As usual Pete it’s a case of buyer beware…!

Mark – time and results will tell.

Elliott, I do agree

There have been some exceptions to the rule, the P40L recovered from the beach in Italy appears to be in surprisingly stable condition, and was obviously well worth the effort of recovery and saved an extinct sub-type, without even the need to use it as patterns?

The current project to recover and preserve a Sunderland mark I is a good case study to see how much will really survive the recovery?

The holy grail of a complete Stirling being recovered and restored will probably justify the effort of still looking and hoping.

But the recent recovery condition of the Skua shows that these materials are deteriorating over time, and for most of the dumped/ditched or wrecked aircraft the clock must be at the proverbial 5 minutes to midnight?

In regards to the Corsairs etc dumped off Australia, workshops seem to be solving the process of “recreating” rare parts such as wing centre-section spars etc, and already have enough patterns without fishing out more, in very poor condition, and I dont think many of these dumped parts are suitable for re-use.

In regards to fishing out a wreck for its identity, I do think we need to think through this habit of finding a corroded rivet, assigning an identity to it, throwing it in the scrap bin, dragging out a replacement and claiming we are now restoring the original complete aircraft. The Corsair cockpit in the photo’s above would seem to yield little other than a shadow on the workshop floor.

If we use jigs and patterns from other restorations we could “rebuild” it in 2008 metal, but then have we really “restored” it, or have we “recreated” it.

If we can do that from existing jigs and patterns and use of other spare parts, why fool our selves and posterity by recovering the wreck to claim its identity?

I much prefer acknowledging the “receation” for what it is, like the F#F, ME262, Oscar and FW190 limited productions of recent times.

I do support trying to recover the Devastator in the Marshall Islands before there is nothing left, and trying to stabilise and preserve as much as possible.

And if its possible to “restore” and fabricate a complete example even better.

regards

Mark Pilkington

I really don’t see how a non-commercial trades/wanted/offered section is going to dent Key’s advertising revenue.

I have advertised in FlyPast Magazine itself several times with mixed responses but if you look there are usually only a handful of adverts placed by individual collectors. I would still advertise in the magazine as many people are still not au fait with or comfortable dealing on the internet.

As long as it stays non-commercial I can’t see the problem – it will serve the preservation community at large and make the forum a much better place – hopefully bringing in more people.

How about a trial? They can always pull the plug if it doesn’t work out.

No, I’m not – cos I dont want to be seen with a conflict of interests. Hence my playing devils advocate above!

Bruce

Cees

A metal one has been made but it is in storage right now so no pics unfortunately – I will try to get you some at the next opportunity.

Cheers