Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:31 pm
From NMNA
Naval History and Heritage Command in Washington is working the liaison with TIGHAR. TIGHAR is acting mostly as a facilitator in arrangements for the possible recovery. It will be a navy show therafter
Naval History and Heritage Command in Washington is working the liaison with TIGHAR. TIGHAR is acting mostly as a facilitator in arrangements for the possible recovery. It will be a navy show therafter
Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:04 pm
It will be interesting to see the TIGHAR take on this. Has anyone seen their press release?
Based on what I have seen over the years, it will always be a Navy show. I am pretty confident that the Navy and winning contractor will work pretty hard to get this one right - there will be a lot of attention and press.
I remember watching the Vindicator come together -- and this TBD aircraft is way more special.
Based on what I have seen over the years, it will always be a Navy show. I am pretty confident that the Navy and winning contractor will work pretty hard to get this one right - there will be a lot of attention and press.
I remember watching the Vindicator come together -- and this TBD aircraft is way more special.
Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:48 am
very very good question!! salt water recoveries are totally different in preparation than fresh water!!bdk wrote:Has A&T ever done any saltwater recoveries? I wonder if there is any difference in the way you do a recovery besides accounting for the condition of the aircraft.
Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:28 am
We have located a number of TBDs in different parts of the world.
The one being talked about would be a very easy recovery for us.
Restoration for any of these airplanes will be expensive.
Money and/or Army Rangers can be the solutions to all of life's problems.
The one being talked about would be a very easy recovery for us.
Restoration for any of these airplanes will be expensive.
Money and/or Army Rangers can be the solutions to all of life's problems.
Sun Jun 21, 2009 2:28 pm
bdk wrote:
Very Very big difference. Salts create a chemical reaction with the metals. It is not simply a matter of washing away the salt. The salt reactions need to be arrested and in the absence of air, which exacerbates the situation. It is my understanding that much of this aresting process needs to be done immediately, which the ship is still at sea.
As I said in an earlier message, it is possible that more damage cane be done in two weeks of exposure to atmospheric oyygen as was done in sixty years of salt water immersion with dissolved oxygen.
This all assumes that the goal is a restored aircraft, rather than a rusted wreck in an "as is" diorama. Gettig a saltwater immersed aircraft to restored status would be much more difficult than with the Lake Michigan recoveries. Indeed, good restorations from salt water wrecks have been very seldom accomplished; the F3F off California is an example that comes to mind, and one has to ask how much of the aircraft now on display at NMNA is original.
Has A&T ever done any saltwater recoveries? I wonder if there is any difference in the way you do a recovery besides accounting for the condition of the aircraft.
Tom Friedman added:
very very good question!! salt water recoveries are totally different in preparation than fresh water!!
Very Very big difference. Salts create a chemical reaction with the metals. It is not simply a matter of washing away the salt. The salt reactions need to be arrested and in the absence of air, which exacerbates the situation. It is my understanding that much of this aresting process needs to be done immediately, which the ship is still at sea.
As I said in an earlier message, it is possible that more damage cane be done in two weeks of exposure to atmospheric oyygen as was done in sixty years of salt water immersion with dissolved oxygen.
This all assumes that the goal is a restored aircraft, rather than a rusted wreck in an "as is" diorama. Gettig a saltwater immersed aircraft to restored status would be much more difficult than with the Lake Michigan recoveries. Indeed, good restorations from salt water wrecks have been very seldom accomplished; the F3F off California is an example that comes to mind, and one has to ask how much of the aircraft now on display at NMNA is original.
Sun Jun 21, 2009 3:02 pm
old iron wrote:As I said in an earlier message, it is possible that more damage cane be done in two weeks of exposure to atmospheric oyygen as was done in sixty years of salt water immersion with dissolved oxygen.
From folks who've been present when an A/C was removed from long salt water immersion, "the skin fizzles
like an alka seltzer". Dunno if it's true.
Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:18 pm
Please note: Restoration for any of these airplanes will be expensive.
Recovery and restoration are two dufferent things, the recovery part is easy, restoration will be expensive.
