dark light

xtangomike

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 428 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #973925
    xtangomike
    Participant

    I’m a little concerned by the attitude of “we’ve come too far to stop now.” There’s an alternative piece of advice which ought to be considered, at least: when you’re in a hole stop digging. Something requiring careful interpretation for an archeologist, I grant you.

    Totally agree Graham…..the time has come for literally, ‘damage limitation’. The answer surely now, is to remove the wings as best as possible to enable an easier lift on the fuselage. Once that part is on the barge, the separated engine will be relatively easy to recover, and eventually the wings should prove manageable, with or without the second engine, which if necessary, can be recovered separately as well.
    It is a great shame that plan A went wrong, but I can still envisage some healthy Dornier parts, which have to be separated at some time anyhow, being on show eventually.
    Good luck you guys , you have the honour of doing your best for the only Do 17 we shall ever have sight of.:o

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #976031
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Comments from a fully qualified and prosperous salvage expert.

    Quote
    Plan B looks even worse with no support for the wings they will break off just like the spit in malta..apart from which just how are they going to feed an ali spar down the fuselage with the sea conditions. It will break the fuselage open.. These guys may be commercial divers but know less and less about a/c by the sound of it.. They are clutching at straws and i can see this being a big pile of ali.. Why dont they water jet under the wings to clear the chalk.. its not granite !!!!!end quote

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #976111
    xtangomike
    Participant

    That particular Hurricane was never 50ft below the surface of the English Channel. It was more on land than in the sea, it was on a tidal beach very near protective high ground. What the sea and the tide could get at, was washed away and destroyed. The amazing part we see today, was dug from the sand and has always been one of the most spectacular exhibits in the RAFM.

    Here is R Robert found on the beach at Dunkirk
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]217178[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #976290
    xtangomike
    Participant

    What they need is a big metal scoop, something like a freight container, they have one sitting in Egypt doing not a lot…

    Do they ??:dev2:

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #977155
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Well…well..well

    Information currently circulating now says that RAFM Hendon were expertly warned by a qualified salvage company, that the aircraft was positioned on a chalk based area of light sand and mud, and that the fitting of a prepared cage would be almost, if not totally, impossible. That information was offered over a year ago, and seemingly ignored.
    The local coastgaurds also informed them, that the underwater visibility (algea growth) and short seas, in that area, were at their worst in the month of May. The reply from RAFM Hendon was that they were happy to lift in May because after all, Dunkirk was carried out in May, in mill pond conditions in the channel. Again, a half a million pound project, jeopardised by those who know better !!!
    You couldn’t make it up, could you ??

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #977279
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Well, well, well……………..

    How come they have only just found out about a chalk bed under the aircraft.
    With all the time, expertise and money used so far, they have only just come up against a ‘chalk bed’ ? Surely it should have been accounted for during the lengthy reconnaissance dives that have taken place so many times. The chalk could only have been a metre below the sand level if it is impeding the rigging of the frame?
    Weather was always going to be the enemy, especially in the English Channel. Any diver worth his salt would have warned to build in a serious weather time factor.

    Do we have the well known ‘we know what we’re doing’ syndrome here somewhere. Were any of the previous people involved in underwater recovery i.e. Heinkel in Norway..Dymchurch 109..Malta Spitfire undersea recovery… and many others, ever contacted for their opinions…you Ross ?
    We know the channel is unpredictable, but to build this frame on land and expect it to slide into position under 50ft of water ect. ect. was a big ask.
    I wrote last April #79
    the film shows the remains of an aluminium aircraft that has been undersea for 73 years, and lying on its back in what is really known to divers as ‘shallow water’. The sunlight and saline content of the water, increase the metal deterioration factor enormously, and that can be seen by the lace like appearance of the airframe. Flaps and ailerons are almost non existent and the chances of lifting the whole airframe in one piece is almost nil.
    The engines weights, will have to be cleverly buoyed for lifting, to prevent them from breaking what’s left of wing spar integrity. After all the silt is removed from the fuselage and tailplane assembly to reduce weight, it may just be possible to bring that much ashore without too much damage, but more than probably without wings and engines attached.

