Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 22   Go Down

Author Topic: Wire & Rope entire.mov  (Read 254694 times)

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #150 on: November 14, 2012, 08:02:52 AM »

So, Tim, this was in a different area that was searched on Niku VII? See anything between the 2 , or the live feeds that are duplicated?

I think "lawn-mowing" attempts were made in the vacinity of VI area, but I am sure we saw nothing of it. The rope would have been a huge visual magnet, and surely noticed by someone of the four or five people who were monitoring the real-time standard definition video that was part of the ROV.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5821
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #151 on: November 14, 2012, 08:24:38 AM »

I think "lawn-mowing" attempts were made in the vacinity of VI area, but I am sure we saw nothing of it. The rope would have been a huge visual magnet, and surely noticed by someone of the four or five people who were monitoring the real-time standard definition video that was part of the ROV.

Tim is right. We didn't see this piece of rope during the 2012 trip.  There is a tangle of rope - possibly a fishing net - on the reef slope just a bit north of the Norwich City that we saw in 2010 and saw again this year.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #152 on: November 14, 2012, 12:20:59 PM »

I appreciate your reply, Tim.

However, I still find the scaling of this stuff challenging -

I think the process is backwards. We don't know what the squiggly stuff is,...

Ric indicated that it actually was identified (if the different pieces of 'squiggly stuff' are the same kind of material, which seems indicated by what I understand so far) -

About the black "squiggly" stuff.  We found a length of it and videoed it up close during Niku VII.  Somebody aboard KOK recognized it as a type of gasket material commonly used aboard ship and showed me a handful of it.  Clearly the same stuff we saw in the video. Now I wish I had taken time to photograph and document exactly what it is, but at the time it was just "Okay, so we don't need to worry about that."

Is there new information on that which suggests the squigglies are something other than what Ric was shown at the time the close-up views were being studied? 

So, as to 'scale' again, you suggested the 'wing' itself can now scale what we see -

Quote
...but we do know, rather precisely, the shape and dimension of the wing. Therefore it should be the wing, if anything, that gives scale to the squiggly, not the other way around.

I agree that we know the shape and dimensions of a Lockheed L10 wing - but shouldn't we try to determine if what we're seeing is 'inches' in scale, or feet more objectively?  It seems then that we could have more confidence that we are actually seeing a wing, not the other way around.

You discounted the 'squigglies' as unknown and say we can't reliably use them for scale, but if we can still rely on Ric's shipboard assessment it seems we can still have confidence in 'what the squiggly stuff is' - and the means of scale actually may be turned somewhat the other way - Ric did give an idea of scale of this stuff in an earlier post -

...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...

I realize you both were there, and I'm sure neither of you is meaning to contradict each other.  I also realize you both are making the best judgments that you can from what you've been able to observe and understand of the process, but this appears to be a striking difference between your individual observations.

As to discernment of what was seen -

Quote
Ric, I thought, was reporting the opinion of a mariner. Since this material is not part of the shipwreck, I can't see any reason to put too much credence in an opinion so far removed from an airplane.

I am sure we're all glad you were able to be there, Tim - it is surely important to have strong 'eyeballs' for an airplane when looking for one, agreed.  Of course Ric is no slouch at knowledge of airplanes either - I'm sure you two make a strong team.  In particular I'd bet Ric probably has Electra details etched into his retinas by now.  I am sure you are both doing your honest best to provide your most meaningful assessments - which suggests to me that the differences in opinion between you is actually an indication of how tough jthe udgment of these images really is.

Thanks for all your work on this and your tremendous support.  Whatever the outcome, and few people would hope you are right here more than me - except probably you and Ric, the pursuit of Earhart is a dream from childhood.  It is always a wonder to me to see the enthusiasm continue after seven and a half decades.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5821
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #153 on: November 14, 2012, 01:15:52 PM »

...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...

I realize you both were there, and I'm sure neither of you is meaning to contradict each other.  I also realize you both are making the best judgments that you can from what you've been able to observe and understand of the process, but this appears to be a striking difference between your individual observations.

Jeff, that quote is from January.
 
Logged

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #154 on: November 14, 2012, 02:21:46 PM »

So is Rics quote about identifying the black squiggleys as ship gasket material correct or not?

I noticed Jeff Neville Posted that, and Tim is still talking about "we know it's not from the ship it must be from the plane."

Ship Gasket , or another part of Amelias Plane? Please let me know.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2012, 02:37:57 PM by tom howard »
Logged

Chris Johnson

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Trying to give a fig but would settle for $100,000
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #155 on: November 14, 2012, 02:51:59 PM »

Ric sugested in January that it was organic.  During NIKU VII someone on the vessel suggested gasket material.

If in doubt follow the bear  ;)
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #156 on: November 14, 2012, 03:02:28 PM »

So is Rics quote about identifying the black squiggleys as ship gasket material correct or not?

I noticed Jeff Neville Posted that, and Tim is still talking about "we know it's not from the ship it must be from the plane."

Ship Gasket , or another part of Amelias Plane? Please let me know.


The two are not mutually exclusive: as I suggested days ago, gasket or caulking material or weather stripping could be used between cabin fuel tanks to prevent them from chafing with one another.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: November 14, 2012, 03:43:23 PM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #157 on: November 14, 2012, 03:21:19 PM »

If the two are not mutually exclusive, why did you state TODAY that the squiggly doos are not part of the shipwreck?
Logged

Doug Giese

  • inactive
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #158 on: November 14, 2012, 03:21:47 PM »

...ship gasket material correct or not?

