B-36 Crash site artifacts

I couldn’t possibly comment! 😉

Was it something to do with the Magic Gnome Twin Otter?

Your post is fascinating b36 and sorry it has been needlessly swamped with the various irrelevant philosophies of UK high ground crash sites another thread would be more suitable for that.

I like many others would love to see any more pictures etc you might have on this crash, I was aware of this one having read about it, your none Spitfire related contribution on this forum is very appreciated

The fate of the gun turret discovered in 2008 is also of note – shown at the local heritage centre until it closed, and it’s now on display at Newark Air Museum for all to see (admittedly, it might have looked better in a shed/ spare room shrine only ever to be seen by a handful of people and members of enthusiast websites).

With respect there seems to be a few discrepancies with some observations in at least one of the ‘Over Exposed’ links that have been posted!

My understanding, and according to accession documents that I have seen; the turret cupola may not have been removed from the moor with MOD approval. It was found after being discarded in a local hedge row and then handed in to the local heritage centre. When that place closed, the cupola was transferred to Newark as opposed to being disposed of via a local scrap dealer.

There has been previous speculation about who removed it from the moor, but I don’t propose to open that can of worms!

Furthermore, why on earth would local people want to shell out a tenner for a piece of the wreck and then return it??????

Well, surely that is self evident? Why? Because of all the ‘fury and outrage’ that local people have expressed about the pieces of wreckage that are being removed and sold on eBay, of course!

If all of these ‘furious and outraged’ locals can’t even be bothered to ‘shell out a tenner’ between them to actually do something about stemming the erosion of this B-29 wreck that is apparently so important to them and their local history (not to mention their local economy) then I put it to you, and the newspaper (the Manchester Evening News) that these locals aren’t, in fact, as ‘furious and outraged’ as they thought they were…

…ten quid is surely a price one of you would be willing to pay?

Seriously? What impact would that have on the seller? Possibly, just possibly, he might think, great, I’ve sold the item – now I’ll sell some more…

Maybe, but I doubt it; the logistics and monetary returns simply wouldn’t be worth it.

As you said the B-29 wreck site is remote, five or six hours round trip (even carrying bits of B-29?) and that’s only after you get to Glossop (is it?), you’d have to factor-in the time (and the petrol) to drive to and from the Peak District (as this scumbag couldn’t be local could he)…

…then eBay and PayPal will take their percentage (10% for eBay) and then there is the time, money and effort of getting these things into the post (unless the scumbag lives next door to a Post Office)!

Seriously, you work-out what you’d want as a financial return for all that effort? Seriously, do it, and then tell me the minimum these bits of wreckage would have to go for to cover those costs.

Trust me, nobody is making a business on eBay by going out and stripping this B-29 for parts!

As I’ve previously identified, they play a role in local history, and the idea of taking bits from sites where, frequently, people have died, to sell on for a tenner or more doesn’t sit well with people.

It doesn’t sit well with me either, not where wreckage is still in situ, where people can go and see it. (I was going to say ‘enjoy’ it but that isn’t really what I mean.)

The thing is, and you should know better than most, you can’t really blame eBay for the demise of this B-29 wreck site (although eBay, and the sellers on it, are an easy target for the ‘outraged’ journalists of the newspapers) because, as I’ve said before, eBay didn’t exist in the United Kingdom before 1999 and we all know that the vast majority of damage to these wreck sites occurred decades before that!

Of course, now that the eBay seller has suffered the wrath of the Manchester Evening News (and admitted his ‘guilt’ by removing his eBay listing!) what will he do with the wreckage he has now? Presumably he’ll just throw it away rather than return it to the wreck site? What about anybody else that ‘innocently’ or thoughtlessly took a piece of the B-29 home with them; if they can’t sell it on eBay (and that’s not why they took it) what will they do with it? What if their deceased father, husband or brother took the piece, what then, just throw it out?

To my mind, it is better that these fragments and relics are freely traded on eBay because if they are perceived to have a real monetary value (even if in reality they don’t), or if somebody just knows how ‘important’ they were to a deceased relative, it may just mean that other rare artefacts will be listed rather than simply being thrown-away as worthless rubbish. Other rare artefacts that haven’t been recently stripped from ‘high ground’ sites or that were taken decades ago (or that were collected by people during the war)?

As has been said, when the really valuable stuff has been cherry-picked by museums or the really ‘serious collectors’ then eBay can act as a useful safety-net to stop the ‘worthless’ stuff ending up in the local dump. And within some of that ‘worthless’ stuff may be some real ‘treasure’, something really important rather than valuable.

Yes, the trade on eBay may encourage some idiot to drive up to the Peak District and then trek for miles to the B-29 wreck site so he can bring back a bag full of aluminium fragments, but I doubt he will make a profit…

…but he may buy a book or a cup of tea while he is up there!

