Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dornier Do 17 bomber to be raised from the sea

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Jimmy View Post
    Oh hell no they don't. I agree it's a travesty that modern warplanes (Vietnam+) are intentionally kept out of private hands unless they're paperweights, but museum pieces are better than nothing. And it's easier to cobble together avionics (which don't necessarily have to be original) and systems to make something flyable if you have a worthy airframe, than try it the other way around.
    There was an ex-Blue Angels F/A-18A for sale a few years ago on eBay, not sure who ended up with it; since it was a demonstration Hornet, I believe it had already been semi-demilitarized (M61 cannon removed, downgraded avionics, etc.).

    I've always wanted to own an F-104; maybe I could get one of Italy's old F-104ASA's?
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
      Ignorant question, then: doesn't salt water cause more damage to metal than wood?
      It depends on a lot of factors, including the type of metal and the conditions at the bottom (ie, the makeup of the sand, is there coral present, is the metal buried or exposed). In this case it sounds like conditions were pretty good. Look at the Titanic...it's been down for over a century and it's still held a recognizable shape. They've pulled up large sections of the hull that are much more than paper-thin even after all that time. Other sections are significantly weaker...it all depends.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Chogy View Post
        I agree with the notion that restoration preferably should be to original, flyable condition. There are a number of WW1 aircraft with modern engines, but very few that could have been pulled off of a flight line in 1917.

        But any flyable aircraft or display that includes engines and avionics is better than an empty shell with an opaqued canopy.

        One of the real problems is that even on a modern jet, a number of components are subject to simple aging, rot, and hardening. Tires, seals, pump vanes, tubings, all will go bad with age even with no use at all. A flyable airplane requires continuous and ongoing maintenance, and that is where much of the expense comes in.
        Yep, that is the number one reason why they won't fly again. They are not like old cars where I can pull the plugs, squirt in a little Marvel's Mystery Oil, rotate the engine by hands a few times, put in a new battery, spray some starting fluid down the carb, or hook up a 1 gal. gasoline jug to bypass the crudy tank, and turn the ignition and have the car start even after 30 years.

        Comment


        • #19
          Even on cars, rubber parts will have to be changed. I have read it somewhere, and been also told, that they all have 5 years shelf life.
          No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

          To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Doktor View Post
            Even on cars, rubber parts will have to be changed. I have read it somewhere, and been also told, that they all have 5 years shelf life.
            Yes, of course, along with fuel lines, brake lines, master cylinders and so forth. The point was that I could still start the engine after sitting 30 years (and have done so) but just try starting a jet or aircraft piston engine sitting 30 years. One could try but I would be behind protection when you do.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
              Ignorant question, then: doesn't salt water cause more damage to metal than wood?
              Ferrous metal dissolves in just a few years, but this is very temperature dependent - think Titanic. Copper alloys (bronzes) are much more resistant... copper is, in fact, toxic to many marine invertebrates. The Cu sheathing applied to the hulls of Napoleonic-era warships protected both mechanically and chemically.

              Aluminum alloys are among the better metals when immersed. The aluminum skin oxidizes into a hard aluminum oxide layer, which then halts and prevents deeper oxidation. Like anodizing. Not that the airframe is flyable after stripping off encrustations, but at least it won't simply disappear when immersed, like iron does.

              Titanium will last indefinitely underwater, as will gold, platinum, and other noble metals.

              Comment


              • #22
                The plane – the last of its kind – was found by a diver in 50ft of water off the Kent Coast in 2008.

                Sonar later confirmed it was in remarkable condition with its tyres still inflated.
                ...

                The Dornier, nicknamed the Flying Pencil because of its long thin fuselage, was shot down over the Goodwin Sands in August 1940.

                Pilot Willi Effmert, 24, lost control as he tried to ditch and the plane flipped, coming to rest on its back.

                It was soon covered by the shifting sands.

                Effmert and his observer were taken prisoner. The bodies of the other two fliers were washed ashore.

                The RAF Museum has tried to trace crew’s descendants, so far without success.



                Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk Only surviving German Second World War Dornier Do 17 bomber to be raised from the sea - Mirror Online
                Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

                It was buried in sand. A large portion of the structure was aluminum, that's why they were so anxious to scrap them. the iron inside the engine is sealed and full of oil, that may have preserved it enough to permit a cutaway display of the engine. I wonder about bolt heads and other small ferrous parts on the outside. I'm sure it would take a lot of restoration and I really doubt it could ever fly. The rudder and vertical stablizer is probably gone.
                Attached Files
                Last edited by USSWisconsin; 07 May 13,, 16:31. Reason: removed engine reference - plane is upside down - engine is too...
                sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                  [ATTACH]32910[/ATTACH]
                  It was buried in sand. A large portion of the structure was aluminum, that's why they were so anxious to scrap them. the iron inside the engine is sealed and full of oil, that may have preserved it enough to permit a cutaway display of the engine. Unfortunately, the inverted vee design would leave the valve gear down on the bottom with oil floating to the top, so it may be pretty bad. I wonder about bolt heads and other small ferrous parts on the outside. I'm sure it would take a lot of restoration and I really doubt it could ever fly. The rudder and vertical stablizer is probably gone.

                  The RAF Museum has on display, the remains of a Halifax that crashed into a Norwegian fjord, so they have some experience of dealing with that sort of problem. however, speaking personally, I would prefer to see a whole Halifax on display!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It was unbelievable... in the 1950's and even deep into the '60's and '70's, you could barely give warbirds away. I distinctly remember seeing an old Trade-a-plane (or similar publication) that was trying to sell off P-51's for $25,000 when I was a kid.

                    Nobody wanted them because they were (and are) immensely expensive to maintain and operate, and not practical.

                    Then, the U.S. passed a law forbidding the sale of demilitarized warbirds, even trainers. Makes ZERO sense. Instead of being lovingly attended by afficionados, they are rotting in the desert or being cut for scrap.

                    The few military jets in private hands are abberations, like planes being put together from separately scrapped parts. A re-engined T-37 would be an awesome sport airplane. T-38's would be more advanced and harder to fly, but still very much within reach. The Navy's turbo-mentors and T-2's, same deal. And there'd undoubtedly be those with the finances and skills to maintain an F-4, F-14/15/16, the Century series, etc.

                    If you can't tell, it really irks me! :bang:

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I remember reading how one man in the US bought of engines, right after the war, for a pitance, to smelt down. Then the Korean War broke out and he sold everything right back to the USAF/USN for a massive profit...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Chogy View Post
                        It was unbelievable... in the 1950's and even deep into the '60's and '70's, you could barely give warbirds away. I distinctly remember seeing an old Trade-a-plane (or similar publication) that was trying to sell off P-51's for $25,000 when I was a kid.

                        Nobody wanted them because they were (and are) immensely expensive to maintain and operate, and not practical.

                        Then, the U.S. passed a law forbidding the sale of demilitarized warbirds, even trainers. Makes ZERO sense. Instead of being lovingly attended by afficionados, they are rotting in the desert or being cut for scrap.

                        The few military jets in private hands are abberations, like planes being put together from separately scrapped parts. A re-engined T-37 would be an awesome sport airplane. T-38's would be more advanced and harder to fly, but still very much within reach. The Navy's turbo-mentors and T-2's, same deal. And there'd undoubtedly be those with the finances and skills to maintain an F-4, F-14/15/16, the Century series, etc.

                        If you can't tell, it really irks me! :bang:
                        Look at Britain, The base at Bruntingthrope has a massive collection of Cold war jets in flyable condition but the CAA will not allow them to fly. The F86A Sabre that flies in Britain, had to have its lox pack removed and replaced with compressed air before it was allowed a registration.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Two shots of an FM-2 Wildcat that sat in Lake Michigan for 50+ years before being pulled out. Stored at NAS Pensacola and no doubt washed up. The aluminum skin was all in great shape. Maybe crunched in some spots on impact but surface wise fantastic. Fabric surfaces gone. The ferrous metal, in the landing gear assembly, does show rust but mostly surface and not through and through. The back of the crankcase clearly eaten away by the water though. Deposits in the fins of the cylinders are as hard as concrete and mean engine substitution in the air frame when done.
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I do not know if it will work in certain countries but is a short BBC news report on the project.


