Most of them have long gone from here due to the negative whingers who love to poke negativity at practically everything they see here.

Hear hear. We’ve been through this discussion a million times already on this forum. I guess anyone is entitled to an opinion. Just don’t expect anybody to act on that opinion.

Now back on topic?

Same in The Netherlands. The Army and 5 private companies together are estimated to clear about 4,000 sites a year. That’s anything ranging from grenades to sea mines and aircraft bombs.

In 2005 three Dutch fishermen were killed when a aircraft bomb they had accidently caught in their nets went up on the deck. In 1978 a gentlemen was killed in a digger accident by a UXB. In the late 1980s a fishing vessel was nearly sunk when a bomb blew up just under it when hauling in the nets. And that’s not even going through the stories of people still losing hands to WW2 handgrenades being found on beaches, in fields, etc.

I was at Eindhoven airfield when they were clearing just one area of UXB’s to build houses there ten years ago. Hundreds of UXB’s turned up, ranging from shells to 2,000 pounders.

This old explosives stuff is still a very real problem in a lot of countries.

The crew of Diana Mite (posing circa pic 56) is a poignant one. They lost 9 crewmember with just one survivor in a mid-air over Germany in Jul 1944 (the other B-24 saw 6 killed and 3 POW)…

it looks fit for scrapping, not recovery

Anything wood is very easy to repair, rebuild, restore or replace. This would have been a very good candidate for restoration these days.

It is the only surviving aircraft designed by Koolhoven actually.

Actually, that’s debatable. Koolhoven’s FK.41 was license-built as the Desoutter Mk I, of which Shuttleworth still has one.

It is one of two (well: one and a half) up for disposal at the time, yes.

http://www.omroepgelderland.nl/web/nieuws-1/2040626/drukte-op-kijkdag-bergingslocatie-lancaster.htm#.UmTmMPr8LIU

Correct. When the Tu-144 crashed (Paris air show ) and destroyed 15 houses, killing eight people, there was no freeloading going on. Ramstein and Reno (2012) remind us that being ‘on site’ is no guarantee of safety either.

It is my understanding that since Rammstein the general attitude towards display flying is to prohibite manoeuvres over or towards the crowdline. Logic would dictate that being on the opposite side of the field would mean an increased risk from manoeuvres away from the crowdline. A guaranteed safety I think is indeed an illusion both in airshows, and in everyday life.