P-38 found on beach – Wales

JJ

Since you have asked, it was neither, it was a P-51K.

The accident report proved to be of next to no help and the locals didn’t know anything about it either. Like Nick said we will return another day.

I have already discovered a largely complete airframe (& know the locations of a few more!)

Not a Whitley by any chance? :p

Reply.

Hi “JJ” – Just back from a day getting plenty of fresh air, thanks – hunting for a P-51 – didn’t find it though 🙁 – This Time !!! We’ll be back! 😀 Thanks for you note of encouragement, however I’m afraid its not the way I like to do things – some of the points you raise are quite correct, but I have been in charge of recovery projects and know all too well the difficulties that can arise when a wreck is in such an exposed location – I also know what some daft idiots will do – we had two incidents of theft on our Time team project for instance – fortunately the police recovered the first item and a “quiet word” in the right places effected the “re-discovery” of the second ! 😎 I have also had to deal with crowd control when details of one or two of our digs have got out before the project – 99% of those who turn up are well meaning and just curious – just rather unaware of the dangers of peering over the edge of deep holes! 😮 But the other 1% have other motives IMO 😡 . The point I was trying to raise was that, perhaps unintentionally, the impression that seemed to be coming over on the forum was that anyone who went near this wreck was up to no good – I feel that this has been corrected now.

I am a great believer in free speech and think it is great that we have this forum as a platform where views can be aired and when concerns arise, there is the opportunity for those involved in such projects to put forward their case and often allay people’s fears and correct misconceptions. I have had extensive, informative and friendly, correspondence both from members of TIGHAR and the individual who decided that this aircraft should be saved and IMO went about it in the best way he saw fit – I’m not saying I would have done things the same way, but at least he did something! I also bear no grudge or envy regarding his “laying claim” to this wreck – it is on his doorstep and his actions all appear to be for genuine motives. Sure it’s a great find, but I have already discovered a largely complete airframe (& know the locations of a few more!) and I know our groups limitations, what the museum I am involved with can and cannot take on and of course what can and probably cannot be achieved with regard to realistic conservation with current technology and materials. TIGHAR obviously seem to do things differently to the way groups operate over here, but I, for one, am prepared to give them a chance and look forward to seeing what they achieve – it is not going to be an easy recovery !

Hi there N. Wotherspoon,

Thanks for the reply, glad you have been getting the fresh-air treatment.
I understand your points, it must be a problem keeping the lookers away
for the problem of not doing damage to whats been started,but come on
its not every day that we get to see this stuff on your back garden.
Anyway I hope it all pans out for them and I will, along with others will keep
our fingers crossed that it all goes to plan and that we really do get at long
last a P-38 to have a good look at.
P.S. was the Mustang a B or D ?

Regards JJ.

Fresh Air

Hi there, N Wotherspoon,

Go on, get some sea air in yer lungs mate. JJ.

Hi “JJ” – Just back from a day getting plenty of fresh air, thanks – hunting for a P-51 – didn’t find it though 🙁 – This Time !!! We’ll be back! 😀 Thanks for you note of encouragement, however I’m afraid its not the way I like to do things – some of the points you raise are quite correct, but I have been in charge of recovery projects and know all too well the difficulties that can arise when a wreck is in such an exposed location – I also know what some daft idiots will do – we had two incidents of theft on our Time team project for instance – fortunately the police recovered the first item and a “quiet word” in the right places effected the “re-discovery” of the second ! 😎 I have also had to deal with crowd control when details of one or two of our digs have got out before the project – 99% of those who turn up are well meaning and just curious – just rather unaware of the dangers of peering over the edge of deep holes! 😮 But the other 1% have other motives IMO 😡 . The point I was trying to raise was that, perhaps unintentionally, the impression that seemed to be coming over on the forum was that anyone who went near this wreck was up to no good – I feel that this has been corrected now.

