brad, Have you read the thread from the very Begining as it is  a conversation in places not just a general out there to all. It is all mixed together as this and your post will be .
Hilary
ps if your unfamiliar with Scouse its from Liverpool and although I am from Wales originally its one up on me
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 21, 2012, 02:26:28 PM

Brad
Richie and Jeff Victor are posting stills takem from the ROV run.  and all of us are commenting on what  the stills might show.
Go to page 23 of this thread and look at reply number 330 where Richie has put a pic of the RDF antenna on the Electra and compared it with a still from the ROV (click on the image to bloow  it up)

Hillary
Can you expand a bit on the "scouse", I am here in the "colonies" (LOL) and need a clarifiction.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 21, 2012, 02:58:29 PM

Brad
Richie and Jeff Victor are posting stills takem from the ROV run.  and all of us are commenting on what  the stills might show.
Go to page 23 of this thread and look at reply number 330 where Richie has put a pic of the RDF antenna on the Electra and compared it with a still from the ROV (click on the image to bloow  it up)

Hillary
Can you expand a bit on the "scouse", I am here in the "colonies" (LOL) and need a clarifiction.

I'll butt in on this one.

Young Richie is from Merseyside/Liverpool and they are often refered to as scouse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scouse) which is both a local dialect as well as a local food (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scouse_(food)).  If richie will pardon me I also beleive that due to his avaialble technology he is also employing a varation of text speak which can make his posts seem rather garbled.  To us older people text speak could well be the future just as Chaucers english was the bane of my life for my 16+ exams.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 03:02:24 PM
right if am correct even though reefs can form some amazeing objects....... this is not a part the reef cud imitate notice how symetrical the hole is


right were the 2 components join u can see outline round the hole that high lights 2 diffrent objects held together with 1 bolt

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 03:17:59 PM
chris u wiki'ed that first bit lid  :o,

get on these claw things kidda, in picture av jus lashed on post, swear lad it's real thing, the real ting lar, just watch aw many agree wid me lad, if u dont i'll get me nan to prove it lad watch, watch lad u'll owe me a fiver if its not k


thats garble from a simple scouse haha

i do try my best though, as school's use these forums for research so i try to type the correct grammer

   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 21, 2012, 03:22:02 PM
Richie,

Calm down calm down lar (and leave my car alone)  ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 03:29:37 PM
ur safe lad, gunna rob a radio out electra wen we find it lad watch haha  :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 21, 2012, 03:32:33 PM
lol - our ex colonials will be scratching their nappers over that one  ;D

Wonder if we can get Ric over here to speak to us Brits and other Europeans?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 03:47:47 PM
nar Ric wud be like,

good job old chaps,

this is one for the books...

however do beware that quick sand will capture u quicker than a rabbit in headlights

rather marvelous wound'nt u agree old chap

 :D :D :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 03:50:22 PM
chris if i get banned its all ur fault k  ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 04:06:25 PM
Red line = wing spar
Blue lines = leading edge + trailing edge
Yellow = cut away for control surface
Violet = control surface end on


Now you know what to look at take a look at the original
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Bessel P Sybesma on January 21, 2012, 05:28:05 PM
This is the first picture I can see something without a good measure of wishful thinking / imagination - mind you, I'm not saying the things are not what we think they might be, I'm just not sure we're looking at shadows...

I'm just wondering about the enhancement - was that done using some objective rules, or by hand with the specific intent of highliting the wheel?

Anyway, what would be interesting right now is to have a composite made of the video, showing the entire area covered by the ROV, indicating what parts might have been identified and their exact location, to see if there is some sort of logical arrangement to them.  Surely if there are wingsections and control surfaces visible, then it is not unreasonable to have the other various bits and pieces still in a configuration that corresponds to the shape of the Electra...

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 05:55:16 PM
yer ur right, an i was in middle of stitching snapshots of video footage together, when i realised in middle of doing it the video jumps from

blah blah 42 sec's to blah blah 37 sec's so have had to start again from scratch, an believe me each piece to knit into place exact takes at least 20 mins in photoshop so last 2 days of hard work down the drain

believe it or not 5 seconds of lost footage are a long time in this kind ov detective work  :( 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Bessel P Sybesma on January 21, 2012, 06:00:30 PM
yer ur right, an i was in middle of stitching snapshots of video footage together, when i realised in middle of doing it the video jumps from

blah blah 42 sec's to blah blah 37 sec's so have had to start again from scratch, an believe me each piece to knit into place exact takes at least 20 mins in photoshop so last 2 days of hard work down the drain

believe it or not 5 seconds of lost footage are a long time in this kind ov detective work  :(

Good man, looking forward to seeing the results of your hard work!

BTW does anyone know if an unedited version is available somewhere to cover that 5 seconds gap?  Or was it cut out because of picture loss or something?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 21, 2012, 06:05:33 PM
This is the first picture I can see something without a good measure of wishful thinking / imagination - mind you, I'm not saying the things are not what we think they might be, I'm just not sure we're looking at shadows...

I'm just wondering about the enhancement - was that done using some objective rules, or by hand with the specific intent of highliting the wheel?

Anyway, what would be interesting right now is to have a composite made of the video, showing the entire area covered by the ROV, indicating what parts might have been identified and their exact location, to see if there is some sort of logical arrangement to them.  Surely if there are wingsections and control surfaces visible, then it is not unreasonable to have the other various bits and pieces still in a configuration that corresponds to the shape of the Electra...

Won't be easy Bessel, we're not sure what it is yet and, it's in a million tiny bits. The 'wing' sections themselves are in thousands of bits, scattered around as in the still, only large 'intact' bit is the end of the control surface. Can't post hi-res photos on site, only jpeg. The terrain around the reef is murderous ( see what it did to the SS Norwich City) plus it's extremely deep water within a few hundred metres of the shore, 300 + metres. It's an extinct volcanic outcrop.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 07:38:49 PM
believe it or not,  in the pic av attached is  the way i look at images some times to work out wat am looking at  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 07:45:38 PM
that last post was in reply to jeff hayden's post   ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 21, 2012, 10:06:41 PM

Sure would be nice to see a chart of where the ROV began and ended the run  that we are looking  at.   Anyone know if and where one exists??

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 10:09:54 PM
well goin bed it 5am

an just thought would post the evidence to prove it the electra

nite all
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 10:11:32 PM
its bottom to top annotice there is only 1 under belly antenna wire  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 10:16:13 PM
if am correct in the finding amelia on discovery channel u see the underwater reef footage before the cable becomes faulty if we can get time on video ov that point an were the ship is based at outer reef we cud narrow it down
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 10:24:42 PM
notice the times on video that shows time it takes to get 1 end to other
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 21, 2012, 10:28:05 PM
well in my eyes it's the electra cos thats the only plane wid belly antenna to go down near by.... even thou there is only 1 instead of 2 metal wires think it makes sense

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 22, 2012, 07:35:32 AM
believe it or not,  in the pic av attached is  the way i look at images some times to work out wat am looking at  :)

Interesting - it seems to work for you.

You have a lot of patience, Richie - very interesting details in the stills.

I 'get' Jeff Hayden's 'clever coral' remark a bit better with regard to the 'wheel' (slow sometimes...) - it IS a very odd formation of 'coral'...

There is a great deal of 'snow' (sediment) down there.  Sitting here in Seattle for the past 5 days and observing the biggest snow and ice storm they've had in 30 years from my hotel window, it is cool to watch how the snow slowly hides many things and leaves tell-tale features evident.  I'm bored, yes - and perhaps a bit slow where snow is concerned too, being from south Georgia... but sure enough, if coral doesn't grow on tires so well, sediment probably does accumulate well if the the parent item stays put long enough.  If that's not sediment on something that looks like a tailwheel, it is one fascinating and 'clever coral' formation, for damn sure.

If you 'know' what you are looking at under there, or know where it should be (like my rented Silverado...), the snow doesn't necessarily hide things so effectively.  Very basic, I realize, but that (and time on my hands) made me think more about the sediment in the ROV footage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yjeyOTFWX0&feature=BFa&list=UL9tvHm3jZcME&lf=mfu_in_order).  There is a light dusting of 'snow' (sediment) on the 'rope' at around frame 13:36:22:05  +/- - what's odd is that the later of sediment seems so light. 

But, looking at around frame 13:37:44:29  there is what appears like 'wear' on the 'rock' in one area where the 'rope' stretches across it.  Makes me wonder if the rope has been in movement enough to keep heavy sediment from staying on it - probably so.  Can rope 'wear' rock?  Nylon rope can wear many thing, and limestone is relatively soft.  Cable might too (and cable also wears more quickly than nylon against some things - so I can't conclude anything much here...).  There is another appearance of 'wear' on an odd looking tubular object (almost vase-like) around frame 13:38:22:07  - I wonder what that thing is?  Almost bell-mouthed with the 'rope' cutting across it.

There is a another tell-tale feature on the 'rope' just before it apparently 'splits off' into two pieces (as if a splice - and maybe this is the base of a loop in the rope) - looks like a ferrule or swage of some sort on the 'rope' - right at frame 13:38:58:16  +/-.

None of this screams "AIRPLANE" to me, but perhaps looking at some of these features can help others appreciate the environment down there and what it does to stuff and how stuff might hide / partially hide.  I have not re-reviewed all of Jeff Hayden's and richie's good stills work, but some if not all of what I mention may already be here somewhere.  Excellent stills work pulling from the tape guys.  Plus, maybe some of the tell-tale features like the swage or ferrule will help identify what the rope might really be.  I admit that I had to fight off any urge to see it as a cable swage right away...  ;)

I also admit the 'tailwheel' has a tendency to keep me going back... that is a very clever chunk of coral, Jeff Hayden, you were right in saying that.  It may even keep me up a bit late.

One thing that becomes more clear to me as I go back through the tape is how dynamic that area has been, for whatever reasons - natural, man-made stuff of some weight crunching down over it, both, whatever - it is a grinder as has been pointed out a number of times.  TIGHAR's probably tried to explain that already, but it comes home even more now.  Maybe it will be the smaller, durable chunks that tell the story one day.  I think it will take a lot of the kind of work you guys are trying to do to find out - excellent.

LTM -
A well written posting Jeff and I agree with all you say. The bit that needs to be emphasized is None of this screams "AIRPLANE" exactly. Most of this could be from anything at all, we need to find something that can ONLY be airplane. I mentioned in an earlier post that I will show a couple of the stills to a retired airframe fitter and now, aircraft restoration. The ones I will show are not the 'could be a' strut, wheel etc... but the ones showing bits of alloy/tin/metal etc..
he should be able to say yay or nay. I think they are restoring a Harrier jump jet at the moment, one of the Falkland Island conflict veterans.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 02:28:48 PM
i think this could be a propeller blade what's other people's opinions ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 02:50:35 PM
does this resemble part of a mono wing to any 1 ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 02:56:46 PM
in these photo's its side view, an above view of wheel object, notice it has rim either side and indented in middle ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 03:17:25 PM
right guys the box with bar typed in, is referring to rear belly antena bar what wire connects too ?

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 03:23:30 PM
also notice the belly reciever bar is identical to earhart's electra 1, if u google it also notice it is in the exact position earharts is just before the wings span out  if looking from underneath from rear of plane
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on January 22, 2012, 03:44:39 PM
For details of the ROV locations, search the Niku-VI records and TIGHAR TRACKS 2010, vol 26. (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuVI/PIPAreport/Niku6PIPAreportpage3.html) for one example, which includes a map.  Also, the expedition daily reports give details of where the ROV was operating that day, and what conditions were like.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 05:44:14 PM
can any 1 tell me !!!!!! if u were in a plane, above Electra why it was in flight an landing gear was up would the wheels protrude the rear of the wings ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 22, 2012, 06:06:33 PM
can any 1 tell me !!!!!! if u were in a plane, above Electra why it was in flight an landing gear was up would the wheels protrude the rear of the wings ?

here's how they fit in flight Richie
(http://)

Richie, can you check out areas in the video where the ROV props have cleared away some of the sediment/residue/silt from the reef. You don't need to invert the images, I just need to see areas that have had this spoil cleared away because what lies beneath is important, cheers mate.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 22, 2012, 06:31:59 PM
Richie, sorry to bother you again. I need to find evidence of wire in the vicinity of where you pointed out a prop? don't think it is a prop but, if you can find any wire in this part of the video in this area that would be brill. 13:37:09;00 to whenever it all goes out of shot. Very small wheel like objects that wire could be guided around would be a bonus.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 22, 2012, 06:33:05 PM
am checking it out now will post sum pics asap m8
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 23, 2012, 06:47:25 AM
Richie, If post 392's outline is a part of the plane I would sooner think it is part of the rudder/stabilizer assembly than a wing tip. The shape is closer to that as shown in the "Lockheed Model 10 3-View" that Jeff posted. Looks to me like one of the rudders. IF, in fact, it is a part of the plane and not a natural feature.  LTM
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 09:02:45 AM
jeff hay

i have found some stuff i will post after my tea later, wire an other bits  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 09:20:11 AM
jeff hay

i have found some stuff i will post after my tea later, wire an other bits  :)
Way to go!
While you are there can you find a better shot of this lump of tin in the video? It appears to have some sort of mark on it, a circle with something in it and a 'line' through it? Resolution is awful as the ROV is in full flight  at this point of the footage.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 10:22:56 AM
Is this metalwork in the red box the way Richies wheel was secured to the rear bulkhead?The 'rope' goes across it unfortunately thus obscuring part of it, shame.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 12:13:33 PM
just some pics i have tryed best to highlight will add some more soon  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 12:22:49 PM
ere is the pic inverted  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 12:28:38 PM
this thing is odd aswell
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 12:43:35 PM
From your still of the metal ring Ritchie. Notice how thin this appears to be? with holes? It's on the top of the object that Ritchie thought might be a door/hatch. The ring is circled, the thin material has lines pointing to it, outer skin of door/hatch?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 01:04:47 PM
i have looked at them they to be connected
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 01:15:27 PM
i have looked at them they to be connected

Ritchie, try not to invert the images. The stuff we are looking for is thin, silver coloured, has holes (Preferably in rows or lines or opposite each other) and is torn to shreds like this stuff

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 01:19:06 PM
Another lot of unusual objects
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 01:22:02 PM
i will start doing it after this k  :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 03:55:18 PM
If you step through the video at around this point you can see what lies beneath this 'coral outcrop'. It's Ritchies hatch/door again and, where this cable/wire/rope has been rubbing away at the coral it has exposed the shiny silver coloured material underneath the coral.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 04:00:16 PM
Also notice how thin this shiny silver coloured material is?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 04:56:19 PM
well guys get on this that i found  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 04:58:18 PM
gunna try an getting better images but were it is out of rov light its took me 3 hours till now to highlight it like that
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 05:27:14 PM
Possible rudder/tailfin

Yellow = outline
Yellow again = straight row of rivets/holes
Blue = outline of damaged area containing the bright shiny silver coloured material (will post a still of this area later)
Notice also material peeling away at the bottom of the object

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 05:45:40 PM
get on this  :o

the botton arrow is to wheel, the top arrow is pointing to strut an i have outlined the wing
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 05:46:55 PM
as in this wheel

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1020;image)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 05:54:13 PM
i have enhanced round objects dya see it  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 05:57:03 PM
Also notice how thin this shiny silver coloured material is?
(http://)

were ur red lines are pointing to,  thats were the wheel is an the shiny stuff is the undercariage that wheel sits in when in flight  :o
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 06:00:51 PM
i have enhanced round objects dya see it  :)

Great work Richie, your'e finding the metalwork now. How many wheels though? I think we have enough now let's concentrate on the tin. :)
keep a look out for holes in the tin you find, in straight lines, opposite each other, circles, semi-circles, rows. These are indications of metalwork being present. Beware though, coral is also full of holes but, generally speaking not as symetrical as man made objects. ;)

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 06:05:18 PM
look at the snapped end of tail the way it jaggers in, thats were our hatch fits  :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 06:06:06 PM
Also notice how thin this shiny silver coloured material is?
(http://)

were ur red lines are pointing to,  thats were the wheel is an the shiny stuff is the undercariage that wheel sits in when in flight  :o
The red lines point to the edge of the hatch/door you found Richie. It is constructed in two skins of alloy over an alloy frame, one outer skin, one inner skin. It's very thin, shiny, silver coloured which makes it stand out from the surrounding coral. Where the rope has chaffed against the edge it's worn away the coral exposing the brightwork beneath.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 06:10:19 PM
Possible rudder/tailfin

Yellow = outline
Yellow again = straight row of rivets/holes
Blue = outline of damaged area containing the bright shiny silver coloured material (will post a still of this area later)
Notice also material peeling away at the bottom of the object



Which could have once been attached to the side of this oblong shaped object, red line side. I have no idea what the thing in the blue circled area is, any guesses?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 06:55:32 PM
jeff what we thought was a hatch is actully half the rear mono wing an that wheel is the tail wheel in the middle of them  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 23, 2012, 07:29:49 PM
jeff what we thought was a hatch is actully half the rear mono wing an that wheel is the tail wheel in the middle of them  :)

I am still convinced you were right first time. Take a look at this door and, there's another in the cockpit... See the curvature and the latching/locking system plus the hinges. Anything held onto the aircraft with just hinges would be the first thing to come adrift. Also notice the shape of the handles
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 23, 2012, 07:42:09 PM
could be  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on January 23, 2012, 10:55:21 PM
Possible rudder/tailfin

Yellow = outline
Yellow again = straight row of rivets/holes
Blue = outline of damaged area containing the bright shiny silver coloured material (will post a still of this area later)
Notice also material peeling away at the bottom of the object



Which could have once been attached to the side of this oblong shaped object, red line side. I have no idea what the thing in the blue circled area is, any guesses?
(http://)
I don't know, it looks like the picture from my last colonoscopy.

https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1035

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 06:43:51 AM
I have managed to be able to extend the outline of this object by enhancing the shiny, silver coloured metalwork (with accompanying holes)
If that looks like part of your colon Gary then, don't let your health insurance company find out, they will triple your premiums  ;D
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 24, 2012, 07:15:54 AM
Watched a documentry on the WW2 wrecks at Truuk Lagoon and what struck me was that all of the planes, trucks and other wheeled vehicles all had complete wheels on them.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 08:05:03 AM
Watched a documentry on the WW2 wrecks at Truuk Lagoon and what struck me was that all of the planes, trucks and other wheeled vehicles all had complete wheels on them.

I have seen that documentary too Chris. Everything down there is so well preserved it's amazing! If only AE and FN had put the electra into the lagoon at Niku we would all be able to see how well the wreck was preserved. The choice of the reef landing was theirs to make and, in hindsight it made it virtually impossible to find the plane. Check out the wreck of the SS Norwich City, same place, same outcome, devastation only worse for a lightweight plane compared to a few thousand ton steel plate ship.
Still, think positive. We are at stage 2 of the 5 stage process of identification.
1. Find debris = done
2. Is debris of aircraft origin = to be confirmed

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 08:47:31 AM
Yet more 'unreef like' objects to the right of the red line...?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 24, 2012, 09:29:22 AM
Watched a documentry on the WW2 wrecks at Truuk Lagoon and what struck me was that all of the planes, trucks and other wheeled vehicles all had complete wheels on them.

I have seen that documentary too Chris. Everything down there is so well preserved it's amazing! If only AE and FN had put the electra into the lagoon at Niku we would all be able to see how well the wreck was preserved. The choice of the reef landing was theirs to make and, in hindsight it made it virtually impossible to find the plane. Check out the wreck of the SS Norwich City, same place, same outcome, devastation only worse for a lightweight plane compared to a few thousand ton steel plate ship.
Still, think positive. We are at stage 2 of the 5 stage process of identification.
1. Find debris = done
2. Is debris of aircraft origin = to be confirmed

Jeff

Guess I was trying to say that unless the action of waves and current have managed to remove it the tyre is likeley to be still on the wheel if it is there.

Agree that you can't compare the lagoon to the reef face.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 10:37:19 AM
Watched a documentry on the WW2 wrecks at Truuk Lagoon and what struck me was that all of the planes, trucks and other wheeled vehicles all had complete wheels on them.

I have seen that documentary too Chris. Everything down there is so well preserved it's amazing! If only AE and FN had put the electra into the lagoon at Niku we would all be able to see how well the wreck was preserved. The choice of the reef landing was theirs to make and, in hindsight it made it virtually impossible to find the plane. Check out the wreck of the SS Norwich City, same place, same outcome, devastation only worse for a lightweight plane compared to a few thousand ton steel plate ship.
Still, think positive. We are at stage 2 of the 5 stage process of identification.
1. Find debris = done
2. Is debris of aircraft origin = to be confirmed

Jeff

Guess I was trying to say that unless the action of waves and current have managed to remove it the tyre is likeley to be still on the wheel if it is there.

Agree that you can't compare the lagoon to the reef face.

Hope so Chris, that would be a bonus if the tyres were intact and, could be able to read the writing on the sidewalls? Lot of information on tyre sidewalls.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on January 24, 2012, 11:03:00 AM
I'm sorry guys, I just can't see any airplane parts in any of the stills.
It is sort of like looking at clouds and seeing Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse or an Electra.
Richie's research and enhancement of the pictures is interesting though and I hope he keeps looking.

But I think I have a lead on what happened to the bodies:skull (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2006/102/mars-humanoid-skull.htm) ;D

Randy
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 11:12:23 AM
I'm sorry guys, I just can't see any airplane parts in any of the stills.
It is sort of like looking at clouds and seeing Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse or an Electra.
Richie's research and enhancement of the pictures is interesting though and I hope he keeps looking.

But I think I have a lead on what happened to the bodies:skull (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2006/102/mars-humanoid-skull.htm) ;D

Randy

It's not easy Randy, you won't see anything recognizable as part of a plane down here. You will see bits that used to be aircraft. Some air disasters leave just fragments of wreckage, hardly recognizable as airplane at all. Now imagine 75 years worth of silt, sediment and residue dumped on top of aircraft fragments.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Phil T Martin on January 24, 2012, 11:30:12 AM
  Though I have found this thread very interesting, and can see where a couple of the stills (the gear fork especially) makes one wonder if the ROV actually was filming bits of the Electra, I stop myself short of saying this stilll is a wheel, that still is a hatch or wing spar - to me that is reading into the picture a little too far. SOMETHING is there for sure, whether it is aircraft parts or just outrageous coral growth. Time will tell.
  Jeff Hayden's comment about the choice of a reef or lagoon landing being their's to make made me think; with all I have read about Amelia, her spirit and/or reckless abandon - I gotta believe she saw that reef and immediately pictured being found, refueling the Electra, and flying that sucker right back off of it to complete the trip to Howland. Failure was not an option - landing in the lagoon = end of trip, period. From the air, she may have thought the reef looked like it could sustain a landing and future take-off attempt. Just a thought...
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on January 24, 2012, 11:32:17 AM
Jeff,

I have done a bit of diving, on sand, rock, coral, and ships. I do have an idea about what years on the bottom does to materials from the surface.

I guess what I am getting at is, I think every statement on identification of the aircraft pieces in the stills should be prefaced by "to me it looks like".  The next observer might see something else.

trying hard not to offend anyone, I'm new here.

Randy
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 11:46:30 AM
Jeff,

I have done a bit of diving, on sand, rock, coral, and ships. I do have an idea about what years on the bottom does to materials from the surface.

I guess what I am getting at is, I think every statement on identification of the aircraft pieces in the stills should be prefaced by "to me it looks like".  The next observer might see something else.

trying hard not to offend anyone, I'm new here.

Randy

Point taken Randy. Any name given to something is arbitrary and, like you say different people see different things. All we are trying to do is to sort out what are natural objects from possible man made ones. I have no idea what I am looking at, it's in too many bits but, those bits have signs of man made origin. I have sent some of stills to be checked by an airframe fitter/aircraft restoration guy to see if we are working in the right direction. All comments in this forum are welcome so, don't be afraid to have your opinions. That's how we get the correct outcome. Nothing is for certain so all input is valuable.
P.S Are you any good at 300 metre diving?

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 24, 2012, 12:12:45 PM

Jeff Victor
You mentioned 5 stages in the path to identification and gave the first.  In your estimation, what are the next 4?
Any further expeditions must include the ability to capture, and bring to the surface for examination and analysis, pieces of the debris that are clearly man-made and suspected of being from an aircraft.  My first choice would be the piece that appears to be an RDF Antenna.

For what it's worth.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on January 24, 2012, 12:22:55 PM
Jeff,
only good to 150 feet, then not for very long. ROV or SUB is the answer at Nikumaroro. If only I were born rich instead of so good looking. ;)
Randy
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 12:58:34 PM

Jeff Victor
You mentioned 5 stages in the path to identification and gave the first.  In your estimation, what are the next 4?
Any further expeditions must include the ability to capture, and bring to the surface for examination and analysis, pieces of the debris that are clearly man-made and suspected of being from an aircraft.  My first choice would be the piece that appears to be an RDF Antenna.

For what it's worth.

Stages
1. Locate debris field, yes, go to 2
2. Is it aircraft debris, yes, go to 3
3. is it Electra debris, yes, go to 4
4. Is it AE and FN electra debris, yes, go to 5
5. Raise money and get that sucker up

Of course Harry if any of the outcomes are no then it's back to the drawing board. Could possibly, at a stretch, do 1 to 3 without having to get feet wet. 4 and 5 are the tough ones.
Anyhow I think we are done with stage one and are working on stage 2 now. (fingers crossed) :)

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 01:03:47 PM
  Though I have found this thread very interesting, and can see where a couple of the stills (the gear fork especially) makes one wonder if the ROV actually was filming bits of the Electra, I stop myself short of saying this stilll is a wheel, that still is a hatch or wing spar - to me that is reading into the picture a little too far. SOMETHING is there for sure, whether it is aircraft parts or just outrageous coral growth. Time will tell.
  Jeff Hayden's comment about the choice of a reef or lagoon landing being their's to make made me think; with all I have read about Amelia, her spirit and/or wreckless abandon - I gotta believe she saw that reef and immediately pictured being found, refueling the Electra, and flying that sucker right back off of it to complete the trip to Howland. Failure was not an option - landing in the lagoon = end of trip, period. From the air, she may have thought the reef looked like it could sustain a landing and future take-off attempt. Just a thought...
And a good one Phil which has been mentioned before. Shame that it didn't turn out that way for them both. It's a story full of if onlys i.e. radio communication, navigation etc...
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 01:15:03 PM
I have outlined some of the unusual bits of ? in this still
(http://)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 24, 2012, 01:30:00 PM
hope u guys can see these ok, its so hard to get these images visable but worth the wait  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 24, 2012, 01:40:34 PM
that was meant to say behind propeller  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 24, 2012, 02:14:52 PM
To my mind the problem of the footage is that the ROV people and possibly TIGHAR in general have concentrated on the wire/rope (as I have done).  Then there is a group of people who are trying to look outside of the box so to speak.

Lookingin outside of the box you can see a 'pig head', 'clouds, 'aircraft peices' or anything else that you might want to see.  Until TIGHAR go back we just won't know but maybe, just maybe we are seening a debrise field and hundreds or thousands of feet below are engines.

Even TIGHAR missed Nessie so who knows?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 24, 2012, 03:15:43 PM
hope u guys can see these ok, its so hard to get these images visable but worth the wait  :)

Good work Richie, can you post the non inverted image as I am not at home at the moment so don't have access to ROV footage. Using I-pad :(
The wheel and strut looks promising though, lot of metalwork there.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 25, 2012, 05:10:47 AM
Richie,  What you have highlighted in your last posts do resemble a wheel and strut. I'm going to guess that this was a dark area of the footage that you had to bring out, causing the more lit area to become whited out. The area that you have indicated as "fins behind the propeller" is very pixillated but, sitting back a bit, seems to have a semi-circular overall shape. Letting my imagination stretch a bit and continuing the curvature all the way around it strikes me that this could possibly be one of the engines. The photo of the Electra on its belly conveniently has the port side gear folded under next to the engine. Comparing the size of the wheel there to the engine shows a similarity in scale to the possible strut and engine in the still. Not saying that is what they are but impossible to say they aren't. Keep looking. If the plane is there it is possible to find something more definitive in the video.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 06:09:31 AM
Yet more unexplained...
Have a look in the red box?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on January 25, 2012, 11:06:16 AM
In response to Jeff's reply #426 as to any guesses regarding "whoknows".jpg: 

Coiuld it be a headset. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 25, 2012, 11:36:16 AM

Jeff
Before steps 2,3,and 4 can be done, ya gotta do step 1B., 1A being done, i.e. locate a debris field.
1B= Retrieve a piece of the debris that appears to be a man-made part of aircraft origin and bring it up to the surface for examination and analysis.  Too bad that wasn't included in the list of objectives of the ROV run.  I know, Hindsight is always 20/20.  But, we can always learn from experience.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 11:36:45 AM
Anyone got any pics of the nose cone AND hinge assembly?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 11:41:35 AM

Jeff
Before steps 2,3,and 4 can be done, ya gotta do step 1B., 1A being done, i.e. locate a debris field.
1B= Retrieve a piece of the debris that appears to be a man-made part of aircraft origin and bring it up to the surface for examination and analysis.  Too bad that wasn't included in the list of objectives of the ROV run.  I know, Hindsight is always 20/20.  But, we can always learn from experience.

It's gonna be a big ask Harry to get something up from down there. I was waiting for step 2 to be confirmed first, is it aircraft? before going any further, if it isn't, well it's been fun. I have sent some emails off to see if I can get it confirmed. Got to extract as much from this video as possible.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 25, 2012, 12:09:17 PM

Jeff
Check this out
SeaBotix makes an ROV  model vLBV300 that has a small arm on which is mounted what appears to be a cutting/shearing capability (two blades that can be moved like shears).  With a little modification the blades could be converted into a crude grasping tool with which some debris could be grasped and lifted into a basket-like container (with a lid of course) and brought up to the surface.

If you're gonna go down to look, ya might as well look with something that has the capability of bringing something up that looks promising.  In other words, work in parallel not in series.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 25, 2012, 12:24:10 PM
Harry, we all agree with that. But, its a matter of money, and the expense of the ROV capabilities, and the support ship and crew. Having a robotic ROV will be expensive. I'm sure Ric has those numbers, and cringes everytime he sees them.
My personal feeling is that IF what Richie, Jeff and others have found in the video & stills ARE parts of the Electra, then I would think that there would be a favorable response from folks with the capabilities (or $ to fund them) to bring up some of these targets. I am very optomistic that TIGHAR can raise the $$$ necessary.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 25, 2012, 12:24:57 PM

Jeff
Looking further into the SeaBotix vLBV300. I see that it is an ROV that has an option which they call "A Grabber" a three jaw option that does just that , it Grabs and holds things.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 12:38:40 PM
Harry, we all agree with that. But, its a matter of money, and the expense of the ROV capabilities, and the support ship and crew. Having a robotic ROV will be expensive. I'm sure Ric has those numbers, and cringes everytime he sees them.
My personal feeling is that IF what Richie, Jeff and others have found in the video & stills ARE parts of the Electra, then I would think that there would be a favorable response from folks with the capabilities (or $ to fund them) to bring up some of these targets. I am very optomistic that TIGHAR can raise the $$$ necessary.
Tom

Agree with all you say Tom but, we need to get confirmation that it is aircraft wreckage (pending) and, it's still only aircraft wreckage, not an Electra, yet.
If it comes back as aircraft wreckage then I'll start fundraising big time to get Ric back there with all he needs.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 12:41:24 PM

Jeff
Looking further into the SeaBotix vLBV300. I see that it is an ROV that has an option which they call "A Grabber" a three jaw option that does just that , it Grabs and holds things.

Harry, It's a long shot but, if we can show that it's aircraft wreckage and, Electra then surely an American Agency would be interested in sponsoring Ric and the teams next mission?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 12:52:02 PM
Anyone got any pics of the nose cone AND hinge assembly?

This is the type of shots I need but without the gentleman standing in front of the part I need to look at GGGRRRRR!!!
(http://)

Help Ritchie!!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 01:01:10 PM
Why is there always someone standing in front of the part I need to look at!!!!!
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 25, 2012, 01:05:03 PM
Tom
Obviously we'll never get some "Daddy Warbucks" to fund the raising of The Electra unless and until he can be shown a piece if The Electra and a location of where the rest of it is lying. 
As long as another ROV scan is contemplated it might as well have the capability to bring up That Piece and the vLBV300-6 has that capability.

I look forward to seeing the Movie   EARHART produced by James Cameron of Titanic fame.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 25, 2012, 01:11:26 PM
u can see the wheel a bit better on this picture

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 25, 2012, 01:19:59 PM
these any good for ye jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 01:22:44 PM
these any good for ye jeff

Good work Richie. I need to see the inside of nose cone with hinge assembly similar to the photos I posted but without the dufuss stood in front of it.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 25, 2012, 01:25:40 PM
Harry, we are thinking alike! I certainly would like t have the ROV bring up something that is no doubt from the Electra---gee part of the tail with the N number would be pretty conclusive. So, even though I didnt word it correctly, we are thinking the same thing.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 25, 2012, 02:31:47 PM

Did the tail surfaces of the Electra have its N number?  I don't recall having seen that, only the wings with really large numbers.

They're down there, we just haven't found them yet.

BTW, can someone give me a link to the ROV video? or a post number that has a link or its http location?   Thanks
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 25, 2012, 02:53:45 PM

Did the tail surfaces of the Electra have its N number?  I don't recall having seen that, only the wings with really large numbers.

They're down there, we just haven't found them yet.

BTW, can someone give me a link to the ROV video? or a post number that has a link or its http location?   Thanks

Here you go Harry

ROV video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tvHm3jZcME&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL584BE3AB77197253)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 25, 2012, 03:24:43 PM
jeff can you check the area in the box on this photo please an see if u can find any traces of ally or metal
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 05:02:02 PM
jeff can you check the area in the box on this photo please an see if u can find any traces of ally or metal

It would be a miracle Richie because of the low resolution. Even if I run it through a shed load of filters all we're going to end up with is black and white shapes. Good work in hunting down the tin and metalwork though Richie. Ther's a lot down there if you follow the clues, rows of holes/rivets in straight lines, in pairs, circles, semi-circles or any symetrical pattern, not random. Shiny thin edges that look torn or bent, possibly with semi-circular cuts along the edge. Remember, when the ROV is looking at the floor of the reef what you are seeing isn't always what it appears to be, check out whats under the thin coating of coral residue/silt/sediment. Best when ROV has flown over it, although in some shots it's actually landed on said material.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 25, 2012, 05:05:53 PM

Thanks Chris
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 25, 2012, 06:01:11 PM
Harry, we all agree with that. But, its a matter of money, and the expense of the ROV capabilities, and the support ship and crew. Having a robotic ROV will be expensive. I'm sure Ric has those numbers, and cringes everytime he sees them.
My personal feeling is that IF what Richie, Jeff and others have found in the video & stills ARE parts of the Electra, then I would think that there would be a favorable response from folks with the capabilities (or $ to fund them) to bring up some of these targets. I am very optomistic that TIGHAR can raise the $$$ necessary.
Tom

True - TIGHAR has a large task on its hands - they need to find good reason to return to a spot already filmed - and I'm sure it is hard to get the level of sponsorship that's required for this search.

I like the idea of a manipulator - and I'm sure TIGHAR probably does too, perhaps even on the first trip.  One thing that has not been mentioned is that Kiribati may not be willing to allow TIGHAR to go willy-nilly gouging at precious reef, either - there may be a duty to clearly identify targets before wrenching them out of the reef face or sediment for all I know.  I would not be surprised - and the point is TIGHAR may not be free to go prodding and pulling at every formation that resembles a 'loop, wheel or hatch handle' on that reef. 

For instance - the 'loop' was in high favor here for a few days - but watch the 'moving' film carefully to get full context: it is not a 'loop' unless you see it in the still, which captures a unique perspective of what is really a rather gnarled outcropping of coral or rock - not even close to a 'loop'.  It's going to take a lot more than just studying the stills to sort things out - it's a 3-D world down there in a big way.

What is going on here is a fascinating exercise - but I have to admit, that's mainly because of the enthusiasm, not so much that I think the holy grail is going to be spooked-up from the coral from it. 

Enjoy!

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 06:50:18 PM
Harry, we all agree with that. But, its a matter of money, and the expense of the ROV capabilities, and the support ship and crew. Having a robotic ROV will be expensive. I'm sure Ric has those numbers, and cringes everytime he sees them.
My personal feeling is that IF what Richie, Jeff and others have found in the video & stills ARE parts of the Electra, then I would think that there would be a favorable response from folks with the capabilities (or $ to fund them) to bring up some of these targets. I am very optomistic that TIGHAR can raise the $$$ necessary.
Tom

True - TIGHAR has a large task on its hands - they need to find good reason to return to a spot already filmed - and I'm sure it is hard to get the level of sponsorship that's required for this search.

I like the idea of a manipulator - and I'm sure TIGHAR probably does too, perhaps even on the first trip.  One thing that has not been mentioned is that Kiribati may not be willing to allow TIGHAR to go willy-nilly gouging at precious reef, either - there may be a duty to clearly identify targets before wrenching them out of the reef face or sediment for all I know.  I would not be surprised - and the point is TIGHAR may not be free to go prodding and pulling at every formation that resembles a 'loop, wheel or hatch handle' on that reef. 

For instance - the 'loop' was in high favor here for a few days - but watch the 'moving' film carefully to get full context: it is not a 'loop' unless you see it in the still, which captures a unique perspective of what is really a rather gnarled outcropping of coral or rock - not even close to a 'loop'.  It's going to take a lot more than just studying the stills to sort things out - it's a 3-D world down there in a big way.

What is going on here is a fascinating exercise - but I have to admit, that's mainly because of the enthusiasm, not so much that I think the holy grail is going to be spooked-up from the coral from it. 

Enjoy!

LTM -

I thought the object in the red box in post 453 looked 'loopier', no pun intended Jeff  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 25, 2012, 07:49:49 PM
On first glance the black mark in this still looks, well, like a black mark. Red lines pointing to it. It's an illusion created by focusing your attention on the most obvious object, the black mark, therefore your brain appoints the black mark as 'the object'. Now look at the edges of 'the black mark', blue lines pointing, thin, silver/shiny, metallic looking, straight edge, nice semi-circle cut out, goes up across then down. It's a tear in the sheet of metal and, what you are looking at as 'the black mark' is in fact the void beneath the sheet of metal. More tearing is evident above the orange whatsit. I know it's hard to get your head around this stuff but, there it is.
You might also notice some odd looking objects scattered about in the background...

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 25, 2012, 11:08:21 PM
I see your point - the 'black mark' looks more like a shadow cast underneath a flat, but somewhat wrinkled / wavy sheet or plate.  The 'object' appears to have either holes in it, or dark, smaller objects dotting its surface.

'Shadow' is what is suggested, but I'm having trouble reconciling that against the angle of lighting from the ROV, as compared to the somewhat more subtle shadowing / different angle on other objects - rocks lying about, etc.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 26, 2012, 05:21:37 AM
I'm here guys, just watching and taking all of this in.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 26, 2012, 06:44:53 AM
I had always considered this outcrop of circular coral to be a natural feature, it happens. However, when I noticed it was also conical it raised my suspicions. On closer examination the top of the circle appears to have some sort of 'bracket' which still has remnants of whatever it was attached to on it, the edges of the outcrop have that now familiar thin metallic appearance and theres something un coral like near the bottom. Now, from previous posts the title given to the object is arbritary, I am using nosecone so I can locate it easily from the increasing number of files on my pc's. I will try to post a better pic soon.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 26, 2012, 10:35:52 AM
Jeff, notice the 'T' shaped peice and the 'Triangular' peice?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 26, 2012, 12:15:12 PM

Chris
Round Object   Navigator's Stool cushion?
T-Bar  Navigator's T Square?
Triangle  45 degree/90 degree triangle?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 26, 2012, 12:25:54 PM

Chris
Round Object   Navigator's Stool cushion?
T-Bar  Navigator's T Square?
Triangle  45 degree/90 degree triangle?

Could be anything Harry but the two items I see have a man made look about them.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 26, 2012, 12:36:37 PM

Chris
No question in my mind that they are man-made and I think that the circular object is also.  Nature hardly ever makes things with straight edges or circles.  Except maybe Crop Circles  LOL.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 26, 2012, 12:57:56 PM
Just to give everyone a rough idea of what we have down there here's a couple of images. Now dump 75 years worth of sediment/coral residue/silt over it and it becomes a different ball game altogether...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 26, 2012, 02:01:16 PM

Chris
No question in my mind that they are man-made and I think that the circular object is also.  Nature hardly ever makes things with straight edges or circles.  Except maybe Crop Circles  LOL.

I don't want to try and put names to peices but it does look like a debries field of some discription.  Going with the TIGHAR graphic this is the lighter stuff, the heavy stuff is further down the slope.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 26, 2012, 02:17:57 PM
and the bottom is way down there----
Anyone see the thing about the strange submerged objects in the Baltic Sea? They have a submersible-----------
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 02:48:50 PM
there is too much stuff down there, makeing a catalogue of stuff an wen my printer decides to work gunna print some pics to stitch together  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 02:56:06 PM
does anyone know if the electra had a chain on the door or pilot hatch to stop it swinging wide open ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 26, 2012, 03:16:18 PM
and the bottom is way down there----
Anyone see the thing about the strange submerged objects in the Baltic Sea? They have a submersible-----------
Tom

Yes but if the 'possible' debrise field can be ID'd then that makes another deeper search more viable?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 03:50:21 PM
dont know whether chain is part of hatch or it has fell on it  :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 04:46:54 PM
dont know what sum of them things u mentioned are, only been on 2 planes in my life never again, always coach or cruise now, air crash investigators, are too advanced to have chains holding stuff together  ;D 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 26, 2012, 05:56:44 PM
dont know what sum of them things u mentioned are, only been on 2 planes in my life never again, always coach or cruise now, air crash investigators, are too advanced to have chains holding stuff together  ;D

'Airplane Anatomy 101' might be a good idea then - airplanes are full of chains, sprockets, gears, torque rods, bellcranks, bearings of all sorts, rod ends, cables of various sizes and types, sheet metal of various thicknesses, construction assembly and size, wiring, weldments, machinings, appliances like antennas and boxes, etc. 

Much of that you can glean as you have here - from the historic pictures; but if you really want to play 'what's that rock' then you need to dig deep and consider that you may be looking at a very obscure construction detail or component you hadn't noticed or thought of before.  That's where a thorough knowledge of what's in the guts of an airplane may help here.  Jeff Hayden has offered up a few examples of crumpled metal stuff - that's the approach I'm speaking of - but much, much more.

A 'navigator's stool' was mentioned above - how about a toilet seat?  Do you know what the 'honeybucket' looked like in NR16020?  A seat belt buckle?  An emergency gear handle?  A seat frame bracket?  A propeller counterweight or pitch change dome?  How about a gascolator?  Could you tell such a thing from it's marine counterpart, i.e. consider that if found you might be looking at something tossed from a boat?

It occurs to me that TIGHAR is well into all that - it's part of how you sort out possible targets from chaff, and even then you won't know until you can definitively identify a part. 

As I noticed before, it is going to be a long, hard search.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 26, 2012, 06:23:25 PM
dont know what sum of them things u mentioned are, only been on 2 planes in my life never again, always coach or cruise now, air crash investigators, are too advanced to have chains holding stuff together  ;D

'Airplane Anatomy 101' might be a good idea then - airplanes are full of chains, sprockets, gears, torque rods, bellcranks, bearings of all sorts, rod ends, cables of various sizes and types, sheet metal of various thicknesses, construction assembly and size, wiring, weldments, machinings, appliances like antennas and boxes, etc. 

Much of that you can glean as you have here - from the historic pictures; but if you really want to play 'what's that rock' then you need to dig deep and consider that you may be looking at a very obscure construction detail or component you hadn't noticed or thought of before.  That's where a thorough knowledge of what's in the guts of an airplane may help here.  Jeff Hayden has offered up a few examples of crumpled metal stuff - that's the approach I'm speaking of - but much, much more.

A 'navigator's stool' was mentioned above - how about a toilet seat?  Do you know what the 'honeybucket' looked like in NR16020?  A seat belt buckle?  An emergency gear handle?  A seat frame bracket?  A propeller counterweight or pitch change dome?  How about a gascolator?  Could you tell such a thing from it's marine counterpart, i.e. consider that if found you might be looking at something tossed from a boat?

It occurs to me that TIGHAR is well into all that - it's part of how you sort out possible targets from chaff, and even then you won't know until you can definitively identify a part. 

As I noticed before, it is going to be a long, hard search.

LTM -

A bit like doing a jigsaw without the picture Jeff

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 26, 2012, 06:28:02 PM
does anyone know if the electra had a chain on the door or pilot hatch to stop it swinging wide open ?

