The Times today devotes one page to the discovery of a complete Sunderland flying boat, scuttled in lake Windermere, in Cumbria.
The sidescan radar image shown is so clear that even the lack of the removed engines is apparent.
If this was the 1st April I would be suspicious.
Plans are in hand for a salvage operation.
Amazing. 🙂
Mark
By: JDK - 27th March 2004 at 13:45
Hi DH,
Sure, the turret doesn’t retract completely; but it moves aft far enough for a crewman to pop up, swing the bollards out, and moor the a/c. The Sundernand at Hendon has the turret in this position IIRC, with the two dummies there. There was a good article about this in Aeroplane a few months back as well: ‘Mooring a Sunderland’ or similar was the title.
Cheers
By: dhfan - 27th March 2004 at 12:05
Looking at that sidescan again, I suspect the turrets are actually missing. My thoughts are probably largely based on the old Airfix kit (!) but I don’t think the front turret retracts completely into the hull. I know it moves back several feet but I believe the cupola (or whatever it’s called) still sticks out. The rear turret also looks like it’s missing.
By: paulmcmillan - 27th March 2004 at 10:41
BTW there are a couple of pictures of the restoration of ML814 in “The Last Flying Boat” that confirm that the control surfaces were fabric covered..
By: galdri - 27th March 2004 at 09:13
Kittyhawk,
I think the Sunderland in question here is supposed to be in a fresh water lake, as opposed to salt-water. It might make all the difference to it’s condition. Generally speaking, it should all be there with out too much corrotion, exept magnezium bit that are long gone.
A Crosair as wheetabix………………..that’s a good one:D 😀 😀 😀
By: kittyhawk - 27th March 2004 at 08:45
the royal navy & rnzaf dumped (and burried inland) 600 hellcats, corsairs & a few sea fires (possibly avengers too) off sydney heads & the gold coast in 1945.
they dug one up from the ground in the 70’s (a hellcat) completely corrodid, they also pulled some out of the water in the 90’s and they were weetbix.
i dont know how it is in england but anything you pull out of the water here just disintegrates.
they just fall to bits.
heres a corsair;)
By: Olds Cool - 27th March 2004 at 08:06
Last time I went RAFM they said that they would not restore the Halifax because it gives people (esp. school groups) an idea of how terrible war is. Apparently, everybody detaches themselves from the realities when looking at whole aircraft. Why dont they fire 88mm shells at the Lancaster whilst their at it? (to show what it looks like ‘limping home’).
On a serious note would they lift it with the wings on? Isn’t there a danger that they may fall off?:eek:
By: ALBERT ROSS - 26th March 2004 at 20:14
RNZAF Sunderlands
Just to make this thread complete, I thought you might like to see a rare colour slide in my collection of the last two operational Sunderlands in service with the RNZAF at Fiji in 1962. :rolleyes:
By: Kenneth - 26th March 2004 at 20:01
Look at all the Vulcans rotting in the open, look at the fact the Beverley still won’t be housed.
Hear, hear! Goes for the rest of your posts on this matter as well, Moggy 😉
By: David Burke - 26th March 2004 at 19:01
Sidescan can give some remarkable detail of the sea bed. The other night a programme on the Britannic showed amazing detail
of mine attachments on the sea bed. I imagine the pictures are very real – people if they are faking something usually choose a
Lancaster or other rarity. It’s completely believable that one could be there – the important detail is having the cash to stop it corroding in front of your eyes!
By: Whitley_Project - 26th March 2004 at 18:12
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Moggy C
[B]No problem if it was a case of haul it up, hose it down and stick a caption on it.
However complete it looks this will be a GIGANTIC undertaking and cost shed loads of money.
There is only so much money and time available for aircraft restoration.
A fair point Moggy – I’m afraid I’m just one of those people who can’t leave things alone 😉
It goes without saying that if it started to rot away then it would be a tragedy.
By: Moggy C - 26th March 2004 at 14:35
There are three cost elements
1) Lifting it
2) Restoring it
3) Looking after it
Items 1 & 2 are finite. Horribly expensive, doubtless, but finite.
Item 3) is unlimited. Once you have it you will have to continue to pay to house it. This is not at negligible cost. As has been pointed out nobody wanted to buy a perfectly good flyer when it was offered. The market for a huge, static aircraft must be tiny to non-existent.
Look at all the Vulcans rotting in the open, look at the fact the Beverley still won’t be housed.
Leave it where it is and make it a feature of submarine sightseeing trips.
Moggy.
I do wonder though if there is any equipment on board that could usefully be salvaged to make the walk-through exhibit at Hendon even more complete?