I am a great believer in free speech and think it is great that we have this forum as a platform where views can be aired and when concerns arise, there is the opportunity for those involved in such projects to put forward their case and often allay people’s fears and correct misconceptions. I have had extensive, informative and friendly, correspondence both from members of TIGHAR and the individual who decided that this aircraft should be saved and IMO went about it in the best way he saw fit – I’m not saying I would have done things the same way, but at least he did something! I also bear no grudge or envy regarding his “laying claim” to this wreck – it is on his doorstep and his actions all appear to be for genuine motives. Sure it’s a great find, but I have already discovered a largely complete airframe (& know the locations of a few more!) and I know our groups limitations, what the museum I am involved with can and cannot take on and of course what can and probably cannot be achieved with regard to realistic conservation with current technology and materials. TIGHAR obviously seem to do things differently to the way groups operate over here, but I, for one, am prepared to give them a chance and look forward to seeing what they achieve – it is not going to be an easy recovery !

Go in search.

Didnt want to be the first to say this! But certainly appears that way – Did also note on their press release I get the impression that they are now looking for sponsorship for the project – Nothing like a good solid (looking!!!) warbird to refill the coffers (IMO of course). Not sure about the use of Aviation Archeology projects as business ventures – but hey I may be the one whose doing it wrong! 😮

What I did find a bit disturbing was the way a lot of people seem to be assuming that anyone who now goes near the site is a potential theif – I live within a a couple of hours drive of the site and would love to go and record it photographically before any attempt is made to “recover” it – but fear registration nos etc are likely to be taken? and should some total pratt go and try anything, I could end up a suspect simply because of my involvement in the hobby – So I will have to stay away 🙁 .

I have to agree with Alan – it obviously spent several years immersed in the sea before it ever got covered by sand – hence the apparent covering of sea life + this is probably not the first time it has been exposed – just the current interest in these things means it has got the attention this time. I suspect it will be in a pretty dire state despite appearance. But should it remain exposed then obviously something organised has to be done before it ends up piecemeal on eBay. If they do pull it off, it will be a shame if it ends up as little more than a pattern/provenance for a “rebuild”, but being realistic, conserving an airframe that has spent so long in the sea is going to be a nightmare – Not impossible though as there are those who have persevered and achieved amazing results.

Hi there, N Wotherspoon,

Go on, have a drive out there with your box brownie, always remember if you
have not been on with anything, you have nowt to worry about.
Has I see it, bearing in mind I’m a nobody, Its a free Country go where you
want if its not on private land. Anyway has anyone claimed this aircraft to be theirs ? where is the proof of ownership and who sold or gave it away, or is
it still up for grabs to anyone yet ? lets see the paperwork. Meanwhile
take your shooter down there and get snapping, before someone breaks it
getting it away from the beach.

Go on, get some sea air in yer lungs mate.

JJ.

Thank you for your questions Bruce.

“I think it is clear to many of us that the aircraft in question is severely compromised as a result of corrosion, and it is currently unclear how successful any recovery will be, bearing in mind the likely fragile state of the airframe.”

Having spent four days doing an archaeological assessment of the aircraft, I can tell you that there is some structural damage which appears to be the result of the crash landing and post-crash human intervention, but at the time of the survey (early October) the aluminium was relatively corrosion free and the airframe showed every indication of being quite robust. We’re don’t yet understand why, but we intend to find out.

This aircraft is like the 90 year-old chain smoking alcoholic whose lungs and liver are clean and healthy. What is it about this metal and/or this environment that has preserved this aircraft in what should be a worst-case situation? The Maid of Harlech has secrets she can reveal if we ask the right questions in the right way – and the answers may help save other historic aircraft from the cancer of corrosion.

For many years now TIGHAR have been working with metallurgists, conservators, and other scientists who are trying to develop effective and economical techniques and technologies for preserving historic aircraft. As TIGHAR’s executive director I have moderated international conferences on aviation historic preservation in Britain and on the the Continent. We’ve helped sponsor scientific research by the Australian War Memorial; Groupe Valectra (GDL), Electricité de France; and Texas A&M University’s Center for Maritime Archaeology and Conservation (CMAC). Some important strides have been made but there is still much to be learned.

