Aviation Wreckology (the early digs) where are the pieces now?

I like popping on this site and finding links to digs with pictures and reports, and its great that they seem to be all done pretty professionally.

My original thread was based on the idea of a amnesty where digs in the past that have disappeared again into time could be found and catalogued.

Some found sites are now lost and could dug up items and there history be slowly being lost in some one’s draw or garage or storage.

I’m sure there will be others in a similar position then me and will probably continue to be, who are re finding sites and wish to learn what was previously taken, not to own but just to be able to present the best detailed report they can.

Is it worth giving it a shot? we don’t have anything to loose, we could only gain.

neil 🙂

Thanks for the responses.

I’m greatly reassured that little or nothing of any ‘value’ (and I’m not talking about money here) is being lost to the scrapman. My concern here of course is that ‘cornflakes’ to one person is the ‘holy-grail’ to another.

Re your recent comments on items on eBay – whilst I acknowledge your point, I have to say it does cause other problems – There is little or no regulation, so items from recoveries carried out illegally can easily be sold on (I am not saying that all such items fall into this category). – Items such as personal possessions and parts of section 5 firearms have appeared on this site and eBay has done little or more often nothing to remove them when asked. – Such sales lead to a perceived monetary value on such artefacts which in our experience has led to landowners demanding substantial fees to allow an excavation. – The market for these artefacts leads others to question our motives.

Finally I noted with interest the post mentioning a hurricane artefact having been sold with the provenance it was from a BoB casualty, the identity of which is now unknown. Such provenance does indeed seem to raise prices and I have to wonder how often such provenance is manipulated to assist sales and how many unidentified pieces are given value by adding details from our websites or museum displays? To qualify this I have seen an item on eBay that could not have possibly come from the aircraft stated, yet was listed as originating from a site we have excavated.

All good points. It would be hypocritical of me to criticize eBay itself as I for one have often bought relics through that site (as well as from aerojumbles). I don’t have a clue how it would even be possible to regulate the trade in these relics. We all have our own standards and morals. I have no problem buying pieces of an aircraft in which people died but find the sale and collection of ‘personal items’ from such crash sites abhorrent. A small distinction perhaps but it’s where I draw the line.

The problem of false provenance is also I’m sure widespread but not unique to eBay.

One of the first relics I ever bought (from Popham) was a ‘genuine’ piston from a Battle-of-Britain Messerschmitt. I can’t tell you how much of a boost it gave to my interest. I researched the crash, bought hundreds of pounds worth of books, visited the places connected with its loss and became interested in the engine design itself…only to find that my piston was clearly from an engine with only two valves per cylinder.

But, I’ve still got that piston, and I’m still interested in historic aviation, and I still collect relics although I’ve taken the trouble to become much more knowledgeable about the things that I collect.

I must also say that for those on the ‘outside’ (like me) who have never taken part in a dig the ‘digging’ community can seem something of a ‘closed shop’. I understand that there is a need for secrecy with regard to some sensitive information but this attitude can be misunderstood and can lead to suggestions of elitism, exclusion and possessiveness of ‘our’ history. I hope those comments will not be misconstrued.

just an idea

If there is a large amount of absolutely useless bits of alloy etc left after a wreck has been cleaned and itemised and the good parts kept etc. How about if you must scrap them then how about donating the money to both your relative museums and a local veterans hiospice or care facility??

There are many sides to a story but as David pointed out these sites can yield parts or information for restoration projects, The Halifax and Albacore are mentioned but the FAA Museums Barracuda also comprises mainly crashed sections. Elliott would have to look ever harder for Whitely bits if there weren’t any high ground wrecks. But as mentioned earlier, several decades ago there were substantial wrecks that could provide a very good start for a restoration.
Cees

The Aircraft in question was a de Havilland Hornet – so I suppose the answer to some of the above is actually YES! 😮 As usual full details of our research, the dig and finds will appear on our website in due course – I know I have quite a bit of catching up to do on the website, but this is purely a hobby, I receive no funding and DO NOT SELL FINDS, I have a full time job and have just moved into a 200+ year old house to restore (not to mention running a very temperamental 30 year old Land Rover a couple of classic cars, a Motorhome and two modernish everyday cars that I also maintain). So a big thanks to Alan for taking on the cleaning and sorting for this dig

Wherever possible we do communicate with those we know have a specific interest in any aircraft we are investigating, and in this case Dave Collins has been kept up to date at all stages of this project and will be visiting to view the finds and will of course be welcome to any fittings from the scrap pile – however Dave be warned – this aircraft hit the ground VERY, VERY HARD! 🙁

Hello Nick

In the case of both of your Hornet digs to-date, you have given me a very welcome opertunity to see some original parts, albeit smashed. For me, if an aircraft is dug, then I am more than happy to assist in part identification for you, and possible measuring or photographing of details that may be useful in recreating new parts for the project. If you don’t mind me posting a photo here you gave to me of the engine limitations plate you found, this has helped us involved with the project to create a new label for the throttle box. I think this is a good example of how digs can help projects.

