Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 70   Go Down

Author Topic: The Question of 2-2-V-1  (Read 1012976 times)

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #735 on: March 25, 2014, 12:30:05 PM »


So now "anything goes"... tell ya what, why don't you find us some examples of repairs using large numbers of undersized / improper style rivets and I'd be happy to consider that more seriously.... 



http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1426.msg30416.html#msg30416

Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6097
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #736 on: March 25, 2014, 01:06:39 PM »

Another interesting discovery on that web page- one photograph shows the Alcoa stamp running at an angle to the rivet line, very similar to what we see in 2-2-V-1.

http://746project.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/dsc02121.jpg



An interesting discovery indeed. I think you have shown us a piece of AN-A-13 metal labeled with a different font than the one we see on 2-2-V-1.  If so, that shoots a hole in the theory that ALCOA fonts were distinctive to a particular label.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #737 on: March 25, 2014, 01:11:56 PM »


So now "anything goes"... tell ya what, why don't you find us some examples of repairs using large numbers of undersized / improper style rivets and I'd be happy to consider that more seriously.... 


http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1426.msg30416.html#msg30416



Size?

...and were there any Soviet modified P-39's in the Phoenix Group area???

Steve Lee was right - lot's of twists and turns here... in fact I think we've about gone circular.  I don't think I have the time, Mark, sorry...
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6097
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #738 on: March 25, 2014, 01:30:57 PM »


That famous phrase attributed to Carl Sagan comes to mind-

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."


Carl Sagan was a giant but I have always had a problem with his famous statement that "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."   All claims require the same standard of evidence.  What makes a claim "extraordinary?"  That it runs counter to some accepted fact?  Maybe the problem is with the accepted fact, not the extraordinary claim.   Does the claim that Earhart and Noonan died on Gardner Island require a higher standard of evidence than the claim that they crashed and sank at sea? 
Logged

Kevin Weeks

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 236
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #739 on: March 25, 2014, 02:06:23 PM »

Mark, with all due respect, I don't claim to have 'proof' in-hand - just confidence.  I am living up to my burden, thanks.

You've mostly provided some challenges, worthy often enough, and some very interesting research material that has been helpful - but now you've clearly established a gloves-off intent to prove those of us who 'seek' to be 'wrong' - so I think you have just stepped into a certain 'burden' all your own by your own assertions.

Just MHO, of course - but since you had the cheek to make the point...


This is a forum dedicated to finding the fate of the electra is it not?? It makes sense that most of us would be at least optimistic about it being from that plane.

*quietly stands in the corner whistling as I await the next round of back and forth to start*

Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #740 on: March 25, 2014, 02:21:47 PM »

Ric opened the thread this way...

"Here's the question:  What evidence would you need to see to convince you that Artifact 2-2-V-1 came from NR16020?

Let's see if we can define the hurdles that must be cleared and what it would take to establish that each has been cleared.  Maybe we'll find a hurdle that absolutely disqualifies the artifact. Maybe not.  If we clear all the hurdles does that make it smoking gun?

We already know that this artifact is more promising than we previously realized. How good is it?  Let's find out."


I believe the ALCLAD markings are now a genuine hurdle.  I agree with Mark Appel,- it's crucial to always follow the Scientific  Method and modify hypothesis and positions as new information is developed and tested.  We've all learned a lot here, and I thank everyone for allowing me to contribute.  I hope I have not offended anyone by bringing to light information that has been overlooked. 
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 02:58:13 PM by Mark Pearce »
Logged

Jeff Carter

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #741 on: March 25, 2014, 03:25:46 PM »

Just for fun, here is how Reynolds aluminum stenciled their sheets (circa 1941):
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8b00608/
Aluminum. Reynolds Metal Company, Louisville, Kentucky. Finished sheets of "strong alloy" aluminum are stenciled with specifications data, such as the chemical and physical analysis. When these shots are fabricated into small airplane parts, this data must appear on every part

And the sheets arriving at the aircraft factories:
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d07130/
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8b05105/
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d42808/
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8b06275/
(Too bad the stencils are not readable.)

And an example where the sheet labeling was very badly crooked on a P-51:
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d36730/

Logged

Tim Gard

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #742 on: March 25, 2014, 03:43:26 PM »

I hope I have not offended anyone by bringing to light information that has been overlooked.

Expert outsiders, who have not taken the time to fully study the hypothesis and its results, usually achieve little more than the exposure of their own naivety.

/ Member #4122 /
/Hold the Heading/
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #743 on: March 25, 2014, 03:49:27 PM »

Ric opened the thread this way...

"Here's the question:  What evidence would you need to see to convince you that Artifact 2-2-V-1 came from NR16020?

