Leave 'em in New Guinea?

Hi James–

Thanks much for that reminder that things are always more complex than they might seem.

The references to tourism and to the Boston airframe stored in Oz on behalf of the PNG museum give me ideas: What’s the chance funds could be raised to put up an uncomplicated steel hangar at one of the old airfields, perhaps a cooperative venture between PNG and the west? Doesn’t need to be an AAM type structure to be sound and serviceable…and the treasures that could then be housed right in the environs where this major campaign was fought, would surely be a tourist draw far beyond a crumbling alloy hulk in the bush (however eerie and poignant the latter is). Is this worth thinking about, or is it just nuts?

Cheers

S.

PS–one irrelevant quibble: the AAM Liberator came from Lackland (Texas), not Castle (California)…but yeah, she was rough.

New Guinea is a very hostile place unfortunately – not for the remains of aeroplanes necessarily, but for people. The capital of PNG is Port Morsby and unfortunately the level of lawlessness is very high. The “Rascals” are a group of people who make live very unpleasant for people in the area.

The unfortunate thing is that it is getting worse, not better and there is a long time to go before the “general” toursits will be safe in that region of the world.

My opinion is get them out and preserve them – better still rebuild them. Aeroplanes were built to fly and that is what they should do. That’s a pilots point of view, but I am holding to it. If I didn’t hold that view then the 150+ people I have taken for a ride in my Tiger Moth wouldn’t have had the experience. A couple of people would have seen the remains of a Tiger stored in a shed somewhere. The remains of my Percival Proctor would have long disappeared, instead it will fly again some day.

Someone who doesn’t fly may hold a different perspective – their interest being in the smaller details and the history side of things, I do to a point but saving a bunch of bits rather than saving the whole seems a bit of a waste of time to me. The bits are interesting, the whole is better!

While I agree in principal, the trouble is not very many people will ever see it in PNG.
What good is a memorial if no one ever goes there?
The swamp in PNG isn’t exactly off the A11 or I-5…

Along the same lines… What good is a museum if it’s closed to the public?

Whilst undesirable to say the least, said hypothetical closed museum would still be preserving material for the future, either when it *can* open to the public, or when another institution can take over. Think time capsule. Same arguably applies here.

Any memorial has a purpose to the people who take the time to visit it. Witness any number of lonely places in the U.K where aircraft came to grief and often there is a plate to commemorate those lost. To me to be at the place of the loss is everything.

For my money Swamp Ghost (which I knew through pictures and video) told me more about war and the sacrifices made by the young men than it will / would do in a museum or flying.
I’m just being provocative. 😉

While I agree in principal, the trouble is not very many people will ever see it in PNG.
What good is a memorial if no one ever goes there?
The swamp in PNG isn’t exactly off the A11 or I-5…

Along the same lines… What good is a museum if it’s closed to the public?

Interestingly I believe there is film footage of the recovery in PNG. Now if it was the recovery of the gas station B-17 which has languished for years in the U.S I guess it would hardly merit a mention.

Much the same goes for the veterans themselves. An old combat pilot dying in some convalesent home is much less newsworthy than the discovery/recovery of a pilot’s remains where they fell in combat. IMO, the inherent travesty would be society’s decision to regard the first pilot in less honorable fashion than the second.

That said, it must be remembered that Swamp Ghost is not only a combat aircraft (unlike the vast majority of B-17 survivors I believe) but an ultra rare “E” model with one of a kind items on board. Other than the slim-tailed B-17D model stored with the National Air & Space Museum, this is the oldest B-17 on the face of the planet. It’s also a phenomenal time capsule (barring some plundering in recent years) unlike the other survivors, most of which have been converted to transports, sprayers, water bombers, etc during their post-war years. No one should make the mistake of equating this plane with any of the other B-17’s around the globe. It is truly unique, and more than any other, it definitely deserves the respect of recovery and preservation.

Regardless of opinion, experiencing the physical presence of these aircraft imbibes the story far better than any book or field report. Every person who visits this forum can most likely recall a moment in their youth when they visited an airshow or museum, at which point their perspective on historical aircraft was changed forever. That’s the kind of message Swamp Ghost deserves to deliver. There is no honor in being reduced to scrap metal in some faraway, uninhabitable swamp when the means exist to properly preserve the icon AND the story for posteristy and valuable historical record. How rich in historical knowledge would society be today if the Pharoes, their artifacts, and all of their historical secrets were never exhumed and preserved for study? What if the fragile Red Sea scolls were left to rot peace rather than be properly preserved and studied because of some political disagreement?

Swamp Ghost may not enjoy the same level of intrinsic historical significance as these things, but the general underlying logic of its historic preservation remains the same. We’d be a far poorer society without the artifact, and we’d certainly be judged fools by future generations – having sat idly by to watch such a thing languish and disintegrate, squandering the opportunity to preserve the touchstone, knowing full well that actions could have been taken to the contary.

