TIGHAR
Maid of Harlech => General discussion => Topic started by: Robert Elliott on November 04, 2013, 12:44:29 PM
-
I was under the impression that the home for the Maid would be the Imperial Air Museum at Duxford, established years ago, correct? It is hard to ignore the elephant in the room "across the street" at Cosford, i.e. the Dornier bomber recovered earlier this year and already on display. I think the Maid recovery would be more straightforward. What if we put together a strawman project plan and at least get some ballpark fiqures. I have an engineering background and could help some. The submarine recovered off Charleston, Sc is a similar project in that a submersion bath of neutralizing fluid to stop ion migration is needed. Just a thought.
-
I was under the impression that the home for the Maid would be the Imperial Air Museum at Duxford, established years ago, correct?
That's a hope, not a promise. The IWM's American Air Museum would seem to be a natural home for the Maid but they have not said they would make room for her.
It is hard to ignore the elephant in the room "across the street" at Cosford, i.e. the Dornier bomber recovered earlier this year and already on display.
As far as I know, the Dornier is still undergoing conservation treatment and we're not convinced Cosford's procedures are adequate. Time will tell.
I think the Maid recovery would be more straightforward.
Yes and no. The Maid recovery is complicated by the fact that Harlech Beach is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSI) and any recovery plan will be subject to stringent environmental permitting requirements.
What if we put together a strawman project plan and at least get some ballpark fiqures. I have an engineering background and could help some. The submarine recovered off Charleston, Sc is a similar project in that a submersion bath of neutralizing fluid to stop ion migration is needed. Just a thought.
Yes, that's basically the technique except the Lightning, unlike the Hunley, is made up of many dissimilar metals and other materials. What's good for one is bad for the others. Complicated problem.
-
Is it really worth the effort to try and recover any former US military aircraft? Check out this story about the problems that the CAF had with the US Air Force over the F-82 (http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/AvWebInsider_F82AirForceFiasco_199957-1.html)that they restored. The story also discusses, if you read down through the comments, the US Navy policy about the ownership of outdated Navy equipment.
-
I agree with Ric. I was only trying to inspire action and will continue to do so. I also think the Dornier project will have a challenge preserving the bomber. If we take small but deliberate steps, complex issues can be resolved. As a side note, all would be impressed with the dedication of an entire wall at the 49th Fighter Training Squadron headquarters to this airplane. These pilots and crew in Columbus,MS are VERY interested in seeing action, not to mention the WWII vets who flew and maintained the P38.
I remain available to help in any way possible.
-
I agree with Ric. I was only trying to inspire action ...
If I'm not mistaken--and I know my friends will jump in to correct me if I am--the action being taken by TIGHAR these days is on two fronts: defending the lawsuit (https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=KKsJzinRv7TF3Rkh_yvA9eNLHZ_cdnm_LJlfpzUxcPAX-DkeeBOMVxJdZNa&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8def8934b92a630e40b7fef61ab7e9fe63) (money needed) and preparing for Niku VIII (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Niku8/niku8plan.html) (gobs of money needed).
There may be actions that can taken by some to push the Maid of Harlech Project forward, but I wouldn't expect a whole lot of enthusiasm or focus on this project from the board. The actions that they are engaged in give them a pretty full plate already.
-
Maybe a compromise would be a 'Archaeology' style survey with extensive footage and photos for an online display or static display at the appropriate museum.
Added as posts clashed:
Shame about the law suit as it has diverted much needed funds away from the Earhart Project and other such projects.
-
Maybe a compromise would be a 'Archaeology' style survey with extensive footage and photos for an online display or static display at the appropriate museum.
Been there, done that - in 2007. We can't publish the photos and video without revealing the exact location of the aircraft - which would doom it to destruction.
-
Can you not filter the background out?
Must admit had a bit of fun with google earth and your photo's to see if I could quess where she is but to no great degree of success.
-
Can you not filter the background out?
We would have to remove the background entirely in any photo taken looking shoreward. The dunes, castle and mountains in the distance are distinctive.
-
I agree with Ric. I was only trying to inspire action ...
If I'm not mistaken--and I know my friends will jump in to correct me if I am--the action being taken by TIGHAR these days is on two fronts: defending the lawsuit (https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=KKsJzinRv7TF3Rkh_yvA9eNLHZ_cdnm_LJlfpzUxcPAX-DkeeBOMVxJdZNa&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8def8934b92a630e40b7fef61ab7e9fe63) (money needed) and preparing for Niku VIII (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Niku8/niku8plan.html) (gobs of money needed).