Regarding what happens to dug up parts afterwards? I would happily help in providing you with information to help present these properly in your museum in the future – photos, specific aircraft history, identification of the part in context, etc.

You also note that you had a section of canopy rail. Even though I have the part drawing for this, seeing the actual part even with damage, will assist in a reproduction no end.

I hope this serves as a good example of how even small finds from a dig can help a project.

Cheers for now,

Interesting posts in this section,thanks for those who are taking the trouble to add comments.

As far as false descriptions are concerned , its always been a case of let the buyer be wary in my view. As the population which experienced WW2 becomes less I expect that more items will appear on the market because sons and daughters who inherit collections may have little interest. Many armed forces people collected souvenirs and hid them away so parts may not be from a recent recovery dig.

And get the useless bits from digs recycled, if you feel unhappy about making a profit from a crash site dig then I suggest choosing a charity to give the proceeds to.

Finally I noted with interest the post mentioning a hurricane artefact having been sold with the provenance it was from a BoB casualty, the identity of which is now unknown. Such provenance does indeed seem to raise prices and I have to wonder how often such provenance is manipulated to assist sales and how many unidentified pieces are given value by adding details from our websites or museum displays? To qualify this I have seen an item on eBay that could not have possibly come from the aircraft stated, yet was listed as originating from a site we have excavated.

I have often seen items for sale as you speak of. How do you warn off prospective buyers of said pieces though, apart from the usual way through having ebay delist the said item. if someone wants to own a piece of Battle Of Britain heritage, the provenance offered, albeit fake, could or would, cloud their judgement and go ahead and buy the item anyway.

In 1974 I bought a piece of Dornier in a militaria shop in Southend on Sea. No ebay in that day!, The sheer thought of owning a genuine ‘Battle Of Britain’ relic, was to me a dream come true. Here I was ,the owner, or should I say Custodian, of a small piece of History.

But was it a good thing or a bad thing by buying a piece of history? I like to think of it as a good thing, for it gave me the determination to find out more about the Battle, and has given me the deep interest in second world war aviation that I have today.

It was also the jolt I needed to find and join a local recovery group. I finally joined the Essex Aviation Group in 1978 and took part in many digs up untill about 1984. I did collect items from different crash sites during that period, most members of the group did. They were parts that were repeated in other displays in the museum, or items not deemed worthy of inclusion in the display of artefacts from that particular site. but all given to me by senior group members.

Like Neil, there were many weekends spent after a dig, cleaning and sorting atrefacts for a display, often….nay, very often without the multitude of members who actually were on the dig… they were conspicuous by their absence:)

The majority of those parts today still reside with me, Although from time to time I have given bits and pieces away, but I am selective. I have only given parts to people I know will look after them and who hold them in the regard that I do.

Cees Broere
We have a huge building where our museum is based and a relatively large storage area and we have in recent years been sifting though the recovered wreckage and anything that is not useful will be send for scrap (mostly scraps of aluminium) with the money put back into our museum.

I used to know a fellow who would cast aluminium models of the aircraft from leftover wreckage, he always reckoned that would bring in more money for individual museums than just scrapping the leftovers. It also kept part of the aircraft ‘alive’ so to speak, brings me nicely back to ebay, and the many ‘Cast from shot down german aircraft Bell’ you see for sale, Oh, that and all the endless ‘From a Spitfire/Hurricane/Lancaster/Mosquito’ switches and dials also available:)

Finally I noted with interest the post mentioning a hurricane artefact having been sold with the provenance it was from a BoB casualty, the identity of which is now unknown. Such provenance does indeed seem to raise prices and I have to wonder how often such provenance is manipulated to assist sales and how many unidentified pieces are given value by adding details from our websites or museum displays? To qualify this I have seen an item on eBay that could not have possibly come from the aircraft stated, yet was listed as originating from a site we have excavated.

My relative bought it very cheaply at the time and supposedly had a bit of paper stating which aircraft it came from. I am very sceptical about this but as I have said it has been positively identified as a piece of Hurricane armour plate by a contributor to this thread. Whatever it’s history it’s not something I want to part with anyway.

