Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:44 pm
Nathan wrote:First of all, aviation archaeology is a crock. Yes, I know that you can get graduate degrees in it and that it is an occupational title. Notwithstanding that, the type of "archaeology" they practice is closer to that of noted archaeologists Indiana Jones and Lara Croft than of academic archaeology.
Wow!The only down fall I see with aviation archaeology is that you really won't make any money in it. Unless you work with current plane crashes. I had planned to get into avaition archaeology..I still might. Justin Tylan said I could come with him someday.
I don't have any problem with what these guys do, I just think it's a joke that they call themselves archaeologists. Aviation "historians" are not much better. If you're a buff and a wreck chaser, why not just say so.
I don't see much call for all the name-calling, references to getting laid, crack addiction, etc. The guy's view that museums are the best trained and equipped to handle historical artifacts is not that far out.
August
Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:16 pm
A2C wrote:I kid you not, and this guy is a pilot. He's got his undergraduate at Embry Riddle, and now he pursues an advanced degree in aviation archeology in California somewhere.
This guy literally does not want any wrecks getting into private hands. I kept thinking, is this a bureaucrat in the making? It's troubling, but true.
I'd sure like to know what he got his undergrad and where he is in school fro his masters. There is no Aviation archeology degree, so either you're blowing smoke or he is...are you sure you aren't drinking again?
Guys, ther eis no aviation archeology Masters. You can only get an archeology masters--one of the fields of anthropology, which has nothign at all to do with avionics. Once you get the archeology degree you would either have to work on a history/aeronautical engineering degree, or go for a phd in archeology which focuses on military recoveries.
Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:24 pm
Guys, ther eis no aviation archeology Masters. You can only get an archeology masters--one of the fields of anthropology, which has nothign at all to do with avionics. Once you get the archeology degree you would either have to work on a history/aeronautical engineering degree, or go for a phd in archeology which focuses on military recoveries.
Serious, I don't drink. I don't know the details, but there's an undergrad deg at Embry Riddle, and he's working on a PhD, so he can work in a gov't agency. He said he would go for the NHC or maybe the A.F. museum or something like that. I don't know all the specifics.
Fri Nov 14, 2008 9:07 pm
I'll ask him specificly next time I talk to him.
Wreckchasing musings...
Sat Nov 15, 2008 9:23 am
I've followed this thread with great interest as I personally know the un-named gentleman who's getting the proverbial "red butt" over this one. He's an extremely knowledgeable individual about military aircraft crashes and has spent a large part of his life immersed in the subject.
There's two disctinct sides of the fence here - those who believe all military and civilian aero wrecks out to be left where they are and kept un-molested for future generations to examine and learn from.
On the other side, there's the group - albeit a small one - of aircraft restorers and preservationists who view these mishaps as a possible source of parts to keep something in the air or to further a museum display.
My observation is this - both sides present very valid arguments for their respective positions. But the threat to vintage wreck sites is not either group - it's the un-educated public that causes more harm to wreck sites over the passage of years and in the end everyone will lose.
In the 1960s and 70s, environmental groups such as the Sierra Club supported wilderness "clean up" projects throughout the United States to remove wartime aircraft wreckage from remote areas. Even groups like the Boy Scouts got involved - and countless bits of history ended up in landfills and junkyards.
Fast forward to today... Quite recently a governmental agency that handles unexploded military ordnance (UXOs) performed some field study work here in AZ to examine the many WWII bomb ranges outside of the immediate PHX area. In their report to Congress, the group noted old target ranges littered with remains of M38A2 100 pound practice bombs and aero flares. While no live ord was found, just fragments and remains, the recommendation calls for federal funding to send teams to these areas and to fully clean the sites. All remains found would be disposed of. While the focus was on bombing and gunnery ranges on flat land, the topic of vintage crashed military was identifed as well as a source of possible UXO material that could cause harm to the general public. A 60 year old 50 caliber bullet in a B-17 that was lost on a stateside training mission oddly enough constitutes UXO hazard potential. Go figure.
