Garry OwenGary, so are you trying to have ago at people? maybe I did not read the other posts or forgot about them.
I would like to offer you a visit to our museum one day and see the dedication which has gone into bringing the memory of these Pilots and crew to the attention of the general public who often leave our museum with a tear in their eye and a realisation of what these people went through to fight for their country and that means whatever side they were on.I am not in it for medals or for financial reasons, I started looking for these wrecks around 1970 and the museum has put me out of pocket to the sum of thousands (that is not a moan far from it)
Wreckology has had its bad points, the people with the personal gain to be had financial or otherwise but please do not paint all the people out of the same pot.
I must admit that some of the “diggers” and their private collections if you want to call them that have given it a bad name but again it is the “Few” who F it up for the “Many” dedicated aviation enthusiasts.
So please if you have a beef put it in plain English and I for one will be happy to answer and prove its not all cowboys in AA.
Hi Nick, glad to see your still banging the drum :rolleyes:
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the offer,it is one I would greatfully accept.
I am not trying to have a go at anyone,but I am having a go at the attitude of some who call themselves wreckologists,thus my question about what exactly defines a wreckologist.
If as you say there are a few who get wreckology a bad name,why do ALL wreckologists seem to think and act as one? the general view seems to be that ANY removal of wreckage from a site is a good thing,and how dare the MOD enforce a law which was passed to protect sites.Or am I missing something? If so I would be happy to hear your views,this is my point,I am asking these questions to see if there are other views towards wreckology.
Nick,I know several families and landowners who feel very strongly that the sites should be left alone,obviously different people have different views and feelings towards sites vary,but certainly here in North Wales most landowners seem to prefer that the wreckage which does remain should stay where it is,this could in part be due to the amount that went during the 70’s and 80’s,and perhaps also the attitude of some wreckologists,for instance I have a copy of a report dating from 1978 by a well known recovery group who went to a site in Snowdonia and they complain in the report about the farmers in the region using electric fences which were difficult to get through! the fact they were on private land without permission does not seem to have crossed their minds.
Garry.
Garry Owenthey take a dim view on rubish on the hillside now by the seems of it as they removed a lot of wreckage off the hills up north recently if i remember by helecopter to keep it tidy. Least if it has gone lets hope its looked after rather that being scrapped
Not sure who you mean by “they” but you are correct,a dim view is taken of rubbish being left,however as wreckage which remains on the high ground sites in Snowdonia is recognised for it’s historical and emotional importance it’s hardly thought of as rubbish!. As I have said before Snowdonia National Park have never had a policy of removing wreckage,however some larger parts such as engines were removed from five sites after a wreckologist from a (now defunct) local group said he wanted them for a museum,in fact the majority of the parts were sold or scrapped.
This is my point with high ground sites,the parts which remain mark the site,anyone can go to see them(not forgetting to ask permission if on private land),and in all the years I have been involved with sites in Snowdonia I have yet to meet a landowner,member of the public or the family of someone who died in a crash who feels the parts should be removed.
I said in my first post that I might be persuaded to alter my views on wreckology,but if anything most of the replies have actually just confirmed my feelings that most wreckologists are basically collectors who are out to grab as much as they can,with no regard to the law,feelings of families,landowners or anyone else!. Such myths as there being a policy of clearing sites is used to defend their actions,after all if the national park want rid of the wreckage,then it’s ok to just take it,right?.
Another favourite excuse is “well it would just rot away if left,by taking it we are preserving history”,not so,the parts left on high ground sites still exist,a vast amount of the parts removed in the name of aviation archaeology don’t,or if they do no one can see them as no one knows where they are or who has them.
I am all for preserving our history,but it’s pointless if that means private individuals or groups just hording as much wreckage as they can.
Garry.
Garry OwenHi Alan,
You raise some interesting points,indeed it would be a large undertaking to put together such a database,but IMO worthwhile. As to it being used as “a stick to beat people” surely if the parts were removed from a site with landowners and MOD permission there would not be a problem? and if the parts were removed without permission then,IMO, it is only right that action be taken if a crime has been comitted. I’m not sure we are talking about the same person in mid Wales as the chap I know seemed interested in just the one site. I’m in north Wales and I must admit I don’t like seeing wreckage being removed for no good reason,on some sites where wreckage remained up to twenty years ago there is now nothing,and little of it seems to have gone into museums. The Boston and Ventura are two sites I do know well and I’m not sure your info on parts going to Australia is correct,but I would be happy to be proved wrong!.
