I understand that the 1986 protection of military remains act as set out in the guidelines is to do just that, ‘protect’.
However
I have a bit of an issue, I know of a site that is under threat of excavation this threat has remained since 1994.
I have been speaking to the MOD for a while now on the subject, and keep getting the same response, since it is known that missing crew are still listed as missing no licence will be issued:eek:
So if some contractor starts digging away and finds things and discardes them, this is ok?, because he has no idea what he has found?
Can anybody or has anybody had the same issue as this and what is the best way to proceed?
Say for instance, if a family member of the lost crew give permission and was done above board via the MOD is this still a possibility?
By: Cees Broere - 6th September 2008 at 15:44
That’s how things work here in the netherlands, the recovery of the Mosquito starting in earnest this coming monday is the result of it. Public pressure is the best insturment
Cheers
Cees
By: Atcham Tower - 6th September 2008 at 09:39
Nick, the best way to deal with the football team problem is to tell the press and stir things up!
By: Me-109E - 5th September 2008 at 22:02
This part of the MOD protection of military remains can be a farce. Its an insult to those who have lost relatives. The whole concept of war grave is flawed on an aircraft crash site when the location is known and access is possible. There was a time when only the military had detection gear and recovery kit. Many groups in the UK have a good track record of well monitored,safe recovery excavations. It is high time the act was reviewed.
So glad there are people who agree, maybe it’s time to get an e-petition going to have the act changed??
By: scotavia - 5th September 2008 at 21:34
This part of the MOD protection of military remains can be a farce. Its an insult to those who have lost relatives. The whole concept of war grave is flawed on an aircraft crash site when the location is known and access is possible. There was a time when only the military had detection gear and recovery kit. Many groups in the UK have a good track record of well monitored,safe recovery excavations. It is high time the act was reviewed.
By: Me-109E - 5th September 2008 at 18:51
Meh, they can hardly be arsed to look after today’s servicemen/women when they return injured…:mad:
Too true 😡
By: Bob - 5th September 2008 at 18:48
Think it’s about time the MOD to take a leaf out of the Americans book and recover our servicemen from unmarked graves in this country and around the world when their locations are known.
Meh, they can hardly be arsed to look after today’s servicemen/women when they return injured…:mad:
By: Me-109E - 5th September 2008 at 18:44
Assuming the site is in the UK, then it should have the full protection of the Act – Disturbance means just that, It does not matter whether it is an organised excavation by enthusiasts or a contractor during building work – both will need a licence to disturb the site. I believe (but stand to be corrected!) that ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.
I acted as consultant a few years ago as a major gas main was put through Lancashire – the contractors took the act very seriously and wanted to ensure they did not inadvertently disturb a crash site – in the end they managed to avoid all but one & only went through the periphery of that one.
However on the other hand a local football team plans to enlarge their training facilities & build over a crash site – I have contacted them several times, but they are simply ignoring me – I am not trying to cause trouble, just ensure that perhaps some form of appropriate marker could be incorporated in the development – the pilot was an accomplished sports man himself! I have even offered to assist with liaison with the MOD – but to no avail 🙁
I have even offered to assist the MOD, they sent a letter thanking me for the offer etc but, no go.
It saddens me to think that ‘we’ the enthusiasts know locations of the where the unfortunate souls are and yet they lie in unmarked graves:(
Think it’s about time the MOD to take a leaf out of the Americans book and recover our servicemen from unmarked graves in this country and around the world when their locations are known.
By: N.Wotherspoon - 5th September 2008 at 18:28
Excavation
Assuming the site is in the UK, then it should have the full protection of the Act – Disturbance means just that, It does not matter whether it is an organised excavation by enthusiasts or a contractor during building work – both will need a licence to disturb the site. I believe (but stand to be corrected!) that ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.
I acted as consultant a few years ago as a major gas main was put through Lancashire – the contractors took the act very seriously and wanted to ensure they did not inadvertently disturb a crash site – in the end they managed to avoid all but one & only went through the periphery of that one.
However on the other hand a local football team plans to enlarge their training facilities & build over a crash site – I have contacted them several times, but they are simply ignoring me – I am not trying to cause trouble, just ensure that perhaps some form of appropriate marker could be incorporated in the development – the pilot was an accomplished sports man himself! I have even offered to assist with liaison with the MOD – but to no avail 🙁
By: ian_ - 5th September 2008 at 18:25
Bit of a tickly issue. Apart from the BoB missing recoveries of which much has been said the only recent one I can think of is this Mosquito:
http://www.redkitebooks.co.uk/aa/ex07_Mosquito_Miltonkeynes.html
When developers uncovered remains the MoD rushed a licence through in double quick time to allow a recovery. The PMRA is very clear about tampering without a licence. There is a distant chink of balls and chains.
Sign In
September 5, 2008 at 5:58 pm