P-47 Recovered from Lake...Additional Pics
Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:24 pm
Here's a link to a site showing some more pictures of P-47 42-29150 which was recently recovered from a lake in Austria.
http://www.juhe.at/presse/article/Traun ... 16020.html
http://www.juhe.at/presse/article/Traun ... 16020.html
Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:40 pm
Thanks for the link Paul!
Check out the "Santa's Helper" nose art. Fantastic!
Check out the "Santa's Helper" nose art. Fantastic!
Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:35 am
Thanks for that, was hoping to see more pics of this. Still amazed at the luck of this find 
Sat Jul 02, 2005 11:22 am
Hi All,
This was an amazing find. And even more so considering how intact the airframe is or rather appears in the photo's. One question though, as, from what I can see at least, how did the engine come off the aircraft ? Did it come out through the lower cowl ? The whole airframe looks to be in almost complete condition and given it's time under water, this is a fantastic basis for a restoration. Wether it will be a flyable example of a combat veteran or static display I do not know personally. But, as I am fascinated by the Thunderbolt, this is signifigant, both from a personal perspective as well as an historical one.
Thank you for posting the link.
Paul
This was an amazing find. And even more so considering how intact the airframe is or rather appears in the photo's. One question though, as, from what I can see at least, how did the engine come off the aircraft ? Did it come out through the lower cowl ? The whole airframe looks to be in almost complete condition and given it's time under water, this is a fantastic basis for a restoration. Wether it will be a flyable example of a combat veteran or static display I do not know personally. But, as I am fascinated by the Thunderbolt, this is signifigant, both from a personal perspective as well as an historical one.
Thank you for posting the link.
Paul
Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:21 am
My information suggests it will be slowly restored to flying status.
P-47 Recovery
Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:49 am
From a reliable source...I hear that a rebuilder named Trojan Aircraft Services located in Reno Nevada is the owner of the Dottie May P-47. And I hear that they plan a historically accurate restoration to flying condition. They are well aware of the significance of this aircraft.
Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:25 pm
Aircraft Mech Paul
Squadron Leader
Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 158
Location: Minnesota
Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 11:22 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
This was an amazing find. And even more so considering how intact the airframe is or rather appears in the photo's. One question though, as, from what I can see at least, how did the engine come off the aircraft ? Did it come out through the lower cowl ? The whole airframe looks to be in almost complete condition and given it's time under water, this is a fantastic basis for a restoration. Wether it will be a flyable example of a combat veteran or static display I do not know personally. But, as I am fascinated by the Thunderbolt, this is signifigant, both from a personal perspective as well as an historical one.
Thank you for posting the link.
Paul
The engine didn't actually come off the aircraft. The nose bowl of the R-2800 housing the reduction gear shattered, and the contents, along with the propellor fell away. Most of the engine, including all of the cylinders, appears to be still attached to the airframe.
Cheers,
Richard
Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:37 pm
Additionally I really do think that it would be a shame to "restore" some parts of the airfame, as that cowling and nose art would be better preserved and placed on display, and a replacement cowling could take over airworthy duties. That nose art is a fantastic survivor of fighter heritage, and perhaps one of only a couple extant from the USAAF.
Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:17 pm
That's not a bad idea at all. The metal may well need to be replaced anyway. In the big scope of things, it couldn't be too much trouble to drill out the original left-side skins and build a jig to place them on display in their original orientation with the cowling panel. It would make a unique "cut away" type of display for the owner's museum of choice (Maybe a tax deductible donation to the USAF Museum to help finance the restoration?).
If the plane is going to fly, the vast majority of the metal will be replaced anyway. I'll dare say that the compilation of material eventually removed from this plane may well comprise a static display in its own right that's indiscernable from the real thing.
This was the case with the Evergreen Bf-109's. Darrel Skurich at one point was noted as scratching his head over the fact that there were still two surprisingly complete 109's sitting disassembled in his hangar, even as the two 'airworthy' examples were seen leaving the facility en route to their new owners. 
This is the only thing that upsets me about trying to take the ravaged, though substantial remains of a VERY unique aircraft and return them to flight. In the end, it's only the idea of that aircraft that actually takes flight. The majority of the plane recovered from the lake actually ends up disected and discarded in the dusty corner of someone's restoration hangar, stripped of its historical identity and tossed out years later as the hangar space is earmarked for other more pressing projects.
