Warbird Information Exchange

Rob,


I think "wreck hunting" can be definitely considered archeology if the recovery is done in a way that documents the find so it becomes part of our historical record. The level of documentation doesn't have to be equivalent to the study of an ancient Egyptian tomb, but pictures showing the original layout of the find and/or some sort of a minimal report to a journal, magazine, website, museum or historical society should suffice.

If the recovery effort makes no effort to document history, just to collect an airframe as quickly as possible for sale to wealthy collectors, then we'd be in the realm of treasure hunting. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised to find that many recoveries are a combination of archeology and treasure hunting. Personally, I don't have a problem with the treasure hunters as long as they respect those aircraft that participated in combat. In fact I applaud anyone, archeologist or treasure hunter that recovers these aircraft so they end up in the air or a museum ..... they ain't going to last forever in humid environments!

Jeff

The above response is a pretty good summation of my feelings as well. There's no reason to leave precious artifacts in the field as long as their history up to that time is well researched and documented, including a detailed survey of the disposition in which they were discovered prior to being relocated for preservation.

I can guarantee that no fragile artifacts from early Egyptian history would be left exposed to the elements for the sole purpose of allowing visitors the opportunity to "see them just as they were left long ago". They would be recovered and displayed accordingly with efforts to preserve them for as long as possible.

If, say, the Swamp Ghost was as resilient as a pyramid, I'd have no problem seeing her preserved on site. It's hard to deny that this is an extremely unique crash site. Unfortunately, her aluminum skin will be as fragile as pottery as the years march on, and it would make no sense to an archaeologist or a historian to allow such a unique artifact to remain in the field only to rot into dust over the next one hundred years. It perplexes me how some people would take what is generally viewed as an irreplaceable archaeological find and elect it as the basis for a mundane study in metallurgy.

The plane's current condition, appearance, location, and history has been well documented in recent years. The next logical step would be effective preservation (not restoration IMO) as a touchstone, so that its uncommon story can continue to set it apart from the hundreds of other B-17's that crashed during the war. If not, the only people that will have been able to enjoy the site are the handful that actually had the time, money, and wherewithal to make the obscure journey. And let's face it - listening to second party recollections just doesn't carry the same weight as being able to cultivate a personal moment with the artifact itself.

In the big picture, the day will come when the legacy of the Swamp Ghost will either be viewed as a living breathing artifact, or a small collection of obscure magazine articles from years gone by. It doesn't take a genius to determine which circumstance fares better for history's sake.

_________________
Rob Mears
'Surviving Corsairs' Historian
robcmears@yahoo.com
http://www.robmears.com

A most emphatic "no"; it isn't archeology unless proper archeological techniques and documentation are maintained during the investigation. This is exceedingly rare in aircraft recovery situations. In fact, I cannot think of such a case. The CIHLI military crew recovery team based in Hawaii does exhaustive documentation on their work, but they never recover the airframes, so they don't really count.

Wreck Hunting, by those very words, means that you are in it for the thrill of discovery, or after recovery of the wreck, and rarely interested in properly documenting the circumstances of how the wreck was found, what happened, where the parts were located, etc. etc. etc. Some of you out there might think that you do a good job with this, but I seriously doubt that it is even close to the standards that a proper archeological dig is maintained.

Having said this, I must confess that wreck-chasing is a lot of fun, and I enjoyed several minor digs in England many years ago. I've been involved in some more substantial ones, from the perifery, as well. I've never heard of any trained archeologists actually participating in, and properly documenting an actual recovery operation though, other than a couple of "Time Team" digs in Europe, and those don't really count.

No, it isn't archeology. "Archeology" is just a convenient term we've come up with to describe it, because we haven't really thought about what it really is.

Cheers,
Richard

I voted no.
Based my vote on how wrecks have been recovered in the past. ie: take all the pieces that can be reused, leave the rest..... that aint nuthin but treasure hunting...

_________________
One day I looked up and he's pushing 80...
He's got brown tobacco stains all down his chin.
To me he's one of the hero's of this country, so why is he all dressed up like them ole men....

Sorry Rob, but I have to agree with Mr. Allnutt on this one. I voted no.

In the true archaeological definition probably not. But I voted yes because atifacts have been found, locations mapped and photographed, and artifacts have been preserved. Many of those artifacts now reside in museum collections on display to the public. Their history of use and function has been recorded, their historical provenance has been recorded.

I wouldn't think that a fairly recent ( in historical terms )wreck site, would be treated the same as an ancient Roman site buried in a farmers field in England. At the Roman site the primary goal would be to try to use the artifacts and their locations to establish an idea of how the ancient people of the time lived. What kind of civilization existed.

