Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 70   Go Down

Author Topic: The Question of 2-2-V-1  (Read 822536 times)

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #75 on: February 10, 2014, 08:12:25 AM »

The nearest aviation repair shop to Gardner island circa 1930's I can find so far is this one.

"May 1939: Pan American World Airways arrives on Kanton Island to build a service station for a flying boat service to New Zealand. The service starts in July 1940."

Does artefact 2-2-V-1 have to be from a missing or crashed aircraft if it isn't from the Electra?

2-2-V-1 is a sheet of aluminum that was once part of an airplane. It was riveted to underlying structure during repairs to that airplane.  The area of repair was later subjected to forces exerted on the interior surface sufficient to blow the heads off many of the rivets and fracture the sheet resulting in a three-sided fragment with some pieces of underlying structure still attached. The fragment was then bent back and forth against a rigid underlying edge until the fourth side failed from metal fatigue. The surviving pieces of underlying structure were pried off.
I think the answer to your question is yes.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #76 on: February 10, 2014, 08:16:20 AM »

Can painted planes be eliminated as donors?

I don't think so. Paint can go away over time.
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 760
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #77 on: February 10, 2014, 09:47:22 AM »

The artifact was previously suspected to be just forward of the cabin door but  the "space between lines of rivets was an inch or less narrower on the artifact than on the airplane”.
So the latest possible fit is directly across the cabin door where the taper has the lines closer together?  Was that area not selected before because the lines of rivets would have been too close together and is it  the possible deformation in the artifact that may now allow it to fit that area directly across the cabin door?
Is the pitch of the rivets in that new location the same as the previous location? If so, is the significance of the spacing of the rivets at 1” on the artifact and 1.5” on the airplane that this is evidence it was repaired?
3971R
 
Logged

John Ousterhout

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #78 on: February 10, 2014, 10:00:24 AM »

Ric sez "...Importation of aircraft aluminum from distant places as you describe, although arguably highly unlikely, was certainly possible.  That's not the issue."

Highly unlikely?  What about the bookcase?  Was it not imported from a distant place?
Cheers,
JohnO
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #79 on: February 10, 2014, 10:31:38 AM »

Ric sez "...Importation of aircraft aluminum from distant places as you describe, although arguably highly unlikely, was certainly possible.  That's not the issue."

Highly unlikely?  What about the bookcase?  Was it not imported from a distant place?

I suspect 'more likely' due to known PBY crash in region.  Yes - it was 'imported' most probably.  But if the sheet 2-2-V-1 were imported, then 'what from'?  No clear other donor as is the case with the bookcase.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
« Last Edit: February 11, 2014, 03:08:53 PM by Jeffrey Neville »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #80 on: February 10, 2014, 12:43:49 PM »

Ric sez "...Importation of aircraft aluminum from distant places as you describe, although arguably highly unlikely, was certainly possible.  That's not the issue."

Highly unlikely?  What about the bookcase?  Was it not imported from a distant place?

I took "distant places" to mean places beyond other islands of the Phoenix Group.  The bookcase came from a B-24.  There was a B-24 crash on Canton. People from Niku worked on Canton after the war, so Canton would seem to be the logical source of the bookcase.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #81 on: February 10, 2014, 01:28:50 PM »

So the latest possible fit is directly across the cabin door where the taper has the lines closer together?  Was that area not selected before because the lines of rivets would have been too close together and is it  the possible deformation in the artifact that may now allow it to fit that area directly across the cabin door?

To be honest I don't remember why we didn't see the match before.

Is the pitch of the rivets in that new location the same as the previous location? If so, is the significance of the spacing of the rivets at 1” on the artifact and 1.5” on the airplane that this is evidence it was repaired?

I'm not sure about the rivet pitch in the new location. Scaling from the photos I have gives conflicting answers. I'll check it in person next Sunday when I'm at the New England Air Museum for a speaking engagement.  In any case, the fact that the artifact is from a repaired section of some airplane is based on the labeling that identifies it as metal that has been approved for use in repairs but original construction.
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 760
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #82 on: February 10, 2014, 02:48:30 PM »

Regarding the antenna lead wire found tangled with 2-2-V-1.
If this piece of aircraft skin was re purposed as a grill after being salvaged then here are some thoughts about the wire:
1. The wire was used to hang up the grill after use(possibly still hot). It came untied after abandonment but still got tangled in a tear.
2. The wire  was used to tie one end of the panel down to something so it could be cantilevered some distance above the fire.
3. It never was untangled while they used the grill.  Seems odd.
4. It became tangled with 2-2-V-1 after being used for something else and abandoned. Seems like long odds. Maybe multiple salvaged aircraft parts were kept in one area.