Two informative resources for propeller packing material:

West Marine shows a sample of Shaft Packing material. This version comes in 1/8" to 7/8" diameter. This is very close to the photo posted here.

Pages 2 and 3 of this site show how the stuff is inserted around a propeller shaft. Start about half way down page 2. You'll see the material. However, the bottom of page 2 and the top of page 3 show that the material is cut into rings that are inserted around the prop shaft.

If the squiggly thing is packing material it's raw and has not been installed. It looks too loose to be the raw material.
------
Doug
 
Logged

Tom Swearengen

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 818
  • earhart monument, Hawaii
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #159 on: November 14, 2012, 03:23:49 PM »

and I only see it in 2 places in the pictures. Sorry.
Tom Swearengen TIGHAR # 3297
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #160 on: November 14, 2012, 03:39:24 PM »

 :)
If the two are not mutually exclusive, why did you state TODAY that the squiggly doos are not part of the shipwreck?
.   

Because they are sitting next to airplane parts, not next to ship wreckage. And because one simple material could be used on both ships and airplanes.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

richie conroy

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1412
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #161 on: November 14, 2012, 03:41:15 PM »

I only see it in one place from all angle's  ;)

Thank's Richie

We are an echo of the past


Member# 416
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #162 on: November 14, 2012, 04:02:12 PM »

...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...

I realize you both were there, and I'm sure neither of you is meaning to contradict each other.  I also realize you both are making the best judgments that you can from what you've been able to observe and understand of the process, but this appears to be a striking difference between your individual observations.

Jeff, that quote is from January.

I know that Ric, the date is clearly posted as such.

Is it no longer relevant?  If your position on the matter has changed, fine, please advise. 

I quoted these two of your posts because they seem to relate here -
The first (January) as to 'scale' of these 'things' - which I've not seen changed; to paraphrase, you advised us we were looking at things that were 'inches' - smaller than we were believing at the time. 
The second, more recent post, had to do with identifying the material as 'gasket' stuff when you got a close-up view and were shown similar material from aboard KoK.  I've quoted both.

But if your views have changed since then, I certainly accept that and will welcome any correction.  Just trying to keep a grip on scaling these 'objects' as objectively as I can.  I've been aware of that need since it was pointed out to us early in the ROV Stills string - rightly so I thought.

Thanks -
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #163 on: November 14, 2012, 04:11:11 PM »

...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...

I realize you both were there, and I'm sure neither of you is meaning to contradict each other.  I also realize you both are making the best judgments that you can from what you've been able to observe and understand of the process, but this appears to be a striking difference between your individual observations.

Jeff, that quote is from January.

Ah - I am sorry - I think I see your point now:

Yes - I used a quote from January - and then rather sloppily implied "you were both there" - which you were NOT given the January post - I apologize for the confusion and need to clarify - the January post obviously involved the Niku VI footage / effort.

My meaning was you were both there when the latest sighting of the material was made - Niku VII - when you were shown similar material - and

The January post involving the 2010 footage was referenced because of the 'scale' comment - 'inches', not larger.  Which so far as I can tell is still your thought on that, but if it changed with observations during Niku VII I certainly understand that too.

My bad.

The point stands, however - by your posts we seem to have some reliable information of 'scale' (2010 footage - 'inches') and 'substance' (2012 expedition - 'shipboard gasket stuff').  That was my intent.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5821
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov
« Reply #164 on: November 14, 2012, 05:46:56 PM »

I don't know why this is so confusing to everybody.

• We saw some black squiggly material in the 2010 video.  The ROV we used on the 2010 trip was small and, although we didn't have scale in the video, we did get a feel for how close the ROV was to the things we were seeing in the video.  I have always felt that the black squiggly stuff was only a few inches (less than a foot) long.  I didn't know what it was but thought it was probably some kind of organic material.  Hence my posting in January

• In 2012 we saw more of what seemed to be the same stuff, this time more clearly. Someone on the ship recognized it and produced an example.  We all agreed it looked just like the stuff we saw in the video.

• Objects seen underwater at Niku are going to fall into one of three categories:
- Natural
- Man-made
- Indeterminate

Man-made objects are going to fall into one of four sub-categories:
- Identifiably Norwich City
- Identifiably modern
- Identifiably aircraft
- Indeterminate

We have lots of man-made objects that are identifiably Norwich City.
We have a few of objects that are identifiably modern.
We have considerable disagreement about whether we have anything that is identifiably aircraft.
We have a few man-made objects of indeterminate origin.

If our shipboard identification was correct, the black squiggly stuff is in the modern category.  Some argue that if could also be in the identifiably aircraft category. If our identification of the material was wrong it belongs in the indeterminate category. 
The only way I know of to settle this question is for me to find out exactly what the gasket material aboard the ship was.  I'll see if I can find somebody who was there and knows the correct terminology.  We should then be able to find out whether there is any chance that there was such material aboard the Electra.

At the time, I felt that the chances that gasket material used aboard a ship in 2012 was also used aboard an aircraft in 1937 were so remote as to be not worth further consideration.  I still feel that way, but I'm willing to try to find out the proper terminology for the stuff.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 22   Go Up
 

Copyright 2020 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

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

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP