Print

[JNev]

I think your points are good, Jay, and Ric's regarding the 'Manning Factor' and the general 'half-assedness' of the whole affair.  That big window, absent some clearly-told purpose (which it clearly lacks since history has us scratching our heads), is a gaping hole on the side of the airplane and carbunckle on the rump of the first round-the-world effort so far as I can tell.  That it was skinned over in Miami may be telling of same - enough of that nonsense, close 'er up and we're off... caution, speculation on my part of course - but that's about where I sit having heard and seen this much to-date.

I am inclined to believe the 'big window' (reminds me of Lucy and Desi's movie now 'the Big Yellow Trailer'...) was not a Lockheed effort, but a Mantz Aviation special: that it seems to lack the doublers you mention leave it suspect that way to me.  In lieu of a visible outer doubler, or telling rivets in the field around the opening, it could have had a fairly substantial frame to compensate - but we see no upper double row of rivets (so far - stand by for better pix when it might happen) to account for the double row that was chopped out for the window (original stringer ran through at about 2/3rds way up the window).  Somehow this all seems (can't say for certain, just seemingly) a bit contrary to Lockheed's elegant conservatism in framing their lovely ships.

Whatever challenges remain, it is interesting that 2-2-V-1 fits within the aperture well enough to qualify, is of an acceptable thickness for such an arrangement, and bears what may be a reasonable fastener count / spacing / row spacing for candidacy.  For one thing, we may be able to at least compare upper row rivet spacing to that of 2-2-V-1 - and an alternate spacing may further suggest non-Lockheed (and what if it matches the non-Lockheed spacing we see on 2-2-V-1?).

[Greg Daspit]

The sheet bordering the patch on three sides (top,rear, and bottom) is .025". The forward edge abuts a .032" skin.  Does it make sense for the patch to be .032"?

 An .032" skin would also still fair reasonably behind the lap just forward of the patch leading edge - except considering that the patch was likely simply applied over the mod-window coaming. 

“Coaming”
Thanks Jeff.  I was wondering what to call the metal at the rim of the window seen in image 10 from the article.
 I was wondering if the coaming was removed, left in place or reinstalled somehow and whether it helped reinforce the edges of the patch.

Edit
To clarify I was wondering why the edge of the patch would separate from the rest of the patch in the context of 2-2-V-1.
Why, if there was enough force to blow rivet heads off, the force didn’t also blow the panel off all the way to the edge.
It seems like if the coaming was left then there may be 3 layers of skin(the original .025, the coaming and then the new.032 plus the structure.
Would that require the need for an upsizing in rivets at the edge as well?

[Kent Beuchert]

I think your points are good, Jay, and Ric's regarding the 'Manning Factor' and the general 'half-assedness' of the whole affair.  That big window, absent some clearly-told purpose (which it clearly lacks since history has us scratching our heads), is a gaping hole on the side of the airplane and carbunckle on the rump of the first round-the-world effort so far as I can tell.

What's wrong with this logic?  1) I have no clue as to why these window mods were made to the ship
                                              2) They are proof of the half-assed nature of Earhart's world flight.
Half assed it may have seemed, but the world flight was nearing complete success, and only failed during the final legs because of  a sequence of unlikely events and bad luck.

[Will Hatchell]

What's wrong with this logic?  1) I have no clue as to why these window mods were made to the ship
                                              2) They are proof of the half-assed nature of Earhart's world flight.
Half assed it may have seemed, but the world flight was nearing complete success, and only failed during the final legs because of  a sequence of unlikely events and bad luck.
[/quote]

Kent,

Wasn't there some celestial navigation advantage having the windows on the starboard side for a west to east equatorial
route as opposed to having them on the port side for the east to west route she finally chose after the Luke Field accident? Seems I've seen or read something re this.

[Ted G Campbell]

All,

Let’s take a deep breath and think back to what was done in Miami during that visit.  I seem to recall that the trailing antenna was removed and the new DF system was installed, does any thing else come to mind?

Are there any “major” components associated with the Miami mods that would need to be placed into the aircraft that would require a large shelf/cabinet to be placed in the lavatory area and fixtured to the fuselage wall?

I just seem to believe that the stop in Miami would have had a fairly large work agenda that would have been developed before getting there.  Some thing that Lockheed couldn’t or wouldn’t attempt in Calif.

Just some ideas.

Ted Campbell 

[JNev]

I think your points are good, Jay, and Ric's regarding the 'Manning Factor' and the general 'half-assedness' of the whole affair.  That big window, absent some clearly-told purpose (which it clearly lacks since history has us scratching our heads), is a gaping hole on the side of the airplane and carbunckle on the rump of the first round-the-world effort so far as I can tell.

What's wrong with this logic?  1) I have no clue as to why these window mods were made to the ship
                                              2) They are proof of the half-assed nature of Earhart's world flight.