Post 428 has pictures of door with something hanging on it, to pull it shut I guess. Where about in the debris did you find it Richie? Anywhere near the 'door' (for want of a better name) shape.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 06:41:49 PM
in attachment hinge bar an hook is 4 o clock ov arrow an chain
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 06:46:07 PM
actully it between chain an rope just look to right of chain an on the rock u will see lighter coral in T shape

if u invert pic it looks like a skeleton  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 26, 2012, 06:57:07 PM
skeleton key that is
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 04:37:40 AM
jeff we deserve a pat on the back for all our hard work in locateing the electra

i think i can say with 100% confidence i have located Electra in what looks to be recognizable condition the front anyway  :) :D ;D

i just need to find a program that can enhance picture quality as am struggleing to get a clear image of it, any ideas ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 04:50:46 AM
right have attached still pic u have to step back from ur screen an let ur eyes focus on it unless u can see it straight away  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Andreas Badertscher on January 27, 2012, 05:19:13 AM
 :o
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 27, 2012, 05:26:50 AM
Richie---you know what? I've been watching our work 'quietly' for about 2 weeks now. Awesome job. After sitting back and looking, it DOES look like a prop, with the engine cowling, in a trough in the reef. It's hard for me to make out the window, but around the 'cowling' is the dark area of the engine, like you might expect it to be. Looks like this is something substantial.
My opinion of course.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Andreas Badertscher on January 27, 2012, 05:32:20 AM
I think I see it. The nose is pointed about 180 degrees south (down). right? Amazing!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 27, 2012, 07:05:13 AM
jeff we deserve a pat on the back for all our hard work in locateing the electra

i think i can say with 100% confidence i have located Electra in what looks to be recognizable condition the front anyway  :) :D ;D

i just need to find a program that can enhance picture quality as am struggleing to get a clear image of it, any ideas ?
I wouldn't say it's an Electra, it's aircraft wreckage for sure. I have some aeronautics guys studying some of the stills so, will wait for their opinion first before anything else. If I get the thumbs up then the hard part begins, manufacturer and type. That won't be easy but, can be done with enough time and effort. Like I said before, there's not much to go on but, it's all we have. Hopefully be able to do it without having to get feet wet. Keep hunting for tin Richie, the shiny bits are more useful than coral encrusted shapes, good work so far. I don't think any imaging software is going to be of much use here. The quality of the footage is poor due to a number of circumstances, the conditions down there, the difficulty controlling the ROV in the currents and so on.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 27, 2012, 07:55:11 AM
dont know what sum of them things u mentioned are, only been on 2 planes in my life never again, always coach or cruise now, air crash investigators, are too advanced to have chains holding stuff together  ;D

'Airplane Anatomy 101' might be a good idea then - airplanes are full of chains, sprockets, gears, torque rods, bellcranks, bearings of all sorts, rod ends, cables of various sizes and types, sheet metal of various thicknesses, construction assembly and size, wiring, weldments, machinings, appliances like antennas and boxes, etc. 

Much of that you can glean as you have here - from the historic pictures; but if you really want to play 'what's that rock' then you need to dig deep and consider that you may be looking at a very obscure construction detail or component you hadn't noticed or thought of before.  That's where a thorough knowledge of what's in the guts of an airplane may help here.  Jeff Hayden has offered up a few examples of crumpled metal stuff - that's the approach I'm speaking of - but much, much more.

A 'navigator's stool' was mentioned above - how about a toilet seat?  Do you know what the 'honeybucket' looked like in NR16020?  A seat belt buckle?  An emergency gear handle?  A seat frame bracket?  A propeller counterweight or pitch change dome?  How about a gascolator?  Could you tell such a thing from it's marine counterpart, i.e. consider that if found you might be looking at something tossed from a boat?

It occurs to me that TIGHAR is well into all that - it's part of how you sort out possible targets from chaff, and even then you won't know until you can definitively identify a part. 

As I noticed before, it is going to be a long, hard search.

LTM -

A bit like doing a jigsaw without the picture Jeff

Jeff

Precisely, Jeff H.  That's why I respectfully suggested a bit of 'Airplane Anatomy 101' - it's like giving richie, who's searching his very guts out in this effort, a more detailed picture to work with.

I meant it as encouragement, not discouragement: this search is all about expanding knowledge, so why not expand your working catalogue of the stuff ye'd search for?

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 27, 2012, 08:31:11 AM
right have attached still pic u have to step back from ur screen an let ur eyes focus on it unless u can see it straight away  :)

Why is it that the normal motion view of this segment doesn't even yield a hint of the same contours (window, prop, engine, hatch, etc.)?  All you see in the normal view is relatively smooth sediment. 

Are you using some sort of radar imaging there, Richie?  Odd.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 09:10:17 AM
i use photoshop cs5 extended

its excellent it has a photo section, and camera raw an it basically lets u fix pictures that are blurred or to dark it also lets u enhance shadows an shapes of objects under water or when its dark

also police forensics use it to inprove cctv footage an stuff like that  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 10:16:14 AM
and it has another section called mini bridge if u open a photo init, it puts a magnifying square box that u can zoom in clearly on little things in pictures

only just found it so chuffed  :) :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on January 27, 2012, 10:43:42 AM
Could the "T" in Chris' post #481 be something like this...actually attached to the cable? 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 27, 2012, 11:19:58 AM
Could the "T" in Chris' post #481 be something like this...actually attached to the cable?

the "T" does look attached to the cable if it is a "T" and not just some fancy shadow.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on January 27, 2012, 12:06:17 PM
Another model, can't see the "T" in the picture, but you can see how it is at the end of a cable. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on January 27, 2012, 12:09:25 PM
Does anyone know if the Electra had controls like this.  If not, then that's not what it is! 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on January 27, 2012, 12:27:42 PM
What is this "T" handle in the floor of this Electra 10E cockpit?  Was this standard and therefore on AE's? 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 27, 2012, 12:33:19 PM

All of which underscores the imperative capability of the next ROV mission to include the capability of grasping , holding, and bringing to the surface some of items that appear to be man-made.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 27, 2012, 01:28:58 PM
Not that I don't trust that what has been pointed out as aircraft parts may indeed be aircraft parts, but is it possible to have any of these images verified by an outside source who may be deemed to be more objective? We all want to see what we think we are seeing. I know Jeff Glickman has done photo imaging for TIGHAR in the past. I don't know what the cost would be, but I think that if the TIGHAR board could have a "professional" stamp of approval that what we think is here really is, it may help with the fundraising effort. I'm not sure if Ric is still following this thread or not, and I agree with him that a lot of what we may think we see might not really be, but if any of it is, then it may be worth the photo imaging costs up front to generate the interest and raise the funds for a more in depth (pardon the pun) search and possible recovery of wreckage. I would like to know, is this it? Trust me, I am not knocking the efforts put into searching the video images. I just think they would carry more weight if verified by an independent expert.  LTM. -John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 27, 2012, 01:57:23 PM
John---you can bet that RIC and others are following this thread. I would also think that Jeff Glickman, or others, are analyzing every piece of film, and still pic available. I say that, because without that evidence, the prospects of getting the big $$$ necessary for the equipment we all have talked about just wont happen. So, I bet every still that Richie and Jeff make available on this forum, Ric is looking at. And for what its worth, I'll bet 'others' are looking at it too.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 27, 2012, 02:30:55 PM

By Jove, Dan Swift, I believe you've got it!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 27, 2012, 02:37:32 PM
Not that I don't trust that what has been pointed out as aircraft parts may indeed be aircraft parts, but is it possible to have any of these images verified by an outside source who may be deemed to be more objective? We all want to see what we think we are seeing. I know Jeff Glickman has done photo imaging for TIGHAR in the past. I don't know what the cost would be, but I think that if the TIGHAR board could have a "professional" stamp of approval that what we think is here really is, it may help with the fundraising effort. I'm not sure if Ric is still following this thread or not, and I agree with him that a lot of what we may think we see might not really be, but if any of it is, then it may be worth the photo imaging costs up front to generate the interest and raise the funds for a more in depth (pardon the pun) search and possible recovery of wreckage. I would like to know, is this it? Trust me, I am not knocking the efforts put into searching the video images. I just think they would carry more weight if verified by an independent expert.  LTM. -John

I agree with you John.  I don't wish to dampen enthusiasm at all - but to make serious progress and attract serious support for more searching on-site at Niku takes strong, independent resources to get convincing data.

I don't think TIGHAR's whole case for going back depends on finding 'something' in this footage.  But if a worthwhile object or two does appear, then it might be worth the objective scrutiny of someone like Glickman (and hopefully Glickman himself, who's done a lot of great work of this sort for TIGHAR already).

I can plink around with stills and shadows until I get all kinds of results with today's software - but I don't trust myself to be that objectively able to discern 'realities' in this murky area.  I saw a neat cloud or two today too... all I can say is that it was a good feeling to see that Mickey Mouse is up there watching over us...  Yes, objectivity and visible qualifications help - and in fact I think are ultimately vital to an outfit like TIGHAR for serious searching.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 03:37:20 PM
sorry to burst anyone's bubble but even if we find sum think, with NR16020 Tighar will not go back to that spot for the simple fact of the time it would take to locate area again an time is money, i know were seeing engine's, wings, wheels struts etc

but in this business u don't have the luxury to be able to go back and forth unfortunately, so what resources we do have we have to use wisely.

also before the wire an rope video, the Tighar hyposis had already in my eye's been proved fact not fiction, so really the video is irrelevant,

on a lighter note the video has proved for me anyway that Tighar's hyposis is right!! not that i doubted it, an it has been an exciteing experience to see some of the object'[s that people have been searching for, for over 75 years

 :) 



   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 07:05:34 PM
in answer to Ur question i have spent at least 5 hours a nite studying these still pics the last 2 weeks, rotating them, inverting them, adding shadows to them, highlighting different area's of them, high res, low res  un-sharpen un-blur, more blur more sharpen...

honestly i have had to av a break, because i thought i was imagining things that i was seeing, but am not!! the camera stays on wire an rope mostly  but when u start looking else were its hard to prove what Ur seeing because when u post still images people say they only see a blur, but when u re run the video u get a feel for the reef surface an start to notice the things that are not part of the reef,

an because the area's the debris is in are pitch black covered in sediment  it takes at least an hour to get a picture viewable to people who aint going over an over the footage

the thing with Photoshop cs5 extended, is how the gradient map  an stuff work, is because each pixel has a number code related to a color an it picks up the different color in anything even under sediment it processors it an displays the image so u begin to see shadows an outlines of objects that are unnoticeable to the naked eye   

an since i found this mini bridge magnifier on photoshop i have found even more stuff which i will post in due course 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 27, 2012, 07:22:06 PM
I believe that, in the absence of any other viable theory, that TIGHAR has the right theory and is what happened to AE and FN. But that's just me. (Probably a lot of the readers of this forum too). The problem is that you can't just declare you are right. You must have the facts, or evidence, to prove your right.  This thread has a ton of enthusiasm but no evidence as to what these images are.  TIGHAR has actual evidence already in hand. Glass, shoes, bones, post loss radio signal reports, native testimony, etc. It's very suggestive and strung together it's very compelling but TIGHAR needs either more evidence from this type of evidence or the "smoking gun".  This "smoking gun" evidence may be found on the island or under the surface of the ocean. Traditional archeology takes time. Exhausting, pain staking work covering only small patches of ground each year. Slow but it is pulling evidence out of Niku. But thr underwater search has a better chance of finding the bigger pieces of evidence.  Ric and TIGHAR have precious few dollars to do the kind of month in month out research I think they would like to do. The current ROV video should be examined by professionals of this visual type of research. IF, and it's a big IF in my humble opinion, there is real evidence to suggest TIGHAR should go back to that spot then it's better than starting to search somewhere else around the island. IF you have anything man made in this video then why would you NOT go back to this spot to search again?   A land archaelogy dig that finds artifacts doesn't stop and say "well now that we found something here let's leave it and go start somewhere else.". But TIGHAR has the ability, as someone else suggested in this thread, to use the video, IF it can be proven to show possible evidence, to use it to raise more funds from deeper pockets.  I suggest that we stop announcing the Electra has been found (boy who cried wolf story as to why) and get professionals to analyze that video.  It's either really helpful or it's not. Use TIGHAR's proven approach at cross checking and verifying evidence before we declare what has been found.
My humble opinion.

I think those who are spending so much time examining the video and their stills are to be commended. BUT. The DNA tests were done by experts, archaeology evidence examined by experts, post loss radio research done by experts, photos examined by experts, skeletal remains descriptions examined and reported by experts, etc, etc.  Let's get this video examined by experts. Richie, Jeff, and others. Great work but shouldn't the experts be examining this video? Or have I got my wires crossed and you are photographic experts. I don't mean to be disrespectful.  I would like to believe you are right.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 27, 2012, 08:01:39 PM
A thought popped into my head---What IF there is wreckage that we are seeing, and TIGHAR went back an found it. I would assume the the Govt of Kiribati woul dhave jurisdiction over any thing in their waters. So, I would guess that they would have the last word in whether Ric & Co could raise any submerged artifacts? Maybe Ric could chime in here--
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 08:24:57 PM
i totally agree m8, professionals shud ov !! and probably have gone over these short video clips, but analysed what the video is called wire and rope,  not what is in the back ground which is understandable givin the fact the footage is ov were the electra went over reef edge, and is the main area Tighar wanted searching first, otherwise they would have started some were else if they thought the electra went down there,

so imagine being on boat, ur seeing man made objects on rov live playback ov were u think electra is, so it's easy to just focus on that...

if members remember a while back, i posted about the wire rope video cos there was other pieces ov rope not mentioned an givin the explanations for it i left it at that,

it werent till jeff hayden posted about it that i started reviewing it again

now i have more video still's of the area than youtube as video's..... an after weeks of analyse i am noticing in-differences in reef bed to suggest the objects we post are man made, an the  "i have found the electra post" i believe i have located it

its only when u start looking at enhanced images, compared to originals that it becomes apparent that their there,

an in none ov the videos is there outlines shadows that correspond with dimesions of the electra, apart from the snapshots av posted  of being electra, which i hope people in the know can dismiss or approve for my own frame of mind  ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 27, 2012, 08:31:19 PM
if the electra was to be found bottom of reef on nikumorro, then imagine the tourism an money it would bring in to the colonies  from sightseers an stuff

so i think the goverment would allow them to raise artifacts for identification like wid the titanic

but doubt they would allow raiseing big parts off reef as the atolls of kirbati are already under protection   :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 27, 2012, 09:29:52 PM

Richie and Jeff Victor
Thank you for all of the hard work that you guys have put in to analyze the ROV video.  I am impressed by the images and have no doubts that the items that you have highlighted are man-made and probably aircraft in nature.

The circle of cable with the T shaped handle and its connection with the picture of an Electra having such a cable is convincing.  I'm guessing here but the cable is probably for opening a vent to allow warm air into the cockpit (or cool air).

Too bad the GPS locator malfunctioned (or did it?) and it will be difficult to relocate the position versus time connection of each item seen in the images.

At any rate, congratulations!!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 27, 2012, 10:06:32 PM
A thought popped into my head---What IF there is wreckage that we are seeing, and TIGHAR went back an found it. I would assume the the Govt of Kiribati woul dhave jurisdiction over any thing in their waters. So, I would guess that they would have the last word in whether Ric & Co could raise any submerged artifacts? Maybe Ric could chime in here--
Tom

I would be shocked if TIGHAR were free to start wrenching things free from the reef and hauling them up without permission from the Republic of Kiribati

Go back and read about every trip TIGHAR has made there - great pains are taken to work closely and in compliance with Kiribati's requirements.  It's about integrity in the relationship and preservation of precious resources that belong to a sovereign nation and people - it's not ours to plunder.

It's clear to me that TIGHAR realizes that sort of relationship is vital if they are to continue to have access and be able to reasonably exploit what findings may come.

This is not the sort of situation where someone should just pull up in a ship and start dragging the reef, or hauling up treasure.  Most of us never have to think about those things - or the level of proof needed to make claims of findings like lost Electras.  Irv touched on it very well though - TIGHAR has to act with integrity and objectivity, or there can be no 'announcement' - or approach to an entity like Kiribati to retrieve artifacts.

---

Richie, no offense intended toward your good work - you are far more capable at what you are doing than I could ever be.  It's very interesting to see your work as it progresses - and who knows?  Maybe you will turn over that magic rock on the reef by peeling the layers the way you are doing?  But the soul of solid science seems to be as Irv and others have suggested - claims very nearly need serial numbers in most cases when it comes to airplane artifacts, no matter how good the shadow-peeling is. 

TIGHAR learned that the hard way - and that's why we see such a conservative approach to big announcement of new 'proof'.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 28, 2012, 06:21:57 AM
none taken  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 07:24:09 AM
Just a theory but, a while back I posted a still describing the 'black mark' as not being a mark at all but, a tear in a thin metal sheet. Well, here's the 'black mark again (red box). In the blue box there is metalwork that extends a line from 'the door' along parallel to the rope  to the metalwork pointed out with yellow lines. Now, IF it is a door and, IF it is a thin metal sheet with a tear in it MIGHT we be looking at the floor of a fuselage and, the remains of the side of a fuselage (yellow lines). Looking forward towards the main spar/wing area?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 07:44:32 AM
Just to voice my opinion on points mentioned recently.
No, we shouldn't be allowed to go dredging the reef area for 'evidence'. Any recovery should be done with with the co-operation of the Republic of Kiribati and, in a scientific and respectful manner.
We don't know if it is aircraft wreckage yet (it looks promising though)
If it is aircraft wreckage, what aircraft is it?
Remember ww2 raged for years in the Pacific with tens of thousands of aircraft, we could be looking at one of them!
I have experience of 'hunting' for objects in images transmitted via (not allowed to say) until I retire in April. My sister is a professional photographer and, I used to be a marksman using the FN 7.62mm SLR during my military service so, my eyesight was and, still is pretty good. I have worked in the aero industry mainly on fire protection systems and oil mist detectors for aircraft and military vehicles so I have an inkling as to what aircraft structures look like (or used to look like) in this case.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 28, 2012, 07:53:24 AM
Jeff/Richie, in your efforts thus far to stitch stills together, have you noticed any relationship or alignment with what you've seen as to location of pieces and parts aligning with where they would be expected to be if this is an aircraft? For example, does Jeff's posting of the possibility of a part of the floor/door/and side of fuselage run in the general direction of Richie's pilot's window/engine still, and what is the distance between them? I'm thinking that aside from the main spar and cockpit area, the next most rugged and durable area would have to be the cargo floor of the plane. It was built to either hold cargo or seats for passengers and would have to be of sturdier construction than the overhead. IF the plane went over the edge and was banged up by the surf on its way down and then settled into a groove or somewhat protected area along the reef, I could see where the wings, tail, and upper surfaces of the fuselage could be beaten and torn off by the surge, allowing them to be tossed ashore over time while still leaving a possibly substantial portion relatively intact on the bottom. It is curious how many metal bits there seem to be and, yes, I am fascinated by the ghostly image of the engine/propellor and possible cockpit window that Richie has posted. As far as possible recovery. I do think that it would be possible with minimal disturbance of the reef environment. Most of what I have seen is rubble and sediment which would settle back without issue. Any fuel aboard is long gone. There may be oil in the engine(s) but even that may have escaped over the years. If it is what it may be I think the recovery would be worth the time and effort to all involved. LTM-  John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 08:41:55 AM
Jeff/Richie, in your efforts thus far to stitch stills together, have you noticed any relationship or alignment with what you've seen as to location of pieces and parts aligning with where they would be expected to be if this is an aircraft? For example, does Jeff's posting of the possibility of a part of the floor/door/and side of fuselage run in the general direction of Richie's pilot's window/engine still, and what is the distance between them? I'm thinking that aside from the main spar and cockpit area, the next most rugged and durable area would have to be the cargo floor of the plane. It was built to either hold cargo or seats for passengers and would have to be of sturdier construction than the overhead. IF the plane went over the edge and was banged up by the surf on its way down and then settled into a groove or somewhat protected area along the reef, I could see where the wings, tail, and upper surfaces of the fuselage could be beaten and torn off by the surge, allowing them to be tossed ashore over time while still leaving a possibly substantial portion relatively intact on the bottom. It is curious how many metal bits there seem to be and, yes, I am fascinated by the ghostly image of the engine/propellor and possible cockpit window that Richie has posted. As far as possible recovery. I do think that it would be possible with minimal disturbance of the reef environment. Most of what I have seen is rubble and sediment which would settle back without issue. Any fuel aboard is long gone. There may be oil in the engine(s) but even that may have escaped over the years. If it is what it may be I think the recovery would be worth the time and effort to all involved. LTM-  John

Some very good point s raised John. I am trying to use the line of the rope/cable/wire as a reference point for what we might be seeing here but, and it's a big but, the wreckage does have the characteristics of not being a relatively straightforward ditching into the sea (where the structure would still be together, even if severely damaged)and sinking. It has the characteristics of being torn apart over time and then being washed down the reef face, which makes putting it back together a nightmare.
I would suggest that when it is confirmed as aircraft wreckage (I have no doubts) a new thread is started trying to identify what plane it is. It could be done using the footage but it's a big ask. What would be needed is PLENTY of pictures of Electra airframe, parts, components etc...
Not saying it IS an Electra but, it's a good place to start. We can always eliminate it being an Electra by this method anyway. Won't be easy but, will be cheap.
Note: ALL aeroplanes have wings so something like that is of no use. It would have to be a wing construction unique to an Electra. Markings would be useful to, if they survive after all these years, Lockheed/ pratt and whitney logos, numbers etc... Even counting rivet holes and their symmetry would help.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 28, 2012, 09:38:35 AM
first picture is of what i believe to be electra but thats just my opinion  :)

however notice the circular object any ideas on what it could be ?

in second image notice the bar wid cotter pin going thru it like its holding the circular object in place

 

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 09:47:26 AM
Here's another area you might want to have a look at Richie. I have no idea what this lot of junk is.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 28, 2012, 10:02:53 AM
pic 1 remember jeff's item wid sqiggles well look to right of it were i have highlighted

pic 2 is of more items were jeff pointed out in earlier 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 28, 2012, 10:15:37 AM
notice all the objects i have pointed out 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 28, 2012, 10:44:00 AM
any idea's what these could be will try to enhance photo asap

top arrow is pointed at what looks like a metal bar that L shaped which has a bracket holding it to sumthink

the arrow pointing down is to what appears to be sum kind of wheel posible a steering wheel 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 12:51:51 PM
any idea's what these could be will try to enhance photo asap

top arrow is pointed at what looks like a metal bar that L shaped which has a bracket holding it to sumthink

the arrow pointing down is to what appears to be sum kind of wheel posible a steering wheel

The possible steering wheel Richie was the object I considered earlier in the thread to be the possible rearwheel assy. Couldn't get better image so left it alone. See the bit inbetween the black lines. Shows up a bit better if you hit invert.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 28, 2012, 01:03:18 PM
wat cud this be
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 01:10:07 PM
wat cud this be

Looks like a tensioner for strap/harness/seatbelt

Rotate it around and you will see the light bit looks to be designed for something flat and flexible to go through it IMHO
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 28, 2012, 04:38:08 PM
I don't think tensioners of the type I believe is being suggested (reel type) were common in AE's time or through WWII. 

The typical belts in use in AE's time were a 'cam lock' type - the seat belt locking lever didn't mechanically 'click' into anything - instead it simply clamped down by cam action through a set of serrations on the metal against the heavy fabric in the belt.  That was how they were tensioned and 'latched'.  The harder one pulled, the more secure the 'latching action' became.

That actually became a problem and those types were made illegal as a type when FAA made a retroactive change in the rule.  There had been too many instances of people not being able to release them when under tension, as in hanging upside down with body weight tugging against the belt, the cam could become incredibly tightly cinched and too hard to release.  But they were common for decades.

The Electra also did not have shoulder harnesses as a norm, and I don't know of an exception for NR16020 in that regard.  Perhaps there are some pictures of this stuff that will help, however.

If that intriguing round shape really is a 'pin', it could relate to many possible items common to the Electra or other craft - a gear component or something similar. 

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 05:25:47 PM
I don't think tensioners of the type I believe is being suggested (reel type) were common in AE's time or through WWII. 

The typical belts in use in AE's time were a 'cam lock' type - the seat belt locking lever didn't mechanically 'click' into anything - instead it simply clamped down by cam action through a set of serrations on the metal against the heavy fabric in the belt.  That was how they were tensioned and 'latched'.  The harder one pulled, the more secure the 'latching action' became.

That actually became a problem and those types were made illegal as a type when FAA made a retroactive change in the rule.  There had been too many instances of people not being able to release them when under tension, as in hanging upside down with body weight tugging against the belt, the cam could become incredibly tightly cinched and too hard to release.  But they were common for decades.

The Electra also did not have shoulder harnesses as a norm, and I don't know of an exception for NR16020 in that regard.  Perhaps there are some pictures of this stuff that will help, however.

If that intriguing round shape really is a 'pin', it could relate to many possible items common to the Electra or other craft - a gear component or something similar. 

LTM -

I think you're right Jeff. The more I look at that whole 'coral' outcrop that it's sitting on the more suspicious it becomes. I think that the assembly Richie has highlighted is 2 parts. One part is dark, the bit to the left and, one part is light, the bit to the right. Now, are these two parts on different chunks of metal? the lighter one does seem to be on a slightly raised up 'coral' outcrop. Also where Richie has put bolthole (would be a thin bolt) how about fiiting a spring in there? That way we have a fairly simple latch assembly to keep something closed?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 05:32:54 PM
Also the white part seems to be able to move because it has 2 semi circular bits of metal allowing it to swivel up and down.(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 08:01:01 PM
In fact that white bit Richie looks and acts like a handle...?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 28, 2012, 08:43:33 PM
Another long shot but, if I'm correct and the red arrow points to the remains of a side of the fuselage then I'm hoping that the blue outline follows the shape of the remains of the wing root/rib/spar...?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 28, 2012, 10:11:17 PM
Hard to say.  I see the 'bolthole' - but in full context I see encrustations that resemble normal sea life stuff too - some of it similar to stuff lying about near the same spot, although in less concentration.  I also see the end of the 'pin' and realize that it is oddly concentrically round, but I'm still a long way from being able to jump at it being a 'pin' of some sort without more to go on.

The shape of that 'wing root' is interesting - but in scale that would have to be a fairly massive rope or cable lying near / over it, with a fairly massive swage or bead on the rope or cable. 

By the way, just a thought, but maybe we should call that rope-thing a 'line' until we know more about what it is.  To me it sharply resembles a piece of boat tackle - complete with and end loop whose shape at the end suggests 'memory' (bending) from being loaded against a cleat for a long time, a 'splice' up-line from the loop with that ball swage - which looks like a black plastic 'bead' threaded onto the line...  I've knitted a hundred loops like that into marine lines over the years to snag over a cleat - and they tend to take a 'set' just like I see in the end of that one after being loaded.  Some people toss old ones overboard after the line gets in bad shape...

One thing that sticks out about all the 'rubble' lying around to me - the area seems clearly disturbed by something: whether 75 years ago or a week before the ROV got there is hard to say, and I'm sure there's plenty of natural rock-fall to do that in the active surf around the reef.  But that and the prospective man-made stuff is very interesting for sure, I agree.

Round holes and 'pins' can be a treacherous prospect though - lots of sea critters create amazing shapes too - round 'bore' holes are not uncommon.  Can't say so much about the round 'end' on the 'pin' - maybe - but it sure suggests man-made.  I love the way you fellas capture these images - it does allow a close look at the details.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 07:34:48 AM
Stll with the long shot. If it is the remains of the side of the fuselage, fuselage floor and wing root/rib/spar then, the black arrow should be pointing in the general direction of where you would expect to find the remains of a wing? First image. Does that sound logical?
In the second image I have marked the outline in red and, the yellow lines point to torn edge and rivets/holes?
Third image shows 'wing tip'? without annotations.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 29, 2012, 08:07:13 AM
Jeff.  If you believe that the picture "wingtip1" shows a wingtip from the Electra then using the wingtip you have outlined for scale, what do you believe is the diameter of the cable in the bottom of the image?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 29, 2012, 08:25:50 AM
Irv,

good point ref scale! Some of these objects have been named after some hefty peices of kit.

Jeff,

what do you make of this that I have a black arrow pointing to?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 29, 2012, 08:59:18 AM
Chris. Using the cable as scale then that could be a washer or cable guide or support. 

Re: scale. In the ROV video you see the ROV's prop wash blowing sediment away. This sediment moves very quickly. Remember that this ROV isn't very big. This means it's props are small but fast. The movement of the sediment, and the amount, should help with scale determination.  When you see the sediment moving quickly from small props then you are dealing with inches and not feet in the frame of the video.   IMHO 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 29, 2012, 09:11:04 AM
There is a moment in the film where the ROV passes close to the 'wire' and next to it is a mollusce shell which didn't look like a man grabbing clam shell, more of a small BiValve which gives a good indication of scale IMO
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 29, 2012, 09:21:44 AM
Chris, an excellent observation.  Scale has to be determined before we can go off claiming huge pieces of aircraft have been found. While I think Richie and Jeff H are to be commended for their investigative endeavors I think we need to "scale" back until scale can be determined to put everything observed into perspective.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 11:01:56 AM
Jeff.  If you believe that the picture "wingtip1" shows a wingtip from the Electra then using the wingtip you have outlined for scale, what do you believe is the diameter of the cable in the bottom of the image?
Yes scale is a real issue down there but, I have noticed and probably you have too that the cable/rope/wire that you mention in this clip looks to be a different size to that at the start of the video. The bit at the start looks more straighter, thinner and wire looking. The bit in this still looks chunkier and ropish (is ropish a word?) and isn't straight. Do we have different types of cable/rope/wire in the ROV footage?
I could work out the scale given the spec for the lens on the ROV and, the focal settings of the lens at any given time of focussing in on an object. That would  then give me the distance from said target.
And wingtip1 is named so I can find the picture again on my PC's without wasting time searching through files entitled a/cd9000256 etc..., it does resemble a wingtip though.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 11:16:27 AM
Irv,

good point ref scale! Some of these objects have been named after some hefty peices of kit.

Jeff,

what do you make of this that I have a black arrow pointing to?
Yes Chris, there's a lot of metalwork in this area bearing in mind this is the area where the black arrow in the remains of fuselage side, floor, wing root/rib picture hints as to which direction is the most likely place to find wing wreckage. I'll be coming back to the area where you have added your arrow later because I think we are missing the bigger picture there, can't see the wood for the trees syndrome.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 29, 2012, 11:54:29 AM
Jeff. Where did you find ROV lens specs?  If you know the lens specs then for sure this aids in determining scale.  More sophisticated ROV's send back the camera metadata to be recorded as part of the video.  I don't think this ROV had this ability. But can't TIGHAR query the ROV operator for more info on all this?  The operator should know more about the video and ROV capabilities than anyone else. That's not to say the know what everything they see is but analysis of video taken by his unit would be helpful. Does anyone know what company made the video?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 12:16:49 PM
Jeff. Where did you find ROV lens specs?  If you know the lens specs then for sure this aids in determining scale.  More sophisticated ROV's send back the camera metadata to be recorded as part of the video.  I don't think this ROV had this ability. But can't TIGHAR query the ROV operator for more info on all this?  The operator should know more about the video and ROV capabilities than anyone else. That's not to say the know what everything they see is but analysis of video taken by his unit would be helpful. Does anyone know what company made the video?

No, I don't have the ROV lens spec Irv but, given that, it would help in tyring to get some sort of scale down there :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 12:27:02 PM
Another point to take into consideration. Over the weeks myself, Richie and all the others have been scrutinising this footage and yet, we haven't found any signs of this wreckage being warlike in any way. Despite keeping a close lookout for signs of ordnance, machineguns, ammo belts,ammo belt clips, turrets etc... nothing, yet.
Which does help to eliminate, so far, a lot of the likely suspects from the Pacific theatre of war. However, that still leaves military recon'/rescue/transport and of course, civilian. It's not much but, every little helps in narrowing down the search and, eliminating suspects :)
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 29, 2012, 12:31:48 PM
Hasn't Ric already identified WW2 aircraft losses in and around the Phoenix group which show that there have been no military losses at Gardner/Niku.  Also the natives would have been aware of any WW2 military crashes as well as the PISS officers and LORAN coasties (but its worth wearing belts and braces as they say)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 01:14:45 PM
just some stills i have marked out areas to look at  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 01:20:47 PM
Hasn't Ric already identified WW2 aircraft losses in and around the Phoenix group which show that there have been no military losses at Gardner/Niku.  Also the natives would have been aware of any WW2 military crashes as well as the PISS officers and LORAN coasties (but its worth wearing belts and braces as they say)

Yes, good point Chris, Ric has a list on the site of all recorded aircraft losses but, like you say belts and braces, someone might have gone down without telling us  :)

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 01:27:26 PM
just some stills i have marked out areas to look at  :)

Hey, good work Richie! I have my suspicions about the still at the bottom as it is in a loction where we are trying to identify wing structure. It's a BIG lump of 'coral'. Can you get to work on it with your infrared/gamma filters. We're looking for circular symmetrical points radiating from a central datum point.

Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 01:32:28 PM
This straight line 'trench' in the coral sediment caught my eye. I assumed it was from where the rope/cable/wire had dug into the coral residue. it's marked with the yellow line. The rope/cable/wire is nowhere near it but it might have been at some stage.(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 01:58:35 PM
Here's the 'trench' in a later frame. I was hoping to see a nice curved leading edge but no, it's blunt. But it's straight :( How about the trailing edge, minus the control surface? yes that would fit. Therefore the leading edge must be towards the top of the picture :) Blast, the image doesn't extend that far >:( Wait a minute though, whats that unusual shape near the top of the image? outlined in blue. Could that be the the trailing edge of an engine nacelle? I'm having difficulty in orientation with this one though. Is it the topside of a wing or, the bottom? I suspect it's the wing from previous postings of images starting from 'the door' and working through 'the fuselage/floor/wing root/rib/spar' and 'wing tip' sequence plus an image taken in 1938.
The red line is a datum point for another picture showing the orientation and, line of view from ROV lens. I'll post more detailed stills later.(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 02:02:53 PM
Here's the datum point, red line, and the black arrows are the view from the ROV lens, port and starboard.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 02:13:05 PM
jeff look at start of ur blue line on the left an let ur eyes focus on dark spot to me it looks like a owls face with its eyes looking down reef slope

i have noticed it loads of times an wondered if it was a sign  :o  :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 02:15:07 PM
thx for posting pic of what to look for otherwise wouldn't have had a jar a glue   :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on January 29, 2012, 02:23:22 PM
thx for posting pic of what to look for otherwise wouldn't have had a jar a glue   :)

Google Translate - Clue
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 02:29:53 PM
jeff look at start of ur blue line on the left an let ur eyes focus on dark spot to me it looks like a owls face with its eyes looking down reef slope

i have noticed it loads of times an wondered if it was a sign  :o  :D
Richie, also notice where the red and blue lines cross there's a shed load of metalwork. Did you spot the circle with something in it logo again? That's two now. Plus, where's wally ;D
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 02:34:27 PM
This is what we're looking at but without the gaggle of people, or the oil leaks
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 02:38:13 PM
Nacelle just coming into view red lines.(http://) Does anyone know if Pratt and whitney used a logo with a circle containing something? Only I have found 2 the same, so far in different locations.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 03:00:27 PM
jeff have u noticed the shadow behind the object, follow the line left to right an near top there is 2 hole

that suggests the rov light is shinein  through but i dont see were it could be ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 03:33:07 PM
notice the circle top right corner

an notice in middle the way pattern holes change
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 03:34:18 PM
u will have to dismiss arrows i edited the wrong one d'oh  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 29, 2012, 04:09:21 PM
notice were the arrows point

also notice the hole patterns  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 05:34:21 PM
Richie, somewhere between 13:38:35 and 13:38:54 there's an engine hiding, go find it. It will look something like this only, might still have the propellor blades attached but, won't be as in pics, no aeroplane attached to it though. Might be in bits as well. Oh, and it's totally covered in coral, silt, sediment etc...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 29, 2012, 06:23:30 PM
Just wondered if the part with the red arrow pointing to it once was part of the object with the blue arrow pointing to it?

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 29, 2012, 08:26:37 PM
Jeff,  A quick Google search shows that Pratt and Whitney used an eagle inside a circle for a number of years as a logo. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Pw-eagle-logo-graphic.jpg. I haven't tracked down years as yet as there are some variations. Can you post a still of the possible logo that you've found as enhanced as you can and I will see if I can fin anything.  LTM
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 29, 2012, 08:39:19 PM
Jeff,  from a few minutes of web browsing it looks like the logos were on either side of the engine cowlings. No links to post just yet. I will try to get some if you think the logo may be what you are seeing.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 29, 2012, 10:30:56 PM

With respect to the Rope.
Might AE/FN,in the first days after landing, have scrounged a long length of rope off the NC and used it to tether the Electra to a Buka tree in order to keep the plane from going over the edge?
Then due to the plane moving in the wind, surf, tide the rope broke and the plane went over the reef edge and down the slope, gouging a trench and shedding bits and pieces until it came to the shelf that it is now resting on.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 29, 2012, 10:41:44 PM

With respect to the Rope.
Might AE/FN,in the first days after landing, have scrounged a long length of rope off the NC and used it to tether the Electra to a Buka tree in order to keep the plane from going over the edge?
Then due to the plane moving in the wind, surf, tide the rope broke and the plane went over the reef edge and down the slope, gouging a trench and shedding bits and pieces until it came to the shelf that it is now resting on.

Might coulda done just that, Harry - not out of the question at all as I see it.

Problem we may have is the line could also be a common item dropped from a boat at any time, too.

About that 'line' - I'm beginning to think that swage bead (the black ball) is a 'sinker' - watch out if a 'hook' suddenly turns up in all this...

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 04:28:16 AM
Jeff,  from a few minutes of web browsing it looks like the logos were on either side of the engine cowlings. No links to post just yet. I will try to get some if you think the logo may be what you are seeing.  LTM- John

Hard to say what it is John but, it's a circle for sure and, something within it. There was another one earlier in the footage that I will track down for you.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 04:46:11 AM
Anyone expecting to see one of these in this condition
 
Have a look at the SS norwich City
Tonnage:
5587.08
Displacement:
8730 tons
(http://)
Anyone recognise a ship?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 04:54:53 AM

With respect to the Rope.
Might AE/FN,in the first days after landing, have scrounged a long length of rope off the NC and used it to tether the Electra to a Buka tree in order to keep the plane from going over the edge?
Then due to the plane moving in the wind, surf, tide the rope broke and the plane went over the reef edge and down the slope, gouging a trench and shedding bits and pieces until it came to the shelf that it is now resting on.

Might coulda done just that, Harry - not out of the question at all as I see it.

Problem we may have is the line could also be a common item dropped from a boat at any time, too.

About that 'line' - I'm beginning to think that swage bead (the black ball) is a 'sinker' - watch out if a 'hook' suddenly turns up in all this...

LTM -
Could well turn up. Lot of fishing goes on in the Pacific. Trawling wouldn't be of much use near reefs but, longlining would be a likely suspect. It's popular with Tuna fleets
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 30, 2012, 05:09:48 AM
Jeff N., I'm not saying that any logo will be visible or identifiable on any part after all these years. But IF there is a logo that MIGHT be identifiable what is the harm in looking into it? I will admit, I don't see hardly any of what all the stills might possibly be or what the arrows are pointing out. I have no expertise in computer photography, how to adjust this and that to look for this and that. Give me enough gas in my tanks, my mask and fins, and a depth I can get back from and I can recognize stuff on the bottom. For me, I need real time context and 3D. I have seen stuff that has been down a while with marine life clinging to and growing on it. Different stuff likes to cling to different surfaces. It is possible that a logo can be "seen" by what is clinging to the various surfaces on and around it. It might be anything, or it might be something. LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 08:41:34 AM
And TIGHAR have evidence of recent visit by a Tuna Trawler from when they were able to take the Island fly by video.
Yes I watched the fly by video again a few days back Chris. Superb views of the surf line and reef, amazing. Of course you have to realise that was taken from a helicopter at 100 feet, perfect viewing platform. Now imagine flying at 400 feet with a huge engine and prop obscuring your view, any observing will be by looking out sideways. Different ball game altogether. Not sure if Lt Lambrecht and his fellow searchers were aware that the reef is not always covered in water and surf and, that at low tides made a reasonable landing strip. If they were aware they might have spent some more time looking along the surf/reef line, sideways of course  :)
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 30, 2012, 11:08:28 AM
Lets face it, the search that was conducted, and the one that should have been (hindsight) will always be a big part of this story. What IF the Electra was partically submerged on the reef, and Lambrecht saw it. Then, what IF he could have landed somewhere without ripping the bottom out of his plane. Still, a big part of this story; all the what ifs.
We try not to speculate (Ric would scold me for speculating!), we theorize then go prove it. Alot of members are doing that in different ways.
TIGHAR is on the right track-----you gotta believe!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 30, 2012, 11:24:11 AM
anyone know what this object is appears to be a big bottle with a bar in centre
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Alfred Hendrickson on January 30, 2012, 11:29:36 AM
I'm amazed at what you guys are "seeing" in these stills. Try as I might, I can't see any of this stuff! You've got everything in there but a '57 Chevy! I did catch that fuzzy fork thing way back on one of the first posts, but nothing since.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 30, 2012, 11:49:37 AM
under the second arrow it looks like the image of a airplane  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 30, 2012, 12:08:26 PM
yer 1 ov them planes that have 4 wings 2 on top an 2 bottom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 30, 2012, 12:11:57 PM
Jeff N., I'm not saying that any logo will be visible or identifiable on any part after all these years. But IF there is a logo that MIGHT be identifiable what is the harm in looking into it? I will admit, I don't see hardly any of what all the stills might possibly be or what the arrows are pointing out. I have no expertise in computer photography, how to adjust this and that to look for this and that. Give me enough gas in my tanks, my mask and fins, and a depth I can get back from and I can recognize stuff on the bottom. For me, I need real time context and 3D. I have seen stuff that has been down a while with marine life clinging to and growing on it. Different stuff likes to cling to different surfaces. It is possible that a logo can be "seen" by what is clinging to the various surfaces on and around it. It might be anything, or it might be something. LTM- John

Granted. 

I was really wondering how in the world Jeff Hayden would be concerned with that detail at this point and so needful of someone to feed him an example of what he might be looking at (as I gather from his report).  I can scarcely imagine that particular item being the least bit discernable at this point.

Part of my skepticism has to do with familiarity with these really cool emblematic logos and how odd it would be for that feature to turn up at this point: I have laid hands on hundreds of them from the oldest radials to the latest turbofans; the older ones are generally an enamaled or porcelin-like colorful image set in a metal 'coin'-like disc and smoothly finished.  On old radials they were typically inset into an embossed ring of the casting or forging that made up the oil sump scavenger casing, between the lower two cylinders. 

What these emblems look like isn't much of a mystery.  There is a nice history on P&W on 'Wiki', including the evolution of their logos  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney) - but the notion of such an item peering back at us through this murk at this point smells more like tuna on the dock than a gold coin in the surf...

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on January 30, 2012, 01:11:10 PM

A liquor bottle, Benedictine liquer (sp?), cognac, FN's favorite?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 30, 2012, 01:15:54 PM
any idea's defo man made
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 30, 2012, 01:32:43 PM
right look at were i have marked out with black lines an then look at 1 underneath u can see somethink t shaped an it has 2 holes 1 either end of T
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on January 30, 2012, 01:58:22 PM
Jeff N-  I saw the history of the PW emblem which was the link I posted. I did see the oil sump on the bottom of the engine but didn't know that the emblem was cast there as well. I was thinking more of a cast emblem affixed to the sides of the engine cowls with raised ridges or even made up of different materials. I don't think a lot of decals were in use then but I could be wrong. I'm still looking for a photo of AE's plane that clearly shows any emblem or decal on the cowl. All I've found in my brief search has been on scale models of the plane which I can not count as accurate. I would think that PW would like to have had their emblem in a visible location, especially given the publicity associated with the flight.  LTM
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 30, 2012, 02:13:33 PM
Havent seen any emblems or decals on the cowlings, but NR16020 and the Electra emblem is on both tails.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 30, 2012, 02:28:27 PM
any idea's defo man made

Based on what I perceive to be a quarter inch diameter cable in the picture I would suggest the item outlined is the size of a large unfolded paper clip. IF it isn't part of the goose Jeff N is seeing.  I saw an outline of the Electra in my toast this morning too.  Wondered what it meant but realized I had no real scale, position or identifiable markings. So I ate it.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 30, 2012, 02:30:22 PM
Jeff N-  I saw the history of the PW emblem which was the link I posted. I did see the oil sump on the bottom of the engine but didn't know that the emblem was cast there as well. I was thinking more of a cast emblem affixed to the sides of the engine cowls with raised ridges or even made up of different materials. I don't think a lot of decals were in use then but I could be wrong. I'm still looking for a photo of AE's plane that clearly shows any emblem or decal on the cowl. All I've found in my brief search has been on scale models of the plane which I can not count as accurate. I would think that PW would like to have had their emblem in a visible location, especially given the publicity associated with the flight.  LTM

Sorry John - I overlooked that you had already posted that link.

Like Tom Swearingen, I am not aware of any textured / embossed / relief-type emblems used on cowlings.  The one on the 'nose' of the sump casing is what I'm familiar with and it's fairly prominent through the large open front of the cowling.  Kind of a 'pride mark' for the maker - just like the 'Electra' ID Tom is referring to.

I can't tell that AE was flying any particular evidence of deep corporate sponsorship by what I see in photos.  There was some of that in her day  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NASM_-_Lockheed_Vega_-_Winnie_Mae.jpg) - not unlike what we see on NASCAR racers and air show machines like we see today.  I don't even know that P&W or Lockheed really 'sponsored' her anyway, although support was there and folks like them and Hooven contributed technically.  What their corporate arrangement was I do not know, but I don't recall any signs of it on the airplane.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 30, 2012, 02:36:41 PM
I was going by the Purdue pictures taken along the flight route, mainly in India. I purposely chose them, and not earlier pics, because there could always have been the possiblility that something was changed after the Luke Field incident. Pictures of the Electra at Lae would be great, but I sense that no other markings are on the Electra.
Are there Hamilton-Standard decals on the props? Probably not now.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 30, 2012, 02:39:26 PM
any idea's defo man made

Based on what I perceive to be a quarter inch diameter cable in the picture I would suggest the item outlined is the size of a large unfolded paper clip. IF it isn't part of the goose Jeff N is seeing.  I saw an outline of the Electra in my toast this morning too.  Wondered what it meant but realized I had no real scale, position or identifiable markings. So I ate it.