There may be actions that can taken by some to push the Maid of Harlech Project forward, but I wouldn't expect a whole lot of enthusiasm or focus on this project from the board. The actions that they are engaged in give them a pretty full plate already.
Good points, Marty - and I'm about to give reason for a string split, I'm sure...
One problem some have with 'how things are done' is that TIGHAR's own mission statement (http://tighar.org/about.htm) includes -
•Compiling and verifying reports of rare and historic aircraft surviving in remote areas.
•Conducting investigations and recovery expeditions in co-operation with museums and collections worldwide.
•Serving as a voice for integrity, responsibility, and professionalism in the field of aviation historic preservation.
Not that this isn't true, at least in partial degree, where the Maid and others are concerned.
The 'rub' as it were gets to be that while much has been compiled and verified about a number of relics, to include investigations, little has happened with regard to the remaining points of recovery and placement with museums, etc. that conservation of history is actually being accomplished.
Which leads to the last point: much also has been 'voiced', but nothing speaks like action. While the Earhart chase is a fascination - and important, it has long dominated the field here. Now we stand on deck with one last line cluttering our ankles - the lawsuit, you are right as to that concern, and our eyes are fixed again on the slopes of Niku. I don't know the future, but my sense - such as it may be - is that we seem aimed at one last major shove toward finally exhausting the reef slopes for wreckage to prove the reef landing hypothesis correct. Oh, it doesn't have to be the final - but when to say when, examine one's own mission statement and move to the next. That's for bigger wallets and more patient adventurer's than moi, at this point.
Or, don't move to the next project at the expense of Earhart - but consider that TIGHAR might at least find more fertile peat by forming some sort of blue ribbon effort in parallel to the Earhart 'thing' to at least look more actively and formatively at these other veterans and developing partnerships to recover and conserve them - those which are known. As I've grown watching this place, this has come to heart: the Maid is not 'conserved' or even well protected where she is, she simply waits - a maiden on a bench in the dark in peril of time and the stumbling fool who might loot her, despite well-intended secrecy, such as it is.
What say ye, director and board? What of the significant talent TIGHAR has accumulated - and trained in the field? Can a management that would oversee Earhart also find the breadth to launch and oversea a parallel effort for one or more of these other fine possibilities, the Maid, etc.?
What would be the real cost of forming that under some trusted leadership - for a team to review each situation, run down details and diplomaticlly seek sponsorship and receivership by museums?
Or are we finding ourselves in a dream that won't work in daylight - have those things been exhausted? I hope not - while I love seeing a fully restored and flying example now and then, I also pitied the wretched mock-up that passed for Yamamoto's last flight, lying in a fake jungle in a museum on the west coast (not at Seattle but another fine place that did it's best to 'interpret' that resting place of the fallen admiral... ) The rather cleverly painted but plain-shaped (not 'plane') 'cone' of sheetmetal representing the fallen bird was not nearly as convincing as would be the 'real deal', for example.
I realize there is a market challenge - who wants to see poor old corroded and mashed-up Maid when they can see 'Glacier Gal' plying the skies in formation with F-15s, etc.? But if I didn't think that story - a bird that didn't quite make it but had nobly tried, was worth it I guess I wouldn't be here.
So is there a chance of TIGHAR considering adding some new life to these dormant projects to develop and oversee the potentials, and let the chips fall where they may?
It is brutal to point out perhaps, but in closing, if in the end the public just won't support 'conservation of wreckage' then perhaps we should yield to the restorers - but do our best to oversee recovery that history and noble losses of life, etc. are at least documented and told of.
Just seems like a lot of academic and historic potential sitting around, waiting for the right focus and energy. Yes, the lawsuit and Earhart effort consume - noted. But might TIGHAR grow and not be robbed in the total sense if she would consider adding a parallel path or two?
Just a thought - and another candidate for being moved to a new string I suppose... *sigh*.
-
The 'rub' as it were gets to be that while much has been compiled and verified about a number of relics, to include investigations, little has happened with regard to the remaining points of recovery and placement with museums, etc. that conservation of history is actually being accomplished.