Preserving the artwork on the forward fuselage would be the least the new owners could do to honor the truth behind the 'restorative miracle' that will once again allow the plane to take flight.
If the plane is going to fly, the vast majority of the metal will be replaced anyway. I'll dare say that the compilation of material eventually removed from this plane may well comprise a static display in its own right that's indiscernable from the real thing.
This was the case with the Evergreen Bf-109's. Darrel Skurich at one point was noted as scratching his head over the fact that there were still two surprisingly complete 109's sitting disassembled in his hangar, even as the two 'airworthy' examples were seen leaving the facility en route to their new owners.
This is the only thing that upsets me about trying to take the ravaged, though substantial remains of a VERY unique aircraft and return them to flight. In the end, it's only the idea of that aircraft that actually takes flight. The majority of the plane recovered from the lake actually ends up disected and discarded in the dusty corner of someone's restoration hangar, stripped of its historical identity and tossed out years later as the hangar space is earmarked for other more pressing projects.
Preserving the artwork on the forward fuselage would be the least the new owners could do to honor the truth behind the 'restorative miracle' that will once again allow the plane to take flight.
Tue Jul 05, 2005 6:49 pm
Rob,
Understood that there is a certain amount of authenticity gone when returned to flight. However within reason it must be done. Some aircraft are time capsules and should be perhaps preserved as original artifacts. But an artifact is not an aircraft. A static is just that and simply represents an aircraft better than a picture, thats all. The flying article to me has greater relevance as it operates the way the original should. In closing though I think its neat to preserve peices of the original in "state", the money spent on recovering the aircraft was spent to fly. If I could recover a similar aircraft I would do the best I could for future generations, but its my money bringing it up. I will do what I have to do to get the aircraft flying.
Understood that there is a certain amount of authenticity gone when returned to flight. However within reason it must be done. Some aircraft are time capsules and should be perhaps preserved as original artifacts. But an artifact is not an aircraft. A static is just that and simply represents an aircraft better than a picture, thats all. The flying article to me has greater relevance as it operates the way the original should. In closing though I think its neat to preserve peices of the original in "state", the money spent on recovering the aircraft was spent to fly. If I could recover a similar aircraft I would do the best I could for future generations, but its my money bringing it up. I will do what I have to do to get the aircraft flying.
Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:38 pm
[quote="Rob Mears"] This was the case with the Evergreen Bf-109's. Darrel Skurich at one point was noted as scratching his head over the fact that there were still two surprisingly complete 109's sitting disassembled in his hangar, even as the two 'airworthy' examples were seen leaving the facility en route to their new owners.
quote]
And you now where they ended up....in the scrap skip.
What a tragedy and ludicrously short sighted. They didn't even bother sanding back the ex YAF aircraft to see if it still had original Luftwaffe markings.
Dave
quote]
And you now where they ended up....in the scrap skip.
What a tragedy and ludicrously short sighted. They didn't even bother sanding back the ex YAF aircraft to see if it still had original Luftwaffe markings.
Dave
Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:40 pm
I cuncur about 90% in regard to where you're coming from Joe. I too can see where the value of, say, an airworthy SBD Dauntless from Lake Michigan would far outstrip the same plane's value in "as recovered" condition. That said, if the same plane had somehow been found mostly intact (in fresh water, miraculously ) where it had fallen following the attack at Midway for example, its historical value would far outweigh it's value as yet another remanufactured warplane populating the circuit.
On the other hand, if Amelia Earheart's Lockheed 10 was found mostly intact in the jungle, I think it would be ludicrous to rebuild it from the ground up just to tour it and thrill airshow crowds. Michael Jackson being rich enough to completely rebuild it and paint it pink by personal preference would in no way make the act any more justified. There IS a threshold where an aircraft's intrinsic historical uniqueness makes it more valuable as an artifact rather than a generic template for manufacturing the "ninth airworthy example of its general type". That can be done without destroying one-of-a-kind artifacts in the process.
Depending on the new owner's resolve to maintain originality at all cost, the relevance of Dottie Mae's paint scheme following it's restoration to airworthiness might as well fall to a coin toss. Any man with the financial means could do the same with nothing more than a legible data plate and a few surviving castings and minor components. That's all that is destined to remain of Dottie Mae in the end any way. Why break up what is otherwise an astounding historical touchstone to achieve the same goal? Other than the story itself, most everything you see in those photos that excites you is on a slow road to the scrap heap.