Irv,

I'm glad to read of another thought on scale here - I tend to agree with that idea.  We're looking at 'inches' in my opinion, not 'feet'.  It did seem to be a very small goose.  ;)

I saw FN and AE in bad shape from a hard landing in my eggs this morning too - but finally decided the salsa was playing tricks on my eyes...  :P

I DID see Winston Churchill in a bagle, though - I kinda wish that guy hadn't stubbed his cigar out in it.  ;D

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 30, 2012, 02:42:08 PM
Mr Neville-----you are working WAYYYY to hard!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 02:48:01 PM
Jeff N-  I saw the history of the PW emblem which was the link I posted. I did see the oil sump on the bottom of the engine but didn't know that the emblem was cast there as well. I was thinking more of a cast emblem affixed to the sides of the engine cowls with raised ridges or even made up of different materials. I don't think a lot of decals were in use then but I could be wrong. I'm still looking for a photo of AE's plane that clearly shows any emblem or decal on the cowl. All I've found in my brief search has been on scale models of the plane which I can not count as accurate. I would think that PW would like to have had their emblem in a visible location, especially given the publicity associated with the flight.  LTM
John, have I missed something here? Did someone think they were decals/stickers? I think in the 1930's they would still be metal 'trademark' types which were screwed down. Anything else wouldn't survive down there which is why I don't hold out much hope for ever seeing NR 16020 on anything down there.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 04:56:00 PM
Another coral outcrop, sorry :) I'll post some better stills later
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 30, 2012, 05:14:01 PM
POSSIBLE!
Red HT leads?
Yellow cylinderhead still in situ?
Blue arrow catch to open access panel/cowling?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on January 30, 2012, 06:21:41 PM
I'm sorry Jeff. I feel like a broken record. SCALE. You point at something that is several feet across. (engine) and there is a cable in the same picture that would likely be a very light control cable or a fishing vessels long line. The cable moves gently in the current in the video. That means its not big and heavy.  So if we use the cable at a quarter or even half inch diameter then that engine is maybe two feet in diameter.  If the object identified as an engine was in the background far enough to show as an actual full size radial engine and the cable in the lower foreground is even a half inch diameter then the range of the ROV lights wouldn't reach to the engine. Too far away. But I think I'm really stretching it here.  This video found a cable and we should concentrate on what that is and see if a scale for all other "items" can be generated.  Start with what you know. Guess later and apply to what is known to see if it stands the scrutiny. No disrespect intended for all the effort.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on January 31, 2012, 02:54:34 AM
I was going by the Purdue pictures taken along the flight route, mainly in India. I purposely chose them, and not earlier pics, because there could always have been the possiblility that something was changed after the Luke Field incident. Pictures of the Electra at Lae would be great, but I sense that no other markings are on the Electra.
Are there Hamilton-Standard decals on the props? Probably not now.
Tom

I think your summation is accurate, Tom.

I saw decals on the props in one of the pix posted here (with the guys working on the engines), so they were there once upon a time.

What years of exposure have done to them is anybody's guess - likely long disintegrated is mine.

In recent years it was discovered that the darn things (decals) actually retained moisture and could create a nasty little corrosion cell behind the pretty things - which can create a stress riser in a critical plane of the propeller blade.  I've forgotten if there were actual blade failures associated with that, but Service Bulletins and possibly an Airworhiness Directive did emerge for some types calling for removal of decals for that reason.  I don't recall if it was specific to a brand - Sensenich, Hartzell, McCauley, Ham Standard, but maybe one or all.  Stuff just doesn't always behave like you think it might - that's for sure.
Your mention of stress risers in connection with prop blades reminded me of a case I had. A Bonanza shed a prop blade in flight and several people got killed. The failure was caused by a small scratch made during manufacturing in the base of the threads on the shank of the blade creating a stress riser and, because of the particular profile of the threads (I don't remember the name of the thread type,) this resulted in a fatigue crack propagating more than half way though the shank of the blade until there was an instantaneous failure, the blade came off and the plane crashed. I remember counting the beach marks on the fracture surface with a scanning electron microscope to determine how long it had taken for the crack to progress so far. It was a McCauley prop, a D36xxxxx. We found out that other McCauley props had had the same types of failures. McCauley had dealt with these other failures by filling the longitudinal hollow cavity in the the base of the blade (usually used for balancing the blade by placement of lead weights) with red dyed oil that would then weep out through any crack that had progressed from the threads far enough in to reach the hollow cavity which then provided a warning to the pilot on pre-flight not to fly the plane. I came out to Ohio and took the depositions of the McCauley engineers and I was shocked by their attitude when I asked them why they had not used the same warning system for the Bonanza's prop.
"Oh, we only had that problem with a completely different type of prop, a D34xxxxx."
"But they both have the same type of threads, don't they?"
"Yes."
"And the threads are cut using the same technique on both the D34xxxxx and the D36xxxxx blades aren't they?"
"Yes."
"And the same machinery was used to cut the threads on both types of blades wasn't it?"
"Yes."
"So what is the difference between the D34xxxxx and the D36xxxxx blades."
"The shank of the D34 blade is only 3.4 inches in diameter and the D36 blade is 3.6 inches in diameter."
"So the only difference between the blades is two-tenths of an inch in the diameter of the base of the blade?"
"Yes."
"Why didn't you consider incorporating the dyed oil in the D36xxxxx props too after the failures in the D34xxxxx props?"
"Well they were different blades."

Yah, they were so different that the only way you could tell them apart was by using a micrometer!

Think about the attitude of these engineers the next time you are flying a plane with a McCauley prop bolted on the nose.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 07:56:38 AM
I'm sorry Jeff. I feel like a broken record. SCALE. You point at something that is several feet across. (engine) and there is a cable in the same picture that would likely be a very light control cable or a fishing vessels long line. The cable moves gently in the current in the video. That means its not big and heavy.  So if we use the cable at a quarter or even half inch diameter then that engine is maybe two feet in diameter.  If the object identified as an engine was in the background far enough to show as an actual full size radial engine and the cable in the lower foreground is even a half inch diameter then the range of the ROV lights wouldn't reach to the engine. Too far away. But I think I'm really stretching it here.  This video found a cable and we should concentrate on what that is and see if a scale for all other "items" can be generated.  Start with what you know. Guess later and apply to what is known to see if it stands the scrutiny. No disrespect intended for all the effort.
No, completely agree Irv. We have no idea of scale down there and, that includes everything in the ROV footage, coral, bits of tin, ropes, wire, cable you name it. The only thing for sure we can take from the footage is that it's wet down there, or is it? Could be another alien autopsy hoax ;D
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: James G. Stoveken on January 31, 2012, 09:05:53 AM

No, completely agree Irv. We have no idea of scale down there and, that includes everything in the ROV footage, coral, bits of tin, ropes, wire, cable you name it. The only thing for sure we can take from the footage is that it's wet down there, or is it? Could be another alien autopsy hoax ;D
Jeff

Hoax?  Not so fast, Jeff...  Click here! (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/team-investigate-underwater-ufo-sunken-ships-millennium-falcon-article-1.1013642)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 10:51:51 AM

No, completely agree Irv. We have no idea of scale down there and, that includes everything in the ROV footage, coral, bits of tin, ropes, wire, cable you name it. The only thing for sure we can take from the footage is that it's wet down there, or is it? Could be another alien autopsy hoax ;D
Jeff

Hoax?  Not so fast, Jeff...  Click here! (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/team-investigate-underwater-ufo-sunken-ships-millennium-falcon-article-1.1013642)

James, the part of the report that really made me take notice was;  "interest in the find has reportedly led to a flood of donations."
As I mentioned in a previous post, when I retire in April I will start fundraising big time for Tighar, this sort of research/investigation costs big bucks. I have a few targets for sponsorship as well...
Jeff

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on January 31, 2012, 10:53:10 AM
POSSIBLE!
Red HT leads?
Yellow cylinderhead still in situ?
Blue arrow catch to open access panel/cowling?

I don't see it - and I agree with Irv's comments on scale.

That line is seen moving gently at one point in the video at least - it seems to be a light rope, perhaps easily less than 1/2 inch in diameter (my guess would be a 3/8" black nylon rope).

The more I look at the end of the 'loop' in the line, the more convinced I am becoming that it is a recent item laid down after breakage and either tossed or lost overboard.  The end of the loop bears a distinct 'set' (memory, if you will) typically of having been wrapped around a cleat or bollard and held fast in tension for a long period of time.  That's not unusual to find aboard a boat.

It's also not unusual for boat crew to use a bit of stand-down time anchored or drifting off-shore some place to do a bit of deck keeping.  And, as bad as it is, sometimes old stuff just gets tossed.  I hate that - I love sea turtles.  ;) 

We have to consider scale - and we have to consider these possible sources for 'man made' stuff that isn't clearly from or attached to NR16020.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 11:42:18 AM

No, completely agree Irv. We have no idea of scale down there and, that includes everything in the ROV footage, coral, bits of tin, ropes, wire, cable you name it. The only thing for sure we can take from the footage is that it's wet down there, or is it? Could be another alien autopsy hoax ;D
Jeff

Hoax?  Not so fast, Jeff...  Click here! (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/team-investigate-underwater-ufo-sunken-ships-millennium-falcon-article-1.1013642)

James, the part of the report that really made me take notice was;  "interest in the find has reportedly led to a flood of donations."
As I mentioned in a previous post, when I retire in April I will start fundraising big time for Tighar, this sort of research/investigation costs big bucks. I have a few targets for sponsorship as well...
Jeff

People are probably more interested in understanding more about the objects that are being found in the Baltic than they are in chasing UFOs.  People also donate for the search of Noah's Ark - and even the Lost Ark.  There was a fairly obvious hoax revealed a couple of years ago regarding the former as I recall.  Motavations vary.

What I like about TIGHAR's research is the hard-headed science they've learned to apply.  Ric has been very frank about his 'lessons learned' as he's come along over the years in building this outfit, and TIGHAR has attracted some major talent that we're lucky to have.  I enjoy supporting that kind of effort - but it's founded on hard-headed objectivity - very important I think.

I would probably not mind supporting something like the Baltic floor search - but not because of UFO headlines (and in fact that would make me want to learn a lot more about who's doing what there before I would send a dime).  I wouldn't send a dime to the Noah's Ark search - just my opinion.

As to raising funds for TIGHAR - what's stopping you now?  I'm a shameless promoter at times - drop a few bucks on the site now and then to support - it's easy - look on the home page.

I guess if you want to get into the more professional part of it then you would be approaching Ric and the board - I'm sure they can acquaint all wishing to do so with the appropriate standards of TIGHAR's operations.  I'm sure they'd not ignore desirable talent.

LTM -
As I said, I will retire and, hopefully, if the government don't get to it first I'll get a decent lump sum. Of which I shall donate a chunk happily, I know what I am looking at ;D
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 11:49:11 AM
Richie, regarding your direction finder chunk of coral. Can you get me a shed load of pics of the direction finder and accompanying PFM box and cable?
Cheers mate
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 12:24:11 PM
Richies coral direction finder revisited
Red; it's metal with a nice concentric row of holes that hold the bit with the red cross to it
Blue; the PFM box that goes with the direction finder
Yellow; A possible home for the circular bit of wire now? See later post re: circle of wire (There's a bit of wire from the cable harness but out of this shot)
Green; the bit that has broken off therefore making us assume it was a coral outcrop because it wasn't complete
The circle of wire is next to Richies RDF 'coral outcrop'
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 31, 2012, 12:42:54 PM
Jeff and Richie--go back o the pic with the 'engine and prop".
Look at the 'prop' above the hub on the blade. Is that a Hamiliton-Standard Decal?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 31, 2012, 01:00:15 PM
jeff do u know of a way, to get a blow up of this still

look under the video time numbers, were black lines point too an it appears to be the base of sumthink with what looks like a
a metal plate...

stupid numbers are in way  :(

pic 1 far away

pic 2 close up marked

pic 3 clouse up un marked
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on January 31, 2012, 01:09:41 PM
its not part of the reef--
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 01:27:51 PM
jeff do u know of a way, to get a blow up of this still

look under the video time numbers, were black lines point too an it appears to be the base of sumthink with what looks like a
a metal plate...

stupid numbers are in way  :(

pic 1 far away

pic 2 close up marked

pic 3 clouse up un marked
 
Yeah, there's loads of junk down at the bottom level of the footage. Identifying it is the problem. Going back to a previous post of yours Richie, the RDF loop antenna. Can you get me a picture of the loop antenna with the PFM box and cable harness? It's a Bendix Mn-5 set.
Your coral outcrop is hiding something important. I've even been on fleabay trying to find one I can take apart, and Bendix have been bought and sold more times than Robbie Keane so, no luck there yet
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 31, 2012, 01:35:09 PM
how random is this image 3 separate anchors in  one place
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 31, 2012, 01:38:54 PM
will post as i find there not many tho
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 02:02:21 PM
Could this be where the mystery circle of wire used to live?
The shielded wire inside the loop?
The inner conductor travels from the feed tee around the loop and is connected to the outer conductor adjacent to the feed tee. The shield is continuous at all places except at the gap which is opposite the feed tee.?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 02:09:28 PM
how random is this image 3 separate anchors in  one place
This whole area is suspect Richie. There's too many thin, black, not straight things lying around. The bits you have pointed out, what the hell is the curved/circular? object? It has holes near the centre. That large clump of 'multi coloured coral' to the right is going to be a challenge to work out.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 31, 2012, 02:18:47 PM
http://tighar.org/sitemap.html

u will find all u need on the link there is plenty of info on df 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on January 31, 2012, 02:20:35 PM
its like a pick axe shape so assume its an anchor  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 02:33:01 PM
its like a pick axe shape so assume its an anchor  :)
Those black, not straight, uniform length 'things' are intriguing, they remind me of the HT leads in my car, of course in the car they are different lengths due to the layout of the straight four cylinders. But if the cylinders were...
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 03:29:52 PM
hope u guys can see these ok, its so hard to get these images visable but worth the wait  :)
Richie, where abouts in the video did you dig this image from? Do you have the frame time?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on January 31, 2012, 05:09:18 PM
See how thin the edge is on Richies RDF 'coral outcrop' and how shiny it is, and the odd shaped hole in it.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 01:29:17 AM
took me ages to find that  :)

jeff am convinced the still on the bottom is were the electra is on left side, also notice the reef floor behind it u can see were what ever it is has slid down reef
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 01:34:17 AM
well big bits ov it an poss engine
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 01:40:18 AM
this is behind the poss door above
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 01, 2012, 02:25:18 AM

I think your summation is accurate, Tom.

..., but maybe one or all.  Stuff just doesn't always behave like you think it might - that's for sure.

...

Your mention of stress risers in connection with prop blades reminded me of a case I had. A Bonanza shed a prop blade in flight and several people got killed. ...attitude when I asked them why they had not used the same warning system for the Bonanza's prop.
"Oh, we only had that problem with a completely different type of prop, a D34xxxxx."
...Think about the attitude of these engineers the next time you are flying a plane with a McCauley prop bolted on the nose.

gl

Wow, Gary. I remember the red dye.  Hate to say it, but what you describe is the classic "silo" type of behavior.  Inexcusable.

I hope that attitude is rare, but as talented as engineers can be, much depends on who's running the programs to ensure the silo walls are kept knocked down.  It takes strong management discipline to keep the doors open and make sure people are cross-talking and applying lessons learned - always a challenge.

One of my pet peeves is prop maintenance.  There have been too many blade failures even from simple corrosion / minute nicks that turned into stress risers and cracks over time.  I hate to walk the line and see a neglected prop.

It's pretty creepy examining a brittle fracture to count the striations from inititation to that final disconnect, isn't it?  Sad in a case like that.  I hate to think of innocents injured or killed by such things - awful.

LTM -
I handled another case resulting in three deaths from a failure of a blade in flight. This involved a separation of a rotor blade on a Sikorsky Skycrane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_S-64_Skycrane), S-64/CH-54, a BIG helicopter. We represented Sikorsky, Pratt & Whitney and United Technologies, their parent company, in many cases. This was also caused by a stress riser. The rotor blades are manufactured out of a long very thick aluminum extrusion with a cross section like a very big letter "D." This makes up the spar of the blade and the curved part of the "D" makes the leading edge of the blade. The trailing edge of the blade is made out of thin aluminum boxes or "pockets" (they are lightly loaded compared to the spar) that taper to the trailing edge. The wide, open side of the "pockets" are overlapped on the spar and glued into place. Since a failure of the spar would be catastrophic, Sikorsky provided a warning system to alert the crew of any developing cracks. Each end on the blade was sealed and the hollow inside the "D" was filled with low pressure nitrogen. A "blade integrity monitor" (BIM) was mounted on the inboard end of the blade where it is visible from the cockpit and on pre-flight. The BIM is a pop-out indicator that is held out, where it is visible, by the pressure inside the blade. If there is a leak of nitrogen then there must be a crack that has already progressed all the way through the web of the spar. If the pressure leaks out then a spring withdraws the BIM pin and the pilot knows he has a problem. They are exactly like the valve caps I have on my car tires that turn from green to white when the pressure gets too low.

The helicopter was returning from Florida to California to start a new fire suppression contract and they were in a hurry, they make a lot of money per day. They landed in Texan and the maintenance truck was a day behind them.
After they landed for the night in Texas the pilot noticed a bad BIM. The pilot borrowed a nitrogen bottle from the FBO (since they didn't have their own maintenance van which carried spare blades and a special low pressure, very precise, pressure testing setup) and added nitrogen to the blade, which popped the BIM indicator back out to the normal position, and then went to the motel. The next morning he checked the BIM, it still looked O.K. so they took off. Several hours later the blade broke in the middle and an S-64 doesn't fly too good with only four out of five rotor blades, three dead guys.

Of course, the widows and orphans sued Sikorsky.

A bad BIM requires a lot more than putting a shot of nitrogen in the blade and seeing if it holds pressure overnight before you can return the helicopter to service. The Sikorsky maintenance manual requires that the blade be removed and placed on two saw horses with a fifty pound weight in the center between the two supporting saw horses. The ends of the blades, the BIM, and the nitrogen valve are checked or replaced. Low pressure nitrogen is added using the special equipment. Then you wait a week and then check the pressure again. If the pressure is still good then you turn the blade over, replace the weight, and wait another week before making the final pressure check. The reason for the saw horses and the weight is that the blade will droop and if the crack is on the bottom the drooping will close the crack. The weight bends the blade the other way to open up any crack so the nitrogen can escape and the failure can be found. The failed blade had a crack on the bottom of the blade and the blade drooped over night in Texas sealing the crack and keeping the nitrogen in so they had a good BIM in the morning.

So what caused the failure? Well, there was a small crack in one of the pockets which was not of any importance, these are common. The crew chief/ A&P had stopped drilled that crack in the pocket, which would have been O.K, the pockets are not critical and it is a fairly common occurence to lose pockets in flight and you don't even notice until after you land. The problem was that he drilled too far forward on the pocket, where the pocket overlapped the spar and put a slight ding in the spar with the drill bit. The spar is heavily stressed and that stress riser eventually resulted in the crack and the three dead people, including the A&P.

As an aside, we tend to think that NTSB investigators are very careful and knowledgeable. The six rotor blades are color coded with a spot of paint on the butt of the blade for maintenance record keeping purposes, white, red, black, yellow, green and blue. The NTSB investigator concluded that the black blade had failed in flight so we spent over a year tracking down the history of that blade. It was manufactured in the '60s, sold to the Army, overhauled by the Army in the '70s, etc. Then we all got together one day with all the parties' experts, laid all the parts of the five blades out on the hanger floor (the other blades had also come apart after the first one failed) and lo and behold it turned out it was actually the green blade that had failed first and precipitated the accident! So much for the competence of the NTSB, if they couldn't get something as big and obvious as this right what else did they get wrong. (I had many other cases with NTSB incompetence but this was probably the most egregious example.) (And we had to pay to fly this investigator back from Brazil for his deposition, he had left the NTSB and was in charge on the safety program at Embraer!)

--------------------------------------

We had fun on another case for Sikorsky that involved a crash of an H-3 helicopter that had formerly belonged to the Navy. Plaintiffs contended that it was a dangerously designed helicopter, "give us ten million dollars please." The judge allowed us to show some pictures to the jury so that they could see what that type of helicopter looked like and we used pictures of Marine Corps One at the Reagan Library (four miles from where I am sitting) which flew Reagan around. Must be a really dangerous helicopter design that they would use to fly the President. We had a good laugh about this one.

gl

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 03:40:12 AM
Could this be where the mystery circle of wire used to live?
The shielded wire inside the loop?
The inner conductor travels from the feed tee around the loop and is connected to the outer conductor adjacent to the feed tee. The shield is continuous at all places except at the gap which is opposite the feed tee.?
(http://)

You REALLY COULD be onto something there.  I know the ROV operator told Ric he thought it was organic (whip coral maybe or something), but it remains one of the most striking images out of the whole video to me -

Isn't it the freakiest match - apparent size and shape?  What are the odds of that!

Good find on that schematic.  That one really does get my attention - I agree it looks like a juicy target to revisit.

LTM -
Looks quite promising Jeff. It's proximity to Richies RDF shaped 'coral outcrop' is a good sign as well. IMHO Richies RDF 'coral outcrop' is in fact the remains of the RDF antenna from which the loop of wire has been finally ejected. I know it doesn't look loop shaped now but, all the bits are there and, if I could go down there and pick it up I would be able to reassemble it.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 03:47:24 AM
took me ages to find that  :)

jeff am convinced the still on the bottom is were the electra is on left side, also notice the reef floor behind it u can see were what ever it is has slid down reef
Richie, if you imagine that the door shaped 'coral outcrop' is in fact the door then, what you are looking at would be the remains of the floor of the fuselage (covered in silt/sediment/coral residue/junj etc...). Have a look at the previous posts about the 'black mark' (a tear in the floors skin) and your pictures of your wheel looking down hill from it. You will notice that there are the remains of the side of the fuselage running alongside the edge of the remains of the floor IMHO.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 06:03:41 AM
IF that is the RDF antenna, with the circle of wire. What would you expect to see not far away from and directly below it? Bearing in mind where it was located on the aeroplane. See if you can spot it, I'll post the pics later.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 01, 2012, 06:18:14 AM
I certainly am NOT in the same league as you guys, but I'll say that I'm really impressed with what you've posted. Not to be sarcastic, but look and see if you can find the box with $15 mil US--to pay for the crews and the subs to bring home the Electra! I know that says very outlandish, but the more 'evidence' you are finding, the better the chances are the the big $$ sponsors will come forth. Saw the other day where Discovery is part of finding a shipwreck in the English Channel (I think).
I certainly would hope that some aviation companies ---Lockhead-- would join in. Gee---perhaps some of the submersible companies would just for the testing of their subs.
I know that Ric is working as hard as he can to gather the funds to do this right. I have the confidence that he will succeed.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 01, 2012, 07:05:51 AM
Jeff VH, Are you referring to what looks like a nice flat panel with a gap under it that has coral rubble and growth and the possible RDF on top of it at 13:43:27?  Might it be a portion of the overhead where the RDF loop had been mounted. Also, in viewing the video and going with the possibility that it is the RDF loop, it looks as if it was crushed and twisted which might cause what appears as a stiff wire loop to pop out of it as it deformed. Or are you referring to something farther downslope. I have no photo imaging programs and pausing the video leaves it blurry. LTM-  John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 09:18:54 AM
jeff i know what you mean, an i have a close up of a still that shows a rivet still in place an rivert holes in running in a line on the angle u would expect  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 10:01:46 AM
Here's what we are looking at IMHO, the BIG object under the RDF 'coral outcrop' where else would it be, the cockpit. You are looking at its roof  and where the plexiglass used to be and, inside a seat.
Red; The roof, trust me its curved that's why I drew the lines curved shape.
Blue; The outline of the window where the plexiglass lived. The edges are man made and metallic.
Yellow; A seat inside
Black; The RDF 'coral outcrop'
Richie can you help and get loads of images of this area? This looks significant
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 10:05:10 AM
right this still is of area above left of were u think antenna is

notice how its curled either side to go round say an engine ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 10:08:02 AM
right this still is of area above left of were u think antenna is

notice how its curled either side to go round say an engine ?
I think that was the possible nosecone 'coral outcrop' and, bearing in mind what we have found in the last day or two it's in the right area to be just that
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 10:16:06 AM
There's a lot of junk on top of the cockpit 'coral outcrop' and some of that looks suspicious as well. I will see if I can get a better handle on whatever that is. No wonder the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' was torn off.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 10:18:34 AM
this "still" is of under were the antenna is its a bit too well shaped dont ye think  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 01, 2012, 10:26:58 AM
Jeff/Richie,  FINALLY. I have finally been able to "see" something before either of you had to point it out to me. Maybe I am developing an eye for this. Either that or my wishful thinking is in overdrive. I hadn't noticed the "window opening" in response to Jeff's query, but I did notice the panel which I believe is the roof. My question to you both is, in the absense of a reliable scale to determine size/distance, couldn't you do a comparison between distances you see in the still ("window opening", "RDF" size and "mount" location) to what we know from the electra. Nothing to prove scientifically, but I think there is enough to say "hey, this is right" "this is right where it should be if..."  I think this may be the prize. Keep up the good work.  LTM -John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 10:33:10 AM
this "still" is of under were the antenna is its a bit too well shaped dont ye think  :)
Yes that's the same bit I posted but a few seconds later in the video, very interesting, the other side of the cockpit for sure. The window is just that Richie, well spotted. That gloopy white object, remains of plexiglass? It appears to be stuck on something circular inside the cockpit 'coral outcrop'.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 10:38:35 AM
Jeff/Richie,  FINALLY. I have finally been able to "see" something before either of you had to point it out to me. Maybe I am developing an eye for this. Either that or my wishful thinking is in overdrive. I hadn't noticed the "window opening" in response to Jeff's query, but I did notice the panel which I believe is the roof. My question to you both is, in the absense of a reliable scale to determine size/distance, couldn't you do a comparison between distances you see in the still ("window opening", "RDF" size and "mount" location) to what we know from the electra. Nothing to prove scientifically, but I think there is enough to say "hey, this is right" "this is right where it should be if..."  I think this may be the prize. Keep up the good work.  LTM -John
Scale is a huge problem down there. We don't know is the only answer I can give you, at the moment. All we can do id identfy POSSIBLE bits of aircraft wreckage and, like jigsaw, put them together in a 'logical' sequence of events (another term for guesswork). All I know is it's aircraft wreckage, now, what aircraft and whose was it?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 12:17:27 PM
i do actually know a way we could match scale u will av to give me a day or 2 to do it

as i will have to find a picture of the electra, at same camera distance an, in photoshop it has a transparency tool so i could use it to layer it on too electra window an see if can match it up 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 12:22:31 PM
an no jeff, as the camera drops from ur pic it shows the depth in my pic, also the camera moves left an back so u see it better

am trying to stitch the pic's together now useing photomerge wat gives it a panoramic view

bare with me  :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 12:29:57 PM
does anyone know what membership level, i would av to get to be able to get rest of rov video, as it dont say in membership part  :(
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 12:40:54 PM
i do actually know a way we could match scale u will av to give me a day or 2 to do it

as i will have to find a picture of the electra, at same camera distance an, in photoshop it has a transparency tool so i could use it to layer it on too electra window an see if can match it up

At this stage Richie it's still an aeroplane. We have to determine what type first so, if you can match parts for sure to an Electra then, perhaps another thread in the Forum is needed. Brilliant work so far Richie.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 01, 2012, 12:41:20 PM
I bet Ric and pat do---
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 12:57:59 PM
jeff last week i was thinking about best an quickest way to identify if it was electra or not so have been doing some work

which took me too studying the nessie photo

but due to pictue quality its hard to do,

but by useing a sharping tool its starting to come together an looks more like that thing that was on top ov electra behind the hatch what was in a v shape an had 2 wires comeing off it,

in the nessie photo wen image is best focused an shadows enhanced there appears to be a dark line from right hand side ov nessie object going down into water

may not be anythink but will post a pic soon  :) 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: James G. Stoveken on February 01, 2012, 03:07:51 PM
Richie, Jeff H.,

Could you clear something up for me?  On page 34 of this thread, post 501, Richie posted a picture that he said showed the cockpit and nose areas and also an engine and prop.  This picture was one of the few that I could actually make out what I was supposed to be seeing.  I got a little excited!  There was a bit of discussion around this then nothing more.  Now you're saying you see the cockpit under the antenna loop.  I'm not so sure I see that one.  These stills are from two different areas.  So are you now thinking the first picture isn't the cockpit and engine/prop? 

Jim
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 04:20:35 PM
i can clear it up for u the picture i posted i think is the electra roof an cockpit an left wing with prop

but where the latest pictures show the cockpit at deepest depth then it means that the plane has been snapped up an shuffled about like dices so like the forum post suggests we have to figure out which is right an wrong...





 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 04:33:06 PM
and that's if there is anything to decide!!!!!!! believe me av looked at this video that much i can make out dinosaur bones more than Electra wreckage   ;D ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 01, 2012, 04:51:25 PM
anyone who wants to work out, what were looking at then imagine Ur looking at an optical illusion that takes u weeks to work out,

well that's what this is like, u have to rotate the pic's, flip them, invert them, just too get an idea off what ur looking at..

and then when they start to make sense, u can start to enjoy the pictures   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 01, 2012, 06:32:27 PM
Richie---I cant speak for everyone, but I certainly appreciate your patience. No way I could do what you are doing. I'd go nuts---some think I already have. Keep it up---crazy is a great place to be!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 08:19:34 PM
This odd shaped object has been puzzling me for weeks now, outlined in blue. The shape of it looks as if it could be part of the fuselage structure/bulkhead/frame but it doesn't have the appearance of being strong and light, too much metal not enough air. The appearance is rough, lots of holes and bits sticking out of it, not smooth flat metal.
Now, if the cockpit 'coral outcrop' is in fact the cockpit then the odd shaped object falls into place. The roof of the cockpit is collapsing due to the missing window pillars now so the odd shaped object would be pushed out. The things sticking out of the odd shaped object, well one of them, looks like the back of a dial/gauge/meter. Is this the back of an instrument panel? It would be in the right place of the aeroplane.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 01, 2012, 08:34:37 PM

Richie, Jeff Victor
You guys are doing us an immense service, thanks.  I really appreciate your hard work.
I assume that you are stopping the video at some preset frequency (say every second) and filing a snapshot at that time.  Then you examine the shot carefully looking for man made items of aircraft origin.

Based on what you have shown us, I am of the opinion that there is an airplane down there, it is a twin engined plane with a passenger door on the rear port,  has a hatch over the windscreen and an RDF loop antenna on top.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 01, 2012, 08:58:04 PM

Richie, Jeff Victor
You guys are doing us an immense service, thanks.  I really appreciate your hard work.
I assume that you are stopping the video at some preset frequency (say every second) and filing a snapshot at that time.  Then you examine the shot carefully looking for man made items of aircraft origin.

Based on what you have shown us, I am of the opinion that there is an airplane down there, it is a twin engined plane with a passenger door on the rear port,  has a hatch over the windscreen and an RDF loop antenna on top.
It's an aeroplane for sure, or what's left of one. Manufacturer? unknown, model? unknown so there's still a mountain to climb Harry. Just because there's aeroplane wreckage doesn't make it an Electra, ww2 was pretty big in the Pacific theatre with thousands of planes (although I haven't seen anything that screams military yet, recon plane? transport plane? rescue plane? who knows...)
 Yes going through each part of video one second at a time and take snap shot of suspicious bits. Bit like a jigsaw puzzle without the picture on the lid of the box. Still, I think we have found some of the edges and corner pieces and, started to piece together tiny bits of the picture. A pattern is beginning to emerge though harry. When a part is 'identified' then it narrows down the search area for the bit that it should be attached to or be next to or near to ...(sometimes) Going back to stuff you looked at a thousand times before helps as well.
Scale is a big issue down there, we have no idea of the gradient or distance between for example the rope/wire/cable focus shot and the object lying on the coral in the background of the shot, 1 metre? 10 metres? 20 metres? who knows...
Whatever plane it is it's taken a hammering, it's not a ditch into the sea in one piece and sink wreck, this has been torn to bits over the years.
All said IMHO
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 12:53:34 AM
Richies coral direction finder revisited
Red; it's metal with a nice concentric row of holes that hold the bit with the red cross to it
Blue; the PFM box that goes with the direction finder
Yellow; A possible home for the circular bit of wire now? See later post re: circle of wire (There's a bit of wire from the cable harness but out of this shot)
Green; the bit that has broken off therefore making us assume it was a coral outcrop because it wasn't complete
The circle of wire is next to Richies RDF 'coral outcrop'

The 'stuff' lying on the reef floor really caps the context - the 'wire' loop is suggestive enough, now I understand the 'fit' you've been seeing to the 'covering' (coral - encrusted sho' nuff?) - but that looks like broken shielding lying on the seafloor beneath this mess.  Your 'black stuff' here an there makes more sense - possible debris from break-up of detailed parts, like a 'loop'.  Then there's the cable...  Damn-a-mighty.

LTM -
Has anybody asked themselves why the piece of wire is so easily identified while all the other stuff takes a very good imagination?

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 02, 2012, 05:04:28 AM
Jeff/Richie,  I don't want to ask more of you when it is obvoius how much time and effort you have been putting into this. I know how much time I have spent looking at and thinking about your posts and pictures. My problem with following along now is that there are so many pictures spread throughout the posts that it is hard to find a specific one when you want to go back and look at something again. Would it be possible to create a separate page/thread just for photos? I am thinking either with a link to take you to it, or probably even easier, something that could simply be opened in another window and the forum user could just click from one to the other as needed. It doesn't need to be anything fancy. Maybe grouping the photos by suspected area of the "plane". I think having all stills posted there as well as in this thread would help everyone to see the big picture a little clearer. Just a thought.  LTM  -John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 06:48:53 AM
Jeff/Richie,  I don't want to ask more of you when it is obvoius how much time and effort you have been putting into this. I know how much time I have spent looking at and thinking about your posts and pictures. My problem with following along now is that there are so many pictures spread throughout the posts that it is hard to find a specific one when you want to go back and look at something again. Would it be possible to create a separate page/thread just for photos? I am thinking either with a link to take you to it, or probably even easier, something that could simply be opened in another window and the forum user could just click from one to the other as needed. It doesn't need to be anything fancy. Maybe grouping the photos by suspected area of the "plane". I think having all stills posted there as well as in this thread would help everyone to see the big picture a little clearer. Just a thought.  LTM  -John

Yes, good point John. When we get the all clear 'it's aircraft wreckage' from a reputable Aeronautics Agency a new thread would be a brilliant idea. Until then though I think it's wise to carry on investigating what we can on a 'possibly' basis. A thread with the best? pictures, great idea.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 07:00:38 AM
Some more pics of the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' Notice the straight lines/oblong shape in the first and the thin circular shape with holes in the second. In the third notice the warning message on the RDF antenna, no it won't harm you but, the maintenance guys love to have something to grab onto when working on planes, it stops them falling off of them. The RDF antenna is fragile, you will break it if you use it as a climbing aid. Now, how's it going to stand up to a prolonged pounding on a reef?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 07:25:07 AM
Could this be the part (bluue outline) that held the RDF antenna and in which the wire went through the fuselage roof into the cockpit? It has a wire attached to it (red lines). I'll try to get better pics on the 'new' bit of wire.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 11:09:03 AM



< AH - I finally spotted your comment above so I came back - somehow it got embedded in the quoted stuff.  YES - it IS odd, and you are RIGHT about that contrast.  I can think of some possible reasons, but I am wondering about your OWN thoughts on that, you must be ahead of me on it. >

LTM -
I went back and realized that I screwed up that posting and didn't put my comment at the very bottom. I still have trouble pairing up the "quote" with the "/quote" symbols. To make it clear, here it is again:

"Has anybody asked themselves why the piece of wire is so easily identified while all the other stuff takes a very good imagination?"

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on February 02, 2012, 11:24:08 AM
Have the official analysts weighed in of this video – what’s their take on this stuff?  I just joined last week (fyi this thread compelled me to stop lurking and join!) so I haven't been able to see any recent TIGHAR tracks. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 12:00:02 PM
jeff in ur stills above have u really studied them  :)

will post some pics in a bit  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 02, 2012, 12:02:26 PM

Jeff N
As a former scuba diver/enthusiast, I can attest that objects underwater appear to be closer and larger than one would think.  Have often reached out to touch something on a wreck only to realize it is smaller than it appears and farther away than arm's length. The Fish look really big when viewed in the water also (holding arms out really wide and saying," it was this big")   Has to do with the clarity, and the reflective and refractive indices of water.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 02, 2012, 12:24:34 PM

With respect to what thhe "Official Analysts" might think of all this, we must bear in mind that there were folks, including TIGHAR folks, viewing the video stuff "live time" i.e. as it was being looked at and recorded.  You can bet that those things that jump out at  us did the same to them.

I recall RIC making a comment like  We're getting closer and it will blow your socks off.  (I think it was in a News section of the expedition progress (I'm sure Marty will know where it is and supply a link.  After he chides me, rightlfully, for my lack of scholarship :) ))
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Don Dollinger on February 02, 2012, 12:35:37 PM
FWIW:  As a diver, and Harry should be aware of this too unless you have never dived a coral reef.  There are so many formations that look as if they are man-made that are natural.  Laser straight lines, circles, near perfect box shapes, etc.  Impressive, but natural.  Granted some of the things DO LOOK like they could be covering man-made items, but the odds are heavily in the favor of them being natural.  Look at the Bimini Road, they have been trying for years to prove one way or the other on whether that is man made or natural.  Still they are divided right down the middle on it.  Not trying to dampen your spirits and am impressed with the amount of time that you have given to this subject but most of what has been pointed out is quite a stretch to envision even with the outlines of what ya all THINK the object could be.  2 more points and I will leave you too it.  First off, when you are talking about distances you must take into account the fact that water magnifies items by upto 40% depending on distance from object.  Lastly, you are attributing this to coral growth over the items.  Coral takes eons to grow even a millimeter and due to lack of light, coral does not grow at depths below 50 meters.  I have seen and dived many shipwreck sites and many that have been submerged for 100's of years have many pieces that are very easily identified and nearly free of any accumulation of anything.  If there was that much plane wreckage there you'd have seen at least one piece (not counting the rope/cable) that would have at least a portion of it that would have been easily discernable (almost beyond a shadow of a doubt) that it is a man made item.  Not seeing it.  YMMV.

LTM,

Don
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 02, 2012, 12:38:38 PM
From our friends at PADI "Object appear to be 33% larger and 25% closer underwater (ratio 4:3) due to REFRACTION". This, of course, is not taking into account any lens on the ROV camera which may change it even more.  As Harry pointed out, until you become accustomed to the effect of refraction, you will reach out for and miss objects and things you see will appear to be larger than they really are.  LTM -John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 02, 2012, 12:42:29 PM
Perhaps some of the wreckage was 'covered' by the coral as it slid own the reef, breaking coral off as it went. I do agree with what Don says. Gee----I wish my father was alive-----he was one of the first Marine Corps divers, and tested some of the original diving suits---yep the ones that look like the Michelin Tire man. I'm sure he would have jumped at the chance to look this reef over!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 12:48:31 PM
Richies coral direction finder revisited
Red; it's metal with a nice concentric row of holes that hold the bit with the red cross to it
Blue; the PFM box that goes with the direction finder
Yellow; A possible home for the circular bit of wire now? See later post re: circle of wire (There's a bit of wire from the cable harness but out of this shot)
Green; the bit that has broken off therefore making us assume it was a coral outcrop because it wasn't complete
The circle of wire is next to Richies RDF 'coral outcrop'

The 'stuff' lying on the reef floor really caps the context - the 'wire' loop is suggestive enough, now I understand the 'fit' you've been seeing to the 'covering' (coral - encrusted sho' nuff?) - but that looks like broken shielding lying on the seafloor beneath this mess.  Your 'black stuff' here an there makes more sense - possible debris from break-up of detailed parts, like a 'loop'.  Then there's the cable...  Damn-a-mighty.

LTM -
Has anybody asked themselves why the piece of wire is so easily identified while all the other stuff takes a very good imagination?

gl
With all due respect Gary, Ric and his team theorised that this was the place to search. They didn't just turn up and randomly lob the ROV over the side of the boat here there and everywhere. Given the footage they obtained in difficult circumstances they did a remarkable job. It turns out that the initial star of the footage was the 'wire and rope', ok...
All it needed was someone with a little patience (and imagination) to step back and ask the question "this is where it is predicted to be, I wonder if ...?" So, ignoring the 'wire and rope' and concentrating on what else is in each frame we come to the stage we are at now.
It's aeroplane wreckage for sure (awaiting 'official' confirmation)
At this stage we don't know the manufacturer or model, yet.
At this stage it isn't a Lockheed Electra.
I have followed your line of thought regarding the navigation, communications etc... and it is very compelling and, I can follow your reasoning very well on how they couldn't have navigated to Gardner island. So, with that in mind I am reluctant to say at this stage that it's a lockheed Electra. Lots of planes around this area during ww2 so, who knows...
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Don Dollinger on February 02, 2012, 12:50:40 PM
Quote
From our friends at PADI "Object appear to be 33% larger and 25% closer underwater (ratio 4:3) due to REFRACTION". This, of course, is not taking into account any lens on the ROV camera which may change it even more.  As Harry pointed out, until you become accustomed to the effect of refraction, you will reach out for and miss objects and things you see will appear to be larger than they really are.

Thanx for the correction.  It has been many years since my PADI training and could not remember the exact ratio.  Your requote of that info rang a bell for sure.

LTM,

Don
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 01:10:37 PM
FWIW:  As a diver, and Harry should be aware of this too unless you have never dived a coral reef.  There are so many formations that look as if they are man-made that are natural.  Laser straight lines, circles, near perfect box shapes, etc.  Impressive, but natural.  Granted some of the things DO LOOK like they could be covering man-made items, but the odds are heavily in the favor of them being natural.  Look at the Bimini Road, they have been trying for years to prove one way or the other on whether that is man made or natural.  Still they are divided right down the middle on it.  Not trying to dampen your spirits and am impressed with the amount of time that you have given to this subject but most of what has been pointed out is quite a stretch to envision even with the outlines of what ya all THINK the object could be.  2 more points and I will leave you too it.  First off, when you are talking about distances you must take into account the fact that water magnifies items by upto 40% depending on distance from object.  Lastly, you are attributing this to coral growth over the items.  Coral takes eons to grow even a millimeter and due to lack of light, coral does not grow at depths below 50 meters.  I have seen and dived many shipwreck sites and many that have been submerged for 100's of years have many pieces that are very easily identified and nearly free of any accumulation of anything.  If there was that much plane wreckage there you'd have seen at least one piece (not counting the rope/cable) that would have at least a portion of it that would have been easily discernable (almost beyond a shadow of a doubt) that it is a man made item.  Not seeing it.  YMMV.

LTM,

Don
Don, although I agree with what you have pointed out I would like to remind you that it's not just the apparent 'shape' we are talking about. On closer examination these 'coral outcrops' are hiding something. Invariably you can define the thin metal edges, regular symmetrical lines of 'holes', the shiny silver colour of the metal, the torn edges, the 'coral outcrops' that are immitating latches, struts, wheels, antenna etc...
Now, it's probably isn't coral 'growth' as you pointed out but, coral sediment/residue/silt from the reef edge grinding it away 100's of metres above this lot, clouds of it continuously raining down onto this stuff. Wouldn't surprise me that you would be able to hoover most of this stuff away. Note the clouds of sediment kicked up by the small ROV props during the footage.
Scale and distances are an issue as has been pointed out before and I agree, it's a challenge.
With respect
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 01:28:10 PM
right pic 1 look were the arrows point too an study area

now pic 2

is rotated 180 degree's, an inverted i have highlighted areas from pic 1 but also study the other stuff i have only picked 1 object but there is other stuff there  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 02, 2012, 01:36:25 PM

For the uninitiated, PADI stands for Prifessional Association of Diving Instructors.

Gary:  Surely you remember your Army traiing to scan from left to right, top to bottom, in circles when looking at a field of vision and trying to detect an object as opposed to looking directly at an area for an xtended time, catching the objec t in peripheral vision bedfore homing in on it.  Especially at night or in limited visual conditions.  This process helps in looking at the video and the stills.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 02, 2012, 01:58:03 PM

Richie
In pic 1 of your post 697 it looks to me like a control wheel (steering wheel) and the thumb and first finger of a flying glove. 

I gotta go lock my doors before the Strait Jacket boys get here.  LOL
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 02, 2012, 02:26:12 PM

Don
Nope, never dove anywhere except on Lake Michigan and in quarries around the Chicago area.  No coral, and yes sometimes nature did present things in straight lines, circles and other geometrical shapes, but not very often.  Those are the things that I scsn for in the video snd the stills as an indication that something man-made is there.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 03:21:11 PM
Some more pics of the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' Notice the straight lines/oblong shape in the first and the thin circular shape with holes in the second. In the third notice the warning message on the RDF antenna, no it won't harm you but, the maintenance guys love to have something to grab onto when working on planes, it stops them falling off of them. The RDF antenna is fragile, you will break it if you use it as a climbing aid. Now, how's it going to stand up to a prolonged pounding on a reef?

OMG!  OMG! OMG! I think I have found the remnants of Earhart's loop antenna!

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1298)


It looks just like Richie's picture.

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1282)

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 03:42:36 PM



I honestly have had a great deal of trouble seeing much of what Richie's been pointing out - but have to admit getting another firm jolt when I realized I was staring at the corner of what DOES look like an encrusted hatch - right down to the radius.  The visual 'code' cracked a bit wider for me when I realized what I was seeing (or maybe it's the 3.25 power reading glasses I bought for a buck today at Dollar Tree - the screen is suddenly much easier to see...).