Let's see if we can define the hurdles that must be cleared and what it would take to establish that each has been cleared.  Maybe we'll find a hurdle that absolutely disqualifies the artifact. Maybe not.  If we clear all the hurdles does that make it smoking gun?

We already know that this artifact is more promising than we previously realized. How good is it?  Let's find out."


I believe the ALCLAD markings are now a genuine hurdle.  I agree with Mark Appel,- it's crucial to always follow the Scientific  Method and modify hypothesis and positions as new information is developed and tested.  We've all learned a lot here, and I thank everyone for allowing me to contribute.  I hope I have not offended anyone by bringing to light information that has been overlooked.

In what way are the markings a genuine hurdle, Mark?  I fail to understand, please explain if you will.

No offense, and nothing overlooked - merely keeping points of fact and behavior straight and holding you as accountable as you would others - and enjoying the new information brought forward (which is not quite the same as 'overlooked' IMO).
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Jeff Carter

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #744 on: March 25, 2014, 06:06:32 PM »

In my mind, the question is whether a photograph or example of an aluminum sheet labelled "ALCLAD" can be located before 1942.  The earliest photograph I can find of aluminum sheet labelled ALCLAD is 1942 in a manufacturing plant photograph.

Two pictures have been posted earlier of the "ALC24ST" label dating from the 1930s.
http://i.imgur.com/qvWZZo5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/eZWbs7b.jpg
Other examples of this style of label include this photo of "ALC24ST" on a door of a DC-2:
http://www.ilmasotakoulunkilta.fi/IlmaSK/ilmaskmma.nsf/sp?open&cid=Content6685E&screen=blogentryscreen&blogid=Content6685E
and this photo from "Aluminum in aircraft", by Aluminum Company of America, Published 1941:
http://i.imgur.com/CEuCtg6.jpg
Although the aluminum alloy type is different, and thus the text is different, several other photographs in "Aluminum in Aircraft" (1941) show the same large serif type face.

Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #745 on: March 25, 2014, 06:20:27 PM »


In what way are the markings a genuine hurdle, Mark?  I fail to understand, please explain if you will.


I could be snarky Jeff, and write as you did earlier that "I don't have the time", but I will say this much....
 
Ric discovered the font on 2-2-V-1 matches ALCLAD labeling now known to be from the WW2 period - it does not match the font in ALCLAD labeling known to date to the 1930s. 

That's the hurdle.  Spin things any way you wish, but go to Dayton with an open mind, and study any ALCLAD labels you see as carefully as the rivets.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 07:06:12 PM by Mark Pearce »
Logged

Steve Lee

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • I am under moderation
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #746 on: March 25, 2014, 06:43:44 PM »

Ric,

In the long time you’ve been pondering the origin of 2-2-V-1 I know you’ve examined the Alclad markings of several Electras and possibly other Electras and prewar aircraft as well.

How was the original (rather than modification or repair) Alclad skin marked in these planes, particularly on the Electras?  Did the markings match those we see on Earhart's Electra in  the photo Greg Daspit found in the Purdue Archives and the Alcoa handbook photo?

Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #747 on: March 25, 2014, 06:46:05 PM »

I believe the ALCLAD markings are now a genuine hurdle. 

Okkkkkkk ... I agree with Mr. Neville on this one. What you have done, to date, while somewhat constructive, really amounts to little more than throwing a whole bunch of stuff against the barn wall to see if any of it sticks. Probability alone guarantees that at least something will appear to stick - but whether it's still there the next day, and the next year, that's a whole other bucket of ... stuff.

Talk is cheap. Answers are expensive. I plan to put my money where my mouth in a few days and try to find some of those answers. Why don't you join us? Heck, I'll even spring for the first round.

LTM, why trys not to hurt himself with steel rulers,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

Steve Lee

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • I am under moderation
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #748 on: March 25, 2014, 06:48:31 PM »

Mr. Pearce - I'm sure you would be more than welcome to come to Dayton and put your money where your mouth is, so to speak.

Unless that would be to inconvenient, that is.

LTM, who remembers what a hypothesis is,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

Monty, 

Good luck in Dayton--thanks for going!  But when you get back perhaps you could find an example of pre-war Alclad that matches the typeface seen on 2-2-V-1.  It's an important point to clear up--if you can find an example it be  a point in favor of the case that Tighar found a piece of the Electra.

Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #749 on: March 25, 2014, 07:26:00 PM »

Some pictures of the underside of the London Science museums Lockheed Electra Model 10-A, although I'm sure I have seen it recorded as being a model 10-B somewhere. I don't think they would allow me to crawl about inside it looking for Alcoa ALCLAD markings though due to its current location, suspended from the ceiling  :-\

This must be the place
 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 70   Go Up
 

Copyright 2024 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

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

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