SUNKEN B-29 "OPEN" TO PUBLIC

[DaveM2]

(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/a ... tml#191716)

A B-29 that has kept its Cold War secrets 200 feet below the surface of
the Overton arm of Nevada's Lake Mead for almost 60 years will soon be
open to the public -- members of the public that are qualified to use
rebreathing equipment for those depths. Although the wreck was found
five years ago, the National Park Service, which "owns" the bomber, had
declared it off limits to even those few visitors who might be able to
venture near it. The ban is expected to be lifted soon. The B-29 was
conducting "atmospheric tests" that required it to alternate between
minimum altitude and 30,000 feet when, according to an Air Force
accident report (http://www.indepthconsulting.com/B29/B29Report.htm), a faulty altimeter may have contributed to the pilot's taking the minimum
altitude a little too low. The plane was skimming the glassy surface of
the lake at 230 mph when it touched the surface, ripping off three
engines.

[APG85]

This aircraft needs to be raised and restored. What a waste........

[Jiggersfromsphilly]

The Deep Sea Detectives from the History Channel did a show about this sometime back. It should be on again soon with this annoucement.

[TimAPNY]

Let the looting begin

[DoraNineFan]

Let the looting begin

I agree completely. Look for small parts to show up on Ebay.

In terms of numbers, just how many recreational divers have the rebreathing equipment and certifications to dive at those depths? Not many I would think.

Admittingly it would be costly, but this aircraft should be raised and preserved.

[B-29 Super Fort]

I am surprised that the Navy hasn't claimed ownership rather than the Park Service.

[Jack Cook]

I am surprised that the Navy hasn't claimed ownership rather than the Park Service.

They're waiting for it to be raised and made ready for shipping first!

[wendovertom]

Sorry to say it has already begun. The guys that found it have been back a couple of times and report that data plates along with other items are already missing. My guess is that buying the B-29 that Kermit has for sale would be cheaper and more cost effective than raising this one.

Tom P.

[B-29 Super Fort]

I am surprised that the Navy hasn't claimed ownership rather than the Park Service.

They're waiting for it to be raised and made ready for shipping first!

Jack and board, here's a what if type of question that I wonder has it ever occurred. What if a warbird was discovered in a lake on privately owned property, would ownership it still be subject to the US Government agencies such as the Navy?

[Capt. Lou]

Gentlemen,

A federal law has been passed that makes it a grave crime with heavy fines and imprisonment to remove any arifact at all from any "war craft" of any nation, any where.

I would like to dive and video this airplane and will use open circuit equipment. Rebreathers, while nice, are not fully developed quite yet and I regard them as dangerous at this point in time. Also to have a Federal agency spefify what kind of gear a diver uses is very odd as most of these people (feds)operate from an impregnable bastion of ingorance.

[tom d. friedman]

it's only opened to those with deep dive scuba ratings!! so 95% of the rest of us poor schmucks will never get to appreciate it. tim is right, bits & pieces will be pulled & the gradual ruination process will begin. what a bunch of morons at the park service!! the usaf museum should cop the navy's attitude on this 1 & lay claim to it. to few b-29s exist, this 1 is right on our territory & can be easily salvaged for preservation. opportunity knocks at saving a super rare bird, & our govt bean counters are out back taking out the garbage!!! disgusting logic!!

[APG85]

There's plenty of other things for divers to visit. This plane needs to be saved. The interior is virtually intact. A lot more people could get enjoyment out of this aircraft if it was raised and preserved. Why should it be the domain of a relatively small number of people who have the ability to dive to it? What a waste!!!!!!!

[Rob Mears]

Since when does the Navy have the USAF by the balls in regard to its own aircraft?

Has anyone been able to gauge the character of the newly employed personel at the NHC yet, and are the positions they hold in any way influential over the decision making that governs the future of sunken aircraft?

[B-29 Super Fort]

As for the question about if a Navy aircraft is on private land who has the ownership well accourding to the NHC they do but when I talk to a property lawyer he said that if the Navy didn't remove said aircraft after so many years then under federal law then its the owners aircraft. Would be interesting to see how this would play out in the courts.

Thanks Col.

[tom d. friedman]

who has longer title of ownership before it became a joint possession between services?? usaf i'd bet!!! let the joint chiefs of both services arm wrestle for it!! to much f'ing politics again. can't the historical branches of the u.s. military at least come together on the same page for the common good of preserving history?? that's what were all about here at wix.