LTM -
If you're up to 3.25's then you must be older than me, I'm only up to 2.5's.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 03:52:26 PM

Don
Nope, never dove anywhere except on Lake Michigan and in quarries around the Chicago area.  No coral, and yes sometimes nature did present things in straight lines, circles and other geometrical shapes, but not very often.  Those are the things that I scsn for in the video snd the stills as an indication that something man-made is there.
I remember going through holes we cut in the ice in Racine quarry but after I discovered the Caribbean I never went in cold water again, that is until my daughter decided to take up diving here in California and she insisted that I go with her. When you are down a hundred feet off of San Diego and your wet suit is squeezed flat, it is COLD-D-D-D-D! Fortunately, the dive boats here have hot tubs so that you can bring your body up to normal temperature after you surface. I've spent quite a lot of time on coral reefs in the South Pacific and in the Caribbean so these pictures are interesting.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 03:55:06 PM
gary is that a guitar string by any chance  ???
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 03:58:47 PM
gary is that a guitar string by any chance  ???
No, it's leader wire used for fishing, kinda like the natives might have been using. If you think it is too thin then cut yourself a piece of 7x19 wire rope, it naturally coils itself up too.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 04:09:42 PM
No Gary! Its not thick enough because the weave of your carpet gives scale  ;)
But there is nothing in Richie's picture to give "scale" so the wires might be the same diameter.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 02, 2012, 04:17:27 PM
Don,   Didn't really intend it as a correction. Hit "post" before I read yours which is certainly close enough for govt work. It's just one of the multitude of tidbidts I had to learn on my way to Divemaster. Again, the PADI way. I don't disagree with you that coral is incredibly slow growing and doesn't like metal too well. I've seen some steel shipwrecks with coral taking hold and posted a picture of one on here that was sunk in 1985. It seems that if there is enough rust or a flat area to accumulate sediment that sea life will eventually attach and start to grow there. With the stuff in the video, I'm of the opinion (my own) that IF a plane were to slide down the reef after being washed off the flat it MIGHT cause a fair amount of sediment and chunks of stuff to come alng behind it and cover it up somewhat. That might account for some encrustation. Not all that encrusts objects is coral. There are a lot of things in the ocean that can concrete around objects if given enough time and the right conditions. Also, keep in mind that like anywhere on land, different conditions effect how things grow as well as how they decay. Wrecks in the north Atlantic decay and look a lot different than those in the Carribean. Oh, and Gary, I help teach in mid-Atlantic quarries, that's what the drysuit is for. Well worth the 2k if you spend much time in less than warm waters.  LTM-  John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 04:40:59 PM
Don,   Didn't really intend it as a correction. Hit "post" before I read yours which is certainly close enough for govt work. It's just one of the multitude of tidbidts I had to learn on my way to Divemaster. Again, the PADI way. I don't disagree with you that coral is incredibly slow growing and doesn't like metal too well. I've seen some steel shipwrecks with coral taking hold and posted a picture of one on here that was sunk in 1985. It seems that if there is enough rust or a flat area to accumulate sediment that sea life will eventually attach and start to grow there. With the stuff in the video, I'm of the opinion (my own) that IF a plane were to slide down the reef after being washed off the flat it MIGHT cause a fair amount of sediment and chunks of stuff to come alng behind it and cover it up somewhat. That might account for some encrustation. Not all that encrusts objects is coral. There are a lot of things in the ocean that can concrete around objects if given enough time and the right conditions. Also, keep in mind that like anywhere on land, different conditions effect how things grow as well as how they decay. Wrecks in the north Atlantic decay and look a lot different than those in the Carribean. Oh, and Gary, I help teach in mid-Atlantic quarries, that's what the drysuit is for. Well worth the 2k if you spend much time in less than warm waters.  LTM-  John
In the olden days they didn't have dry suits.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 05:00:12 PM
if u watch video when the rov is moveing about, in some parts wen it goes very close to reef bed u see shadow of rov in refelection off reef bed, but in rest of it u dont so its fair to say that its at a distance to accept some of the pieces in stills cud be part of a man made object
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 05:53:27 PM
Some more pics of the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' Notice the straight lines/oblong shape in the first and the thin circular shape with holes in the second. In the third notice the warning message on the RDF antenna, no it won't harm you but, the maintenance guys love to have something to grab onto when working on planes, it stops them falling off of them. The RDF antenna is fragile, you will break it if you use it as a climbing aid. Now, how's it going to stand up to a prolonged pounding on a reef?

OMG!  OMG! OMG! I think I have found the remnants of Earhart's loop antenna!

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1298)


It looks just like Richie's picture.

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1282)

gl


See, about 2 inches below where the wires cross, can you see the Roman head riding a 6 legged fly? it's at about your eye level, can you see it?
I think there's a special forum on the Tighar site for this sort of joviality so, let's keep it where it belongs. ;D
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 02, 2012, 05:54:54 PM
gary is that a guitar string by any chance  ???
No, it's leader wire used for fishing, kinda like the natives might have been using. If you think it is too thin then cut yourself a piece of 7x19 wire rope, it naturally coils itself up too.

gl
Available from all good fishing tackle stores on gardner Island, honestly.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 06:08:24 PM
gary is that a guitar string by any chance  ???
No, it's leader wire used for fishing, kinda like the natives might have been using. If you think it is too thin then cut yourself a piece of 7x19 wire rope, it naturally coils itself up too.

gl
Available from all good fishing tackle stores on gardner Island, honestly.

Yes, most likely it was. This is common stuff and has been around forever. Gardner Island is not the moon, people lived there, harvested copra, fished, grew kitchen crops, repaired their boats, etc. Goods were brought in to be sold to the inhabitants, most likely at a "Chinese store," a general store stocking everything needed by the island people including fishing equipment. I get the feeling that some think that Gardner was "the land that time forgot" with primitive natives building stockades to keep out the dinosaurs and King Kong. In fact, it was set up as a money making proposition, people were imported to work there growing coconuts, harvesting them and drying the meat to make copra. Then the schooner would come, buy the copra and, guess what, the workers would get paid for their labors. Where do you think they spent their money? What do you think they purchased? The local store stocked everything that was useful to islanders, pots, pans, bowls, shovels, wheel barrows, nails, hammers, saws, canned food, fish hooks, fishing leader wire, etc, and these goods were brought in on the schooner. I wouldn't be at all surprised, based on what I have seen in many "Chinese stores," that the Gardner store even had some goods that would make good presents for the wife, such as a compact with a mirror, and I'll bet that bits of aluminum, harvested from American  bases, also ended up on the store's shelves.


gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 06:22:38 PM
the video resolution is 654-480

frame rate: 29.970628
video vp8 (VP80)

so its fair to say the video footage is deceiving due to resolution used  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 02, 2012, 06:29:39 PM
Don,   Didn't really intend it as a correction. Hit "post" before I read yours which is certainly close enough for govt work. It's just one of the multitude of tidbidts I had to learn on my way to Divemaster. Again, the PADI way. I don't disagree with you that coral is incredibly slow growing and doesn't like metal too well. I've seen some steel shipwrecks with coral taking hold and posted a picture of one on here that was sunk in 1985. It seems that if there is enough rust or a flat area to accumulate sediment that sea life will eventually attach and start to grow there. With the stuff in the video, I'm of the opinion (my own) that IF a plane were to slide down the reef after being washed off the flat it MIGHT cause a fair amount of sediment and chunks of stuff to come alng behind it and cover it up somewhat. That might account for some encrustation. Not all that encrusts objects is coral. There are a lot of things in the ocean that can concrete around objects if given enough time and the right conditions. Also, keep in mind that like anywhere on land, different conditions effect how things grow as well as how they decay. Wrecks in the north Atlantic decay and look a lot different than those in the Carribean. Oh, and Gary, I help teach in mid-Atlantic quarries, that's what the drysuit is for. Well worth the 2k if you spend much time in less than warm waters.  LTM-  John
I'm back to doing only warm water, no wet suit needed in 84° F water around Bora Bora.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 06:32:45 PM
am lost jeff  ;) were do the wires cross or am i being niaive, if u mean the 2 wires between 12 o clock an 9 o clock well the bottom wire is the shadow of top wire i know because i thought same but after hours of researching it turned out  a big X

if not my bad, my apologies in advance  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 06:37:33 PM
gary is that a guitar string by any chance  ???
No, it's leader wire used for fishing, kinda like the natives might have been using. If you think it is too thin then cut yourself a piece of 7x19 wire rope, it naturally coils itself up too.

yer i read there was a Netto on there as well, an if memory serves right the natives were useing airplane wire to fish  :D

gl
Available from all good fishing tackle stores on gardner Island, honestly.

Yes, most likely it was. This is common stuff and has been around forever. Gardner Island is not the moon, people lived there, harvested copra, fished, grew kitchen crops, repaired their boats, etc. Goods were brought in to be sold to the inhabitants, most likely at a "Chinese store," a general store stocking everything needed by the island people including fishing equipment.


gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 06:43:02 PM
yer there was a Netto on there as well, but if memory serves me right weren't the natives using airplane wire to fish ? sorta makes sense now, giving its not as coralised as rest ov reef bed
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 02, 2012, 07:04:07 PM
does any one know what this metal ring cud be off
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 04:02:15 AM
Here's a little bit of info' on RDF antenna:
Airplanes in flight accumulate electric charges52,53 that cause radio noise interference. This is in addition to the interference that might be caused by the ignition system and other electrical equipment.54 Snow,55 ice, rain, and dust particles generally are electrically charged, and, when an airplane flies through masses of such particles, the airplane acquires an electric charge. If the charges through which the airplane flies were uniformly distributed, the matter would be simplified. During turbulent air conditions, accompanying atmospheric storms (a thunderstorm, for example), the magnitude and polarity of the charge from point-to-point along the flight path varies. This causes the rapidly moving airplane to acquire a charge of one sign, then rapidly lose it, and so on. The charge may not be distributed uniformly on the airplane. When an airplane loses charges to the atmosphere, corona and electric sparks often occur; or brush discharges and electric streamers may be formed. These cause electromagnetic radiations, called precipitation static, that may render radio reception impossible, a matter of great seriousness if a pilot is "flying blind" and following the beam of a ground radio-range station.
Although many details are involved, precipitation static could be controlled if receiving systems not sensitive to the static were developed, or, if the accumulating charges on the airplane were drained away slowly and uniformly, so that no sparks and similar discharges occurred.
One of the first developments56 was the use of the shielded loop (Fig. 27) for reception when precipitation static is bad. Such a loop is shielded so that it does not receive energy from an electric field but does receive energy from a magnetic field. Furthermore, a loop is directive and can be "aimed" in the direction of the desired station. The loop is close to the source of disturbance on the airplane and is in the induction field (page 441). Because of the high-voltage nature of the precipitation-static discharges, the electric-field component of the induction field is strong, and the magnetic component is weak. Thus, the electrically shielded loop does not pick up the same amount of noise that would be picked up by an open-wire antenna.57 The radiation field from a distant station arrives at the airplane with equal electric and magnetic components, and the shielded loop receives the desired signal by magnetic induction (page 504). "Open-wire11 antennas, insulated with polyethylene, are also used,53 This insulation reduces the possibility of corona or other discharges from occurring on the receiving antenna where such discharges would be in a strategic location to cause interference. Methods of draining away the charges were early used. These have taken the form of trailing wires,56 wicks,52,53 and other devices. Tufts of fine stainless steel wire have been advocated.53 Radio Noise Meters.59,60,61 Various instruments and methods have been used for measuring radio noise. Cooperative work has resulted in the development of a standard instrument and methods of measuring radio noise.58 This instrument covers the ranges of 150 to 350 kilocycles, and 540 to 18,000 kilocycles. The radio noise meter is essentially a superheterodyne radio receiver with suitable weighting arrangements in the circuit of the second detector so that the response of the measuring instrument in this circuit will have the desired characteristics.
Figure 27. An antistatic shielded loop antenna located for experimental purposes beneath an airplane. In practice the loop is usually located beneath the front portion of the main body of the airplane. The dark band around the loop is an insulating insert in the metal shield so that the shield will not offer a continuous path to current flow. (Courtesy Bell Telephone System.)  Picture quality zero marks but, I'll try to get a better one of a 1930's RDF antenna
(http://)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 04:50:27 AM
Any suggestions as to what this little box of tricks used to be?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 03, 2012, 05:32:58 AM
Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 05:54:58 AM
Forget about the fishing puns, they're just a red herring  :)
Another 'wire' trail, sorry :(
The lower red arrow points to a 'wire', the upper red arrow points to where the 'wire' goes through something before arriving at its final destination, the object outlined in blue. Forget the bit with the black cross, that's just sitting on top of the object outlined in blue, although if you care to follow the object with the black cross on it to its destination you will be amazed.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 09:01:04 AM
jeff here is the picture i posted yesterday of the area ur looking at i have inverted image an rotated 180 degree's

u will have to dismiss the lines i have put on as they were pointing objects out

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1294;image)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 09:28:43 AM
jeff here is the picture i posted yesterday of the area ur looking at i have inverted image an rotated 180 degree's

u will have to dismiss the lines i have put on as they were pointing objects out

(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1294;image)

Good job Richie, you can now see the guts of the outer shield now a bit clearer. The inner wire and outer shield have to be totally insulated from the aeroplane metalwork for it to work correctly + the inner wire and outer case of the shield similarly have to be insulated from each other. Even using stainless steel fasteners will ruin the effect of the design I believe.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 09:30:05 AM
o an jeff i think i solved the wire rope issue
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 09:57:25 AM
o an jeff i think i solved the wire rope issue
That framework in the background of your last pic' Richie. It's too flimsy to be a structural part of the airframe. Whatever it was clad in has long gone so, it must have been very thin in comparison to aircraft skin. Perhaps it was designed to contain something?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 03, 2012, 10:09:25 AM
Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom

No doubt there's still a long way to travel before anyone proves the wire is really part of a loop antenna -

But I have major doubts about it being fishing leader or similar wire: it's too rigid in the currents and has too much evident memory of shape.

That said, I'm not sure we know yet exactly how the core of an RDF loop behaves when in 'free air' (or free water), so to speak - free of the normal structure that we see from the outside.  And, for this wire to survive 'in shape' like it is, the outer material would have had to give way without major trauma or the wire would have suffered more deformation.  It is possible that the outer material deteriorated and fell away in chunks over time, but we need to understand more about how these things were constructed at the time to know that. 

The character of the wire within a loop also needs to be better understood to know if it would stand free in its 'loop' shape or not too.

I hope Jeff Hayden can provide more details from the source his recent post came from - and it would be good to get a better picture of an old loop (it appears what he was trying to show was one that was cut-away but hard to tell).

There are also tell-tale bits of something lying on the sediment below the wire in some of these shots that is suggestive of shielding that fits around such a wire.  Then there are the other 'wiring' segments nearby - and components that Jeff Hayden is seeing (although I still having trouble with that picture - but I'm not the greatest at this stuff for sure).  All of that must be better understood - but this is one strange conglomeration of goods - I don't think the loop fishing leader.

Time will tell.  But I think TIGHAR was right to say they're going to need a bigger boat...

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 10:40:27 AM
Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom

No doubt there's still a long way to travel before anyone proves the wire is really part of a loop antenna -

But I have major doubts about it being fishing leader or similar wire: it's too rigid in the currents and has too much evident memory of shape.

That said, I'm not sure we know yet exactly how the core of an RDF loop behaves when in 'free air' (or free water), so to speak - free of the normal structure that we see from the outside.  And, for this wire to survive 'in shape' like it is, the outer material would have had to give way without major trauma or the wire would have suffered more deformation.  It is possible that the outer material deteriorated and fell away in chunks over time, but we need to understand more about how these things were constructed at the time to know that. 

The character of the wire within a loop also needs to be better understood to know if it would stand free in its 'loop' shape or not too.

I hope Jeff Hayden can provide more details from the source his recent post came from - and it would be good to get a better picture of an old loop (it appears what he was trying to show was one that was cut-away but hard to tell).

There are also tell-tale bits of something lying on the sediment below the wire in some of these shots that is suggestive of shielding that fits around such a wire.  Then there are the other 'wiring' segments nearby - and components that Jeff Hayden is seeing (although I still having trouble with that picture - but I'm not the greatest at this stuff for sure).  All of that must be better understood - but this is one strange conglomeration of goods - I don't think the loop fishing leader.

Time will tell.  But I think TIGHAR was right to say they're going to need a bigger boat...

LTM -
Jeff, the picture is courtesy of Bell labs' and you're right, it's an awful pic, but it's the only one I can find at the moment of the 'insides'. Short of buying one on fleabay and taking it apart... that might be the only option.
The pics' I posted re: another bit of wire may need amending. The object is what I suggested, the wire bit may not be IMHO. I always take notice of other peoples post and therefore always, I am open to correction on the basis of what other people have shown. That's how progress is made
Wasn't it police chief Brodie in the film jaws who suggested they might need a bigger boat on seeing the size of the shark?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 03, 2012, 11:13:37 AM

A bigger boat?   Yes, and the Glomar Explorer comes to mind.  Designed to find, go to, look at, go down to, and bring up parts of a Soviet Nuclear Sub for the CIA (the cover story was that the Hughes Corp. wanted to explore the sea bottom for the mining of magnesium)Sure.
Maybe TIGHAR  could put in a bid if/when it next comes up on eBay.  I think it is now in Indonesia supporting oil drilling operations.

Seriously now and obviously, another ROV operation with the capability of bringing up promising candidates  for examination and analysis is needed between now and the Big Boat recovery  operation.  But Then, RIC knows that and is prolly in the planning stages for that step.  GO! RIC, get that thing!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 11:50:01 AM
o an jeff i think i solved the wire rope issue
That framework in the background of your last pic' Richie. It's too flimsy to be a structural part of the airframe. Whatever it was clad in has long gone so, it must have been very thin in comparison to aircraft skin. Perhaps it was designed to contain something?

who said it was frame work i never ?

in the pic i posted yesterday, i have outlined stuff that appear man made, they are  unrelated to ur wire which u can see in image, u posted about ur pic today  an i only had inverted edited pic of yesterday to show better view of  ur wire ? thats why i said dismiss my lines ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 11:53:39 AM
will let yous decide if these still's show electrical wire  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 01:32:19 PM
will let yous decide if these still's show electrical wire  :)

Richie, wire pic3. The end of that wire/rope/cable, not the 2 loop ones, the one on the right. It doesn't look like wire/rope/cable at the end section, it looks like, well, it doesn't look right. Can you get a better handle on that pic?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 01:46:12 PM
if u right click an save, an open in paint or windows an zoom in, its cables running too 1 spot, an sum are broke its like a wireing harness like u have in car behind dash  bunch of snapped cables an sum that are not because i actully thought it cud be the black rope stuff u have on a dinghy that runs round top but it is actully wires

also if u study images of wire further up vid, what looks like rope is actully a kind of conduit wat u put cables thru in sum places u can see were conduit has wore away an revels thin wire   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 01:49:01 PM
if u right click an save, an open in paint or windows an zoom in, its cables running too 1 spot, an sum are broke its like a wireing harness like u have in car behind dash  bunch of snapped cables an sum that are not because i actully thought it cud be the black rope stuff u have on a dinghy that runs round top but it is actully wires

also if u study images of wire further up vid, what looks like rope is actully a kind of conduit wat u put cables thru in sum places u can see were conduit has wore away an revels thin wire
The one I am trying to examine is pic 3. It looks similar to this
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 02:03:20 PM
oh sorry will try get a close up for ye  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 03, 2012, 02:25:37 PM
Richie and Jeff----
on the still that you named poss+windows----at 13:43:44:14--
to the left of the red out line, at 270* there is what appears to be a wire with a shadow. ther is a circular shape, like maybe a starter, or a generator--
Can you check that out?
Tom
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 02:28:47 PM
sorry jeff camera dont go close enough, but judgeing by what i can make out in minibridge, they appear to be bolted... through were loop starts an finishes  :(
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 02:35:46 PM
tom it appears to be a mechanical object as 1 wire goes in an 1 out on opp side 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 03, 2012, 02:36:39 PM
and at 13:43:41:23, look just under the 13, under what looks like a round tube. Appears to be something louvered, of finned, like an oil cooler?(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 03, 2012, 02:41:39 PM
Richie--
"winder" looks like a generator----the aft section. The bearing housing with the cooling holes. Cant see what the is on top of it, and dont know if they would have mounted the regulators on top (doubt it). But certainly does look like an electric motor of some kind.
(now that I figured out how to outline and post pics, maybe I can be of more help)
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 02:54:54 PM
I'm getting there Richie. Something doesn't sit right with this end of the cable. It runs through an alloy duct or an outer skin/inner skin, Red lines. The blue arrow points to something that holds it in place. The end is looped, white circle. Whatever this cable is it's attached to the wreckage. You found something similar Richie on the other side of the fork in the cable. That appeared to be attached to an object very similar to this one.
I think I have worked out why the cable appears to be the thickness of rope in this section, I can't find 1 frame where the ROV isn't in full flight while pointed at the cable therefore giving it a blurred appearance IMHO
I'll try some different imaging software that can compensate a bit better for motion sickness.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 03:04:44 PM
i am not into planes an stuff that fly in air  :o so i just highlight stuff i know like windows, doors, engine props, wheel struts, tail parts, etc or i cud prob post some damning evidence,  as too wat were looking at, so go off what u guys reply really to get idea of what to look for...

things don't disappear, an when i seen finding Amelia on discovery, i decided to have a nose at story which brought me ere to Tighar, up till then i thought it had well been solved even the film "night at the museum" didn't flick the switch till i seen documentry

 :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 03:12:48 PM
here is a close up off earlier part ov video but same cable an it has conduit round it notice there is black line running thru it...

i think it may be earth strap as it seems to break off in places 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 03:25:07 PM
another american project am involved in, is of notes found on deceased person who was murderd,  an he had paper in pocket in code an fbi have asked for help see pic's below

it is no gain to me wether these are solved or not i just like to help others out

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 03, 2012, 03:32:36 PM
Tom,   I don't think the object you pointed out in the poss window still is a generator or anything like that. IMHO it is too far from where I would expect engine parts to be but right where I would think to look for a guage out of the overhead instrument panel. In fact, having disassembled any number of old project cars, it reminds me very much of the backside of a speedometer with the protruding part in the center where the driven cable would go and the wires for the lights to illuminate the dial side and/or warning lights. What guages were in the overhead panel and which, if any, were cable actuated. I think that is what this object is, IMHO. LTM-  John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 03, 2012, 03:39:29 PM
Tom,   Not sure if the fins would be an oil cooler. Again, seems too far from where I would expect engine parts. How about louvers on a fresh air system to keep bugs and whatnot from blowing into the cockpit? My 1956 Ford has air intakes behind the grill that could swallow a small turkey that feed fresh air to the heater blower and cabin vents. The intakes are covered with wire mesh from the factory. Does anyone know what type of fresh air system the electra had, other than opening the side windows or roof hatch? I do agree that they definately look like aluminum louvers. What they are for is the question.  LTM-  John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 03:56:39 PM
remember the fact, it takes over 3 mins for the rover to get top to bottom ov video, an the rov is at same distance from reef bed, most of time, yet it takes rover at least 30 seconds from orignal postion to thump on to ground so gives u idea of scale only for cable straps i would still be thinking i was seeing rope, an thats even after at least 600 still pics an say 5 hours ov re runs of video

 :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 04:24:46 PM
remember the fact, it takes over 3 mins for the rover to get top to bottom ov video, an the rov is at same distance from reef bed, most of time, yet it takes rover at least 30 seconds from orignal postion to thump on to ground so gives u idea of scale only for cable straps i would still be thinking i was seeing rope, an thats even after at least 600 still pics an say 5 hours ov re runs of video

 :)

Richie, I have done some preliminary work on your note but, I don't think We should be doing that in this forum. I have worked 2 trails re: the writer of the note so far but, you're gonna have to give me your e-mail ad' as this shouldn't be aired in the public domain. Is this case still within the USA jurisdtiction or, are we outside?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 04:31:42 PM
haha its richieconroy@hotmail.co.uk an if u av worked that note out will give u gold star  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 04:34:48 PM
it still on going an there is other notes 2 years av been studying these   :o
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 04:36:37 PM
here is the link if u wanna get involved  :) http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/march/cryptanalysis_032911
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 04:43:42 PM
i know most of what the notes say, but sum dont even make sense even to a scouse person who is used to chattin in code  ::)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 04:49:40 PM
i know most of what the notes say, but sum dont even make sense even to a scouse person who is used to chattin in code  ::)
I can't understand Scouse, it wasn't one of the languages offered at school :)
My boy was up the 'pool a few weeks back visiting his girlfriend, she's at uni there he's at uni in chichester. She had to translate for him !
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 05:03:22 PM
thought u were american  ;), wat uni does ye daughter in law go ? we have got all the contracts for hope uni in childwall been there main contractors for 4 years  an ye am a scouser who works an pays taxes before u comment lol
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 05:09:47 PM
Back to the ROV footage. I can't get a handle on these cables!! There has to be more than 2 but for the life of me I can't work out which one goes where. As soon as they go out of shot I lose the thread. On the positive side the cable at the top looks the same as the cable at the bottom but, IMHO they are not one continuous length of cable. Why would they have fixtures on them that don't appear, at this stage anyway, do anything except guide them. I have checked out the fixtures, the cable runs through them and there is no sign of any stops on them, yet, but there's nothing on the fixture that suggests it has or had anything attached to it, strange.
I'll start at the bottom of the cable and work upwards. That doesn't look right either :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 05:14:41 PM
thought u were american  ;), wat uni does ye daughter in law go ? we have got all the contracts for hope uni in childwall been there main contractors for 4 years  an ye am a scouser who works an pays taxes before u comment lol
She's at Liverpool John Moores university, music. Not American but, do lots of work for them, until April then feet up ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 05:33:20 PM
our main work is wen they on half term or summer break  :)

an study the wire rope carefully i h8 being the one to point out the obvious,

 but there is loads of cable straps an untill today i hadnt, but have now noticed, were each cable branches off the main loom line u can see were it goes too even if its to infinity its plain to see  :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 03, 2012, 06:07:43 PM
Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom
 
One word, boat. Native people fish from boats or outrigger canoes, you have seen pictures of outrigger canoes, haven't you? What do you think they used them for, only for joy riding the girlfriend on Saturday night? It was common to sail many miles offshore to fish from these canoes. (Outrigger canoes are still very popular. Just walk along the harbor in Papeete and you will find racks holding many many canoes. Go down to the harbor at lunch time and you will see ten's of them out racing each other. On more remote islands you find them being used every day.)

In the second part of your post you imply that fishing leader would not be found down a 800 meters. If the fishing line broke while fishing above the Marianas trench, then the Trieste would have found the leader at the bottom of the trench, 36,000 feet down (about 12,000 meters.) Fishing leader wire is made of metal, it has a specific gravity greater than seawater, it SINKS.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 03, 2012, 06:35:29 PM
Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom
 
One word, boat. Native people fish from boats or outrigger canoes, you have seen pictures of outrigger canoes, haven't you? What do you think they used them for, only for joy riding the girlfriend on Saturday night? It was common to sail many mile offshore to fish from these canoes.

In the second part of your post you imply that fishing leader would not be found down a 800 meters. If the fishing line broke while fishing above the Marianas trench, then the Trieste would have found the leader at the bottom of the trench, 36,000 feet down (about 12,000 meters.) Fishing leader wire is made of metal, it has a specific gravity greater than seawater, it SINKS.

gl
sorry but fishing line wouldnt even show up in rov vid spec, specially the one u suggest that is see thru
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 03, 2012, 06:54:43 PM
here is the link if u wanna get involved  :) http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/march/cryptanalysis_032911
Sent it off to Quantico, see what comes back
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 03, 2012, 09:38:07 PM
Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom
 
One word, boat. Native people fish from boats or outrigger canoes, you have seen pictures of outrigger canoes, haven't you? What do you think they used them for, only for joy riding the girlfriend on Saturday night? It was common to sail many mile offshore to fish from these canoes.

In the second part of your post you imply that fishing leader would not be found down a 800 meters. If the fishing line broke while fishing above the Marianas trench, then the Trieste would have found the leader at the bottom of the trench, 36,000 feet down (about 12,000 meters.) Fishing leader wire is made of metal, it has a specific gravity greater than seawater, it SINKS.

gl
sorry but fishing line wouldnt even show up in rov vid spec, specially the one u suggest that is see thJFK

Richie, a fishing leader is a metal wire section that fastens to nylon fishing line that "may" be the see through variety. The leader is designed with swivels at both ends so a lure or baited Hook doesn't just twist round and round. The wire section varies from inches to feet in length. Fishing for larger fish such as sailfish is done with all metal (wire) line. Commercial fishermen like the tuna boat that loaned TIGHAR it's helicopter use heavy wire lines with thinner wires attached with hooks. These are the "long lines" that are referred to in this thread.   The see thru nylon stuff is for relatively light sport fishing.   Gary is referring to real wire fishing line.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 03, 2012, 09:45:46 PM

Richie
The Electra had a "VEE" radio antenna that had two wires that stretched from a Vee  shaped fixture above the cockpit one each to each of the two vertical tail structures.  Looks to me that the cable1.jpg pic in your post 747 on page 50 is one of those wires attached to a vertical tail structure.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 03, 2012, 11:48:39 PM
Here's a little bit of info' on RDF antenna:
Airplanes in flight accumulate electric charges52,53 that cause radio noise interference.

O.K., I've been having fun but now it's time to cut to the chase. At the risk of giving away my age, when I was young (make that VERY young) I had an AM radio on the nightstand next to my bed. I would fall asleep listening to soft music in my bedroom lit by the warm orange glow from the radio's tubes shining out through the ventilation holes in the back of the radio. (For those who do not know what a radio tube looks like, I am attaching a photo of several types and also go here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_tube).) The back of the radio was made out of some kind of fiberboard. When I removed the back (they were made easy to remove so that you could replace the tubes when they burned out) I found the loop antenna mounted on the inside of the back. It was designed to work on the AM broadcast band, 535 kc to 1600 kc, just slightly above the "beacon band" (190 kc to 535 kc) which was the band used for radio direction finders, it still is. This is where the standard direction finder frequencies used in Earhart's time, 375 kc, 400 kc and 500 kc, 800 meters, 750 meters and 600 meters wave lengths. Itasca was transmitting homing signal on 500 kc/600 meters. The loop antenna inside my radio consisted of dozens of turns, or coils, of wire. There was a reason for this.

It turns out that a loop antenna designed for direction finding should contain a length of wire equal to 0.08 wavelength for optimum performance but it can also be tuned to work on nearby frequencies. So the loop antennas used on aircraft radio direction finders do not have just one or two coils, but many coils. Do the math. Looking at the photo of Earhart mugging with the antenna, it appears that the loop is about one foot (30 cm) in diameter. Multiply by Pi and the circumference is a little more than three feet, let's call it one meter. The loop was designed to cover wavelengths between 600 to 1500 meters, let's say it was optimized for the standard direction finder wavelength of 800 meters. Multiply the 800 meters by 0.08 and you find the amount of wire in the loop is 64 meters long. Since the circumference of Earhart's loop is about one meter then there had to be 64 coils of wire inside it. The picture from the ROV shows only two coils so it ain't an RDF antenna. (And yes, they use very fine wire so 64 meters does fit inside the static shield.)

Also, the static shield has to be made out of a non-magnetic, conducting material, usually copper or aluminum. Where did that go?

(Does anybody else remember the tube testing machines which, at least in Chicago, were found in drugstores, for some reason. When your radio stopped working you pulled the tubes and carried them down to the drugstore. Looking at a table on the self test machine, you found the listing for your tube, placed it in the right sized socket, followed the instructions for your type of tube, set the various switches and then read the meter. If the reading was not in the correct range then you had found the bad tube and you bought a replacement tube, they were kept in a locked cabinet making up the base of the testing machine, you had to call the druggist over. If the first tube tested O.K. then you tested the rest of your tubes until you found the bad one. Too bad Earhart didn't have a tube tester machine.)

gl


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 02:32:38 AM
gary the df on howland weren't turned on anyway till at least 7am in the morning of disappearance because battery had run low during nite trying to contact amelia an thought it was not needed as she had fred noonan aboard,

in video footage of lae take off, u see fred helping amelia climb onto wing then proceed in to electra cockpit not bad for someone who is bladdered,

amelia telegram ed either her husband or newspaper stateing she was feeling illl due to petrol fumes

an that was before lae take off, so can imagine what it would be like fully loaded, no doubt fred being an hardcore drinker they say prob had straw going in to reserve tank didnt help

a few things bother me about the flight in general...

amelia on take off from lae, diverted round weather front, before joining planned flight path which add's at least an hour on to time of arrival ?

the electra was fine tuned to take off fully loaded, if tanks emptied 1 by 1 then correcting balance of weight due to one wing tank full to opp side tank empty would that give false reading on instruments ?

also if they corrected  flight path due to head wind - side wind, an didnt adjust these back as plane got lighter would it be possible while the compass states ur heading north still, they could have blowin well off flight path while still heading north on compass reading ?       
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 04, 2012, 06:10:36 AM
John--
I didnt see any apparent threads on the nose end of this 'cylinder' to retain a tach cable. Might be there. I was going by the shape and apparent size of the target. About the size of a Bendix generator, or starter. May be the electric motor for landing gear retraction. I have no pictures of that, other than a large "flywheel" looking apparatus. I'll try to fing that pic. Insted of an instrument like a tach, it seemed larger in diameter like an electric motor.
I'm probably wrong.  But, we are seeing all sorts of different debris, and if the wings and undercarriage were torn off by the reef, well, the motor has to be somewhere. I looks to me that there is a random pattern so this debris field. Maybe If Richie and Jeff can string these pics together in like  panagram, we can study the debris field closer.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 04, 2012, 06:17:17 AM
Gary,  I don't think we can write off the RDF just yet. What type(s) of wire were used for the coils and the inner loop? Seems to me that it would probably have been a thinner guage of wire to have been wrapped inside of the loop. Two dissimilar metals in a salt water environment is the perfect situation for a galvanic reaction which, I would think, be more than capable of dissolving a thin wire over the course of 75 years of submersion. I might be wrong, but I don't recall the plane being equipped with any sacrificial zincs. Not surprising as it was never intended to be immersed in salt water. I know that I've needed to change the zincs on my boats a couple of times and they've never spent 75 years in the water.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 04, 2012, 06:21:50 AM
As for the Louver looking thing, I dont recall anywhere on the airframe any louvers. Maybe in the cabin. But it does look like it has a finned configuration. Ideas?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 04, 2012, 06:22:44 AM
Tom,  It wouldn't necessarily have to be a threaded connection. I have seen some that use a 'c' clip or have a squeeze type clip built into the end of the cable housing. Depending on how it was mounted, it might be a bit hard to reach up and unthread the cable connector where it might be easier to squeeze a clip to remove it. Again, we don't have anything definitive scale wise to go by, but in looking at various pictures of the cockpit there are diffeerent sizes of guages visible, some fairly large. You may be right, it could be a starter or generator as well. Who knows what got tossed where during th break up and following years.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 04, 2012, 06:28:13 AM
Tom,  I surfed the web for a bit looking for a purpose for the louvers and came up empty thus far. To me they look like louvres and not slots. I play with old cars and not planes, but the oil coolers I have seen have slotted fins just like a radiator to allow the most unrestricted airflow possible. Louvers are more for directing the airflow one way or another. Maybe mounted up behind the panel to direct the outside, or even heated, air down toward our intrepid crew's feet? I don't know. I will kep looking.   LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 08:33:23 AM
can anyone make out a shape, or have a idea what this could be have been on it 2 hours an my mind has gone blank..  :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 10:15:30 AM
cud these objects be same thing ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 10:38:56 AM
Yet again, while we were debating the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' the answer was again staring us in the face. Take a look at the first image. The little blue hole is where the cable goes from the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' through the fuselage roof into the cockpit. The yellow lines outline the 'imprint' of the mounting used to secure it to fuselage roof. There's even a part of the inner skin of the fuselage ceiling dropped down, again with convinient hole to route cable. The third picture is the mounting used to hold the RDF antenna 'coral outcrop' to the top of the fuselage which I posted before. The last picture is of a ditch and settle aircraft wreck, shallow water, with the RDF (it's in there somewhere). Note this wreckage hasn't had to endure the reef/waves/storms/tides of TIGHARs one or the 300 metre slide down a volcanic outcrop. That's why it looks so pristine, if you can make it out through the growth all over it. Photo courtesy of PacificWrecks.com, Kevin Denlay.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 10:55:04 AM
or do these match up better
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 11:15:51 AM
or do these match up better

Did they carry parachutes? take a look at what Freds stood next to on the ground.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 04, 2012, 11:37:32 AM

Gary
We only had one radio, a big cabinet piece of furniture in the living room.  Went to Wallgreen's Drug Store to test and get replacement tubes when radio crapped out.  A real chore, had to take the back off, look in to see if ya could spot the unlit tube (if ya were lucky), take them all out if ya weren't lucky, put them in a paper bag, walk down to the Wallgreens store, etc.  A real project.

During the War years my Grand Father had a crystal SW radio  and I used to listen to War news on the headset  I forget the station, prolly BBC or its wartime equivalent.  Pretty exciting stuff for a kid.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 04, 2012, 12:18:42 PM

Richie
With respect to fuel usage and plane balance, pilots are taught to adjust the fuel usage from tank to tank with some frequency (say every half hour or hour ) as the flight progresses in order to maintain balance.

What AE did or didn't do is unknown to us.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 04, 2012, 12:18:53 PM
Gary,  I don't think we can write off the RDF just yet. What type(s) of wire were used for the coils and the inner loop? Seems to me that it would probably have been a thinner guage of wire to have been wrapped inside of the loop. Two dissimilar metals in a salt water environment is the perfect situation for a galvanic reaction which, I would think, be more than capable of dissolving a thin wire over the course of 75 years of submersion. I might be wrong, but I don't recall the plane being equipped with any sacrificial zincs. Not surprising as it was never intended to be immersed in salt water. I know that I've needed to change the zincs on my boats a couple of times and they've never spent 75 years in the water.  LTM- John
Copper wire is used to make the coils inside the anti-static shield. All the coils were made out of the same wire so why are there two coils left? They should all be left or they should all be gone. And where is the anti-static shield which was made out of metal. The RDF antenna  should look like the one in this picture tht was posted later.
(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1368)

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 04, 2012, 12:27:54 PM
or do these match up better

Did they carry parachutes? take a look at what Freds stood next to on the ground.
Those are two standard seat pack parachutes.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 12:32:27 PM
or do these match up better

Did they carry parachutes? take a look at what Freds stood next to on the ground.
Those are two standard seat pack parachutes.

gl
Doubt very much if they have survived but, you never can tell.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 04, 2012, 12:33:38 PM
or do these match up better
What you labeled as "latch hooks" are actually props to hold the door open slightly in flight so that Noonan could use the driftmeter to take observation directly behind the plane which is necessary when the drift angle is small.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 01:16:31 PM
have a guess at what is in white box, if u struggle to work it out take a couple steps away from computer screen an look again   :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 01:25:24 PM
have a guess at what is in white box, if u struggle to work it out take a couple steps away from computer screen an look again   :)

It's the remains of a radial engine Richie, can you recognise the remains of the cowling at the top + latches
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 01:33:31 PM
yes an half of the propeller on floor in front of it  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 01:48:59 PM
Bendix had a number of patents for RDF antenna pre-1940. This is the most likeliest one to have been used, patent application 1935. If you want me to point out every single component from the ROV footage I will have a go but, don't expect miracles. Thin strands of copper wire? Sealant?  resin? outer skin of soft metal? soldered joins? The stuff most likely to survive salt water corrosion after being exposed during the shredding on a coral reef and the slide down a volcanic outcrop to 300 metres are interior construction parts made from alloy, these would be the last to be exposed to salt water. That said, we still don't know the exact Bendix antenna used or the PFM box that goes with it, there is still some dispute as to which one was on board at Lae, see cockpit photo TIGHAR website. Here’s a couple of links. The first is the most likely suspect and the second is all Bendix RDF antenna.

http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=82hpAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_pctT46-OcGz8QP4-5GZDw&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Bendix%20shielded%20wire%20loop%20antenna&f=false (http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=82hpAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_pctT46-OcGz8QP4-5GZDw&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Bendix%20shielded%20wire%20loop%20antenna&f=false)

http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=bendix+rdf+loop+antenna&hl=en&cp=33&gs_id=8h&xhr=t&q=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&prmdo=1&tbm=pts&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=9544add527a35883&biw=1600&bih=795 (http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=bendix+rdf+loop+antenna&hl=en&cp=33&gs_id=8h&xhr=t&q=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&prmdo=1&tbm=pts&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=9544add527a35883&biw=1600&bih=795)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 04, 2012, 02:01:48 PM
finally found a place for this funnel shaped object in pic it has annoyed me for weeks  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 02:09:52 PM
Gary,  I don't think we can write off the RDF just yet. What type(s) of wire were used for the coils and the inner loop? Seems to me that it would probably have been a thinner guage of wire to have been wrapped inside of the loop. Two dissimilar metals in a salt water environment is the perfect situation for a galvanic reaction which, I would think, be more than capable of dissolving a thin wire over the course of 75 years of submersion. I might be wrong, but I don't recall the plane being equipped with any sacrificial zincs. Not surprising as it was never intended to be immersed in salt water. I know that I've needed to change the zincs on my boats a couple of times and they've never spent 75 years in the water.  LTM- John
Copper wire is used to make the coils inside the anti-static shield. All the coils were made out of the same wire so why are there two coils left? They should all be left or they should all be gone. And where is the anti-static shield which was made out of metal. The RDF antenna  should look like the one in this picture tht was posted later.
(https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=571.0;attach=1368)

gl

Discovery of USS Perch (SS-176)

The Java Sea Reveals a Wartime Secret

In early March of 1942, less than three months into the War in the Pacific, the submarine USS Perch (SS-176) was conducting her second war patrol in the hostile waters of the Java Sea.

After a series of battles against multiple units of the Japanese Imperial Navy, during which Perch was severely damaged and rendered unable to dive safely or to defend herself, commanding officer David Hurt ordered his vessel abandoned.  He sent his vessel to the bottom with an open conning tower hatch in order to avoid its capture.  The entire crew was picked up by the Japanese and sent to Prisoner of War camps, where six members of the Perch crew died as POWs, but the remaining 53 did manage to survive and were liberated at the War's end.

Over sixty years later, an international team of divers and photographers were on a regular dive charter in the waters north of Surabaya City, Java when the vessel's sonar revealed a long slender object on the sea floor that merited investigation.  Vidar Skoglie and dive team members Kevin Denlay, Dieter Kops, Mike Gadd, and Craig Challen soon found a wreck at a depth of approximately 190 feet.  Although the divers immediately knew that the wreck was a submarine, they were unsure of its identity until they discovered a plaque on its conning tower.  Even under a layer of more than a half-century of marine growth, the large lettering of the plaque could be read: USS PERCH SUBMARINE.

Photographer Kevin Denlay contacted the Naval Historical Center in Washington, D.C., and the USS Bowfin Submarine Museum, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in early December of last year and shared the news of the team's discovery.  He provided the museum with still photographs and a DVD of the dive which clearly reveal, despite low visibility conditions, evidence of the identity and final resting place of the vessel.

When Perch survivor Robert Lents was contacted in his Arkansas home, he expressed great interest in the discovery.  He especially would like to see what his boat looks like after all these years.  Not only that, he added, "I left $35 in my locker on the boat.  It's probably still there."  The wreck is protected under U.S. and International laws, so Bob's savings and as well his battling submarine lie at the bottom of the Java Sea, undisturbed.
Scuttled intact, appart from a few patched up shell holes and resting gracefully on the flat bottom of the Java Sea, war memorial.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 04, 2012, 03:55:00 PM
Somewhere between the first pic and the fixture in the second pic the wire/cable changes from being wire/cable to a solid lump of black metal.
Pic one:
Blue: solid lump of metal
Yellow: 2? holes
Green: Loop at end
Red: small odd circle/wheel/pulley? surrounded by trashed alloy

Pic 2:
Blue circle: The fixture

I'll see if I can find the join, that might give us a better idea of what the wire/cable used to do
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 04, 2012, 04:02:14 PM
Bendix had a number of patents for RDF antenna pre-1940. This is the most likeliest one to have been used, patent application 1935. If you want me to point out every single component from the ROV footage I will have a go but, don't expect miracles. Thin strands of copper wire? Sealant?  resin? outer skin of soft metal? soldered joins? The stuff most likely to survive salt water corrosion after being exposed during the shredding on a coral reef and the slide down a volcanic outcrop to 300 metres are interior construction parts made from alloy, these would be the last to be exposed to salt water. That said, we still don't know the exact Bendix antenna used or the PFM box that goes with it, there is still some dispute as to which one was on board at Lae, see cockpit photo TIGHAR website. Here’s a couple of links. The first is the most likely suspect and the second is all Bendix RDF antenna.

http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=82hpAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_pctT46-OcGz8QP4-5GZDw&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Bendix%20shielded%20wire%20loop%20antenna&f=false (http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=82hpAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_pctT46-OcGz8QP4-5GZDw&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Bendix%20shielded%20wire%20loop%20antenna&f=false)

http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=bendix+rdf+loop+antenna&hl=en&cp=33&gs_id=8h&xhr=t&q=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&prmdo=1&tbm=pts&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=9544add527a35883&biw=1600&bih=795 (http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=bendix+rdf+loop+antenna&hl=en&cp=33&gs_id=8h&xhr=t&q=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&prmdo=1&tbm=pts&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Bendix+shielded+wire+loop+antenna&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=9544add527a35883&biw=1600&bih=795)
The first is NOT the most likely suspect   since it a patent for a fixed, non-rotatable, not an RDF, antenna mounted under the cowling ring surrounding the engine.

I am attaching the most likely patent description and you will see that it calls for multiple turns of wire in the antenna, (just like I said) not just two as shown in the ROV picture. And what became of the spacers that the antenna coils were threaded through to maintain their spacing? Not to mention, what happened to the metal shield?

