mark_pilkington.
The item seems to be described as “Checking Gauge (set 18??) for C.P. (centre-plane)? truss front and rear top starboard”
I would therefore interpret it to be a QA compliance plate from a Factory installation test item, used in measuring the wing top starboard front and rear truss relative to the jig SG2189?, rather than a part dataplate for the truss in a particular aircraft itself?, and therefore would agree with Rocketeer.
However the plate “blank” may well be a standard Sunderland aircraft part dataplate, given the pre-engraved “Sunderland”, “Jig”, and “Inspected” text.
A nice brass plate would be an attractive souvenir to unscrew and keep, as you dumped such equipment into the skip for scrapping, regardless of the equipment’s purpose, especially with the mention of the Sunderland and its strong relationship to the site you were clearing.
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonThe ‘Charles Church connection’ is most probably a confusion with RR232, also from the same SA Metals yard, that was shipped to Australia and rebuilt as a static before being purchased by Church in 1987.
I think RR232 is the former Peter Sledge airframe whose fuselage was restored to static condition in the late 1970’s by Ian Whitney at historic Point Cook base in Victoria.
I was a lot thinner and fitter as a teenager when I squeezed inside the rear fuselage regularly to do rivet bucking for Ian on that airframe, although I am sure none of those rivets survived the later rebuild to airworthy condition.
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonAs to the rights or wrongs of the ongoing sale of these items I see no difference, actually, between items on this scale and larger scale wreck recoveries on onward sale thereof (often involving fatalties – ancient or modern) for the rebuild of whole aircraft for flying or museum display.
I guess I do tend to see a difference, in that most of these dig recoveries are from fatal wartime combat crashes and therefore in my mind war graves no different to a ship wreck, whereas few wrecks recovered for restoration (airworthy or otherwise) are related to fatalities.(up until now at least)
Obviously the more recent development of “near new” reconstructions have meant the proverbial dataplate/firewall recovery has been the only primary part required to survive, opening up many fatal crashes as potential rebuild sources.
However even where they are related to a fatality, the ability to cheap the memory of those involved is usually limited to claiming 90% of the new metal aeroplane is actually the wreck Joe Blogs flew and died in, and I’m not sure that is disrespectful to Joe Blogs (other than raising the question of how Joe Blogs died given the aircraft survived??) where as the Dornier 17 part passed off as a me-109 fin skin cheapens both the Dornier history, and the “imposter” 109 history, and therefore in my mind is very disrespectful to the memory of both wreck’s casualties.
While I do generally support the recovery of parts from these wrecks despite my view they are technically war graves, I certainly feel there should be a lot more respect being shown by some in this hobby as to the purpose for the recovery, and the way parts and artefacts are treated once recovered.
The starting point for this must sit with MOD who issue the permits in the first place.
I would agree with Gerry’s proposal that perhaps a dig recovery be independantly recorded, and significant parts certified onto an online database? .(digital camera “film” is virtually free) Even a summary of the parts recovered simply listed on the online database would be better than nothing, in part I am surprised that the MOD doesnt require the successful applicant to provide a summary report of the dig and recovery undertaken, if that was then publicly available subsequent buyers could confirm if windscreen frames or engines etc were actually recovered?
If the MOD cant do this, then perhaps a Wreckology Association should be formed with member participation of such a scheme, leaving those who choose not to participate in an un-validated world of decreasing marketability?, once those building such collections knew of this independent reference source, the shonks would be limited to duping new buyers, and the odd General Public one-off purchaser, and would not gain anything from constant new sales identities.
A Wreckology Association could force compliance with its standards of independantly verified documentation and reporting, and have this feed back through lobbying into the MOD permits to also require compliance?
This current situation of the Dornier 17 part being presented (and modified) as a BoB 109 part is a one off example of the value of a photographic reference, as are the independent records (memories) of what was specifically recovered from high profile digs.
