Kee Bird?

Dave Downs · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:25 am

gary1954 wrote:

I thought the same thing when I saw the recovery effort of the Kee Bird, I wondered why they didn’t contract a Sikorsky CH-54 Tarhe commonly referred to as the Crane or Skycrane. It is a Heavy Lift helicopter that has a payload capability to transport a M551 Sheridan tank and that sucker weighs in at 34,000 pounds. Seems to me that removal of the outer wing panels and fly them out followed by the fuselage, she could have been extracted and reassembled at another location. I’m just sayin’

Sitting here in my armchair playing quarterback (even though it's not Monday) I have to think the added logistics load to get the Skycrane in the area, fuel it, adding another support crew plus obtaining a re-assembly work area would be problematic.

The Inspector · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:03 pm

Wildchild wrote:

andyman64 wrote:

Mr Greenamyer knew better than anyone in order to achieve great things you have to first try! its all fine and dandy for us all to say in hind sight how stupid this thing or that thing is that daryl did but at least he tried if he hadn,t none of us would be having this conversation and the KEEBIRD would still be in GREENLAND just my 2 cents!!!

The KEEBIRD would still be in Greenland In one piece
And, couldn't they have used a helicoptor to remove the wings and fuslage (Swamp Ghost...) to a road or something?

It's on the icecap, ain't no such a thing as a 'road'

CoastieJohn · **Joined:** Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:37 pm **Posts:** 1380

The Inspector wrote:

Wildchild wrote:

andyman64 wrote:

Mr Greenamyer knew better than anyone in order to achieve great things you have to first try! its all fine and dandy for us all to say in hind sight how stupid this thing or that thing is that daryl did but at least he tried if he hadn,t none of us would be having this conversation and the KEEBIRD would still be in GREENLAND just my 2 cents!!!

The KEEBIRD would still be in Greenland In one piece
And, couldn't they have used a helicoptor to remove the wings and fuslage (Swamp Ghost...) to a road or something?

It's on the icecap, ain't no such a thing as a 'road'

Actually....back in the day when the U.S. military was building an early warning station 100-something miles inland from Thule, they did indeed create a "road" or "path" to get to the site. I recently got two DVD's of documentries showing Thule and the inland station being built. They showed the "road" being built using these snowtugs...for lack of the correct term. They towed huge pieces of the station, equipment, etc across the ice cap on this road system. They had cabooses that work crews would be in for the ride across the ice cap. I want to say it was 20+ hour drive from Thule to the station. Pretty cool documentries.

Hind sight being what it is.....if the B-29 salvage crews had known the history up there....they maybe could have towed the plane out. Locate a pathway to a suitable location/villiage/town and tow the plane out across the ice cap. The plane (or disassembled plane) of course would be on a specially built sled for the tow and need several of the "snowtugs". After seeing the documentries and how it was done, I do think it would have been very possible.

N3Njeff · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 1:32 pm

On the initial site visit they used a UH-1. If I remember the story with the video Ive seen, they had to run drums of fuel out to a checkpoint a couple of times just to get the range to reach it for a site visit.

You also got to remember, these guys did not have Paul Allen's money. It was on a shoestring budget and thats a FACT. I know a guy who has a piece of paper telling him that his prop is at the bottom of the lake. I can only imagine that he is not the only one that was at a financial loss on this gamble.

maxum96 · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:21 pm

N3Njeff wrote:

On the initial site visit they used a UH-1. If I remember the story with the video Ive seen, they had to run drums of fuel out to a checkpoint a couple of times just to get the range to reach it for a site visit.

For some reason, the figure of 250 miles from Thule sticks out in my mind where the Kee Bird was. Hence the reason that airlifting the Kee Bird out was not feasible.

The Inspector · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 8:01 pm

maxum96 wrote:

N3Njeff wrote:

On the initial site visit they used a UH-1. If I remember the story with the video Ive seen, they had to run drums of fuel out to a checkpoint a couple of times just to get the range to reach it for a site visit.

For some reason, the figure of 250 miles from Thule sticks out in my mind where the Kee Bird was. Hence the reason that airlifting the Kee Bird out was not feasible.

That coupled with the fact that there is one dirt road that runs between the town of Thule and the airport, and NO WHERE ELSE. A rock toss East or Northeast of Thule is all icecap, there are NO villages, towns, hamlets, Mc Donalds, or Howard Johnsons out on the ice. GOOGLE EARTH Thule and then move your pointer to 80.15N and tell me what you find there or en route to there from Thule.

jmkendall · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:04 pm

Big difference between feasible and practical.

It was feasible to move it from the site to Thule. Easily in fact. You simply establish refueling points. Moving those sections 250 miles could be done in one or two days. You could even swap out crews. It isn't a matter of engineering, it is a matter of logistics.

How do you think we built bases on the icecap in the first place, or New Guinea for that matter? How do you think things were done before there were roads?

We used to establish firebases in Vietnam, seemingly overnight; with Artillery. All with Helicopters, in areas with no roads.

It is all a matter of logistics.

Practical is the better word. Someone else said it, they did not have deep pockets funding.

The Inspector · **Posted:** Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:37 pm

jmkendall wrote:

Big difference between feasible and practical.

It was feasible to move it from the site to Thule. Easily in fact. You simply establish refueling points. Moving those sections 250 miles could be done in one or two days. You could even swap out crews. It isn't a matter of engineering, it is a matter of logistics.

How do you think we built bases on the icecap in the first place, or New Guinea for that matter? How do you think things were done before there were roads?

We used to establish firebases in Vietnam, seemingly overnight; with Artillery. All with Helicopters, in areas with no roads.

It is all a matter of logistics.

Practical is the better word. Someone else said it, they did not have deep pockets funding.

OK then, open YOUR wallet :wink:

Chris Brame · **Posted:** Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:53 am

Quote:

OK then, open YOUR wallet :wink:

Seriously, though, is what's left of the Kee Bird enough to make it worthwhile to recover with an eye towards putting one of the several "project" B-29s either back in the air or static?

CoastieJohn · **Joined:** Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:37 pm **Posts:** 1380

Chris Brame wrote:

Seriously, though, is what's left of the Kee Bird enough to make it worthwhile to recover with an eye towards putting one of the several "project" B-29s either back in the air or static?

There's a question for the legal types.....who owns the new part's/pieces that were put on the airframe?

N3Njeff · **Posted:** Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:45 am

CoastieJohn wrote:

Chris Brame wrote:

Seriously, though, is what's left of the Kee Bird enough to make it worthwhile to recover with an eye towards putting one of the several "project" B-29s either back in the air or static?

There's a question for the legal types.....who owns the new part's/pieces that were put on the airframe?

BINGO

cooper9411 · **Posted:** Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:20 am

Who, if any one has permits!

CoastieJohn · **Joined:** Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:37 pm **Posts:** 1380

cooper9411 wrote:

Who, if any one has permits!

Ummm....maybe not if the parts are brought back into the states. Why can't the original owners of the parts claim they were internationally stolen? I'll have to look at ours but I think the new Greenland permits just allow the permittee to do the salvation work....it doesn't establish nor assign ownership or title.

b29driver · **Posted:** Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:07 am

Last time I was in Thule it was a July 15th and it was 33 degrees and blowing snow.

The Inspector · **Posted:** Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:45 am

b29driver wrote:

Last time I was in Thule it was a July 15th and it was 33 degrees and blowing snow.

Race ya to the beach!!! :lol:

Warbird Information Exchange

Kee Bird?

Who is online