And why do you suppose that is? TIGHAR certainly has the demonstrated expertise to mount complex field operations, and TIGHAR certainly has the demonstrated ability to raise money. So it must be because TIGHAR has chosen not to recover aircraft for placement in museums. And why would that be? Because TIGHAR will recover aircraft only for true historic preservation and few aviation museums are interested in true historic preservation. After nearly 30 years of trying we have only recently been able to match up a recovery opportunity with a museum who will work with us to truly conserve an historic aircraft. I'm not free to discuss specifics yet but I should be soon.
Which leads to the last point: much also has been 'voiced', but nothing speaks like action.
There has been far more action than you know about.
While the Earhart chase is a fascination - and important, it has long dominated the field here.
Yes, because it lends itself to public discussion and participation. Other projects do not.
Now we stand on deck with one last line cluttering our ankles - the lawsuit, you are right as to that concern, and our eyes are fixed again on the slopes of Niku. I don't know the future, but my sense - such as it may be - is that we seem aimed at one last major shove toward finally exhausting the reef slopes for wreckage to prove the reef landing hypothesis correct. Oh, it doesn't have to be the final - but when to say when, examine one's own mission statement and move to the next. That's for bigger wallets and more patient adventurer's than moi, at this point.
Suit yourself.
Or, don't move to the next project at the expense of Earhart - but consider that TIGHAR might at least find more fertile peat by forming some sort of blue ribbon effort in parallel to the Earhart 'thing' to at least look more actively and formatively at these other veterans and developing partnerships to recover and conserve them - those which are known.
That was done years ago and we're hoping that that the effort will soon come to fruition.
As I've grown watching this place, this has come to heart: the Maid is not 'conserved' or even well protected where she is, she simply waits - a maiden on a bench in the dark in peril of time and the stumbling fool who might loot her, despite well-intended secrecy, such as it is.
True. Her time will come, or not. But we won't compromise her out of impatience.
What say ye, director and board? What of the significant talent TIGHAR has accumulated - and trained in the field? Can a management that would oversee Earhart also find the breadth to launch and oversea a parallel effort for one or more of these other fine possibilities, the Maid, etc.?
We're way ahead of you.
It is brutal to point out perhaps, but in closing, if in the end the public just won't support 'conservation of wreckage' then perhaps we should yield to the restorers - but do our best to oversee recovery that history and noble losses of life, etc. are at least documented and told of.
There's always someone in the trench who suggests it might be smarter to surrender than go over the top. TIGHAR has been going over the top for 28 years and at times we've been shot up pretty bad, but surrender just isn't in our DNA.
-
Ric,
were just a nest full of chicks, beaks open and wanting to be feed 24/7.
-
The 'rub' as it were gets to be that while much has been compiled and verified about a number of relics, to include investigations, little has happened with regard to the remaining points of recovery and placement with museums, etc. that conservation of history is actually being accomplished.
And why do you suppose that is? TIGHAR certainly has the demonstrated expertise to mount complex field operations, and TIGHAR certainly has the demonstrated ability to raise money. So it must be because TIGHAR has chosen not to recover aircraft for placement in museums. And why would that be? Because TIGHAR will recover aircraft only for true historic preservation and few aviation museums are interested in true historic preservation. After nearly 30 years of trying we have only recently been able to match up a recovery opportunity with a museum who will work with us to truly conserve an historic aircraft. I'm not free to discuss specifics yet but I should be soon.
Which leads to the last point: much also has been 'voiced', but nothing speaks like action.
There has been far more action than you know about.
While the Earhart chase is a fascination - and important, it has long dominated the field here.
Yes, because it lends itself to public discussion and participation. Other projects do not.
Now we stand on deck with one last line cluttering our ankles - the lawsuit, you are right as to that concern, and our eyes are fixed again on the slopes of Niku. I don't know the future, but my sense - such as it may be - is that we seem aimed at one last major shove toward finally exhausting the reef slopes for wreckage to prove the reef landing hypothesis correct. Oh, it doesn't have to be the final - but when to say when, examine one's own mission statement and move to the next. That's for bigger wallets and more patient adventurer's than moi, at this point.
Suit yourself.
Or, don't move to the next project at the expense of Earhart - but consider that TIGHAR might at least find more fertile peat by forming some sort of blue ribbon effort in parallel to the Earhart 'thing' to at least look more actively and formatively at these other veterans and developing partnerships to recover and conserve them - those which are known.
That was done years ago and we're hoping that that the effort will soon come to fruition.
