Warbird Information Exchange

As some may know the fate of Lancaster KB882, currently on outdoor display at Madawaska Municipal Airport in the Canadian city of Edmunston, has been in question for some time.
Most recent efforts to save this Lancaster from an undesirable future have failed and the aircraft is to remain outdoors, decaying to the point of no return.

However, an Australian based collector Reevers, is raising awareness of this ongoing neglect by requesting the Canadian authorities release the Lancaster for sale so it can be secured by others who wish to save it for future generations.

"If the Canadian authorities are prepared to allow this Lancaster to fall apart and expect no one to ask questions about this inaction then they are sadly mistaken".
The story of this Lancaster's ongoing saga and the efforts being made to save the aircraft can be found at https://www.facebook.com/Reevers-Warbir ... =bookmarks

It doesn't look that bad in the 2010 Lancaster Survivors book.
I think your statement "... decaying to the point of no return" maybe a bit premature.
Yes, it would be nice t see it under cover, but I don't think our Canadian friends would let it fall apart.
I'd be very surprised if they'd let that aircraft, built in Canada and a combat record with the RCAF, leave the country.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Well I haven't actually seen the aircraft like yourself but I do not rely on a book for my information. I've asked a few people who are connected to or have had an interest in this Lancaster previously
and I am consolidating that information in my statements. Nevertheless this aircraft needs to be protected and placed into undercover storage. Perhaps the local council could take a cut in their travel, vehicle or spending allowances to
help divert funds to achieve this. Perhaps the Government could step in and do something, it may cost them 0.0000001% of their annual memorial budget. The bottom line is this, everyone who has dealt with aircraft that have been in long term outside storage know this is not a proactive way of protecting historical items such as this. We purchased our B-25 (Lucky Lady aka Chapter XI) knowing it had spent considerable time outside. So if we can compare what we know our
B-25 experienced to this Lancaster, then from our point of view there is a real danger of losing this aircraft and I mean losing it from being "at 'east" a structurally sound static display.

_________________
Peter
ESAD (E-Science and Digitalisation)

Sorry I relied on a book for the basis of my comment...

Okay, let's get the the main point....
Do you, the OP, or the group you seem to represent have any information that the aircraft owners and or the Canadian government would let the Lanc leave the country? If not, do they expect approval?
Do they have the funds to buy and transport the aircraft?

The OP posted an identical post on the Flypast forum...which hasn't received any significant comments.

Does the Reevers group have the money and resources to do the aircraft justice or would it languishe in Australia for an undetermined period?

I ask that because the last time I heard of the group, a supporter here posted that they have acquired a previously unknown B-17 "project" ...which turned out to be a group of parts.

Unless the group has the means to put the Lancaster at the head of the queue and throw a lot of money and time at it, my opinion is it might as well stay (undercover) in its homeland.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

I don't know how likely it is that KB882 will leave Canada any time soon. It's a lovely idea - especially if a good permanent home can be found in Australia to display the aircraft - but, together with Mayor Simarrd's comments about the aircraft being a "Canadian heritage jewel", I can't imagine the process of getting a complete Lancaster to Australia from Canada can be very cheap! Or even as comparatively simple as the B-25 or the B-17 parts (without intending to demean either of those projects).

I'm sure Australian enthusiasts would be very excited to have another Lanc on display, but I hope the Reevers organisation has all its ducks in a row - taking on a display aircraft seems a major commitment.

How's the A-26 restoration going?

_________________
Zac in NZ
#avgeek, modelbuilder, photographer, writer. Callsign: "HANDBAG".
https://linktr.ee/zacyates

"It's his plane, he spent the money to restore it, he can do with it what he wants. I will never understand what's hard to comprehend about this." - kalamazookid, 20/08/2013
"The more time you spend around warbirds the sooner you learn nothing, is simple." - JohnB, 24/02/22

JohnB - I was not the original poster but I do represent the group working with Reevers. You seem to want to know a lot about the inner workings of this campaign so all I can say is that we would not place ourselves
into a situation of National coverage in Canada if we could not back up our comments with a commitment. Additionally, if you read the material currently available on line you get all the answers to your questions. There is
no hidden agenda and all has been explained via forums, radio interviews and other main line media. As for comments or responses to other OP's all I can say is - so what.

As for the B-17 project being a group of parts, this seems to contradict your observations regarding the Lancaster KB882. While you ask questions relating to finances and capabilities, exports and imports etc, you have not extended the same to the B-17 project. Its not like you can go down the local mall and get one. If you had been following the progress on this project you would know that a wreck has been identified and is currently the subject of a site survey, assessment of what is still recoverable and of course access. Yep, as most if not all B-17's in our region operated in tropical locations, the window of opportunity to conduct recoveries using heavey equipment is realistically narrowed
down to about 4 months in the year. Hence we choose to do our homework first before rushing in, that way we can make our dollars go further and achieve more. Remember the three P's - P*ss Poor Preparation is no excuse for failure.

As for KB882 staying in Canada and being placed undercover we agree, in fact that has been our primary objective so I'm not sure what you are on about regarding this. We (I have) stated during a national radio interview that all avenues
will be assessed with the first phase to be securing the aircraft in an environment that will guarantee its long term future - preferably in Canada. If this can not be achieved then we would petition to have this Neglected 'jewel' reloacated to Australia. So there are a lot of steps between our phases before we would consider removing the Lanc from its current location.

Kiwi Zac, the A-26 is currently for sale as explained on our site. We have consolidated our collection with the view to achieve two specific goals. To present the B-25 in the NEIAF scheme of N5-131 aka Pulk and secondly to support our
intentions about KB882.

I hope this answers the questions (?) asked but we would hope that further research into what we have stated and what we have achieved be recognised and factored into the opinions of posters before they post.

_________________
Peter
ESAD (E-Science and Digitalisation)