Recent events have got me thinking and I realise there is a substantial gap in my knowledge regarding Aviation Archaeology and wreck recovery. As I sit here, with my limited knowledge of this particular subject, I admit to being fairly entrenched in my view that it is only valuable when human remains are to be recovered for identification and burial or, just perhaps, if the airframe to be recovered is extremely rare.
Leaving aside the contentious issues regarding the final destinations of any items recovered, or indeed, the possibility of any payment received for them, can anyone explain the value of this activity? What is the reasoning and rationale? In the meantime here’s a few thoughts……
Can a few corroded lumps of engine and airframe portray the history of a particular type or airframe to any great effect?
Is the recovery of parts useful to the restoration movement in that it may provide patterns or templates where no parts, or possibly even drawings, exist? (Thinking about extinct types such as Manchester, Stirling, Whitley et al.)
With the massive upsurge in historic aircraft which are now airworthy, is Aviation Archaeology as relevant now as it was when there were fewer aircraft airworthy or restored? I,m thinking back to when you couldn’t see ten Spitfires in the air at once and that the sight of a battered Browning or mangled Merlin was as close as one could often tangibly get to a Spitfire for instance.
When Cosford was in its infancy as a Museum, and I were a lad, there was a significant amount of remains displayed by a group from a number of crash sites. Not talking about this group in particular, but, do those groups who display such material have any policy as to what happens to those remains or any donated material in the same way as a Museum should? Or is it all privately owned.
Not trying to be contentious here, just asking a few questions to help me understand and appreciate the purpose of this activity.
Regards,
kev35
By: kev35 - 7th July 2009 at 00:07
But Graham I do have a sense of humour, just forgot to add the appropriate smiley.
Regards,
kev35
By: scotavia - 7th July 2009 at 00:03
High ground wrecks in the uk will diminish over time due to weathering and pilferage. No one has the resources to protect them in situ against these events.
Not every wreck is worthy of recovery ,but those which are significant should be recovered asap.I am already very pleased to see the logical work of the Whitley project in this respect. And in a similiar way the Rescue 57 team works on behalf of the Halifax sites. But that at the moment seems to be it as far as cohesive planned type survey and recoveries.
can anyone add to the list? Hampdens might feature, although the Soviet wreck has made a good start at Cosford.
By: Graham Adlam - 6th July 2009 at 23:46
Graham.
Look at the date the thread started. At the time it wasn’t tongue in cheek, I was asking a serious question in light of some heated arguments in the preceding weeks.
As for lighting the blue touch paper and standing back, isn’t that how you start the tank engine in your model?
Regards,kev35
LOL:) no offence intended thought you might have a sense of Humour sorry seem to have misjudged you. Actually the model and the tank engine are remarkably civilized apart from the noise after all I guess it’s a Rolls Royce so it’s got some class 😉
By: kev35 - 6th July 2009 at 23:03
In answer to Andy’s question I think perhaps my mind is clearer on some of the issues. I can see some value in the recovery and I think it is essential that recovery be undertaken where there are human remains. However, there are still, to my mind, unresolved issues regarding the governance of the activity. The part that concerns me most is the selling on of parts, especially in a world where a few hundredweight of twisted and mangled metal, provided it has a data plate, can be transformed from scrap value to a project worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.
But that’s probably a whole other issue.
Regards,
kev35
By: kev35 - 6th July 2009 at 22:51
Graham.
Look at the date the thread started. At the time it wasn’t tongue in cheek, I was asking a serious question in light of some heated arguments in the preceding weeks.
As for lighting the blue touch paper and standing back, isn’t that how you start the tank engine in your model?
Regards,
kev35
By: Graham Adlam - 6th July 2009 at 22:35
Recent events have got me thinking and I realise there is a substantial gap in my knowledge regarding Aviation Archaeology and wreck recovery. As I sit here, with my limited knowledge of this particular subject, I admit to being fairly entrenched in my view that it is only valuable when human remains are to be recovered for identification and burial or, just perhaps, if the airframe to be recovered is extremely rare.
Leaving aside the contentious issues regarding the final destinations of any items recovered, or indeed, the possibility of any payment received for them, can anyone explain the value of this activity? What is the reasoning and rationale? In the meantime here’s a few thoughts……
Can a few corroded lumps of engine and airframe portray the history of a particular type or airframe to any great effect?
