TBDude wrote:
Ric, please allow me to offer a different perspective.
People here and elsewhere have raised legitimate concerns that this historic aircraft could be at risk from looters or vandals. This is simply a sad fact of life and it would be naive not to acknowledge the issue. It’s unfortunate if you feel that those with a genuine interest in seeing, experiencing, and documenting wrecked WWII aircraft in place have somehow been tarred by the same brush. I find your comment about the "bleating" on this subject somewhat puzzling, however, as the most pessimistic and strongly worded indictment of likely visitors to the wreck site is your own (dated November 14) -- in which you state that "the thieving scumbag pikeys are nicking everything" and "will find it difficult to come away without a souvenir".
..
The beach is public property and people should be well within their rights to visit and admire it. Just don't expect myself or anyone involved with the project to put an "X" on the map in a public forum. Again, this should be understandable to someone with a sincere interest in preserving aviation history -- nor should it prove much of a challenge if, as you say, the location has already been accurately reported elsewhere.
Not everyone with an interest in this plane will have the same means, opportunity, or knowledge to see the wreck site for themselves before it is recovered. I've tried to address that through the WIX Hangar by posting what I could about the background and progress on the project (incidentally, the detailed historical information on the pilot, the accident, and the plane all came from research conducted on a volunteer basis by a TIGHAR member who was more than happy to have me share his work on this forum with no compensation or credit for himself). Of course, many folks (myself included) would like to see more. In fact, I tend to doubt that "a couple of decent shots from ground level" would completely lay that natural curiosity to rest. But, it's not up to me (or even to TIGHAR) and that's why I was especially pleased when the recovery working group decided to at least release the kite photo to the general public. I think it’s pretty cool -- giving a great overall impression of the wreck as well as capturing some the excitement I think we all feel about these kinds of things -- and, judging from their reaction, most people appear to agree.
The photo was obtained as part of a detailed survey conducted over four days (October 8-11, 2007) by a core team of seven highly qualified volunteers, many of whom also paid their own way to be there. They scrupulously followed the guidelines laid out in the Protection of Military Remains Act of 1986 which prohibits tampering with, damaging, moving, removing or unearthing any part of a crashed military aircraft in the United Kingdom -- using only cameras, probes, and metal detectors to establish the extent and condition of the wreck. The Ministry of Defense was made fully aware of the effort from the outset and is currently considering the recovery license that was filed shortly after the aircraft was first identified. In addition, they have consulted extensively with the landowners (which in this case is Gwenydd County). No one that I have talked to has any illusion that they "can waltz in in spring and take it off the beach."
I think your impression that this effort is not a local undertaking is unfair, though understandable – especially given the poor job done by the media (and, to be honest, yours truly) in conveying the wide array of UK based agencies and institutions directly involved. In addition to TIGHAR, the P-38 working group consists of representatives from the Royal Air Force Museum, the Imperial War Museum, the Fleet Air Arm Museum, the Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust; the Underwater Archeology Department of the University of Wales; the Gwynedd County Council; the Gwynedd Archaeological Trust; and Snowdonia National Park. Surely that is a good start and still others will be invited to participate as the project progresses.
In light of this information, I would hope you’ll reconsider encouraging just anyone to “dig away” in an effort to “annoy TIGHAR.” Even as a joke it seems irresponsible and out of character from someone as clearly committed to preserving our shared aviation heritage as yourself (if the impassioned and informative posts to the “Flypast” forum about your ongoing quest to preserve the remains of Lancaster NF920 “Easy Elsie” are any indication). Certainly you can agree that, like "Elsie," P-38F-1 Lightning 41-7677 is a plane that “just needs saving.” I personally believe that the groups currently working together towards that goal are doing a thorough and responsible job -- and I would ask that you let them (or even help them to) do it.
Hi,
I don't often go off like this, I am trying to stay objective... you can see this from how often (or not) I post.
I am guilty of how I put it myself, "bleating", though in the most part I was referring to the reports carried in the national media, who tend to refer to most people who aren't involved in the project, as looters. Several people who I have spoke to in the UK have been both surprised to learn it was a P38 (after dismissing it as another Jindivik) and subsequently dissuaded from visiting and taking their own photo's by the fact that if anything has changed, they are easily targeted as looters, simply guilty by association.
I have a very good idea of where the wreck is, as I say I believe it has been reported elsewhere. I have no intention of sticking an X marks the spot up nor did I ask you to, but I am going to Wales early next month to collect some classic car parts, and I will be in the area. So at low tide I will be having a look. I will say if I don't find it and it's buried by the sands, I will sleep a lot easier.
The frustration carried in my earlier posts are not directed at the people attempting to successfully recover this aircraft as it is a monumental task and not one taken lightly. It stems from the fact a recovery was not carried out before the story was blown into the worlds attention and the aircraft left in situ. There are groups in the UK that have the knowledge required to carry out this kind of recovery, the last well known one being the recovery of a Vickers Wellington from a beach in Scotland.
It was also in part due to my general dismay about the conduct of some of my countrymen, in the past month; conduct which at this time of year has made me almost ashamed to be an Englishman.
To give you a couple of sorry examples of this, in the past month there have been plaques disappearing off war memorials, and one memorial which was made of a DeHavilland Mosquito propeller was taken too. Read some of the threads on Flypast and you will hear about the Poppy appeal collection tins getting stolen. These are the theiving scumbag pikeys I refer to, and are the lowest of the low.
But, enough of them. I do have some other concerns, which I feel I should explain.
