Hail Mary Analysis

[Dave Thaker]

Ric, we've gotten to six pages of Forum member comments but I don't think anyone on the forum has suggested that there is anything that looks particularly promising in terms of possible linkage to the Electra.  I imagine you've examined these photos, and perhaps others have too (EPAC members?). Has that analysis been completed yet?  Is there an interesting story to tell about objects in any of these pictures that we haven't heard yet? Has anything 'Glickman-worthy' been identified? At what point do you see being able to provide some sort of summary statement about the Hail Mary photos?   

Thanks...

[Gabriel Arthur Petrie]

In image #394, if the dots are 2.5" apart then here's some straight object 7.5 inches long. Maybe it's a drinking straw.

Can't wait to see the contour of the anomaly once the mosaic is complete.

[Gabriel Arthur Petrie]

Smooth, metallic nipple in #403.

Maybe it's a jelly?

[Gabriel Arthur Petrie]

I'd bet a lot of money on that being the inside of one half of a bi valve mollusk shell.  In fact the other half could well be to the right of it in the image.

I have to agree with you on the identification, though I can't find the other half.

[George Lam]

Who cares about the other half?!  We're looking for a frickin plane here!

[Bob Smith]

Keep at it Greg! There's got to be a plane here somewhere!

[George Lam]

Oh I've gone through the images many times over, and continue to spot things I haven't noticed before.  Nothing that's worthy of posting on the forum,.. yet.... I'm not going to point to out of focus bubbles or sea shells (aka metallic nipples) and ask "what's that?... no you're pointing to the wrong object, but wait that looks interesting too, like a stirrup shape..."  ZOOM in and use your reasoning skills to judge before posting. IMO.

Images 568 through 595 intrigue me the most, but I can't quite say why.  There's more to see in terms of topography, possibly because they fall within the line, on the new 2015 GPS plot map, that the supposed anomaly was established on the 2012 sonar map.  But I still can't attribute these features to the anomaly since I don't know if the camera actually matched up to the GPS coordinates taken from the SURFACE of the water.  I also can't discern the 3d dimensional qualities of these features (height/depth) since the images provide only so much 2d information.  It's hard to say, at Niku, how much coral can grow on (and obscure) a relatively intact man-made object that's been sitting underwater at 600ft for 75+ years.  Could it be totally encrusted over by now??

[Bob Smith]

You've got the right idea, Greg. In answer to your last question, if it would be totally encrusted over, I think it can be, but not level with the surrounding terrain. The deeper it is the more junk would have fallen on it, I suppose. We may never know!

[Mark Fuller]

Go look at images of WWII sunken aircraft and also look at side scan sonar images of aircraft.  Those planes have been under the Pacific Ocean nearly the same length of time as the Electra. I don't see why it wouldn't look nearly the same. Those aircraft are easily recognizable and are not completely covered over in coral. They jump out in the side scan images.  I would even say ( not to be negative) that the images of the " anomaly" are nowhere near as obvious that it's an aircraft. But I'm still hopeful.

[Craig Romig]

Dang dang dang. I don't think there is anything in the photos I've seen. I also don't think the anomaly is the fuselage.  At least not one long piece. I believe the stories of pieces of fuselage on the far shore of the lagoon. I hate that it is so hard to find. To prove tighars hypothesis. Dang dang dang. 

This just means try again is all.
Da#!$@!
Keep going gentlemen.

[Randy Conrad]

Morning Guys...Hey was looking at some of these photos this evening and noticed two things. Please give me your insight...thanks!!! The first picture I believe circled is an old fashioned key! The second image is what I believe to be a tire!!!

[JNev]

Go look at images of WWII sunken aircraft and also look at side scan sonar images of aircraft.  Those planes have been under the Pacific Ocean nearly the same length of time as the Electra. I don't see why it wouldn't look nearly the same. Those aircraft are easily recognizable and are not completely covered over in coral. They jump out in the side scan images.  I would even say ( not to be negative) that the images of the " anomaly" are nowhere near as obvious that it's an aircraft. But I'm still hopeful.

I believe you've touched the heart of the thing, Mark.

The bulk of evidence that can be seen as to known sunken wrecks and by what my engineering friends seem to think, there's little reason to believe that the Electra would lie broken up and scattered in a 'debris field' of tiny parts.  There's also ample evidence as you speak of that such relics are not typically concreted over or covered with growth.  It does seem reasonable that the Electra would likely be quite recognizable - and it does seem to me by the examples you cite that sonar data should likely be more definitive and not leave such an amorphous signature as this 'anomaly' were that the Electra - but what do I know?

[John Klier]

I don't believe you can compare one wreck site to another without also considering the environmental conditions of the sites.  I believe the depth, water temperature, even if it is blocked from the prevailing currents by an island should all play a roll in the amount of marine growth.  Consider the flaperon that is potentially part of MH370.  They are considering the type of marine growth on it to determine what part of the ocean it came from.

I am involved in academic research but this is not my field, so this is just my opinion.

[Matt Revington]

There should be a pretty good reference for the type and amount of marine growth on metal over 70 or 80 years on that reef  from the materials of the Norwich City just a couple of hundred metres away.  I think the most of the parts  of the NC were probably more susceptible to corrosion than the aluminum of the Electra would be but otherwise they should have have similar levels of covering with or coral or sediment.

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

There should be a pretty good reference for the type and amount of marine growth on metal over 70 or 80 years on that reef  from the materials of the Norwich City just a couple of hundred metres away.  I think the most of the parts  of the NC were probably more susceptible to corrosion than the aluminum of the Electra would be but otherwise they should have have similar levels of covering with or coral or sediment.

You'd have to have some map of what parts of the NC fell off and when they fell off to use it as a reliable guide.

They didn't exit the ship and the reef all at once.

But, with that caveat, yes, it might be a good model.