As I've grown watching this place, this has come to heart: the Maid is not 'conserved' or even well protected where she is, she simply waits - a maiden on a bench in the dark in peril of time and the stumbling fool who might loot her, despite well-intended secrecy, such as it is.
True. Her time will come, or not. But we won't compromise her out of impatience.
What say ye, director and board? What of the significant talent TIGHAR has accumulated - and trained in the field? Can a management that would oversee Earhart also find the breadth to launch and oversea a parallel effort for one or more of these other fine possibilities, the Maid, etc.?
We're way ahead of you.
It is brutal to point out perhaps, but in closing, if in the end the public just won't support 'conservation of wreckage' then perhaps we should yield to the restorers - but do our best to oversee recovery that history and noble losses of life, etc. are at least documented and told of.
There's always someone in the trench who suggests it might be smarter to surrender than go over the top. TIGHAR has been going over the top for 28 years and at times we've been shot up pretty bad, but surrender just isn't in our DNA.
Thank you for the response, Ric.
No need for defensiveness, I wasn't on the offensive.
I well appreciate the difficulty you must face in getting museums to embrace 'true historic preservation' - as I myself suggested might be the problem. You have confirmed that - after all these years it is clear that there is just not enough 'wow' factor in the public to drop $5 bills into a glass jar at museums to preserve historic wrecks as interpretive material - apparently by comparison to what the average Joe Public can see on the museum floor in most cases, it would be no more than so much, well, wreckage - or junk.
To share a small, related story (and beyond the 'Yamamoto cartoon wreck' I mentioned already) -
I happen to be a great fan of the 'Forgotten Eagle' Wiley Post and what he did with the earlier wooden Lockheeds. An able but sometimes overly-ballsy man, most know he came to grief in Alaska in an ill-advised Lockheed hybrid he'd assembled from parts: an Explorer wing - large, long, on an Orion airframe - without the very necessary oversized tail-plane (horizontal) to offset the significant increase in pitch-over moment causedy by that efficient but huge 'borrowed' wing. This was complicated by the installation of floats intended for a larger airplane since the proper Edo float Post had ordered were not available, and he and Rogers were intent on progress. For whatever reason - carb ice, water / contamination or just a cold engine, they lost power on take-off at Point Barrow; even the mighty one-eyed Post could not recover in time to prevent a pitch-over (loss of thrust = loss of wash over tailplane = uncontrollable pitch over is one theory, comlicated by a possible stall / break and mass of oversized floats / nose-heaviness. The end result: Rogers crushed in his sleeping bag in aft cabin; Post crushed against his seat and the door / bulkhead behind it as the massive engine piled aft into his poor body.
From this accident there are a handful of artifacts from the ill-fated Lockheed hybrid that Post and Rogers died in that day near Point Barrow, Alaska: a red fragment of wing or fuselage skin - fabric covered wood with doped red finish; a metal access panel, similarly painted; most poignantly, a badly distorted seat from the airplane, by appearances the pilot's seat - and exactly then the one poor Post perished in as his mid-section was crushed. It is a sad thing to see, but as has been said of highway mishaps, one finds it hard to take the eyes off of it and think of Post's last moments. These things sit in a lonely glass case in a somewhat quiet area of the museum; if you didn't have some morbid curiosity or at least some realization of what it might be, you'd likely not be attracted. It was ignored by nearly everyone around me as I gazed at it for some moments. In microcosm, that may be the problem: the public likes shiny and new, not sad and bent, when they take the kids out to 'learn about aviation history'. Crap - they like looking at pretty airplanes.
One man's junk is another's treasure, I mentioned one of mine just now and I don't demean your passion. That is why I wondered of alternate paths and targeted 'paper' efforts by well-qualified persons. There is a very fine book on Post called the "Forgotten Eagle" and in the end, that may be the most profitable 'relic' of the man and his end, not the Orion / Sirrus / Explorer hybrid wreck, very little of which remains to be ignored by a fickle public.
So I'm very glad to hear that you and TIGHAR are way ahead of me on that sort of thing.
As to 'action' - my point was not that TIGHAR has not been active - far from it; on the contrary, I merely meant that nothing would speak so clearly as to bring these things to the fore. If it is premature for you to speak of what goes then fine, the visible effort is awaited. Things have been promised in the past under 'what's next' for TIGHAR, so we wait.
