Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Artifact 2-3-V-2  (Read 2421 times)

Bill Mangus

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 364
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2020, 10:07:28 AM »

Yes, right in the middle of the circle, that material which appears to be rising from in between the vertical piece and the flat, top of the stringer.  Right in the middle of the circle is where it seems to be the highest.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5689
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2020, 10:10:28 AM »

I agree. That could be Plexiglas. 
Logged

Bill Mangus

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 364
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #17 on: January 04, 2020, 11:13:46 AM »

It's not much but probably enough for testing.  If it's needed we know where it is.
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 759
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #18 on: January 04, 2020, 12:58:46 PM »

Weren’t the original cabin windows changed? The early photos showed a horizontal bar.
3971R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5689
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #19 on: January 04, 2020, 01:15:49 PM »

Weren’t the original cabin windows changed? The early photos showed a horizontal bar.

The windows were changed in January 1937 as part of the modifications for the world flight.  The bar, which was actually a stringer left in place for strength, was cut and standard Model 10 widows were installed.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5689
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #20 on: January 04, 2020, 03:32:30 PM »

The Alaska wreck is c/n 1021, a 10A delivered to Northwest Airlines 4/29/35.  It was later sold to Boston & Maine Airways and then to National Airlines before being sold to Morrison-Knudsen.  Somewhere along the way it was converted to a 10B (Wright engines instead of Pratts) and had a fuselage fuel tank installed for the long haul from Seattle to Ketchikan.  Between 1935 when it was built and 1943 when it was lost, the material for Electra windows changed several times. Whether 1021's windows were ever updated is not known but there would be no reason to change the windows unless they were somehow damaged. Bottom line: chances are 1021’s windows were different from 1055’s.  But there's really no need to take another stroll into the Misty Fjord Wilderness Area if we can do non-destructive testing.

We don’t yet know whether the non-destructive process used in the Smithsonian survey would give us the detailed information we would need.  All they were doing it distinguishing different types of transparent materials.  The question we need to answer is whether pre-war PMMA is different from wartime PMMA.  It’s a lot like the aluminum alloy question.  The basic recipe didn’t change, so we’d be looking for subtle changes.  You need enough samples from known sources to compare to your unknown sample to have statistically significant results. 

The closest Model 10 to Earhart’s is the New England Air Museum 10A, 1052 (just three airplanes away from 1055) but it has been extensively restored. No way to know if it has the original windows BUT if its windows test out identical to 2-3-V-2 and different from a selection of WWII aircraft, that would be pretty significant.  So we’re back to the question of whether the non-destructive process would give us the detail we need.  I'll see if I can contact the people who did the Smithsonian study.
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 759
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #21 on: January 04, 2020, 03:55:37 PM »

Why were the original windows not standard? How is the book coming along?
3971R
 
Logged

Matt Revington

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 328
  • member #4155
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #22 on: January 04, 2020, 05:01:12 PM »

As far as the windows it is explained here https://tighar.org/Projects/currentnews.html


Also Ric you are right to contact the people at the Smithsonian, they had a second paper related to the one I previously mentioned discussing the development of the portable probe they used to analyze the samples in that study in situ , although it was 5 years ago I doubt it is generally available to other researchers
« Last Edit: January 04, 2020, 05:37:22 PM by Matt Revington »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5689
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #23 on: January 05, 2020, 11:44:18 AM »

Why were the original windows not standard?

The link Matt found (thanks Matt, I had forgotten about that) explains the thickness but it doesn't answer your question. 
What we see as a "bar" through the original windows is actually a stringer and its removal speaks to the unprofessional nature of Earhart's entire operation.  In January 1936, confronted with the need to deliver an Electra with a 50% greater maximum gross weight than the airplane was designed for, Lockheed eliminated all but two of the ten standard windows and left in place a stringer that, on the standard Model 10, would be cut to accommodate each window.  As delivered in July 1936, the "10E Special" featured an immensely strong uninterrupted fuselage structure of stringers and bulkheads broken only by the cabin door.  In January 1937, as the airplane was being prepared for the world flight, navigator Harry Manning (who had no experience in aerial celestial navigation) insisted on an elaborate "navigator's station" in the rear cabin.  He wanted mounts for a pelorus (sighting device) at each cabin window, but the stringers would be in the way so they were cut out and standard windows installed.  He felt he needed optically correct windows for taking star sightings so a special window was put in the cabin door and a large window was installed on the starboard side in the lavatory - all of which butchered the integrity of the fuselage structure created by Lockheed to accommodate the stresses caused by the heavy fuel load. The work appears to have been carried out at Mantz Air Service without benefit of Bureau of Air Commerce approval or inspection.

How is the book coming along?

