Lakr Michigan

shepsair · **Posted:** Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:06 pm

Been sent by A&T but cant see so possibly only available in the USA

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video ... y.cnn.html

regards

Mark

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:33 pm

Wow is that SBD coated or what? Shame. Total shame compared to how these planes looked a decade or two ago.

shepsair · **Posted:** Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:54 pm

No more recoveries it seems!

Seems its better to leave them to the Quagga and Zebra mussels. Obviously they need home! :evil:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthre ... ost2146310

regards

MS

gary1954 · **Posted:** Wed Jun 18, 2014 5:57 pm

it is just the way the NAVY likes it :axe:

, worthless to anyone

cooper9411 · **Posted:** Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:49 pm

Well if we can't have them then the zebra mussles will! Just imagine what an airplane in shallower water would look like!

Dave Hadfield · **Joined:** Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:31 pm **Posts:** 1672

If there were any aircraft lost in the northern, deeper, colder waters of Lake Michigan, they may be much better preserved.

Of course the bulk of the training flights would have been not too far from Chicago, but you never know...

Dave

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:24 am

So let me get this straight…. because the Navy sees no use or reason for themselves to recover anymore aircraft, then thats it. And no private group could acquire them. Wow thats sad. If the Navy was interested in these airframes, Id say sure, ok. But the fact that they don't "need" them and refuse to let anyone else have a chance to acquire them is so pompous and arrogant. Not to mention short sighted.

Let the rest of the wrecks be fair game and watch how many more recoveries we see happen a year. How many more naval aircraft we'll have being restored to flight. But thats not what the Navy stupidly wants. Makes me sick.

lmritger · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:29 am

Here we go again... just when the historic aviation community starts to honestly believe the NHC has finally managed to extract their collective heads from their own backsides, we're suddenly right back to square one after years of good faith efforts on the part of the private sector to try and build relationships and get these things out of the water before they're fully consumed.

Is it any wonder there is so little trust in the NHC?

Utterly, utterly stupid.

Lynn

lmritger · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:34 am

I just had a thought- doubt it'll happen, but I'm going to put it out there.

What if every current owner/operator flying a Navy aircraft declines an invitation to participate in any USN-run events and refuses to take part in the Heritage Flight programs until this policy is revisited? And don't be quiet about it, either... make sure all the major aviation news outlets and local news outlets in the Navy-sponsored airshow areas such as Norfolk, etc are informed as to why the public isn't going to see a Corsair or Wildcat or Avenger with an F-18.

There are obviously pros and cons here, but the way I see it, the private sector cannot constantly be the one bending over to kiss the Navy's a55 and try to get them to change their idiotic ways. If the NHC is serious about showcasing the nation's proud naval aviation history, they need to understand that they do not solely control the dissemination and interpretation of that history.

Lynn

sandiego89 · **Joined:** Mon May 21, 2012 12:28 pm **Posts:** 1199

I can see the point of the navy directing "their" museum to not spend finite resources on additional recoveries, but I think they should allow well planned recoveries, with planned and funded restorations or preservation plans.

I would like the navy museum to really concentrate on getting the planes they have on the ramp at Pensacola under proper cover. A few perhaps obscure but important planes, including sole survivors like the marlin and savage have rotted for years in the unforgiving Pensacola climate. Thus I would vote to have money spent on a proper shelter for these before "another" wildcat or such is pulled from the lake.

But on part two, I wish the navy were more supportive of well funded private recoveries. If someone has a good plan to recover, restore or preserve a sunken wreck, the navy should allow it. If someone wants to recover with no real plan, or is just speculating on hoping to cash in as the price goes up, the navy should decline. We do not need more planes recovered just to sit in someone's field or ramp.

tulsaboy · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2014 11:39 am

Quite frankly, I think the Navy should contract with A&T to recover all of the remaining Lake Michigan aircraft, and as they are brought up make them available via auction. The Navy could vet potential bidders if they wished via a requirement to place $100k in escrow if they needed to make sure the bidders were legit. All proceeds (less expenses) from the auctions could go directly to the Navy Museum to restore recovered aircraft and to build a new wing to house the remaining aircraft still in outdoor storage. Granted, as you recover more and more SBDs or Wildcats the law of diminishing returns would make the price go down. But surely the recovery of 20 or so aircraft, auctioned at a minimum of $100k each, would provide some substantial funds to support the Navy Museum. A&T could thus capitalize on their research and recovery expertise, the Navy could turn "lost" assets into real cash, and private operators and museums could obtain historic aircraft free of legal concerns. How is that not a win for everyone?
kevin

mike furline · **Joined:** Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm **Posts:** 2635

tulsaboy wrote:

How is that not a win for everyone?
kevin

It's simple. You're dealing with a government entity, common sense doesn't apply.

CoastieJohn · **Joined:** Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:37 pm **Posts:** 1380

Said it before and I'll say it again.....the Navy works for the taxpayer. The planes belong to the taxpayer (according to the Navy). Get in touch with your local Congressperson and get the legislation started to change or over-ride the Navy's policy. Talking about it on here won't change things.

John Ceglarek · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:00 pm

Am I missing something? Why the negativity? I saw the clip, and it said that the hope is to recover the aircraft and display it in Chicago. There was nothing said in the clip about the Navy not allowing salvage. I know what the Navy's policy is regarding ownership, but the clip said nothing about the aircraft having to remain on the bottom.

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:02 pm

John Ceglarek wrote:

Am I missing something? Why the negativity? I saw the clip, and it said that the hope is to recover the aircraft and display it in Chicago. There was nothing said in the clip about the Navy not allowing salvage. I know what the Navy's policy is regarding ownership, but the clip said nothing about the aircraft having to remain on the bottom.

Post three in the thread. Follow the link and read the memo:

shepsair wrote:

No more recoveries it seems!

Seems its better to leave them to the Quagga and Zebra mussels. Obviously they need home! :evil:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthre ... ost2146310

regards

MS

Warbird Information Exchange

Lakr Michigan

Who is online