I am also attaching a description of the type of RDF mounted in the plane, the MN-5.


gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 05, 2012, 04:11:00 AM
I think we've been taken for suckers Re: the wire/rope/cable being vee shaped or, branching off from one wire/rope/cable into two/wire/rope/cable. If you look at this still the wire/rope/cable on the right continues its downard path hugging the 'coral outcrop' outline as it does so. But the one on the left comes out from underneath the 'coral outcrop'?
That would exclude the vee tail antenna.
What about the Chinese/Korean fishermen? Were they fishing here before whatever it is slid down the reef slope? or did they get unlucky recently and it slid down ontop of their line as they were fishing? What sort of fishing would they have been doing for that to happen? Not long lining for sure, the main cable is held afloat on the surface with a line of floats spaced at regular intervals with the weaker breaking strain lines attached to the main. So for a long line to be trapped underneath the 'coral outcrop' the 'coral outcrop' would have to have fallen onto it at the surface. Trawling? Could be but still, how did it get underneath the 'coral outcrop' I have yet to find anything to do with nets/chains etc.. Trawling along a coral reef would probably guarantee that you lose your net anyway.
So it looks like two different wire/rope/cable. The one on the right we pick up above the door shaped 'coral outcrop' and it goes down hugging the outline of the 'coral outcrop' before I lose it. The wire/rope/cable on the left suddenly appears just below the door shaped 'coral outcrop' but, we can follow it down to its end, the end with the black metal fixture that has a loop in it and one or possibly two holes in it.
More on the 'coral outcrop' that the wire/rope/cable on the right seems to like hugging later.(http://)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 05, 2012, 06:34:02 AM
JEFF------Stop it!!! no dummies, no suckers, no talk like that!. Yep the wire , rope , cable, whatever was a longshot to possibly be from the Electra, but think of it as a hightway that led you to other discoveries. I would think that the Govt. of Kiribati 'may'have records of vessels entering their waters, especially fishing around pristine reefs. Certainly they would want to know, especially if a ship were to run aground, hit a submerged object and dump fuel. I guess Ric and Co would know all about the interworkings of having a ship in someone else's territorial waters. I dont.
IF it would be possible to find out if that information exsists, then it can be determined if it may be fishing cable, towed net cable, or something else. At any rate, the work you have done has opened the eyes of many people to the mystery. Stay with it. Your work will be rewarded with an amazing discovery. No, I'm not clarivoyant-----just very analytical. Your work points to definately aircraft wreckage on the reef at Nikumaroro----and until someone PROVES it isn't NR16020, I think it is. Call me crazy---but youre on it.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 05, 2012, 08:00:26 AM
Tom,  I don't think that Jeff is saying that the wire/rope/cable isn't from the Electra. More that it isn't from the V-antenna. I've been surfing the web looking for a schematic for the wiring harness and overall type of wiring used in the Electra to see what I could find. So far, nothing. My first house was built in 1928 and the wonderful wiring that was in it was all cloth and rubber wrapped copper wire contained within a metal outer conduit which protected the wires and served as a ground. The rubber didn't age well and became very brittle. I ended up rewiring the entire house. My point is, did aircraft manufacturers in the 1930's run the wiring through a similar type of flexible metal conduit? It would protect the wiring quite nicely as well as offer a ground (earth, for our friends on the eastern shore of the pond) and, more importantly, might look very much like a rope whil laying on the bottom of a coral reef. How many circuits would the aircraft have needed? Obviously the instrument panel, radio gear, interior lighting would require electricity. Then the flap motors, landing gear, etc. Lastly the engines would require starter circuits, generator circuits, ignition, etc. How much wiring was there and what would remain of it?  Does anyone have a schematic?  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 05, 2012, 08:03:13 AM
JEFF------Stop it!!! no dummies, no suckers, no talk like that!. Yep the wire , rope , cable, whatever was a longshot to possibly be from the Electra, but think of it as a hightway that led you to other discoveries. I would think that the Govt. of Kiribati 'may'have records of vessels entering their waters, especially fishing around pristine reefs. Certainly they would want to know, especially if a ship were to run aground, hit a submerged object and dump fuel. I guess Ric and Co would know all about the interworkings of having a ship in someone else's territorial waters. I dont.
IF it would be possible to find out if that information exsists, then it can be determined if it may be fishing cable, towed net cable, or something else. At any rate, the work you have done has opened the eyes of many people to the mystery. Stay with it. Your work will be rewarded with an amazing discovery. No, I'm not clarivoyant-----just very analytical. Your work points to definately aircraft wreckage on the reef at Nikumaroro----and until someone PROVES it isn't NR16020, I think it is. Call me crazy---but youre on it.
Tom
The point I was trying to make Tom was, how did it get underneath the wreckage, whatever it is. It's aircraft wreckage for sure but, which aircraft? I'm currently studying DC3 models. We called them Dakotas over here. I know there isn't any recorded losses of them in this area but, we have to cover all possibilities. Military transport?
It's hard to get decent structural photos of Electra but, easier with the DC3.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 05, 2012, 08:07:33 AM
Tom,  I don't think that Jeff is saying that the wire/rope/cable isn't from the Electra. More that it isn't from the V-antenna. I've been surfing the web looking for a schematic for the wiring harness and overall type of wiring used in the Electra to see what I could find. So far, nothing. My first house was built in 1928 and the wonderful wiring that was in it was all cloth and rubber wrapped copper wire contained within a metal outer conduit which protected the wires and served as a ground. The rubber didn't age well and became very brittle. I ended up rewiring the entire house. My point is, did aircraft manufacturers in the 1930's run the wiring through a similar type of flexible metal conduit? It would protect the wiring quite nicely as well as offer a ground (earth, for our friends on the eastern shore of the pond) and, more importantly, might look very much like a rope whil laying on the bottom of a coral reef. How many circuits would the aircraft have needed? Obviously the instrument panel, radio gear, interior lighting would require electricity. Then the flap motors, landing gear, etc. Lastly the engines would require starter circuits, generator circuits, ignition, etc. How much wiring was there and what would remain of it?  Does anyone have a schematic?  LTM- John
John check the pic I posted of the end of the left wire/cable/rope. It's a solid lump of black metal with hole/s and what appears to be a circular bend at the tip?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 05, 2012, 08:23:34 AM
jeff if u read back couple pages some one mentioned that they thought it was vee antenna cable

me personally i don't think it is.... i was thinking more along the lines of it being a earth cable due to its length as it would start from one engine route round plane earth in, wings tail etc then to other engine i.e protection from lightning...

and if it isn't that

the Electra was carrying a life raft dingy, they have that black rope\wire that runs round top think its like a safety rope, so depending on size of raft it could be off that

also if u go back to the picture i posted showing what i thought were anchors, well the rope ends directly  in front of it...

an believe it or not were the anchor is, it is at 11 o clock when ur looking at radial engine pic i posted yesterday an rope is in front of engine

sort of makes sense but i dismissed it on the grounds it was to easy to be that  :)

anyway don't be disheartened jeff, we will find out eventually why it's there

keep up the good work  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 05, 2012, 08:34:57 AM
what we need is someone to stitch together the video still's in a panaromanic  way, i have been doing it but i have only managed to do few still's at a time because it's harder than finding a serial number on these bits of wreckage  will post what i have managed to do so far k

also if ur a captain of a trawler fishing vessel an u see a ship wreak thats ran aground am sure u would be deterred from trawling round that area ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 05, 2012, 08:41:49 AM
right am attaching 2 images bare in mind its first time av done it so dont expect much
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 05, 2012, 09:10:20 AM
Jeff,  Any chance the solid chunk of metal with the holes could be a junction box where two or more of the cables fed in/out? I've seen them curved to fit snugly into a curved structure so it is possible. I would think that a juction box could be a point of failure for the cables to separate as the aircraft is torn apart. Again, I think we need to find out what type of wiring was in use in aircraft to either rule it in or out. The other object that appears to be some type of fitting along the run of the rope/cable may be a clamp to keep it from moving one way or another through a bulkhead.   LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 05, 2012, 09:14:04 AM
Yeah Richie,  That panoramic sure looks like fun to string together   ;D. Not only do you have to crop and rotate, you also need to resize and play with exposure settings too. Sorry, my friend, I have neither the skills nor the computer software to even attempt that. Good luck.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 05, 2012, 10:26:07 AM
jeff one of them rope's is tied to a metal bar underneath what i think is the nose cone

which if it is, then its fair to say who ever tied the rope onto wreckage before it went down reef could have got rope off norwhich city
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 05, 2012, 10:36:31 AM
jeff in this still

top arrow rope tie

bottom arrow poss nose cone

also look at debris field there is loads specially to left of nose cone
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 05, 2012, 11:12:31 AM
jeff in this still

top arrow rope tie

bottom arrow poss nose cone

also look at debris field there is loads specially to left of nose cone
I'm pretty sure we're looking at the fuselage floor where all that junk is sitting in the background and to the left of the door.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 05, 2012, 11:18:54 AM
jeff if u read back couple pages some one mentioned that they thought it was vee antenna cable

me personally i don't think it is.... i was thinking more along the lines of it being a earth cable due to its length as it would start from one engine route round plane earth in, wings tail etc then to other engine i.e protection from lightning...


The Electra was a metal airplane and the skin acts as a "Faraday Cage" so a lightening bolt doesn't penetrate it, the charge travels on the exterior surface so planes do not have an "earthing cable."

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 05, 2012, 11:28:09 AM
Jeff,  Any chance the solid chunk of metal with the holes could be a junction box where two or more of the cables fed in/out? I've seen them curved to fit snugly into a curved structure so it is possible. I would think that a juction box could be a point of failure for the cables to separate as the aircraft is torn apart. Again, I think we need to find out what type of wiring was in use in aircraft to either rule it in or out. The other object that appears to be some type of fitting along the run of the rope/cable may be a clamp to keep it from moving one way or another through a bulkhead.   LTM- John
That wire/cable/rope John looks as though it was designed for work not carrying juice IMHO. It doesn't look as though it would stretch much and that weird metal fitting at the lower end, and the fixture further up. there's something in between Those 2 points that could shed more light on the purpose of this bit of wire/cable/rope.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 05, 2012, 11:46:03 AM

Again
I think that AE/FN acrounged a long rope off the Norwich City, looped it around the Electra (prolly around the empannage) and tied it off to something stationary (the NC?, a Buka Tree?) in order th stabilize the plane against the wind, surf, tide, etc.  Rubbing against the coral wore the rope, it broke, plane went over edge with rope still looped around it   QED
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 05, 2012, 04:15:02 PM

Again
I think that AE/FN acrounged a long rope off the Norwich City, looped it around the Electra (prolly around the empannage) and tied it off to something stationary (the NC?, a Buka Tree?) in order th stabilize the plane against the wind, surf, tide, etc.  Rubbing against the coral wore the rope, it broke, plane went over edge with rope still looped around it   QED

It would surely fit the whole scene, Harry - if that 'stuff' down there is what is suggested.  I agree with Jeff Hayden that it looks more like working line (rope) than electric cable.  If that's what it is and given how it's strung out down the slope (I think that's the orientation, more or less) - it could well be as you suggest.

There were some sort of stores left behind according to the N.C. accounting, and at least one boat left - there could easily have been a bunch of mooring line left on the island among that stuff.  Wonder if we should be looking at pix of N.C. / life boat details - there's that peculiar 'bead' on the line before it splices into a 'loop' (what it looks like): I've done dozens of braided splices like that for mooring loops - but never used a 'bead' like I see there - I wonder what British working lines on tramps tended to look like in the '20's?

Fascinating.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 05, 2012, 05:32:05 PM
Tom,  I don't think that Jeff is saying that the wire/rope/cable isn't from the Electra. More that it isn't from the V-antenna. I've been surfing the web looking for a schematic for the wiring harness and overall type of wiring used in the Electra to see what I could find. So far, nothing. My first house was built in 1928 and the wonderful wiring that was in it was all cloth and rubber wrapped copper wire contained within a metal outer conduit which protected the wires and served as a ground. The rubber didn't age well and became very brittle. I ended up rewiring the entire house. My point is, did aircraft manufacturers in the 1930's run the wiring through a similar type of flexible metal conduit? It would protect the wiring quite nicely as well as offer a ground (earth, for our friends on the eastern shore of the pond) and, more importantly, might look very much like a rope whil laying on the bottom of a coral reef. How many circuits would the aircraft have needed? Obviously the instrument panel, radio gear, interior lighting would require electricity. Then the flap motors, landing gear, etc. Lastly the engines would require starter circuits, generator circuits, ignition, etc. How much wiring was there and what would remain of it?  Does anyone have a schematic?  LTM- John
John check the pic I posted of the end of the left wire/cable/rope. It's a solid lump of black metal with hole/s and what appears to be a circular bend at the tip?

I've said before here several times - this looks like a mooring line - what the black 'bead' is I don't know (and don't know that it's metal) - and the "end of the left wire/cable/rope... solid lump of black metal with hole/s and what appears to be a circular bend at the tip" looks far more like 'stress memory' in the end of a loop on a mooring line -

Not to say 'I told you so' - I don't KNOW - but this line looks alot like what I've described to me.  The bead's a mystery.

If it is a mooring line or piece of line for any boat or shipboard use, it could have come from any number of sources - known or unknown to Kiribatic authorities.  I'm now wondering, just on a longshot - what the lines associated with the N.C.'s boats may have looked like?  The reason I wonder is Harry wondered about use of such a line, or lines, to try to secure the plane on the reef somehow - a possiblity. 

The 'bead' could be a signature item - where does stuff like that appear?  All over the Asian fishing fleet, or maybe an obscure feature found on boats on British tramps of the 1920's?  May be worth digging into.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 05, 2012, 06:31:02 PM
Jeff Hayden---my most humble appologies. I completely misread, and mis understood what you said earlier. Please DO keep up the good work.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on February 06, 2012, 07:04:16 AM
"Rope" - any educated guesses as to how long the rope is, i.e., inches, feet, tens of feet, hundreds of feet etc.?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 06, 2012, 01:44:23 PM
does anyone know what a rocket line looks like  ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 06, 2012, 02:14:46 PM
does anyone know what a rocket line looks like  ?

I'll ask my sister she's a volunteer coast guard

she's going to ask what they use now and also in the past.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 06, 2012, 02:25:34 PM
cheers, apparently it is wat the rescuers of norwich city used to pass supplies
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 06, 2012, 02:36:24 PM
Yes thats in the wiki, also it was used by the coastguards and RNLI in the UK to get lines to vessels in trouble.

Rope can be presserved for a long time in sea water as usually it was covered in tar and other oils to preserve it at sea.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 06, 2012, 02:45:03 PM
does anyone know what a rocket line looks like  ?

Here's an example from WWII (http://landandseacollection.com/id742.html).  Note the smaller line size - it has to travel behind the rocket; of course a larger line could be manipulated between shore and ship once the smaller line was established. 

Here are examples of some rockets  (http://www.cyber-heritage.co.uk/schermuly/lots.jpg) used with such devices.

Flotation line is mentioned in some texts on these - an obvious advantage would be to avoid entanglement on reef structure.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 06, 2012, 04:34:01 PM
thx will check them out  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on February 06, 2012, 06:55:31 PM
re: the rope or line in the ROV video. How about this stuff? It is pot line, used to attach float to fishing pots, about 1/2 inch diameter.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 06, 2012, 07:04:14 PM
does anyone know what a rocket line looks like  ?

Here's an example from WWII (http://landandseacollection.com/id742.html).  Note the smaller line size - it has to travel behind the rocket; of course a larger line could be manipulated between shore and ship once the smaller line was established. 

Here are examples of some rockets  (http://www.cyber-heritage.co.uk/schermuly/lots.jpg) used with such devices.

Flotation line is mentioned in some texts on these - an obvious advantage would be to avoid entanglement on reef structure.

LTM -
It's called a "messenger line," a light line that is then used to pull out a heavier line. It may be necessary when passing a very heavy line to do this twice, a light messenger pulling out a stronger messenger which is then use to pull out the strong line.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 07, 2012, 01:33:23 AM
does anyone know what a rocket line looks like  ?

Here's an example from WWII (http://landandseacollection.com/id742.html).  Note the smaller line size - it has to travel behind the rocket; of course a larger line could be manipulated between shore and ship once the smaller line was established. 

Here are examples of some rockets  (http://www.cyber-heritage.co.uk/schermuly/lots.jpg) used with such devices.

Flotation line is mentioned in some texts on these - an obvious advantage would be to avoid entanglement on reef structure.

LTM -
It's called a "messenger line," a light line that is then used to pull out a heavier line. It may be necessary when passing a very heavy line to do this twice, a light messenger pulling out a stronger messenger which is then use to pull out the strong line.

gl

Thats right the UK coast guards or RNLI crews fire a light line to the target (ship) who then secure the line to a heavier line for the rescuers to pull it back and carry on with their rescue.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 07, 2012, 01:35:08 AM
Richie,

Checking the Wiki the line was fired to the Norwich City Crew 1 1/2 miles south of the wreck.  The prevailing currents would take a line left in the sea further south of the island.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 03:45:10 AM
thx am just trying to narrow down possibility to rope/wire,  as i have found a couple sections of the rope an there is U clamps used to secure 2 ropes together

(http://www.hawkinstraffic.com/images/thumb1.gif) 

so wondering why they could be used ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 05:31:44 AM
in these still's have i got prop right way round ?

1) - back of prop

2) - front of prop

3) - poss balance weight

4) - emblem
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Lisa Anne Hill on February 07, 2012, 10:35:50 AM
Wow. Can I just say, you guys have done fascinating things with this video! Keep up the great work!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 07, 2012, 11:14:56 AM
Richie unless I missed something, that makes 2 engines and 2 props. Keep it up! Need a tail, WITH the N number and the electra decal--
Tom






Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 11:46:11 AM
i dont know about that tom

but i could do with a haynes manual for a electra L10-e  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 12:08:19 PM
Wow. Can I just say, you guys have done fascinating things with this video! Keep up the great work!

thanks Lisa

hopefully we will be able to provide enough evidence, to senior Tighar members to revisit ground already covered

due to cost's, i think we are working on a 1% Yes and 99% No

i think its worth it though  :)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 07, 2012, 12:19:53 PM
I think the Harney Drawings may be the best guide for you. We probably wont find a 'manual' on a 10E, much less her highly modified version. But , the Harney Drawings should be accurate.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 12:27:47 PM
aren't they in this post some were, will have a look but it's the inner workings am after, like floor joists moving parts in an under cockpit  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 07, 2012, 12:35:54 PM
in these still's have i got prop right way round ?

1) - back of prop

2) - front of prop

3) - poss balance weight

4) - emblem
Richie, it's the port side landing gear pushed through the wing from the bottom through the top skin of the wing. The rear of the engine nacelle can be seen at the top of the pic. We are looking at it from the trailing edge of the wing.
Blue arrow the top of the Oleo strut
Yellow arrow gear retract assembly? or various other options here. See Tighar The Nessie Hypothesis for stacks of pics
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 07, 2012, 12:38:50 PM
Richie---like this
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 07, 2012, 12:46:28 PM
Even better, Black arrow gear retraction assy, yellow arrow frame around Oleo strut ? See post 566 for more info (Good work with this image Richie)(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 01:03:18 PM
thx tom it will help gratefully,

jeff it looks more like propeller than strut to me, good job ur ere  :D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 03:23:37 PM
sorry jeff, just like the wire an rope video only shows the obvious, it's when u dig deeper that u can tell rock shaped objects

to man made objects, like the circular wire, like the rope

were just showing items that don't knit in with rock formations or reef beds, if this is going to do anything it's going to highlight the Electra or bits of it, as i cant see it bypassing the area the rove covered before tumbling down reef,  without shedding some parts

so if anything it will confirm the Electra weren't on part of reef were was assumed     

it's called trial an error i suppose

but thank's for ur comments  :)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 07, 2012, 03:47:03 PM
Maybe the psychic lady from Australia was right---and its more to the southeast. Damn---need to go there--
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 03:48:50 PM
i agree it's hard to estimate, but to get an idea u only have to look at other rov footage like of other wrecks titanic etc, from year's gone by, the light on the rov only reaches a certain distance so the lens will only cover what lights do, an when the rov pulls away from rope, at furthest distance from the rope, it looks like shoe lace compared to close up when it looks like elephants trunk

 :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Monty Fowler on February 07, 2012, 05:29:53 PM
I stare at - usually - itty bitty bits of black text all day long, but I think we might be straying a tad into not knowing what we don't know territory, guys. A wise man knows when it's time to take a step back, crack a cold one, and return later in the game for a fresh perspective.

But this is coming from someone who's been kicked in the head a lot   ;D

LTM, who trys to dot all the wee little frickin' i's,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 05:48:37 PM
this post is all what u say i admit  :)

however untill u study the video's over an over, it's then that u start to identify reef an none reef items an things stand out,

for instance u could see a sonar scan of sea floor an not notice anythink but then when sum one points out sumthink, it stares u in the face

believe me i have disregarded so many things in wire/rope video, that i am starting to wonder about  :)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 07, 2012, 06:40:55 PM

Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom

Richie, a fishing leader is a metal wire section that fastens to nylon fishing line that "may" be the see through variety. The leader is designed with swivels at both ends so a lure or baited Hook doesn't just twist round and round. The wire section varies from inches to feet in length. Fishing for larger fish such as sailfish is done with all metal (wire) line. Commercial fishermen like the tuna boat that loaned TIGHAR it's helicopter use heavy wire lines with thinner wires attached with hooks. These are the "long lines" that are referred to in this thread.   The see thru nylon stuff is for relatively light sport fishing.   Gary is referring to real wire fishing line.
No, the tuna boat that supplied the helicopter is a purse seiner, you can tell by the net skiff pulled up onto the net pile in the stern. It uses a purse net, not long lines. To set the net you lower the net skiff that then pulls the net off the stern and makes a big circle around the school of tuna that had been spotted by the "fish captain" flying in the helicopter (that's why they carry helicopters) and then brought back to the stern of the ship. Then the purse is then pulled closed and the net (full of fish) is brought on deck with the power block mounted on the end of the boom. That ship (in the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL9FGsvB3E8&context=C3e269daADOEgsToPDskLamDkGwt34hSiaH9b48rcM)) was built by the Campbell shipyard in San Diego, you can tell by the configuration. I can tell you it is a long climb to the top of the mast where the fish captain watches for schools of fish when not in the helicopter. I have been aboard Campbell seiners in Guam and in Singapore.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 07, 2012, 08:01:25 PM
i agree take a step back

maybe the break will do ye good

 :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 07, 2012, 09:15:47 PM

No, the tuna boat that supplied the helicopter is a purse seiner, you can tell by the net skiff pulled up onto the net pile in the stern. It uses a purse net, not long lines. To set the net you lower the net skiff that then pulls the net off the stern and makes a big circle around the school of tuna that had been spotted by the "fish captain" flying in the helicopter (that's why they carry helicopters) and then brought back to the stern of the ship. The the purse is then pulled closed and the net (full of fish) is brought on deck with the power block mounted on the end of the boom. That ship (in the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL9FGsvB3E8&context=C3e269daADOEgsToPDskLamDkGwt34hSiaH9b48rcM)) was built by the Campbell shipyard in San Diego, you can tell by the configuration. I can tell you it is a long climb to the top of the mast where the fish captain watches for schools of fish when not in the helicopter. I have been aboard Campbell seiners in Guam and in Singapore.

gl

Gosh-o-mighty, Gary, is there ANYTHING you DON'T KNOW ??? :o

You either 'Google' REAL fast and absorb even quicker, or you DUNNIT!!!   8)

Monty, worry not - he who gets kicked in head a lot and survives the dain bramage gains a certain wisdom - I wholly agree.  Time to step back from the coral quarry a bit, me thinks...

By the way, if you think you have permanent damage I know a good attorney out in California  ;)

LTM -
The Milagros Z was built as an 1100 ton purse seiner by Campbell for ZEE Fisheries Inc., owned by John Zuanich (he owned 11 purse seiners based in Guam and their names all included the "Z.").  In 1990 it was brought to the Singmarine shipyards (http://www.keppelom.com/en/content.aspx?sid=2574) in Singapore where it was cut in half and an 800 ton extension plug was inserted, increasing it to 1900 tons, In 1991, while fishing in the Carlolines, the boom fell, knocking a sailor overboard and he was never found. His widow sued Campbell and Singmarine, I represented Singmarine. The boom fell because the topping lift swivel pin worked its way out, allowing the topping lift block to fall. I had to climb the masts on a number of these ships to inspect the topping lift swivel assemblies, in Guam and in Singapore, and I spent several days at sea watching the fishing operations. I had to make three trips to Guam, a trip to Manila and I spent over a month in Singapore preparing our clients and then representing them at depositions in Singapore. The widow lived in Bosnia and the war was on so we had to smuggle her out so that I could take her deposition in Vienna. We went to trial in Federal Court in San Diego. So I guess you're right, there isn't anything I don't know. ;)

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 07, 2012, 09:22:53 PM

Ok---for all of you 'fishing leader' guys-----how far from the village was the ROV when these were taken, AND 800 feet down? HUM--I'll bet 1/2 to 3/4 miles out then 800 down. Fishing leader? I dont think so, but you guys are smarter than me!
Tom

Richie, a fishing leader is a metal wire section that fastens to nylon fishing line that "may" be the see through variety. The leader is designed with swivels at both ends so a lure or baited Hook doesn't just twist round and round. The wire section varies from inches to feet in length. Fishing for larger fish such as sailfish is done with all metal (wire) line. Commercial fishermen like the tuna boat that loaned TIGHAR it's helicopter use heavy wire lines with thinner wires attached with hooks. These are the "long lines" that are referred to in this thread.   The see thru nylon stuff is for relatively light sport fishing.   Gary is referring to real wire fishing line.
No, the tuna boat that supplied the helicopter is a purse seiner, you can tell by the net skiff pulled up onto the net pile in the stern. It uses a purse net, not long lines. To set the net you lower the net skiff that then pulls the net off the stern and makes a big circle around the school of tuna that had been spotted by the "fish captain" flying in the helicopter (that's why they carry helicopters) and then brought back to the stern of the ship. Then the purse is then pulled closed and the net (full of fish) is brought on deck with the power block mounted on the end of the boom. That ship (in the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL9FGsvB3E8&context=C3e269daADOEgsToPDskLamDkGwt34hSiaH9b48rcM)) was built by the Campbell shipyard in San Diego, you can tell by the configuration. I can tell you it is a long climb to the top of the mast where the fish captain watches for schools of fish when not in the helicopter. I have been aboard Campbell seiners in Guam and in Singapore.

gl


Oops. Sorry Gary. I know you can long line for tuna. You are describing the tuna boat that loaned the helicopters for the Gardner overflight but if one tuna boat goes to Gardner for fish then others can. I did look up long line equipment and I think those wires are thinner than the wire in the ROV video.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 07, 2012, 09:31:59 PM

I'd like to see a new thread about Deserted Island, Castaways, and Survival but I don't know how to start it and get it under General Discussion.
Maybe someone can guide me? or start it?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 07, 2012, 09:57:55 PM

I'd like to see a new thread about Deserted Island, Castaways, and Survival but I don't know how to start it and get it under General Discussion.
Maybe someone can guide me? or start it?
That's easy, just go to "General discussions" and near the upper right of the screen you will see the "new topic" button. Click it.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 08, 2012, 03:24:22 AM
Richie,

in the 20's the line fired by rocket would be hemp or sisal, nowdays its polypropalyne (sp)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 08, 2012, 06:12:06 AM
Richie,

in the 20's the line fired by rocket would be hemp or sisal, nowdays its polypropalyne (sp)

According to a 'Wiki' article, polypropylene didn't come in until 1954 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polypropylene).

Nylon showed up much earlier  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nylon) - as bristles for toothbrushes by 1938, and ladies stockings by 1940, but not in use for rope in 1937 for AE's use.  Of course it showed up for parachutes in WWII after silk became harder to find.

Hemp or sisal rope it likely was for the rescue of the N.C. crew.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 08, 2012, 06:24:15 AM
A thought occurred to me about this whole "I think this is..." thread. Even though it is pretty much impossible to say with any certainty that this is the remains of this part or that part, or that the Electra has been found, or hasn't been for that matter, this thread (through the work of Richie and Jeff H.) has isolated stills from the video that may truly contain pieces and parts of AN airplane. Not necessarily THE plane we are hoping for, but a plane nonetheless. If you think about the number of hours that they have spent going over the video frame by frame to isolate the stills worthy of examination and then consider what it would have cost to have paid for this work to be done, it would amount to a significant cost. Now, I'm not saying that this is part of some ingenious plan on the part of TIGHAR Central, but allowing others (Richie and Jeff H) to do the bulk of the work of isolating stills would certainly save some big $$ from the precious amount that helps support the search. The beauty is, now that potentially important stills have been isolated, all that someone like Jeff Glickman needs to do is take his own stills from the original video and process them from the original source material. This eliminates the potential questions that Richie or Jeff H may have manipulated the stills. Think about it, every still has a time stamp in it. How much more convenient could it get? I know Ric in an earlier post commented that our collective imaginations are seeing things in the stills. Maybe so, maybe not. If I had limited funds and thought I could get the job done by others simply by saying that there is nothing there and then letting them have at it while I sat back and watched, what would I do? Pretty slick Ric. Or should we call you Tom Sawyer while we admire our newly white-washed fence? So, am I way off base or has Jeff Glickman been looking into some of the more promising stills? At any rate, I find this thread fascinating and can't stop following it. Thanks again Richie and Jeff H for your efforts. There is something there.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on February 08, 2012, 06:44:28 AM
I've seen old "messenger line" made of braided linen, with a "wax-looking" coating/finish (maybe lacquer?).  It uncoiled really easily from the center of the coil, and didn't tangle.  I doubt it would survive 70+ years in the ocean - something would likely find it delicious to nibble on.
The Norwich rescue ship reported firing messenger lines, but also reported their position was south of the wreck.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 08, 2012, 08:21:40 AM
John---right or wrong, I dont think we will know until the symposium in DC. I belive the Electra is there. Whether it is the pics that Richie & Jeff are showing, or closer to the 'psychic' location, I havent a clue. I must say for the record---I think Richie and Jeff are honest men, doing an honest search, until proven otherwise. I certainly hope so. And---if Jeff Glickman is on this forum, and you are 'able' to talk about this (obviously there may be contractual limitations), I'm sure we would ALL love to here from you.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 08, 2012, 08:33:38 AM
Tom,  Thanks for the reminder. I hadn't seen the dates for the syposium (June 1-3). I live near Annapolis, MD and Alexandria, VA isn't a bad drive. It's on my calendar now.  BTW, I have complete faith in the honesty of both Richie and Jeff H. The comment about Jeff Glickman getting his own stills from the video was meant more toward anyone not in the know from being able to insinuate that we (being Richie and Jeff H) manipulated the stills and then Jeff Glickman reviewed the manipulated ones and not the originals.   LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 08, 2012, 08:43:01 AM
I agree John---I would think that Jeff Glickman would have had first crack at the video and other other pics taken. I think we are all on the same page, and hopefully there will be some positive news from all of this. But---you'll have to admit---its been a fascinating experience!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 08, 2012, 09:47:38 AM
have i missed some think ?

manipulated the stills really ?

if pausing a video, taken a snapshot, opening still in paint, changing file type to j-peg then opening still in windows live photo gallery an altering brightness an contrast to improve image or inverting image then adding color removeing color blah blah blah

if that's manipulating the still's, then guilty as charged

useing photoshop, is the same as what likes of kodak, canon, panasonic, etc use to improve the colors in ur old tired photo's, its good for highlighting outlines etc

bare in mind as jeff hayden said earlier in posts the picture quality in the still Ric gave him was 100% better than what were working with

 :(   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 08, 2012, 11:03:33 AM
A thought occurred to me about this whole "I think this is..." thread. Even though it is pretty much impossible to say with any certainty that this is the remains of this part or that part, or that the Electra has been found, or hasn't been for that matter, this thread (through the work of Richie and Jeff H.) has isolated stills from the video that may truly contain pieces and parts of AN airplane. Not necessarily THE plane we are hoping for, but a plane nonetheless. If you think about the number of hours that they have spent going over the video frame by frame to isolate the stills worthy of examination and then consider what it would have cost to have paid for this work to be done, it would amount to a significant cost. Now, I'm not saying that this is part of some ingenious plan on the part of TIGHAR Central, but allowing others (Richie and Jeff H) to do the bulk of the work of isolating stills would certainly save some big $$ from the precious amount that helps support the search. The beauty is, now that potentially important stills have been isolated, all that someone like Jeff Glickman needs to do is take his own stills from the original video and process them from the original source material. This eliminates the potential questions that Richie or Jeff H may have manipulated the stills. Think about it, every still has a time stamp in it. How much more convenient could it get? I know Ric in an earlier post commented that our collective imaginations are seeing things in the stills. Maybe so, maybe not. If I had limited funds and thought I could get the job done by others simply by saying that there is nothing there and then letting them have at it while I sat back and watched, what would I do? Pretty slick Ric. Or should we call you Tom Sawyer while we admire our newly white-washed fence? So, am I way off base or has Jeff Glickman been looking into some of the more promising stills? At any rate, I find this thread fascinating and can't stop following it. Thanks again Richie and Jeff H for your efforts. There is something there.  LTM- John

I wholeheartedly agree that the work Richie and Jeff H. have put in represents many valuable hours.

I think your meaning about eliminating 'potential questions' means 'in case some wonder', and that it's not an accusation.

I don't think they've done that (nor do I sense you do, but see the point of objectivity needing to be preserved).  I do get concerned that we 'see too much' in some things, e.g. when a picture is inverted / colors enhanced, etc. - not that those aren't fine techniques for a guy like Richie to use to ferret out details.  My question of it would come when it's put before us with a suggestion.  Innocently, I believe - but it has to be realized that we can fall exactly into the trap Ric described of 'seeing things with our collective imaginations'.

So, hat's off to Richie and Jeff H. for their efforts - but I think 'step back' a bit isn't such a bad thought for now, and that it's true that real forensics is a lab-level effort before too many announcements get made.  And I'm not even saying that Richie's and Jeff H's facilities, whatever they are, aren't 'lab level' - in today's world that might be a coffee table with the right hardware and software at hand for all I know.

So I hope none of us misunderstand each other, or good faith efforts that some are making in their own way - that's all.

And agree - Richie's and Jeff H's work is probably too hard and long for them to let it come under that risk too, so I hope they can appreciate what's being said here.

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 08, 2012, 11:39:10 AM
Easy Richie. I am not saying nor insinuating that you or Jeff H have done any manipulating in the sense to put in something that isn't already there. Yes, you've enhanced, lightened, rotated, inverted, etc what is there to bring it out and make it easier to see, but manipulated in the sense of falsifying something, no. What I was referring to are the naysayers and doubters who would seize the opportunity to say "Well yes, there are aircraft parts in that picture. But that picture was manipulated, falsified, etc, by so and so, so it can't be taken at face value." even though there really was nothing more done than changing the contrast so you could better see what is already there. That is why I stated that Jeff Glickman could view what you've found, pull the original source video, and look for himself. It takes the whole question of tampering out of it. Trust me, I've been a police officer for over 22 years. (It's ok Gary, I don't dislike ALL lawyers  ;) ) and I know how it works with evidence. We have all kinds of policies and procedures dealing with taking and submitting pictures because everything is digital and everyone photoshops. Without an original of the source data it is useless. So, Richie and Jeff H, let me state again, I have nothing but the utmost confidence in your honesty, integrity, and work ethic and I thank you for the work you continue to put into this. It's those outside of our group who will question your work when it is proven that there is a plane there, and hopefully the one we want it to be.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Don Dollinger on February 08, 2012, 11:59:29 AM
Any suggestions as to what this little box of tricks used to be?
(http://)

Yep, used to be a rock.  Now its a... its a... its a... wait for it... Its still a rock!

LTM,

Don
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 08, 2012, 02:22:45 PM

Boy, I am glad we got all that cleared up.  Needed to be said and it was said well by all.
Emphasizes how people see things differently, or better yet, as we all have heard before "Different Strokes for Different Folks"

For those of you that have plenty of reading time, I  offer, as an example of seeing things differentl,y,  a book that describes a Native American Indian way of viewing things.  The book is  "Seven Arrows" by Hyemyehost Storm (sp?).
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 08, 2012, 02:55:44 PM
Yes, we don't have to do this. We do it because every little helps. We don't do it for any rewards, all this is done voluntarily and with our best intentions. It might save some time/money/effort of the guys at the pointy end of the stick at TIGHAR so that they can get on with the organising. It's a mystery that needs closure, there's a plane down there, don't know what type yet but, it's a plane.
I'm happy to keep plugging away at less than 3 mins' of video footage for free, no problem. When you look back we have gone from a nice underwater scene of some wire and rope that no one took any notice of to, hold on there! That shouldn't be there, what's that?
So, to recap and not jump to any conclusions, it's a plane of unknown manufacture and type and it's been there a long time, that's all we have for now.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Lisa Anne Hill on February 08, 2012, 04:20:27 PM
Well said, everybody!  :D
It would be great eventually to be able to see the whole area of video in one piece, it's hard to tell where one piece is in context to the rest of them. But as it stands now, I am enjoying the heck out of this thread!
Lisa
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 08, 2012, 04:37:07 PM
sorry didn't mean to come across like that so my apologies in advance,

trust me i could find better things to do with my time, than being a nerd sat at my laptop making shapes out of reef rocks

all night, but am willing to do it because it could be very helpful, to Tighar

an i would like to suggest to any members who likes finding things in photo's, of gardner or the reef floor or of amelia

then get a magnifying glass so u dont have to zoom in on image an lose resolution an sharpness

make sure to look at pics of reef were we think electra was

there is no electra but there is an intresting object about 100 yards from water  :)   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 08, 2012, 04:38:56 PM
jeff u may wanna av a look at these objects i have pointed out with red arrows
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 08, 2012, 04:39:40 PM
Hey Lisa---see any Navy submirsibles at Pearl we can borrow? Oh --while youre at it, maybe a ship with a crane? I know the Navy has this stuff just sitting there---its a shame to just let it rust---we need to take it for a spin and let it breathe!!
Lucky Lady to live on Oahu---
Mahalo Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 08, 2012, 04:44:53 PM
Jeff And Richie---continue--
I circled a target in the blue box--coral doesnt make right angles---see what you can make of this
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 08, 2012, 04:46:53 PM
jeff or anyone get a magnifying glass an look at area were arrow points

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 08, 2012, 04:54:54 PM
cant make it out--but I blue arrowed something to the right of it--dark may be above the surface.
There is also something light colored on the shoreline to the left of Richies red arrow.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Lisa Anne Hill on February 08, 2012, 06:24:16 PM
LOL Tom I will keep my eyes open for one - I can see the shipyard across the harbor from my office 8)! Even though I've been here just over a year, I miss northern California like crazy, especially since it's ski season...
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 08, 2012, 06:53:13 PM
jeff or anyone get a magnifying glass an look at area were arrow points

The white dot is a flaw in the film.  Just to the right of the white dot is a black dot that is probably a real thing.  It might be chunk of coral tossed up on to the reef flat in a storm - or it could be wreckage.  In any case, it's quite large - a meter or more in diameter - and it appears to be submerged so it's not very tall (less than a meter). 

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 08, 2012, 07:15:22 PM
The dark dot is what I was looking at. Is this the 1938 pic? i noticed the ship off the stern of the Norwich City. Ric--youve been there, probably near that spot--how deep would you say the water would be at high tide? I remember you saying that there was a flat part, and relly rough parts with crevasses. I would guess that this is near one of the crevasses and the nessie site (?)
I guess my next dumb question would be, could it be seen from the air? I would assume so, since its in a pic from a plane. So, why do you think the Colorado flight didnt see it? Maybe they werent looking.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 09, 2012, 04:46:41 AM
The dark dot is what I was looking at. Is this the 1938 pic?

Yes. Dec. 1, 1938

i noticed the ship off the stern of the Norwich City.

That's Yanawai, the ship used by the New Zealand Survey.  They had just arrived.

Ric--youve been there, probably near that spot--how deep would you say the water would be at high tide?

Less than a meter.

I remember you saying that there was a flat part, and relly rough parts with crevasses. I would guess that this is near one of the crevasses and the nessie site (?)

This is inshore of the object in the Bevington photo (aka Nessie) roughly half way between the spur and groove area at the reef edge (where the object appears in the Oct, 1937 photo) and the shore.  The area where the black dot is in the 1938 photo is quite rough.  It could be a piece of wreckage that has been washed part way across the reef flat.

I guess my next dumb question would be, could it be seen from the air? I would assume so, since its in a pic from a plane. So, why do you think the Colorado flight didnt see it? Maybe they werent looking.

Or maybe it hadn't washed up yet.  Or maybe it's just a junk of coral.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 09, 2012, 05:18:25 AM
Ok Ric---I figured I'd ask the question of someone who had been there.
Thanks--
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 09, 2012, 06:15:08 AM
Ok, that proves that Ric is following this thread, at least on occasion. Remind me not to play poker with him.   LTM
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on February 09, 2012, 06:38:16 AM
When big chuncks of coral get washed up onto the reef, where do they originate from?  The "spurs and grooves"?  The top surface of the reef?  Deep down the side of the reef?  Does anyone know?
I'm curious to know just what are the forces that tear loose a piece of relatively monolithic structure like a piece of reef that may be thousands of years in the growing.  The violence of storm wave action is obvious, but only reaches a few meters deep from the surface.  How does water manage to get leverage on it, and get it up onto the reef flat?  Is there a "prevailing direction" they tend to move?  If so, then there may be a sort of "debris trail" down-stream of the island, where anything heavy enough to sink would be deposited.  Where I live is a coulee washout area (look up channeled scablands).  Big rocks are piled up where flood waters initially spilled out of the coulee, with the size/weight of rocks getting smaller/lighter the further downstream one looks, in a natural sorting process.  Aluminum aircraft fragments would be further downstream than chunks of coral, or engines.
Am I right to assume the chunks come from the reef edge, just below the waterline?  That's also where TIGHAR suspects the Lockheed was hidden during the flyover.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 09, 2012, 07:19:42 AM
this is a stretch---earthquake activity--
well--its a thought. Samoa has had a few-
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 09, 2012, 10:29:04 AM
When big chuncks of coral get washed up onto the reef, where do they originate from?

Underwater video taken by our divers shows that there are significant overhangs/caves in places along the reef slope at depths of less than 100 feet.  It seems most reasonable that the big chunks of coral that have been thrown up on to the reef flat in some places are the result of uncommonly humongous storms breaking off the overhangs and throwing them up on to the reef flat.  The force that would take is sobering to contemplate but I can't imagine any other source.

Is there a "prevailing direction" they tend to move?

The really bad boys come out of the northwest.

  If so, then there may be a sort of "debris trail" down-stream of the island, where anything heavy enough to sink would be deposited.  ... Aluminum aircraft fragments would be further downstream than chunks of coral, or engines.

That's kind of been my assumption.  I would expect the massive bits - engines, center section, landing gear - to be fairly deep but not far laterally from where the plane went over the edge.  There may also be a debris trail of smaller "dense" components - batteries, radios, gear motor, flap motor, cables, etc. - that broke free and tumbled down the slope as the fuselage came apart.  (But I'm not convinced that we've seen any such debris in the ROV video.)

Components that have more surface area relative to mass  - outer wing panels, empennage, etc. - should be either downstream or thrown up onto the reef flat and shoreline to be scavenged by the locals.

Buoyant components - floor boards, fuel and oil tanks, maybe even the cabin door - might have washed up on the shore or been carried through the main passage into the lagoon to fetch up almost anywhere along the lagoon shore.


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 10:32:07 AM
jeff can u check this still out aswell look in white box under arrow

it looks to me like an emblem to left and letter E but it cud be nothink just need another opinion thx  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 10:56:37 AM
Ric can u tell me anythink about objects that have arrows pointed to them in photo's

photo 1 there appears to be a tree trunk under electra an if u make photo bigger u can make out wavey squiggle silver line

photo 2 is what looks like a shark ?

photo 3 is it just another glint on the water as its on nearly all photo's

photo 4 aerial view off reef i was wondering why the other objects haven't been highlighted or are they just rubbish ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 09, 2012, 11:09:15 AM
Ric and all, somewhere back in this thread I posted about how deep objects can be in the ocean and still be effected by surface storms. Three examples from my diving experience: 1) USS Spiegel Grove- Sunk as a reef off of Key Largo Florida, landed on her side and was later rolled upright and slid backward until her anchor chains came up taught by a hurricane (I can't remember which one). She lies at 120 feet; 2) USS Aeolus- Sunk as a reef off of North Carolina, landed on her side and was later broken into three pieces some of which were righted by hurricane Irene (??). She lies at 110 feet; USCGS Spar- sunk as a reef off of North Carolina, landed on her keel and was later rolled 45 degrees and moved 200 feet by hurricane Earl. She lies at 110 feet. If the reef at Niku has caves and overhangs at 100 feet or less, it stands to reason that severe storms could cause pieces to break off and be tossed onto the flat. If a ship at 120 feet can be rolled and moved by the sea, I hate to think what could happen to an aluminum aircraft.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 09, 2012, 11:12:47 AM
if pic 2 is a shark-----man its Huge. But the water should be pretty shallow right there, so I would think not---.
But the black dot is pretty prevelant--
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 09, 2012, 11:16:07 AM
photo 1 there appears to be a tree trunk under electra an if u make photo bigger u can make out wavey squiggle silver line

If you go frame by frame in a hi-res version of the takeoff film you can see that it's a small bush or short tree on the other side of the runway.
 
photo 2 is what looks like a shark ?

There's a dark shape on the reef edge that I've wondered about for a long time, but there's no indication that it's a man-made object and it's way too big to be a shark (I hope).

photo 3 is it just another glint on the water as its on nearly all photo's

That's a flaw in the photo.

photo 4 aerial view off reef i was wondering why the other objects haven't been highlighted or are they just rubbish ?

The only way to tell for sure whether a mark on a photo is is a real thing or just a flaw in the photo is to have two photos of the same area. Real things will be in the same place on both photos.   The only features that Jeff pointed out are the ones that appear in both photos and are therefore real.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 09, 2012, 11:32:18 AM
Ric--in reference to the humungous storms---do we know of the weather in the area from july2 through july9, and whether there were any exceptionally high and strong tides during that time? In Finding Amelia, you write from Betty's notebook that the water was knee deep during one of the radio transmissions. I'm guessing that the weather comes from the Northwest during the summer months, and was still prevelant post landing. If thats the case, and if the Electra was damaged on the reef, it didnt stand a chance.
I hate to speculate on someone in the rear cabin possibly being tossed around back there by really strong tidal action.
Thoughts?
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 11:36:50 AM
thanks Ric

just thought i would post these photo's as well, ov what i come across yesterday

pic 1 an 2 are of Amelia on electra, pic's are more for tail wheel

pic 3 an 4 are ov same newspaper page, read the column bottom left pic 3 about amelia's bag what she left at lae obviously what she forgot due to the thermos comment :) 

u will probably have to copy an save to comp to enlarge image
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 09, 2012, 12:02:41 PM
Ric--in reference to the humungous storms---do we know of the weather in the area from july2 through july9, and whether there were any exceptionally high and strong tides during that time?