Quit Niku? Prematurely? I was merely being definitive - I admire the tenacity, but now we are promoting the biggest effort of all, designed to address lessons-learned from the last and then-largest effort to date and to seek even beyond - putting live observers in two submersables to search a very impressive area of the reef slope.
I believe that is 1 mile x 1000 meters or so deep - something approaching a square mile of dragnet for where the bird must surely have shredded herself and left some identifiable elements, or herself even coming to rest somewhat intact on the way over the edge and down the slope if she landed on the reef at Niku (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/56_WhereIsElectra/56_where3.htm). 28 years and all that has been done is admirable - but in mine and perhaps other's view (including apparently you or it wouldn't be happening) this is what it is going to take, as we can see it today, to prove the hypothesis by finding a clear and convincing artificat that the public will buy so that we can pass 'Kilroy' and say 'Earhart was here': feathers of the ghost, the grail itself.
So one may fairly look at that and make a judgment, I believe, for when to call it a day, that's all: the landed artifacts are what they are, and IMO, YMMV, of course, they are fairly wrung dry - barring some breakthrough in DNA technology that unambiguously puts Earhart's turd on the table (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,225.msg1892.html#msg1892) once and for all, etc. Short of that, need the bird, dude. I know you are trying your heart out.
But if roughly a square mile of almost certain target area (for distinguishable debris of a 1930's transport airplane going down a reef slope from surf sweeping off the reef flat above) is thoroughly searched and found empty, then what? Merely a question - but scale enters: does the approach change, do we start considering that she may have washed away and floated for some distance before sinking? If so, did she do that fast enough to escape TIGHAR's target area and yet sink quickly enough that Lambrecht and crew saw her not on the ocean blue?
It becomes then a myriad of possibilities as I see it - YMMV, of course. In my view should Niku VIII not produce the grail then TIGHAR is entering the same twighlight zone that Nauticos did up at Howland, mowing the lawn. Does it lie 2 meters outside our last pass...
Academic, of course - but I offered it for illustration and to suggest that for some, at least, there may 'come a day'. YMMV, and obviously does, but 28 years and now this elegant capstone effort are impressive and at some point beyond that, some may see madness for not moving on, not timidity.
Thanks for all you do. I do not overlook that TIGHAR has spoken volumes through her work putting up papers and gathering and cataloguing historic material - that itself is a huge part of what I suggested and certainly supports the credo in TIGHAR's mission statement in good part. But that too is part of the point: when does TIGHAR sensibly move to the next and even alter her mission strategies if people won't donate to support preserved wrecks and some denizens are just not ready to reveal themselves to us in our time? To me that is a question of 'how does TIGHAR remain vital and relevant as conditions sensibly press in new directions?'
But so much that I do not know by what you've said; that's good to know, I'm sure it will be good to find out when it is time.
All the best -
-
I'm afraid I'm a little late to this most interesting discussion, but I'm very pleased to see Captain Elliott here on the forum and read of his desire to see his Uncles aircraft recovered and conserved.
It is true that the project has not moved forward as quickly as some(myself included) would like, however this is in large part due to outside factors rather than any lack of effort on Tighar's part.
In many ways it's a catch 22 situation-before considering a recovery there must be a suitable home for the aircraft, yet it's difficult to convince a museum to take on a complicated conservation project when they cannot see the aircraft before first carrying out a recovery.
Some will ask "So why not go ahead and recover the aircraft anyway?", however there are a number of very good reasons for not doing this. At present the P-38 is stable in her present environment, but as soon as she is removed from that environment rapid decay will occur without proper(and costly) intervention. Now if funds were not an issue a recovery and conservation could be carried out without first having a museum on board, but to what end? in the(admittedly unlikely) event that even after conservation was completed a home still couldn't be found what then? to place the aircraft into storage would in many ways differ little from leaving her where shy now sits under the sand.
Though this is a rather controversial statement to make, the history of historic aircraft recovery is littered with the wreckage of best intentions, recoveries carried out without better planning or enough funding for the long term care and preservation of the subject aircraft, the best known of these being the B-29 "Key Bird" but there are many others. I for one do not wish to see The Maid as a broken pile of wreckage on the beach, or a rapidly corroding hulk in some yard, or being hacked apart piecemeal for want of more time.
