Part of the problem is the assumption–and we can argue till we’re blue in the keyboard as to whether or not it’s a fair one–that by “the saving of endangered aircraft” it means Tighar goes in with bulldozers, backhoes, barges, winches and derricks and literally “saves aircraft.”
I would agree this is where most of the criticism is based, . – Clearly in the B-17, TBD and P-38 website extracts above, TIGHAR “implies” its directly involved in the recovery negotiations and planning, and a reader could be forgiven in assuming that they are leading the expeditions and preparing to go in with bulldozers, backhoes, barges, winches and derricks to save aircraft through “Aircraft Recovery”.
Of course some revision of the mission statement (even name?) and other articles on the website might be worthwhile to better reflect the role TIGHAR does perform, especially if it has evolved since the organisation and name was first created.
Part of the apparent loathing of Ric Gillespie seems to come from the fact that he continues to put together the funds to do what he’s doing, which infuriates those who haven’t the ability to do anything like that, and part of it comes from the fact that the media finds him charming (which I can assure you he actually is), and this really steams those who haven’t got such a pulpit.
Frankly, I find what Gillespie has accomplished while -not- finding Earhart’s Electra vastly more interesting than what somebody achieves by buying a supposed Spitfire spade grip at a yard sale. .
Let me make it clear I dont have any loathing for Ric Gillespie personally (I dont know him to judge him to be charming or otherwise), or even TIGHAR as an organisation, and like the Vulcan fundraising in the UK while I might think such scarce money could be spent in other more productive ways, thats not for me to decide, but for the donors to decide.
TIGHAR does not loom large in my daily thoughts, either in a positive or negative form, my involvement in this debate is simply in response to posts such as yours in reply to my own comments regarding the PNG Bullion Wreck and other Earhart wreckology.
The TIGHAR Nikumaroro hypothesis and investigations are apparantly worthwhile to those willing to donate, just as long as desperation for funds or success, doesnt encourage someone to fabricate evidence, (No – I’m not accusing anyone of that).
Neither should campaigning for donations cause someone to extrapolate what might be theoretically “possible”, to being what is “probable” or “likely” or is “fact”, based on nothing but very circumstantial evidence. ( I do think the media needs to be managed by careful wording of TIGHAR’s media releases/statements/website etc to avoid such wild claims).
regards
Mark Pilkington
Oh, and by the way…Tighar never claimed to have “discovered” either the so-called Swamp Ghost, the Devastator or the Welsh P-38. Go to their site and read what it says about these aircraft and tell me where it says THEY discovered them.
No they didnt, as per their website link to “Lady in Waiting” in 1985 they said
“TIGHAR has confirmed that the worlds last restorable B-17E survives in a grassy swamp near Agaiambo New Guinea. The aircraft appears remarkably well preserved and complete…….This aircraft is potentially one of the most significant aviation recoveries in history. Late this year a small TIGHAR team will conduct an onsite recovery evaluation. A suitable restoration facility will be selected and recovery preparations will begin.”
http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/1985Vol_1/0101.pdf
Of course, this is after (and not mentioned in the article), the aircraft had been located by an Australian Army helicopter, photographed and published in various magazines by Bruce Adams @1972, inspected by Monty Armstrong and Charles Darby, and approved for recovery by Dave Tallechet in @1974, and extensively covered in text and colour photos in Charles Darby’s “Pacific Wrecks and where to find them” published in @1979.
Pacific Aircraft Wrecks begins with Darby’s introduction titled “Aircraft Relics Today – Fact and Fiction” is as classic as texts get for the field of Pacific Wrecks. Although it was written in 1979, and sadly many of the wreck described have since been removed, destroyed, scrapped or have unknown fates, or are now the possession of unknown millionaires, it is still fun to read.
The photographic survey is from 1973 – 1976, and many of the pictures are reproduced in color most wrecks are from Papua New Guinea, Irian Jaya or the Solomon Islands. The author chooses wisely to be vague about the locations of many of the wrecks, referring to most as B-17 in grassy swamp, or G4M in the Solomons.
The book has wonderful images of the famous New Guinea B-17 “Swamp Ghost”, that, sadly since has been stripped of all the equipment that are shown in in the pictures, including its oxygen tanks, instruments, guns and ammunition.