We know from the Itasca and Colorado logs that there was no unusual weather during that time.  We have very specific information about the tides and water level on the reef at Gardner.  High-tide was gradually getting higher during that period.

I'm guessing that the weather comes from the Northwest during the summer months, and was still prevelant post landing.

No.  The weather comes from the NW during storms.  Storms typically occur between November and March.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 12:06:54 PM
has anyone read the newspaper clippings yet top right column, second photo about fuel leakage
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 09, 2012, 12:08:21 PM
ok Ric---got it!
just thinking out loud-
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 12:11:45 PM
jeff or anyone get a magnifying glass an look at area were arrow points

The white dot is a flaw in the film.  Just to the right of the white dot is a black dot that is probably a real thing.  It might be chunk of coral tossed up on to the reef flat in a storm - or it could be wreckage.  In any case, it's quite large - a meter or more in diameter - and it appears to be submerged so it's not very tall (less than a meter).

the black dot is the shadow ov white object prob due to position of sun  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 09, 2012, 12:23:18 PM
has anyone read the newspaper clippings yet top right column, second photo about fuel leakage

There is nothing there about fuel leakage.  The Army accident report does no say anything about fuel leakage.  The airplane was de-fueled after the accident.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 12:26:32 PM
Ric last one

in this photo to left of tree there is 2 items i have arrows pointing to are these Tighar's work tools
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 12:44:52 PM
Ric in the box i have highlighted it says amelia had fuel and oil pipes wrapped to prevent leaks

fuel was spotted at over 30 spots along her course ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 09, 2012, 12:49:09 PM
in this photo to left of tree there is 2 items i have arrows pointing to are these Tighar's work tools

I don't know.  I wasn't there when that photo was taken, but I think it's safe to say that those items are not crucial overlooked evidence in our Earhart investigation. (Sheeesh.)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 09, 2012, 12:56:09 PM
in this photo to left of tree there is 2 items i have arrows pointing to are these Tighar's work tools

I don't know.  I wasn't there when that photo was taken, but I think it's safe to say that those items are not crucial overlooked evidence in our Earhart investigation. (Sheeesh.)

Look more like sunlight shineing through vegitation but have you noticed Fred Tie  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on February 09, 2012, 01:10:23 PM
"...fuel was spotted at over 30 spots along her course..."

To those who may not know, to "spot" fuel means to pre-position a supply of it at previously agreed-upon locations.  It does not mean there were fuel spills.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 01:37:00 PM
ahhhhh my bad sorry

shows what i know about planes  :-[
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 09, 2012, 01:50:45 PM
Try them ---you'll like them!
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 09, 2012, 03:00:49 PM
watched too many air crash investigators  :o

been on 2 never again stick to goin to wales thank haha unless i go by boat  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 09, 2012, 07:39:13 PM
I have possibly located engine number 2. If it is what I suspect it is then it throws into question the assumptions we have made regarding the black squiggly thing caught up in whatever it is that started this forum off. Why did we assume the black squiggly thing was a single object. Could it just as easily be a number of similarly shaped  black coloured objects caught up on whatever that forked thing is?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 10, 2012, 05:32:18 AM
It appeared ( to me) to me a one piece squiggly thing, and unbroken. But, I've been wrong before.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 10, 2012, 06:24:35 AM
Jeff H- Are you thinking the tie downs for the cabin tanks? I wouldn't expect them to all be gathered together in one place although I guess anything could happen. What might they be, if not one length of something?  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 10, 2012, 08:01:04 AM
Jeff H- Are you thinking the tie downs for the cabin tanks? I wouldn't expect them to all be gathered together in one place although I guess anything could happen. What might they be, if not one length of something?  LTM- John
What I am investigating John is the possibility that, if it is the other engine a little further up the slope then, could we be looking at a gaggle of ignition leads wrapped around whatever the forked thing is?
I have requested some photos of the wasp junior with leads in place and, on the bench from some guys in the states who overhaul P and W wasp engines. See what happens.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 10, 2012, 08:17:03 AM
Jeff H- I guess that's possible although they seem a little thick to me to be ignition leads. Without an indication of scale it is hard to guess. I work with old automobiles and not aircraft. Are the ignition leads firmly attached to a coil with the other end clipped to a spark plug on a radial engine or are both ends clipped. I'm thinking that if one end is firmly attached to the ignition source and that was pulled free then I could see all leads pulling from the spark plugs and the group staying together. If, like a car, one end is plugged into the distributor cap and the other to the plugs, I think it less likely that they stay as a group. LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 10, 2012, 09:18:23 AM
Jeff H- I guess that's possible although they seem a little thick to me to be ignition leads. Without an indication of scale it is hard to guess. I work with old automobiles and not aircraft. Are the ignition leads firmly attached to a coil with the other end clipped to a spark plug on a radial engine or are both ends clipped. I'm thinking that if one end is firmly attached to the ignition source and that was pulled free then I could see all leads pulling from the spark plugs and the group staying together. If, like a car, one end is plugged into the distributor cap and the other to the plugs, I think it less likely that they stay as a group. LTM- John
John, from what info I have been able to gather so far they were bolted to the spark plugs and were quite chunky but flexible enough to route them around a radial engine. The twisted copper strands used to make the conductor were fairly hefty, possibly enough to retain the shape of the routing. The insulation properties were extremely high obviously because of the high voltage so, again, possibly insulated enough to remain intact. Plus, they must be fairly robust to survive their location on the engine itself. I requested a photo of some ignition leads recently removed from an engine to see if they retain the shape of the routing they took in and around the engine when it was in service. Plus am searching through patents re ignition leads circa 1930- 1937 to get some specs for them.
In the object ROV footage there are a couple of frames where the ROVer isn't in full flight and, the black squiggly thing looks a bit thinner. A bit like the problem with the wire/rope/ cable in the same named ROVer footage. It's the same diameter all the way down but, when ROVer is
 in full flight it looks a lot thicker due to motion blurring effects.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 10, 2012, 11:08:35 AM

Jeff Victor
How about a post of the still of the 2nd engine up the slope?
Don't leave us here panting.  hehe
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 10, 2012, 11:41:18 AM

Jeff Victor
How about a post of the still of the 2nd engine up the slope?
Don't leave us here panting.  hehe
I'm still working on that Harry, ROVer was in full flight went it went past it. But, having said that, it's on the other side of fuselage remains (good), the coral growth colouring on it is the same as that on the other engine (could that be influenced by the type of metal it's growing on? (good). It is in close proximity to various lengths of black whatever they are's, it has plenty of shaped bits in it with holes, right angles,bolt heads etc...(good), there seems to be a shaft projecting out of the front of this one (good). Trying to get a decent picture of it (bad) but, the signs look promising. John was absolutely correct in his comment about the 'ignition leads' needing a focal point to keep them bunched together, the P and W wasp engine had such a distributor cap assembly, I hadn't thought about that, well spotted John.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 10, 2012, 06:33:16 PM
Jeff H- Are you thinking the tie downs for the cabin tanks? I wouldn't expect them to all be gathered together in one place although I guess anything could happen. What might they be, if not one length of something?  LTM- John
What I am investigating John is the possibility that, if it is the other engine a little further up the slope then, could we be looking at a gaggle of ignition leads wrapped around whatever the forked thing is?
I have requested some photos of the wasp junior with leads in place and, on the bench from some guys in the states who overhaul P and W wasp engines. See what happens.
Jeff
These should help.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 10, 2012, 06:44:19 PM
jeff av been examining what Ur on about, an to me it looks like a tube exiting a yoke ? if thats what its called an were the video goes over tha bit at end of first video, well the start is the front view of that area in second bit were it jumps from 43 mins to 37  dya get me

so the first bit on video footage 1, shud be at end of vid 1 not beginning  ::)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 11, 2012, 12:57:49 PM
Jeff H- Are you thinking the tie downs for the cabin tanks? I wouldn't expect them to all be gathered together in one place although I guess anything could happen. What might they be, if not one length of something?  LTM- John
What I am investigating John is the possibility that, if it is the other engine a little further up the slope then, could we be looking at a gaggle of ignition leads wrapped around whatever the forked thing is?
I have requested some photos of the wasp junior with leads in place and, on the bench from some guys in the states who overhaul P and W wasp engines. See what happens.
Jeff
These should help.

gl

Thanks for the images Gary they should be useful.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 11, 2012, 01:01:27 PM
I thought that the black squiggly thing may be this, or bits of it, tangled up in that forked thingy
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 12, 2012, 07:05:03 AM
The way the wire/rope/cable/ hugs this 'coral plateau' is interesting. It eventually vanishes underneath the 'coral plateau', picture 1. What could cause that to happen?
Take a look at the last 3 pics. See what the arrows point to. This type of feature is used in airframe construction to add strength while saving weight. This looks like fuselage flooring and, that would explain why the wire/rope/cable has vanished from view and, why all the debris ontop of the 'fuselage floor' is laying around flat and level. IMHO
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on February 12, 2012, 12:51:19 PM
Following this thread I cannot help but be reminded of the scene from “A Boy named Charlie Brown” where Lucy, Linus and Charlie Brown and lying on the ground looking up at the clouds and describing the images they see in the cloud shapes :

Lucy Van Pelt: Aren’t the clouds beautiful? They look like big balls of cotton. I could just lie here all day and watch them drift by. If you use your imagination, you can see lots of things in the cloud’s formations. What do you think you see, Linus?
Linus Van Pelt: Well, those clouds up there look to me look like the map of the British Honduras on the Caribbean. That cloud up there looks a little like the profile of Thomas Eakins, the famous painter and sculptor. And that group of clouds over there gives me the impression of the Stoning of Stephen. I can see the Apostle Paul standing there to one side.
Lucy Van Pelt: Uh huh. That’s very good. What do you see in the clouds, Charlie Brown?
Charlie Brown: Well… I was going to say I saw a duckie and a horsie, but I changed my mind.


I guess I must be Chatie Brown because all I see in this last set of stills is the profile of a face (not that I’ve really seen anything in any of the other ones discussed in this thread, save for, perhaps, the landing gear.)

heavy sigh... 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 13, 2012, 06:24:10 AM
It's a struggle for sure Jeff but, ever the optimist, the glass is always half full never half empty. The logic behind the black squiggly thing was based upon 'what black component would survive
For so long and why' that said, the high insulation value of these leads would suffice. That doesn't mean that's what they are, or it is, but it's a possibility.
Scale will remain a challenge simply because there is nothing in the footage that we can take as the datum point from which to measure all else. There is nothing to determine the distance and depth of the field of view.
Example: what was the total distance covered by ROVer in the footage? 20 metres? 50 metres? 100 metres?
When focussing on an object while settled on the bottom, how far is the field of view into the background?
On top of that there is the problem caused by the effect of filming underwater, things appear closer/further away than they actually are, there's a posting re: this effect somewhere in this thread regarding this.
I'm convinced it's airplane so all that's left to do is to...
Convince others
Find out which type
Find sponsor
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Patrick Dickson on February 13, 2012, 06:28:09 AM
and the Electra was carrying "spares" of quite a few parts, wasn't it ??
it could be a debris-field of those items.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 13, 2012, 07:09:49 AM
Spares? if so, not many. Lots of extra fuel for the open water leg.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 13, 2012, 12:20:55 PM
or do these match up better

Hi Richie, could the silver cylinder in this picture be the item you asked about in your #591 reply about the picture from the ROV film?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on February 13, 2012, 12:27:25 PM
What would be interesting would be footage from another area minus rope/wire/cable and black squiggle to see if the background terrain looked the same in terms of coral/rock formations and other stuff.  Might clarify the cloud watching from the possible debries field.

Just a thought  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 13, 2012, 01:00:21 PM
Here's an image taken at only 100 metres (NOT Niku) Now see how difficult the environment is down there @ 100 metres X 3. It's a miracle they got any footage. We should make the most of what we have. Notice the propellor blade and hub? :)
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 13, 2012, 01:57:10 PM
the squiggle black tube is defo not organic.... in the stills

pic 1 u see black squiggle line quite a bit of it in fact just stops ? well white tube now as it is inverted

pic 2 is of the shelf under pic 1 u can see a tube thats L shaped what has a black bracket i think black tube might go into this ?

in pic 3 is a round metal rim i have changed color in still so u can see it better this is directly under L shaped metal tube
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 13, 2012, 02:07:50 PM
i think we need to try getting a better picture of the object in these still's, there is to many straight lines an notice what looks like a engine cowl with encrusted propeller
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 13, 2012, 04:30:12 PM
how are these video's allowed to be youtube ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwJtxpVhAmU
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 14, 2012, 06:13:28 AM
anyone can upload anything to you tube.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 14, 2012, 08:13:04 AM
Hum---you know, the black squiggly is alot more pronounced than the 'gear'. If it were a brake hose, it wouldnt be as 'bold' looking. Ever seen a hose from that era after submersion? I have---They definately do not look real black. More of a mat black. In most cases, the black coloring will come off in your hands, making it a more mat finish---if it even stays together. Same thing happens to the hydraulic hoses on boats around here---exposed to salt water, the cover color will literally rub off on your hands. Now in 1937, the hoses were not the same construction as we have now.
If you look at the pic, and invision the tire, comparitively it should be as bold as the 'hose' if it is a hose. This squiggily thing is dark, and there are no other organic things there to compare the color to----
tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 14, 2012, 12:17:28 PM
just wondering if any of yous can work out size of objects in rov video from the rov data sheet

http://www.seabotix.com/products/lbv300-5.htm

http://www.seabotix.com/products/pdf_files/LBV300-5.pdf
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 14, 2012, 12:20:00 PM
also can any Tighar Admins tell if this short video is from round Nikumorro

when rov first goes in water it looks like niku

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCs1r2TmRz4
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 14, 2012, 12:35:49 PM
Thats NAI'A, so it may be Niku----if it is, WOW-------the reef is a mess of crevasses, and sharp out crops.
yep we need a bigger boat and a BIG crane
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 14, 2012, 12:56:49 PM

Yeah, like the Glomar Explorer?
It was built for the CIA to go out and recover a Russian Nuke Sub, or parts of it, from the depths of the ocean.  I've read on Wikipedia that they did manage to grapple parts of the sub up to the surface.  Of course that stuff was classified at the time.

The cover story was that the Hughes Company. Howard, wanted the ship built in order to bring up some Magnesium Nodules from the sea floor in order to assess the feasability of mining.

I think the Glomar is now in Indonesia supporting drilling operations there.  I thimk it was sold or leased for about 2 Million dollars after being in the Naval Reserve Fleet (Mothball Fleet) out here in Suisin Bay (near SF Bay).
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 14, 2012, 01:05:12 PM
yeah Harry---But I dont think the Glomar Explorer can get close enough.  Maybe like that though. We certainly dont want it to run aground like the Norwich City.
I bet the Navy has something like what we need. HUM---maybe like the ship (S) that brought back the USS Cole after the attack.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 14, 2012, 01:44:14 PM

Tom
Yeah, no running aground allowed!
Maybe a Seabotix ROV with their "Grabber" option could put in some helium-filled ballons  and we can float it up to the surface, or a bunch of ping-pong balls blown in.

Gotta think outside the box.

Can I borrow your "Crazy" certificate?LOL
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 14, 2012, 02:26:20 PM
you bet---i can print them off for you!!! On a serious note------if that short video was at Niku, that is pretty serious terrain. Certainly not what I was expectly. Guess I should have listened to Ric. Hum---I wonder what depth that was taken at, and if it gets any better as you go deeper? Perhaps if we have any of the Seabotix folks on her, they can tell us. Looks to me that anything that slid down the reef would be torn up like a meat grinder.  :o So in that case----maybe the debris found in the village WAS from there, and fit it is deep enough and hung up enough, we can see it. Trying to make something positive out of this.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 14, 2012, 04:51:05 PM
the squiggle black tube is defo not organic.... in the stills

pic 1 u see black squiggle line quite a bit of it in fact just stops ? well white tube now as it is inverted

pic 2 is of the shelf under pic 1 u can see a tube thats L shaped what has a black bracket i think black tube might go into this ?

in pic 3 is a round metal rim i have changed color in still so u can see it better this is directly under L shaped metal tube

How can you possibly "defo" know that the squiggly is not organic, Richie?  That escapes me.

I grant you the squiggly and whatever it seems associted with is fascinating - and I even confess it looks like a certain aircraft component -

But the major problems I have are scale (may be inches, not feet) and that we cannot know that it's not organic, IMHO.

LTM -
because in video the only other squiggle bits are part of what we have think resemble plane parts... other than that the reef slope is very bare,

weather that's due to under currents or due to chemicals off either Electra or Norwich city the squiggle is out off place were it is

but i admit it's new to us all so hopefully, either way we can identify what it is  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 14, 2012, 06:15:17 PM
Sorry for being AWOl recently, this is due to the pc with all my TIGHAR files has been hijacked by my son who is home from Uni and is frantically doing his final Dissertation. There are 3 more areas of interest that I have been working on (when I get the superfast pc back!) I'll post some pics then.
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 14, 2012, 06:17:12 PM
no worries fella, we'll still be hummin an arrrin wen ye get back haha  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 16, 2012, 07:05:47 AM
I'm pretty sure this is the other vertical satbiliser IMHO, possibly.
I have marked out the interesting features of it but, it's in a bit of a state however, given a hammer and some pliers it could once again look reasonable
Note: it's not in pristine condition but, what would you expect?
Blue outline: Nice conviniently positioned cut out
Red Box: The remains of the possible vertical stabiliser
Yellow arrows: Who knows? I wouldn't expect to see numbers visible after all this time but, you never know.
Green box: No idea
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on February 16, 2012, 12:12:06 PM
Jeff VH,
you are pulling my appendage, aren't you? :D
Randy
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 16, 2012, 01:02:47 PM
Jeff VH,
you are pulling my appendage, aren't you? :D
Randy

In the Country of the Blind the one-eyed Man is king

While attempting to summit the unconquered crest of Parascotopetl, a fictitious mountain in Ecuador, a mountaineer named Nunez slips and falls down the far side of the mountain. At the end of his descent, down a snow-slope in the mountain's shadow, he finds a valley, cut off from the rest of the world on all sides by steep precipices. Unbeknown to Nunez, he has discovered the fabled Country of the Blind. The valley had been a haven for settlers fleeing the tyranny of Spanish rulers until an earthquake reshaped the surrounding mountains and cut it off forever from future explorers. The isolated community prospered over the years despite a disease that struck them early on, rendering all new-borns blind. As the blindness slowly spread over the generations, their remaining senses sharpened, and by the time the last sighted villager had died, the community had fully adapted to life without sight.
 
Nunez descends into the valley and finds an unusual village with windowless houses and a network of paths, all bordered by kerbs. Upon discovering that everyone is blind, Nunez begins reciting to himself the refrain, "In the Country of the Blind the One-Eyed Man is King". He realises that he can teach and rule them. But the villagers have no concept of sight and do not understand his attempts to explain this fifth sense to them. Frustrated, Nunez becomes angry but they calm him and he reluctantly submits to their way of life because returning to the outside world is impossible.
 
Nunez is assigned to work for a villager named Yacob, and becomes attracted to Yacob's youngest daughter, Medina-saroté. Nunez and Medina-saroté soon fall in love with one another, and having won her confidence, Nunez slowly starts trying to explain sight to her. Medina-saroté, however, simply dismisses it as his imagination. When Nunez asks for her hand in marriage he is turned down by the village elders on account of his "unstable" obsession with "sight". The village doctor suggests that Nunez's eyes be removed, claiming that they are diseased and are affecting his brain. Nunez reluctantly consents to the operation because of his love for Medina-saroté. But at sunrise on the day of the operation, while all the villagers are asleep, Nunez, the failed King of the Blind, sets off for the mountains (without provisions or equipment), hoping to find a passage to the outside world and escape the valley.
 
In the original story, he escapes the valley but becomes trapped in the mountains, which ultimately leads to his death. In the revised and expanded 1939 version of the story Nunez sees from a distance that there is about to be a rock slide. He attempts to warn the villagers, but again they scoff at his "imagined" sight. He takes Medina-saroté and flees the valley during the slide.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 16, 2012, 01:11:59 PM
Another remarkable coincidence!
Just as the wire/rope/cable on the left goes in between an inner and outer 'coral outcrop', picture 1. So does the wire/rope/cabe on the right, picture 2
So, not only does the wire/rope/cable emerge and disappear from underneath the 'coral outcrop' on a number of occasions, it also likes to route itself in between inner and outer 'coral outcrops'. Amazing!
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 16, 2012, 03:08:10 PM
This isn't what it appears to be (whatever that is). There's something strange happening inside whatever this is. I just assumed the wire/rope/cable went straight through it, no troubles. That's not the case. I'll post some pictures later as I have to switch between videos and pc's to get it in perspective.
here's the whatever it is...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 16, 2012, 03:21:56 PM
Jeff, where did you guys find the ROV segment that includes this sequence? The one that I downloaded does not show this series of pictures.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 16, 2012, 03:28:49 PM
Jeff, where did you guys find the ROV segment that includes this sequence? The one that I downloaded does not show this series of pictures.

Woody, if you visit the TIGHAR channel on YouTube there are two videos, wire and rope and object.
Were you in the 82nd?
Jeff
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 16, 2012, 03:30:15 PM
Thanks Jeff. Yes I was in the 17th Cav.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 16, 2012, 03:35:53 PM
Thanks Jeff. Yes I was in the 17th Cav.
Good man Woody. We did some joint training exercises with the 82nd in West Germany donkeys years ago. Very impressed with them, worked well together. How's your health now Woody?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 16, 2012, 04:01:04 PM
Not the best. I lost my left lung to Agent Orange induced cancer in 1997. My remaining lung gives me about 30 per cent normal capacity. I have a 100 percent disability from the VA but with the aid of much o2 I can still function. They gave me a less than 15 per cent chance of surviving for more than a year so I am just thankful to still be here.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 16, 2012, 05:09:11 PM
jeff any ideas what the object bottom right in still ?

appears the black rope goes into it then it wat i think is cloth with wire wrapped around it ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 16, 2012, 05:41:48 PM

Richie, Jeff Victor
IMHO, you guys are making a good case for there being a debris field (American pronounciation Da-Bree) field down there.  The debris (English pronounciation Deb-Ree) LOL appears to be man-made and likely aircraft in nature, but then  what do I know?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 16, 2012, 07:40:24 PM

Jeff
The "wire" in picture cable1.jpg, in my opinion, is the back end of one side of the "Vee" antenna that stretched from one side of the  Vee fixture atop the fuselage to the point where it is attached to the vertical stabilizer. It prolly fastens to the stabilizer with an insulated bolt/nut.  Another wire would be attached to the other stabilizer in te same way. 

Maybe the plane didn't  "tumble" a lot as it slid down the reef slope and came to rest on the plateau?  Maybe the plane is relatively intact and the stuff you are seeing is stuff that came outa the door and hatch as the plane slid down the slope.

My guess is that the "rope" is just that, a rope looped around the plane and tied off to something stationary to keep the plane stable on the reef edge.  The rope broke and the plane slid over.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 17, 2012, 09:39:56 AM
Even better, Black arrow gear retraction assy, yellow arrow frame around Oleo strut ? See post 566 for more info (Good work with this image Richie)(http://)

Hi Jeff, I have seen several "guesses" about what this might be in this ROV still. Well here is another one. Could this be AE's camera lying between the ear pieces of one of the headsets from the Electra?? I don't have a guess about the "lump" on top. A piece of coral maybe?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 17, 2012, 09:54:27 AM

Jeff
The "wire" in picture cable1.jpg, in my opinion, is the back end of one side of the "Vee" antenna that stretched from one side of the  Vee fixture atop the fuselage to the point where it is attached to the vertical stabilizer. It prolly fastens to the stabilizer with an insulated bolt/nut.  Another wire would be attached to the other stabilizer in te same way. 

Maybe the plane didn't  "tumble" a lot as it slid down the reef slope and came to rest on the plateau?  Maybe the plane is relatively intact and the stuff you are seeing is stuff that came outa the door and hatch as the plane slid down the slope.

My guess is that the "rope" is just that, a rope looped around the plane and tied off to something stationary to keep the plane stable on the reef edge.  The rope broke and the plane slid over.

Harry, here is a picture of the attachment of the dorsal (top) vee antenna to the left vertical fin of the Electra. It looks like the antenna itself is a bare wire. From looking at other photos it appears that the ventral (bottom) antenna/antennas had some type of coating on them.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 17, 2012, 10:23:47 AM

Woody
The wire and its attachment sure looks different than I imagined.  Scratch another guess. X  Another day on the ol' cold case.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 17, 2012, 11:29:33 AM
Harry, Here is a picture that shows how the ventral antenna was attached to the mast for the pitot tube no less!! Note how the wire appears to be coated.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 17, 2012, 12:05:44 PM
Do you suppose that the item circled in the first attachment could be one of the drift bombs shown in attachment 2?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 17, 2012, 12:18:04 PM
Looks like it could be. It would be so nice to be able to actually hold and examine just one of the objects seen down there. Of course, if you could get just one and it turned out to be just a rock or coral, that doesn't mean that the rest aren't aircraft parts. Of the items tentatively identified, which one would be the one to go for if you could?  LTM -John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 17, 2012, 12:36:15 PM
At this point I think I might have to try for the "camera". AE's camera was very expensive, about $85.00 at the time, so I doubt there could be many ways one like it could have gotten to the island. I don't think we have a serial number for her camera but the Luke Field inventory did list a serial number for a lens and one for a shutter housing so if the lump on top of the "camera" turned out to be them we could have the "smoking gun" everyone has been searching for. A lot of "IFS" there though and someone else has to make decisions like that.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 17, 2012, 01:35:29 PM
Harry, Here is a picture that shows how the ventral antenna was attached to the mast for the pitot tube no less!! Note how the wire appears to be coated.

That's a good picture Woody. So if antenna was attached to pitot tube and, on take off at Lae antenna ripped off = damaged or mis-aligned pitot tube?
Would not there be discrepencies between the two airspeed indicators in the cockpit, one from the undamaged pitot tube and one from the damaged/mis-aligned one?
And if that was the case then how would you decide which one is giving you the correct airspeed?
Just a thought
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 17, 2012, 02:24:16 PM
Jeff, it looks to me like that would happen. If the ventral antennas were installed as they were on some of the older Army aircraft that I flew, the antennas were attached to the fore and aft masts but the center mast mainly functioned to keep the wire from sagging. There was an insulator in the mast that the wire simply passed through. There has been earlier discussion about whether or not the pitot tube was bent. In the Lea takeoff photo it looked as if at least one of them was. The photo was evaluated by PHOTEC and they determined that it was not bent but rather an optical illusion made it appear to be. I, personally think it was bent (just my opinion). There has also been much discussion about whether one of the ventral antennas was removed before the second trip left Florida. The attached photo taken somewhere along the route, I'm not sure where, appears to show both of the rear antenna masts still installed. It is not obvious if the second antenna wire is still there. If both wires were still there, both A/S indicators could have been off. In whatever case, AE should have been able to maintain close to the correct airspeed just by using the proper power settings in conjunction with the other flight instruments.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 17, 2012, 03:34:17 PM
Jeff, it looks to me like that would happen. If the ventral antennas were installed as they were on some of the older Army aircraft that I flew, the antennas were attached to the fore and aft masts but the center mast mainly functioned to keep the wire from sagging. There was an insulator in the mast that the wire simply passed through. There has been earlier discussion about whether or not the pitot tube was bent. In the Lea takeoff photo it looked as if at least one of them was. The photo was evaluated by PHOTEC and they determined that it was not bent but rather an optical illusion made it appear to be. I, personally think it was bent (just my opinion). There has also been much discussion about whether one of the ventral antennas was removed before the second trip left Florida. The attached photo taken somewhere along the route, I'm not sure where, appears to show both of the rear antenna masts still installed. It is not obvious if the second antenna wire is still there. If both wires were still there, both A/S indicators could have been off. In whatever case, AE should have been able to maintain close to the correct airspeed just by using the proper power settings in conjunction with the other flight instruments.
I think you have discovered why Earhart ran out of gas just after the 2013 Z message. Both pitot masts were bent out of shape causing both airspeed indicators to read too low. (There is no way that they can be bent to make the airspeed read too high.) To get the recommended cruise speed to show up on the airspeed indicators Earhart added more power which increased the fuel flow and so reduced the specific range (miles per gallon) causing the plane to run out of gas much sooner than expected. You might think Earhart would be suspicious that such high power settings were needed but she probably just chalked it up to operating at a higher gross weight than she had ever flown the plane at before.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 17, 2012, 04:18:00 PM
"To get the recommended cruise speed to show up on the airspeed indicators Earhart added more power "
Gary, do you think this might also have added error to the 'distance from howland' communications?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 17, 2012, 05:45:50 PM
guys in recent weeks av been stepping back from rov video, cos there is that much debris on it that i feel i have too  :)

however i have been going over other images of reef, nessie, seven site etc,  an want ur opinions on following pic an tell me if u notice anythink odd ?



Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 17, 2012, 05:59:39 PM
here is what am on about water, waves etc dont make identical patterns unless the left side was a mirage of right side i.e reflection soooo

what do u guys make of this image ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 17, 2012, 06:07:06 PM
Jeff, it looks to me like that would happen. If the ventral antennas were installed as they were on some of the older Army aircraft that I flew, the antennas were attached to the fore and aft masts but the center mast mainly functioned to keep the wire from sagging. There was an insulator in the mast that the wire simply passed through. There has been earlier discussion about whether or not the pitot tube was bent. In the Lea takeoff photo it looked as if at least one of them was. The photo was evaluated by PHOTEC and they determined that it was not bent but rather an optical illusion made it appear to be. I, personally think it was bent (just my opinion). There has also been much discussion about whether one of the ventral antennas was removed before the second trip left Florida. The attached photo taken somewhere along the route, I'm not sure where, appears to show both of the rear antenna masts still installed. It is not obvious if the second antenna wire is still there. If both wires were still there, both A/S indicators could have been off. In whatever case, AE should have been able to maintain close to the correct airspeed just by using the proper power settings in conjunction with the other flight instruments.
I think you have discovered why Earhart ran out of gas just after the 2013 Z message. Both pitot masts were bent out of shape causing both airspeed indicators to read too low. (There is no way that they can be bent to make the airspeed read too high.) To get the recommended cruise speed to show up on the airspeed indicators Earhart added more power which increased the fuel flow and so reduced the specific range (miles per gallon) causing the plane to run out of gas much sooner than expected. You might think Earhart would be suspicious that such high power settings were needed but she probably just chalked it up to operating at a higher gross weight than she had ever flown the plane at before.

gl

You're doing it again Gary. You speculated that AE ran out of gas but said it as though it was fact. "I think you have discovered why Earhart ran out of gas just after the 2013 Z message."

TIGHAR doesn't know what happened to AE and neither do you. Are you intentionally twisting things to suit your way of thinking because you have no real evidence to work with? 

I could just say it this way.  " Objection your honor, statement has no basis in evidence or fact.". Probably not the right words but you get my point. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 17, 2012, 06:14:07 PM
here is what am on about water, waves etc dont make identical patterns unless the left side was a mirage of right side i.e reflection soooo

what do u guys make of this image ?

Sorry Richie.  In this Nessie shot I see a person walking back to shore. They have a bare midriff and possibly a swimming cap on their head. Dark top and bottom. One hand and arm up over their head.

I don't think either of us is right but I can always see "something" in shots like this. But just not an Electra.

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 17, 2012, 06:20:51 PM
here is what am on about water, waves etc dont make identical patterns unless the left side was a mirage of right side i.e reflection soooo

what do u guys make of this image ?

Sorry Richie.  In this Nessie shot I see a person walking back to shore. They have a bare midriff and possibly a swimming cap on their head. Dark top and bottom. One hand and arm up over their head.

I don't think either of us is right but I can always see "something" in shots like this. But just not an Electra.
what ur seeing is what is obvious ye

but bare in mind the nessie object as been zoomed in on from distance so the more u zoom in, the bigger the outline of object becomes  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 17, 2012, 07:18:55 PM
If both wires were still there, both A/S indicators could have been off. In whatever case, AE should have been able to maintain close to the correct airspeed just by using the proper power settings in conjunction with the other flight instruments.
I think you have discovered why Earhart ran out of gas just after the 2013 Z message. Both pitot masts were bent out of shape causing both airspeed indicators to read too low.
gl

You're doing it again Gary. You speculated that AE ran out of gas but said it as though it was fact. "I think you have discovered why Earhart ran out of gas just after the 2013 Z message."

TIGHAR doesn't know what happened to AE and neither do you. Are you intentionally twisting things to suit your way of thinking because you have no real evidence to work with? 

I could just say it this way.  " Objection your honor, statement has no basis in evidence or fact.". Probably not the right words but you get my point.
Sure there is evidence, the most compelling of which is Earhart saying she only had a half hour of fuel left at 1940 Z. One radioman recorded it that way, "SEZ RUNNING OUT OF GAS ONLY 1/2 HR LEFT," and the other paraphrased it as  "BUT GAS IS RUNNING LOW." Now it didn't make sense that she should be running out that soon but it was possible to do that by running the engines at higher power. If she ran her engines at full cruising power, 550 hp per side, then the fuel flow would be 55 gallons per hour per side, a total of 110 gallons per hour, see attached power setting table. At that rate the fuel would all be gone after only ten hours. Of course it would make no sense for her to run her engines at full power but it is possible, depending on just what power settings she did use, to burn all the fuel in 20 hours and 13 minutes.

TIGHAR doesn't like the "1/2 HR LEFT" logged message so they came up with a strained, contrived explanation to try to get around the plain language of that message.

Further evidence is that she stopped transmitting after 2013 Z and none of the alleged later messages can be shown conclusively to have come from Earhart.

I didn't have any explanation before for why she would have used higher power setting. Elgin Long came up with an unreasonable explanation that she cruised faster at higher power settings to counter the headwind but the amount of extra fuel burned for that amount of headwind would not explain using all the fuel that quickly. But, increasing the airspeed in order to make the faulty airspeed indicator show the right number does make a reasonable explanation for using up the fuel.

And there is additional support for the damaged pitot theory, since this also explains the long takeoff at Lae, the plane barely skimming the ocean after that takeoff and the two puffs of dust behind the plane on takeoff. There is no reason the takeoff should have taken so much runway since the plane was only about 500 pounds heavier than when it took off from Oakland and that takeoff was only 1900 feet. An airspeed indicator that was reading too low would cause the pilot to accelerate to a higher speed than needed for the takeoff and this explains the long takeoff. The plane should climb at 730 feet per minute even at the maximum gross weight of 16,500 pounds and the plane was nowhere near that weight for the Lae takeoff. But to climb well the plane must be at the proper climb speed. With the airspeed indicator reading low then Earhart would hold the nose down in an attempt to see the correct climb speed on the airspeed indicator so she was actually flying at a higher speed which explains why she ended up skimming over the ocean instead climbing.

It all holds together.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 17, 2012, 08:33:08 PM
there flight path was 2570 miles to howland

an according to this document the least the electra could do is 3100 so i think both fuel Q/A upto now wont be answered till we have the electra fuel gauge in front of us  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 17, 2012, 08:38:12 PM
here is what am on about water, waves etc dont make identical patterns unless the left side was a mirage of right side i.e reflection soooo

what do u guys make of this image ?

Sorry Richie.  In this Nessie shot I see a person walking back to shore. They have a bare midriff and possibly a swimming cap on their head. Dark top and bottom. One hand and arm up over their head.

I don't think either of us is right but I can always see "something" in shots like this. But just not an Electra.
i never said u cud see electra i was askin ppl's opinion on what i have outlined to see what there thought is ?

but thanks for your opinion anyway  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on February 17, 2012, 09:51:25 PM
Richie,

I tend to agree with Irv in that the object in the picture looks like a person wading across the reef toward the shore. Quality of pic is so bad tho, who knows?
As far as the waves go, they look pretty normal to me and I have lived on or near the beach for the last 50 years. You get a new view every second.
The white blob looks like a defect in the pic but could be a reflective highlight off a wavelet.
Is it a possibility that this picture was taken by someone standing on the reef? It could have been taken by a fixed lens camera with a fairly wide field of view.

Randy
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Randy Reid on February 17, 2012, 10:09:36 PM
Gary,

Wasn't there some type of power indicator gauge on the Electra. I seem to remember reading about some type of exhaust gas analyzer that was giving them trouble on the first portions of the trip and was supposedly repaired at one of the stops. I was given the impression that Amelia relied on that gauge to adjust power and fuel burn. Of course I could be imagining this ;D

Randy
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 17, 2012, 10:12:07 PM

Gary
At takeoff the throttles would be to the firewall and the plane would be turning max rpms and  mx power.  Doesn't matter what the airspeed indicator says.  Then at some time the airspeed indicator nedle drops indicating a loss of speed?  And AE doesn't notice that?  She can't go any faster cause she's at full power already.  She gets outa ground effect and is heavily loaded so she dips a bit, happens alla time.  She establishes her climb with the engine rpms and notices the climb rate on the vertical speed indicator, no matter what the airspeed indicator says.

She reaches her cruise altitude and levels off, her vert speed indicator on zero, but because she is still at max rpms she has to fly nose down to keep from climbing, and she doesn't notice this?  She's flown that plane three quarters of the way around the world and doesn't know what rpm settings produce her cruising speed?  I think she notices it, gets on the radio and goes back to see what the problem is, if indeed there is a prblem..  I don't think thhat even AE would be that dense as to keep flying in a nose down attitude.  She would back off on the throttle to a rpms setting that gives zero climb  and steady cruise altitude on the altimeter no matter what the airspeed indicator says.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 17, 2012, 10:18:52 PM
Richie.  The more you zoom in the more pixalated the image gets.  You really need the sharpest image possible to start with.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 17, 2012, 10:20:58 PM

Randy
Yes, the Electra had exhaust gas anylzer on each engine that allowed AE to adjust the richness/leaness of the fuel mixture for each engine to an optimal level for the flying conditions.  It was repaired at Lae (see Chater report)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: JNev on February 17, 2012, 10:34:55 PM
Jeff, it looks to me like that would happen. ...personally think it was bent (just my opinion). There has also been much discussion about whether one of the ventral antennas was removed before the second trip left Florida. The attached photo taken somewhere along the route, I'm not sure where, appears to show both of the rear antenna masts still installed. It is not obvious if the second antenna wire is still there. If both wires were still there, both A/S indicators could have been off. In whatever case, AE should have been able to maintain close to the correct airspeed just by using the proper power settings in conjunction with the other flight instruments.
I think you have discovered why Earhart ran out of gas just after the 2013 Z message. Both pitot masts were bent out of shape causing both airspeed indicators to read too low. (There is no way that they can be bent to make the airspeed read too high.) To get the recommended cruise speed to show up on the airspeed indicators Earhart added more power which increased the fuel flow and so reduced the specific range (miles per gallon) causing the plane to run out of gas much sooner than expected. You might think Earhart would be suspicious that such high power settings were needed but she probably just chalked it up to operating at a higher gross weight than she had ever flown the plane at before.

gl

That's very interesting, Gary - and nearly utter non-sense.

How do you KNOW such things to be true at all?  Quite a leap.

First of all, a slight bent pitot tube won't necessarily cause such a gross error.  We take great pains to keep tolerances on stuff like that for a good reason, but it's still far from certain that a bent tube would create that much error from what I've seen damaged and flown in the field over 4 decades.  I don't buy your statement at all as a certainty.  I also agree with Clarence Herndon that such errors can be readily spotted and dealt with well enough.

You, TIGHAR, nor I can know exactly what AE meant in that statement about running low on gas - maybe she meant the reserve she was able to spend searching before moving down the line - which of course you have always clearly rejected.  This appears to be nothing more than a convenient grab for you to bolster your pet thought on the idea of sputtered and sank - you have no substantiation for your claim.

After the celestial nav ad nauseam you have posted here you also know that you don't even have to chase A/S with power like that if any of your cel nav ideas are even near to the truth - so which is it?  You can't have it both ways.  If something is out of whack to that degree you sort it out - and they did have substantial mileage behind them at the 0718 position call (with identifiable land in sight).  That was enough miles to know if they had such a problem.  AE may have been dingy, but yes I do think she'd be suspicious - the airplane wasn't that heavy after several hours of burn-off, and again - she had a position check per above.  She'd come nearly around the world in the Electra by then - if the numbers were grossly crossed it's not likely she'd have chased the needles like that - with a navigator aboard, most especially.  It's a long leap to say that she'd 'chalk it up' to something like that - you're being too dismissive IMO.  You can have your opinion, of course - I just see it as flawed for obvious reasons.

Where do you get that both pitot tubes would have been bent anyway?  Maybe an astroid struck the bird...  You talk about TIGHAR grabbing at the 1/2 fuel remaining comment (highly questionable record on that anyway), but you grab this non-sense and hold it up?

Irv's got the right track on this - it looks like you're just contriving another crash-splash-n-sink platform.  But, NOW we know what your theory is!!!  Happy day!  :D

LTM -
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 17, 2012, 10:49:02 PM
Quote
Sure there is evidence, the most compelling of which is Earhart saying she only had a half hour of fuel left at 1940 Z. One radioman recorded it that way, "SEZ RUNNING OUT OF GAS ONLY 1/2 HR LEFT," and the other paraphrased it as  "BUT GAS IS RUNNING LOW." Now it didn't make sense that she should be running out that soon but it was possible to do that by running the engines at higher power. If she ran her engines at full cruising power, 550 hp per side, then the fuel flow would be 55 gallons per hour per side, a total of 110 gallons per hour, see attached power setting table. At that rate the fuel would all be gone after only ten hours. Of course it would make no sense for her to run her engines at full power but it is possible, depending on just what power settings she did use, to burn all the fuel in 20 hours and 13 minutes.

TIGHAR doesn't like the "1/2 HR LEFT" logged message so they came up with a strained, contrived explanation to try to get around the plain language of that message.

Further evidence is that she stopped transmitting after 2013 Z and none of the alleged later messages can be shown conclusively to have come from Earhart.

I didn't have any explanation before for why she would have used higher power setting. Elgin Long came up with an unreasonable explanation that she cruised faster at higher power settings to counter the headwind but the amount of extra fuel burned for that amount of headwind would not explain using all the fuel that quickly. But, increasing the airspeed in order to make the faulty airspeed indicator show the right number does make a reasonable explanation for using up the fuel.

And there is additional support for the damaged pitot theory, since this also explains the long takeoff at Lae, the plane barely skimming the ocean after that takeoff and the two puffs of dust behind the plane on takeoff. There is no reason the takeoff should have taken so much runway since the plane was only about 500 pounds heavier than when it took off from Oakland and that takeoff was only 1900 feet. An airspeed indicator that was reading too low would cause the pilot to accelerate to a higher speed than needed for the takeoff and this explains the long takeoff. The plane should climb at 730 feet per minute even at the maximum gross weight of 16,500 pounds and the plane was nowhere near that weight for the Lae takeoff. But to climb well the plane must be at the proper climb speed. With the airspeed indicator reading low then Earhart would hold the nose down in an attempt to see the correct climb speed on the airspeed indicator so she was actually flying at a higher speed which explains why she ended up skimming over the ocean instead climbing.

It all holds together.

gl
Baloney IMHO.  You say there is evidence to support your theory and then show how the radio messages were confusing but picking the one that fits your theory.  Then you say "IF" she ran her engines at full power. How can a statement with "if" in it be used as evidence??  That's speculation. Then you say the post loss messages aren't credible. They can't be attributed to her. But the opposite is also true. No evidence to say it wasn't her. In fact the direction finding by qualified radio operators points to Gardiner.  So you're saying they didn't hear AE but heard something coming from an Uninhabited island. 

Then you say the only reason for a long takeoff was damaged pitots.  Talk about trying to make the evidence fit. There was no other possible reason for a longer take off??  Not one??  It had to be damaged pitots??  How about no mechanical issue and just a plain old lets drag the take off out for dramatic effect?  How about she was wiggling in her seat on the new seat pack parachutes because she was uncomfortable?  How about she felt something "go" during takeoff and instead of climbing away immediately she decided to double check everything? 

Read Harry's post on your nose down theory. Sure makes a lot of sense to me.

So I don't think it holds together. Speculation and guessing isn't evidence. 

Seems like your finally telling us you believe in the crashed and sank theory. 

Just read Jeff N' great reply to your post. Well said Jeff. It appears Mr. Lapook is out in the open now. And I have to say I'm just a little disappointed. I thought Gary would have something spectacular to share with us.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 17, 2012, 11:34:53 PM

You, TIGHAR, nor I can know exactly what AE meant in that statement about running low on gas - maybe she meant the reserve she was able to spend searching before moving down the line - which of course you have always clearly rejected.  This appears to be nothing more than a convenient grab for you to bolster your pet thought on the idea of sputtered and sank - you have no substantiation for your claim.

"Maybe she meant the reserve" and as you typed those words you knew that it is as contrived as the old "the dog ate my homework" excuse, created to try to explain away this "inconvenient truth" because it doesn't fit your theory. Nobody talking to the Coast Guard is going to play word games like that, trying to keep it secret from the people who would have to search for her the true fuel state of the plane.
Quote



Where do you get that both pitot tubes would have been bent anyway?  Maybe an astroid struck the bird...  You talk about TIGHAR grabbing at the 1/2 fuel remaining comment (highly questionable record on that anyway), but you grab this non-sense and hold it up?