One comment I would make concerning the point Jeff raised about the publics desire to see a recovered aircraft verses a restored example, last month I visited the Dornier at RAFM Cosford and even on a damp October day the one aircraft at the museum which drew a small crowd during the entire time I was there was the Dornier, people are fascinated by something which has survived untouched for over 70 years and which bears not only the scares of war but details like the original paint overspray, and the controls still in the position they were left by it's last pilot, these things speak to many people and bring home far more the human side of war than a shiny restored aircraft could ever do.
Regards,
Matt.
-
Is there a ball park figure for such a recovery and conservation?
Was the TIGHAR survey a full survey? I don't know what a full survey would entail.
Here's a 'what if' Next Niku draws zip, any chance of switching to either MOH or the Deverstators?
-
Is there a ball park figure for such a recovery and conservation?
A don't-hold-me-to-it ballpark would be about $1 million.
Was the TIGHAR survey a full survey? I don't know what a full survey would entail.
We did as much as we legally could. We could not excavate so we could only survey what nature had exposed. See attached illustration.
Here's a 'what if' Next Niku draws zip, any chance of switching to either MOH or the Deverstators?
We can walk and chew gum at the same time. The delay in recovering the Maid has nothing to do with the Earhart Project or lack of desire. As Matt says, there are practical reasons of the delay. Everybody thinks it should be simple, but it's not. As for the Devastator, that project has been moving forward for years, but due to its intensely political nature we have not been able to talk about it.
-
Maybe a compromise would be a 'Archaeology' style survey with extensive footage and photos for an online display or static display at the appropriate museum.
Been there, done that - in 2007. We can't publish the photos and video without revealing the exact location of the aircraft - which would doom it to destruction.
Here's a photo of the Maid of Harlech taken from Google Earth which does not reveal the location of the aircraft due to proximity and angle. As shown in the survey drawing, the aircraft is pointing towards the North and is partially covered with sand.
-
Here's a photo of the Maid of Harlech taken from Google Earth which does not reveal the location of the aircraft due to proximity and angle. As shown in the survey drawing, the aircraft is pointing towards the North and is partially covered with sand.
You're just as wrong about the Maid as you are about the Electra.
-
Everybody thinks it should be simple, but it's not. As for the Devastator, that project has been moving forward for years, but due to its intensely political nature we have not been able to talk about it.
That's pretty much TIGHAR in a nutshell - find the Electra? Easy! All you need to do is look in precisely the right spot! How hard could that possibly be, anyway? From my comfortable armchair quarterback throrn, it seems to have gone on for an unnecessarily long time - let's wrap this one up and move on to the next one. Same thing with the Devastator. How hard, really, is it to yank that sucker up from the bottom of the lagoon? And the Maid of Harlech is dirt simple! Anyone could have that sucker up on dry land with a half-days work with a backhoe.
*exaggeration off* Real life, I have found in my brief span of time on this rock, is far more obtuse than we like to think. Wishing for things to be simple doesn't often make it so.
LTM, who's pretty sure he can handle the truth,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
I have been in contact with Matt Rimmer and am pleased with the opportunity to work with him as needed to preserve and display the Maid , including a personal visit to meet him at some point. As I said, since my retirement July 1st I can devote more time to this project. Many folks in the UK are deeply interested in this project and in fact, I was contacted by The Cambrian News this past week and they pounced on the opportunity to publish an article on the Maid, which appeared Thursday. We wanted to keep the Maid in the public eye an also be positive about it. TIGHAR did a magnificent job on the survey. Now we want to build on that.
-
I have been in contact with Matt Rimmer and am pleased with the opportunity to work with him as needed to preserve and display the Maid , including a personal visit to meet him at some point. As I said, since my retirement July 1st I can devote more time to this project. Many folks in the UK are deeply interested in this project and in fact, I was contacted by The Cambrian News this past week and they pounced on the opportunity to publish an article on the Maid, which appeared Thursday. We wanted to keep the Maid in the public eye an also be positive about it. TIGHAR did a magnificent job on the survey. Now we want to build on that.
Here's a shortened version of the Cambrian News article (http://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/news/i/35990/). (Apparently one has to pay extra to view the entire article.)
-
Maybe a compromise would be a 'Archaeology' style survey with extensive footage and photos for an online display or static display at the appropriate museum.
Been there, done that - in 2007. We can't publish the photos and video without revealing the exact location of the aircraft - which would doom it to destruction.
Here's a photo of the Maid of Harlech taken from Google Earth which does not reveal the location of the aircraft due to proximity and angle. As shown in the survey drawing, the aircraft is pointing towards the North and is partially covered with sand.