Interestingly I believe there is film footage of the recovery in PNG. Now if it was the recovery of the gas station B-17 which has languished for years in the U.S I guess it would hardly merit a mention.
We have to distance an aircraft recovered for interpretation of its role against a recovery done because it’s entertaining and with a large amount of her skinning replaced be potentially a flyer.

I’m surprised that no-one’s mentioned the basic archaeological principle of leaving something behind for the next team with better kit, or different equipment.

There’s an important difference, in that archaeological remains left in situe, having survived as long as they have already, will continue to do so, as they will be more or less stabilised. Airframes dating to within living memory are a little different than sealed layers and associated bone, stone, ceramics, copper alloy, iron etc, and 60 years later, we still have a chance to recover artefacts more or less intact that will undergo further deterioration. Left for future generations, this evidence may have gone.

Then again, we know far more about the technology and events of the 1940s than we do true archaeological remains, so is there a need to “rescue” the remains and bring them to the UK or the US? Perhaps, perhaps not. If so, my vote would go to a preserved diorama over a full rebuild, for the same reasons as discussed previously.

Conserve it and display in an indoor climate controlled swamp diorama :)….best of both worlds and safe from plunder.

Dave

I’m surprised that no-one’s mentioned the basic archaeological principle of leaving something behind for the next team with better kit, or different equipment.

For my money Swamp Ghost (which I knew through pictures and video) told me more about war and the sacrifices made by the young men than it will / would do in a museum or flying. (I’ve seen B-17’s fly and it’s great. But a wreck gives a pause for thought as to the dangers and transience of the war experience that a flyer doesn’t get.)

It also occurs to me that there’s one or two flying B-17s that could use the amount of cash that was recently spent on the ghost to good effect. ‘Lucky Lady’? ‘Sally B’?

How about restoring ‘Swoose’ with that money?

Vote now – which aircraft is more historic – Swoose or Ghost? Ooo, tough.

Far away = exotic = interesting. Close = boring. Maintaining the aircraft we’ve got is expensive and dull. Much better to get a new toy.

I’m just being provocative. 😉

It’s a little bit of a contradiction but the ‘Swamp Ghost’ has survived rather better than the B-17’s lost in various fire bombing accidents in the U.S during the 1970’s and indeed the B-17’s flown over to the U.K for ‘The War Lover’ in the 1960’s and latterly the French B-17 lost at Binbrook circa 1989.
Maybe we should look at our own record with ‘warbirds’ first before judging the ability of other nation’s.

I think you’re rather too harsh…operational accidents (especially when the B-17s were still working for a living in the 60-70s..) are hardly the same thing as doing nothing to stop a plane from vanishing due to neglect or vandals.

It’s a little bit of a contradiction but the ‘Swamp Ghost’ has survived rather better than the B-17’s lost in various fire bombing accidents in the U.S during the 1970’s and indeed the B-17’s flown over to the U.K for ‘The War Lover’ in the 1960’s and latterly the French B-17 lost at Binbrook circa 1989.
Maybe we should look at our own record with ‘warbirds’ first before judging the ability of other nation’s.

Bring them all out. In 20 years time there will be little left to look at and while the surviving flyers of any type are still in single figures there will be cries of “Why didn’t we recover “it” when we had a chance”….

And if the locals lose a bit of income, so what? If the wrecks are left to rot away/get robbed, in a few years they’ll definately not have nothing to show for what was left behind by whichever government deemed “it” surplus.

If the aviation community really feels that the locals should be ‘compensated’ for robbing them of a source of income, then surely donating something of use to the locals (water pumps, filtration systems, school books, computers, building materials) would be far more use than a pile of rotting metal and paint?

That was me. You make a fair correction, but the fact remains it is a shambles today and sadly judgement has to be on results, not effort. It gets tricky if you compare it to the sensible efforts to re-establish Japan and Germany, post-war for instance, or the Marshall Plan, with the results they had. A fraction of that cash and planning would have had a massive effect on the area. But, as you imply, it’s also very hard to get right.
Cheers!

There’s many threads on other sites about PNG so don’t want to get off the aviation side [too much] but to compare it with postwar reconstruction in Europe and Japan is not possible.

NG was run by the Germans up to WWI with the Brits in Papua, [in the early 70s there were still elders that spoke German]. After the Australians took over PNG it was administered in a low key way with copra continuing as it’s main source of income.

Aviation came into it’s own during the 30’s with Lae and Wau being the busiest airports in the world at one stage.

After WWII, which as you say the locals did not want, but then the locals in all the other places in Asia and the Pacific didn’t want it also, PNG had not changed much apart from some war wreckage left lying around.

