2-2-V-1 - patch?

[Jeff Lange]

Terrific and easily tested hypothesis. Well done article, and, if the surviving rivet proves to be of the lower magnesium content, it WILL answer a big question we have had. Good work!

[Ric Gillespie]

It's just a hypothesis but it seems to make sense.  The SEM EDX work will be expensive but it should answer the question. 
A dedicated and generous TIGHAR once said "Questions are cheap. Answers are expensive."

[JNev]

It does make sense.  The condition of the holes is very odd - not typical where rivets would have been drilled out, and there does not appear to be evidence of chiseling heads off, etc. either.

This is the thing I've come to ache for people to understand - this stuff doesn't come together over night and it isn't cheap, but if you have any inkling that Earhart just might have gone down at Niku then whatever is found that can't be shown impossible, is possible, and deserves to be wrung dry.

Will we have to sacrifice that surviving rivet?  We have pictures, but if this is destructive, I'm sure it will be thoroughly documented in all possible respects before it undergoes 'the machine'.

[Ric Gillespie]

I asked Aris Scarla (our 2-2-V-1 Commission structures expert) to review the article.  His reply:
"Ric, that is a very accurate theory and hypothesis that I could support. Dissimilar metal corrosion can have very dramatic effects on aircraft. That hypothesis can still be tested today by placing a sheet of aluminum with stiffeners of bucked rivets from that era in a salt bath with the same consistency of salt that is in that portion of the Pacific. Then wait and see what happens. Temperature and time controlled would tell you how long it would take."

From the patches of coral growth we already know that 2-2-V-1 spent some period of time in shallow salt water. It would be nice to know how long. Seems like the tricky part about that experiment would be finding a supply of rivets from that era.

[Ric Gillespie]

Will we have to sacrifice that surviving rivet?

No. SEM EDX is non-destructive.

[JNev]

Thanks!  Duh - 'x-rays' - I should pay more attention - probably does not even have to leave the host part.

[Ric Gillespie]

probably does not even have to leave the host part.

I dunno.  Having observed some SEM work, I wouldn't be surprised if we have to "dismount" the rivet. 

[Gus Rubio]

Wow, the "Corrosion Hypotheses" document is fascinating.  It provides a way to find a couple of important pieces of information, namely, what happened to all the missing rivets, and it could date the lone present rivet to a specific era, i.e. pre-WW2, as Ric indicated above. 

Seems like the tricky part about that experiment would be finding a supply of rivets from that era.

Might it not be possible to cook up a batch of those low-Mg rivets for the salt-water test?  The recipe has to be around, doesn't it?  Or maybe you could use a a donor rivet to determine the composition?  One could be borrowed from a pre-war museum plane, or a known wreck in the field. 

The story keeps getting more interesting, you can feel it coming to a conclusion, if only in a Zeno's Paradox way.

[James G. Stoveken]

I never bought the idea of a "fluid force" blowing the heads off all the rivets.  At least this new corrosion hypothesis is something I can subscribe to if the rest of the evidence goes that way.  In the back of my mind though, I seem to remember that with galvanic (or is it electrolytic?) corrosion one surface loses while the other gains so it would seem like there should be evidence of the rivets existence around the holes.  But I could very well be mis-remembering that.

Me and Occam still think the "they-aren't-rivet-holes-they're-screw-holes" idea is the simplest answer, at least until someone tells us why that can't be.

[Monty Fowler]

Might it not be possible to cook up a batch of those low-Mg rivets for the salt-water test?  The recipe has to be around, doesn't it?  Or maybe you could use a a donor rivet to determine the composition?  One could be borrowed from a pre-war museum plane, or a known wreck in the field.

I don't know if any of the Idaho Electra wreck parts that TIGHAR recovered have rivets on them, I seem to recall that the one piece we examined in Dayton did. I don't believe TIGHAR recovered anything with rivets on it from the Alaska Electra wreck. That one would be a bear to get back to.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR no. 2189 ECSP

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

Me and Occam still think the "they-aren't-rivet-holes-they're-screw-holes" idea is the simplest answer, at least until someone tells us why that can't be.

In an environment where there is a lot of vibration, rivets would be preferable to screws, I think.

I'm not an A&P.  I've just done a lot of dumb things in my life with nuts and bolts and screws.

[Bessel P Sybesma]

Interestingly, the rivet corrosion theory also provides an explanation how 2-2-V-1 got separated from the rest of the airframe, having been fitted with old stock rivets in Miami, while the rest of the rivets fitted in the factory were corrosion resistant enough to prolong the integrity of the rest of the aircraft

[JNev]

Interestingly, the rivet corrosion theory also provides an explanation how 2-2-V-1 got separated from the rest of the airframe, having been fitted with old stock rivets in Miami, while the rest of the rivets fitted in the factory were corrosion resistant enough to prolong the integrity of the rest of the aircraft

Good thought but we have those edges that suggest some sort of 'mechanical help', as if cleaved away.

Of course that could have happened after the part was running loose, too.

[Ricker H Jones]

Might there have been any surviving rivets from the re-skinning of the Wichita Electra?
Rick

[Monty Fowler]

I would defer to Jeff and those who know about fixing airplanes, but as I understand it, the old rivets are drilled out and pretty much destroyed during the reskinning process.

Never hurts to ask, though!

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP