Should we salvage or take keepsakes from crash sites?

[GARY HILTON]

In a topic on a crashed B-17F, Tulsaboy broached a subject that is sure to get a few people worked up. I would like to see others opinion on this as well.
I have been to a few crash sites, and have a pretty straight forward approach. I say unless it's an historical site, or the governing property owner says leave it alone, go for it.

I have read with great interest almost all the books and magazines on wreck locations with thier histories, and have done my share of hiking to visit a few. I find it kinda funny that some of the folks that have written about these crash sites and visited them, are pretty concerned that the locations are kept secret. It was OK for them to find the site, describe the scene, and photograph it, and relate how the aircraft got to that place, and not without some expence to them...Can they tell me that they have never walked out without taking a souvineer? I doubt it. One had told me that they look exclusively for the data plates...their prized collectable...but they don't want anyone else to go there because they will destroy the site....to me, it makes no difference how small or large the item is...you still took away something.

There is more than one warbird that is flying today with salvaged parts, and I've been to more than one restoration yard that has large and small recovered wrecks that will be put to use as static displays, or flyers... Nobody seems to have a problem with reputable companies doing this...

I look forward to your solutions!
G

[maxum96]

Seeing as it was my post and photos of the B-17F crash site that started this, here's my opinion.

If we all took away a souvenir, eventually there wouldn't be anything left. Hiking to this site and seeing the wreckage and melted aluminum was very powerful to me. It brought a real sense of what a tragedy the crash was and the ultimate price paid by the 8 men that died at that site. As this was a site that people could hike to and that there was not one usable part left, I feel it should remain as is. In fact, maps to the crash site and websites I read told people not to pick up souvenirs even though there is tons of aluminum fragments laying around everywhere.

Now if it's a site that's not accessible to the public (i.e. underwater) and/or no deaths occurred and/or there are parts that could be used to maintain a flying example, then I don't see an issue with recovering it. More people will get to see it and enjoy it (static or flying) if it's recovered than unreachable to most people.

Just my dos centavos

[SaxMan]

I think there is a third option: Preservation. Depending on the wreck site and how much of the plane is left, perhaps collecting the items and putting them on display in a local museum to tell the story of the plane and the people may be best way to satisfy the need to get the items in from the cold, but keep them together.

With the Capital Airlines DC-3 crash site that I'll be surveying, leaving the items in situ is an option, as they are in a remote section of the park. Outside of the local "old timers", no one really knew about the site. I actually surprised the local park service historians when I brought it to their attention. I know the site has already been corrupted, as the CAB went through the wreckage looking for clues as to the cause of the crash, moving various items and discarding them once they checked them out. An outbuilding was erected literally over the point of impact as well.

The site was visited by members of the Capital Airlines Association in the mid 1990s and they pulled out the engine crankcase and restored it. They were very insistent on keeping the location a secret, as they feared souveneir hunters. Unforunately, all the individuals involved with that site visit have all passed on, and I'm not even sure of the whereabouts of the crankcase, although I do have one decent lead. They did mistakenly believe they were on private property, when they were actually on park property. Again, with some detective work and talking to some of the local "old timers", the location was fairly easy to uncover.

Depending on what we find, if I had my druthers, I'd move the various bits and pieces to a more accessible part of the park to be used as a memorial for the three men who perished, as well as informative panels on Capital Airlines and the DC-3. At least there, these items can be preserved and their story can be told. Option 2 would be to move them near a trail which is scheduled to be built and pass near the current site, once again with informative panels and as a memorial.

Weather permitting, the site survey is going to take place in two weeks.

[cooper9411]

maxum96 I agree with you that if we all took away a "souvenir" there would be nothing left. Case in point, the B-24 out on Atka Island in the Aleutian chain. The only thing really left now is the airframe,wings with engines and props still attached. Pretty much everything on the inside has been taken as a "souvenir"! If all that is left at a crash site is chunks of molten aluminum/metal I say leave it be. If there are pieces/parts that could be used to make another example complete or used as a template, why not salvage it? If its a site where members of the crew perished, there should be some form of memorial erected at the site in the crews honor.
Too many times individuals have "picked over" a site or area to their benefit (Alaska, thanks Ted )then when they have collected all they need or wanted they enact laws to prevent others from saving abandoned aircraft! Or , the times when some one finds a wreck site and by the time they get permission to recover the plane some one else had come along and did it illegally. One that comes to mind is a Corsair that was found around Chesapeake Bay. One day it will come out as to who got it!


Just my .02

[jmkendall]

Back in the early 70s when I was in Boy Scouts, in California, my Troop was doing a "Wilderness" Hike. This was a hike where you set out with a Map and Compass and then navigate to and from a set of points. It was always a lot of fun, and that skill that went a long way in the Army. Anyway we were backpacking in the Sierra Nevada's and on the third day came across a crashed B-17. We were obviously the first people to get there as it was completely pristine. I don't mean intact, just that it was obvious that no one had been there before us. The wings and fuselage from the radio compartment back were intact( How intact? Intact enough we took shelter there during a storm!). The Nose section, Cockpit, and part of the Bombay were....crumpled I guess is the best word for it. We were a Military Troop Headquartered on the old Mare Island Navel Shipyard. Our Scoutmaster was Riverine Small Boat Commander who had just returned from Vietnam. He took apart the five intact .50 cal MGs and we transported them back to Mare Island. On our way back to base camp we notified a Park Ranger, and gave him the location of the wreck.