So while in 1985 TIGHAR states it has “confirmed” it survived (and how was that done – by looking at page “56” of Darby’s book?), it clearly didnt play much of a part in doing so?, but thats not what a reader (or donor) would determine from reading their publication.
TIGHAR “might” have been fund raising in 1985 to assist MARC/Tallichet recover it, as they already had the recovery rights from 1974? but again thats not implied at all by the article, it implies a TIGHAR managed recovery.
In anycase, it doesnt seem their proposed expendition in @1985 to recover it was successful? or added to the later efforts of Hagan and co?
Two intact Devastators have been found in relatively shallow water on the bottom of Jaluit lagoon in the Marshall Islands. These aircraft not only represent the best surviving examples of their type but they are also individually historic. Ditched on February 1, 1942 during a raid launched from U.S.S. Yorktown, they are among the first American aircraft lost in offensive operations in World War Two. The best candidate for recovery and preservation at the National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida is the deeper of the two aircraft: U.S. Navy TBD-1 Bu.No. 1515.
TIGHAR is working closely with the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the United States Navy, the Naval Aviation Museum Foundation, and the Center for Marine Archaeology and Conservation at Texas A&M University to save a Devastator
.
Not unlike the earlier Swamp Ghost example, a reader (donor) of the TIGHAR website entry above regarding the Devastators might be excused for thinking it was TIGHAR who “found” or discovered them? as there is no mention or acknowledgement of any one else doing so.
But yes the P-38 in Wales is acknowledged as being discovered due to the efforts of a local man.
The fundamental issue is TIGHAR is the International Group for historic AIRCRAFT RECOVERY, and states that
The foundation devotes its resources to the saving of endangered historic aircraft wherever they may be found,
.
Yet there doesnt seem to be any recoveries actually ever undertaken or achieved?, If TIGHAR stated they support, encourage and assist others undertaking such recoveries that might clarify the concerns and reduce the criticism? but in each of the reports on their website (B-17, TBD and P-38) the reader is left with the strong “impression” TIGHAR is managing the recovery, identifying dis-assembly methods and identifying suitable restoration facilities?
As I have stated earlier, I dont know what TIGHAR actually “has” achieved behind the scene, or in assisting others in their own efforts, but TIGHAR’s record in recoveries is not worth mentioning, as there doesn’t appear to be any to mention.
TIGHAR’s efforts over the last 23 years at Nikumaroro to find evidence to support their hypothesis is fine, and if they are able to find donors to support their ongoing work there that is fine too, its the way discoveries are announced into the media as being successful only to turn out to be of little or no substance, that is concerning.
The 1985 Swamp Ghost article above seems a perfect example of that.
While I understand donors and members need to be kept informed of progress, enthusiasm or desire to be proven right (or to keep the cash flowing?) should be tempered with scientific impartiality or better still some healthy scepticism.
While I’m sure sometimes the media picks and up runs amok with information issued by TIGHAR, it does seem that it is TIGHAR who first lights the wick.
regards
Mark Pilkington
I will certainly be the first to eat my hat. But I rather suspect I wont have to, although would actually like to be proved wrong.
On the other hand, I’m curious to know what TIGHAR have thus far achieved in their work. Can anyone enlighten me?
And as regards to being someone who can’t actually do the work…..oh…..never mind! :rolleyes:
Andy,
i’m not a fan or supporter of Tighar, but am happy to offer the following to counter my own contribution above to any confusion that they were involved in the recent “Bullion/Snake” discovery.
Tighar has done a lot more than develop a plausable but as yet unproven hypothesis into the fate of Amelia Earhart, and to be fair, undertaken numerous expeditions trying to find conclusive evidence to support that hypothesis.
And of course there is another hypothesis that has Earhart returning to New Britain and crashing, where the wreck was later discovered by an Australian WW2 patrol, or even now the more recent discovery by “Indiana Jones” of her wreck in the sea off PNG loaded with Gold Bullion and guarded by a huge snake.
While the Tighar hypothesis is possible, I dont consider its probable, and like many others, still consider the most likely outcome was a ditching in the open sea and subsequent drowning. But good luck to Tighar if they do find conclusive evidence.
