The neighbours cats seem to like ‘doing their business’ in my garden!, I have tried absolutley everything to stop them, repellent, ultrasonic, lion poo! etc etc, I have even spoke to neighbours but they FOB me of with excuses. This is costing me a small fortune and I refuse to spend anymore money on this problem!
Any suggestions people?? 🙁
1) Collect cat poo.
2) Wait until dark.
3) Throw cat poo over fence.
The neighbours cats seem to like ‘doing their business’ in my garden!, I have tried absolutley everything to stop them, repellent, ultrasonic, lion poo! etc etc, I have even spoke to neighbours but they FOB me of with excuses. This is costing me a small fortune and I refuse to spend anymore money on this problem!
Any suggestions people?? 🙁
1) Collect cat poo.
2) Wait until dark.
3) Throw cat poo over fence.
Ahead? I think in 1940 the Allison engine you speak of was producing more power than the Merlin and was a lot more reliable with it!
The typical dig will yield maybe just a handful of items worth recording on the finds form + x lbs of misc scrap. The last dig we did had 1 reduction gear, 1 oxygen bottle, 2 propellor spigots, a section of engine bearer, half a dozen valves, a counter weight and about 150lb of misc engine fragments, mainly casing but some through bolts and cam shaft fragments and bits of alloy.
Maybe a longer time scale needs to be implemted or maybe a more detailed report to be added when all is done.
To what end?
I’d be interested to know what aircraft/engine type was being dug?
What is the true significance of the few parts that you mention?
Of course they are unique, irreplaceable and ‘valuable’ to those of us who value them and, if sold, would have a ‘cash’ market value but what more can we say about them?
Are they the only surviving examples of that aircraft/engine type? Could they help in an airworthy (or static) restoration? Would they allow drawings to be made if none existed, materials to be specified, or manufacturing techniques discovered if these are unknown? Do they hold vital information about how the aircraft was lost?
I’d suggest that the answer to all these questions is probably ‘no’.
If they are not going to be displayed in a museum (and I can’t think of a museum where I’ve seen everything recovered from a single wreck-site on display) then dispersion to those who dug (cleaned and catalogued) the relics is the best course. And should some of these relics end up on eBay (or at an aerojumble) then all the better.
Does anybody else think that eBay may actually discourage wreck-sites being illegally dug? A steady supply of relics to satisfy the collectors out there will depress prices and make it uneconomic for the unscrupulous.
A database of every relic ever recovered from every crash-site would surely be pointless not to mention impracticable; the sheer volume of material recovered, its condition and the huge task of cataloguing it in enough detail for such a database to be of any use. Also where is the incentive? Those required to carry out this vast task would be unlikely to benefit from it in proportion to the amount of work required.
Personally I don’t understand what is wrong with most recovered artefacts being the hands of private individuals. Often such artefacts can foster a great interest in specific incidents and lead to detailed individual research that larger museums have neither the resources nor the inclination to carry out.
In my opinion the internet is the perfect tool to publish such personal research and also to allow those with a personal connection with the crash, or who are related to the aircrew involved to contact those that have carried out the research. Through this interaction a greater understanding of the personal history can be gained, detail can be added and in some cases ghosts can be laid to rest.
Where there is a specific type, such as a Stirling, Whitley or Whirlwind that has escaped preservation then of course special efforts should be made to collect as much information and to preserve as many artefacts as possible but for other, better preserved, types I don’t see the point.
I suspect part of the problem here is that several groups/individuals would like to think they are the ‘rightful’ custodian of the few relics that remain.
Didn’t bomber crews ignore their assigned altitudes and simply fly as high as their bomber/payload would allow?
There is the recently sunk USS Oriskany, but it is a bit deep for the average diver at 130 feet to the flight deck.
There is a lot of video of diving the USS Oriskany on YouTube plus this remarkable footage of the actual sinking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saEy35JycMQ&mode=related&search=
I too saw the Ark Royal documentary. It seemed to contradict the official version of events somewhat.
One interesting part was the presence, during filming of the wreck, of one of the Fulmar pilots. I can’t remember his name but apparently he was the very last man to abandon the Ark before she capsized.
Some very tantalising footage of Fulmars and Swordfish lying on the seabed at 900 metres. I expect they would disintegrate if any attempt was ever made to recover one of them.
Is Ark Royal protected as a war grave? Only one crew member lost his life and his body may have been removed before she sank.
I don’t think the Graf Zeppelin has been mentioned yet.
She was discovered in the Baltic at 80 metres (265 feet) by Polish divers in July 2006.
I’m not sure but those periscopes look familiar to me, could they (or one of them) be the same type as fitted to a VC10?
I guess that more than one type used periscopes in those days and Vickers would probably use the same type on a VC10 as on a Valiant (if that one had a periscope) to save cost.
The VC10 one was made by Smiths industries, could it be that they were the only aircraft periscope builder around by then?
Thanks for the link.
An interesting site…lost myself for a bit in the Brooklands VC10 undercarriage failure!
Yes, the VC10 periscope seems to share a very similar design but neither of mine are made by ‘Smiths’ and neither of them is as long as ‘two-and-a-half-feet’.
The maker of mine is ‘Kelvin and Hughes’ or ‘Barr and Stroud’ – can’t remember which.
The VC10 site does solve one mystery that has been troubling me. How do you get a periscope/sextant through the fuselage of a pressurised aircraft!
HMS Dasher – The forgotten Tragedy
It has been dived but it depends what you mean by ‘surveyed’. Conditions and depth would make things extremely challenging.
I found this site:
Maybe we’re not talking about the same thing here.
I’ve got two aircraft periscopes and was told that these were from ‘v-bombers’. One of them has a serial number crudely painted on it and when I looked it up it was the serial of a Valiant.
From the posts so far it doesn’t sound like either is from a Vulcan.
No way! Can’t possibly be a whole submarine! 😀
Shame the Canadians never operated Short Stirlings – God knows what’ll happen IF a suitable example is ever found, by a Brit team ?
Whatever happened to that project that found a Stirling buried in silt in a Norwegian fjord?
I think it had ditched following an attempt to drop equipment to a resistance unit.
It was reported in Flypast about four-or-five years ago and was an MOD sponsored effort if I remember correctly.
These are above the surface….just !!
I suppose these could be salvaged but at least two are missing about a third of their hulls (the engine/motor rooms and stern). I don’t think any of them have coning towers.
I not sure what would be more expensive. Raising a u-boat from the seabed or extracting these three from under the collapsed bunker.
There seems to have been little interest in U-534 and that only needed recovering from Birkenhead! 😀
…and there are no better u-boats to be had…anywhere!
Without doing a search for their numbers I believe there are 2 very complete and original U-Boats. One is in Germany and was presented to them by Norway who used it after WW2 and the other is in the US (Chicago or Boston or somewhere).
I thought somebody would pick me up on that point. 🙂
What I meant of course is that there aren’t any u-boats available that haven’t spent 15 years more than U-534 on the seabed.
I didn’t think there was much chance of getting hold of U-505 (type IXC) from Chicago, U-995 (type VIIC) from Laboe, near Kiel in Germany or the Wilhelm Bauer (ex-type XXI U-2540) from Bremerhaven, Germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unterseeboot_995
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wilhelm_Bauer_%28U-2540%29
There is also CV-707 (type II) built (in Finland) as the prototype for the type II German u-boats preserved on the island of Suomenlinna in Finland.