I can use the restoration of P-38 "Glacier Girl" as another example. The one thing that has made THAT particular aircraft so historical is its recovery and the restoration itself. Without that, the plane was just another anonymous Stateside fighter who's greatest historical accomplishment was rolling off the factory floor. It's current situation far outstrips the relevance of that, even though she's all new metal for the most part. After all, there are still five other P-38's that share her same exact history still preserved beneath the ice! Just like the Lake Michigan SBD's, she's nothing overly special without the "recovery and restoration" chapter in her history.
This P-47 is the ONLY Thunderbolt you will find on this planet that remains largely intact, just as it was when her squadron was changing the course of world history. She may well be the only Allied fighter to survive in this undisturbed original condition (as far as I know). Her uniqueness and originality is unrivaled among museums, yet I'm supposed to believe that somehow tearing her apart for patterns for making a new-production, airworthy example of her likeness is supposed to trump the very history that made the Thunderbolt the icon that it is in the first place? This plane was at the heart of the action where the type's reputation was forged, yet it might as well be serving as the basis for the next bitchin' Reno racer.
Maybe I've been spending far too much time attaching value to actual WWII history and not enough time honing my praise for those rich enough to recover a one-of-a-kind historical artifact, only to effectively destroy it in the name of "flight at all costs". If another restorer locates the data plate for Don Gentile's P-51 Shangri-La and fabricates a new plane around it, I would hope the man representing "Dottie Mae" would not presume that the aircraft under his own butt is any more historically relevant. Other than that, I suppose I'll be happy enough knowing the story of this particular Jug will now live on among enthusiasts rather than be lost to time.
By the way, I hear the Crown Jewels are for sale on eBay. The man selling them actually bought the lot and replaced them all with exact duplicates before destroying the originals. Still, his actions are now part of the written history of the collection, so he and other experts feel the intrinsic nature of the jewels themselves should still be considered largely intact. Some have questioned the actions of the new owner, but people should realize that it is "his" collection to do with what he pleases after all. Any takers?
) where it had fallen following the attack at Midway for example, its historical value would far outweigh it's value as yet another remanufactured warplane populating the circuit.
On the other hand, if Amelia Earheart's Lockheed 10 was found mostly intact in the jungle, I think it would be ludicrous to rebuild it from the ground up just to tour it and thrill airshow crowds. Michael Jackson being rich enough to completely rebuild it and paint it pink by personal preference would in no way make the act any more justified. There IS a threshold where an aircraft's intrinsic historical uniqueness makes it more valuable as an artifact rather than a generic template for manufacturing the "ninth airworthy example of its general type". That can be done without destroying one-of-a-kind artifacts in the process.
Depending on the new owner's resolve to maintain originality at all cost, the relevance of Dottie Mae's paint scheme following it's restoration to airworthiness might as well fall to a coin toss. Any man with the financial means could do the same with nothing more than a legible data plate and a few surviving castings and minor components. That's all that is destined to remain of Dottie Mae in the end any way. Why break up what is otherwise an astounding historical touchstone to achieve the same goal? Other than the story itself, most everything you see in those photos that excites you is on a slow road to the scrap heap.
I can use the restoration of P-38 "Glacier Girl" as another example. The one thing that has made THAT particular aircraft so historical is its recovery and the restoration itself. Without that, the plane was just another anonymous Stateside fighter who's greatest historical accomplishment was rolling off the factory floor. It's current situation far outstrips the relevance of that, even though she's all new metal for the most part. After all, there are still five other P-38's that share her same exact history still preserved beneath the ice! Just like the Lake Michigan SBD's, she's nothing overly special without the "recovery and restoration" chapter in her history.
This P-47 is the ONLY Thunderbolt you will find on this planet that remains largely intact, just as it was when her squadron was changing the course of world history. She may well be the only Allied fighter to survive in this undisturbed original condition (as far as I know). Her uniqueness and originality is unrivaled among museums, yet I'm supposed to believe that somehow tearing her apart for patterns for making a new-production, airworthy example of her likeness is supposed to trump the very history that made the Thunderbolt the icon that it is in the first place? This plane was at the heart of the action where the type's reputation was forged, yet it might as well be serving as the basis for the next bitchin' Reno racer.