Of course at the moment most would describe the “desktop” autopsy “conclusion” of the male castaway remains being now identified as female, the womans shoe (apparantly not the right size) the sextant case, the make-up jar, and now the Earhart/ Human/ Turtle bones, all as questionable or circumstantial evidence supporting the hypothesis, not proving it.
The Tighar website lists a worthwhile purpose or Mission Statement which is deserving of support.
TIGHAR (pronounced βtigerβ) is the acronym for The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, a non-profit foundation dedicated to promoting responsible aviation archaeology and historic preservation. TIGHARβs activities include:
Compiling and verifying reports of rare and historic aircraft surviving in remote areas.
Conducting investigations and recovery expeditions in co-operation with museums and collections worldwide.
Serving as a voice for integrity, responsibility, and professionalism in the field of aviation historic preservation.
TIGHAR maintains no collection of its own, nor does it engage in the restoration or buying and selling of artifacts. The foundation devotes its resources to the saving of endangered historic aircraft wherever they may be found, and to the education of the international public in the need to preserve the relics of the history of flight.
http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/1985Vol_1/0101.pdf
Unfortunately it is Tighar’s claims of aircraft recovery that are the biggest cause of its critic’s and questions of credibility, and that may be unfounded in that Tighar may have well played a role in many eventual outcomes, but equally may have not been the major player, but it does seem they havent ever themselves achieved a recovery?
Tighars website lists a timeline with involvement in a number of discoveries and planned recoveries.
http://tighar.org/timeline.html
In 1985 they discovered a rare B-17E force landed in PNG and commenced to undertake a site visit with plans to recover it, once a restoration facility was identified. (I think the discovery and recovery are both the results of others, as the wreck was discovered by an Australian helicopter crew, and Tallichet had recovery rights in 1974?, and of course it was finally recovered by Hagen and others very recently, but am happy to give Tighar credit if it is due?).
In 2004 they discovered two rare TBD Devastators in the Mrshall Islands, and commenced to undertake a site visit with plans to recover it, once a restoration facility was identified. ( to be fair I think the discovery is complicated by local government heritage limitations, but the planned recovery now seems overtaken by the potential customer / restoration facility Pensacola finding one elsewhere? and not at such a shallow depth, and surely the Navies expertise in the US lake recoveries would allow it to undertake such recoveries with its own resources).
In 2007 they discovered a P-38 on a beach in Wales /UK, and commenced to undertake a site visit with plans to recover it, once a restoration facility was identified. (I suspect unless a National collection such as the IWM Duxford pursues it as an “as is” display that the airframe will remain in the sand?
Smiles, I do note that Tighar dont list any role in the discovery and recovery two DH-9’s from India. ( I wonder who did discover and recover them?)
Regards
Mark Pilkington
.
More on the PNG discovery of Amelia Earhart’s aircraft reported here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/03/3154684.htm
There are claims that one of the world’s great aviation mysteries – the disappearance of 1930s airwoman Amelia Earhart – has been solved in Papua New Guinea.
Locals believe a plane wreck could be the final resting place of Earhart who disappeared somewhere over the Pacific in 1937.
Even more incredibly they say there is gold bullion on board and that a giant snake is guarding the wreck.
An expert on Earhart’s disappearance, however, says the claim is “silly beyond description”.
The rumour mill, or coconut wireless as it is known, is always running hot on Bougainville. Many of the tall tales that fly around the island involve gold.One of them was given prominence by the Post Courier newspaper this week with the front-page headline “Plane wreck believed to be Earhart”.
It said there are “strong indications” a wreck found off the coast of Bougainville was the plane flown by Earhart, who famously disappeared while attempting to become the first pilot to circle the globe close to the equator.
If that was not amazing enough, the report said there was bullion on board and a six-metre snake was guarding the wreck.
The man at the centre of the claim is local businessman Cletus Harepa, who is paying for divers to inspect the wreck.
“Somebody saw it when they were diving for fish and they saw the plane but they don’t know that that plane was Amelia’s plane,” he said.
He says a diver found two skulls in the cockpit and three boxes of gold bullion, but the bars were too heavy to carry to the surface.
Mr Harepa says he plans to use the potential spoils to help improve services on the island.
“The government can have some. I will have some. But what I want to do is improve the island. Get a good hospital, rich school, good water supply and maybe a small boat,” he said.