The further I get into the story of c/n 1055 the more it becomes the story of Amelia and the people around her.   The simple progression of first-they-did-this-then-they-did-that would be a useful guide in dating the many photos of the airplane, but it's the "why" the changes were made that sheds much-needed light on who she was and how her career and life came to a tragic end. The book needs to be broader in scope than I originally contemplated.  The same thing happened with my first book.  It started out to be a TIGHAR Tracks article, then a book, about the post-loss radio signals and morphed into Finding Amelia - The True Story of the Earhart Disappearance. I'll undoubtedly need the Forum's advice as I work out the boundaries of this book but, wherever we end up, everyone who has donated to the book project will get a signed copy when it's finished.
Logged

Greg Daspit

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 759
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #24 on: January 06, 2020, 04:51:43 PM »

Why were the original windows not standard?

The link Matt found (thanks Matt, I had forgotten about that) explains the thickness but it doesn't answer your question. 
What we see as a "bar" through the original windows is actually a stringer and its removal speaks to the unprofessional nature.

Thanks for the detailed answer Ric. You hit at the heart of what I was concerned about since seeing the separation in a seam of skin at the belly of the plane in the Nilla Putnam photo which seems to have appeared after the hard landing in Miami.
I was wondering if the stringer was part of the original design for c/n 1055 specifically.
Though the non-approved removal of one stringer at each of the two small windows may not be as significant as the multiple rows cut away for the big lavatory window it does seem to add to the evidence there was a pattern of reckless decisions.

I think boundaries that include the latest that has been learned about the evolution of the plane and its operation, the effects “modifications” had on the final flight and the pattern of decisions that lead to the lost flight would make a historically significant book. IMHO

3971R
 
Logged

Ted G Campbell

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 344
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2020, 01:25:58 AM »

Ric,
Something odd has jumped out to me when watching "Expedition Amelia"! (about the third time)

Notice the cockpit entrance hatch early in the video, it folds out toward  the wing - showing three windows!

Then you see the hatch folds toward the C/L of the plane.

Then again toward the wing.

Then over the C/L of the plane.

Has someone patched together a video for TV rather then show the true story of the last flight?

However, if the clips they show are real, have we looked at the "patch" may have came from above the cockpit rather then the rear window?

Just an observation.

Ted Campbell

 https://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=post;topic=2109.0;last_msg=43549#
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5689
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2020, 08:39:51 AM »

Notice the cockpit entrance hatch early in the video, it folds out toward  the wing - showing three windows!

The three windows in the shot are the windshield, the small cockpit window and the sliding cockpit slide window.

Then you see the hatch folds toward the C/L of the plane.

When Earhart's airplane was delivered in July 1936, the cockpit hatch opened outward as it did on all Electras.  The hatch was an emergency exit and seldom used on the passenger version.  The crew entered through the cabin door and walked forward to the cockpit.  Earhart's cabin was encumbered with fuel tanks so getting to the cockpit was awkward, but the outward-opening emergency hatch was also awkward.  In October 1936, while the airplane was at Purdue, Bo McKneeley reversed the hatch so that it opened toward center-line, making it easier to use.

However, if the clips they show are real, have we looked at the "patch" may have came from above the cockpit rather then the rear window?

Yes, we considered that. No, it didn't.
Logged

Matt Revington

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 328
  • member #4155
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2020, 09:22:06 AM »

That hatch had other issues  also  during the Bendix race in September 1936.

"Amelia Earhart had flown in many air races prior to the 1936 Bendix. She had only
recently taken delivery of the new Lockheed Electra 10E from Purdue University as
   her "Flying Laboratory" Her co-pilot for the race was Helen Richey, one of America's
top  women pilots.  Unexpectedly the emergency  cockpit escape hatch blew open
 almost sucking both pilots out,  they were able to secure it with a rag till they landed
   at their Kansas City fuel stop where they  were able to wire it closed. The open hatch
caused  much  lost time."
From http://www.airrace.com/1936NAR.htm
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5689
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2020, 09:31:56 AM »

Unexpectedly the emergency  cockpit escape hatch blew open
 almost sucking both pilots out,  they were able to secure it with a rag till they landed
   at their Kansas City fuel stop where they  were able to wire it closed. The open hatch
caused much lost time."

Yeah, think about that.  It was a standard hatch.  Hatches on Electras did not routinely blow open in flight.  Earhart and Richey departed Floyd Bennett Field in the pre-dawn darkness.  The hatch blew open about 20 minutes later.  Sounds like somebody didn't secure the latch properly.  Assuming AE flew from the left seat, she was the last person to enter the aircraft.  Pilot error.
Logged

Daniel R. Brown

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
Re: Artifact 2-3-V-2
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2020, 05:21:10 PM »

Saturday, 5 June 1937. One day layover in Fortaleza, Brazil; crew rest. AE: “I shopped this morning for sponge rubber to replace some wearing on the cockpit hatch.”

Dan Brown, #2408
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 

Copyright 2020 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