We see this aircraft as more than another wartime wreck to be recovered and restored. I can’t say that the Maid of Harlech will be aviation’s Rosetta Stone that unlocks the secrets of preventing corrosion, but she’s an important opportunity that we shouldn’t squander.

“1) Why were TIGHAR asked to become involved, where there are so many groups within the UK that could have done a similarly professional job?”

As I mentioned earlier, we’re an international organization, so national parochialism is not something we think about very much. If it matters, the call for help came from a TIGHAR member within the UK. The only question for us was, are we the best group for this job? I think we are.

“2) Bearing in mind the above question, is it not worthwhile involving people within this country, who have the necessary expertise and contacts – AND good experience of getting jobs done for very little!”

From the beginning we were keen to involve people in the UK with the needed expertise and contacts, and we had quite a crowd of them there on the beach with us in October – archeologists, aviation conservators, government officials, etc. Americans are distinctly in the minority on this project.

As for getting the job done for as little as possible, we’re more interested in getting the job done right. Honestly, I hate fund raising and I don’t think I’m very good at it, but I think the aviation historical community will get behind this effort if we give them a chance.

“3) What is the state of the aircraft at present? What are the realistic chances of it being recovered intact? I am remembering a number of previous beach recoveries in France, where aircraft ended up being significantly damaged by the recovery attempt.”

If I didn’t think this aircraft could be recovered without significant additional damage I wouldn’t be here on this forum asking for your support. I certainly have no desire or intention for TIGHAR to preside over the butchery of an important cultural resource.

“4) What are TIGHAR’s credentials for recovery of aircraft in this state? The group is mostly known for its extensive research of the Earhart aircraft, but as far as I can see on the website, has yet to recover an aircraft per se?”

Fair question. TIGHAR has been around for 22 years as a full time aviation historical organization. We decided early on that our focus should be recovering intact historic aircraft for long-term museum conservation. There were plenty of wealthy individuals eager to recover aircraft for rebuild to flying condition. Most static museums were focused on restoration to like-new condition. Both activities are important aspects of aviation historic preservation, but almost no one was paying attention to the other, and equally important, end of preservation spectrum – recovering, stabilizing and safeguarding the original material that has survived from the past.

It soon became apparent that we were ahead of our time, so we did what we could to promote conservation research while we built our investigative and logistical skills by taking on famous aviation mysteries like the disappearance of Nungesser and Coli, and Earhart and Noonan.

Conservation research progressed and some museums began to devote more attention to long-term preservation of original aircraft. In 2003 we launched The Devastator Project to recover a Douglas TBD-1 Devastator from the bottom of Jaluit lagoon in the Marshall Islands. It’s a huge and complex project in which we’re partnering with the U.S. Navy, the Naval Historical Center, the National Museum of Naval Aviation, CMAC, and the government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. We conducted a preliminary survey in 2004 and an engineering evaluation in 2006 with a U.S. Navy ship (USS SAFEGUARD – ARS-50) in support. We’re hoping that the recovery operation will be ready to proceed in 2009.

To answer your question, what are our credentials to recover an aircraft in this state? I don’t know the best way to recover this aircraft, and I don’t think anyone does – yet – but we’ve spent 22 years building relationships and credibility that enable us to draw on a wide range of expertise in a broad array of disciplines. We’ve demonstrated our ability to organize and lead logistically complex field operations in a wide variety of hostile and sensitive environments. I’m confident that TIGHAR can bring together the expertise and resources to do this job.

“5) What are the intentions for the aircraft once recovered? I don’t expect names to be named, but am curious to see what the broad plan is. I am envisaging something along the lines of the Italian P40 that was successfully recovered from the sand, and displayed as recovered.”

That call is not ours to make. Conservation and curation of the aircraft after recovery will, of course, be the responsibility of the accessioning museum. Our goal is to deliver the aircraft in the best condition possible.

I’ve released more information about the aircraft here than we have publicly anywhere else, but I think it’s important for you gentlemen, of all people, to understand what this project is about and that it can benefit aviation historic preservation in ways far beyond the recovery of one American airplane from a Welsh beach. It’s not about territory and it’s not about ego. It’s about knowledge and remembrance. I ask for your support.