While Mr Harepa dismisses the story about the giant snake as rubbish, he remains confident the wreck will prove to be Earhart’s Lockheed Electra.
It has been rumoured female pilots were used to smuggle gold out of Lae on the PNG mainland in the 1930s.
Lae was Earhart’s last stop before she vanished.
American Ric Gillespie, a leading expert on the Earhart mystery who has spent the past 22 years trying to locate her final resting place, has dismissed the latest claims as laughable.
“These stories about gold bullion and a six-metre snake guarding the wreckage are just, frankly, hilarious. There is simply no way the Earhart aircraft could be anywhere near Papua New Guinea,” he said.
Mr Gillespie says radio transmissions and other evidence indicates Earhart landed on Nikumaroro atoll in the Central Pacific, where she and her navigator later perished from a lack of food and water.
He says the story coming out of Bougainville is testament to the enduring mystery surrounding her disappearance.“The whole thing is silly beyond description, but I guess it is just an indication of how popular the Earhart mystery is and how everybody wants a piece of that action,” he said.
Gold fever, meanwhile, has broken out on Bougainville with armed men reportedly preventing outsiders from diving on the wreck.
Great choices between these outcomes,
Story 1, we have human Finger bones, identified as that on discovery, that “might” be from a Turtle, but are more likely to be from a missing aviatrix, even though they cant identify human DNA present, and a desktop review of an historical autopsy of a body long lost, can prove the sex of the body was incorrectly identified by the actual inspection!, and finally the fact that a womans shoe washed up on an island in the Pacific ocean proves a particular woman (with different sized feet) crashed her plane there!, because of course the shoe couldnt possibly belong to anyone else?
Story 2, an aircraft full of gold bullion and guarded by a giant Snake! that might (on top of all that) also be the aircraft of a missing aviatrix, and why, well it just makes the story that so much more believable if its her aircraft!
Cant get better can it?
A novel third alternative is that they simply got lost and ditched in the sea and drowned!, aircraft and their bodies never to be found, and leaving the “finger” to be a turtles bone, and the sunken aircraft to be full of bulls#*! not full of bullion.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Errol,
Hammond, like many other contributors to Australia’s aviation history, are not getting much if any recognition on their centenaries, hence my post.
But of course corrections to record historical facts accurately are always welcomed, and I look forward to reading your serialisation with interest, particularly of the move to Sunshine in March?
Can you elaborate more on why and where that occured?, as this is the first reference I have seen of it?
As you would know, Bristol’s demonstration tour of Australia, and particularly the later demonstration flights for the Army in Sydney by McDonald on Hammond’s resignation, were a major influence on the birth of Military Aviation in Australia some 3 years later at Point Cook, with the order for the first 5 aircraft going to the Bristol and Colonial Aeroplane Company, and the first Military Flight being very appropriately undertaken in a Military Boxkite with extended upper wings but otherwise not changed from that demonstrated by Hammond in 1911.
Making for an interesting historical overlap with the 90th anniversary of the RAAF and the Centenary of Hammond all occuring in the one month.
As you would also know, Hammond went on to be an important early pioneer in his own country before the commencement of WW1, and hopefully your article is covering his later exploits through that period and to his unfortunate demise in the USA, or is it limited to the Bristol Demonstration tour of Australia?
I recently attended celebrations at the City of Hobsons Bay Library (Altona Bay) which sits opposite the original Laverton homestead and on the ground where the Boxkite was operated, and a number of locally sourced photos have come to light.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
did you know that it costs more to have a Spitfire rebuilt from scratch to fly than it does to by one thats already been flying for a while !!!!!!!
that explains the 6M price tag:
Current market price 2M, price to build one from scratch 3M, cost to dig lots of holes all over Oakey looking for a mine and to find the data plate 1M = 6M
smiles
Mark Pilkington
.
Unfortunately not intended to be flying replica’s but instead museum full scale mock-ups, the Qantas Founders Museum have active plans to create a full size mockup of the DH-86 Express, and even more impressive is a Shorts Empire! Flying Boat!
Regards
Mark Pilkington
,
Yes there are celebrations at Point Cook, but I understand from sources on base that “We’re not allowed to advertise that”.