I was relying on Herndon's observation that both tubes could have been bent in the same event as it looked like to him that both ventral antennas were still on the plane and connected to the two pitot tubes. And there are TWO puffs of dust behind the plane on takeoff, not just one.

How is it "highly questionable" it's in the radio log, you just don't like it because it makes the Gardner theory less likely.

Try this analogy. Your oldest daughter, Cathy, is away at college. Your younger twin daughters, Mary and Joan, tell you they got a call from Cathy today but don't share with you what they talked about. When Mary and Joan go out to the movies you sneak into their room and read their diaries. Mary wrote, "Cathy has a new boyfriend but she thinks he is too short for her." Joan wrote, "Cathy's new boyfriend is only five feet two." How tall is Cathy's new boyfriend? Joan wrote detailed information while Mary wrote a paraphrase of that detailed information that did not conflict with the detailed information.  I think you would believe that the boyfriend is five foot two not just that he was short because you would rely on the detailed information. If Cathy had just said the boyfriend was short then Joan would have had to have made up the detailed information and doing so would not be truthful. Yet you turn this same logic upside down because you want to dismiss the "1/2 HR of fuel left" log entry.


As for setting the power, you know that there are two methods for doing this. You can set the power controls and then accept whatever airspeed the power setting produces, and this is the most common way for setting cruise power in small planes. The second method, for those occasions when maintaining a particular airspeed is important, you adjust the position of the nose to give you the desired airspeed and then adjust the power to maintain altitude. With Earhart attempting to maintain the airspeeds called out for maximum range she would be using the second method and accepting whatever power setting that required. With erroneously low airspeed readings she would actually end up going faster than she thought but would accept the higher power settings necessary for the higher speed because they were producing the desired indicated airspeed.

Quote

Irv's got the right track on this - it looks like you're just contriving another crash-splash-n-sink platform.  But, NOW we know what your theory is!!!  Happy day!  :D

LTM -
Check my posts back to 2002, I've always stated that I believe she splashed down in the vicinity of Howland.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 17, 2012, 11:40:49 PM

Gary
At takeoff the throttles would be to the firewall and the plane would be turning max rpms and  mx power.  Doesn't matter what the airspeed indicator says. 
Sure it matters what the airspeed indicator says. You're a pilot so I know that you watched the airspeed indicator on every takeoff you have ever made. If the rotation speed was 90 mph she wouldn't pull the nose back until seeing 90 on the airspeed indicator. If the airspeed indicator was reading 20 mph too low then she would keep the plane on the ground until it actually reached 110 mph using a whole lot more runway.

Same in the climb, you know that you must maintain the correct airspeed or the plane won't climb at all or will climb poorly. I know that you have watched your ASI when climbing. If she was climbing at an airspeed 20 mph higher than the best climb speed this would greatly reduce the rate of climb.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 17, 2012, 11:44:27 PM


Seems like your finally telling us you believe in the crashed and sank theory. 


Wow, you finally found me out. But don't pat yourself on the back to much since all you had to do was check my posts back to 2002, I've always stated that I believe she splashed down in the vicinity of Howland.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 18, 2012, 12:06:28 AM


Seems like your finally telling us you believe in the crashed and sank theory. 


No surprise, you can check my posts back to 2002, I've always stated that I believe she splashed down in the vicinity of Howland.

Sorry Gary.  Point to just one of your prior posts where you state this.  Even Marty stated in a recent post that he could not find, in any post since joining the forum in 2002, where you stated what you believed.  Jeff Neville and I have been asking you to tell us what you believe in for months.
You even suggested you would tell us at Christmas.   Now it's "no surprise".  Give me a break.

Ok. So what evidence do you have to support your theory?  Hard evidence please.  No IF's, no could've, no It's what I would have done arguments. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 18, 2012, 12:43:26 AM


Seems like your finally telling us you believe in the crashed and sank theory. 


No surprise, you can check my posts back to 2002, I've always stated that I believe she splashed down in the vicinity of Howland.

Sorry Gary.  Point to just one of your prior posts where you state this.  Even Marty stated in a recent post that he could not find, in any post since joining the forum in 2002, where you stated what you believed.  Jeff Neville and I have been asking you to tell us what you believe in for months.
You even suggested you would tell us at Christmas.   Now it's "no surprise".  Give me a break.


=====================================================================
====
Date:         Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:13:26 EST
From:         Gary LaPook
Subject:      Re: Telegram Typos and Implications (LOP)

"...

This brings me to another point that I have not seen any discussion of on the web
site or on the forum. The assumption that they blithely just followed the 157 LOP
to Gardner. This however is impossible....


 Would this make any sense since he would have to do this
work all over again while in flight with no greater probability of success in
finding Gardner than they had had up to that time in finding Howland and a whole
lot less fuel available to search for Gardner after using the fuel to fly an
additional 350 NM? Wouldn't it make more sense to use all of the fuel remaining
in searching for Howland since they knew they were fairly close to it
? If
necessary he could do the landfall procedure again at Howland using his
precomputaions which is a lot easier and less prone to error than doing them all
over again in flight while enroute to Gardner."

In other posts I also discussed how shooting a moon shot would keep them in the vicinity of Howland.

Doesn't look like I was hiding the ball.

gl


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 18, 2012, 02:58:17 AM
Hadn't noticed this before but, there's more black thin strips of rubber on the Electra...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 18, 2012, 03:23:40 AM
There have been a number of incidents with airliners in which the pitot tubes have given the crew false information. Either the pilot or co-pilots air speed indicator has been fed duff information. The problem lies with 'which one is correct' and, 'when does it become apparent that one of them is wrong'. Dealing with the second point, at take off = trouble (maximum weight) and, at night = trouble (no spacial awareness). The tubes in a couple of incidents were found to be blocked either by failing to fit the covers while sat on the ground and, by faulty maintenance procedures (taping over them and then forgetting to remove it). The first point 'which one is correct' was discovered by choosing the incorrect one, with tragic consequences, either a mid air stall at night or insufficient take off speed.
So even a slight amount of mis alignment on one of AE's Electra pitot tubes may have gone un-noticed, allowing her to at least get airborne but, it's still there quietly waiting to catch her out in the following hours.
It's just a possibility, it's not to be taken as written in stone.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 18, 2012, 05:05:17 AM


Seems like your finally telling us you believe in the crashed and sank theory. 


No surprise, you can check my posts back to 2002, I've always stated that I believe she splashed down in the vicinity of Howland.

Sorry Gary.  Point to just one of your prior posts where you state this.  Even Marty stated in a recent post that he could not find, in any post since joining the forum in 2002, where you stated what you believed.  Jeff Neville and I have been asking you to tell us what you believe in for months.
You even suggested you would tell us at Christmas.   Now it's "no surprise".  Give me a break.


=====================================================================
====
Date:         Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:13:26 EST
From:         Gary LaPook
Subject:      Re: Telegram Typos and Implications (LOP)

"...

This brings me to another point that I have not seen any discussion of on the web
site or on the forum. The assumption that they blithely just followed the 157 LOP
to Gardner. This however is impossible....


 Would this make any sense since he would have to do this
work all over again while in flight with no greater probability of success in
finding Gardner than they had had up to that time in finding Howland and a whole
lot less fuel available to search for Gardner after using the fuel to fly an
additional 350 NM? Wouldn't it make more sense to use all of the fuel remaining
in searching for Howland since they knew they were fairly close to it
? If
necessary he could do the landfall procedure again at Howland using his
precomputaions which is a lot easier and less prone to error than doing them all
over again in flight while enroute to Gardner."

In other posts I also discussed how shooting a moon shot would keep them in the vicinity of Howland.

Doesn't look like I was hiding the ball.

gl

Surely you jest?  That bolded line is you asking a question!  Not making any statement that you believe in the crashed and sank theory.   You're really stretching now.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 18, 2012, 05:36:06 AM
There has also been much discussion about whether one of the ventral antennas was removed before the second trip left Florida. The attached photo taken somewhere along the route, I'm not sure where, appears to show both of the rear antenna masts still installed. It is not obvious if the second antenna wire is still there. If both wires were still there, both A/S indicators could have been off.

Gary, I don't mind if you quote me but if you do so please qoute what I really said. Thanks!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on February 18, 2012, 06:37:31 AM
Gentlemen: Been an interesting day with all the back and forth stuff. The fact is, we dont know what happened to the Electra. Because we dont have that FACTUAL, DOCUMENTED information, we cant say for sure that AE was on Gardner. I want to paraphase Ric in 'Finding Amelia" page 241. Epologue. Speaking of bones that were discovered on Gardner --"Bones look more than four years old to me but there seems to be very slight chance that this may be the remains of Amelia Earhart." Gallagher obviously knew of the lost flight, and 'suggested' that this may be her. Along with some other artifacts, he may very well be right.
My contention all along has been if we can find INDENTIFIBLE WRECKAGE of the Electra on Nikumaroro, then we prove she was there-without question. Like others on this forum, I think there may be other explanations as to what may of may not be in the still pictures that Jeff & Richie have uncovered. I feel pretty certain that the Electra is there. Whether there are other bones there that can be identified or not, is best left to Ric and the archelogy team. They ae experts in their field.
I'm not an expert in anything that pertains to this mystery, other than to approach it from a logical troubleshooting exercise. Some of the thing posted here, including some of my way out statements, are not logical. WE were not there in July, 1937, so we dont know what transpired to cause this mystery. But, 75 years later, here we are. In my view, we have to look at all possibilities. A reef landing at Gardner, or on another island it plausible. A ditch at sea is plausible. A combination of both is also possible. Being picked up by the Japaneese and taken to Saipan, is a stretch, but again possible. ANYTHING could have happened.
Its still a mystery. Working together, we will find the answers. My suggestion, if I can make one, is to bring your theories and documents to the Symposium in DC--and lets figure it out together.
Including video, stills, airpeed computations, navigation and weather data, or like me several ink pins an a big notebook.
Opinions welcome.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 11:26:26 AM
jeff h look in box top left any ideas what the objects are were seeing, i think 1 is fuel inlet pipe but there is sum sort ov grid just bottom left of it any idea's 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 18, 2012, 11:38:52 AM
jeff h look in box top left any ideas what the objects are were seeing, i think 1 is fuel inlet pipe but there is sum sort ov grid just bottom left of it any idea's

Could be part of the manifold although I would have expected that to have rusted away long ago.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 12:05:08 PM
jeff also if u get chance in the pic av posted in top left box were arrow points to there is a bar, thats upright an it has sum kind of either sprocket or cog on it can ye check it out  :)

will try myself but av found sumthink that if i can get good enuff image of it will be worth the work  :) 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 12:41:11 PM
do any of u guys have this picture ov electra in flight

want it for my bacground image on computer but u cant save this one cos its got a block on it  :(

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&hash=item2317955a09&item=150719519241&nma=true&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&rt=nc&si=K381DoJOhj6%252B6HeNjNEaVUisZfY%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc#ht_1392wt_952
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 18, 2012, 12:59:26 PM
Richie
See if you can get anything from the area I have circled, it doesn't look right to me
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 18, 2012, 01:10:12 PM
Here you go Richie.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 18, 2012, 02:24:40 PM

Richie
In Woody's pic notice the RDF loop antenna atop the cockpit roof.  That's the way it would look when ya had a "null" and the station was on your nose.  Inside, on  the direction card the needle would be pointing at the nose, i.e. 0 degrees
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 02:33:17 PM
thx Clarence  :)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 02:55:34 PM

Richie
In Woody's pic notice the RDF loop antenna atop the cockpit roof.  That's the way it would look when ya had a "null" and the station was on your nose.  Inside, on  the direction card the needle would be pointing at the nose, i.e. 0 degrees


thx i just wondered about it, because if it was suppose to be centre to nose cone like in the drawing i have highlighted

then when u look at photo of, take off at lae the RDF looks to be turned more to an angle than what the plane is

an wondered even if she could get bearing it would put he off course ?

as i couldnt image her putting hand out hatch to rotate it at that speed  :o
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 18, 2012, 04:07:54 PM
Richie, she probably was not using the radio for any kind of navigation at the time of takeoff but she would not have to open the hatch to rotate the loop antenna. If you look at the attachment, in the lower center portion of the instrument panel there is a rectangular box with a white knob in each corner. This is the control box for the loop antenna. There is a dial in the center that shows you which direction the loop is pointed and has, among other controls, a knob to rotate the loop antenna on top of the aircraft. Short course in rdf operation.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 04:17:14 PM
Richie, she probably was not using the radio for any kind of navigation at the time of takeoff but she would not have to open the hatch to rotate the loop antenna. If you look at the attachment, in the lower center portion of the instrument panel there is a rectangular box with a white knob in each corner. This is the control box for the loop antenna. There is a dial in the center that shows you which direction the loop is pointed and has, among other controls, a knob to rotate the loop antenna on top of the aircraft. Short course in rdf operation.

thx am on it now

cheers  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 18, 2012, 04:42:54 PM
Richie, she probably was not using the radio for any kind of navigation at the time of takeoff but she would not have to open the hatch to rotate the loop antenna. If you look at the attachment, in the lower center portion of the instrument panel there is a rectangular box with a white knob in each corner. This is the control box for the loop antenna. There is a dial in the center that shows you which direction the loop is pointed and has, among other controls, a knob to rotate the loop antenna on top of the aircraft. Short course in rdf operation.
Nope, that's the remote control for her radio receiver. That photo was taken before the loop was installed. The radio control is clearly visible in this September 20, 1936 photo. (http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=%2Fearhart&CISOPTR=1153&DMSCALE=25&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMMODE=viewer&DMFULL=0&DMX=81&DMY=81&DMTEXT=&DMTHUMB=1&REC=18&DMROTATE=0&x=457&y=427)

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 18, 2012, 04:44:21 PM

Woody
Yeah, too bad that she didn't turn on her RDF and tune into the Lae station when she reached cruising altitude.  If her RDF  wasn't working  she might have gone back and have it looked at and fixed before she continued on.  After all it was their lifeline and she knew from the test flight the day before that there were problems.

Or, if she still thought she was still  too close she might have tuned another station, like Rabaul to test and be sure that the RDF was working bwfore she flew 2360 miles and find out when she needed it that it wasn't working.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 18, 2012, 04:58:33 PM

Woody
Yeah, too bad that she didn't turn on her RDF and tune into the Lae station when she reached cruising altitude.  If her RDF  wasn't working  she might have gone back and have it looked at and fixed before she continued on.  After all it was their lifeline and she knew from the test flight the day before that there were problems.

Or, if she still thought she was still  too close she might have tuned another station, like Rabaul to test and be sure that the RDF was working bwfore she flew 2360 miles and find out when she needed it that it wasn't working.
Amen.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 18, 2012, 05:14:05 PM
just a random question, in the file/telegram i have attached... it says bulb of left carburetor thermometer replaced

the thermometer in question wouldnt be like the one found on gardner would it

i know nothink about planes but know my way round car / bike mechanics etc

but the term thermometer to me indicates a glass object wid mercury in  :)

as we call it temperature gage  ::)   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 18, 2012, 05:21:51 PM
The way the wire/rope/cable/ hugs this 'coral plateau' is interesting. It eventually vanishes underneath the 'coral plateau', picture 1. What could cause that to happen?

These images were taken at a depth of roughly 800 feet where the slope of the reef begins to decrease.  This is known as the "talus slope" where loose coral ("talus") that tumbles down the steep reef slope piles up.  Your "coral plateau" is probably just talus that tumbled down some time after the rope came down.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Ousterhout on February 18, 2012, 09:26:49 PM
The Lae TX was on 6540, still too high a freq to work on AE's loop antenna. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 18, 2012, 10:29:59 PM
Quote
Quote from: Irvine John Donald on February 18, 2012, 07:05:17 AM

Quote
Quote from: Gary LaPook on February 18, 2012, 02:43:26 AM

Wouldn't it make more sense to use all of the fuel remaining
in searching for Howland since they knew they were fairly close to it
?

In other posts I also discussed how shooting a moon shot would keep them in the vicinity of Howland.

Doesn't look like I was hiding the ball.

gl



Surely you jest?  That bolded line is you asking a question!  Not making any statement that you believe in the crashed and sank theory.   You're really stretching now.


That was at the end of a long post that I shortened down to keep Marty from yelling at me. :D Go back and read the whole post and you will see it is clear that I have never hidden the fact that I believe that they "crashed and sank." So that provides you with your "one post" in which I stated my position, there are many others.

gl
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 18, 2012, 10:58:57 PM
Quote
"Maybe she meant the reserve" and as you typed those words you knew that it is as contrived as the old "the dog ate my homework" excuse, created to try to explain away this "inconvenient truth" because it doesn't fit your theory.

No Gary, I don't 'know' that it is 'contrived' at all - my best understanding of what I read there says that what you have concluded is far from certain - that's the point.


LTM -
The other radio operator, Leo Bellarts, who logged "BUT GAS IS RUNNING LOW"  also said:

Earhart’s Voice: “The last time we heard her voice it was so loud and clear that you could hear her outside the radio shack. We heard her quite a few times, but that last time, it sounded as if she would have broken out in a scream if she hadn’t stopped talking. She was just about ready to break into tears and go into hysterics, that’s exactly the way I’d describe her voice, I’ll never forget it”.

Sounds like somebody running on fumes doesn't it, not somebody with a large fuel reserve left in the plane. I have missed instrument approaches and have had to divert to an alternate and I never went into hysterics because I DID HAVE A FUEL RESERVE to use on the way to the alternate. What about you, Jeff, did you ever get hysterical after you missed an approach and had to go to your alternate, using your fuel reserve?

ITASCA Radio Operators: “During the flight, the ITASCA radio operators were getting disgusted with her for not staying on schedule and just hanging up after just a few words. She apparently didn’t listen for us at all. She’d call, come on and just say, the weather’s overcast and then just hang it up, not go ahead. She never tried to establish contact until the last - the last quart of gas she had. ..."

Looks like Bellarts also interpreted Earhart's statement that she was out of gas, not that she had some reserve of fuel left. The other people on the scene also interpreted her words the same way. The captain immediately recalled the shore party and they were aboard only 30 minutes after her last transmission and the ship was underway an hour and a half after that at 2210 Z, less than two hours after her last transmission at 2013 Z. Nobody ever came up with the "fuel reserve" interpretation until TIGHAR conveniently invented it more than 50 years after the event to support their theory.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 19, 2012, 09:36:39 AM
Jeff N, You are right that this thread has lost its rudder and begun to drift. One thing I think we all seem to agree on is that the plane did, at some point sink. Gary, and probably some others on here, think AE/FN ran out of fuel and went down in the ocean, eventually sinking. fair enough, it is a credible scenario. Others on here think that our duo,, running low on fuel and unable to find Howland, turned toward an area where they new there was some land to be. I agree with Gary in that it is impossible to get there from here if you don't know where here is. I think, though, that FN new where here was as a line, just not where on that line, so they did know which way to go to maybe find land. Finding land and setting the plane down, they watched as it eventually washed into the ocean, again, eventually sinking. See, same result, plane sinks, duo expires either way. Now, that said, back to the thread. Jeff H stated a while back that he was going to send some of the stills to folks in the business of building/repairing/restoring aircraft to get their take on what they see. Has that been done, Jeff H, and any results? I'm still undecided as to whether there is anything really in the stills or it is my wishful thinking. Some things I think I see, others I don't. Any reply from the build/repair/restore folks?   LTM-  John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Irvine John Donald on February 19, 2012, 09:40:42 AM
From another thread... 

ROV search

The stories you read in this forum and elsewhere all suggest that it's not easy to get ashore with a boat due to surf action.  I have read that the current comes around the tip of the island and would have pushed the Electra off the reef edge while the pictures of the surf come head onto the beach. I would imagine that this creates the problems with getting a boat ashore. Andrew has been swimming in this and can likely shed some light on it. I think the Electra might be pushed off the reef in the direction of the current and the surf would keep pushing it to shore. Hence the Electra would be pushed down the shore line and getting holed each time the surf pushed it against the ref edge. So how far down the shore would it travel before sinking?  Was that the premise used in the ROV search?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 19, 2012, 10:50:10 AM
Jeff N, You are right that this thread has lost its rudder and begun to drift. One thing I think we all seem to agree on is that the plane did, at some point sink. Gary, and probably some others on here, think AE/FN ran out of fuel and went down in the ocean, eventually sinking. fair enough, it is a credible scenario. Others on here think that our duo,, running low on fuel and unable to find Howland, turned toward an area where they new there was some land to be. I agree with Gary in that it is impossible to get there from here if you don't know where here is. I think, though, that FN new where here was as a line, just not where on that line, so they did know which way to go to maybe find land. Finding land and setting the plane down, they watched as it eventually washed into the ocean, again, eventually sinking. See, same result, plane sinks, duo expires either way. Now, that said, back to the thread. Jeff H stated a while back that he was going to send some of the stills to folks in the business of building/repairing/restoring aircraft to get their take on what they see. Has that been done, Jeff H, and any results? I'm still undecided as to whether there is anything really in the stills or it is my wishful thinking. Some things I think I see, others I don't. Any reply from the build/repair/restore folks?   LTM-  John
John, good response from aircraft restoration team. Only concerns were, you've guessed it, scale! So unless there was also a Radio Control model aircraft club on Gardner Island things are looking pretty good. They are tracking down some blueprints for us and will request more stills when they get them.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 19, 2012, 11:21:23 AM
Any thoughts on how plexiglass would look after 75 years in sea water? There's some material down there that you can just about see through. You can see the coral, sea shells and junk underneath it (just). Surely it wouldn't survive?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 12:06:52 PM
Richie, she probably was not using the radio for any kind of navigation at the time of takeoff but she would not have to open the hatch to rotate the loop antenna. If you look at the attachment, in the lower center portion of the instrument panel there is a rectangular box with a white knob in each corner. This is the control box for the loop antenna. There is a dial in the center that shows you which direction the loop is pointed and has, among other controls, a knob to rotate the loop antenna on top of the aircraft. Short course in rdf operation.
Nope, that's the remote control for her radio receiver. That photo was taken before the loop was installed. The radio control is clearly visible in this September 20, 1936 photo. (http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=%2Fearhart&CISOPTR=1153&DMSCALE=25&DMWIDTH=600&DMHEIGHT=600&DMMODE=viewer&DMFULL=0&DMX=81&DMY=81&DMTEXT=&DMTHUMB=1&REC=18&DMROTATE=0&x=457&y=427)

gl

OOOPS!  I knew that. Thanks Gary.

Richie, sorry about that. When an old guy trys to multi-task things sometimes get a little confused. I have attached a photo of AE with the loop antenna. It's not easy to see but the best I could find. The antenna is mounted on the roof of the aircraft, the white part) with a control for rotating the antenna directly underneath the loop in the roof of the cabin. There is a wheel to turn the loop which I have circled in yellow. The red arrow points to a scale to show which direction the loop is turned. There is a index mark there somewhere to align with the numbers on the scale. While hard to see I think the white arrow is pointing to it (partly hidden by AE's right hand). You had to manually rotate the antenna until you found the null(where there was either no signal or the least amount of signal) and that was the direction of the station from the aircraft. I hope this clears thing up. Sorry for the error.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 12:24:01 PM

Woody
Yeah, too bad that she didn't turn on her RDF and tune into the Lae station when she reached cruising altitude.  If her RDF  wasn't working  she might have gone back and have it looked at and fixed before she continued on.  After all it was their lifeline and she knew from the test flight the day before that there were problems.

Or, if she still thought she was still  too close she might have tuned another station, like Rabaul to test and be sure that the RDF was working bwfore she flew 2360 miles and find out when she needed it that it wasn't working.

Harry, I agree she should have checked her radio somewhere but I doubt she could have done it with one at Rabaul. A little history here. On May 29, 1937 there was a massive volcanic eruption at Rabaul that pretty much destroyed the city and the airport. See this reference, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabaul. The rebuilding of the city and the airport was completed by the Japanese some time in 1942.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 19, 2012, 12:31:10 PM
Jeff H- I think plexiglas (perspex) would survive, but I don't think you would be able to see through it. Plexiglas is much easier to scratch than glass is, which is why it comes with a thin plastic film covering it to protect it until you get it home and scratch it yourself ;D. If you've ever seen clear glass from bottles or whatnot on the beach that have spent time in the surf they have been scoured enough by the sand as to become almost frosted in appearance. I think that the plexiglas would do just the same, although in a shorter amount of time. Just my humble opinion.  LTM- John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 19, 2012, 12:51:22 PM
Jeff H- I think plexiglas (perspex) would survive, but I don't think you would be able to see through it. Plexiglas is much easier to scratch than glass is, which is why it comes with a thin plastic film covering it to protect it until you get it home and scratch it yourself ;D. If you've ever seen clear glass from bottles or whatnot on the beach that have spent time in the surf they have been scoured enough by the sand as to become almost frosted in appearance. I think that the plexiglas would do just the same, although in a shorter amount of time. Just my humble opinion.  LTM- John
Yes I agree John, should have put 'just barely see through it' instead of 'see through it'. I'll go back and correct it.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 01:00:21 PM
Guys, since the Electra was a "commercial grade" aircraft, the two windshields may have been tempered and or safety glass. I don't know when they started using glass for the windshields or what it would look like after all those years in the surf. Just my thoughts.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 19, 2012, 01:06:54 PM
Guys, since the Electra was a "commercial grade" aircraft, the two windshields may have been tempered and or safety glass. I don't know when they started using glass for the windshields or what it would look like after all those years in the surf. Just my thoughts.
That sounds about right Woody but, also bear in mind there were other windows on the Electra (or whatever plane it is down there) on the side of the fuselage and one put into the door I believe. In the pics we posted of 'looking into the cockpit' there is something there that reflects the light from ROVer which could possibly indicate remains of windshield.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 01:33:32 PM
Guys, since the Electra was a "commercial grade" aircraft, the two windshields may have been tempered and or safety glass. I don't know when they started using glass for the windshields or what it would look like after all those years in the surf. Just my thoughts.
That sounds about right Woody but, also bear in mind there were other windows on the Electra (or whatever plane it is down there) on the side of the fuselage and one put into the door I believe. In the pics we posted of 'looking into the cockpit' there is something there that reflects the light from ROVer which could possibly indicate remains of windshield.

Jeff, I agree with what you say. I have wondered myself about the reflections. They are really obvious to me in this ROV still.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Gary LaPook on February 19, 2012, 02:37:02 PM
The other radio operator, Leo Bellarts, who logged "BUT GAS IS RUNNING LOW"  also said:

Sounds like somebody running on fumes doesn't it, not somebody with a large fuel reserve left in the plane. I have missed instrument approaches and have had to divert to an alternate and I never went into hysterics because I DID HAVE A FUEL RESERVE to use on the way to the alternate. What about you, Jeff, did you ever get hysterical after you missed an approach and had to go to your alternate, using your fuel reserve?


gl

No Gary, and I cannot imagine any circumstance in which I would break into such hysteria - but if you know that no fuel reserve is precisely THE condition that would do that to you, and YOU believe that is precisely the condition that would do so to AE, more power to you. 


I been pretty low on fuel on occasions so, like you, I have never panicked in that situation. I only brought up Bellart's observation as it adds support to what was logged, "BUT GAS IS RUNNING LOW" and "SEZ RUNNING OUT OF GAS ONLY 1/2 HR LEFT,"  since it is reasonable to deduce that a pilot, running on fumes in the middle of the Pacific, is more likely to "panic" than a similarly situated pilot sitting on a lot of extra fuel.

gl
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 03:35:40 PM
I have been looking at some of the old ROV reef pictures that Richie posted earlier and was wondering if the items circled in the reef picture could be the switches circled on the instrument panel?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 03:40:31 PM
Another, of Richie's pictures, could the circled items in the reef picture be the mixture control levers circled in the cockpit picture?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 19, 2012, 03:51:16 PM
And one last one, could the object at the red arrow in the reef photo be one of the rudder pedals partially shown in the cockpit photo?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 19, 2012, 03:56:36 PM
been looking at this still again, wondering what the grid like object could be next to pipe an look at this earlier image of electra ?

think it is random the pipe being next to grid object as the fuel tanks would have buttered up to that  :)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on February 20, 2012, 08:13:41 AM
Again, if you believe AE "spashed down" near Howland...or anywhere for that matter...then you have to ignore ALL other evidence:  Who made the distress calls, whose bones, whose compact, whose Capana Italian Balm, whose rouge, whose knife, all from the mid '30's.  So who was living at "7site"?  If you are so sure of the "spash down" theory, then you might focus on explaining away the findings on Niku. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on February 20, 2012, 10:31:30 AM

Dan
Nor sure why this is in this thread but... Somewhere on the forum (I'll look for it ) I read about a Mr Langdon who was on the Islandwith his wife and "an American lady visitor" that was with them.  A possible source of the items?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 20, 2012, 12:29:50 PM

Dan
Nor sure why this is in this thread but... Somewhere on the forum (I'll look for it ) I read about a Mr Langdon who was on the Islandwith his wife and "an American lady visitor" that was with them.  A possible source of the items?

Harry, there are several things in this thread that I don't know why are there but I guess it will eventually get sorted out. Some interesting reading though.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 20, 2012, 01:00:17 PM
Woody, here's the thing inside the 'cockpit' that reflected the lights from ROVer.
Plexi? Glass? Squid?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 20, 2012, 01:17:21 PM
Jeff, Any ideas?? Think it could be that plexiglas? I just noticed 3 other items in the picture that I hadn't noticed before. The don't look natural to me. Circled them in yellow.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 20, 2012, 01:27:42 PM
how do yous not see them letter's

av got arrows pointing too them and it clearly reads  _-_-_-_-_



Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 20, 2012, 01:28:25 PM
Jeff, Any ideas?? Think it could be that plexiglas? I just noticed 3 other items in the picture that I hadn't noticed before. The don't look natural to me. Circled them in yellow.
Sure is a shed load of stuff to look at in this pic Woody
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 20, 2012, 02:26:31 PM
Jeff, I agree 100%. Too many things there for all of them to be "natural". Just my opinion and you know how those are, but I think this site is part of the cockpit area "an aircraft".  I have trouble not saying "the Electra". Too many coincidences.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 20, 2012, 04:46:48 PM
Jeff, I agree 100%. Too many things there for all of them to be "natural". Just my opinion and you know how those are, but I think this site is part of the cockpit area "an aircraft".  I have trouble not saying "the Electra". Too many coincidences.
That's exactly what we thought it was as well Woody. You can see the the strips of metal which once held the windows in place. Also it could be part of an instrument panel inside it (reverse side). Richie posted a pic of this earlier in the thread in which he outlined where the windows went, eerie. Yes it's difficult not to say Electra, how about DC3?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 20, 2012, 05:40:45 PM
I'd rather say "Electra" but I guess we don't have that indisputable evidence yet. Just an adundance of circumstantial stuff.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 20, 2012, 08:10:52 PM
jeff any chance u can get zoomed in shot inside highlighted box at bottom of pic

have tried my self but image goes too distorted  :(

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 22, 2012, 10:31:32 AM
So if the object in the white circle is the remains of a radial engine and the red semi-circles are the cowling/nacelle remains then I would hope to see a bit of the wing very close by, yellow lines leading edge and rib, red lines point to rib. POSSIBLY IMHO
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 22, 2012, 10:58:23 AM
I'll try to sqeeze as much out of the 3 minute ROV footage as I can. Reason? It might, repeat, might just be enough to persuade someone to part with enough cash to get Ric and the team back to Niku for a better look/grab.
Probably not going to get a lot more images without using effects now but, I have a few more areas of interest that could be useful without too much in the way of Hollywood effects.
There's a possibility of the remains of a hinge? on top of the cockpit remains, anyone have any ideas or info regarding that possibility?
Also the hinge assemblies for the nosecone?
Am having trouble locating the main spar, shouldn't be 'cos it's a fair lump of metal. I have a mental image of the layout of the wreckage but sometimes it doesn't fit together as you would expect i.e. it didn't sink and settle in one gentle act of surrender, it put up a good fight from daylight to the depths.
I'll try to get the wreckage layout down on paper first, it might help in locating other bits :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on February 22, 2012, 01:12:17 PM
On closer inspection of picture 2 in previous post the wire/rope/cable in the foreground seems to resting on something interesting.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 24, 2012, 12:30:02 PM
anyone any ideas what the object is that arrow 1 is pointed too

i thought it was tree's but there is something there that is out of place  ???

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 24, 2012, 01:43:47 PM
wonder what this guy knows we dont  ::)

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AMELIA-EARHART-GREAT-AMERICAN-AVIATOR-w-NAVIGATOR-HARRY-MANNING-FREIGHT-FREE-/120859989222?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item1c23d114e6#ht_8131wt_952
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 25, 2012, 08:57:14 AM
does anyone know if a steel cable like the one in attachment was used on planes

its only a diagram i have done but thats the shape of it ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 25, 2012, 11:45:24 AM
some new vids on ere i think they are new ones from last time

http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675063652_Amelia-Earhart-Putnam_Wilmer-Stultz_refueling-aircraft_Louis-Gordon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 25, 2012, 12:57:29 PM
does anyone know if a steel cable like the one in attachment was used on planes

its only a diagram i have done but thats the shape of it ?

Richie, there are two cases where there are attachments like that on the Electra. 1st where the  ventral (belly) radio antenna attached to the fore and aft antenna masts. 2nd where the dorsal (upper) radio antenna attached to the forward antenna mast and each of the vertical stabilizers. Notice that the upper antenna seems to be a bare wire while the lower one seems to have some type of coating or cover on it.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 25, 2012, 02:43:53 PM
just thought would post this  :)

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 25, 2012, 02:46:43 PM
does anyone know if a steel cable like the one in attachment was used on planes

its only a diagram i have done but thats the shape of it ?

Richie, there are two cases where there are attachments like that on the Electra. 1st where the  ventral (belly) radio antenna attached to the fore and aft antenna masts. 2nd where the dorsal (upper) radio antenna attached to the forward antenna mast and each of the vertical stabilizers. Notice that the upper antenna seems to be a bare wire while the lower one seems to have some type of coating or cover on it.

thx Clarence will check it out  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on February 26, 2012, 06:16:58 PM
is it me or is the object arrows pointed too has to many straight lines to me natural coral
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: John Joseph Barrett on February 27, 2012, 06:40:15 AM
Hey Richie,  that chain-like object certainly does look like the end of one of the antenna cables. It sure would be nice to have some kind of scale to compare it to.  Keep looking.  LTM-John
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 04, 2012, 05:35:12 AM
does anyone know, if an what instrument wud take an electrical connector similar to one i have highlighted in attachment ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 08, 2012, 09:39:46 AM
Why dont we call James Cameron? After he's done going to the bottom of the Mariana Trench, maybe he could stop by Niku--along with Nat Geo, and have a look around the reef?

Ok---maybe not
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 08, 2012, 02:34:07 PM
Tom is that a trick question ?  :o

i would rather Tighar wait till enough funds were raised by Tighar means

than someone like James Cameron come in an get all the glory

Bottom Line, it might prove the Tighar Hyposis right, but why SHUD anyone else other than Tighar get the glory  :)

As thats the only way Cameron would do it  ???
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 09, 2012, 07:02:58 AM
Actually Richie--is was NOT a trick question. Nat Geo has the means, the equipment, and the marketing ability. Cameron is a world renowned film maker. Yes, personalites will certainly get in the way. but---the reality is this----is there ever going to be enough money to see this mystery to a conclusion? For you Richie, to see first hand, some of the things on the reef that you have pointed out in the stills?
With costs going up, the reality of getting somewhere around $5 million US, anytime soon to fund the kind of expeditioon to Niku that we all would like to see, probably isnt going to happen. I suspect that Ric will let us in on that in DC.
The other part of this is----each day that goes by, the debris has the potential to move somwhere else. Earthquakes make things move, ocean currents do as well. We've seen that with the debris from the Norwich City. There is the real possibility the there could be an event that take the debris we are looking for, and moves it to really deep water. That make it an even smaller needle in a very large haystack.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 09, 2012, 07:39:36 AM
I suspect that Ric will let us in on that in DC.

Sooner than that.  I'll have some news to announce next week.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 09, 2012, 07:44:21 AM
awesome news Ric-
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 09, 2012, 09:39:49 AM
Yes---alot has happened with technology since 1985. I may have sounded too stern about getting things done NOW. I appologise. I fear that TIGHAR wount be able to wait 27 years to find out whats on the reef at Niku.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 09, 2012, 11:38:31 AM

President Reagan had a saying; (paraphrasing it)  It is amazing what can be accomplished when we don't care who gets the credit.

The objective is to find and raise the Electra and its contents as carefully and safely as possible.  Who cares who gets the credit.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 09, 2012, 12:53:06 PM
Yes---alot has happened with technology since 1985. I may have sounded too stern about getting things done NOW. I appologise. I fear that TIGHAR wount be able to wait 27 years to find out whats on the reef at Niku.

some of the things i have found recently in still's, i think it's safe to say if the objects aint plane or ship part's i will commit my self to a mental home

i am 100% it aint just coral  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 09, 2012, 01:11:06 PM
And I think we ALL want to see IF those objects in Richies still are Electra parts. Actually, I was amazed that it has taken 27 years from the time Ballard found the Titanic, until a good mapping of the debris field is done. I did notice that the Waitt Institute was involved in that.
Personally-----I think Ric and TIGHAR should get the credit for whatever is found. But, there again, this project might be better served to have a partnership with some available commercial assets. Everyone could share some portion of the credit. Obviously, most of that credit to TIGHAR, but many others have made contributions under the TIGHAR banner. Teamwork will get the job done.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 09, 2012, 01:13:27 PM

President Reagan had a saying; (paraphrasing it)  It is amazing what can be accomplished when we don't care who gets the credit.

The objective is to find and raise the Electra and its contents as carefully and safely as possible.  Who cares who gets the credit.

we may raise objects but we wont raise the Electra in 1 piece

an i do care who get's the credit, Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon, but do all the people of the world know the names of the people who made it possible ? i don't 

my point is i would rather Tighar get the credit they deserve than some one else  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 09, 2012, 01:37:23 PM
that is a valid point. BUT---with out the sipport of the thousands that worked on the moon project, armstrong would be just another tet pilot.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 09, 2012, 02:09:31 PM
exactly Neil Armstrong got most of the attention, because he was the one who stepped on the moon

just like Cameron would if he raised the smokeing gun object of the Electra, if thru the work of Tighar

i think Tighar were actually approached by some one some time with mega bucks to spare, but it was on the condition they got the recognition for it..

dont take my word for it like, as i might of dreamed it  :) but am sure it was along them lines  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 09, 2012, 06:31:45 PM
i think Tighar were actually approached by some one some time with mega bucks to spare, but it waot the recognition for it..

dont take my word for it like, as i might of dreamed it  :)

You dreamed it.  We're happy to give recognition for sponsorship but we won't mis-attribute research.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 09, 2012, 06:48:35 PM
Thx Ric

i prob did dream it,  :)

no thank's to Amelia  :D

same thought's every nite goin asleep!!!! wat would u do as a castaway on gardner  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 09, 2012, 07:35:56 PM

Richie
There's a thread for that  "Deserted Island, Castaways, Survival  under General Discussion.  Join us.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 09, 2012, 08:54:05 PM
can anyone make out anythink in debris field wat ever it is, it has slid down slope  >:(

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 11, 2012, 06:54:25 AM
guys i think this could be steering colum ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 17, 2012, 05:41:46 PM
could these be same objects ?

(http://tighar.org/aw/mediawiki/images/4/46/Tin_can.jpg)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 18, 2012, 04:21:47 AM
No because he top object is the remains of a food can?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 04:46:36 AM
ano but they might have had more than 1, which went over the edge some time later  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 18, 2012, 11:41:54 AM
I'm going to make a broad statemnt here so i'll pull on my tin hat.

Food tins unless covered by silt/sand/mud are very likely to have corroded beyond recognition at these depths.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 11:57:23 AM
my thoughts exactly chris  :) just wanted second opinion as they are very similar in shape 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 18, 2012, 12:02:36 PM
We've both seen the state of modern cans that have been washed up near where we grew up or live.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 01:22:56 PM
dunno were u live chris but the nearest sea to were i live, is 7 or 8 miles away so i don't see things getting washed up frequently, an the river mersey has the most merkiest water in uk

u wud not see ur hand if u placed it underwater thats how bad it is  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 18, 2012, 01:58:26 PM
dunno were u live chris but the nearest sea to were i live, is 7 or 8 miles away so i don't see things getting washed up frequently, an the river mersey has the most merkiest water in uk

u wud not see ur hand if u placed it underwater thats how bad it is  :)

Been in the North West for over half my life but spent 18 years on the North Devon Close.

Richie, your surrounded by great beaches! Formby (great for finding cans etc) and my favourite Crosby with these  guys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Another_Place) If the tides comeing in I always feel like I need to wade in and rescue them.

Taking the grandkids and pack up there next weekend we hope for a beach combe and walk.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 02:03:24 PM
any time i have been to crosby or formby i have ended up chaseing the dogs when they have chased joggers  ;D

so dont go near the water cos the dogs wud chase waves haha
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 04:51:01 PM
has anyone else noticed this object in pic i have attached its not a wave or anythink like that ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 04:54:34 PM
here is inverted image

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 18, 2012, 05:24:02 PM

Richie
That looks like  "Nessie"  Go to Ameliapedia, Research Bulletins or Technical Papers and read up on it.  I think there is a thread on here also.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 05:27:06 PM
i know its nessie but look in the box bottom left i have highlighted
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 18, 2012, 05:32:36 PM

Richie
Sorry about that, Mate.  No Offense?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 05:34:27 PM
here's more pics viewed from ship hull off Tighar's dots photo

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 05:42:30 PM
non taken m8 i shud have made box to highlight bigger so my fault  ::)  :)

here another view from ship hull

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Monty Fowler on March 18, 2012, 06:10:44 PM
Richie, while I admire your enthusiasm on the underwater ROV stills, I think the aboveground stuff, with its generally lousy resolution to begin with, is sliding more into Jeff Glickman territory. That's how I see it, at any rate.

LTM, who knows an expert is someone who knows when it's time to call in the experts,

Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 18, 2012, 06:42:19 PM
totally agree Monty i have the utmost respect for Jeff Glickman an co an the job they do, an i am no expert i just like posting stuff i come across on the off chance it could be something Tighar might find of intrest  :)

an it passes the time  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 19, 2012, 07:05:17 AM
I guess we'll see that Jeff says at the Symposium.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 19, 2012, 11:27:11 AM

Perhaps, perhaps not.  I've been here on the Forum for 8 months now and haven't seen word one from the experts about Nessie.  Maybe I missed it.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 19, 2012, 11:32:55 AM
Me either Harry---but Jeff is supposed to be in DC-----so I assume that we can ask him---or anyone else.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on March 24, 2012, 02:28:34 AM
right people what are your thoughts on, A on this image i only found it other day so want other people's opinions on what it could be.

D is the shadow of C

so is it possible that A is shadow of B

?

an what does the object A look like  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on March 24, 2012, 07:06:30 AM
Dont know Richie---hard for me to make out anything. But---the black dot doesnt appear to be a shadow. There are other white looking things on the reef, that may just be white caps from the wave action. The object at the reef line is interesting. My mind wants to say its a wing, broken off from the fuselege, but my eyes arent sure.
Perhaps its is another pic that can get some extra investigation.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on March 24, 2012, 02:29:42 PM
Glickman would be the guy since he's on tap to talk.

Yes, Jeff Glickman is one of the featured speakers for the Symposium (http://www.earhartsearch75.com/speakers.html).  My guess is that he will be prepared to answer questions about his re-analysis of the aerial photograph.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 26, 2012, 09:42:06 AM
Here's our old friend the wire/rope/cable again, this time from the 'Object' ROV footage. Notice again how the wire/rope/cable suddenly appears from underneath the 'coral' that is covered in shiny bits of metal etc...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on March 26, 2012, 09:55:29 AM
I am still convinced this is a headset.  And it is sitting on an obvious piece of framework or panel that has straight edge at 90 degrees.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 26, 2012, 10:45:09 AM
I am still convinced this is a headset.  And it is sitting on an obvious piece of framework or panel that has straight edge at 90 degrees.

Yes, it's very tempting to try to add labels to these objects Dan. I think the best route is to try to work the metal that is lying about. We need identifiable parts of airframe/construction/techniques, fasteners, rivets, symmetry of holes, angles, evidence of tearing/shearing and stuff like that Dan. But yes, I agree it does look like the skeleton of a headset but, it's the object it's sitting on that is more important from the perspective of airframe and, again I agree, I don't like the 90 degrees and the straight edges, it doesn't look natural, it looks engineered. (but covered in... well, it's been there 70+ years, what would we expect to see?)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 26, 2012, 10:49:45 AM
Here's another handy bit of engineering at the point where the door shaped coral meets the fuselage floor shaped coral. It appears to be a square hole/fitting and, a nicely bent piece of metal, all enclosed in torn silver alloy coloured metalwork?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 26, 2012, 01:43:14 PM
Could possibly be the remains of prop and hub, one blade (bent), it's to the front of what we suspect is a radial engines remains IMHO

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 27, 2012, 05:17:32 AM
Here's a couple of Images from The Waitt Institutes Catalyst 2 expedition in 2009. There were 5 targets detected but, only 2 were airplane possibles IMHO.
Target 2 possible but, warbird
Target 1 more interesting so here are the images
Only problem is it's 18,000 ft down on the bottom of the Pacific just off Howland Island, DOH!
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 31, 2012, 04:31:30 AM
More 'coral'

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on March 31, 2012, 04:50:04 AM
Maybe not coral (as in the living kind) but Coral Talus that has been broken up by sea and surf and then deposited down the reef slope?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 01, 2012, 04:18:28 PM
look at the object in middle of white circle

the black thing

seems to be suspended in mid air

surely to keep a shape like that it has to be attached to something ?

any idea's

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 02, 2012, 08:42:30 AM
An update on a previous posting in this thread. Now that we are all agreed that the landing gear is of the earlier type, Picture 1 (I have been under the impression it was the later type, DOH!) Looking at wrong pictures in this link...
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/58_NessieHypothesis/58_NessieHypothesis.htm (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/58_NessieHypothesis/58_NessieHypothesis.htm)

In the following sequence of stills there could possibly be the remains of the semi circular part of the worm mechanism that was once attached to the strut. In the previous posting the red box indicated the possible remains of the top of the gear assembly with top of oleo strut protruding. So it would be nice to find something in close proximity that could possibly match the semi circular part of the worm mechanism. Again, yes it's a matter of scale, no, it's not definite, yes, you can agree to differ, all this has been posted numerous  times and, I am very much aware that this is, at this stage anyway, speculation. That said, have a look, it's either a big coincidence or, see previous sentence.