It would be wonderful for a variety of government agencies to be able to employ an "Aviation Archaelogist" (whether such a title is real or imagined or pending I haven't a clue) to steward over the hundreds of potentially historic crash sites in CONUS. But then what? How does one protect a historically significant site from a hiker who visits and takes a souvenir here or there... or the eco-loving visitor who still feels compelled to hike out the "garbage" from the mountainside? Or better yet, how to keep a wreck site safe from the morons who hike up to see the wrecked plane and have to put bullet holes into something or smash it up further? (This last element is the group I hate the worst - and THEY are the ones who are breeding and feeding...).
It's been my observation being very close to this topic that wreck sites rate even lower on the "historic preservation" totem pole than do Native American sites, historic buildings, or landmarks that are built over, plowed under or knowingly destroyed each and every day. Only a few folks employed by municipal or federal government - and usually those on a local level - care about the history behind a bent plane or two up on a mountainside.
Too bad that both sides of the wreckchasing group can't join forces to become that 2 percent that takes on a "real" stewardship role to fight the remaining 98 percent of the "really could care less" public.
There's two disctinct sides of the fence here - those who believe all military and civilian aero wrecks out to be left where they are and kept un-molested for future generations to examine and learn from.
On the other side, there's the group - albeit a small one - of aircraft restorers and preservationists who view these mishaps as a possible source of parts to keep something in the air or to further a museum display.
My observation is this - both sides present very valid arguments for their respective positions. But the threat to vintage wreck sites is not either group - it's the un-educated public that causes more harm to wreck sites over the passage of years and in the end everyone will lose.
In the 1960s and 70s, environmental groups such as the Sierra Club supported wilderness "clean up" projects throughout the United States to remove wartime aircraft wreckage from remote areas. Even groups like the Boy Scouts got involved - and countless bits of history ended up in landfills and junkyards.
Fast forward to today... Quite recently a governmental agency that handles unexploded military ordnance (UXOs) performed some field study work here in AZ to examine the many WWII bomb ranges outside of the immediate PHX area. In their report to Congress, the group noted old target ranges littered with remains of M38A2 100 pound practice bombs and aero flares. While no live ord was found, just fragments and remains, the recommendation calls for federal funding to send teams to these areas and to fully clean the sites. All remains found would be disposed of. While the focus was on bombing and gunnery ranges on flat land, the topic of vintage crashed military was identifed as well as a source of possible UXO material that could cause harm to the general public. A 60 year old 50 caliber bullet in a B-17 that was lost on a stateside training mission oddly enough constitutes UXO hazard potential. Go figure.
It would be wonderful for a variety of government agencies to be able to employ an "Aviation Archaelogist" (whether such a title is real or imagined or pending I haven't a clue) to steward over the hundreds of potentially historic crash sites in CONUS. But then what? How does one protect a historically significant site from a hiker who visits and takes a souvenir here or there... or the eco-loving visitor who still feels compelled to hike out the "garbage" from the mountainside? Or better yet, how to keep a wreck site safe from the morons who hike up to see the wrecked plane and have to put bullet holes into something or smash it up further? (This last element is the group I hate the worst - and THEY are the ones who are breeding and feeding...).
It's been my observation being very close to this topic that wreck sites rate even lower on the "historic preservation" totem pole than do Native American sites, historic buildings, or landmarks that are built over, plowed under or knowingly destroyed each and every day. Only a few folks employed by municipal or federal government - and usually those on a local level - care about the history behind a bent plane or two up on a mountainside.
Too bad that both sides of the wreckchasing group can't join forces to become that 2 percent that takes on a "real" stewardship role to fight the remaining 98 percent of the "really could care less" public.
Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:37 am
I couldn't agree with you more.
Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:42 pm
Matt Gunsch wrote:don't get the guy laid, he might reproduce, castration on the other hand would solve the problem very nicely
Oh CRAP!!!! I didn't think of that!
Re: Wreckchasing musings...
Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:52 pm
Pooner wrote:It would be wonderful for a variety of government agencies to be able to employ an "Aviation Archaelogist" (whether such a title is real or imagined or pending I haven't a clue) to steward over the hundreds of potentially historic crash sites in CONUS.
It may be a federal job position but is almost certainly not an official degree. Archeology is a subfield of anthropology. You get an Anth degree, then an Arch masters.You could probably get an avionics Phd, and could definitely get an archeologists job for the feds dealing with aircraft wrekcs. But the way A2C is describing it doesn't make sense. that's why teh red ass. (I'm an Anth Major and have considered getting a Masters in Forensics so i an do wreck recovery for the DoD.
Re: Wreckchasing musings...
Sat Nov 15, 2008 5:16 pm
Pooner wrote:But the threat to vintage wreck sites is not either group - it's the un-educated public that causes more harm to wreck sites over the passage of years and in the end everyone will lose.
That is my biggest problem with leaving some wrecks in place. I've visited several crash sites and most have been stripped of "cool" things by folks who stumble on them in the woods.
I think Wreck-Chasing is a much better term, I think it really calls it what it is.
Tim
Sat Nov 15, 2008 6:20 pm
It would be wonderful for a variety of government agencies to be able to employ an "Aviation Archaelogist" (whether such a title is real or imagined or pending I haven't a clue) to steward over the hundreds of potentially historic crash sites in CONUS. But then what? How does one protect a historically significant site from a hiker who visits and takes a souvenir here or there... or the eco-loving visitor who still feels compelled to hike out the "garbage" from the mountainside? Or better yet, how to keep a wreck site safe from the morons who hike up to see the wrecked plane and have to put bullet holes into something or smash it up further? (This last element is the group I hate the worst - and THEY are the ones who are breeding and feeding...).
Someone mentioned earlier that wrecks are all well documented from newspaper accounts, modern digital photography, and thorough knowledge and documentation of the airplane design.
This said, is there any real use of have them protected? Who will haul a piece of metal away? I've been to several wreck sites, and have had little to no desire to touch it. There is usually very little there to protect.
With all due respect, it seems to me that the creation of such a "wreck protection czar", is sort of another waste of taxpayers money.
First, most wrecks are too far away and remote for anybody except a diehard to approach. And usually the diehard is the same guy who wants to be the archeologist.
The pilot or rebuilder 99.9% could care less, unless there is something intact and rare enough to warrant some use in a restoration project. Most wrecks are disentegrated junk.
for the remaining 0.1% of wrecks that are of some marginal value, let the restorers get a hold of them.
With that said, it simply sounds like somebody is trying to create a new job for themselves within the government. And to also extend the micromanagement of these officials. We've got enough of these running around as it is.
Wreckchasing and all that...
Sat Nov 15, 2008 6:35 pm
Tim is right on the money with his observation.
Our digital age is a wonderful thing. I can sit back in the office when I am supposed to be working and Google "wrecked WWII plane" and find all kinds of neat pictures and dialogue from people who've found stuff in hills and valleys all over the country. But with every posting I cringe, wondering if someone who is not a historian or restorer isn't going to use this information to farm the site and quite possibly destroy something in the process.
Mind you, the phenomenon of "smash and gash" souvenir hunting at a warbird crash site is nothing new. And a remote location doesn't necessarily give a wreck safe harbor - take a look at the photos of B-24 "Lady Be Good" as first viewed as found in 1958 in a remote Libyan desert. Then look at images taken a decade later... this old girl was just raped and plundered. When you see pictures of her as she sits today in Benghazi, she's just a hollow shell and a handful of parts. That's just sick.
LBG's fate illustrates what I have seen here in the last 25 years or more of visiting wreck sites in the western US. And I know that the stuff plundered from these various wrecks I'm familiar with by and large has not gone off to museums or put into airplanes owned by private collectors. Or sitting in the private collections of enthusiasts or historians. And I admit I have a problem with that, feeling that these wrecks are indeed war memorials where usually some poor soul or multiple souls perished. A little respect is due.