Is the recovery of parts useful to the restoration movement in that it may provide patterns or templates where no parts, or possibly even drawings, exist? (Thinking about extinct types such as Manchester, Stirling, Whitley et al.)
With the massive upsurge in historic aircraft which are now airworthy, is Aviation Archaeology as relevant now as it was when there were fewer aircraft airworthy or restored? I,m thinking back to when you couldn’t see ten Spitfires in the air at once and that the sight of a battered Browning or mangled Merlin was as close as one could often tangibly get to a Spitfire for instance.
When Cosford was in its infancy as a Museum, and I were a lad, there was a significant amount of remains displayed by a group from a number of crash sites. Not talking about this group in particular, but, do those groups who display such material have any policy as to what happens to those remains or any donated material in the same way as a Museum should? Or is it all privately owned.
[B][COLOR=”Red”]Not trying to be contentious here, just asking a few questions to help me understand and appreciate the purpose of this activity.
Regards,
kev35
[/COLOR][/B]
Kev
Isn’t this thread a bit tongue in cheek? Surely being an active member on this forum for a long time you must have seen the rights and wrongs of this activity debated at least half a dozen times and even made a contribution yourself? Its always a pretty contentious issue everyone has strong views. Surely this a case of light the blue touch paper and stand back? 😉
By: Rocketeer - 6th July 2009 at 20:57
JC said..
snip….. Battle and Tomahawk parts got dumped to a scrapyard at Baldock ex RAF Henlow store after a lot of effort went into recoveries.
That I did not know….there were still small parts for a few years…then we were allowed to remove them…just a few trinkets left (plates etc)…no they wont be at Legends
By: Whitley_Project - 6th July 2009 at 19:55
Steve
The pilfering from this site is fairly well known and has been by collectors. Regarding the willingness to manhandle large items – you’d be surprised – Merlin engines have been removed from hilltops by sheer manpower alone in the past.
As for the suggestion that Gary’s post is advertising the site to further public intereference, that is closing the door after the horse has bolted, and besides the RAF have just removed everything they could anyway.
This is just scaremongering claptrap. The site is on a hillside miles away from a public road. It is too remote and uninteresting to be visited by anyone other than estate workers or aviation scrap dealers. I suspect that the limited pilfering that has happened here has been done by estate employees who are housed near it during the stalking season. Do you, the guys from Waddingto or the estate owner really believe that anyone is capable of manhandling a Lancaster mainwheel – complete with smooth tyre – the six miles or so to the nearest road without the assistance of the estate?
Do you trade in aviation wreckage by any chance, and why did you name this particular site? It seems to me that naming this source for Lancaster parts on a public forum is not exactly the smartest thing to do if you are concerned with the well-being of this crash site. I just get the feeling that you are more concerned with selling parts than preserving the sites.
Best wishes
Steve P
By: scotavia - 6th July 2009 at 19:24
JC said..
aside from the other aspects, i hope what has been recovered is put to good use, and not languish in a store until one day some bright spark decides to have a clear out
Very true JC,… Mickle Fell Stirling parts,Larkhill Battle and Tomahawk parts got dumped to a scrapyard at Baldock ex RAF Henlow store after a lot of effort went into recoveries.
By: scotavia - 6th July 2009 at 19:20
Estate workers would not risk loosing a job by recovering parts, especially as in this case they knew the site was regarded by the owner as a war grave.I had a good chance to chat to them while I was grouse beating on this estate several years ago.
By: scotavia - 6th July 2009 at 19:14
Oh well the net is full of misunderstandings, the site has been well known for at least twenty years .Tyres are easy to shift off a site they are rolled down the hills and can be found some distance away from crash locations, even in farms where they turn up on farm carts.
I have never dealt in the sale of parts but I see no reason why it should not be done when the legal aspect has been correctly dealt with.
By: Arabella-Cox - 6th July 2009 at 15:14
Like Rocketeer, I am puzzled by SteveP’s response to Scotavia.
Maybe its just me.
