Of course the company wouldn’t be interested in recovering the crew if they didn’t want to put a wind-turbine on the crash-site; they are a commercial company motivated by profit…

…but, if this commercial company met the expense of excavating the site, recovering the crew and giving them an appropriate burial would that be a bad thing? Even if the primary motive was ‘profit’?

It boils down to whether you think the crew should remain ‘missing’ even if somebody was willing to fund their recovery?

So you are saying, if I understand this correctly, that any and every site designated a war grave should be open to the potential of commercial exploitation on the off chance that it might not actually be a grave?

No, more accurately, every site designated a war-grave should be open to commercial (or non-commercial) exploitation…

…BUT also that every case should be judged on merit by the MOD and very particular criteria would need to be met before any ‘exploitation’ would be allowed. And paramount among these criteria would be respect for the dead and the wishes of any living relatives.

The reason that this is not done by the MOD is probably because of the cost of administering such a process.

Have any known (or suspected) aircraft war-graves been excavated and remains recovered? Yes, but this may have been before the current rules were introduced.