There seems to be a lot of belated hand-wringing and sanctimony occurring in later posts. As with many things, there seems to be no black-and-white about this, but a look at the USS Arizona Memorial might provide a good impression of how and why some artefacts need to be left where they are.

It seems to me that those who want wrecks left where they are, have much in common with those who opposed the removal of the steam rollers that were in kids playgrounds, or even the A1 Lightning, local landmarks and considered by the locals as “theirs”; history isn’t just the hulk of wreckage, but the story of both the machine and the men/women.

Year on year the local connection will become more distant, and eventually no one will remember what it was and why it is there; memorials get vandalised and plaques are stolen, but “sayeth a mans name, and he shall live forever”

I’d like to see the artifacts eventually make their way to a museum where they can be shared. The B–36 is a sadly rare type (they make a Lancaster seem common by comparison) and preserved turrets, systems or components are rarer still.

Ideally, I’d like to see it at a museum that has a B-36 indoors so the turret can be shown alongside…so NMUSAF, SAC.

Far be it for me to give away something that’s not mine, but hopefully the owner would be willing to part with it at a reasonable price to a museum instead of simply trying to maximise his investment.

I agree that its a shame B36’s thread has gone south and i apologise for that also.
I think overall people here see aircraft wrecks as a part of history with an interesting and often sad story behind them. Some people think nothing should ever be removed from the crash sites and others think that sometimes its ok to remove some parts.
Its always going to be a debate that comes up on here from time to time unfortunately.

In a perfect world, i would like it if nothing was ever removed from the crash sites, but in the real world, there is no way that items like flying helmets, instruments and so on are going to stay there forever and i would rather see B36 have those flying helmets than some random person with little to no interest in the aircraft and its story.

In my opinion B36 has, in the long run, saved those parts, as its clear he is taking good care of them and has great interest in them.

Creaking door, as for your first point – I think I’ve stated my view quite clearly in that the high ground wrecks in the UK are transitory in that they will decay over time (this is a slow process – a significant number of the wrecks go back to the 1940s and will be there for many more if left there). Yes, I include the B29 here – I don’t recall having made a special case for any particular wreck.

As for your second point:

Yes, these books do encourage people to visit them – and why not?

Yes, some people will take fragments home – it’s impossible to stop, but the majority do not. Furthermore, most of these wrecks are remote, relatively inaccessible, hard to locate, on steep or rough terrain, and often take a 3-6 round trip, which most people are not up to – or want to do. After all, that is the primary reason the wrecks are still there after so long.

As to who takes the parts – no-one knows definitively, it’s all speculation. It will be a combination of all 3 groups you identify (in what proportion we don’t know and there is no way of telling).

Regarding the Manchester Evening News article – I’m not a journalist so can’t be held responsible for the sensationalist tone. If you stop and think for a second about your repurchasing idea. Seriously? What impact would that have on the seller? Possibly, just possibly, he might think, great, I’ve sold the item – now I’ll sell some more. Furthermore, why on earth would local people want to shell out a tenner for a piece of the wreck and then return it?????? I think you need to see the wreck site with your own eyes and then possibly re-evaluate. As I’ve previously identified, they play a role in local history, and the idea of taking bits from sites where, frequently, people have died, to sell on for a tenner or more doesn’t sit well with people.

The eBay trade itself IS fuelled by what you call the ‘serious collector’. Very few other people would be searching for these parts, let alone shelling out the asking price for what are often fragments or very damaged.

I suggest you do move out of your armchair and spend a few hours in these areas to get a better perspective of what the wrecks are actually like, the terrain they’re located in, and how they’re perceived in the local area. For the people on this site – aviation enthusiasts – is the need to possess these remnants so great? When the ‘collectors’ are dead and gone, relatives who they are passed on to, or even organisations the items are donated to, will keep the most interesting items only (often for lack of space if anything else) and dispose of the rest.

I’ll say no more on the matter.

History is transitory – not everything needs to be fossilised or preserved…

Isn’t this also true of ‘high ground’ wrecks like the B-29?

Or is it only acceptable for history to be ‘transitory’ when it doesn’t affect the long-term money-making potential for local businesses?

For those who of us who actually live in ‘some blasted moor’ the wrecks actually have a significance, both in terms of modern local history and bringing in a small, but significant, number of walkers/ visitors throughout the year who will spend money in pubs, shops, etc. after a day on the moors – which all help small communities. Next time you’re up in the Peak District, just have a look in the tourist/hking-orientated shops and count up how many Peak District wreck books and Peak District wreck walking guides there are on sale.

Seems a lot of these local businesses may be victims of their own success; surely by selling books and guides about these Peak District wrecks they’ve only encouraged people to visit the wreck sites…

…and, people being what they are, many will be tempted to take a tiny fragment home with them.

