Next Channel recovery

I agree why dredge up some old wreck when there are better preserved bits lying on the land

http://barbaadventures.no/2012/08/11/the-ju-88-crash-site-on-jan-mayen/#more-319

..

Its salvage could really only be useful/justifiable as the basis for a reconstruction project along the lines you suggest. The alternative is that it sits where it is and just rots away, gradually degrading with each season, each tide and each visitor. Or, it could be recovered on the basis that 43-2195 suggests. However, all the time that TIGHAR (presumably?) still sit on the PMR licence and do nothing, then nothing will happen.

Or someone else with money could apply for a PMR licence and test the system – I’ve been led to believe their is no exclusivity in them. I always suspected that the desire was for a rich American to come forth to ‘save’ the P-38

Maybe a Lincolnshire farmer could turn up some ‘eye-witnesses’ who definitely saw Amelia Earhart aboard the P38?

Moggy

43-2195

I agree with you entirely!

The thing is, and as I understand it, any recovery has never happened simply because the mindset is such that its recovery to a museum for preservation and conservation has been the plan. But it is also the stumbling block. Not by any standards does this type represent a gap in any national collection(s) and thus no museum is likely to step up to the plate and embark upon a ‘Goodwins Dornier’ type project.

Its salvage could really only be useful/justifiable as the basis for a reconstruction project along the lines you suggest. The alternative is that it sits where it is and just rots away, gradually degrading with each season, each tide and each visitor. Or, it could be recovered on the basis that 43-2195 suggests. However, all the time that TIGHAR (presumably?) still sit on the PMR licence and do nothing, then nothing will happen. In some cases relating to aircraft recovery/aviation archaeology, I think we need to take a much harder look at the reasons for such a project and not always be focussed on the preservation and conservation of the wrecks for the sake of the historical context of that wreck. Sometimes, that isn’t always the most appropriate course of action and if we are to look at the possible future of this fragile airframe then it might be the only way unless it is left to the elements and become lost, anyway.

Would any member take offence if I suggested that the “Maid of Harlech” was just one P-38 of the 10,000 built, with no particularly “Historic” value? And that the world of Old Aircraft Preservation/Restoration would be better served if a private individual(of some financial independence) acquired ownership and used the corroded wreckage to build jigs, use as patterns for new parts and de-rivet it to isolate any small parts which might still be useable? there are plenty of ditched P-38s in the pacific with far more historic value than “The Maid”. Just because it’s accessible and close to civilization, should not give it the importance it seems to have.

In direct reply to your post, my thought is Bruce Lawless’ Tempest 5 off the coast of Dover. This is the aircraft that he ditched and was rescued by
RAF launch. This was apparently the first Tempest to be ditched. Restored and displayed next to the Spitfire and Hurricane at Manston perhaps? and not hidden away in the corner of a roof.

Seeing the quality of the restoration of the items from the Dornier, what are the RAF Museum expecting the finished airframe to look like ? Are pristine looking items due to be refitted to a conserved though wrecked airframe ? Are robbed parts to be refitted ? Do we expect to see something similar to the Halifax ?

The smaller items seem to have faired substancially better than the main aircraft structure.

The cost of putting a diver to work safely on the seabed will be dictated by many factors and is variable, but expect a four figure bill per day just to put the diver in the water. Some sites might only see a 20 minute window of opportunity for work every 12 hours. The risk assessment would probably dictate surface supply and comms/video feed. Plus the cost of cutting equipment or other tools. Any recovery will require a charter vessel capable of supporting both diving operations & lifting.

There are no short-cuts, and its expensive.

I am suprised there is talk about the Dorniers condition being worse than they thought as when I spoke to some guys at cosford they were saying it was actually in better condition than they thought it would be. They really only have the opportunity to clean/preserve some of the smaller items on public view and these are in v good condition.

Surely there is an argument to recover something like the JU88 much much more cheaply, by cutting it up on the sea bed and lifting in small sections.

The cost of putting a diver to work safely on the seabed will be dictated by many factors and is variable, but expect a four figure bill per day just to put the diver in the water. Some sites might only see a 20 minute window of opportunity for work every 12 hours. The risk assessment would probably dictate surface supply and comms/video feed. Plus the cost of cutting equipment or other tools. Any recovery will require a charter vessel capable of supporting both diving operations & lifting.

There are no short-cuts, and its expensive.

Why has nobody found a Spit or Hurrican in a similar state?

http://www.maltaviationmuseum.com/hurricaneIIA.asp

Is there a need for a Ju88?
The Dornier was a Phoenix, risen again from its ashes, but whilst we are not exactly swimming in Junkers neither are they as rare as once they were. Whilst there might be enthusiastic sponsors or lottery backing (if they still have money after raising the cost of a ticket) for retrieving something from extinction, there will be little interest from the financiers for something they can already see a version of at Hendon. Therefore you are looking for a philanthropic multimillionaire willing to raise and conserve it, and there will be precious few of those about.

The only reason it cost so much was the aim of recovery in one piece, which in my opinion was always doomed to failure.
How much did that useless lifting frame cost ?

Surely there is an argument to recover something like the JU88 much much more cheaply, by cutting it up on the sea bed and lifting in small sections.

I maintain that if the Dornier had been done this way, they would have a lot more to show for their efforts, a much better final exhibit, and a great deal of spare cash to spend on other useful projects.

I agree with Tangmere though, first you have to fund the aftermath of such a lift, which is a bigger problem.

Why has nobody found a Spit or Hurrican in a similar state?

Having spoken to some of the Cosford technicians a while ago, they were unaware of how bad the Dornier actually was until they saw the YouTube dive videos via links on this forum, a few weeks prior to the lift. While the aircraft appeared intact, it was obvious to them that the holes visible in the structure and mainplanes wasnt due to bullet holes, but good old fashioned aluminium corrosion. And because the dive team couldnt use the specially designed frame to lift it from the sea bed, the outer wings and tips didnt come up with it, and the back broke. It was only the aluminium bar stuffed down the rear fuselage that stopped that falling back into the sea…

If you want to spend around 3/4s of a million on a couple of nav lights and some blue paint, and what maybe a machine gun but I doubt it, then feel free…

Interesting though judging by that video providing the wreck hasn’t been pillaged some parts are in better shape than the Dornier. I can see the cockpit front facing machine gun, Landing and nav lights, stencilling and blue paint on the wings….

Not that Ju88 thats for sure…

It’s a rotbox… in a far worse condition than the Dornier 17 appeared on the YouTube dive videos…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TC8JSXDrSM

Point taken about conservation, Andy. But seeing the set up at Cosford with the Dornier in the polytunnels at the moment, what could go in there when the Dornier comes out ?

If you wanted a Ju88 it would be far easier to speak to the Norwegians rather than pulling some corroded bits out of the Channel

Well it looks like time again to post the YouTube link to Bob’s video of the Ju88

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Prmz6YAse6c&feature=share&list=FLyfJRRYGv4Phok-X_j9jxMg

Ross

JU88. WOW! Fantastic! If I win enough on the Lottery I’ll Fund the whole recovery. Yes conservation is a problem no matter how much money you throw at it. Thing is, even for a short while the history of it and photos would be worth its weight in gold, far more than just leaving it in the sea don’t you think?