Aviation Archeology

A2C · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:19 am

Hey Guys:

I have a friend who will possibly start working for the U.S. government as an aviation archeologist, and his job will be to prevent anyone from removing any wrecks either Air Force or others. What do you think of that? He says he will start after he get his masters degree in Aviation Archeology. He said he may just go to work for the NHC. He said he wants to prevent greedy collectors from removing wrecks, and only allowing government 0k'd museums to have the planes. he says he views the wrecks as relics of history which must not be touched.

Matt Gunsch · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:30 am

A2C wrote:

Hey Guys:

I have a friend who will possibly start working for the U.S. government as an aviation archeologist, and his job will be to prevent anyone from removing any wrecks either Air Force or others. What do you think of that? He says he will start after he get his masters degree in Aviation Archeology. He said he may just go to work for the NHC. He said he wants to prevent greedy collectors from removing wrecks, and only allowing government 0k'd museums to have the planes. he says he views the wrecks as relics of history which must not be touched.

sounds like he needs to go to work for the navy museum, they know how to keep valuable and historic wrecks and parts from the unwashed

JDK · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:49 am

Is this the same 'friend' who has the social problems on the phone in shows? :lol:

Someone's being wound up. I wonder who?

Quote:

He says he will start after he get his masters degree in Aviation Archeology.

Where'd you get one of them, then?

daveymac82c · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:50 am

I applaud his interest in aviation archeology. Preserving our history is very important, but what's also is important is how we preserve it.

So I'm assuming his philosophy is to leave the airframes as is, where is, in order to stand as a historical monument?

I much prefer to recover, restore, and preserve aircraft if they so happened to have crashed, then have them displayed in a museum so the public can see them. Of course, some airframes may be better suited to be in museums in an "as is" display. That's just my opinion though.

I don't want to start this into a major argument or enter into any politics, but I think that the government controlling all crashed airplanes is an excessive use of pwer (a la Navy).

Technically doesn't the US government kind of hold ownership over most historical airplane crashes anyways? I'm probably wrong.

Then again if the airplane once belonged to the US gov't, it still sorta does, but if declared abandoned it is pretty much available for recovery. Right of ownership only lasts so long.

For any aircraft lost in Canada, they belong to the federal government, even US military aircraft from WWII. They all belong to the feds. But, thery can be recovered by Canadian historical organizations only, and when recovered they must prove that the artifacts will be preserved and displayed properly. So, in Canada you can still recover airplanes, but need permission to do so first, and prove that you'll take care of them.

Anywho, gotta run.

Cheers,

David

BHawthorne · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:01 am

A2C wrote:

He said he wants to prevent greedy collectors from removing wrecks, and only allowing government 0k'd museums to have the planes. he says he views the wrecks as relics of history which must not be touched.

I applaud him for his interest in aircraft history but I feel he's a bit misguided in some ways. Why must only museum have the right to preserve history? Is his intent to only stop greedy collectors, or how about those with other intent? If he believes wrecks are reclics of history which must not be touched, can museums touch them? He seems to have a passion for things, but he needs to think things through in a more complete manner.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:01 am

Matt Gunsch wrote:

A2C wrote:

Hey Guys:

I have a friend who will possibly start working for the U.S. government as an aviation archeologist, and his job will be to prevent anyone from removing any wrecks either Air Force or others. What do you think of that? He says he will start after he get his masters degree in Aviation Archeology. He said he may just go to work for the NHC. He said he wants to prevent greedy collectors from removing wrecks, and only allowing government 0k'd museums to have the planes. he says he views the wrecks as relics of history which must not be touched.

sounds like he needs to go to work for the navy museum, they know how to keep valuable and historic wrecks and parts from the unwashed

You know things are going to be changing and we are going to be recovering some of those aircraft. There is positive things to think about.

A2C · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:08 am

Thanks for the input everyone.

Anyway, I talked more with this fellow, and asked him what the problem is with the collectors, and surprisingly he has the mindset that only museums and government agencies can be trusted. Basicly, collectors and operators are EVIIILLL CAPITALISTS out to shortchange the history of the precious rusted relics from the people who own them.

ZRX61 · **Joined:** Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:16 am **Posts:** 2308

Sounds like he needs to walk into a propellor.. :roll:

JDK · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:41 am

You sure that's what he actually said? I mean, no offence and all, but that's not actually how the evilll professional archaeologists speak. As well as quite a few evil capitalists, I know quite a few evil archaeologists and evil museum people and most of them, face to face, come over a lot better than the Ed D n' Bill G show.

If your friend's genuinely parroting a script as written for their evil enemies by the warbird fanatics, he's going to get an attitude adjustment when he hits the real world of evil museum administration.

I did ask a question, and I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

I wonder if his course will cover the difference between ferrous decay and aluminium alloy decay?

It is convenient to have a sockpuppet level enemy to worry about.

BHawthorne · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:56 am

A2C wrote:

Basicly, collectors and operators are EVIIILLL CAPITALISTS out to shortchange the history of the precious rusted relics from the people who own them.

I think that's pretty silly. Museums are just as capable of doing the same things as private collectors, both good and bad. Who do you think sold the F-84F cockpit section I have now? A museum. Is his one dimentional logic that museums can do no wrong and private collectors can do no right? I think he needs to realize that museums are capitalists too at times. And on top of that museums and private collectors are capable of working together to preserve history. I'm also a museum aircraft restoration volunteer. :wink:

The Inspector · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:31 am

I was of the opinion that we were precluded from making overt political statements on this forum, if that is the case, A2C please remove or alter your tag line because I find it to be hyper political -and potentially inciteful, the sort of thing that belongs on aerovintage or another board.
Thank you in advance for being so understanding-

Richard Woods · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:14 am

I thought that due to the loss of records, the US air force didn't retain title of any crashed aircraft prior to abou 1965?

It would be interesting to know how A2C's friend is going to get around that... I'd love to see him march on to someone's land and tell them they can't touch that aircraft wreck that has been theirs since the air force abandoned it.

Ric

HELLDIVERS · **Joined:** Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:38 pm **Posts:** 642

Just what we need another nut case out there screwing up the preservation efforts of the working class :shock:

Lets all hope his intrest changes and he focuses on the preservation of the endangered yellow spotted fruit cake :roll:

Nathan · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:48 am

A2C wrote:

Hey Guys:

I have a friend who will possibly start working for the U.S. government as an aviation archeologist, and his job will be to prevent anyone from removing any wrecks either Air Force or others. What do you think of that? He says he will start after he get his masters degree in Aviation Archeology. He said he may just go to work for the NHC. He said he wants to prevent greedy collectors from removing wrecks, and only allowing government 0k'd museums to have the planes. he says he views the wrecks as relics of history which must not be touched.

Sounds to me like he really doesn't care about "preserving" aircraft wrecks. Is letting aircraft rot preserving them? I don't think so. It doesn't mention why he doesn't want aircraft to be recoved so it all seems kinda fishy to me.

Please don't take my post the wrong way. I know I feel strongly about letting aircraft being recovered. Many here feel the same way. Its a darn tough world for us warbird savers. Why is warbirds such an issue with people?

Anyway sorry for the rant.

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:10 am

logistics of locations will do the govt's program in. trust me, i've been wreckchasing with 1 top authority on it, & it aint as easy as you think. most desert wrecks are bits & pieces that can fit into one's pocket or back pack, the fragment being undiscernable as to what it is. leave it to the private guys, they have more historical foresight & know how to get it in a responsible / repectable way.

Warbird Information Exchange

Aviation Archeology

Who is online