I sense a similiar situation to that which covers shipwreck recovery. It took a long while before many land archaeologists could accept that it in most cases it is not possible to apply land standards to underwater sites. And because marine archaeology started in the Med it was wrongly assumed that the methods which work in areas of low tidal movement could also be expected in the shallow rock strewn coasts of Ireland and West Scotland.
Those with years of practical experience in wreckovery can explain to a traditional archaeologist on site why there is nothing to be gained from the painstaking methods used by AAIB on a recent accident site. When the record of the crash is known prior to the dig a lot of the questions are already answered. It is a matter of co operation and a willingness to learn from those with experience. I do not approve of even greater requirements and hate it when new qualifications are introduced into an area where few problems exist.
As for JDK asking about how to keep out the less savoury characters, I just do not believe any official ruling will help. No one has the resources to place a gaurd on the many sites to prevent scrap dealers, souvenir seekers and Nighthawks with metal detectors from taking away items and the market in resale of bits /coins/jewellery etc is not illegal. In fact the aviation bits market is a fraction of what is on sale ,loads of coins of which many are forged are on the open market.
Sign In