Tim, I'm afraid I gave up on google earth long ago, it just doesn't have the detail to be precise enough to ID anything IMO. On the beach and especially in the shallows at low tide there are all kinds of anomalies, from seaweed to mussel beds, and a redundant sewerage outlet which someone pointed out to me as he was convinced it was a part of The Maid.
Matt.
-
I'm with you on Google Earth, Matt. What we sometimes forget, while marveling at the images of the Earth as we have never seen it, is that these "pictures" were taken by satellites, pretty high up in the sky, and subject to the same image-processing biases as any other electronic document would be.
It's easy to see things when you want to. Look at the case of Steve Fossett in 2007. Lots of people took to Google Earth to look for his plane wreckage; they succeeded in squandering an enormous amount of the aerial and ground searcher's time. The only way to be really sure is to put on your boots or swim fins or whatever and actually go to the physical location. There's no substitute for ground-truthing. TIGHAR has been around the block often enough to know that (I still chuckle about the giant red blob affair).
LTM, who probably needs new glasses anyway,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Lots of people took to Google Earth to look for his plane wreckage; they succeeded in squandering an enormous amount of the aerial and ground searcher's time.
I participated in the Mechanical Turk. (http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/news/2007/11/fossett_search) It was an interesting exercise.
The aerial and ground searchers ought not to have "squandered" any time if they did not like the look of the Google imagery. They didn't have to look at any e-mail from anybody if they didn't want to. Live and learn.
-
Nice one Ric!
Nailed it!
-
Can't we all just be nice... sheesh...
I'd be more inclined to drop a twenty now and then in the glass jar at a museum to see conserved history IF -
We could find the traction among the public to actually make it happen, gain the substantial means to do it, and then see happy-others dropping their twenties in too -
All of which might make for a more productive / less acrimonious environment in places like this.
So, how do we do that?
- How, after years of promoting in various ways, do we finally find a way to get the public / museums excited about the intent to 'raise 'em as they are, conserve 'em and show 'em that the public can see', and -
- Can we bolster such an approach and make real tracks with it so that we become more 'doers' than 'sayers' about these semi-obscure efforts?
I don't mean to criticize by comparing 'doers' and 'sayers' at all, please no defensiveness - moreover I may share some frustrations with people like Ric and others out there - how do we make these things find traction?
One voice here added a bit of positive light -
I have been in contact with Matt Rimmer and am pleased with the opportunity to work with him as needed to preserve and display the Maid , including a personal visit to meet him at some point. As I said, since my retirement July 1st I can devote more time to this project. Many folks in the UK are deeply interested in this project and in fact, I was contacted by The Cambrian News this past week and they pounced on the opportunity to publish an article on the Maid, which appeared Thursday. We wanted to keep the Maid in the public eye an also be positive about it. TIGHAR did a magnificent job on the survey. Now we want to build on that.
So to borrow from Capt. Elliott, how do we build on that?
-
Jeff Neville,
How do we build on that?
I believe the most rewarding way to "... build on that" in these instances of recovery (conserve and show) vs. recover (reconstructed and show) is to put the historic human figure clearly in the picture.
I am sure that even in the case of AE/FN's Lockheed 10, if enough of the aircraft is recovered someone would suggest it be reconstructed to the state it was in when it disappeared. What a marvelous display it would be - just step in and pretend to fly. What's missing in this picture-the human element?
Put the wrinkled up pieces of the aircraft along with all other pieces of evidence on display and what you have is an animate object that is associated with a human tragedy that makes one pause.
A real life example of the foregoing is the memorial of the USS Arizona. What's more poignant a floating Arizona or a solemn display as she rests?
Ted Campbell
-
Good points, Ted. Yamamoto's 'end' was dramatized by the exhibit I mentioned earlier. The USS Arizona remains commissioned to this day, obvious reasons. Vets who survived her can have their ashes interred there.
I've somewhere mentioned seeing the pilot's seat from Wiley Post's last airplane - the Sirius-Orion-Explorer hybrid - said artifact distorted and crushed, just as it was when Post was crushed to death in it. It sits in a lone case, probably not much noticed as anything other than an oddity - and of course the museum refrained from garish explanation of what the item was exactly, and how it came to be the way we see it. The observer must know the history to 'get it'.
