Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 70   Go Down

Author Topic: The Question of 2-2-V-1  (Read 1023231 times)

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #375 on: March 01, 2014, 07:32:11 PM »

What year was the "wheel of fortune"?

2002
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3006
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #376 on: March 01, 2014, 09:27:35 PM »

Ric,
What year was the "wheel of fortune"?
Ted Campbell

"Wheel of Fortune."
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #377 on: March 02, 2014, 09:24:47 AM »

This photo shows what may be a patch on the hull of a PBY [just aft of the wing strut, bottom of photo.] 

If done "by the book", the patch would be made with .032" sheet, the same material as 2-2-V-1. 



More photos can be seen here-
http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/hans-hermann_buhling/pby-5a_433915/index.php?Page=3

Here is a direct link to the PBY repair manual-  Hull plating diagram is on page 92 of 182.
 
http://miravim.org/avimlibrary/Manuals/Airframe%20Manuals/Other%20Airframes/Consolidated%2001-5M-3%20(PBY-5%20,%205A,%206A%20-%20Handbook%20of%20Structural%20Repair%20Manual).pdf

The "Hull Skin Repair Rivet Table" also gives "Damaged Skin Gage and Repair Sheet Gages"
See page 94 of 182.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2014, 11:56:14 AM by Mark Pearce »
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #378 on: March 03, 2014, 07:53:25 AM »

This photo shows what may be a patch on the hull of a PBY [just aft of the wing strut, bottom of photo.] 

If done "by the book", the patch would be made with .032" sheet, the same material as 2-2-V-1. 



More photos can be seen here-
http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/hans-hermann_buhling/pby-5a_433915/index.php?Page=3

Here is a direct link to the PBY repair manual-  Hull plating diagram is on page 92 of 182.
 
http://miravim.org/avimlibrary/Manuals/Airframe%20Manuals/Other%20Airframes/Consolidated%2001-5M-3%20(PBY-5%20,%205A,%206A%20-%20Handbook%20of%20Structural%20Repair%20Manual).pdf

The "Hull Skin Repair Rivet Table" also gives "Damaged Skin Gage and Repair Sheet Gages"
See page 94 of 182.

Mark,

I was finally able to view the PBY picture on iPhone, not ideal), but not other PBY link or B-17 details yet (won't open in my current venue), but will.  Interesting.

I was able to peruse the PBY manual, also very interesting - but it shows heavier riveting in the areas that would be likely hosts: #4 AD456 (modified braziers) seem to be the smallest there.  By all I could see about the PBY I have to say it does not look like a strong contender as a potential parent to 2-2-V-1.  The hull and wing do have some .032" 24ST skins, for sure - but again, the smallest rivet called out was a #4.  The floats were even more heavily built - .040" skins and the smallest rivet I found was #5.  Also, the modified brazier, not the original brazier, seems to have been the norm in air-passage areas.

Of course that doesn't tell us anything directly about a PBM (different airplane), but it does suggest to me that the structure on the more modern PBM are likely at least as heavily built as those of the PBY, so if anything this might diminish the odds of that Howland wreck being a contender.  But there it lies and I still favor learning more about the PBM if we can.

As to the Canton junk heap, sounds interesting but I think more needs to be known about specific types and their construction before it could be 'ruled in' as a likely source.  The proximity and mixing of Niku folk there are of course strong things to consider - but I still see 2-2-V-1 as having a very unique signature that speaks of a certain type of structure - not so commonly found.

Thanks for your work on this - good information.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #379 on: March 03, 2014, 12:11:32 PM »


Mark,

I was finally able to view the PBY picture on iPhone, not ideal), but not other PBY link or B-17 details yet (won't open in my current venue), but will.  Interesting.... Thanks for your work on this - good information.

You are welcome Jeff.  I believe the greatest revelation lately is to find the B-17G had 3/32" rivets in the stressed skin wings.

See reply #369 above.

"Design Analysis of the Boeing B-17G Flying Fortress"
http://legendsintheirowntime.com/B17/B17_articles/B17_IA_4412_DA.html

"...Over this basic truss structure is a layer of 24ST clad or 24SRT clad corrugated sheet which ranges in thickness from .064 gauge inboard to .016 gauge outboard, in turn covered with 24ST clad skin varying in gauge from .016 to .040. Attached to the structure with skin-type aluminum alloy rivets ranging in diameter from 3/32" to ¼", this corrugation, with the stressed skin, carries two-thirds of the wing loads..."

Silver clecos - sized for 3/32 rivets - can be seen in many on-line photos of B-17 restoration projects.  By chance, this story about the project in Urbana, Ohio appeared just yesterday.

http://www.timesnews.net/gallery/9073929/photo-gallery-ohio-museum-volunteers-building-vintage-b-17

One picture in the photo gallery [at the bottom of the page] shows silver clecos in an aileron undergoing repair.  This restoration group BTW, has a complete set of plans for the B-17, [supplied by Boeing I believe.]  Maybe someone in Urbana would be willing to look over the plans [and the plane] for areas that match up with 2-2-V-1.

Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 788
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #380 on: March 03, 2014, 01:08:49 PM »

This photo in the purdue archives shows something odd under it but I'm not sure exactly where it is. The photo is taken from the opposite side but something seems to be protruding from the skin close to that area maybe a little rear of the suspected location?

I see what you mean, but that photo was taken at Burbank in early March before the first world flight attempt, so it was before the wreck and the repairs.

But it could tell us something of an alteration, if present.  That may be a standard belly vent - or maybe something else. 

Were belly stiffeners altered in placement to accommodate some piece of equipment?  We have at least one notable offset to deal with in the artifact if it came from this area of the Electra - a found alteration might help explain that.
If I understand the scenario for a possible fit right, after the Luke Field repairs, the starboard half of the keel was able to take rivets but the port half of the original keel for some reason could not take rivets and they added either a stiffener or another stringer next to it to provide adequate structure for the second line of rivets where the skins overlapped. What is a little odd is the starboard side of the plane, in general, had more damage but the port side of the keel at 2-2V-1 is the half that needed additional structure added. There could be several reasons for this but one reason might be that when the plane’s belly hit the tarmac, whatever that protrusion is, caused a concentrated load to the port half of the keel and bent it up. See attachment.

Another note:
If the skin extended over another ¾” then prototype panels off the factory floor would be too small.
3971R
 
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 06:26:41 PM by Greg Daspit »
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #381 on: March 03, 2014, 02:15:56 PM »

Here's a good photo of a B-17 wing at the Air Force Museum.  I believe this may be a wing from the Memphis Belle. Or it may be from the "The Swoose."  Rivets out by the tip could be 3/32" braziers- AN455's.  Something to look for on the trip to Dayton. 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Swoose_(B-17D)



http://www.pbase.com/jmhoying/restoration
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #382 on: March 03, 2014, 02:48:06 PM »

Maybe I'm just being dense today (nothing new about that), but why are we looking at aircraft types that were not lost in the area of interest, as possible artifact candidates?

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #383 on: March 03, 2014, 02:56:53 PM »

Maybe I'm just being dense today (nothing new about that), but why are we looking at aircraft types that were not lost in the area of interest, as possible artifact candidates?

Because if we don't somebody will claim that we should have.
Logged

Mark Pearce

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #384 on: March 03, 2014, 03:03:27 PM »



Maybe I'm just being dense today (nothing new about that), but why are we looking at aircraft types that were not lost in the area of interest, as possible artifact candidates?

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

Consider all the aircraft activity that took place on Canton Island.  It must have been a busy place-  before, during, and after the war.  Pan Am was operating from there starting in 1938 [... and up until Dec. 7th, 1941 I believe.]

"...The airport was used as a military airfield during World War II by the United States Army Air Forces in 1942 and 1943, initially being used by the 40th Ferrying (later Transport) Squadron, Ferrying (later Air Transport) Command as an airfield for moving combat aircraft to forward combat units. The airfield saw various aircraft, including A-20s, B-17s, B-24s, B-25s, B-26s, P-38s, P-40s, C-46s, and C-47s transit the base. In February 1943, the long-range B-24 Liberator Bombers of the 392d Bombardment Squadron were sent to the airfield."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canton_Island_Airport
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #385 on: March 03, 2014, 03:04:58 PM »

Right ... quadruple redundancy. Good point.

LTM, who ruminates on redundancy,
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 #386 on: March 03, 2014, 07:33:01 PM »

OK, I was going to keep out of this because I’m way over my head but this has become a really interesting thread. So, I’m willing to take one for the team of people like me who don’t know the difference between an AN455-3 rivet and a thumbtack, and dare to ask a few general, not-in-the-weeds questions:

From what Mark Pearce has found, at this point we should consider PBYs as possible sources of the ‘right’ kind of aluminum, with the ‘right’ kind of rivets and rivet holes?… If so, then one of the PBYs that Tighar lists as having crashed or destroyed by bombing on Canton should at this point be considered a possible the source of 2-2-v-1?…

Should we consider, based on what is seen of the PBM wreck on Howland, that that type of plane, e.g. the PBM tha Tighar lists as having ‘hit reef while taxiing’ is a possible source of 2-2-v-1?…

I’m also wondering about the PV-1 that Jeff Carter asked about at reply #46 on this thread. It certainly looks like a good candidate to me, as without-weight as that assessment is.  Perhaps someone with knowledge of a surviving example or a wreck (possible contact) would have an informed opinion? Or maybe some nice Forum reader has $19.95 to spend on a PV-1 maintenance manual to see what it has to say about skins and rivets?

