FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Dear Freddy

No offence taken.. but I give up!

Bob

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your honest and direct reply. Here are my answers:

I quote
>
>I’m sure the editorial staff cruise the forum, but if they
>reply to one they would have to reply to them all and that
>is just not possible. Or do you think you are an exception?

unquote

I don’t think that I am an exeption, that’s why I wanted to know the general opinion among the regulars on this forum about this subject. Judging from the various replies as well as the fact that a large number of people have read the various replies the subject is very much alive and kicking. And you are correct that if the editor received my “complaint” he doesn’t have to reply. But on the other hand, if a large number of people do about the same subject the outcome is a different matter don’t you agree?

quote

>I ask again, have you given the editorial team the courtesy
>of a direct question to them? I very much doubt it.

unquote

Of course you can ask me again, and I can confirm that I have not questioned them directly (has nothing to do with courtesey). I think that if there are many people on this board who agree with my original question, then why should I ask the editorial staff of FP directly? The results are selfexplanatory.

Although I do not wish to call you old-fashioned but I get the feeling that you are trying to shut me up about this subject. And why should that be?

As I said earlier it FP didn’t have any interests in this forum why start one in the first place, to keep people busy? That would be an insult to the very knowledgable people on this forum.

Personally I have great respect for what the editorial staff has done with the magazine over the two decades other than that they have taken a different course as they started with in the early eighties, and I am aware that activities in the UK have decreased, that doesn’t mean they have stopped altogether. As well as that there is an enormous amount of activity going on in Europe alone. And judging again from the various replies I am not alone.

I have no hard feeling towards you, and I hope you don’t have any towards me.

Cheers

Freddy

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Dear Freddy

I gave two recent examples and you claim them to be all in ten years.. you have a harsh interpretation of things.

I’m sure the editorial staff cruise the forum, but if they reply to one they would have to reply to them all and that is just not possible. Or do you think you are an exception?

I ask again, have you given the editorial team the courtesy of a direct question to them? I very much doubt it.

Bob

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Have to agree that FP has lost the plot. Haven’t bought the mag for at least a year now. When I see it in the newsagent I do have a flick through but it seems full of jets and stuff happening in the US (yawn)

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Bob,

Two items spread over a ten year period cannot be called heavy coverage if you ask me.

Ok, about the Wellington recovery, which I enjoyed very much, when will the follow up article be published, I think you can wait a long time for that one. And that’s what so important to see how a certain projects evolves. FP haven’t covered the ongoing restoration of NA337 for years while the progress on her is nothing short of fantastic.

And why would FP issue a forum without any meaning to it? I agree that it is a ideal way for enthusiasts to meet and exchange information but there is always a catch and in my opinion the editorial staff of FP would check every now and then what’s discussed and perhaps get some inspiration.

Also having read the replies in answer to the original topic, I don’t expect to see locations published where remains are still to be found, only articles after the recovery took place, that way the recoverer/recovery group wouldn’t have to be afraid that someone else tried to pick the site clean (I’m not that thick).

Cheers

Freddy

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Dear ‘Freddy’

Call me old-fashioned, but this is a forum for FlyPast readers and not the place to direct a question to the Editor – have you e-mailed the FlyPast office with this? It strikes me the replies here are just goin to go around the houses unless you’ve done that.

As for aviation archaeology, I have just thumbed a few copies and there is the recovery of the Wickenby ‘Lanc’ in the Jauary 2002 and the mag headlines with the recovery of the MWM Wellington last year. I’d hardly say they were ignoring the topic!

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Also, I know it came to naught but was -any- evidence of those lancasters buried in a field found a few years ago??? I remember a picture in the national press that at least showed what looked like an outline of a lanc on a radar picture……..

Paul.

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

What happened to the crated P51 that was raised from the sea near Australia?

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

I lived in Oxford 10 years ago and some of the old boys in Littlemore where I played rugby were kids there during the war and used to dig up “salvageable” stuff from the trenches dug to bury wrecks from the Cowley repair depot. From the way they described it it sounded like the trenches were dug in the fields out towards Garsington Road as you came off teh old railhead there. Anything left these days will be small I am sure, but you never know.