Thank you,

I am delighted to see Ric’s response in this thread, although it poses as many questions as it answers.

Welcome to the forum Ric, we are a mixed bunch, but count a number of type specialists, restorers, conservationists and recovery experts amongst our number.

The find of the P38 is without doubt highly significant, and one of the more interesting finds in Europe for some years. It is worth recalling that a P38 snagged in the nets of a fishing vessel in Italy, just a few years ago, ended up being scrapped.

I think it is clear to many of us that the aircraft in question is severely compromised as a result of corrosion, and it is currently unclear how successful any recovery will be, bearing in mind the likely fragile state of the airframe.

I would like therefore to take the time to ask some salient questions of thos in the know, so that we can learn a little more about this important artefact:

1) Why were TIGHAR asked to become involved, where there are so many groups within the UK that could have done a similarly professional job?

2) Bearing in mind the above question, is it not worthwhile involving people within this country, who have the necessary expertise and contacts – AND good experience of getting jobs done for very little!

3) What is the state of the aircraft at present? What are the realistic chances of it being recovered intact? I am remembering a number of previous beach recoveries in France, where aircraft ended up being significantly damaged by the recovery attempt.

4) What are TIGHAR’s credentials for recovery of aircraft in this state? The group is mostly known for its extensive research of the Earhart aircraft, but as far as I can see on the website, has yet to recover an aircraft per se?

5) What are the intentions for the aircraft once recovered? I dont expect names to be named, but am curious to see what the broad plan is. I am envisaging something along the lines of the Italian P40 that was successfully recovered from the sand, and displayed as recovered.

Clearly, not all these questions can be answered yet. There is much still to do, and if I read it right, the aircraft has now disappeared once more under the sands. I wholly support the decision to attempt to preserve it intact until a recovery can be mounted, and to discourage visitors to the site in the meantime. We dont want to see the aircraft being systematically stripped before there is a chance to recover it!

Please note, that in aking these questions, I am not attempting to criticise any organisation, or individual, rather I am trying to begin a sensible discussion on the subject.

All the best

Bruce

Thanks for putting the tighar side of the story on the Forum Ric, your website looked a little gung ho at first viewing but your intentions are clearly honourable! Still a little expensive for my teacher’s pockets mind, but it needs to be done properly.

Welcome TIGHAR

Hello and welcome to the forum Rick. Thanks for clearing up some misinformation. Now that the true story about TIGHAR is out, hopefully things can progress with the project.

Hello Gentlemen,

I’m Ric Gillespie, Executive Director of TIGHAR. I appreciate Peter’s efforts to squelch erroneous assumptions and he is absolutely correct in observing that bad information can be damaging to good projects. Of course, access to accurate information is always better than censorship so I’ll be happy to answer your questions, as best I can, about TIGHAR’s involvement in the effort to recover the P-38 in Wales.

Allow me to correct some misimpressions.
First, although we’re based in the U.S., TIGHAR is very much an international organization with many members in the UK.

Second, we do not collect or restore aircraft. We’re not anyone’s competition. Our purpose is to serve the worldwide aviation historic preservation community with research, expertise, education, and fund raising assistance.

Third, we did not discover the P-38. We were asked to help and we’re helping. We fully expect and intend that the aircraft will go to a UK national museum.

Fourth, our greatest concern is that the aircraft survive until it can be recovered. Surely all of you can appreciate that without security in place, there would soon be little left to recover – not than anyone on this forum would disturb the site, but we all know that, unfortunately, there are those who would.

Fifth, yes, we’re raising money to help cover the cost of planning and carrying out the recovery – and that, of course, includes our costs. Like all of you, we’re in this for the love of aviation historic preservation. TIGHAR’s archaeologists, historians, scientists, engineers, etc. are all volunteers who donate their time and expertise – but you can’t pay for essential services with love.