Of course given the 90th anniversary alligns with the bi-annual dates for Avalon it makes sense, but the Air Force, having fought to take control of Point Cook once it was saved, (and played little if any role “to” save it) seems to focus its efforts every else BUT Point Cook.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Thanks for that JDK, I will be there on Thursday. It’s great to see RAAFM is allowing the SE5a replica do the trip – how about the 504K and Demon?
It is the 90th Anniversary so I would love to see the imagination run wild, and let these escape from the museum for a few days.
Actually – its the 90th Anniversary so why not celebrate it at Point Cook which was the only site the fledgeling airforce occupied 90 years ago, rather than at Avalon which was at best a sheep paddock in those days, or any of the other bases that seem to be the focus to host RAAF celebrations, including the RAAF Base and RAAF Museum at Temora.
Bring the party to Point Cook, not bits of Point Cook to the party!
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Peter,
The fin and tailplane are from an Australian built Lincoln A73-64 of 10 squadron that crashed on Mount Superbus on a mercy flight to rush a sick infant and the attending nurse to Brisbane from Townsville.

A73-64, although originally built as a mark 30 Heavy (Strike) Bomber, was stored by GAF and later converted to a long nose Maritime Patrol bomber before delivery to the RAAF, hence its service with 10 Sqn RAAF, the former WW2 Sunderland Sqn which served in Europe with Coastal Command.
The RAAF Museum recovered the turret? and tail section of the wreck some years ago, many other parts of the wreck have been souvenired by others over the years including a couple of the engines, the “shattered” mid fuselage survives relatively intact at the wreck site.
Avro Lincoln bomber, A73-64 of 10 Squadron RAAF based in Townsville crashed into Mount Superbus near Emu Vale in the early hours of Easter Saturday morning on 9 April 1955 during a medical evacuation of a sick baby from Townsville to Eagle Farm airfield in Brisbane. The crew of four RAAF personnel and the two passengers were all killed in this tragic accident.
10 Squadron RAAF had received a telephone call late on Good Friday night from the Townsville hospital seeking an emergency evacuation to Brisbane of a critically jaundiced 2 day old baby, Robyn Huxley.
As most of the Squadron’s air crew were on leave or stand-down over Easter, the Commanding Officer of 10 Squadron, Wing Commander John Costello decided to pilot the Squadron’s only serviceable aircraft, A73-64, for the evacuation flight.
The crew consisted of the new Commanding Officer Wing Commander Costello who had flown Sunderlands during the war against the German U Boats in the Atlantic, the Senior Navigation Officer, Squadron Leader Finlay, who was a wartime Pathfinder navigator, the squadron Chief Signaller, Flight Lieutenant Cater, and the squadron Senior Engineering Officer, Squadron Leader Mason.
The baby girl and nurse Mafalda Gray were positioned in the long-nosed section of the Lincoln bomber. The aircraft took off from Garbutt airfield at 00.30 am on Saturday 9 April 1955. The aircraft encountered some cloud and rain as it approached southern Queensland. The aircraft had to fly at a relatively low altitude to ensure the baby had a comfortable flight.
At 4.05 am the aircraft contacted Brisbane Air Traffic Control to advise that they were flying in cloud at 6,000 feet. They advised that they would arrive in Brisbane in about 10 minutes time and sought a clearance to reduce altitude to 5,000 feet. Brisbane Air Traffic Control advised that they were cleared to drop to 5,000 feet and if they wished they could drop to 4,000 feet for the approach to Eagle Farm airfield.
A short time later Brisbane Air Traffic Control contacted them with weather information and asked them to confirm when they had obtained a visual fix on the town of Caboolture. No further reports were heard from the Lincoln bomber. There were no low clouds in the Brisbane area at that time.
Some time later, reports came in that an aircraft, later confirmed as a Lincoln, was heard to circle over the town of Bell at about 3.30 am. Bell is located about 18 miles north east of Dalby. Clearly A73-64 was well off course. The weather south of Bell was overcast with scattered rain.
At 4.14 am some members of the Brisbane Bushwalking Club heard a large aircraft fly overhead followed by the noise of an impact and some large explosions. By their estimation it had slammed into a nearby mountain in the Main Range region of the Border Ranges near Emu Vale. This was later confirmed to be Mount Superbus, the highest mountain (1,375 metres) in southern Queensland.