Unipart , the sports club and the industrial estate might be on top of it now but I am sure a few pints of Morrell’s at the club might elicit some HUMINT.

I am sure an old photo in one of the Flypst BoB specials showed some German wrecks in the fields there.

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

I agree with you about the possibility of pulling perfectly good parts out of the ground Steve, though there’s the odd exception with saltwater recoveries too and I think that there could be the odd spit or hurri sitting under a few layers of silt around the coast which could, given the right conservation techniques are used, provide some useful projects. As for the lack of reports of possible recoveries I agree with all of you in saying that it is all kept quiet until the actual recovery has taken place, I know of a few ‘sites’ and wouldn’t tell the world when there are less and less places to look for this type of material as I wouldn’t want the items getting into the wrong hands. I’m just saving up for my Magnetometer 😉

Tom 😉

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

I agree entirely. This section was what sparked my interest in FlyPast and its a great pity they’re not doing it now-especially with all the finds in Europe mentioned earlier in this thread.
The proposed “Easy Elsie” recovery would make a great article.

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

i remember reading an copy of flypast when i was at school (15-20 years ago 🙁 ) and it had a bit about aviation archaeology in my area (Kent) a group were looking for a german bomber, cant think what it was, but thay were looking for it on marshes in the medway and this is , i think, what kick started my interest in aircraft and especially “the battle of Britain” i drive past the marshes evey day and still wonder if it’s still there.Please bring the archaeology section back.

Dezz 🙂

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Hi Guys

Perhaps the reason that the dump sites and dig site havent been reported is so to keep the tresure hunters in the dark about some sites. I being part of the digger community know how heartbreaking it is to find a site and then be pipped to the post by someone who wants all the finds for himself and doesnt offer any parts up to the rebuilds or museums. Also you will find that this community is built up of possibly hundreds of small groups who all work in the same area and dont talk to other groups to share info or work. And this ends up with people going over the same areas and wasting time.

I personally would like an engine of my own to restore and run at events. If I could do this in my life time I will be happy. But if I found servicable parts then I would put them up to any group that was going to fly or was flying that type. The only cost to them would be shipping and possibly a small fee to cover equipment should anything else other than a spade and metal detector be needed. But hopefully the only cost would be shipping.

I dont think it would be wise to broadcast these sites on the magazine cover. I do however think that it would be nice to hear of what had been found on actual sites dug. And think that they could do a feature on aviation archaeology that tracks the finds of different groups.

I know of at least two sites that the stuff would be so easy to get to that one day would be enough to destroy the site. I think I will sit on these sites until I am ready to take o the task or untill someone else finds them.

what do you guys think.

Merlin

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

While I also wouldn’t want to attack a magazine that I’m very fond of, I think it’s absolutely TERRIBLE that everything Steve listed has not been reported here; so much for ‘all the news’, eh?

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Steve,

You are absolutely right, it is not just a matter of hearing a story and then waiting till the parts come crawling out of the ground. There are many interesting sites where servicable parts have been found or are still to be found.

What about Little Snoring where Tony Agar dug up some very interesting Mossie bits and pieces, in fact his cowlings came from one of these digs. Also there was an report about a decade ago where dozens of Typhoon firewalls as well as all sorts of useful parts were recovered. The site was used after the war to scrap Typhoons. There are many more of these sites that could yield very usable material. Research and keep on trying are the name of the game here. What about the Castle Bromwich site where Spitfires are reported to have buried as well as tons of spares, engines etc.

In fact aviation archaelogy is a very important part of the whole warbird community these days with dug up remains now forming the starting point for rebuild projects. That’s why I find it strange that FP stopped with the pages covering this kind of work.

As Lancman said when KD took over the balance shifted towards the jets, and althoug that is interesting as well the balance was disturbed and nowadays I wonder if I should have bought a certain copy of FP. I still do because I have done that since the beginning of FP.

If you look at the news in FP, the quality is less than other magazines which I shall not name. But if you take for instance the past ten years then a large number of recoveries have taken place around Europe (not Britain, is that the reason?) of which only scant info has reached the pages of FP, while this is where they started with in the first place.