PNG was not an industralised nation with educated [?] people to reconstruct; it was a backwater with about 500 different languages and tribes that Australia was lumbered with. Tribes used to attack each other but it was only with roads that they were actually able to go longer distances to do mischief.

It is a shambles now because law and order doesn’t exist and has been hamstrung by corruption and civil war, not due to any post war action.

Cheers
Ian

As an aside, somebody mentioned that not much has been done for them since WWII, the Australian Govt did a great job in administering PNG with many fine people, mostly Kiaps, preparing it for independence.It’s not their fault it is such a shambles today.

That was me. You make a fair correction, but the fact remains it is a shambles today and sadly judgement has to be on results, not effort. It gets tricky if you compare it to the sensible efforts to re-establish Japan and Germany, post-war for instance, or the Marshall Plan, with the results they had. A fraction of that cash and planning would have had a massive effect on the area. But, as you imply, it’s also very hard to get right.

Thanks to everyone for thoughtful rather than toy-box-acquisition level posts.

Cheers!

………………..
No one asked the people of PNG if they’d like W.W.II to be fought over them. The support the Papuans and others gave us was excellent. However, since W.W.II we’ve done relatively little for them and it’s easy to see (from a PNG point of view) as a lot of take and little give. A lot of their people died in a war that didn’t make a lot of difference to their quality of life. Had the Japanese won, it would have been worse; but it’s hardly better than it was pre-war – not a great achievement by the Allies, I’m afraid. They live in the world as it is, and it’s tough – telling them it’s better than it might have been is a short conversation. ………………
Cultural imperialism is a nasty problem.

JDK you make valid and interesting points here which, from a moral standpoint, aren’t solely pertinent to wreck recovery. Similar arguements can be applied re the effects of trading with repressive regimes to release valuable warbirds. Rare examples have been purchased en mass,by or on behalf of western collectors, for restoration to airworthy status. If that meant funds were paid to representatives of such military regimes, how can that be defended if such aircraft weren’t in physical jeopardy (which was an arguement re PNG). It sends out the message that trading with such regimes is OK ? Surely this has adverse knock-on effects for the local population as it helps sustain the regime’s legitimacy? I have mixed feelings – I feel hypocritical as I welcome the fact such airframes may fly again but do the benefits outweigh the consequences of the trade?

I was in PNG in the early 70’s when the first ‘warbird’ hunters arrived and saw the likes of the two seater Zero being hoisted out of Rabaul Harbour.
At that time any airfield you operated to had aircraft littered all over the place – mostly Japanese and one in partiucular had about 4 ‘Tonys’, some in VG condition.

Having worked with and known PNG nationals I think they would be rolling around with laughter about the hand-wringing over their war wreckage and would turn the B-17 into ready cash if offered.

As an aside, somebody mentioned that not much has been done for them since WWII, the Australian Govt did a great job in administering PNG with many fine people, mostly Kiaps, preparing it for independence.It’s not their fault it is such a shambles today.

Steve – I am helping someone in the U.K regards your interest . Best to say that it’s in everyones interest to get the engines sorted and where they belong.

The Hercules at Wick is from a Beaufighter. The farmer has never bothered to return my calls and may by now have moved it. It should also by now be undercover as he did not realise that he should have got permission for the recovery from the crash site. The crash resulted in one of the crew getting a medal for bravery .
Sadly I only have limited time now when trying to get farmers interested in finding a proper place for recovered items and the Inverness H.A .M were given details so its up to them.

Scotavia–

What type is the Wick Hercules from? I can think of a major museum that might be interested if the engine’s the right mark (and of course available). If there were two of them, that would be even better (ahem!)…

Everybody–

Great thread, everyone’s thinking before writing…the kind of discussion that can be both enjoyed and learned from.

Cheers

S.

Now, if there were a Stirling, or Halifax in PNG, China, or elsewhere, and it was also part of their heritage, then I would question its return to the UK as well.
Bruce

While I don’t doubt your sincerity…I suspect you’d be in a very small group. 😀

When in doubt, the question needs to be asked “who has a greater reason to keep it?”
That’s why I’ve always said a unique (1-2 of a kind) aircraft really out to be displayed where it was designed, built, and the country who it served.
So I think the DO-335 might be better appreciated in Germany and not be in the NASM (although as, I believe, the world’s most visted museum…more people might see it in Virginia…but how many really appreciate it?)
This does not mean the US gets all the Mustangs and the UK all the Spitfires…but applies to very rare aircraft only.

If someone finds a Stirling (very unlikely I know…) or can produce a replica (and I hope someone does), I’ll be more than happy to make a donation. It would have to be in the UK as a tribute to all the men of Bomber Command and something their familes could share for posterity.