The National Naval Avaition Museum knows how to handle the restoration process.
Taras
Recovery and restoration are two dufferent things, the recovery part is easy, restoration will be expensive.
The National Naval Avaition Museum knows how to handle the restoration process.
Taras
Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:36 pm
RyanShort1 wrote:GO LEX!!!
Ryan
I'll second that! GO LEX!
Tim
USS Monitor and CSS Hunley
Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:27 pm
I am wondering if the process with all metals is similar. An interesting example, although in iron instead of aluminum, is the restoration of the Monitor's turret and other parts in Newport News using large electrolysis tanks. A large holding tank was constructed and electrodes placed to reverse the seep penetration of the sea water based salts into the iron. Like what was said, if it was brought up without this process, apparantly the structure would be very brittle reacting with free oxygen.
Of course, down the coast they went ahead and opened up the CSS Hunley, but I suppose that was out of consideration of the human remains.
I can well imagine that the aluminum is quite brittle with chemical deterioration and will require special electrolytic treatment if it were even to support its own weight.
Would love to hear from someone that knows the details or has actual experience.
Of course, down the coast they went ahead and opened up the CSS Hunley, but I suppose that was out of consideration of the human remains.
I can well imagine that the aluminum is quite brittle with chemical deterioration and will require special electrolytic treatment if it were even to support its own weight.
Would love to hear from someone that knows the details or has actual experience.
Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:34 pm
Was the TBD's aluminum structure heavily anodized or anything? I accidentally tossed a couple of pieces of anodized aluminum into some "alumiprep" a couple of years ago and got a pretty interesting reaction! I won't be doing that again...
Re: USS Monitor and CSS Hunley
Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 pm
snj5 wrote:I am wondering if the process with all metals is similar. An interesting example, although in iron instead of aluminum, is the restoration of the Monitor's turret and other parts in Newport News using large electrolysis tanks. A large holding tank was constructed and electrodes placed to reverse the seep penetration of the sea water based salts into the iron. Like what was said, if it was brought up without this process, apparantly the structure would be very brittle reacting with free oxygen.
Of course, down the coast they went ahead and opened up the CSS Hunley, but I suppose that was out of consideration of the human remains.
I can well imagine that the aluminum is quite brittle with chemical deterioration and will require special electrolytic treatment if it were even to support its own weight.
Would love to hear from someone that knows the details or has actual experience.
World of difference between the Monitor's turret and the Hunley. If you are trying to preserve the item, you have to remove anything that can cause corrosion in the future, in this case, mud from the harbor floor. The Monitor's turret was upside down and it was easy to remove the mud, the Hunley was a sealed tube, it had to be opened to remove the mud if it was to be preserved.
Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:12 am
Taras wrote:We have located a number of TBDs in different parts of the world.
The one being talked about would be a very easy recovery for us.
Restoration for any of these airplanes will be expensive.
Money and/or Army Rangers can be the solutions to all of life's problems.
Thanks Taras, you guys have been doing a GREAT job with the Lake Michigan birds... here's hoping we see an airborne squadron of Dauntlesses one day.
Out of curiosity, have you guys identified more than just the Jaluit VT-5 aircraft and 0353 off of Miami?
Cheers!
Lynn
Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:31 am
Taras wrote:Please note: Restoration for any of these airplanes will be expensive.
Recovery and restoration are two dufferent things, the recovery part is easy, restoration will be expensive.
The National Naval Avaition Museum knows how to handle the restoration process.
Taras
Terrific work, Taras. Just amazing. The story of the recoveries would make for an awesome book.
Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:59 pm
On a related note I came across a shoe on the beach at Malibu yesterday that had clearly been in the water for quite some time. I was tempted to take a pic & send it to Tighar... 
Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:07 pm
Yes, we have located others beside the one you are speaking about and the Miami one.
The problem is the great expense of restoration of these airplanes. If there were a fresh water one, it would be on shore now.
Taras
The problem is the great expense of restoration of these airplanes. If there were a fresh water one, it would be on shore now.
Taras