TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => Artifact Analysis => Topic started by: richie conroy on June 22, 2012, 04:29:31 PM
-
am pritty sure these two objects are of the same material and design
-
am pritty sure these two objects are of the same material and design
Richie, the item you're comparing is artifact 2-2-V-2. That is quite different from the artifact 2-2-V-1 that is the subject of this thread. It isn't even part of the aluminum skin of the aircraft. This entry probably deserves a separate thread with a proper subject description within the Artifact Analysis category.
Please create a new topic for Artifact 2-2-V-2 and repost your pictures. I tried to move it, and it looks like I goobered it up and lost it. Whoops! My bad, sorry.
Here is the relevant portion for this artifact within the NTSB report (Earhart Project Research Bulletin #32) (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/NTSB_Report/ntsbreport.html) for many of the artifacts brought back from the Niku II expedition.
2-2-V-2 Panel
The artifact shown in figure 9 (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/NTSB_Report/figure9.jpg) appeared to be a portion of an instrument mounting panel made from a flat piece of Bakelite-like material. The panel section had a solid metallic cylinder screw attached to one of the corners. The flat portion had several small holes and a portion of a much larger hole. No metallurgical sections were removed from this artifact.
-
Correct me if I am mistaken but the metal fragment looks to be ferrous while the instrument panel would be aluminium.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakelite
The testing report indicated the material is a Bakelite-like material and likley from an instrument panel. I think the testers would be able to tell if it was more a bakelite material and not a ferrous material just by lifting it or using a magnet. It seems they were so sure it was not ferrous metal that they didn't even bother to do a test for metal.
Does anyone know what AE's instrument panels was made of?
The large dials look close together in the image of AE. The hole for the adjacent large dial does not look like it shows up on the artifact in the area marked up. One way to check is to use dividers to determine the diameter. Then determine the distance between the dials in the AE photo based on diameter and see where the next dial would be on the artifact using diameter units as a scale.
For example if the distance between dials is 1/4 of the diameter of the dial in the picture you can determine where the next hole should be on the artifact. This can only determine if they are spaced right and can not determine if they are actually the same size.
-
Here is another article (http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/1993Vol_9/NikuIIIPlan2.pdf) that explains some details of the 2-2-v-2 item - bakelite 'radio' component believed there, but the visible pattern is also consistent with part of an instrument panel. I can't tell anything about scale and didn't read enough to learn of it if it's in the write up. Bakelite seems an odd material for an instrument panel, if that's what it is.
LTM -
-
Here is another article (http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/1993Vol_9/NikuIIIPlan2.pdf) that explains some details of the 2-2-v-2 item - bakelite 'radio' component believed there, but the visible pattern is also consistent with part of an instrument panel. I can't tell anything about scale and didn't read enough to learn of it if it's in the write up. Bakelite seems an odd material for an instrument panel, if that's what it is.
LTM -
Thanks Jeff. That was interesting. I did not know the two artifacts were found so close together
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakelite
The testing report indicated the material is a Bakelite-like material and likley from an instrument panel.
Thanks - I only had a quick look at the pic, its colour suggested ferrous but as you say it is Bakelite.