I was contacted by a German guy who worked for IBM. He had a coworker whose American relative lost a brother as part of a B-24 crew.
Enrico ( he really was German) started researching what was known and located the crash site. The majority of the aircraft was removed during the war. After careful excavation a fair amout of aircraft remained. Everything was documented as it was removed. The remains of 6 of her crew was still there. The U.S. military was notified and the remains were identified and ultimately returned to their respective families. Reports were put together the artifacts were carefully identified, cleaned, and I believe are now on display at a local museum.

I don't know but it sounds like a form of archaeology to me?

ARCHAEOLGY def. the scientific study of ancient cultures through the examination of their material remains, for example, buildings, graves, tools, and other artifacts usually dug up from the ground.

I say yes. My definition of archeology says that its the scientific study of material remains from past humain life and activities. So as long as you have a history of the a/c, how it crashed and how it was recoverd then I say yes.

_________________
The conquest of space is worth the risk of life. - Gus Grissom

I voted yes because it should be.

_________________
Scott Rose
Editor-In-Chief/Webmaster
Warbirds Resource Group - Warbird Information Exchange - Warbird Registry

Be civil, be polite, be nice.... or be elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------------
This site is brought to you with the support of members like you. If you find this site to be of value to you,
consider supporting this forum and the Warbirds Resource Group with a VOLUNTARY subscription
For as little as $2/month you can help ($2 x 12 = $24/year, less than most magazine subscriptions)
So If you like it here, and want to see it grow, consider helping out.



Thanks to everyone who has so generously supported the site. We really do appreciate it.

Follow us on Twitter! @WIXHQ

i voted yes as those of us with ww 2 / korean war veterans are the majority of the enthusiasts. those that are 60 to mid 40's age have alot to relate to on this topic. especially those with the misfortune of having mia family from that era.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

let's start with alot less politics & more long term historical foresight as to recovery & preservation, & for best starters....... a code of conduct that will prevent pissing off foreign govts & revocation of salvage policies. in negotiations there is always a happy medium.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

Wow Col.....

Great question.....

And smart answers...

Great tread....As for me I think you need to be careful as it is different to apply traditionnal archeology to 20-21 century stuff. I mean those planes are recent stuff. They ain't no 2-3 hundred years old thingies.

This beeing said; I am like the above to recover if properly documented & respected. As to the make a buck out of it thingy...........well it's worth another discussion on it's own altogether.

Really think about it. These leftovers are not like piramids made out of stones....It's Aluminum.......They will not last the same time as the ancient old history icons of centuries ago.

As much archaeology as an NTSB accident report in my opinion.

HI I VOTED YES AFTER THE RECOVERY AND RESTORATION OF THE A25 IM GLAD THAT I PHOTOGRAPHED AND DOCUMENTED AS MUCH ABOUT THE CRASH,THE CRASH SITE,THE CREW MEMBERS,WHAT LEAD TO THE ACCIDENT,CRASH REPORTS,THE RECOVERY EFFORTS AND THE CREWS THAT HELPED.THE RESTORATION PROCESS HAS BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED AND IS A CONTINUATION OF THE AIRCRAFTS HISTORY.FROM DISCOVERY TO RECOVERY ONE CAN PIECE TOGETHER THE SERIES OF TRAGIC EVENTS THAT ENDED IN TWO EXPERIENCED AIRCREWS COMMING TO GRIEF IN THAT RUGGED UTAH CANYON.DURING THE RECOVERY OPERATION ITEMS LIKE THE 8 DAY CLOCK STOPPED AT EXACTLY 9:53,THE ALTIMETER FROZEN AT8500 FT.A RUBBER EAR CUP FROM A CLOTH HELMET,A WELL WORN HEAL OF A SHOE.THE FLAIR GUN,EVEN THE MAP WAS STILL IN THE MAP CASE! AFTER THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED I PLAN TO WRITE A BOOK THAT TELLS THE WHOLE STORY FROM BEGINNING TO END.IT WILL BE LOADED WITH LOTS OF PHOTOS AND A DETAILED HISTORY OF THE RECOVERY,RESTORATION AND HUMAN ASPECT OF WHAT STARTED OUT AS A ROUTINE FLIGHT AND ENDED AS DISPLAY IN THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE.THANKS MIKE

_________________
IF YOU CAN FIND IT WE CAN FIX IT

If it is done like Mike describes yes, otherwise it really is treasure hunting. I think you can find recover and rebuild to eventually fly and still call it archelogy - it is all in the documentation and research of the project from start to finish.

Tom P.

Great answer, Mike. That is exactly what I was talking about. In the end what we know about a particular space in time with a particular item has been recorded and analyzed, information has been assimilated and conclusions drawn. Now that information about that particular aircraft can be passed on to later generations.

To me that qualifies as archaeology.