And, let’s be honest here, only a small proportion of those that take these tiny fragments will be ‘serious collectors’ of aviation artefacts, nor will the majority be hoping to make a fast-buck on eBay!

As is usual with this sort of ‘FURY and/or OUTRAGE’ story in the newspaper none of the ‘outraged’ interested parties (including the newspaper making money from gathering and then ‘selling’ the outrage) were outraged enough to cough-up the £9.99 for the piece of B-29 and then simply return it whence it came!

You’d hardly even need to move out of your armchair to accomplish that.

Apologies B36, you must excuse us, your ‘simple’ thread has opened a favourite ‘can of worms’ on this forum!

I’ve often wondered how people would feel about the RAF placing a few old Tornado or Jaguar aircraft out on the hills of the United Kingdom as ‘points of interest’ below the skies they once frequented during low-level training?

Of course they couldn’t do it; even stripped of everything even remotely hazardous somebody would no doubt ‘slip’ on a damp wing while trying to get that selfie sitting in the cockpit and would need to be heavily ‘compensated’…

…funny how nobody ever seemed to injure themselves during the removal of a fragmented B-29 Bomber!

James, you’re right – the RAF and USAF did get there first and removed the majority, and, yes, their main concern will no doubt be the discovery of remains. No-one has claimed the wrecks were left as memorials.

For those who of us who actually live in ‘some blasted moor’ the wrecks actually have a significance, both in terms of modern local history and bringing in a small, but significant, number of walkers/ visitors throughout the year who will spend money in pubs, shops, etc. after a day on the moors – which all help small communities. Next time you’re up in the Peak District, just have a look in the tourist/hking-orientated shops and count up how many Peak District wreck books and Peak District wreck walking guides there are on sale.

Obviously, in spite of running past a number of these wrecks most weeks, I must be an ‘armchair tub thumper’ as I hold a view contrary to your own; so I attach a link from the Manchester Evening News form 2011 about B29 wreck ‘Overexposed’, the most well-known and accessible of all the wrecks:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/fury-over-sale-of-plane-crash-856920

Also, another from Aviation Safety Network – the final paragraph is of particular interest:

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=69124

Finally, one more from February 2018 concerning the daughter of ‘Overexposed”s pilot.

https://glossopchronicle.com/2018/02/daughter-plans-glossop-return-in-dads-memory/

The fate of the gun turret discovered in 2008 is also of note – shown at the local heritage centre until it closed, and it’s now on display at Newark Air Museum for all to see (admittedly, it might have looked better in a shed/ spare room shrine only ever to be seen by a handful of people and members of enthusiast websites).

History is transitory – not everything needs to be fossilised or preserved – those wrecks/parts that were of significance have been long been removed (e.g. the Stirling). Dispersed fragments hold far less significance, and to claim every scrap that’s on eBay or picked up is preserving aviation history is stretching it a little bit in my view.

I’m sure there are many views on leaving or removing the wrecks, and they are not just the preserve of aviation enthusiasts – it would serve us well to remember that sometimes.

Anyway, I need to get a tissue as I’m getting all dewey-eyed….

Here’s another little piece of irony:

monument
ˈmɒnjʊm(ə)nt/
noun
noun: monument; plural noun: monuments

a statue, building, or other structure erected to commemorate a notable person or event.

So in fact B36 has erected the only true monument in this entire issue – the RAF just did a poor job of removing scrap.

Cheers
James

The M102 BirdCage was the storage device which held the plutonium bomb core for the early mk4 & 5, assemble by hand, in flight atomic bomb. Because it’s interior matches the exterior of the core it gives a pretty good indication of the core shape, size & yeild;- very secret stuff, all were supposed to have been shredded.

‘Birdcage’…..radar?

I have pictures that show the B36 intact after landing..pointing up the mountain…at the time 20 ft snow on mountain. Discovered by RAF looking for a lost Alaskan millionaire. When aircraft was identified…it took 2 years…2 different attempts by USAF team to reach site. Upon arrival they removed items then blew it up..i was there..seen it..done it. Even found a explosive cannister..parachute attached…unoppened …dropped by air.

Still items classified to this day……RAF never went to site…strictly USAF as items were all top secret. Here is a quizz for the armchair..never leave house guys….when and who recovered the…BIRDCAGE…second quizz….what the hell is the…BIRDCAGE….

…20 min flight in Bell 206 helicopter…

In twenty minutes in a Bell 206 I could reach five wartime crash-sites from where I’m typing this in the UK!

And I bet a million people could walk past those same crash-sites and not a single one of them would have the slightest clue that an aircraft had crashed at any one of them, or that nearly twenty people had died there.

Nice collection- thanks for posting