And walking away from that exhibit - the first encounter with a civilian-disaster artifact that I can recall, I had to ask myself if I had truly done the right thing in studying it closely and considering Post's last moments. Did I do well to take photographs of such a thing? I knew the details - I am intimately familiar with how the two bodies were found, and how their condition was shielded at the time. Rogers, crushed in the cabin - sever impact injuries; he'd been in his sleeping bag for warmth. Post, sitting in that nose cockpit (similar to that of the Vega 5 series arrangement) crushed and disemboweled when the engine rammed back into his person: the reason the seat is so distorted is because poor Post was sandwiched between the brutal force of the engine and relatively unyielding properties of the seat and bulkhead behind it. A dreadful scene.
There's some contrast here to me, between military history and civilian: Yamamoto and Arizona both figure into the national consciousness in major iconic ways, no doubt. When Yamamoto was shot down and killed - gunned down as it were, it was a huge historic war event, however one sees it or cuts the ethics of it. BTW, I don't regret it nor as an American would I ever apologize for it - he was a 'war lord' who was a worthy target - call it assassination if you will; Bin Laden was no more worthy for the taking than a Japanese Admiral in WWII as far as I am concerned.
Same for the Arizona - hallowed 'ground' there - she stands as tall under the waves as Gettysburg, Flanders, you name it.
Earhart? At least with the prospect of a Niku theory we have a chance of discovering a less-violent end in the airplane than poor Post suffered. But it still gets violent, if 'Thirteen Bones' and other views ever prove true - it had to have been at least a gruesome ending of dehydration, possibly hunger and debilitating injury, infection or disease - and a final insult to the human victim by nature's own devices, possibly while the human was in a state of awareness.
But in the airplane? Not likely if Niku is correct - so that artifact would be relatively sterile of the garish things I've mentioned. It would be more of an icon of her last existence, finally understood - but also perhaps approaching a gravestone of sorts - even if she wasn't near it at the end.
Post's seat is one thing; had that crushed airplane been displayed I'd have turned away - I hope. I've seen the pictures. I've also - like Ric and many others, seen the real aftermath of many a fatal crash, up close and too personal. But hopefully NR16020 did not issue the coup d' grace to our brave, lost aviators and we'd have a neater decision to make.
But will the public buy? What is it that they will get from 'interpreting' a long-submersed and buried P-38 (which was not involved in a fatal accident, pilot having swum away to fly another day)? Curiosity? What is the lesson - "this is what a P-38 looks like after an unintended ditching near a coast, after 7 decades of exposure"? Don't get me wrong - I hope this comes off - but I believe it could be an important test case of what the public gets from it and how well they accept it.
In terms of ethics, no one died in it. In terms of ethics, as to Yamamoto and any sensitivity, I say "tough shit", I WANT to know how they got him (and respect that he was very westernized and not without some peculiar empathies for America (mostly cautions, I think) - but also a mortal enemy). In terms of ethics, there lies Arizona - deserving of solumn recognition - a pause and reflection of what was sacrificed in those terrible moments in that place - we refuse to let her die, after all.
Oh, the stories need to be known - and when there were people lost it should be recorded and told as best we can interpret it. But do I want to see the wrecked remains of the P-38 that Capt. Robert de Vlieg was lost in (a friend of my dad's) in the CBI theatre? Too personal - he was a line pilot in a photo outfit and deserves individual respect. YMMV, but I would not want to see the shattered cockpit that he likely died in displayed in a museum in situ, too much.
Earhart's plane? I don't know - except of course we want to find it and 'understand' what happened. Are we prepared to find a machine that did not find its end as we thing, e.g. a harsh water landing that may have mortally wounded its occupants?
It is just not a clear path to me as I think it all over. There can be many ethical questions. Those who find wrecks and rebuild are often criticized for overlooking the human history attached to that wreck, and losing evidence of it for all time in their haste to recover a rebuildable wreck. I abhor the loss of human story in those things - but am ambivalent as to the airframe being restored.
Matter of balance - and what works. What will the public 'buy' - ultimately that is what pays the bills to allow any sort of effort to develop. All I can say is that while there are a lot of good ideas, I think we're treading on fairly new ground with this prospect of retrieving and displaying wreckage - it is not all so clear as-yet. Not like looking at an 800 year old Viking ship which is far past projecting any sense of tribal loss as we gaze at it - as opposed to seeing shoes and such from the Titanic.
So, how to build on that? Carefully, I'm sure.