Jaluit Atoll TBD Devastators

[Taras]

Both the one off of Florida and the one off of California have corroded beyond the point of no return. I believe the RMI aircraft are at that point as well. Deep ocean is thousands of feet deep. Aircraft in those depths may be in good condition. My target would be the aircraft from the “Raft.” A movie about that will be released in the near future.

Taras

[Russ Matthews]

My target would be the aircraft from the “Raft.” A movie about that will be released in the near future.

A teaser for the movie (now titled, AGAINST THE SUN) can be found in this thread ...

http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=53807

[dweller]

I used to live in the Marshalls. The main source of income for the RMI is US aid (tens of millions per year). Due to the caste-type nature of their society, if the right palms were greased, those planes would be available...

[Chris Brame]

Really sorry to hear that about the one off CA; I thought it was going to be recovered since the others were tied up in red tape (and that F3F was recovered off San Diego in pretty decent shape; did Douglas aircraft have less corrosion protection?). Wouldn't it still be usable for patterns and small parts to create a replica or two? Considering what's being built nearly from scratch nowadays, the TBD seems like a good idea for a small production run. Do the factory drawings exist?

[dbrown]

Sorry to hear this Taras - I would love to see a TBD-1 in a museum.

Given that the restoration process would likely require the reconstruction of (a guess here) 85 to 90% of the airplane via new patterns for the wings and fuselage parts-n-pieces, would there be an option of agreeing to build a few extra with one going back to the islands? Much like was done with the 262's and the Oscars - use the original as patterns for the 'new' builds.



DB

[Mark_Pilkington]

Last night we received an e-mail from the archeologist of the RMI with a copy of their law attached. It is very clear in the e-mail and the RMI law that any idea of recovering one of the aircraft from their waters is a futile effort, because they would only allow the aircraft to be loaned for a short term.
Taras
Taras Lyssenko
http://www.ATRecovery.com

Taras

I assume they are effectively saying that if you recover one, that it remains their property, is only on loan to the USN and then has to be given back?

I assume they DONT intend to then sink it back into the sea to let it rot away, when its returned, and instead would retain it and put it on display somewhere?

Given that assumption, then is it viable to recover 2, and return one "restored" or even simply "conserved" as per the RAFM Do17 etc after a "short term" loan, and retain the other one on longterm ie permanent "loan" after full restoration in the USA, ie it remains the RMI property but isn't required on display there, given they already have one?

Wouldn't this then:

Give the RMI a conserved "above water" archeological artifact for their national collection, (or one to sink back into the sea if that is their want?), and another one, restored and on permanently display in the USA, promoting the RMI, the battleground and wartime history, and on paper retained in ownership by them, but permanently restored back to static condition?

Hence resulting in two survivors, at both ends of the Pacific, and at both ends of the conservation/restoration ends of preservation, as against simply enjoying them both as rotting wrecks in the sea for a few more years?

Surely this is something worth exploring via the State Department? rather than just USN or Defense?

How about an online petition campaign? or polite letters to the RMI President HE Christopher Loeak

Regards

Mark Pilkington

[Pat Carry]

Two questions here

1.Why does the Navy care if someone recovers a plane that the Navy is just gonna let rot?
2. Why do these pacific nations care if someone recovers a planes as they are just gonna let it sit there and rot?

It makes no sense!
If I had a lot of money I'd buy a ship like the Glomar Explorer and these wrecks would oddly disappear and several years later I would have a rather large stock of rebuilt WW2 planes for sale. If anyone asks I found them on my grandfathers farm. lol

We here on the WIX have been asking those same questions for many years now.

[Pat Carry]

Taras, Is it true about Lake Michigan recoveries being a thing of the past now?

[tom d. friedman]

looks like the navy got a taste of it's own medicine ala the marshall islands govt!! isn't it possible that a fresh water devastator could be on the bottom of lake michigan?? surely a few were used on the training carriers on lake michigan landings training, they surely couldn't have been all scrapped after coral sea & midway being so short of aircraft in the beginning stages.

[wendovertom]

Now I know that they are not TBDs but this is a womething to think about.

Maybe 10 to 15 years ago I would have said what about all the planes in Bikini atoll? but I guess they are too shallow as well and quite beyond any saving. As I recall the Saratoga's hangar deck is full of a/c.

Just thinking,

Tom

[Chris Brame]

isn't it possible that a fresh water devastator could be on the bottom of lake michigan?? surely a few were used on the training carriers on lake michigan landings training

Afraid not; TBFs were the only torpedo planes used there. Baugher has the fates of all the TBDs listed and only one had a Chicago connection:

0356 (VN-5) stricken at NATT Chicago 31 January 1944

Ten Devastators went down with the carrier Lexington; is that carrier in the video referred to here?

[marine air]

Loaned for a "short time". So retrieve it, bring it to the U.S. and let the bureaucrats debated for years on the wording and definition of a "short time."
99 years seems pretty short to me. THe Smithsonian loans out aircraft, what are their terms and limitations?

[tom d. friedman]

Loaned for a "short time". So retrieve it, bring it to the U.S. and let the bureaucrats debated for years on the wording and definition of a "short time."
99 years seems pretty short to me. THe Smithsonian loans out aircraft, what are their terms and limitations?

excellent point!! I want to see the answers......... this i'm sure will be a morass of govt mol - asses

[SaxMan]

SaxMan, I'd respectfully disagree that the TBD is the "holy grail" of aircraft recoveries. TIGHAR proves that not to be true, with stunning regularity. It's why they keep getting millions of dollars to pursue their flights of fancy, and manage to get the "support" of the Secretary of State, Robert Ballard, etc. while efforts to find a sole surviving TBD, or President Bush's TBM, or even just finish all of the Lake Michigan recoveries get no attention and little funding. Again, sad but true.

kevin

Point taken. I probably should have said the TBD was the "holy grail" of warbird recoveries. It does make one wonder if it is more practical to build a replica from scratch than it would to recover one that has been submerged for over 70 years. The TBD does not seem to be an overly complex aircraft and the fabrication required would appear to be well within the skill level of most of the restoration shops that we've seen here on WIX.

President Bush's TBM would be a nice find, but it's doubtful it would be intact after impacting the sea. At the end of the day, it's still a TBM, and there are thankfully plenty of them around. My "bucket list" recovery for strictly personal reasons would be finding the original "White 4" that MAAM's TBM was based on. White 4 was pushed overboard after a barrier crash on USS Langley. It's probably reasonably intact at the bottom of the ocean.

[camshaw]

the navy has access to any aircraft they want, find out how many remaining mothballed copters are in storage and swap the islanders for what wreck the museum wants... hell maybe even one of the surplus HUEYs sitting around....