I live in the hills of Derbyshire, and there are a lot of high ground wrecks out here. In ten years since the internet spread wider, the locations of these have become known and the wrecks have suffered. A lot of walkers, internet surfers, and others, have learnt that they are out there. What didn't get recovered, has now been mutilated. The problem lies in that a lot of people don't have a copy of the "Guidance Notes" or the "Protection of Military Remains act 1986" to hand or simply don't care.
Regrettably it is only a small minority of us stick to the rules. Respect for the dead plays a big part, but the fact that it has been publicised that the pilot got out of this aircraft alive, means that the sympathy often felt for a wreck is lost.
I can agree that this is another aircraft, like "Elsie" that does indeed need saving, however I still strongly feel that it was the wrong way to go about publicising it... and I learnt the hard way with "Elsie" about shouting about what I was doing or finding. I found out that the more fuss I cause(d) the more it cost me, in time, effort and blocked avenues. It gave me an insight into why people break the news AFTER the event, not before.
If this had not been publicised, it would still be a Jindivik to most of us (me included) and nothing more than a point of interest to break up a beach walk. Much like the sad Royal Navy destroyed remains of the Bristol Beaufighter and the Comet tank that stands near to it, on the ranges at Donna Nook in Lincolnshire. As I stated in my earlier post, if the aircraft is found by daytrippers, Jindivik or Lightning, little johnny will have his souvenir. They don't know they are breaking the law.
I still feel some shots from ground level would have put down some of the curiosity. There are several wrecks in the pacific I would love to visit, but for the moment I don't have the means. However others that have, post excellent photos. I don't see why TIGHAR can't of the P38, if they did the survey. The kite photo, while very cool, has just made itself a teaser.
My waltz in and take it off the beach comment stands. I hope they have crowd control, as if a photo survey session gets this much attention, I doubt there'll be less of a fanfare when the recovery starts. Just think how many people are going to be watching this are a now... waiting. Just the idea scares me.
I don't doubt the credentials of the people who are involved, however I doubt any have done anything of this kind before.
I will offer this thought... the more agencies involved in the recovery; archaeologists, universities, the more conflict this can lead to about the recovery. If they don't agree, and a condition of the licence is that the recovery has to be done to their satisfaction, there will be a major issue.
Glaringly despite various archeological institutions(both above ground and underwater) being mentioned, nowhere has any reference to conservation been made. None of the groups you mention have regularly shown that they can safely stop this kind of artefact turning to mush, after being removed from salt water.
Also I have not seen many beach recoveries done by the Imperial War Museum, or RAF Museum, indeed the one major water based recovery that comes to mind when thinking of the RAF Museum is Handley Page Halifax W1048 at Hendon, and she looked better when she came up out of the Fjord in Norway than she does now.
My cynicism in this area comes from the statements released to the press, and indeed on TIGHARS site, which state, "A recovery is tentatively planned for spring 2008" along with lots of big "donate by paypal" signs. This seems to be the case for most of TIGHAR's recovery projects, hence I don't have that much faith in them. While TIGHAR seem to be excellent at research, there has been no information furnished about 41-7677 that cannot be found on the accident card, and all of it you need to fill in the necessary forms for a licence.
Incidentally in my dealings with the MOD, nothing happens until everybody from the bottom to the top is happy. In short nothing, however simple, happens fast.
I would love for them to get their licence to recover 41-7677, but I fear this project will join the back of the queue behind the Devastator, Amelia, and the White Bird. In time, no doubt they'll probably go looking for another missing aviator, Steve Fossett. I still think a fisherman is going to find Amelia's plane in his nets before analysis shows the bone fragments and metal buttons to be part of anything.
I will address asking "just anyone" to dig away. Both you and I, and all the lovely people at TIGHAR are "just anyone". Don't discount those you don't know. If somebody (not me... I don't want a P38... I'm a bomber boy.) manages to get the Gwynedd council to sign the forms, submits them them to the MOD, and gets a licence, then however much TIGHAR don't like it, they are entitled to as I put it earlier "dig away". Just like them.
What I will say is that it wouldn't surprise me if a UK group better qualified at beach recoveries come forwards, get a licence, and probably dig it. And if TIGHAR support historic aviation recoveries they should support them, not the other way round. Especially if the aircraft is still there unrecovered this time next year; and TIGHAR is still fundraising, still sending out press releases about the "maid of harlech", and still claiming they are going to get it out.
The remark "annoy TIGHAR" is a direct statement as to what will happen when they find that the rest of the UK Aviation Archaeology movement got tired of waiting, and it has happened.
In short...
I will take all this as gospel when:
1. A MAJOR UK museum comes forwards and takes responsibility for housing this aircraft.
Just quoting that you have a representative on side, doesn't guarantee a home.
2. I can confirm the site is being protected... No sites other than graves I know of are as yet. Regular patrols by the council? I don't think so.
3. Some of TIGHAR's projects start to come to fruition. Honestly. If I look in my garden I can find leather, aluminium, and bone. It doesn't mean I've found Amelia, its just the remains of an old Jaguar saloon and my sisters cat.
I hope this adds balance to my angered post above. I don't want to hinder ANY group recovering ANY aircraft, far from it. If you personally believe they are the people to do it, good. But the final proof will be in the spring next year. I sincerely hope we are not discussing this post this time next year, rather celebrating the rediscovery, one year on and the retrieval.
I've said what I have to say, they are my own opinions, and I stand by it for good or bad. I won't be posting further on this subject on this board or any other.
So all that remains is to wish those who ARE as committed to this as I am to my endeavours, regardless of opinion.....
Good hunting gentlemen. Best of luck.
Richard Woods
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
)