TIGHAR provides aviation history enthusiasts with a way to support good, solid professional work in service to aviation historic preservation world wide. I invite any and all of you to join TIGHAR and help support the Maid of Harlech recovery project. (www.tighar.org)

Thanks,
Ric

ahhhh Bader’s Spitfire found at last !!!:D

Different subject but kind of connected…any further word on the Do night fighter wreak shown a month or two ago in Flypast ?

Eh no, we have to get permission first as it’s a Seal habitat (not the singer:p )and you know how Dutch environmentalists are, almost like terrorists. So we have to be patient and hope to get permission (any permission at al would be great).
But the aircraft isn’t as complete as the pic in flypast, The tail is seperated and we have the starboard side of the cockpit on display next to the starboard engine, the port engine is on the isle of Texel. The wings are still in one piece but with a lot of upper skinning missing (because of the salt water) but the undercarriage is still tucked up inside the nacelles and the tyres still hold air. There was interest from a German museum which contacted us but nothing more has been heard from them.
Cheers

Cees

Perhaps this one would be an easier option?

ahhhh Bader’s Spitfire found at last !!!:D

Different subject but kind of connected…any further word on the Do night fighter wreak shown a month or two ago in Flypast ?

Speculation and comments

Gentlemen,
we all have our opinions over aircraft recovery projects and are entitled to voicing our opinions on this subject. However I have been asked to kindly remove the last two posts and the reason being is that this thread is getting away from the topic of the P38. If anyoone has a problem or question with TIGHAR then please contact them directly and voice your concerns. Incorrect information posted on a public forum can and has been damaging to projects in the past. From what I have read and heard, The project will not be going to the USA it will remain in the UK.
Peter,
Moderator

Perhaps this one would be an easier option?

Damn – I was hoping to keep the wraps on that one !!! 😀

Please note my comments regarding difficulty of getting to view the site were not intended as any sort of sleight at our police forces or the group in whose interest it is that the site remains under surveillance – I would be doing the same thing! I was simply expressing disappointment that because, as it is the negative elements of our hobby that seem to get the attention, it would probably be unwise for me to visit the site.

My fears regarding the ultimate fate of the airframe have now been allayed together with an invitation concerning the possibility of officially visiting the site. My comments were simply made as I saw the situation and we are all fortunate to have a medium such as this forum to air our views (even if ill informed) and allow those involved to set the record straight.

I have to say that certain comments that seem to have resulted from my post are definitely not my views and I feel this forum is not the place to air them.

Brrrrrrrrrrr!

The wreck is between high and low water marks and therefore is on Crown property( an ancient clever bit of law making which ensures the crown have the right to shipwreck,flotsam and jetsam washed up)
So you can visit the wreckage as long as you are just looking.

Its a smashing bit of trivial knowledge because it means you can have access at low water to all sorts of seaside places which the owners claim are private beaches.

Yes, but you get b****y wet and cold asserting your rights at high tide!

Perhaps this one would be an easier option?

Hatton,
Just look at the 53 Immigration questions being brought in to travel by air and justify to me that speed cameras reduce accidents !!

I dont need to justify this to you, I have no interest in speed cameras nor the knowledge of the issues surrounding them to have any sort of qualified opinion on the matter.

I apologise for diverting the thread off aviation, but I take offence at the rabid negativity expressed on here sometimes.

The wreck is between high and low water marks and therefore is on Crown property( an ancient clever bit of law making which ensures the crown have the right to shipwreck,flotsam and jetsam washed up)
So you can visit the wreckage as long as you are just looking.

Its a smashing bit of trivial knowledge because it means you can have access at low water to all sorts of seaside places which the owners claim are private beaches.

Certainly does look that way.

Nice of no-one to contact any of the UK based groups who actually have experience of recovering aircraft, after all the one trick pony hasn’t yet found that elusive Electra (probably in tiny pieces in a few miles of water). Lots of experience looking for aircraft yes, recovering, different question.

It would certainly be nice to be able to see it in person (rather than a photo) before it gets removed next year (unless that is a ploy to shift interest while they recover it).

Picture and press report in today’s Daily Mail.

Looks like someones publicity machine has got rolling then ! 🙁