The point I was making is that if moves were to be made cataloguing, retrospectively, everything that has been recovered, isn’t it a bit like bolting the stable door a long time after the horse has bolted? Items like that which I posess were sold for profit. How much more has been sold in the same way? While there are obviously individuals and groups who are genuine, and N Wotherspoon gives a compelling reason for NOT selling recovered items, there are those who have in the past and continue to do so. Bearing this in mind then, does it not make a mockery of any kind of attempt to regulate the recovery of crashed aircraft? Surely this is more than evidenced by the fact that a piece of Battle Dress blouse from a deceased crewman was offered for sale on Ebay?

Regards,

kev35

In reply.

No problem with me either – My reason for not selling artefacts is simply that I personally feel it would be disrespectful to those who died in an aircraft – whilst you are quite right that it could hardly be called profit when considering the time and money we put into our digs, it is simply the way I feel and as I organise most of our digs, I ask all those attending to respect my wishes with regard to any small parts that they may be given.

We do store rather a lot of material that is not suitable for display, but like Cees, we also have allowed those involved in rebuild projects access to this material and also recycle some material as scrap – we are talking material such as aluminium “cornflakes” & shapeless lumps of engine casing or occasionally mutilated lead ballast weights and battery plates.

Re your recent comments on items on eBay – whilst I acknowledge your point, I have to say it does cause other problems – There is little or no regulation, so items from recoveries carried out illegally can easily be sold on (I am not saying that all such items fall into this category). – Items such as personal possessions and parts of section 5 firearms have appeared on this site and eBay has done little or more often nothing to remove them when asked. – Such sales lead to a perceived monetary value on such artefacts which in our experience has led to landowners demanding substantial fees to allow an excavation. – The market for these artefacts leads others to question our motives.

Finally I noted with interest the post mentioning a hurricane artefact having been sold with the provenance it was from a BoB casualty, the identity of which is now unknown. Such provenance does indeed seem to raise prices and I have to wonder how often such provenance is manipulated to assist sales and how many unidentified pieces are given value by adding details from our websites or museum displays? To qualify this I have seen an item on eBay that could not have possibly come from the aircraft stated, yet was listed as originating from a site we have excavated.

No problem, feel free to ask.

We think that these crashsites are being investigated out of historical viewpoint as well as solving some mysteries and provide a chance for next of kin to close an emotional chapter in life. We do not wish to make money out of selling bits. But that’s just our own way of doing it.

We have a huge building where our museum is based and a relatively large storage area and we have in recent years been sifting though the recovered wreckage and anything that is not useful will be send for scrap (mostly scraps of aluminium) with the money put back into our museum.

Cees

The Aircraft in question was a de Havilland Hornet – so I suppose the answer to some of the above is actually YES!

As usual full details of our research, the dig and finds will appear on our website… but this is purely a hobby, I receive no funding and DO NOT SELL FINDS.

Wherever possible we do communicate with those we know have a specific interest in any aircraft we are investigating, and in this case Dave Collins has been kept up to date at all stages of this project and will be visiting to view the finds and will of course be welcome to any fittings from the scrap pile…

I stand corrected. A de Havilland Hornet certainly falls into the ‘save everything’ category.

I’m genuinely interested to know why you don’t sell anything? What becomes of everything in your ‘scrap pile’?

The bits recovered will be cleaned and identified and serve as a memorial to the tragedy. A selection is then made for display. But there is always part of the wreckage that cannot be displayed, that will be put in storage, and thus creating a poblem in itself. We do never sell anything, although the bits are availalable for projects such as the Stirling Project and Whitley project for which we have donated or loaned items.

Indefinite storage, as you say, must create huge problems in itself. Again I’m interested to know why you don’t sell anything?

Perhaps much of what has been lost in the past has been put into storage with the best intentions but as time passes and circumstances change the reality of indefinite storage has led to the ‘loss’ of much that was recovered.

I hope I don’t cause offence by asking these questions of either of you. It is clear from the descriptions of your recoveries and your donations to worthy restoration projects that your characters are not in question. I’m not in any way suggesting that you could ‘profit’ from recovering anything; the costs and time involved in recovery clearly make that a ridiculous suggestion.

To what end?

I’d be interested to know what aircraft/engine type was being dug?

Of course they are unique, irreplaceable and ‘valuable’ to those of us who value them and, if sold, would have a ‘cash’ market value but what more can we say about them?

Are they the only surviving examples of that aircraft/engine type? Could they help in an airworthy (or static) restoration? Would they allow drawings to be made if none existed, materials to be specified, or manufacturing techniques discovered if these are unknown? Do they hold vital information about how the aircraft was lost?