If a database did turn up parts that were needed by museums surely that would only be a good thing?
Garry.
Garry OwenI can think immediatley of 6 people or organisations with aims to rebuild an aircraft which rely on recovered parts which are sometimes not available !!!!
But has anyone actually succeeded in rebuilding an airframe,or even a complete section,from a UK crash site?.
Garry.
Garry OwenThanks everyone for the replies so far.
Scotavia,I know some parts were scrapped,but surely there would still be merit in a database of wreckage held by groups and collectors?. I haven’t done anything with the Plynlimon P38 so I doubt it was me who you sent info,but I do know a chap down in mid Wales who was doing a lot of research into it and last time I spoke to him he’d tracked down quite a lot of it,I will give him a call to find out more. The Albarcore at Yeovilton is one I had overlooked,but wasn’t that recovered by/for the museum?.
Colin,Tony’s Hurricane is indeed impressive,but (and I hope Tony doesn’t mind me saying this and will correct me if I’m wrong) it is more a composite rather than an aircraft being rebuilt from the remains of a specific aircraft.
Thanks,
Garry.
Garry OwenI’d be seriously interested in one of the F-104’s!:dev2:
Garry.
Garry OwenHi Tony,
If it’s not spoken for can I have it?
Thanks,
Garry.
Garry Owen🙁
Garry OwenHi Martin,
Thanks for the info. I spoke to the guys at Supermarine Aero Engineering and they have no knowledge of the engine from W4088 or the whereabouts of Mr Lovelock,with whom they have no connection.
If anyone does hear of the engine from W4088 I would be happy to hear from them.
Thanks,
Garry.
Garry OwenHi,
Interesting thread which brought the following questions to mind…
Does anyone know the original USAAF/USAF Serial of the C-54?
IF these aircraft are for sale,or come up for sale,would there be enough interest in saving at least one for static display in the UK?
C-54’s were used by the USAAF in the ETO during WW2 so are historically important. Looking at it another way if it were an example of another US four engine type,eg B-17 or B-24 then I’m sure there would be plenty of interest.
I’d be happy to put time,effort and money into seeing the C-54 preserved in the UK.
Garry.
Garry OwenIt’s ages since I saw this,but it made a big impression on me,Dieter Dengler comes across a true gentleman. Wasn’t his father a German infantryman during WW2?
I’ll look for the film.
G.O.
Garry OwenGary
Would that be the P47 recovered from a certain part of Shropshire?
No this is a site in Wales. I suppose there are bound to be P47 parts in Shropshire with the 495th being at Atcham. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if there are actually enough parts in sheds and gardens across the UK to produce examples of several rare airframes.
Getting back on topic,the C-47 from the lake in Snowdonia,parts of which are now in Fort Pearch at New Brighton,although last time I visited the place all the parts from sites in Wales had been removed from display.
G.O.
Garry OwenHi Nick,
That sounds depressingly familiar:mad: I did have some success in tracking down parts held by an ATC unit but they would only admit to having them and give access after being told to do so by their wing HQ,the squadron staff were doing their best to be un-helpful.
If I were you I would write to the current squadron CO and ask for details of where the parts are,pointing out you would like to see the surviving wreckage in a suitable local museum,if you get no joy there go to the wing. I wonder how much more of our aviation heritage is rotting away in peoples sheds and gardens?. I know of someone who has quite substantial parts of an early P47 which they removed from a site in the 1980’s(without MOD or landowners permission) but they will not allow anyone access.
G.O.
Garry OwenWell, there’s the obvious things such as the Loch Ness Wellington.
But in this part of the world there are a couple:
Spitfire P7540 recovered from Loch Doon, Dumfries
Magister L8355 recovered from Ullswater Lake District 1974 by local ATC Unit (where is it now?)
Suprisingly there’s not that much in the Cumbrian lakes – aircraft tended to hit the mountains rather than the water.
It would be interesting to know what became of Magister L8355,how intact was it when recovered? Does anyone know what became of it? Knowing how ATC units tend to treat wreckage/crash sites I don’t hold out much hope of it having survived:(
G.O.
Garry OwenGo to http://www.aviationarchaeology.com and you can get the individual aircraft record card for $50 with translation. The card will probably have the manufacturers number on it so you can cross reference with the USAAF serial.
As I said if it looks like it may have an ETO combat history let me know as I may have a picture of it.
Regards,
G.O.
Sign In