By: paulmcmillan - 26th March 2004 at 14:21
Ok
Assume she is there..
How easy/hard would this be able to raise. The Wellington needed an external raising frame because of her construction. However, she is a metal framed hull and basically ‘sound’
Is it really that expensive??
The Norwegians have had mucho success raising big aircraft (except the Condor) 🙁 with normal inflation bags.. Of course we could get 10,000,000 ping pong balls
By: Bruce - 26th March 2004 at 14:01
Originally posted by Moggy C
I’d hate to see a Sunderland, displayed as a wreck with a refurbished front turret, in a hut on the shores of Windemere in ten years time
Yes, and thats the point really!
Sorry guys, but a Sunderland on Windermere would NOT be a major tourist attraction, unless it was selling joyrides. Look at what Joe Public actually WANT.
This was discussed a while ago – on the top 10 of what the public want from a museum, the content starts to appear at about number 7. Right after Toilets, shops, cafes etc etc.
Love to see it, if there is a good and genuine home for it, that is capable of either preserving it as it is, or restoring it completely – no half measures. But I’m not sure I can see it.
Bruce
By: Moggy C - 26th March 2004 at 13:42
Aaaagh!
Have you seen the Beaufort film on that dive site?
Horrid!
It’s 2.5 Mb, so takes a little while to load.
Moggy
By: paulmcmillan - 26th March 2004 at 13:35
re:
I would love to know which characters are behind this… Anyone know anything?
I don;’t know but I would definately start any investigation here:
Also does any body else thinks that the image indicates that she has ‘moved’ i.e. there is a brief outline of her in the ‘silt’. I do not think this is due to acoustic shadows ‘north to south’ in the image on here and east to west on the image at
By: Moggy C - 26th March 2004 at 12:55
Originally posted by WebPilot
if a private backer wants to raise and restore it who are we to oppose it?
Can’t argue with that. 🙂
Moggy
By: JDK - 26th March 2004 at 12:50
Hmmm.
As far as I know the RAF Museum’s Halifax isn’t up for restoration.
If someone wants to do something with a Sunderland, within the reasonable parameters, that’s fine by me.
Saying ‘Oi, you, don’t spend the money on that, spend the money on this’ is perfectly possible, but generally it don’t make a difference.
The Poms had 10 Sqn RAAF on loan throughout the war (who also spawned another RAAF Sunderland Squadron…) defending Britain, so Australia (currently without a Sunderland) is another possible destination.
The Lake District was bady hurt by the Foot and Mouth epademic; I agree they don’t want more tourists, but it’s not that simple.
A Sunderland is a big complex aircraft. Even Hendon and Duxford have been challenged by protecting and referbishing theirs; but let’s not look the gift horse in the mouth – this is a good thing.
It’s perfectly possible that any salvage plan includes building a hangar, etc – we don’t know.
Cheers
By: WebPilot - 26th March 2004 at 12:45
Originally posted by Moggy C
No problem if it was a case of haul it up, hose it down and stick a caption on it.However complete it looks this will be a GIGANTIC undertaking and cost shed loads of money.
There is only so much money and time available for aircraft restoration.
Shouldn’t it be spent on the RAF Museum Halifax first?
Depends on whose money – if a private backer wants to raise and restore it who are we to oppose it? It doesn’t take funds away from the RAFM Halifax, which it would seem is never to be anything more than a semi-reconstructed wreck, whatever the merits or demerits of that particular case. Could funds be better placed elsewhere? Probably but that’s not our decision, is it?
I’d agree that it would be a tragedy if it was brought up only to rot away as an eyesore or become a plaything for the ignorant and disrespectful.
True also that Windermere has all the tourists it needs, however that wouldn’t detract from it being an attraction in its own right.
But we’re in guessing game time at the moment. We don’t know what’s there and what condition it’s in. Let’s wait and see.
By: Moggy C - 26th March 2004 at 12:22
No problem if it was a case of haul it up, hose it down and stick a caption on it.
However complete it looks this will be a GIGANTIC undertaking and cost shed loads of money.
There is only so much money and time available for aircraft restoration.
Shouldn’t it be spent on the RAF Museum Halifax first?
I’d hate to see a Sunderland, displayed as a wreck with a refurbished front turret, in a hut on the shores of Windemere in ten years time
Moggy
PS: Have you ever been to Windemere in the summer? The last thing they need is to attract any more tourists 🙁
By: Whitley_Project - 26th March 2004 at 12:17
I would love to know which characters are behind this… Anyone know anything?
Sign In
March 25, 2004 at 7:59 am