No more recoveries Lake Michigan? :(

Remember, the government is always our friend.
They know what’s good for us.

🙂

It maybe because it is written in ‘officialese’, but there is a tone of admonishment in that memo!

Some of the ‘backlog’ has probably been sitting at Pensacola for nearly twenty years ! I doubt they will ever get it done .

It does not say they won’t do it again, part of it says they will get though the backlog sitting awaiting restoration first before considering salvaging anymore.

Nicely put.

I think these artifacts should be regarded as national monuments, and cared for as such: if the means exist to recover each and every one (with the exception of war graves), then it should be done as a moral obligation. And using private funds as a means to doing this seems an entirely sensible idea, given the appropriate controls.

To just say ‘no’ is unhelpful at best, and to treat these objects as a way to (presumably) control the value of one’s assests is also morally questionable.

But the USN has the final say, and so sadly I imagine there’s little that can be done.

I think its clear that, whilst over the years, it has helped fill in gaps in the national collection, excessive duplication of types is now a real issue.

Unless there are further examples of poorly, or un-represented types, I think it is a sensible and pragmatic statement.

However, as Dave says, why not sell the recovery rights to the highest bidder, on a per plane basis? Now that the gaps are filled, and posterity is satisfied, it is a waste of resource to just leave them there. If there are collectors willing to put their hands in their pockets, then why not?

Do we know what is still down there?

Bruce

The problem lies with the USN refusing to relinquish ownership of its aircraft lost to accident etc. regardless of what their historical value, current circumstances or condition is. If these belonged to another air arm or nation the wrecks would have been written off when they crashed (war graves perhaps excepted) long ago. That refusal simply means that a private consortium or individual who is interested in salvaging a wreck cannot do so without expensive and time consuming negotiations with the USN and if the USN historical section feels it has enough examples and no more are needed then in the end aircraft types that would be popular private restoration ventures are left to rot. It is quite bizarre when one considers that if the aircraft was struck off charge in the accepted fashion then there would be no danger of public litigation from private salvors. A very strange and unhelpful practice and an example of accounting for public money gone mad.

I was horrified at the condition of the aircraft (even the recently-restored ones) on the flightline at Pensacola on a recent visit there. I’m sure that this decision is at least partially a result of the realisation that they have their work cut out without having yet more Wildcats (I think they have 5 in the museum already) and Dauntlesses to restore. They opened up the sole surviving AJ Savage for me to look inside. It was restored a few years ago, but the cockpit area had an inch or two of stagnant, green water in it. Condensation was everywhere, dripping from the panels, and the paint was peeling off the internal surfaces revealing white, powdery corrosion. The PBJ Mitchell and PB4Y-2 Privateer (also recent restorations) didn’t look much better, and the SB2C Helldiver recently recovered from a lake near San Diego was also left open to the elements on the ramp.

I think its clear that, whilst over the years, it has helped fill in gaps in the national collection, excessive duplication of types is now a real issue.

Unless there are further examples of poorly, or un-represented types, I think it is a sensible and pragmatic statement.

However, as Dave says, why not sell the recovery rights to the highest bidder, on a per plane basis? Now that the gaps are filled, and posterity is satisfied, it is a waste of resource to just leave them there. If there are collectors willing to put their hands in their pockets, then why not?

Do we know what is still down there?

Bruce

As of 2012 the count was 31.

Moggy

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-12-08/news/ct-met-wwii-plane-retrieval-20121208_1_a-t-recovery-taras-lyssenko-national-naval-aviation-museum

Can anyone tell us how many aircraft have been recovered from Lake Michigan please, and what types?

The problem isn’t the cold water- it is the zebra mussels, the last Wildcat was in quite poor condition compared to earlier recoveries. The aircraft remaining are fast running out of time as the pest increases in numbers. Taras of A&T Recovery will be talking about this in the next issue of Classic Wings

The Navy should allow others to recover and perhaps charge a ‘fee’….say the ‘collector’ pays 20k to the Navy Museum, so that way the Navy still gets something out of it and can use it as a funding resource.

Of course I assume their big worry is litigation if something goes wrong- but surely a water tight agreement can be drafted and signed so that the Navy relinquishes responsibility for injury and damage etc.

I remember speaking to Capt Rasmussen about our Heritage Centre at Omaka being keen on getting a long term loan of a Dauntless, since the RNZAF operated them. He was fine with it, but said none of the current recovered aircraft are available. Perhaps the Navy should also think a bit more globally with regards to these treasures being presented to the public as well.

The cold, fresh water of Lake Michigan causes little to no corrosion now, some 70 years after they went in the water.

Yes, if they had been pulled out 60 years ago you would be able to notice a difference – but almost all of that damage occurred in the first 20 or so years. If you pull an aircraft out 15-20 years in the future from now, very little (if any) changes will be noticeable.

As for the oil – every year private boats put more oil & fuel into the lake than all those aircraft had aboard combined – and then you look at what the large commercial freighters leak. Possible pollution from these aircraft, from now going forward, is truly insignificant.

The aircraft are not in ‘suspended animation’ -they corrode and will leak more oils as the years go by. The decision isn’t in the best interests of the aircraft -I am sure there would be a commercial interest in recovering further aircraft and for the Navy to assert that they have enough doesn’t mean there is no demand.

In terms of the storage of aircraft – pictures of airframes parked outside at Pensacola don’t exactly convince that the Navy knew exactly what to do with them ! Maybe if they had considered storage first and had it in the desert corrosion and decay wouldn’t be so critical.

All in all its the wrong decision.

Seems eminently sensible given the reasons quoted – ie multiple aircraft of same type already recovered, types likely to be recovered already well represented in national collections, backlog of restoration of Lake Michigan recoveries etc

It a decision of the moment – there’s nothing in this decision that can’t be reversed should the specific circumcustances change. The unrecovered airframes remain out of harms way in suspended animation

In the meantime perhaps any available resources could be directed towards the recovery (finally!) of a TBD Devastator