Is there evidence of scratched areas that could be evidence of grilling and/or scraping cooked fish off on 2-2-V-1? Perhaps the area of corrosion?
3971R
 
« Last Edit: February 10, 2014, 03:52:05 PM by Greg Daspit »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #83 on: February 10, 2014, 04:26:20 PM »

Regarding the antenna lead wire found tangled with 2-2-V-1.....

Recall that the artifact was discovered in the wash-up from a severe storm.   If our speculation is correct that the artifact was repurposed as a cooking grill and was merely uncovered and moved inland buy the storm, then the presence of a piece of wire tangled on the artifact implies no particular significance to the wire.

Is there evidence of scratched areas that could be evidence of grilling and/or scraping cooked fish off on 2-2-V-1? Perhaps the area of corrosion?

Good thought but, no, I don't see anything like that.
Logged

richie conroy

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1412
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #84 on: February 10, 2014, 04:45:43 PM »

Ric

Can u add a photo of other side of artifact ? My apologies as i know this image is available but cant find it anywhere  ::)

Thanks Richie
We are an echo of the past


Member# 416
 
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2967
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #85 on: February 10, 2014, 06:25:00 PM »

Can u add a photo of other side of artifact ? My apologies as i know this image is available but cant find it anywhere  ::)

There is a photo of both sides in the NTSB Report

LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #86 on: February 10, 2014, 07:04:29 PM »

"That said, I doubt it is likely.  It did first fly in 1938 and was introduced in 1942, but its construction - by what I've found so far, appears to be more typically flush, heavier military.  I found a few pictures on Wiki so far - lots of flush rivets on outer skin. 

It did have lovely lines  despite other challenges to its performance."

Quite an innovative design for a pre-WW2 plane Jeff, mid engine to allow for the machine guns to be installed forward of the cockpit, tricycle undercarriage but, shame about the performance and inherent problems with the skin stress. Fully flush riveted as you noticed and nice streamlined lines as well, good looking plane.

From a recovered P-39 project regarding problems with the skin

During testing and combat reports, the one thing the Soviets were discovering was that the P39 suffered a structural weakness of the rear fuselage. After thorough testing, the Soviet LII (Flight Research Institute) and TsAGI (Central Aero and Hydrodynamic Institute) recommended a number of improvements to be undertaken at repair workshops from mid 1944.

These were recorded as: -
 Defect and modification. - Twisting of rear fuselage and skin deformation.
 All Q models up to and including the Q21 to have the following.
 a. Two additional skins around radio compartment hatches.
 b. fuselage longeron reinforcing member
 c. two supports to forward tailplane spar attachment joints
 d. two plates to reinforce the port forward fuselage beam. 

Items a and c are clearly visible on ‘White 23’. These skins have been added over the red star and have covered segments of it. Whether or not it was deemed important, the star was not repainted.

All Q series models were to have the following work undertaken to the fin.
 a. reinforce fin leading edge with additional skin.
 b. add third fin/fuselage attachment point.
 c. reinforce the forward and rear post with additional profiles.
 d. additional plates at the middle of the rudder hinge.

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/


I was aware of these problems as I have read up on this model many years ago and wondered if the problems were due to the mid engine arrangement adding unexpected stresses along the length of the fuselage when manoeuvring.

From a P-39 restoration project regarding the riveting

"In fact, what shines through every facet of this 28+ year project is the ingenuity Ian applied not just to replicating the work of "Mr Bell and his many thousand work force of WW2" but to the very design and building of numerous tools. The P-39 features an external skin flush riveted throughout. These rivets require 'countersinking' and when holding thin metal STRESSED skin in place, this means deforming the inner edge of the hole - an operation called "dimpling".

http://www.qaww2.com/p39-project.html

This must be the place
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #87 on: February 10, 2014, 08:13:59 PM »

These photos of 2-2-V-1 were taken under low angle lighting to accentuate the bends, bows, wrinkles and dents.  It is one beat up piece of metal.
The notations of nose and tail reference how the piece appears to fit on NR12060.  We, of course, don't really know the nose/tail orientation of the piece but the rivet lines do taper slightly toward what was probably the tail.

The four edges of the piece have been numbered for ease of reference.

« Last Edit: February 10, 2014, 08:19:47 PM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Chuck Lynch

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #88 on: February 10, 2014, 09:52:47 PM »

If I may make a suggestion, those two sepia images look much better in black & white.

Thanks.
Logged

Chris Johnson

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Trying to give a fig but would settle for $100,000
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #89 on: February 11, 2014, 05:32:43 AM »

Top sepia image to the right as you look at, the row of holes seem wider spaced than those on the inside of the piece? Why would this be?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 70   Go Up
 

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

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

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