Page 8 – Key Publishing

Me-109E

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 190 total)

← 1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 11 12 13 →

Author

Posts
September 5, 2008 at 10:02 pm in reply to: Aviation Archaeology and the MOD #1218156

Me-109E
Participant

This part of the MOD protection of military remains can be a farce. Its an insult to those who have lost relatives. The whole concept of war grave is flawed on an aircraft crash site when the location is known and access is possible. There was a time when only the military had detection gear and recovery kit. Many groups in the UK have a good track record of well monitored,safe recovery excavations. It is high time the act was reviewed.

So glad there are people who agree, maybe it’s time to get an e-petition going to have the act changed??

September 5, 2008 at 7:00 pm in reply to: Lancaster memorial #1218449

Me-109E
Participant

Were the team from Waddington granted a license for recovery of the blade? Or doesn’t that apply as effectively, it was the RAF recovering its own property?

Regards,

kev35

Your probably right, doubt the RAF had a licence……..

September 5, 2008 at 6:51 pm in reply to: Aviation Archaeology and the MOD #1218469

Me-109E
Participant

Meh, they can hardly be arsed to look after today’s servicemen/women when they return injured…:mad:

Too true 😡

September 5, 2008 at 6:44 pm in reply to: Aviation Archaeology and the MOD #1218487

Me-109E
Participant

Assuming the site is in the UK, then it should have the full protection of the Act – Disturbance means just that, It does not matter whether it is an organised excavation by enthusiasts or a contractor during building work – both will need a licence to disturb the site. I believe (but stand to be corrected!) that ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.

I acted as consultant a few years ago as a major gas main was put through Lancashire – the contractors took the act very seriously and wanted to ensure they did not inadvertently disturb a crash site – in the end they managed to avoid all but one & only went through the periphery of that one.

However on the other hand a local football team plans to enlarge their training facilities & build over a crash site – I have contacted them several times, but they are simply ignoring me – I am not trying to cause trouble, just ensure that perhaps some form of appropriate marker could be incorporated in the development – the pilot was an accomplished sports man himself! I have even offered to assist with liaison with the MOD – but to no avail 🙁

I have even offered to assist the MOD, they sent a letter thanking me for the offer etc but, no go.

It saddens me to think that ‘we’ the enthusiasts know locations of the where the unfortunate souls are and yet they lie in unmarked graves:(

Think it’s about time the MOD to take a leaf out of the Americans book and recover our servicemen from unmarked graves in this country and around the world when their locations are known.

September 5, 2008 at 5:17 pm in reply to: P38 On Welsh Beach – So-called, by a few "Maid Of Harlech" #1218668

Me-109E
Participant

Sorry of this is a daft question but I know nothing of wreckology.

How long is a licence valid for Tangmere? Say if the wreck hasnt been recovered in x years does it have to be renewed or are others given a chance to become licence holder?

Ive never heard of TIGHAR before but what I found interesting was that they show no pictures of the P-38 on their www.

If I had a www trying to advertise a project and drum up support I would put pictures of the object in question on the site by the bucket load.

Yet……………………………..

My unqualified observation.

As far as I know a Licence is valid for 12 months only, I think andy has got it in one “Sand Ghost” it will remain..

Not sure if the licence holder has sole rights to the wreck though, will have to look at the PMA handbook:)

September 4, 2008 at 3:13 pm in reply to: Phillippa Hodgkiss #1220145

Me-109E
Participant

Now Phillippa Wheeler.

I can pass on a message to let her know you wish to make contact. The rest is up to her, of course.

Thanks Andy,

have been pm’d with contact details

August 29, 2008 at 3:09 pm in reply to: High Salvington Heinkel #1226822

Me-109E
Participant

Elliott

Graham’s book is certainly a nice little publication. However, I have serious doubts about the provenance of some of the artefacts that have surfaced from this aeroplane in recent months. If I were he, I’d keep my money in my pocket and not be tempted to try to purchase the supposed tailwheel from this Heinkel. It was offered on e bay a while back. In my view it was a phoney. Similarly, so were the collection of German coins found recently at the crash site and also offered on e bay as well as numerous other artefacts offered there.

Sadly, a regularly repeated theme.

Andy,

Caveat Emptor eh! or these day’s should that be Caveat Venditor??:rolleyes:

August 26, 2008 at 3:24 pm in reply to: Going, going…gone! #1230186

Me-109E
Participant

Although I knew it was going to happen someday, when I went flying on Saturday morning, I and my friend looked down at a house in St Cleer, Cornwall to find the Lightning that used to sit in the garden there, has well…gone.

I was told where it was going but I’m getting on now and cant quite remember. Will try and find out and report back tomorrow!!

Martin

I’m sure it was/is owned by a member of the Flood family, who also have the lightning at castle motors, FLOOD is a member of this forum 🙂

August 22, 2008 at 12:35 pm in reply to: ME 109 Firewall Needed #1233940

Me-109E
Participant

my recommendation for 109 parts in general:
http://www.leichtbau-gmbh.de/

Thanks one-o-nine been in touch with the company, and they can help out

Many thanks:)

August 21, 2008 at 10:06 pm in reply to: ME 109 Firewall Needed #1234251

Me-109E
Participant

t0553r….? Never encountered that e-bay name before, have I Robbo??:D

t0553r?? me neither, must be talking about himself:D

August 21, 2008 at 5:27 pm in reply to: General Discussion #323004

Me-109E
Participant

It sounds a lot when you say it like that…

…but it only actually represents about three quid per person per year since the games were last held in Britain. 🙂

Three quid I would rather spend on something that interest’s me 😀

August 21, 2008 at 5:27 pm in reply to: What do you think of the Olympics. #1902231

Me-109E
Participant

It sounds a lot when you say it like that…

…but it only actually represents about three quid per person per year since the games were last held in Britain. 🙂

Three quid I would rather spend on something that interest’s me 😀

August 21, 2008 at 5:24 pm in reply to: ME 109 Firewall Needed #1234550

Me-109E
Participant

… however, the danger with ebay is that you might end up paying a fortune in good faith for an anonymous piece of scrap aluminium that an unscrupulous t0553r has invented a provenance for.

Will ignore that comment

… or you might win on ebay , pay a large sum of money and then never receive item…..

And will also ignore your comment as it is obvious this is some sort of ‘DIG’ at me

August 20, 2008 at 4:44 pm in reply to: General Discussion #323170

Me-109E
Participant

I hate the olympics!

I hate the Olympics

And the thought that it is going to cost us the taxpayer, there is no denying it!!

I heard that the cost of the London olympics will not cost more than 9.4 BILLION pounds!!!!!:eek:

What the hell!!:mad:

Why should the Lottery contribute anything?? oh yeah I forgot it must be a ‘good cause’

:mad::mad::mad:

August 20, 2008 at 4:44 pm in reply to: What do you think of the Olympics. #1902350

Me-109E
Participant

I hate the olympics!

I hate the Olympics

And the thought that it is going to cost us the taxpayer, there is no denying it!!

I heard that the cost of the London olympics will not cost more than 9.4 BILLION pounds!!!!!:eek:

What the hell!!:mad:

Why should the Lottery contribute anything?? oh yeah I forgot it must be a ‘good cause’

:mad::mad::mad:
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 190 total)

← 1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 11 12 13 →