Maybe I've been spending far too much time attaching value to actual WWII history and not enough time honing my praise for those rich enough to recover a one-of-a-kind historical artifact, only to effectively destroy it in the name of "flight at all costs". If another restorer locates the data plate for Don Gentile's P-51 Shangri-La and fabricates a new plane around it, I would hope the man representing "Dottie Mae" would not presume that the aircraft under his own butt is any more historically relevant. Other than that, I suppose I'll be happy enough knowing the story of this particular Jug will now live on among enthusiasts rather than be lost to time.
By the way, I hear the Crown Jewels are for sale on eBay. The man selling them actually bought the lot and replaced them all with exact duplicates before destroying the originals. Still, his actions are now part of the written history of the collection, so he and other experts feel the intrinsic nature of the jewels themselves should still be considered largely intact. Some have questioned the actions of the new owner, but people should realize that it is "his" collection to do with what he pleases after all. Any takers?
Tue Jul 05, 2005 10:27 pm
I was under the impression the airframe was going to the USA for work then returning to an Austrian museum which seems fair.
I don't know if a WW2 combat airframe should be further risked for a limited airworthy career.... just my thoughts.
I'd love to know what else is in those lakes....
I don't know if a WW2 combat airframe should be further risked for a limited airworthy career.... just my thoughts.
I'd love to know what else is in those lakes....
Tue Jul 05, 2005 10:33 pm
Well said Rob, agree totally.
Marty, the aircraft has been sold to a Californian and isn't going back to Austria. Full story in the upcoming 'Classic Wings'
Dave
Marty, the aircraft has been sold to a Californian and isn't going back to Austria. Full story in the upcoming 'Classic Wings'
Dave
Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:06 am
Richard,
Thanks for the info, I guess from what I saw of the photo's the airframe looked to be without an engine. But I couldn't rationalize why until now. Having the idea that the front gearbox shattered would explain why it appeared to have no engine. My fault in looking at the photo's.
As to the idea of restoring the whole airframe. I think that would be a great idea. Keep it as original as possible, however, Joe, you make an excellent point about finding or fabricating another replacement cowl for this Thunderbolt. However, one point if I may, and I base this on working on a Jug in the past. The engine cowl isn't as easy as it looks. In other words, simply replacing sheet metal and building a fixture to build a new one it isn't as simple as it sounds. If memory serves me correctly, the cowl has an inner liner to it for cooling purposes for the engine cooling. Simply "changing" the outer skin may sound good on the surface, but it would be a fairly involved procedure to replicate a new cowl.
As to making the whole thing airworthy. May I suggest this. If it is indeed going to be an airworthy craft, then put it on a "schedule" not unlike the time frame that Boeing's 307 was put under prior to it's donation to the Smithsonian. In other words...fly it, but give it's flyable a life a lifespan of it's own. Thereby not perhaps inflicting damage to a true combat veteran.
At any rate, we can "suppose" all we want, but in reality, what will happen will happen. It would be nice to see her in the sky once again, and in the States where she was born. But either way, she should be preseved for the future.
Just my own two cents,
Respectfully,
Paul
Thanks for the info, I guess from what I saw of the photo's the airframe looked to be without an engine. But I couldn't rationalize why until now. Having the idea that the front gearbox shattered would explain why it appeared to have no engine. My fault in looking at the photo's.
As to the idea of restoring the whole airframe. I think that would be a great idea. Keep it as original as possible, however, Joe, you make an excellent point about finding or fabricating another replacement cowl for this Thunderbolt. However, one point if I may, and I base this on working on a Jug in the past. The engine cowl isn't as easy as it looks. In other words, simply replacing sheet metal and building a fixture to build a new one it isn't as simple as it sounds. If memory serves me correctly, the cowl has an inner liner to it for cooling purposes for the engine cooling. Simply "changing" the outer skin may sound good on the surface, but it would be a fairly involved procedure to replicate a new cowl.
As to making the whole thing airworthy. May I suggest this. If it is indeed going to be an airworthy craft, then put it on a "schedule" not unlike the time frame that Boeing's 307 was put under prior to it's donation to the Smithsonian. In other words...fly it, but give it's flyable a life a lifespan of it's own. Thereby not perhaps inflicting damage to a true combat veteran.
At any rate, we can "suppose" all we want, but in reality, what will happen will happen. It would be nice to see her in the sky once again, and in the States where she was born. But either way, she should be preseved for the future.
Just my own two cents,
Respectfully,
Paul