Gee, it was a
thought and a
comment - not an instruction! Last time I checked there wasn't
anyone in charge.
Another thought (please skip if you are easily offended) is I can think of (from my experience in warbird magazine editorial work) a significant number of fraudulent or unrealistic 'recovery' efforts that have solicited effort and cash where no actual real recovery was likely, possible, and in a couple of cases not even intended. While many museums (and private collections) could manage resources better, very few (albeit some) have actually acted fraudulently, not burnt up resources at the rate a recovery effort must do.
Of any given ten recovery efforts, a significant number fail; and others bring back mostly scrap - sometimes restored, sometimes not. However it is an absolute certainty that any recovery needs to be followed up with a major restoration or conservation project; which will often require as much or more effort or cash. Part of my point (which is
just something to think about) was that there's recoveries that right now need conservation and restoration - but they're in store.
So, you can venture money and effort on something that's got great bragging rights down the bar, but a high chance of using the lot and recovering nothing, or you could do something that has
no bragging rights in the bar but is guaranteed to improve the number of preserved aircraft on show. Of course you can please yourself, but some basic study of the odds
first doesn't hurt!
Richard - good point, and it makes sense than
many future recoveries aren't going to be by satellite and bushwacking, but by the consumption of tea, biscuits, cash, barter and patience!
rwdfresno, of course I'm an elitist - swimming among the mass vegetating in front of
Big Brother or
CSI Des Moines holds no attraction. I'm also not interested in just going 'that's nice' or 'that's awesome' here, but working with others to achieve something useful, and that sometimes means being awkward and proposing a different view.
I've no intention of telling people what they can and can't do, but it's also not hard to figure out odds, good and bad ideas, and to spot romance masquerading as useful adventure. My point was just a point of view - it's not 'inaccurate'; it's just taking a hard look at a 'wouldn't it be nice' thought, which some regard as nasty. I'm the last person to stop anyone - I've actually assisted some myself, and good luck to them all.
Take just two types - Supermarine Walrus and P-61. In both cases there 'might be' others out there to recover. With the Walrus, like most rare types, the recoveries have been made (from Thame and Antarctica) and several restorations undertaken - yet one example just needs cash (and maybe effort) to return it to the sky. With the P-61 there's an example in a museum that could be better looked after, but would require a major secret diplomatic effort to 'recover', yet it's the second best bet. (lots of hard, uninteresting work, high risk or total cash loss, etc.) The best bet for a flying P-61 is at MAAM, and I'm sure they'd rather you help
them than wander the world trying to recover a wreck. Of course if you turn up with that hypothetical aileron out of a tree, or the remains of a mountain wreck, they'd be very appreciative. But if you tell
them you've go a team and a load of cash, wouldn't it be smarter to help them rather than finding another wreck? - But remember, it's your money, your mileage may vary, wrecks in imaginations appear larger in the mirror etc.
Someone will mention Glacier Girl eventually, so I will. For the magnificent effort of recovering and then restoring that aircraft - an amazing achievement, which we remember, quite rightly, it's often overlooked there were a half dozen expeditions that returned with zip, nada, zilch. Yet there are people proposing to go get more from
Bolero! Well, we know what
some of those aircraft are like, and in
some cases it's not worth it. IF someone pulls it off, I'll lead the cheering, but I'd not put a red cent toward it.
My money gets a better return.
As to your inaccurate remark about 'books for model builders', that cheap, and certainly inaccurate, and for the record... The Lysander book and the research has, and currently is, assisting restorations in several countries to restore Lysanders to the air and into accurate schemes, with exchanging information I've gathered from each other and archives in the UK, Canada, Australia and elsewhere. I've no skill or delusions I can do what the Gary Austins do, but I've thanks from engineers and crew working on these aircraft for a small amount of help I've managed. It may not be big, clever or impressive , but it
certainly has helped restore aircraft to the sky as against being a
probable total loss. Place your bets.
Cheers
P-61
http://www.maam.org/p61.html
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... hp?t=13535
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... hp?t=13826
Supermarine Walrus
http://www.projectwalrus.com/
http://www.defence.gov.au/RAAF/raafmuse ... walrus.htm