I’d suggest that the answer to all these questions is probably ‘no’.

The Aircraft in question was a de Havilland Hornet – so I suppose the answer to some of the above is actually YES! 😮 As usual full details of our research, the dig and finds will appear on our website in due course – I know I have quite a bit of catching up to do on the website, but this is purely a hobby, I receive no funding and DO NOT SELL FINDS, I have a full time job and have just moved into a 200+ year old house to restore (not to mention running a very temperamental 30 year old Land Rover a couple of classic cars, a Motorhome and two modernish everyday cars that I also maintain). So a big thanks to Alan for taking on the cleaning and sorting for this dig

Wherever possible we do communicate with those we know have a specific interest in any aircraft we are investigating, and in this case Dave Collins has been kept up to date at all stages of this project and will be visiting to view the finds and will of course be welcome to any fittings from the scrap pile – however Dave be warned – this aircraft hit the ground VERY, VERY HARD! 🙁

When we recover a wreck ourselves (before making sure no missing aircrew or UXB are involved) we aim to recover everything and not leaving any bit behind. This is mainly because the landowner wishes his land to be left neat and tidy without any metal contamination that may end up in a cow’s belly with the consequenses of that. When a recovery is done it’s meant to be a definitive dig to end a local story. The bits recovered will be cleaned and identified and serve as a memorial to the tragedy. A selection is then made for display. But there is always part of the wreckage that cannot be displayed, that will be put in storage, and thus creating a poblem in itself. We do never sell anything, although the bits are availalable for projects such as the Stirling Project and Whitley project for which we have donated or loaned items.
There are as many ways to deal with this as there are groups active in this field.

Cheers

Cees

What about stuff that was recovered and sold? I’m sure there must be massive amounts in private ownership of individuals who had nothing at all to do with the actual recovery of the item. I have a piece of Hurricane armour that has been verified as genuine by one of the contributors to this thread. This was gifted to me by a distant relative who bought it at an airshow in the late 60’s or 70’s. It is said to be from a Battle of Britain casualty but I have no idea how true that is or which one. Point is, if I have that, how much more is held privately by people who had such items gifted to them or bought them from airshows, aerojumbles and even through the internet?

Regards,

kev35

Interesting discussion….we had the MoD present at the first visit to the site we are currently digging. They produced a comprehensive report. Since then we have recovered about 1000% more than the first visit. We are aiming to recover every single piece so it is painstaking. We have already set up a sorting system to decide what is displayable (i.e a travelling display and 2 fixed displays), what is able to be melted down to make presentation models (corroded pieces of engine casing) and what will be unuseable (the latter will be returned to the site. As you may see, I do not scrap stuff….my pet hate is aircraft relics that have lost their history.

There are some sites where it would be nice to know where all the parts went/are.

The typical dig will yield maybe just a handful of items worth recording on the finds form + x lbs of misc scrap. The last dig we did had 1 reduction gear, 1 oxygen bottle, 2 propellor spigots, a section of engine bearer, half a dozen valves, a counter weight and about 150lb of misc engine fragments, mainly casing but some through bolts and cam shaft fragments and bits of alloy.

Maybe a longer time scale needs to be implemted or maybe a more detailed report to be added when all is done.

To what end?

I’d be interested to know what aircraft/engine type was being dug?

What is the true significance of the few parts that you mention?

Of course they are unique, irreplaceable and ‘valuable’ to those of us who value them and, if sold, would have a ‘cash’ market value but what more can we say about them?

Are they the only surviving examples of that aircraft/engine type? Could they help in an airworthy (or static) restoration? Would they allow drawings to be made if none existed, materials to be specified, or manufacturing techniques discovered if these are unknown? Do they hold vital information about how the aircraft was lost?

I’d suggest that the answer to all these questions is probably ‘no’.

If they are not going to be displayed in a museum (and I can’t think of a museum where I’ve seen everything recovered from a single wreck-site on display) then dispersion to those who dug (cleaned and catalogued) the relics is the best course. And should some of these relics end up on eBay (or at an aerojumble) then all the better.

Does anybody else think that eBay may actually discourage wreck-sites being illegally dug? A steady supply of relics to satisfy the collectors out there will depress prices and make it uneconomic for the unscrupulous.

The information that SPVA-JCCC collect is kept on file but is not released to other individuals / groups.

Also the detail required on the form for documenting finds is not that great and the timescale they allow for return of the form rarely allows for proper cleaning let alone catalouging of parts. In recent digs I have taken part in within a few weeks a letter has arrived demanding the finds form be submitted.

