Taraia Object deciphered

[MichaelAshmore]

There is much more to this image. After months of review, here's what I've found. This object is most likely to be the left wing of Amelia's Lockheed Electra. The size, shape, angles and image shadowing say it is. The wing being much shorter in height than the fuselage, would easily disappear under the sand/ silt of the shallow water at the Taraia spit. There is probably much more damage to the wing than my pictures show. For instance, wing tip most likely bent enough to break off the outer aileron hinge. Which would explain why the aileron is at a different angle then the wing. The length that was brought up in previous post on original Taraia object forum also coordinates with the Electra 10E wing. Have a look.

[MichaelAshmore]

https://youtu.be/nsKmqJA085k
Short video of Taraia object hypothesis.

[Christian Stock]

You may be on to something. We were all thinking fuselage the whole time, but it's a pretty good match for the wing. The question is, does this match where the wing would separate from the fuselage? Wouldn't the forces required to separate the wing bash it around and damage it much worse than this?

[Ric Gillespie]

The question is, does this match where the wing would separate from the fuselage?

The short answer is no.  The Model 10 is built around a "center section" that includes a massive "main beam".  The engine mounts and landing gear are attached to the main beam which runs from engine to engine, so the wings of an Electra are made up of three pieces - the center section and two outboard wing panels.  The fuselage sits on top of the center section and the main beam runs through the cabin (passengers in the forward seats had to step over the main bean to get to their seat). In other words, a Lockheed 10 cannot come apart like that.

[Bill Mangus]

And it was likely this center section that Emily Sikuli had pointed out to her by her father in the late '40's, long after wave action separated the fuselage, engines and wings.

[Ric Gillespie]

And it was likely this center section that Emily Sikuli had pointed out to her by her father in the late '40's, long after wave action separated the fuselage, engines and wings.

Make that early '40s.  Emily and her family arrived in early 1940 and she left to go to nursing school in the fall of '41.

Tapania Taeke saw "part of a wing" on the reef flat not far from the main passage some time in the late '50s.  The size and color she described sounds like an outer wing panel.

[MichaelAshmore]

Why couldn't a Lockheed Electra come apart like this ? Whose to say the forces exerted on the aircraft at that exact moment didn't exceed everything the designers thought they overcame.

[Ric Gillespie]

Why couldn't a Lockheed Electra come apart like this ?

It sold be obvious from my explanation of how the aircraft was constructed.  The center section is a single unit with the main beam extending from engine to engine.  For the inboard and outboard sections of one wing to separate from the aircraft, the wing would have to sustain so much sheering force as to cause that massive main beam to fracture at the wing root.  Explain how that could happen without demolishing the wing itself.

[MichaelAshmore]

So understanding your statement correctly. Your saying it's highly improbable, but not impossible. Basically, anything could happen during a aircraft incident or subsequent airframe failure situation during a crash. Let's also take into account flying an overloaded plane thousands of miles. Compounding the stresses from wind and turbulence on the airframe substantially, causing metal fatigue. So mixing in the human factors like lack of sleep and altered judgement due to fatigue,  plus speed and angle of impact could be the reason for its separation. Leaving us to see this object the way we do.

[Randy Jacobson]

I think Ric is saying that Occam's Razor should be applied here.

[Ric Gillespie]

 Occam's Razor is a handy guide, but it's not a law.  Highly improbable things happen.  A Bushnell surveyor lost a sextant box near where a castaway's bones would later be found.   A few people stumbled across Amelia's distress calls on harmonics of her primary frequencies.  It looks increasingly like the only surviving piece of the Electra washed up in a storm near where TIGHAR came ashore in 1991.  Occam would have a fit.  That said, highly improbable events must still obey the laws of physics.  The problem with the wing separation theory is that it doesn't.  There is no conceivable way to break an entire wing off a Lockheed 10 without virtually destroying the wing.
That said, if we ever go back to Nikumaroro I promise to go to that spot and check it out.

[Christian Stock]

If she landed on the reef at Gardner, the airplane likely later broke up into 7 substantial pieces:

1. Outboard left wing
2. Outboard right wing
3. Engine 1
4. Engine 2
5. Center section
6. Aft main fuselage
7. Empennage (tail section)

6 and 7 could possibly have stayed together, but I think it was eventually ripped apart.

That center section is so heavy and strong that it and the big radial engines are likely the only pieces that anyone will find. Even if she decided to nose dove into the reef, that beam probably just bent, but did not shear.

Here's how the wing would separate from the fuselage:

[Ric Gillespie]

Yep, and radial engines in a coral reef environment (rather than a lagoon) don't hold up as well as everyone assumes. The aluminum and magnesium go away, leaving only the steel crank and cylinders.  The photo below is what's left of a Brewster Buffalo R-1820 Wright Cyclone engine on the reef at Midway - and that's a level surface.  The steep reef slope at Niku is prone to underwater landslides that could easily bury wreckage.

[MichaelAshmore]

Being dismissive and quoting Occam's Razor doesn't make your assertions correct. As for 2-2-V-1, there's no concrete evidence that it has anything to do with Amelia Earhart's Lockheed Electra. But more likely one of the thousands of planes lost during WW2. Grant-it this theory doesn't fit your narrative, but here we are.  An image that has more substance to it then not. To say there's no way the wing could sever is ludicrous. The long search for the Titanic proves anything's possible. Until it was found, nearly everyone thought it would be in one piece due to it's innovative design and safety features. It was simply considered unsinkable. And there was no way that could happen. But the keel did in fact break and the ship wasn't found in one piece. 

[Jeff Lange]

While I applaud Mr. Ashmore for his zeal- you are preaching to the choir here and you'll need WAY more proof than a re-imaged photo to begin to sway the group.
I'll just address one of your statements that are misleading."But more likely one of the thousands of planes lost during WW2." Yes-there WERE many planes lost in the Pacific during WWII, however records indicate very few were anywhere remotely near Niku, and having been a part of the group comparing 2-2-V-1 to sample aircraft at the USAAF museum in Dayton, OH. for rivet pattern matches and seeing how no military craft matched even closely, it makes the likelihood of the artifact having come from anything other than the Electra extremely remote. I'll stick with the factual evidence that has been presented regarding 2-2-V-1.