Digs are a valid component of investigating, recording and preserving aviation heritage, but there is a need for the participants to safeguard “provenance” if the activity is to lift above the apparant shonks currently operating in the ebay arena, and not bring the whole purpose of these activities into question? as simply a money making enterprise.
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkington?
Or possibly just a garden variety Scottish Aviation Bulldog listed on the preliminary appearance program just as a Bulldog, and a webmaster who doesnt know his aircraft types? to know the difference when finding clip art photos? for the web poster?
There are only 2 static survivors and the only known replica is currently still under construction in the USA?, the show seems to be a full scale airshow rather than a model show?
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkington.
There is an excellent Freighter fuselage CF-TFZ apparantly available “free to good home” at Beaverlodge Lake Canada.
Perhaps a fuselage (& centre-section?) recovery, married with the existing wings and engines already in the UK could create a survivor for preservation in the UK?
Regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonwl745 Side Scan Sonar
——————————————————————————–
The American company “Humminbird “have an affordable side scan sonar on the market !Good for wreckology!
Good idea to check if there’s something there first.
In this case, there isn’t. 😉
Yes, if theres nothing there, “far better and cheaper results” are achieved with a digital camera, model airfix kit, and negative feature of photo shop, than buying a side scanner and spending time on or in the water (as a father and son had done at Windermere) , as shown by some of the “other” media releases and “claims” about sunken aircraft.
The “expert” I referred to above, made a number of “wild” claims and had such images on his own website, suggesting he was involved in the charade far more than just being a believer in them.
His involvement in providing diving, videoing and scanning services, his own direct claims of discoveries and earlier recoveries, and other strange activities in forums including using multiple identities to cross support and promote himself would suggest anything was possible, particularly as many of these supicious scan images were released on his own website.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=27408&highlight=sunderland+lake
The multiple Identities progressed to “Allison” here on KP itself, a “female” diver who also sought support for recovery operations, was a close “admirer” of the “expert” and also had found a scuttled Sunderland.
4th July 2006, 18:13
Allison Johnson
Rank 4 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dishforth, N Yorkshire
Posts: 425I have the movement card of a Mk II that was scuttled in Lough Erne in N Ireland. It quite clearly says “Scuttled” on it. If the scuttled bit is faked then the microfiche at Hendon has been tampered with. Anyone interested in going over there to try and look for it? I’m a diver and have access to a sonar unit.
Ali
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=59765&highlight=dive+recovery
Not surprisingly “Allison” has not posted in KP for over 2 years, ie before the death of the gentleman concerned. Photos of Allison skydiving shown in this forum by herself, were shown elsewhere by the “expert” as him with his skydiving instructor in the USA??
Being exposed for running multiple identities (including admiring females) on his own dive forum was eventually linked to his sad demise.
His claims of the intact glass/bomber nosed Me-262, Ar234 and Me163 found in a European lake near Rechlin airfield still sit in a thread somewhere here in the KP archives, over in WIX and the vintage-and-warbirds yahoo group, unfortunately the submerged Spitfire Seaplane thread in which he detailed his own discovery of the wreck was deleted by a KP Mod, both were advertised as recovery/restoration project opportunities on Barnstormers.
These were the most significant “promotions” for the use of side scanners for the location and recovery of aircraft wrecks, and the field has gone strangely quiet with his demise?
All very strange, and a very sad ending to the whole weird saga.
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonPaul,
the event went well with two rare Brabham’s on display and many other historic cars, and the running merlin on display on the sunday.
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonSigned as an “expat”. I notice that Vicki Pilkington has signed it but no Mark Pilkington???
Cheers Paul
Paul, I have signed the Australian petition, but I’m not a UK citizen/expat and therefore not entitled to sign the UK petition, whereas my wife is.
I would if I could.
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonLake flying boat rumours scuttled
? Oh thats surprising, given the quality and confidence of the original expert who discovered them???, I mean there were conclusive side scans that proved they were there!!!
Still, there is always the Spitfire Float plane, he had positively identified that one from running his hand along the float, so it must be still there!!
and then there’s always the glass nose Me-262 he located in a lake in Europe, and advertised for recovery on barnstormers.
