Buried Aircraft
Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:15 pm
Does anyone know how quickly the aluminum on a WW II aircraft deteriorates and to what extent after it is buried in clay type soils?
Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:59 pm
depends on who's aluminum, is it US, British, German, Japanese, Italian...
Buried Aircraft
Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:03 am
The aluminum that I am refering to would be for a US Navy/Marine aircraft.
Re: Buried Aircraft
Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:28 am
CraigBirkhold wrote:The aluminum that I am refering to would be for a US Navy/Marine aircraft.
Uh oh, you had better go into a witness protection program. The Navy will NOT be happy if you plan on a recovery!
The Men-in-Black will be at your door shortly to interrogate you. Too bad the Col isn't here anymore. He can tell you from personal experience about the MIB.
Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:44 am
what is the general location??
Buried Aircraft
Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:09 am
What does the location of the aluminum have to do with the original question?
Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:24 am
because the Navy believes that all crashed airframes still belong to them, even though they have left them to rot on island for 60+ years.
Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:34 am
"What does the location of the aluminum have to do with the original question?"
We just want to know where it is! Actually the location (soil composition and water table) have a lot to do with the rate of deterioration. Obviously dry sand would be optimum. The advantage of Naval aircraft is that the planes were built with better corrosion prevention, the disadvantage is that they were also probably exposed to salt water and had corrosion prior to disposal.
The only way to really know is to dig and see. There are more dos and don"ts than a person might guess. I have some experince with excavation of planes and with USN. PM or call if I can help.
Pirate Lex
http://www.BrewsterCorsair.com
We just want to know where it is! Actually the location (soil composition and water table) have a lot to do with the rate of deterioration. Obviously dry sand would be optimum. The advantage of Naval aircraft is that the planes were built with better corrosion prevention, the disadvantage is that they were also probably exposed to salt water and had corrosion prior to disposal.
The only way to really know is to dig and see. There are more dos and don"ts than a person might guess. I have some experince with excavation of planes and with USN. PM or call if I can help.
Pirate Lex
http://www.BrewsterCorsair.com
Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:27 am
Speaking as the geologist here, perhaps the most important variable is the nature of the clay. Clay soils have complicated relationships with water, and many of these soils have shrink/swell qualities that can be very physically destructive of airframes. An airplane carefully buried in a clay soil might later be crushed to such an extent as to appear to have crashed there rather than simply having been buried. On the other hand, clay because of its small grain size may actually preclude oxygen and groundwater from getting to the aircraft and thus preserve it.
Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:52 am
This post makes me think of something I read about - it was 2 I think F9F Panthers being buried up in Minnesota and being unearthed within the past year or so. Does anyone remember anything hearing about these jets or did I dream this one!? 
-Derek
-Derek