A small group from the Bushwalking club was despatched immediately to Emu Vale to notify the relevant authorities. Five hours later a Canberra bomber from Amberley airbase was able to confirm the location of the still burning wreckage of Lincoln, A73-64 just below the summit of Mount Superbus.
Ground rescue crews were dispatched to the site. They quickly confirmed that there were no survivors.
Those killed in this tragic accident were:-
Wing Commander John Peter Costello MID (pilot)
Squadron Leader Charles Surtees Mason MBE (co-pilot)
Squadron Leader John Watson Finlay (navigator)
Flight Lieutenant William George Stanley Cater (signaller)
Baby Robyn Huxley
Sister Mafalda GraySister Mafalda Gray, aged 26 years of Melton Hill, Townsville had resigned on the Friday to take up a nursing position in New South Wales. She volunteered to travel on the emergency flight when she heard the plight of the sick baby.
The accident investigation team were able to determine that the aircraft had been on a heading of 135ΒΊT at the time of impact and that immediately before the impact it had tried to gain altitude (presumably to avoid the top of the mountain). The nose and cockpit of the aircraft were totally destroyed but accident investigators were able to determine that the 4 throttles were on maximum power, the propeller pitch controls were set in the cruise position and the fuel cocks were all open. It appeared that the rudder trim control and the trim tabs on the elevators were all in the neutral position.
One suggested, but not confirmed theory for the crash, was the fact that an oxygen bottle and trolley taken on the flight for the baby, may have affected the accuracy of the P-type compass on board the Lincoln bomber. The Lincoln bomber had two compasses installed. One was the G3 master compass in the navigator’s compartment and the other was the P-type compass which was located to the left of the pilot’s seat. It was considered that the unserviceability of the G3 compass may have contributed to the navigational error.
It is also possible that the crew did not check the Drift Meter located in the bomb aimer’s compartment due to the baby and nurse being located in the nose of the aircraft.
Another factor may have been that Brisbane radio station 4BC lost signal strength at around that time on Saturday morning. Sydney radio station 2UW was only 10KHz away from 4BC, so it was considered possible that the navigator may have accidentally locked on to 2UW thinking it was 4BC. This was another scenario that may explain the incorrect path taken by the Lincoln bomber.
photo and text from the oz at war website which is a wonderful resource created by Peter Dunn on Australian WW2 and Military aviation stories.
http://www.ozatwar.com/ozcrashes/superbus.htm
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Quote:
Local residents Lester Resinger and Bill Martin have rebuilt a Spitfire using parts found around the airfield. The finished aircraft is displayed in the Oakey Aviation Museum
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story..
Spits?? you mean you guys have pulled that rebuilt complete and finished one apart? and that all that is left now is a forward cockpit section???
(thats what they did to complete Spitfires at Oakey years ago too, are you recreating local history?)
smiles
Mark Pilkington
Coincidentally, the likelihood of one coming to a UK museum is about as likely as a gnat giving birth to a badger π
No – a far better idea is to ask NASA for one and form Shuttle to the Sky, get Robert Pleming on the job, a little bit in the kitty from the Heritage Lottery and NASA, annual “payup or the Shuttle gets it” marketing to UK and US enthusiasts and General Publics, and the Shuttle can do airshows in both the UK and the USA on 6 monthly rotations!
Leaving the only question to ask – “when” Will it be at Legends?
smiles
Mark Pilkington
Well they bl00dy well not getting ours.. π
Spits, if they cant borrow “yours” then they could borrow the “other one” at Oakey – seems there is a fully restored one there already??
Local residents Lester Resinger and Bill Martin have rebuilt a Spitfire using parts found around the airfield. The finished aircraft is displayed in the Oakey Aviation Museum
Smiles
Mark Pilkington
If you can’t fix it with a hammer, it’s an electrical problem.
My Father, a carpenter by trade, always called a hammer an American Screwdriver (no disrespect intended to our US cousins), which I assume related to his experience in joint RAAF/US bases in PNG, so strictly speaking all of ZRX61’s equipment are screwdrivers, and yes you are right, hammers cant fix an electrical problem, but they do a good job of causing them.
smiles
Mark Pilkington
So do I! Its STILL in my garage
Tony,
you have a PM
regards
Mark Pilkington