(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 02, 2012, 05:14:14 PM
any ideas on what were seeing in this attachment ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 02, 2012, 05:19:31 PM
Hello, I'm a newbie and will be playing catch-up, I  suppose, until 2020, so I apologize if you've all gotten past my question. (I did go through all 74 pages of this thread, but whew!)

I've been looking at the video as everyone does, but frame by frame by frame rather slowly.  I've also done my fair share of outlining ("That cloud looks like a horse!!"), and I'm currently trying to build some panoramic views.  As I work, it appears to me that perhaps the plane was not beat into bits on the reef.  this section looks like the control panel and related interior cabin components.  Has anyone started looking at pieces as if they were more probably part of one area of the plane rather then a broad collection?

thanks - you guys are great.
-Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 02, 2012, 05:23:52 PM
hi Leon

an welcome to the forums

not sure what parts go were yet, if thats what were seeing but we should know in july  :) ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 02, 2012, 05:32:57 PM
It's going slower then I imagined, but I will post some shots.  Doing some inventory, however, of the work to date i think you've found:
the contol panels (smaller hanging one and main panel with attachments)
the yoke and wheel (upside down)
one front window
one side window
maybe second yoke assembly
floor control valves and piping

and perhaps, one engine with prop mounted, face up, and with decals on prop. (there's always an exception  :)

Ok I know I'm crazy, but I'll get some posted.  Until then, maybe you more experienced folks can take a look from the perspective that big chunks came down together, sort of, maybe....

-Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 02, 2012, 05:46:54 PM
i suppose having knowledge of aircraft parts would be a big help

thats why i let others say what they see  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 02, 2012, 07:19:41 PM
what do u guys see in the circle  :o

i know what i see  ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 03, 2012, 05:41:57 AM
 A square shaped hole and twisted/torn 'metal'?
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 04, 2012, 10:13:41 AM
Richie,
Attached are some photo's you've seen I'm sure, with features highlighted.  The video sees this stuff, up close in many cases, but still outlines it.  The guages and the '30's style knob' are VERY close up early on.  After looking at these stills a bit, returning to the video you'll see what I imagine I'm seeing - these things highlighting parts of the cockpit.  Some may be upside down or not, in some cases, I can't tell.   

There are labels and/or lines on the pics to highlight objects.

Sorry if I'm going over old ground. I'm Still working on the panoramas - very hard!

L
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 04, 2012, 10:34:50 AM
Richie,
Just one 2-shot  set of early location with labels.  there are more knobs and switches in pic if I'm correct, but too many labels already.  My drawing isn't too hot either...

If I may be right then we've got some clues to the scale of things in this area.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 04, 2012, 11:26:42 AM
Richie,
Attached are some photo's you've seen I'm sure, with features highlighted.  The video sees this stuff, up close in many cases, but still outlines it.  The guages and the '30's style knob' are VERY close up early on.  After looking at these stills a bit, returning to the video you'll see what I imagine I'm seeing - these things highlighting parts of the cockpit.  Some may be upside down or not, in some cases, I can't tell.   

There are labels and/or lines on the pics to highlight objects.

Sorry if I'm going over old ground. I'm Still working on the panoramas - very hard!

L

the wheel in the 3rd pic, could well be what the arrow pointing to right in my attachment..

notice the knob to the left, just behind whatever it is sticking up were arrow is pointing

good work Leon any help is much appreciated

 :) 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 04, 2012, 08:59:22 PM
I think you're right, but the 'steering wheel'  will be much bigger.  You already found one of them, clearly, in another photo and an earlier post.  It was upside down compared to the press photos.
  I'm trying to get better images of the upper right, but I think the camera only wobbled up there once or twice. 

We'll see.

L
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 12, 2012, 01:25:46 PM
There clearly visible on the left. They're covered by 15 ft of silt, the bow of the Norwich, part of the Thresher, and of course all the right angled carefully machined coral.  :)

-Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 13, 2012, 09:17:11 AM
Hadn't noticed it before but going back to the door shaped coral and the thin metal looking edges around it gave me an idea. Here's the back end of the detached 'cockpit' which also has thin metal looking edges...
Words used to describe objects are for reference, it does not imply that it's gospel truth that they are positively identified as such,YET, all are IMHO. That said, have a gander...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 13, 2012, 10:19:07 AM
look at top left of picture at reef wall

strange patterns
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 13, 2012, 10:27:03 AM
these look more like sunglasses, rectangle box an the object in circle looks like the bracket outside door for air tester bar ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 13, 2012, 12:03:02 PM
Richie,
The reef+wall picture above  seems to have alot of detail in it.  I've got to spend some time on it!  Upper left I see an engine-propeller type thing, but it is way too small compared to other things in the photo.  Bottom right seems to have some very unusual coral shapes . . . I'll have to try to lighten that or something.
thnks so much.
Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 13, 2012, 12:46:24 PM
Jeff H

this is ur wheel strut pic from ur first post i would say u can see alot of fastners ?

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 13, 2012, 12:49:57 PM
i have put arrows to point out the brackets

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 15, 2012, 03:22:18 PM
Jeff H

when u look at this image, if what people were saying about scale

is it poss this could be a engine ?

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 15, 2012, 05:06:55 PM
Scale will always be an issue down there and, on the reef. There isn't anything to compare possible objects with Richie. Until a yard rule goes down there with the ROV's it is difficult to tell. However, having said that there are certain possible objects that look 'suspiciously like' certain parts used in aircraft manufacture. So, unless there was a radio control model aeroplane flying club on Gardner Island I would say there's a good chance...
I have circled what I previously posted as being the remains of a radial engine, cowling/nacelle.  The radial engine is in poor condition and, has begun to fall apart so, what you have circled could certainly be part of it.
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 16, 2012, 09:30:51 AM
i still think the object in attachment is apart of fuselage or its a wing with radial

look at the bottom the square could be a flap of sum sort

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 16, 2012, 02:10:33 PM
look at the shape of the dark shadows top left above were we think an engine is ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 16, 2012, 07:14:41 PM
look at the shape of the dark shadows top left above were we think an engine is ?

Could you be more specific - all I am seeing is lumps of coral.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 17, 2012, 04:15:23 AM
obviously light cause's shadows

an when u look at pics u can see shadows i have marked were i see them

in the second set of stills there is what appears to be a pipe going into lets say rock

now in a photo of Amelia's Electra fuselage while being built there is a similar pipe that must feed the electrics
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 17, 2012, 04:24:27 AM
here the pic for pipe that goes to wing
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 17, 2012, 06:18:44 AM
Richie, shame we can't get down there and brush away the silt and coral residue with a little brush and trowel, might see things more clearly. Reality prevents that from happening though, at 300 metres deep, nearly 1000 ft, it's way beyond normal diving capabilities so, we'll just have to do the best with what's available i.e. 3 minutes of video footage. It would be interesting to discover what the ROV didn't record like, what was behind it, out of range, in darkness etc... Time will tell, we can wait.
For all those whe expected to see something like this. Here's an image for you, the arrow points to something else you won't see on the Niku wreck either...
(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 17, 2012, 07:57:45 AM
haha Jeff

Tighar does have more Rov footage availible of the area

 but to paying member's which is right way to do it  :)

 :( unfortunately for me am getting married in October

so my other half, empty's my bank before my wages even register on computer   ;D :) :(
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 17, 2012, 01:12:18 PM
Thanks for that Richie, I didn't know there was any more ROVer footage available to anyone, can you point me in the right direction.

Congratulations on your upcoming wedding!!!
(why are you getting married in the middle of the football season?) Are you Liverpool or Everton?
 ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 17, 2012, 03:12:58 PM
Liverpool an Thank You

Jeff what cud the object be that arrow is pointed ? does it resemble anything 

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 17, 2012, 08:38:10 PM
obviously light cause's shadows

an when u look at pics u can see shadows i have marked were i see them

in the second set of stills there is what appears to be a pipe going into lets say rock ...

Thanks Richie but I am afraid it still looks like undifferentiated coral lumps to me.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 19, 2012, 05:31:47 PM
Here's the odd shaped object/coral whatever again, circled, any ideas? I haven't come across anything like this in my career in aerospace, oil industry or military, but then I didn't spend much time in the comfortable areas of aircraft.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 19, 2012, 08:25:59 PM
In looking  at it, it appears to be hollow (if you imagine it was sitting on top of a pipe, say, and you could partially look in.)
Looking at what is around it may help identify, with scale issues etc. as well as related materials.

I'll try to look more at it.
Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 20, 2012, 06:48:52 AM
Here's the odd shaped object/coral whatever again, circled, any ideas? I haven't come across anything like this in my career in aerospace, oil industry or military, but then I didn't spend much time in the comfortable areas of aircraft.

(http://)

Jeff thats the u bolt thing i was on about wen i posted pic on 11 tubes posts
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 20, 2012, 06:58:26 AM
right u will have to use your head's a bit here to understand what am on about..

pic A is of the what i think is a funnel with tank behind it. on top of the tank u will notice there is sumthink that looks L shaped

pic B is just a bit higher up from pic A

u can see the L shaped object in pic B

now at the top on pic B, u can see what resembles a thin tube with little tubes comeing off it.

 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 20, 2012, 09:36:07 AM
can anyone see a couple odd things in this image ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on April 20, 2012, 12:08:00 PM
Hey Richie---as much as I hate to admit it, the last pic is difficult for me to interpret. I think, for me at least, I'm going to let the new expedition determine what is down there. You have worked wonders, but actually being on site is probably better than doing the work from UK. I'm SURE ( :o) we'll get to see those images. And I'll bet that if once on site and they need some things to look for, they will send an all hands message asking for help. You should be very proud of your work---and your new wife should be proud too.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Dan Swift on April 20, 2012, 01:25:12 PM
JVH,
I weighed in on this back in January and again in late March.  It still looks like a headset to me. 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 20, 2012, 07:43:34 PM
Richie, I see Medusa's head, gazing off into the distance, while in the background the Sirens are ramping it up for another stirring rendition of Let's Drive Homer and the Rest of His Crew Crazy.

No, wait, there are I mixing metaphors and mythologies again. Sorry. Too many federal regs today.

LTM,
Monty Fowler
TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

P.S. - Seriously, if you were coming to DC in June I'd buy you a pint. Or two. But be forwarned, over here in the colonies we drink our beer cold. I know, total abomination.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 05:52:43 AM
i maybe going crazy  :-X but does anyone else think the object circled could be a dial of some sort

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 11:18:21 AM
Jeff

could it be possible, what i have marked off in rover image, is what i have marked off in the Electra cabin

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 21, 2012, 11:48:20 AM
JVH,
I weighed in on this back in January and again in late March.  It still looks like a headset to me.

Yes, I recall you did Dan. IMHO it does look like like the skeletal remains of a headset but again, it's down to scale. I think the best we can say is that it isn't coral. It is man-made, that's for sure. There's a lot of stuff down there that is difficult to get any detail and clear images of but, this image is pretty clean. Doesn't mean it's from an Electra though. We shall see...
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 21, 2012, 11:57:16 AM
Could very well be Richie. Again, in the lower picture, the 'black mark' in the foreground isn't a 'black mark'. It's a tear in aluminium alloy, the black appearance is created by looking through the tear into the darkness beneath the aluminium alloy. Look at the edges of the 'black mark', thin, regular shaped, aluminium colour. There are a couple more 'black marks' like this one in the area and, I'll put up some pics later to show the similarities.
If they aren't what I theorise then, any one got any ideas as to what they are? :-\
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 12:10:33 PM
Jeff have u noticed when,

 u survey the area round nessie there is a silver shadow have a look in the box i have highlighted an then the original ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 12:13:33 PM
Could very well be Richie. Again, in the lower picture, the 'black mark' in the foreground isn't a 'black mark'. It's a tear in aluminium alloy, the black appearance is created by looking through the tear into the darkness beneath the aluminium alloy. Look at the edges of the 'black mark', thin, regular shaped, aluminium colour. There are a couple more 'black marks' like this one in the area and, I'll put up some pics later to show the similarities.
If they aren't what I theorise then, any one got any ideas as to what they are? :-\

i thought that black mark was a oil, poss from a cylinder breaking open recently ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 12:19:49 PM
look at this shape as well that's silvery ?

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 21, 2012, 12:22:05 PM
The shape of the 'black mark' is too 'engineered' to be an oil spill Richie. The general appearance is of a 'corrugated' sheet of aluminium. There are similar ones around this area. I don't think oil would stick around for too long given the currents and tides around the reef.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Heath Smith on April 21, 2012, 12:46:32 PM

Richie,

Do you know the physical size of the Nessie print? 4x6, 8x11?

Thanks.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 01:08:21 PM
according to the properties of photo

width 1000 pixels

height 561

resolution  72 Dpi

hope this helps
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 04:54:24 PM
Jeff

u may be able to get some good still's from this video ?

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNHofFglMho&feature=related
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 06:24:30 PM
Hey Richie---as much as I hate to admit it, the last pic is difficult for me to interpret. I think, for me at least, I'm going to let the new expedition determine what is down there. You have worked wonders, but actually being on site is probably better than doing the work from UK. I'm SURE ( :o) we'll get to see those images. And I'll bet that if once on site and they need some things to look for, they will send an all hands message asking for help. You should be very proud of your work---and your new wife should be proud too.
Tom

Tighar

only need to look in shadows of last rover dive to find what we seek,

i think there is sparse things to raise to put on exhibit, but what they do will be worth going to see  ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 21, 2012, 07:19:38 PM
In all of the 79 pages of this thread, apart from one piece of what appears to be a wire cable which could have come from anything in the last century, all I see is amorphous lumps of coral. It might help speculation if at the very least there was a scale in the images because without that essential tool everything is nothing more than imaginative guess work.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 07:19:53 PM
is it poss on 11:19 mins on video, it could be gardner an norwich city wreck on reef ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 08:01:28 PM
In all of the 79 pages of this thread, apart from one piece of what appears to be a wire cable which could have come from anything in the last century, all I see is amorphous lumps of coral. It might help speculation if at the very least there was a scale in the images because without that essential tool everything is nothing more than imaginative guess work.

it's lucky then that the new search is based on what is seen on top of reef,

obviously Tighar's evidence in search of amelia, is more compelling than anyone else has give

so u have to give respect were respect due

one thing is for sure, there is stuff on the reef face that are not natural coral

so we shud know either way by mid july  :)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 21, 2012, 09:58:42 PM

one thing is for sure, there is stuff on the reef face that are not natural coral

so we shud know either way by mid july  :)

Yep, one bit of wire.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 21, 2012, 10:27:57 PM

one thing is for sure, there is stuff on the reef face that are not natural coral

so we shud know either way by mid july  :)

Yep, one bit of wire.

hopefully your right

 because that would mean the Electra is down the bottom, intact waiting to be found

 :) 


Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 22, 2012, 02:02:59 AM
And some 'coral', see posting 1138
 ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 22, 2012, 02:28:47 AM

 because that would mean the Electra is down the bottom, intact waiting to be found

 :)

I must admit that I have never been convinced that if the Electra had landed on the outer reef at Nikumaroro it would be now in small bits. The most likely thing to have happened is that if it had landed on the reef and lost an u/c leg it would simply have been picked up by the tide and washed out off the reef with minor structural damage and then slid down the steep outer reef slope until it either lodged somewhere or kept going to the bottom. Either way it would be out of harms way from wave action on the reef. Using the Norwich City as some sort of surrogate destruction model is deceptive. The Norwich City was very big heavy chunk of iron that relied on the sea when it was afloat to support its structure, once it part grounded on the reef, the hull was no longer evenly supported and it simply broke up as the waves lifted the floating portion setting up stresses which caused that to break from the part that was wedged on the reef. Rather like the Titanic broke into two parts once the forward 2/3rds of it went under water. With 2/3rds of the flotation support gone the remaining 1/3rd which was still floating couldn't support the weight. Put simply, if you were a giant and picked up the Norwich City by the stern it would snap off in your hand.

Now the Electra is a different type of structure. Like all aircraft of that form it is the wing centre section running out past the engines which provide the basic unit around which the fuselage, outer wing sections and tail are attached. This is very lightweight and rigid structure which has its strength further enhanced by having a stressed skin construction which is to say that the strength provided by the main centre section is reinforced by the aircraft skin which is rivetted to a framework extending from the centre section. As a structure it is supported in the air by the wings and on the ground it is supported by the undercarriage which is attached to the centre section and to the rear fuselage which is supported both by the centre section and the stressed skin. Unlike the Norwich City the Electra's structure is soundly supported and strong whether in flight or just sitting on the ground. The Norwich City is only a sound structure if it is afloat or in a dry dock with carefully placed frames to support all of the hull. If you were a giant and picked up the Electra by the tail nothing would break off because the structure itself is capable of supporting the unsupported parts - otherwise the fuselage would break in half once it sat on its undercarriage. If you attached wheels to the front and rear of the Norwich City and attempted to sit it on them it would promptly break its back.

So if the landing on the reef was relatively normal it would survive in one piece, then be washed off with minimal damage and quickly sink nose first due to engine weight, again incurring minimal damage like loss of the undercarriage and aerials, below the zone on the slope where waves could batter it against the reef and cause more damage, with corrosion being the only enemy. I'm only offering a hypothesis here, I remain unsold on the reef landing because as with all the other theories it is yet to be demonstrated with hard evidence. But if it is there I would expect it to be relatively intact excluding the corrosive action of the sea water.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 22, 2012, 03:59:01 AM
u have highlighted good points Malcolm 

as to why the Electra would be in 1 piece  with normal landing on reef and i Respect ur view on it..

my view is that given the amount of time the plane wreckage was visible up to 1941 (i think)

an the aircraft skin that has been recovered on the island, i honestly don't think we will find an intact Electra

simply because the structure must have been under allot of pressure to snap the landing gear 

swaying back an fourth

it is possible due to it not being found on a ledge in shallower water, that wen it did eventually leave the reef surface it must have floated out far enough to not get caught by the reef face to a depth of over 300 meters

an that's why we are only finding bit's that resemble airplane parts

they may not be parts of aircraft

we maybe just seeing what we want or wish to see

until proved wrong i think highlighting objects for next dive is the only way we can help... 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 22, 2012, 07:49:15 AM
u have highlighted good points Malcolm 

as to why the Electra would be in 1 piece  with normal landing on reef and i Respect ur view on it..

my view is that given the amount of time the plane wreckage was visible up to 1941 (i think)

an the aircraft skin that has been recovered on the island, i honestly don't think we will find an intact Electra

simply because the structure must have been under allot of pressure to snap the landing gear 

swaying back an fourth

it is possible due to it not being found on a ledge in shallower water, that wen it did eventually leave the reef surface it must have floated out far enough to not get caught by the reef face to a depth of over 300 meters

an that's why we are only finding bit's that resemble airplane parts

they may not be parts of aircraft

we maybe just seeing what we want or wish to see

until proved wrong i think highlighting objects for next dive is the only way we can help...

Depends on a couple of things. When Earhart ground looped the Electra the lateral stress snapped the legs which necessitated it being rebuilt, so wave action on the reef may have simply put pressure on the attachments in the same way. Then it would simply float out with the tide and sink.

The Electra had a very light but strong structure, so as I suggested it would have just been half floated and half dragged over the edge where gravity would have done the rest. This strong and light structure would have ameliorated contact damage as it sank down the outer edge of the reef - some bits would have come off and it might have got a bit dented but otherwise just falling off the reef would not result in catastrophic damage if it was in one piece to begin with. We're not talking about the catastrophic damage that would have occurred if it had actually crashed on the reef at speed.

I am not convinced about the veracity of the claim that there was aircraft wreckage in view in 1941 - given the concern over the identity of the skeleton as being Earhart's in 1940 which would have been hard to keep from the locals, I wonder if there is some gossip developing amongst the natives which then when this shiny light coloured metal is seen is tied into the story and becomes part of an aeroplane. The Norwich Citymay well have had items in it that were composed of another light coloured metal like galvanized iron tanks or piping which would resist corrosion in the reef water much better than aluminium. Also the descriptions go from bright and shiny to rusty, so is that the zinc coating wearing off to expose the underlying iron? - but aluminium of any kind if it is exposed to sea water near the surface would oxidize very quickly to a white chalky appearance then pretty much stay that way until it corrodes away. It doesn't rust as does iron or steel, so that is a story is open to another interpretation.   

The main issue for preservation is depth, The deeper the water the less oxygen, and the less oxygen the less oxidization - the reef shelves away quite steeply so unless it hung up on the reef at a shallow depth it more than likely just kept sliding down a great deal further. We do know from preserved examples that aircraft from WW2 have remained pretty much intact except for the damage that put them in the water in the first place the deeper they are submerged. In fact the difficulty with recovering them is to stop the rapid oxidization that occurs when they come into contact with the atmosphere. So again purely a hypothesis but the Electra, if it is in the ocean around Nikumaroro, might not be in fragments.   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 22, 2012, 10:43:38 AM
Jeff

any idea's on what this object could be ?

look in bottom left corner at the object that looks like a brick pattern ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Brad Beeching on April 22, 2012, 12:33:03 PM
Honestly Richie, As it passes near the rope the first time I saw it, I had the impression that there was something on the video just on the edge of the light from the ROV. But aside from the fact that there is not a way to accurately guage scale, I have seen nothing that resembles anything but chunks of coral rubble. As much as I want to see something, I've just been at a loss to identify anything with any certainty. I'm not an expert and will be in line to shake your hand if any of the lines you and others have drawn incompass anything manmade let alone having to do with an airplane. With your talent maybe you can identify something in the shoreline (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Lambrecht_Photo.html) photo from the overflight? Wouldn't it be something to be able to see people waving? Then again, maybe it would be pretty horrible to see people waving in that photo...

Brad
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 22, 2012, 01:07:33 PM
Jumping the gun a bit there Malcolm. While it would be a nice reward for it to be the Electra at the moment it only resembles aircraft wreckage (to some). If it turns out not to be the Electra then, progress has been made, some of the circumstantial evidence can be said to have proved true (aircraft wreckage on reef the Islanders witnessed), other circumstantial evidence not (the Electra landing gear photo, Nessie).
If nothing at all is found then again, progress has been made in the process of elimination. There are other valid theories as I'm sure you are well aware of. The object of the search for AE and FN + plane is to find it.
I have no particular favourite theory, there are too many but, there are two frontrunners and, this is one of them. As long as nobody gets injured or worse then, at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter as long as the outcome is successful, find that plane. ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 22, 2012, 03:30:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=ULBmc8f2U4DLI&feature=player_detailpage&v=Bmc8f2U4DLI

gives a idea how big objects are when Rov is close to object
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 22, 2012, 06:52:23 PM
Jumping the gun a bit there Malcolm.

Jumping what gun? I thought the whole text of my post was that I am doubtful about the whole hypothesis. My only intent was to clarify what I think is the mistaken assumption that the Electra if it was off the reef in deep water would be in small fragments.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on April 23, 2012, 07:35:59 AM
Malcolm---not to toss out Richie & jeffs great work---But I would like to see an INTACT Electra, sitting on the bottom in 3400 feet of water in pristine condition--other than the landing gear. it is 'possible', that the tides and current took the electra off the reef, and it floated for several hundred yards, filling with water, before sinking. Possible? probably not, but until the submersibles go down there, were are all theorizing.
Tom
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 23, 2012, 11:25:49 AM
Tom makes a good point, until we find the actual pieces - or piece - of our favorite Electra, it's just a bunch of WAGs. But it keeps some of us up late nights.  ;D

LTM,

Monty Fowler
TIGHAR no. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 24, 2012, 09:25:58 AM
Jumping the gun a bit there Malcolm.

Jumping what gun? I thought the whole text of my post was that I am doubtful about the whole hypothesis. My only intent was to clarify what I think is the mistaken assumption that the Electra if it was off the reef in deep water would be in small fragments.

1. Jumping the gun in respect of naming i.e. Electra
2. Mistaken assumption to be investigated soon, that's why we're here
3. Here be dragons
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 24, 2012, 10:17:29 AM
Lumps of coral?

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 24, 2012, 04:55:51 PM
Richie,
For better or worse, attached is my first attempt at stitching some pix together.  The pic is fairly large.  Try converting to grayscale to get a "1938" magazine look.  I've been swamped at work, so it took longer then expected. 

Added:  It will be best if you download the pic to view it.  When displayed here is at 100% but unmanageable.  Depending on your viewer you've got alot to see at 200% or 400%.

Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 24, 2012, 07:51:46 PM

1. Jumping the gun in respect of naming i.e. Electra
2. Mistaken assumption to be investigated soon, that's why we're here
3. Here be dragons

Sorry but I rather thought I had made my scepticism in this matter quite clear. In fact if you read my second post regarding the completeness or otherwise of the Electra if it had landed on the reef you will note where I stated that I see a strong possibility that the aircraft wreckage recollection may indeed be a combination of native gossip and simply mistaking bits from the Norwich City for aircraft components.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 24, 2012, 08:16:06 PM
if they were getting paid for there story, then fair argument..

but the Natives weren't used to seeing planes,

so there was no gain for them to make stuff up

so can u explain

how it was rather fortunate for Tighar that Emily's  recollection of what she saw on reef edge is matching of airplane description 

the post loss messages crossed in the vicinity on Niku

etc list goes on 

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 24, 2012, 08:58:05 PM
if they were getting paid for there story, then fair argument..

but the Natives weren't used to seeing planes,

so there was no gain for them to make stuff up

so can u explain

how it was rather fortunate for Tighar that Emily's  recollection of what she saw on reef edge is matching of airplane description 

the post loss messages crossed in the vicinity on Niku

etc list goes on

First rule of ethnography - establish what it is exactly that the people claim to have seen. So far that has not been achieved.   
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 25, 2012, 05:39:18 AM
Norwich City debris field in 1985.

A rust-colored something-or-other on the reef so close to the Norwich City might logically be thought to be shipwreck debris, except it’s in the wrong place. For most of the year the weather at Nikumaroro comes out of the east and is relatively benign, but from November until April (as we learned to our regret in 1997) immense westerly swells sometimes pound the island. The effect of these rare but devastating events can be seen in the progressive deterioration of the S.S. Norwich City. As the ship has broken up over the decades, the debris field has scattered west and southwest – never north.


http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/32_SatPhoto/Nikusatphotopage2.html (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/32_SatPhoto/Nikusatphotopage2.html)

The chances of SS Norwich City debris ending up where the Electra was theorised to have touched down are slim to say the least. Native Gilbertese islanders could have moved some of the SS Norwich City debris to that location, for whatever reason, but that seems unlikely. Why would they do that?
From the ROV footage I have yet to come across anything robust enough to have come from a 1911 built cargo ship. In fact if any of the junk down there came from the SS Norwich City then, there was a shipyard in 1911 that was decades ahead of anyone else in terms of construction methods and materials. They could construct a vessel of Tonnage: 5587.08 Displacement: 8730 tons Length: 397 feet, using thin aluminium alloy and rivets that managed to even leave the shipyard would have been a miracle of engineering in itself.
Like you, I am not sold on the idea of a reef landing but, after spending some time with the ROV footage there is something down the reef slope that doesn't fit in with a coral reef or a 1911 ship. Of course at this stage it's still only speculation but, some time this year all will become clear one way or another.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 25, 2012, 06:36:31 AM
Yes, aluminium doesn't rust, it corrodes. It will form an oxidisation layer which will protect the aluminium underneath from further attack.
Aluminium has a natural corrosion protection from its oxide layer, but if exposed to aggressive environments it may corrode

The following factors may affect the stability of the aluminium oxide and thereby cause corrosion:

• The oxide is not stable in acidic (pH < 4) or alkaline (pH > 9) environments [1].
• Aggressive ions (chlorides, fluorides) may attack the oxide locally.
• Certain elements (Ga, Tl, In, Sn, Pb) may become incorporated in the oxide and
destabilise it [4].

Pitting
Pitting is a highly localized type of corrosion in the presence of aggressive chloride ions. Pits are
initiated at weak sites in the oxide by chloride attack [4,5]. Pits propagate according to the reactions
Al = Al3+ + 3e- (1)
Al3+ + 3H2O = Al(OH)3 + 3H+ (2)
while hydrogen evolution and oxygen reduction are the important reduction processes at the
intermetallic cathodes, as sketched in figure 1:
2H+ + 2e- = H2 (3)
O2 + 2H2O + 4e- = 4OH- (4)
As a pit propagates, the environment inside the pit (anode) changes. According to reaction 2 the pH
will decrease. To balance the positive charge produced by reaction 1 and 2, chloride ions will migrate
into the pit. The resulting HCl formation inside the pit causes accelerated pit propagation.

http://www.sintef.no/static/mt/norlight/seminars/norlight2003/postere/gaute%20svenningsen.pdf (http://www.sintef.no/static/mt/norlight/seminars/norlight2003/postere/gaute%20svenningsen.pdf)

http://www.nautechmarine.co.nz/corrosion.html (http://www.nautechmarine.co.nz/corrosion.html)

So, in a nutshell Aluminium doesn't like saltwater, it doesn't like being in contact with other metals when in saltwater. The oxidisation layer will give some protection as long as it remains intact and un-disturbed by chemical reactions (with other metals) or movement. Movement breaks the oxidisation layer which leads to more corrosion and eventually structural failure etc...

Very similar to the propogation of stress cracks in airframes, once they start they keep going until...

Aircraft wrecks sat in lagoons or the bottom of oceans are protected from movement. Aircraft wrecks sat on reefs are not.

We use aluminium as sacrificial anodes on our narrowboats over here, they have to be replaced on a regular basis as they break down over time.Refreshing your sacrificial anodes every year is important

http://www.anodeoutlet.co.uk/blog/tag/narrowboat-anodes/#axzz1t3R9vIoa (http://www.anodeoutlet.co.uk/blog/tag/narrowboat-anodes/#axzz1t3R9vIoa)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 25, 2012, 06:49:10 AM


Taking Care of your Aluminium Boat
 



Thousands of aluminium boat owners are not aware of how important it is to ensure their hulls are checked and maintained regularly. Owners have no hesitation in flushing the salt water out of their motor (to stop the aluminium corroding) yet may over-look the importance of flushing out their aluminium hull. It is a fact that aluminum boat corrosion is becoming more of a problem as time goes by, not because of the aluminium itself, but due to the lack of awareness and knowledge on how to take care of it.
 
Taking proper care of your aluminium boat will provide you with a life-long investment. Some common causes of corrosion in aluminium boats are detailed below, as well as how to identify any problems and avoid costly repairs.
 
Types of Corrosion

 
There are no mysteries in corrosion control, since the early 1800's scientists have been trying to solve the problem and it is understood that salt water is one of the most difficult environments in which to control corrosion.
 
It is important to note that corrosion in aluminium boats start from the inside out, so by the time it shows itself on the outside of the boat it’s usually a lot worse than a pin hole and will require professional repair.
 
Aluminium naturally develops a hard outer coating that protects itself against corrosion (oxide layer). However, where the stringers and bulk-heads sit on the hull there are crevices that can trap saltwater. This saltwater can break down the protective oxide layer, allowing corrosion to develop.
 
Lack of oxygen (oxygen starvation) can be another reason aluminium corrodes (ie; leaving saltwater sitting in the hull of your boat over a long period of time can cause tiny areas where the oxide layer is compromised, allowing corrosion that is evident as pitting).  Click here to view examples of corrosion caused by Oxygen Starvation.
 
Dissimilar metal fittings incorrectly installed to your hull (stainless rod holders, stainless fasteners, chrome plated brass fittings - even your anchor winch) and stray metallic objects, such as hooks, sinkers, swivels, coins, lying against the aluminium hull, cause corrosion when combined with moisture. Dissimilar metals cause galvanic corrosion when immersed together in saltwater.  Click here to view examples of Dissimilar Metal corrosion.
 
Stray current corrosion, where an electrical component or system is incorrectly installed or has a bad earth, will turn your boat into a huge battery, with the saltwater becoming the electrolyte: Aluminium Hull + Current + Electrolyte = Corrosion.  Click here to view examples of Stray Current corrosion.
 
How to Identify Corrosion
 
If you have a leak on the outside of your boat, there is definitely something more sinister happening on the inside beneath the floor.
 
If you can, lift up the floor of your boat and flush it with fresh water. Make sure all the internal drain-ways are free from build up of scum, leaves, sinkers, or an escaped pilchard. If you can see a white paste on the surface of the aluminium or a white powder forming in the joints, then it is a sign that corrosion is taking place and requires attention.
 
If you have a painted hull and the paint is blistering and peeling off around the fittings, or there is evidence of a white powder between the hull and the fittings on a non-painted hull, it is likely that galvanic corrosion is taking place.
 
If your boat is equipped with sacrificial anodes (zinc blocks) and they are not corroding, your hull more than likely could be!
 
Managing Corrosion
 
One of the most important things to do after each fishing trip is to flush out the hull of your boat with fresh water. Remove the bung, let the salt water empty then put a fresh water hose in there and let it fill up. If possible, do this before you take the boat home so it can swish around whilst on the trailer, then open the bung up when you get home to let it drain. Always leave the boat parked bow high and the bungs open - this enables the hull to completely drain and breathe, preventing sweating. Some wooden floors and outboard packers in and on aluminium boats may contribute to advancing the corrosion process, as the copper and chrome used in treatment of some timbers (CCA treated) reacts with the aluminium. Timber also absorbs moisture holding it against the hull, thus causing corrosion.
 
If your hull is painted, any chips, scratches or holes drilled through the hull will leave the aluminium exposed to the environment which will allow moisture to ingress between the paint and the hull. This will cause the paint to blister and peel off. It is important to seal any exposed areas to prevent corrosion forming.
 
It is okay to fit stainless steel fittings to your aluminium boat. However, if there is moisture present between the aluminium hull and the stainless fitting, the less noble metal (aluminium) will deteriorate while protecting the more noble metal (stainless steel). This can be overcome easily during the installation process by using a sealing product such as Sikaflex or Duralac to provide a moisture barrier between the two metals.
 
In summary, there will be no corrosion if there is no moisture present, so keep your boat clean and dry. Lift the floor at least twice a season to check your hull if you can.
 
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 25, 2012, 07:31:58 AM
Here's the 'black mark' again. I have subrtacted the background for the first 2 images to get a better resolution of the black mark itself.
The blue arrows point to the black mark but, notice the area around it, how clean it looks. Notice the edges of the black mark, sharp, thin. look at the shape it makes. The black mark is a void beneath something very thin which has split/torn.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 25, 2012, 05:05:26 PM
Malcolm,
(and with all due respect to all)-
I too believe  that if it went over, it went over in one piece, or in big pieces.  The possible boyancy argument seems to presume a safe landing in this environment, and a safe exit from the island.  Otherwise, if any of the undercarriage or skin gets ripped, the plane is likely to take on water.   

In an earlier post you said you have only seen things that look like coral in the ROV footage.  Is that still the case? 

I have a strong belief in the pictures we're seeing now as containing man-made guages, piping, etc.  And the scale seems to be narrowing down.  When you look at gauges, knobs, and the matching switches from the control panel, I would argue we're looking, in many of the photos, at cockpit pieces, but very, very close up. When I zoom in on some of the stills (like those I posted above) I see guage-like objects with black faces and white markings.

As to the plane staying in one or more big pieces - Wouldn't the rusting away of the rivets cause the plane to loose at least some of it's  conventional shape?

I have also researched a PBY cockpit, and it is no fit - very few guages, and mostly the big levers both on the floor and above.  If we think we can rule out the PBY in these photos, then we're left with a aluminum object with guages etc. that crashed before 1937, or after 1937  when nobody was looking.  WWII seems to be one of those times, as things were rather hectic then.  We could as easily suppose somebody dumped this wreckage in 2007 when nobody was looking ...

However - finding alot of items similar to the electra cockpit (including fuel lines), that are NOT from the cockpit seems a bit of a stretch too. 

I appreciate everyone's interest and intensity.  I don't want to perturb it however.  I have enough stress elsewhere.

Regards
Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 25, 2012, 05:18:29 PM
Attached are some comparison pix of electra guages to some object from the ROV footage. No way to know the orientation of the object from the ROV.

Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 25, 2012, 07:36:43 PM
Malcolm,
(and with all due respect to all)-
I too believe  that if it went over, it went over in one piece, or in big pieces.  The possible boyancy argument seems to presume a safe landing in this environment, and a safe exit from the island.  Otherwise, if any of the undercarriage or skin gets ripped, the plane is likely to take on water.   

In an earlier post you said you have only seen things that look like coral in the ROV footage.  Is that still the case?
Regards
Leon

Hello Leon

Yes that is the case, until someone actually comes up with pictures that have a scale and items that do not appear to be anything other than lumps of coral. I also note that that cautionary approach is also TIGHAR'S.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: LWhite on April 25, 2012, 08:55:06 PM
Ok,
Then I think we need a working definition of "coral."  I'm not a marine biologist, so I'll have to leave the description to someone else.  However, for me coral is NOT

perfect right angles with sharp corners
Long straight lines (ruler straight)
wheels
shiny - like metal
smooth with regularly repeated holes of uniform size in repeating patterns
smooth symetrical curves (like the corners of passenger windows); that is, without irregular small bumps etc.
perfect circles or circular outlines
perfectly round black outlines with lighter colored markings.

There are more in my list of things that I won't accept as coral, but I'll stop there. 

What should a working definition be?

Leon
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 25, 2012, 09:24:25 PM
Ok,
Then I think we need a working definition of "coral."  I'm not a marine biologist, so I'll have to leave the description to someone else.  However, for me coral is NOT

perfect right angles with sharp corners
Long straight lines (ruler straight)
wheels
shiny - like metal
smooth with regularly repeated holes of uniform size in repeating patterns
smooth symetrical curves (like the corners of passenger windows); that is, without irregular small bumps etc.
perfect circles or circular outlines
perfectly round black outlines with lighter colored markings.

There are more in my list of things that I won't accept as coral, but I'll stop there. 

What should a working definition be?

Leon

Hello Leon

Because there is no scale one has no way of assessing how "long" these long straight lines are. I'm sorry but nowhere in any of the pics from the ROV footage is there anything that has demonstrably straight lines, or smooth symmetrical curves but there are lots of bumpy lumps of encrusted coral.

At one stage someone was claiming to have found an engine, the cowl and the propellor right down to the manufacturer's decal on the propellor blades. Now given the nature of the pictures posted, and myself having an idea of what these objects actually look like, I was stunned to see that there was no questions asked at all about such a definite identification. I put that down to either ignorance or a polite wish not upset the person who made the claims.

These lumps, fragments and other amorphous chunks look like coral they don't bear any demonstrable resemblance to aircraft parts and none are shiny. Even the people at TIGHAR have cautioned against taking the ROV footage for anything else than a view of the reef. So until either a scale is placed in new footage and someone retrieves one of these blobs to prove otherwise then to me and I suspect many people, coral it is. I cannot understand why so much wishful thinking has been allowed to push the concept of proof aside. It doesn't help to advance TIGHAR's hypothesis.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 26, 2012, 05:17:56 AM
Quote
Because there is no scale
This has been mentioned before and, discussed in detail. Scale is an issue as there was nothing noticed on the ROV footage except 'wire and rope' at the time it was made. So, understandably, the issue of scale wasn't deemed neccessary at the time. In hindsight if these 'lumps of coral' had been noticed at the time then, it would have been logical to send down a yard stick but, that's hindsight for you.
Quote
At one stage someone was claiming to have found an engine, the cowl and the propellor right down to the manufacturer's decal on the propellor blades
Anything that looks out of place for a coral reef is worth taking a closer look at. What they resemble or, might be, is speculation at this stage. It doesn't mean that is what they are 100% certain. That's why you will see words like could be, possibly and IMHO. Remember, there's only a few minutes of ROV footage, not very good at that but, that's all we have to go on. So anyone who expects to be shown an Electra or any other aircraft wreckage on a plate is living in cloud cuckoo land. Whatever is down there has 75 years worth of coral debris piled on top of it. The wave action on the reef at the surface will grind the coral to powder which decends downwards and will cover anything and everything, check out the steep drop offs and shelf positions on the site.
Quote
myself having an idea of what these objects actually look like
Let me guess 'lumps of coral'?
Quote
These lumps, fragments and other amorphous chunks look like coral they don't bear any demonstrable resemblance to aircraft parts and none are shiny. Even the people at TIGHAR have cautioned against taking the ROV footage for anything else than a view of the reef.

...

Finally, all will become clearer later this year. IMHO there is something on the reef slope that doesn't naturally belong there.
Notice the use of IMHO
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on April 26, 2012, 05:49:15 AM
Jeff

what would be interesting is to see other reef slope footage taken before this one so that we can compare exactly what the reef slope does look like.

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 26, 2012, 06:05:19 AM

Quote
At one stage someone was claiming to have found an engine, the cowl and the propellor right down to the manufacturer's decal on the propellor blades


Finally, all will become clearer later this year. IMHO there is something on the reef slope that doesn't naturally belong there.
Notice the use of IMHO

I was remarking that I know what a radial engine, its cowl, a propellor and the decal that goes on the propellor blade look like, and yes I am afraid that stuff in the video just looks like coral. I also have a pretty sound idea through experience of what instruments and undercarriage legs and the other assorted bits and pieces of an aircraft's structure look like, and once more all I can see in the video is coral. I'll not deny that I hope that for TIGHAR's sake that after all this effort they do find something there, but let it be something other than another blind alley.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on April 28, 2012, 02:34:40 PM
Jeff

if u look closely were the red arrows are pointing to, can u see the shape of mechanism ?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 29, 2012, 06:20:50 PM
Ah ,yes Richie, the door shaped 'lump of coral'. Worth another visit I think as there was quite a lot of unexplained "    " on it. I'll dig out the files and sees what we have.
Brilliant hat trick, last goal was amazing!!!!
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tom Swearengen on April 30, 2012, 05:36:38 AM
Wrong thread---but either of you 2 coming to DC?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 30, 2012, 07:25:27 AM
Wrong thread---but either of you 2 coming to DC?

Tom, I would have given my right arm to be there but, I am retiring this month and, have tons of stuff to do at work before they cut me loose. Those that are attending I wish you all the best. This time around you should all have your confidence levels raised a lot more than previous gatherings. The jigsaw pieces are slowly coming together, just remains to be seen what the picture on the box turns out to be...
everyone can add 'hilarious' comments here, I'll go first...
The Loch Ness monster ;D
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 30, 2012, 07:36:08 AM
Back to the thread. I will  post some stills of the door/hatch shaped 'lump of coral' with the "  " highlighted. There are around 5 or 6 "  " to point out. I have no idea what they are, yet. Odd that so many "  " appear on just one 'lump of coral'.

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 30, 2012, 07:43:42 AM
I cannot understand why so much wishful thinking has been allowed to push the concept of proof aside. It doesn't help to advance TIGHAR's hypothesis.

Malcolm,  I'm sorry I haven't had time to reply to the questions you've raised on various threads.  They're good questions to which (I think) I have good answers.  I just have way too much on my plate right now.  I hope you'll come to the symposium in June.

I agree with you that this particular thread does not help advance the TIGHAR hypothesis.  We try not to control what forum subscribers want to say as long as it's vaguely on-topic and civil and we make it clear that TIGHAR does not endorse this kind of camels-in-the-clouds magical thinking.

We've done some genuine forensic imaging analysis of interesting-looking objects that appear in underwater photos taken at Nikumaroro, but we've seen nothing so far that is worth getting excited about.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Tim Collins on April 30, 2012, 09:45:47 AM
... but we've seen nothing so far that is worth getting excited about.

Does that include the landing gear shaped thingie?
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 30, 2012, 05:54:39 PM
Can we try to keep this thread on topic please.
 ;)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on April 30, 2012, 07:27:07 PM
[
Malcolm,  I'm sorry I haven't had time to reply to the questions you've raised on various threads.  They're good questions to which (I think) I have good answers.  I just have way too much on my plate right now.  I hope you'll come to the symposium in June.

I agree with you that this particular thread does not help advance the TIGHAR hypothesis.  We try not to control what forum subscribers want to say as long as it's vaguely on-topic and civil and we make it clear that TIGHAR does not endorse this kind of camels-in-the-clouds magical thinking.

We've done some genuine forensic imaging analysis of interesting-looking objects that appear in underwater photos taken at Nikumaroro, but we've seen nothing so far that is worth getting excited about.

G'day Ric

Thanks for the reply - I would like to attend but it's a bit of an expensive trip for me. I guess we are all waiting to see what comes out of the next trip - especially in regard to seeing with the enhanced ROV equipment just what does lie of the reef at Nikumaroro.

Regards

Malcolm
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: richie conroy on May 01, 2012, 05:26:08 PM
how does coral form such straight lines unles it's forming round an object ?

 :-\

Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Malcolm McKay on May 01, 2012, 07:13:25 PM
how does coral form such straight lines unles it's forming round an object ?

I don't see straight lines, I just see rather rough edged fracture surfaces.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Chris Johnson on May 02, 2012, 02:08:53 AM
I'm with Malcolm on this one.  If the corel is subjected to forces that cause it to fracture along a fault then this failt would produce lines like these.  Wave action at the surf line would round these off but not at this depth hence the roughly streight line.
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on May 02, 2012, 05:11:53 AM
?

(http://)
Title: Re: Still from ROV video
Post by: Bruce Thomas on May 02, 2012, 03:08:59 PM
Nature is too dynamic and has too much time on her 'hands' - she can put a sculptor to shame and all manner of shapes come to be - including what may occasionally appear to be 'straig