[/b]

Nothing, in my view -
 
1) The purpose for the window mod (big one at least) remains obscure and no one has produced a truly good reason for it; they got on famously without it - until they couldn't find Howland... AH-HAH!!!  That's IT!  THAT was the window in which Howland was to have appeared, dammit - no WONDER they never saw Howland...    Anyway, that is a segueue into...
2) Arriving with a plane load of 'help' in Hawaii with dry prop hubs, Earhart at the wheel and losing the bird on take-off (differential throttle handling to augment directional control in lieu of manly rudder handling was implied by Mantz but nobody convicting of Earhart), thence a change in direction with Putnam assuming some vocal roles to convey key information, i.e. non-sense about radio coordination, etc., off-route on first African stop, radio mishandling from get-go - less than steller preparation is evident = Keystone Cops exercise.

Half assed it may have seemed, but the world flight was nearing complete success, and only failed during the final legs because of  a sequence of unlikely events and bad luck.

Yeah, they almost made it... and almost really sucks when it comes to finding Howland.

Is it really so unlikely or bad luck to have mismatched radio capabilities so badly, or to have (NOT) prepared for radio usage so poorly?  Or are those failures waiting to happen when one prepares 'halfassedly'?

Or one could say that Howland just didn't seem to want Amelia - her Luke Field event staved it off first, now this unlikely bad luck... or maybe it really is safe to say that the Pacific doesn't tolerate 'half-assedness' with charity.

No slight is meant toward poor dead Amelia and Fred - I'm a fan; but the thing does speak clearly for itself to a reasonable hind-sighter - 'half-assed' in more ways than I care to think about.  That's a good way to get lost...

[Mark Appel]

From Fox News among others... hopefully going viral...

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/01/photo-may-offer-crucial-clue-in-amelia-earhart-mystery-report/

[Bill Mangus]

As I see things now, it doesn't really matter 'why' the window installed or why it was removed and patched.  Answering that won't tell us if 2-2-V-1 is, in fact, the patch.  What needs answering, if possible, is 'who did the work and where are the records -- drawing, pictures, descriptions, approvals and so forth for this and all the other work that may have needed to be done?

Only finding the records will conclusively prove or disprove the question.  Let's think about where they might be and where's a good place to start.

Jeff Glickman might find a suggestion of rivet lines in some of the old photography, but that's not in my opinion the 'any idiot smoking gun'.

[Mark Appel]

Jeff Glickman might find a suggestion of rivet lines in some of the old photography, but that's not in my opinion the 'any idiot smoking gun'.

Perhaps not as definitive as we like, but consider this: The good folks at the USAF Museum confirmed 2-2-V-1 was a "professionally installed" part. If Pan Am personnel installed the patch, that would likely qualify as "professional." If Jeff can, with some reasonable assurance, correlate the rivet lines and other detail between 2-2-V-1 and the patch depicted in the picture, you'd still have objects of not just matching detail, but also confirmation that both were installed in a precise, workman-like manner. Quelle coincidence!

[Ric Gillespie]

That looks like a temporary plug for that opening that was used only during production.

The bar through the cabin windows was there after the airplane was delivered.  They appear in numerous photos until early 1937 when they disappear at the same time the cabin door window, the lave window and other modifications for the world flight appear.

I can’t figure out why they needed such a large window at that location.  The better question woud be:  If they thought that he large window was necessary, and obviously they did at some point, why would they have attempted the round-the-world flight without it?

As I explained above, the big window was probably Manning's idea. Noonan didn't need it.

[Ric Gillespie]

This should help.  It's a photo of the interior of c/n 1130 in 2004 when it was being rebuilt by the Navy at Pensacola as a replica of NR16020.  The bulkhead with the door to the Lavatory hasn't been installed yet so we can see right back to the bulkhead that is the rear wall of the lavatory (Sta. 243).  Lots of information here.  Note the red arrow.  To install that window they had to cut away part of the stiffener at Sta. 207.  Really surprising that they would do that.

[Ric Gillespie]

I just received permission to share the Miami Herald photos for research.  They must be credited to the Miami Herald and they can't be used in a book or documentary without special permission.  Enjoy.

[Joe Cerniglia]

This photo from page 13 of the July 3, 1937 Melbourne Argus seems to have the area of interest on NR16020 that was seldom photographed.  The National Library of Australia's online copy on Trove unfortunately does not offer better quality, but an original surviving photo from the newspaper's archives might. 


[Edit: Purdue appears to have an original copy. I can see the patch in it but can't make out rivet lines.]

It may be a totally moot point if the Miami photo proves to show everything we hope it might show, but it may be another option for study if it does not.

From what I can see, though, the stars appear to be aligning around the Miami photo in terms of quality.  That could be hard to beat.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078C

[Ken Nielsen]

Journalists, groan.

"The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery claims that the skin and other items including a woman's shoe prove conclusively that Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan perished on the remote Pacific island of Nikumaroro while on the final leg of a round-the-world flight in 1937."

Could this long forgotten picture FINALLY solve the mystery of Amelia Earhart's disappearance over the Pacific Ocean?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2677486/Did-Amelia-Earhart-perish-castaway-desert-island-Long-forgotten-picture-hints-tragic-demise-aviator-disappeared-nearly-80-years-ago-today.html#ixzz36IncUczh

[Ric Gillespie]

Journalists, groan.

Ahh well, at least they spelled my name right.