Andy, thankyou for speaking up for the official MOD line.

Why do you assume that any Christian with moral fibre would tolerate men who sacrificed their lives for their country being denied Christian burial once their bodies have been found and identified?

Without a funeral there is no proper closure.

Most Christian folk believe that a funeral with the body is the best way to say farewell and honour the memory of the departed, and even if no living relatives can be located that should shame the State of Maine into bringing home these 2 airmen who could not be found 60 years ago when they were lost
Few Christian folk would be happy having their own bones or the bones of their loved ones rotting in a lake being gawped at by divers and internet browsers.
This is a very rare example of a supposedly Christian community (State of Maine) denying honourable funerals for 2 men who made the ultimate sacrifice in full knowledge of where their bones lie abandoned and easily recovered.

SMS88,
thank you for your attempt (if a slightly pompous one) at offering me religious instruction.
Thank you also for taking the time to point out my moral responsibilities. I realise that without people like you, I wouldn’t have the apparent intellect to have an opinion of my own, and would need to fall back on the official MOD line–NOT!!!!
The opinion on what should happen is entirely mine and furthermore, I don’t need you to point out my moral or spiritual duties.
When I need help with my spiritual outlook–I’ll ask for it.

So Andy Saunders is correct in his argument that my opinion is just that–my opinion.

However Andy, I disagree about ships.
HMS Repulse and POW are easily accessed by divers and there has been no effort to recover the remains of the crew, so while the USS Arizona might be a special case, they are not.
And to Mr Burke, the wreck of the submarine HMS M2 is in easy diving depth in the Solent and the crew are still down there but no recovery effort is being made there either.
Friends of mine dive down to it regularly.

However, as already discussed, the families have not as far as we know been consulted on the matter and the failed attempt at recovery had much less to do with the sensitive recovery of human remains and much, much more to do with the recovery of aluminium remains which could be converted to data plate rebuilds–for commercial gain and no doubt further profit again for the media coverage, which no doubt the History Channel or some other ghastly organ would pay good money to screen.

So this is about about making a Pound/Buck after all.

And to finish, I suppose we could always be practical.
The two aircraft and therefore by definition the two pilots have been immersed in fresh water for 65 years.
If recovery of the bodies was attempted, what do you think would actually be recoverable? Let’s put it another way, the coffins as buried would need considerable ballast to make up a feasible weight.
So what would the families get?–two coffins, mostly full of sand and two new headstones.
Seeing as the two men are remembered already, adjacent to each other on the Lee On Solent memorial to the missing (Bay 5, Panel 7) surely their resting place on the lake-bed should also be their final place of repose.

And it’s nonsense to say that all families want our even need a memorial. Some do and some don’t, it’s a personal choice.

Andy Jones.

I imagine that given the choice, both families would appreciate military funerals, the pilots themselves would given the choice probably also wish a funeral rather than to remain lost in the lake

2+2+2=9=assumption.
Why should they want to be put to further grief (assuning the original NoK are still alive) and if some living relative is found, why should they want matters disturbed after 60+ years..??

It should be their choice.

You do realize that all these movies are fiction right?

Oh no, I thought Gone in Sixty Seconds actually happened in Los Angeles in 1976 and I’ve lived under that misapprehension for all those years.
Thanks for clearing that up–That’s called sarcasm.

However, the point I was making was that the modern film industry seems to find it much easier to re-vamp old ideas rather than come up with original ones, fiction or otherwise and it’s that I object to.

I was referring to realism, not re-making. There will be no need to re-make Band of Brothers. Ever. There is a need to re-make the Dambusters out of all reasons given. The movie I’m sure was good in the 50’s, but it does nothing in 2009. In order to keep these stories alive, movies have to be made, stories have to be told. To refuse a re-make of the Dambusters is like shooting your own foot.

I think you contradict yourself somewhat. You’ll be able to argue exactly the same reasons for the a re-make of Band of Brothers in fifty years. It’s attitudes reflect the era it was made just as the original Dambusters does. It actually already has a slightly dated feel about it–I was watching bits of it the other night on DVD.

I think they should all be left to stand, good and bad.

A.

“…Eight Of The Lancasters Are Missing.”

Here are the last six minutes and thirty eight seconds of the original:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yaXyDU6YB0

I doubt any film made for the mass market these days would be of anything like this quality.

Good direction, actors who can act, a script written for an audience who have more than just the rudiments of the English language, some understanding of the cost of war etc etc.

You might have the best films stunts/CGI ever, but without the above, you end up with Flyboys or Pearl Harbo(u)r.

A.

Well my children.

I’m sorry to see James go, but as someone who used to post here a lot, I think many of you are missing an essential point.

Key Publishing haven’t answered your queries because they don’t care to–and the reason they don’t care to is that you’re too insignificant for them to believe that you warrant an answer.

You may think that when you buy a magazine that your three or four quid helps to keep them in business, but it’s a small contribution compared with the advertising revenue they make, and they’ll go where the money is.
They are after all, running a business.

As far as this little on-line eisteddfod is concerned, I reckon you might find that Key find the whole thing an irritant which they’d happily dump–if only they could un-invent the internet.

As to so called aviation press in this country (Gt Britain), they’ve got their heads so far up a few peoples *rses I doubt many of the so called reporters have seen daylight for years.

Let’s face it, if some individual washes up at Duxford (or similar) with a new P-51 and is willing to let them take a few pictures while he waxes a few platitudes about respecting history, etc etc they’ll roll over and let him rub their tummies while they produce some glowing piece about him–While conveniently ignoring the fact that he made his pile from child prostitution and gun running or some other similar nefarious activity.

Or as a warbird pilot and owner I used to know very well used to say–‘Wave at the little people, they like to feel involved’.

I’m gone now.
Good luck.

Andy.

Sandra,
have you seen this?

http://halifax346et347.canalblog.com/archives/2008/12/23/11849682.html

Your great uncle is listed on the memorial.

Andy.

David Ogilvy at OW.

LVG C.VI turns in for finals.

Ogilvy “As the LVG turns towards you, you will see the quite marked wash-out on the ailerons. The strange teutonic reasoning for this has been lost in the mists of time…”

LVG lands on cue–Brilliant.

All Shuttleworth commentators are volunteers and SVAS members.
We’re as ever on the lok out for the willing.
Please PM me if you think you can do better than the others.

Andy.

Oil derived from the paring down of slithery legless reptiles…

Malcolm, Andy, all good stuff; I think I also mentioned caveat emptor some time ago, but we aren’t in ancient Rome – it is a reasonable assumption in a civilised country that traders adhere to the law of the land – those that don’t should be forced to cease trading – legally. This does, despite many differences, still apply to private sellers, even through e-bay. Because of the law, in this case English law, we don’t have sellers of patent medicines and many other forms of snake oil. Yes, there is dubious trading, but this is a case that could be dealt with in court.

Yes James I agree, but like me, you are of the real World and you know things don’t really quite work like that.
If you’ve ever bought or sold a second hand motor–well you’ll know…:):):)

And you know that snake oil is sold everyday in the UK–they just call it something else…

In this case, I still think that it really is a case of buyer beware.
If the seller is knowingly passing stuff off in a fraudulent manner then I’m afraid to say that it’ll be between him and his conscience–assuming of course that he has one.