Neil, you should be aware of just how large a task cleaning parts is so they are identifiable and that while it is easy to get 20 people for a dig try getting that number every weekend for however long it takes to clean everything.

The typical dig will yield maybe just a handful of items worth recording on the finds form + x lbs of misc scrap. The last dig we did had 1 reduction gear, 1 oxygen bottle, 2 propellor spigots, a section of engine bearer, half a dozen valves, a counter weight and about 150lb of misc engine fragments, mainly casing but some through bolts and cam shaft fragments and bits of alloy.

It took a lot of effort just to clean that lot but it has only been recorded by photograph so far.

Been there, im one of the few who cleans the items after the dig and trys to set the display up.

Maybe a longer time scale needs to be implemted or maybe a more detailed report to be added when all is done.

The information that SPVA-JCCC collect is kept on file but is not released to other individuals / groups.

Also the detail required on the form for documenting finds is not that great and the timescale they allow for return of the form rarely allows for proper cleaning let alone catalouging of parts. In recent digs I have taken part in within a few weeks a letter has arrived demanding the finds form be submitted.

Neil, you should be aware of just how large a task cleaning parts is so they are identifiable and that while it is easy to get 20 people for a dig try getting that number every weekend for however long it takes to clean everything.

The typical dig will yield maybe just a handful of items worth recording on the finds form + x lbs of misc scrap. The last dig we did had 1 reduction gear, 1 oxygen bottle, 2 propellor spigots, a section of engine bearer, half a dozen valves, a counter weight and about 150lb of misc engine fragments, mainly casing but some through bolts and cam shaft fragments and bits of alloy.

It took a lot of effort just to clean that lot but it has only been recorded by photograph so far.

A database of every relic ever recovered from every crash-site would surely be pointless not to mention impracticable; the sheer volume of material recovered, its condition and the huge task of cataloguing it in enough detail for such a database to be of any use. Also where is the incentive? Those required to carry out this vast task would be unlikely to benefit from it in proportion to the amount of work required.

Personally I don’t understand what is wrong with most recovered artefacts being the hands of private individuals. Often such artefacts can foster a great interest in specific incidents and lead to detailed individual research that larger museums have neither the resources nor the inclination to carry out.

In my opinion the internet is the perfect tool to publish such personal research and also to allow those with a personal connection with the crash, or who are related to the aircrew involved to contact those that have carried out the research. Through this interaction a greater understanding of the personal history can be gained, detail can be added and in some cases ghosts can be laid to rest.

Where there is a specific type, such as a Stirling, Whitley or Whirlwind that has escaped preservation then of course special efforts should be made to collect as much information and to preserve as many artefacts as possible but for other, better preserved, types I don’t see the point.

I suspect part of the problem here is that several groups/individuals would like to think they are the ‘rightful’ custodian of the few relics that remain.

The details and scope of such a task would be horrendous to carry out but with a modern day dig license you are already stating what items were recovered and from what and where.

With a gap occuring before licences were needed i thought it could be usefull if sites and items could possibly be accounted for in an amnesty.

The amateur wreckology people are important in this task and are much needed.

Information and technology today like the internet make the task of research alot easier then in the past. So if a site has been dug on in the past and has been refound it would help to know what was recovered in an earlier effort.

Not to try and take the items away from the people but to log and take a photo of the item which would bring a fuller finish to the research and maybe help items disapearing forever into obscurity.

Is it possible to find out what has been found from previous licensed digs from the MOD, is this public info???????

A database of every relic ever recovered from every crash-site would surely be pointless not to mention impracticable; the sheer volume of material recovered, its condition and the huge task of cataloguing it in enough detail for such a database to be of any use. Also where is the incentive? Those required to carry out this vast task would be unlikely to benefit from it in proportion to the amount of work required.

Personally I don’t understand what is wrong with most recovered artefacts being the hands of private individuals. Often such artefacts can foster a great interest in specific incidents and lead to detailed individual research that larger museums have neither the resources nor the inclination to carry out.

In my opinion the internet is the perfect tool to publish such personal research and also to allow those with a personal connection with the crash, or who are related to the aircrew involved to contact those that have carried out the research. Through this interaction a greater understanding of the personal history can be gained, detail can be added and in some cases ghosts can be laid to rest.

Where there is a specific type, such as a Stirling, Whitley or Whirlwind that has escaped preservation then of course special efforts should be made to collect as much information and to preserve as many artefacts as possible but for other, better preserved, types I don’t see the point.

I suspect part of the problem here is that several groups/individuals would like to think they are the ‘rightful’ custodian of the few relics that remain.