Those were the days.
I was an open skeptic of this gentleman’s claims as were most others, and it seemed clear he was living in a Walter Mitty world of his own.
but on a more sober note I understand he passed away in very very sad circumstances, and certainly he and his family paid far too high a price for his silly antics.
(for those who dont know the background to the above comments, I’m not referring to the author in the bbc clip or the recent book that JDK refers to)
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonthat it is Chad,
smiles
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkington.
The two Beauforts are RAAF aircraft that collided over Jervis Bay NSW in April 1943, A9-27 and A9-268, while performing a “Prince of Wales” display the starboard wingman struck the tail of the lead aircraft with its wingtip, as the lead aircraft commenced to climb away, causing both aircraft to crash into the sea with loss of both crews, a third Beaufort survived unscathed.
The B-17 ditching is a radio controlled ditching test, a USAF film narrated by Ronald Reagan, the A-20 belly landing is a famous series of footage taken in PNG by famed Australian wartime photographer Damien Parer, reknowned for filming on front line ,and behind enemy lines.
He filmed some unique Coral Sea combat footage from behind the pilot’s seat of an Australian Beaufighter.
http://www.awm.gov.au/people/78005.asp
I’m not sure about the story of the Widgeon, it seems to have an Australian “VH-” civil registration marking on the wing, suggesting a post war PNG accident?
Regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonI am sure the Red Barron would be horified at having to live in a bunker:)
No, the Baron was very much at home in the bunker, he kept an entire squadron of Fokker Triplanes stored in the bunker to make him feel at home, and they remain there still to this day, awaiting to be recovered and also sold on ebay.
Of course to get to them you would need to remove the entire squadron of Fw-190’s parked in front of them that were placed into the same bunker during WW2.
smiles, gets his coat, and leaves
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonI’d establish a petition to keep her in the UK. If not then, in a few years time, people will be saying – why did we let such a unique vessel go? And I doubt that the UK would then be able to get her back. Don’t act in haste and repent at leisure!
I believe you will find there was such a petition in 2007 that attracted 840 signatures with the apparant current resulting situation of it being subject to a HLF grant application to “deconstruct” it?
I think the time for “not acting in haste” is well and truely over, if you think this ship is worth keeping “anywhere”.
I think many people will one day ask why did we let such a unique vessel go, even more so if it is let be “deconstructed”?
This current petition and proposed relocation to Adelaide in South Australia is at least a proposal to preserve it? and surely worth supporting on that basis, especially as the current cost of effort is the time taken for a signature?
regards
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkington.
The Walter came in 3 models, the smallest being the Mikron at 65HP, but the Minor was also available in 2 sizes, being a 4 cylinder and a 6 cylinder, in some ways mirroring the Gipsy Minor, Major and Queen.
The Walter Minor 4 cylinder lives on today as a new build engine available from Avia as the Avia M332 with 145HP, seemly more than enough for a DH60 Moth given the Cirrus Mk I was 60HP and the Cirrus Mk II 90HP, and the Gipsy Mk I 100HP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_M332
The real question is what to call it?
A “Walter Moth” or an “Avia Moth”
smiles
Mark Pilkington
mark_pilkingtonI feel a bit like the sorcerers apprentice who started something he couldn’t stop!
Have had so many e-mails, and PM’s, from people having had similar bad experiences with one particular e-bay seller (some ongoing!) that it will take a while to reply to them. But I promise I will…..!
Meanwhile, an item from an e-bay seller we were previously pointed to in this thread had this listed:
To my certain knowledge a bomb rack has not been recovered post-war from this particular site.
Smiles, and who said you dont provide free provenance advice on ebay items lol
Perhaps if there is a overwhelming evidence of fraudulent parts identification then ebay should be directly advised and challenge the seller with the information, the Dornier 17/ me-109 photos seem damning enough on their own?, let alone the multiple experiences now being mentioned by others?
regards
Mark Pilkington
Sign In