    The ‘new’ idea of attaching lifting wires to the strongest points and shoving a girder up the back end of the fuselage like a doctor’s finger probing for ……… well…we all could have tried that years ago, and would have ended up like the Dymchurch 109, and all the recriminations that would surely follow.

    The only safe way to get this aeroplane to the RAF museum, is to section off the wings and engines from the fuselage and bring the separated parts to the surface one by one …even if that is possible.
    It makes for easier transport and eventual soaking and further restoration at Cosford.

    I do not want to be seen as the ‘I told you brigade’ because all the warnings were there some time ago. To bring it up in one piece was always a ‘bridge too far’. The Germans said it recently, and older wiser heads here in UK said it. But no, the big wigs and money spenders knew it all and now we will be lucky to get an engine and maybe a cockpit section….
    Will it be at…..?

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #977432
    xtangomike
    Participant

    This evening BBC Newsroom South East were reporting and I paraphrase, that the recent bad weather meant that they would need to employ a less satisfactory method of lifting the Dornier than they had originally planned. Anyone have the details on what that might mean?

    I think those that know will have to tell us exactly what ‘less satisfactory methods’ means. It sounds as if the lifting cradle, or part thereof, is not going according to plan……lets hope whatever is happening still leaves us with something ‘Dornier’ :apologetic:

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #978066
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Is all well under the water at the Goodwin sands…..is everything going to plan? Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I thought I heard a seagull sounding worried…..

    in reply to: Is this Rolls Royce….. #979755
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Could someone please interpret the two words, ‘ everyone’ and ‘crap’. Perhaps ‘powerandpassion’ first would be polite.

    in reply to: Dambusters Remake Latest #986238
    xtangomike
    Participant

    What do you think Ni..er….woof.woof.woof tthhrrrrbbbbb (dog f.rt) woof woof…..ucking rubbish !!!!!!

    in reply to: HMS ARK Royal off to be Scrapped! #986918
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Bloody disgracefull…..United Kingdom Impotent Place:apologetic:…anyone else add to it ?

    in reply to: Seen on eBay – 2013! #987664
    xtangomike
    Participant
    in reply to: The last surviving Dornier #993754
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Don’t the two posts above, if true, make you want to weep ?

    in reply to: Browning .303 #999862
    xtangomike
    Participant

    Does it look like this one : Mosquito fighter 1944

    in reply to: Goodwin Sands Dornier progress thread #1008622
    xtangomike
    Participant

    I’m going to get shot up from all angles for saying this, but lets get real here…the film shows the remains of an aluminium aircraft that has been undersea for 73 years, and lying on its back in what is really known to divers as ‘shallow water’. The sunlight and saline content of the water, increase the metal deterioration factor enormously, and that can be seen by the lace like appearance of the airframe. Flaps and ailerons are almost non existent and the chances of lifting the whole airframe in one piece is almost nil.
    The engines weights, will have to be cleverly buoyed for lifting, to prevent them from breaking what’s left of wing spar integrity. After all the silt is removed from the fuselage and tailplane assembly to reduce weight, it may just be possible to bring that much ashore without too much damage, but more than probably without wings and engines attached.
    What is left will certainly have to be submerged in fresh water as soon as possible, and then treated with whatever the boffins have come up with, to prevent defoliation of the remaining metal.
    A really huge operation being undertaken, but don’t expect too much. I’ve seen two such salt water recoveries, and the results were disappointing to say the least.
    Now faced with the possibilty of a bomb on board…well…….RN bomb disposal ?…….’we’ll have to blow it up in situ Sir !!’…..end of story??
    Good luck all…the only Do 17 we have a chance of….

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 428 total)