The next year we hiked back to the crash site and it was gone. ALL OF IT. We inquired at the Ranger Station and they informed us that, after we left, they informed the Sierra Club; and they "decided they didn't want a war machine polluting "their" pristine forest". At least that is what one Ranger said. The other thought it was just a fund raising operation; as they apparently made enough money salvaging that wreck that they asked the Rangers if they knew where any other wrecks were that they could salvage.

A few years later I read that a Museum in California was suing the Parks department because they had wanted to salvage, for display in their Museum, what they described as an intact WW2, wrecked plane. Apparently the Parks department kept them stalled through the permitting process long enough for the, again, the Sierra Club, to go up there and salvage that wreck. Ironically, according to the article the SC didn't need a permit to "clean up" the site, but the Museum needed one to Salvage it!

And finally even if you don't touch it, how much will be left after a hundred years? Look at the Swamp Ghost. Metal deteriorates. That is a fact and no amount of "preserve it in it's 'natural' setting" sentiment is going to change that. Get it out and preserve it because an instrument sitting on your shelf is better preserved than the one that the bear stepped on, the tree fell on; got washed down the gully in a flash flood, corroded past the point of recognizability; ect.

[Nathan]

I think we should recover whatever is left of any wreck and display the peices as is. Have the airplane type, serial, name, crew name list etc for display. I think these would fill some space in air museums. Intact airplanes are expensive. I see it as more affordable and having a piece of wartime airplane.

[GARY HILTON]

I like your idea Nathan....I have been to a couple of museums that have just scant remaining pieces of a rare aircraft on display. What I don't like, is when there is no given history of the part, where it was found, or how it ended up in the museum....it has to have attention to detail.

So what do we do.....declare crash sites off limits until the prime pieces get toted off to museums? I think it would be cool if anyone that removed a part, would have to leave some type of record of what was taken, and it's present location.....Like that would work real well......

[bdk]

I say finders keepers! It is all just abandoned wreckage.

[Mike]

I trust all those that voted for 'no souvenirs' and 'leave as is' will petition the NMUSAF and all other museums that display parts of 'Lady be Good' to return those parts to Libya.

[maxum96]

I trust all those that voted for 'no souvenirs' and 'leave as is' will petition the NMUSAF and all other museums that display parts of 'Lady be Good' to return those parts to Libya.

Those parts were recovered years ago when there was a different attitude towards wrecks. Times change. Remember when we were told doctors recommending smoking and cars didn't have seatbelts?

[The Inspector]

I might examine parts and pieces of a downed aircraft, but would tend to leave everything at the scene out of respect for those who were aboard, in my career I've dealt with enough scrap airplane parts removed during maintenance so there's no real facination in it for me. IF I locate a data plate, I make a note of its info but leave it where it is.

[Randune]

I tend to agree with the bring it back crowd. 90% of people can't or or won't make hikes into the rugged remote areas. The parts are basically rotting away.... Better to get them back and in the hands of collectors and others to preserve, enjoy and share.
However that being said most of the items remaining are heavy and can't be gotten out anyway.

[p51]

I have a skin section from a relatively well-documented B-17 crash site, and it has the corner of a star from the national insignia. A guy walked into the area and took a bunch of skin and support stuff and filled a ruck with it. I ran across him at a Collings event later and he gave it to me (I showed up with my WW2 Jeep and was wearing a USAAF mechanic uniform). I didn't take it from the site but I've shown it off at several display events. If it'd stayed there, it would just be another piece of twisted metal in the woods.

I trust all those that voted for 'no souvenirs' and 'leave as is' will petition the NMUSAF and all other museums that display parts of 'Lady be Good' to return those parts to Libya.

Yeah, funny how if any of us walk up on a crash site and take some stuff (which nobody else will likely ever see), it's looting.
But, if someone represting any museum walks up on the same crash site and takes some stuff (which nobody else will ever see as it'll be put in storage somewhere), it's 'preservation'.
Either way, you're just taking stuff from the wreck.

[bombadier29]

Yeah, funny how if any of us walk up on a crash site and take some stuff (which nobody else will likely ever see), it's looting.
But, if someone represting any museum walks up on the same crash site and takes some stuff (which nobody else will ever see as it'll be put in storage somewhere), it's 'preservation'.
Either way, you're just taking stuff from the wreck.

Sort of goes with my grave robbing or archeology question in the thread about the bell from the HMS Hood.

[p51]

Yeah, funny how if any of us walk up on a crash site and take some stuff (which nobody else will likely ever see), it's looting.
But, if someone represting any museum walks up on the same crash site and takes some stuff (which nobody else will ever see as it'll be put in storage somewhere), it's 'preservation'.
Either way, you're just taking stuff from the wreck.

Sort of goes with my grave robbing or archeology question in the thread about the bell from the HMS Hood.

I went back and read that. You made some good points there.
My late uncle was an archeologist and geologist for the state of Florida for many years and he once said that the only difference between archeology and grave robbing was if there were any relatives around to complain.