Its probably a long shot, but I’m even wondering if a crashed P-39 on Canton is a possible donor? And, even if not, according to this interesting account of Canton Island during WWII the P39D that crashed in November 1942 was involved in a two plane crash:

Pacific airfields were mostly named for the first man killed on them. When the night patrol returned at dawn, they were under orders to buzz the field at 3 feet off the deck. 2nd Lt. John H. Topham died buzzing it in a spectacular two plane crash: it became Topham Field.

What was the other plane involved in the crash? It doesn’t show up on the Tighar list of Canton plane crashes?

Finally, there is much here on Canton as an an airbase during WWII  indicating that it was a fairly significant airbase. One thing I read here is that bombers based at Canton stopped at Baker on prior to proceeding to their targets; I point this out because of earlier discussions here about possible modes of transport of objects to Canton from other islands. (again, I don’t know why anyone would carry wrecked plane parts between islands, but this does indicate a potential ‘pipeline’  for transport of wreck parts Baker and Canton…
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 07:53:52 PM by Steve Lee »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #387 on: March 03, 2014, 08:03:05 PM »

To keep it simple:

To be a candidate for a source for 2-2-V-1 and aircraft must:
1. Have #3 brazier rivets in a .032" skin
2. The rivets must be in a pattern identical or very similar to the pattern seen on 2-2-V-1.
3. If there is such an aircraft (other than a Lockheed Model 10) the aircraft must be shown to have been present or transited through the Central Pacific.
4. To be a serious contender, it must be shown that an aircraft of that type was lost somewhere in the Central Pacific.

As far as I know, no one has yet identified an aircraft that meets the first criterion.  Lots of airplanes had #3 rivets.  Lots of airplanes used brazier rivets.  Lots of airplanes had .032" skins.  We need to look at any aircraft that might meets all four criteria but at this point nothing looks even close.
Logged

Steve Lee

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • I am under moderation
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #388 on: March 03, 2014, 08:41:14 PM »

To keep it simple:

To be a candidate for a source for 2-2-V-1 and aircraft must:
1. Have #3 brazier rivets in a .032" skin
2. The rivets must be in a pattern identical or very similar to the pattern seen on 2-2-V-1.
3. If there is such an aircraft (other than a Lockheed Model 10) the aircraft must be shown to have been present or transited through the Central Pacific.
4. To be a serious contender, it must be shown that an aircraft of that type was lost somewhere in the Central Pacific.

As far as I know, no one has yet identified an aircraft that meets the first criterion.  Lots of airplanes had #3 rivets.  Lots of airplanes used brazier rivets.  Lots of airplanes had .032" skins.  We need to look at any aircraft that might meets all four criteria but at this point nothing looks even close.

Have surviving models of the specific types wrecked on Canton PBY, PBM, PV-1, been checked as possible matches the rivet pattern on 2-2-V-I?  What about the rivet patterns on B-17s?


« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 08:43:10 PM by Steve Lee »
Logged

Jeff Carter

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Re: The Question of 2-2-V-1
« Reply #389 on: March 03, 2014, 09:39:10 PM »

Some B-24's had large skin panels with seven vertical rivet rows on the starboard side above the rear bomb bay doors.  A clear example is on this page http://www.grubby-fingers-aircraft-illustration.com/liberator_A72-176_walkaround.html in the image http://www.grubby-fingers-aircraft-illustration.com/images/Liberator_A72-176_051_med.jpg.

The panel size is approx. 2 1/2 feet x 3 feet which would place the rivet rows approx. 3 1/2" - 4" apart.  There are no crossing patterns of rivets. 

This particular example is a B-24M, and a B-24M was damaged landing at Topham Field on Canton Island in 1945.  Some sources show a similar rivet pattern on B-24Js, but I have not been able to confirm or deny.  (http://www.flickr.com/photos/34076827@N00/5717863344/in/photostream/)

I do not have B-24 repair/structural manuals or blueprints to identify skin thickness or rivet size, but I do have factory photographs showing at least some B-24s/C-87s used .032" skin on the fuselage sides.

This rivet pattern does not appear on all B-24s.

These photos show the same rivet pattern on original B-24s (not restorations), so the pattern is not just a mistake in restoration  (http://www.flickr.com/photos/34076827@N00/5717863286/in/photostream/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/34076827@N00/5717863344/in/photostream/).

Here are two additional photos which show this section of the B-24M with the seven vertical rivet rows, both from the inside and the outside:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/87791108@N00/2953297685/sizes/l/
(the darker aluminum panel in the mid-background)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/canvaswings/8553395708/sizes/l/
(the vertical stringers in the back of the bomb bay on the left and right sides)

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 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