That said - full disclosure becomes necessary here - I'm a restorer and a parts guy. Have I removed my share of parts or removed entire airplanes from crash sites? Yes, and I will probably continue to do so. I'd like to think when I do this that it's done with admiration and reverence to the departed aviator(s). If one piece or an entire airframe can be saved to tell a story to another generation that might not have been able to see this example in the air or on a museum floor, this endeavor called "wreck chasing" is a noble venture.
Our digital age is a wonderful thing. I can sit back in the office when I am supposed to be working and Google "wrecked WWII plane" and find all kinds of neat pictures and dialogue from people who've found stuff in hills and valleys all over the country. But with every posting I cringe, wondering if someone who is not a historian or restorer isn't going to use this information to farm the site and quite possibly destroy something in the process.
Mind you, the phenomenon of "smash and gash" souvenir hunting at a warbird crash site is nothing new. And a remote location doesn't necessarily give a wreck safe harbor - take a look at the photos of B-24 "Lady Be Good" as first viewed as found in 1958 in a remote Libyan desert. Then look at images taken a decade later... this old girl was just raped and plundered. When you see pictures of her as she sits today in Benghazi, she's just a hollow shell and a handful of parts. That's just sick.
LBG's fate illustrates what I have seen here in the last 25 years or more of visiting wreck sites in the western US. And I know that the stuff plundered from these various wrecks I'm familiar with by and large has not gone off to museums or put into airplanes owned by private collectors. Or sitting in the private collections of enthusiasts or historians. And I admit I have a problem with that, feeling that these wrecks are indeed war memorials where usually some poor soul or multiple souls perished. A little respect is due.
That said - full disclosure becomes necessary here - I'm a restorer and a parts guy. Have I removed my share of parts or removed entire airplanes from crash sites? Yes, and I will probably continue to do so. I'd like to think when I do this that it's done with admiration and reverence to the departed aviator(s). If one piece or an entire airframe can be saved to tell a story to another generation that might not have been able to see this example in the air or on a museum floor, this endeavor called "wreck chasing" is a noble venture.
Sat Nov 15, 2008 7:59 pm
To put my two cents worth in, I can't imagine just leaving these historical relics to further degrade outside, where ever they happened to crash, be left, and so on. How can that possibly serve to further educate or edify anyone?
And certainly musuems and the government are not the only ones worthy to recover and restore. Some of the best collections we have today are from private collectors--look at FHC. If Paul Allen hadn't been willing to recover & restore many of those planes with his own resources, that collection wouldn't be here today. And certainly he is not making any money from his collection. Can you imagine trying to offset restoration costs with museum entrance fees?? Crazy.
Let's all be glad there are people out there who are willing to put the time & money into preserving history, making it available for people today to appreciate and learn from.
And certainly musuems and the government are not the only ones worthy to recover and restore. Some of the best collections we have today are from private collectors--look at FHC. If Paul Allen hadn't been willing to recover & restore many of those planes with his own resources, that collection wouldn't be here today. And certainly he is not making any money from his collection. Can you imagine trying to offset restoration costs with museum entrance fees?? Crazy.
Let's all be glad there are people out there who are willing to put the time & money into preserving history, making it available for people today to appreciate and learn from.
Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:46 pm
With all due respect, it seems to me that the creation of such a "wreck protection czar", is sort of another waste of taxpayers money.
Wreck protection czar has a nice ring. First the guy supposedly rants about saving wrecks from greedy collectors and now he has progressed to czar seeking status as a one man government agency wasting taxpayer money.
Make yourself a nice bubble bath and light some candles and take a deep breath, it will be alright.
Sun Nov 16, 2008 12:11 am
Wreck protection czar has a nice ring. First the guy supposedly rants about saving wrecks from greedy collectors and now he has progressed to czar seeking status as a one man government agency wasting taxpayer money.
Essentially a guy working for the NHC is in the business of wreck protection in the same direction as wreck protection czar, etc.. 2+2=4, got it?
Last edited by A2C on Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:07 am, edited 3 times in total.