You want examples? Well, in Holland there have been many recoveries going on with the past few months seing a Wellington recovered with two missing airmen, a few weeks ago a Lancaster was recovered of which 15 (yes, fifteen) tons of wreckage was recovered. A very substantial Lancaster has been found in the IJsselmeer of which a few sentences were published in FP many years ago but since a lot more has been recovered. One call to the organisation involved and I think they can have the whole story with photographs et al. A Lancaster in the same IJsselmeer with five missing persons will be recovered during march/april 2003, followed by the very first Stirling to crash on Dutch soil in May 1941 together with six missing crewmembers. What about the investigation into “Dinghy” Youngs Lancaster of Dambusters fame that has been going on for years now and a site has been pinpointed. Same goes for Germany, you only have to look into the pages of FLugzeug Classic and you know that a number of very interesting German engines were recovered at Frankfurt airfield complete with photographs, something I missed in FP (or the other British magazines). Same goes for Belgium where a Halifax was recovered with three missing Canadian airmen, an epic recovery but nothing was reported in Britain. In France a DB610 engine of a He-177 was recovered which is one of the most rare things to find in this field (no pun intended) but nothing was reported.

This should not be taken as a full frontal attack on magazines as FP but I think that those who buy the issues are also entitled to read not only about jets etc, But also what is going on in aviation archeology, something that got FP started in the first place.

Just my view of course

Cheers

Freddy

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

First of all, anything which ended up in the Channel or the North Sea is now likely to be little more than mush. Salt water and aircraft structures really don’t get on very well.

As for buried aircraft and parts, you’d be surprised. I agree that the “I know where there’s a brand new Spitfire still in its crate” stories must always be taken with a very large pinch of salt, but I do also know that it is still possible to unearth perfectly servicable parts. It just takes a lot of research and a pretty big slice of luck. 😉

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

…but, there are no ‘crates of new Spitfires/Lancasters/whatever’ buried out there.

An area I’d like to see investigated would be what is to be found at the bottom of the channel/North Sea etc-although of course you’re talking MAJOR searching, funding, salvage etc etc, I’d have thought that if you wanted a Stirling, that’s where to look! There must be so many wrecks to be looked over down there, and I’d sure as damn rather see a few original Stirling wrecks raised and turned into one nice display example, or likewise Halifaxes, than either have nothing at all, or lame replicas. Still, just money-wise, it’s fantasy land I know.

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

What about all the Lend Lease Spitfire dumped into the sea. I meet one 603 Squadron (City of Edinburgh) Who flew from an airfield in his spit and landed it on the carrier to be pushed over the side. Although the aircraft would now be a moulten mess because of the materials used and the corrosion it would be interesting to see what was down there.

I also know of a few sites local to me where aircraft were buried and I am under no illusion of what I might find. Possibly moslty crushed wing panels of fuse panels as the weight of the other aircraft and earth would crush them and possibly if we dug long enough we might get a few useable pieces to help with someones restoration. But more than likely end up with a lot of scrap metal for the dealer to come and take away.

I am interested in the Merlin engines that are dumped in my are but they would require quite a bit of work to get them out. I know of at least two site where these are and I am working on finding a third.

I know that good things are out there all you have to do is talk to lots and lots of people do a bit of research and then everything usually fits into place.

Regards Merlin

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Seems to me this whole dump site issue smacks of urban myth.

For as long as I can remember there have been tales of ‘factory fresh’ (insert your own favourite type here) being bulldozed / carefully placed whilst wrapped in corrosion proof cotton wool into huge pits on airfields by somebody’s uncle at the end of WW2

Equally, as far as I know, not one even remotely intact airframe has ever been located.

Nice dream, but I reckon that’s all there is to it.

Moggy

RE: FlyPast article on airfield dumpsites

Sadly, a lot seems to have vanished from the pages of ‘Flypast’ over the years, though I guess things have to change now and then to keep it fresh. I lost some interest in taking it regularly when Ken Delve took over as the editor, and there was a huge and immediate shift in emphasis put on historic jet aircraft, which was fair enough as so many were being restored and flown at the time, but, it seemed a bit cosy what with KD being involved with the Canberra and all, and just too much forme at the time. But, I suppose historic jet fans loved it! Also, FP gets criticised for being a bit Spit/Lanc/Hurri heavy, also a fair comment, thoughg they have to please the masses in order to shift issues, don’t they?