By: Rocketeer - 6th July 2009 at 15:05
aside from the other aspects, i hope what has been recovered is put to good use, and not languish in a store until one day some bright spark decides to have a clear out,
my sentiments too JC…happened before! There seems to be a huge amount of over confidence put in official museums/organisations to protect our heritage
By: Junk Collector - 6th July 2009 at 13:25
aside from the other aspects, i hope what has been recovered is put to good use, and not languish in a store until one day some bright spark decides to have a clear out,
By: Rocketeer - 6th July 2009 at 12:18
This is just scaremongering claptrap. The site is on a hillside miles away from a public road. It is too remote and uninteresting to be visited by anyone other than estate workers or aviation scrap dealers. I suspect that the limited pilfering that has happened here has been done by estate employees who are housed near it during the stalking season. Do you, the guys from Waddingto or the estate owner really believe that anyone is capable of manhandling a Lancaster mainwheel – complete with smooth tyre – the six miles or so to the nearest road without the assistance of the estate?
Do you trade in aviation wreckage by any chance, and why did you name this particular site? It seems to me that naming this source for Lancaster parts on a public forum is not exactly the smartest thing to do if you are concerned with the well-being of this crash site. I just get the feeling that you are more concerned with selling parts than preserving the sites.
Best wishes
Steve P
Reading your post made me feel that I no longer understand the English language! I think that you have taken everything that Scotavia wrote and ‘perverted’ it…..where does he talk of selling in that post? Where does he talk claptrap in that sentence? He is using understatement in the ‘walk’ bit. Please calm down old boy….I think he named the site because steps had been taken to clear it….it is true that items left on hillsides will corrode to nothing…if there is a better place for them, then surely that is in everyone’s best interest?
I hope Waddington do something good with the wreckage.
By: steve_p - 6th July 2009 at 11:03
Like many high ground sites it is on open ground with access from many directions if you dont mind a walk.
This is just scaremongering claptrap. The site is on a hillside miles away from a public road. It is too remote and uninteresting to be visited by anyone other than estate workers or aviation scrap dealers. I suspect that the limited pilfering that has happened here has been done by estate employees who are housed near it during the stalking season. Do you, the guys from Waddingto or the estate owner really believe that anyone is capable of manhandling a Lancaster mainwheel – complete with smooth tyre – the six miles or so to the nearest road without the assistance of the estate?
So I maintain that all sites should be cleared and if needed a simple memorial marker placed on site.
Do you trade in aviation wreckage by any chance, and why did you name this particular site? It seems to me that naming this source for Lancaster parts on a public forum is not exactly the smartest thing to do if you are concerned with the well-being of this crash site. I just get the feeling that you are more concerned with selling parts than preserving the sites.
Best wishes
Steve P
By: scotavia - 6th July 2009 at 09:08
I admire the Waddington team for polite persistence which led to saving these items. From the first time I saw a pic of the painted coded fuselage section I knew that it was worth recovering.(and could not be hidden in a backpack)
And it the person who has the control spectacles unit reads this,surely its time you gave up the parts to Waddington?
By: Arabella-Cox - 5th July 2009 at 21:30
Where does time go to??
Seems like only yesterday Kev’s thread provoked the debate and discussion that followed, although the topic has reared its head (one way or another) several times since then on this forum.
Just playing kinda Devil’s advocate, but I wonder if Kev has found the answers to the questions he posed in the first post of this thread? Just curious to know if he had formulated a definitive opinion?
By: Peter - 5th July 2009 at 13:35
Taken from here:
He said: “The RAF recovered one of the original landing wheels, which they were very excited about, because it’s the only smooth tyre from a Lancaster in existence; all the others are grooved.
Not quite as there are a few smooth tires still around worldwide!
By: scotavia - 5th July 2009 at 11:23
Update due to the recent recovery by the RAF many Lancaster parts from the wreck of PD259 on the Balavil estate near Kingussie.
Comment by the landowner…”we came to the decision that some of the pieces which were being vandalised,which is a great tragedy,should be given to them for future protection ”
At last my views are backed up by a landowner, and he does not realise how many of the smaller items have been removed without permission in the last twenty years, including the control column,spectacles,carried down to a vehicle and whizzed away forever to private collector in England.
Like many high ground sites it is on open ground with access from many directions if you dont mind a walk. And this is a site that he felt he was protecting!
So I maintain that all sites should be cleared and if needed a simple memorial marker placed on site.
Sign In
June 24, 2008 at 10:15 am