                            BBC iPlayer - Dornier 17: The Fall and Rise of a German Bomber

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              An update on their progress.

                              BBC News - German Dornier 17 salvage hit by English Channel weather



                              A plan to raise the only surviving World War II Dornier 17 bomber from the English Channel has run into difficulties due to bad weather.
                              Experts salvaging the German aircraft, which is lying in 50ft of water at Goodwin Sands, off the Kent coast, have had to ditch their original strategy.
                              A faster but riskier approach will now take place.
                              The project has been likened to a modern Mary Rose, the famous Tudor warship raised from the Solent in 1982.
                              The original scheme to bring up the Dornier 17 - devised by the RAF Museum - was to build an aluminium frame or cradle around the wreck in which to lift it - putting the least possible strain on the fragile aircraft.
                              Divers were expected to take about three weeks to construct the frame, working down on the sea floor.
                              But ever since a salvage barge, complete with giant crane, arrived over the wreck site on the afternoon of 3 May, work has been repeatedly interrupted by bad weather.

                              Time pressure
                              Fifteen days of diving have been lost and the barge has had to take shelter in the harbour at Ramsgate, Kent on four occasions.
                              What is more, the salvage team discovered that the wreck, which was thought to be resting entirely on sand and silt, was in fact partly lying on chalk bedrock.
                              To put the lower struts of the frame in place, divers were having to drill painstakingly through the chalk rather than simply sliding the frame's components through soft sand.
                              Last week the museum and the specialist diving company doing the work, Seatech, held a crisis meeting.
                              The budget of more than £500,000 allowed 35 days to complete the project.
                              Continuing with the original plan would, they estimated, take 50 days - longer if the bad weather returned - and would cost tens of thousands of pounds more.
                              The RAF Museum told Seatech to adopt a revised plan which involves attaching cables at three points to the aircraft itself - exactly what the experts had hoped to avoid.
                              All three points are on the strongest part of the airframe - two single-section spars that run the length of both wings.
                              Since the plane is lying on its back, one cable will pass through its central bomb bay, with the other two running through the undercarriage doors next to the engines on either wing.
                              'No choice'
                              The tail of the wreck will also be supported during the lift, and a central beam will be inserted to run from the bomb bay doors back towards the tail section to give the fuselage extra strength.
                              Divers have discovered that a crack running around a third of the circumference at the point where the fuselage joins the wings has widened in the past two years.
                              "We're having to rely to a larger degree than we originally planned on the structural integrity of the aircraft," said Ian Thirsk, the RAF Museum's head of collections.
                              "But we have no choice. We're doing what we can to save a unique and precious heritage asset. If we leave it one thing is certain - it won't be there in a year's time."
                              The museum is hoping to put the new plan into practice next week, weather permitting.
                              The Dornier 17 was a mainstay of the German bomber fleets during the Battle of Britain in 1940.
                              The plane on the Goodwin Sands is believed to be aircraft call-sign 5K-AR, shot down on 26 August that year at the height of the battle by RAF Boulton-Paul Defiant fighters.
                              If the wreck is successfully raised the RAF Museum plans to transport it by road to its conservation centre at Cosford in the West Midlands, where it will spend more than 18 months being drenched in a solution of water and citric acid to stabilise it and prevent corrosion of the plane's aluminium structure.
                              It will then go on display at the museum's main base at Hendon in North London.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Chogy View Post
                                The few military jets in private hands are abberations, like planes being put together from separately scrapped parts. A re-engined T-37 would be an awesome sport airplane. T-38's would be more advanced and harder to fly, but still very much within reach. The Navy's turbo-mentors and T-2's, same deal. And there'd undoubtedly be those with the finances and skills to maintain an F-4, F-14/15/16, the Century series, etc.
                                There's a guy near here who privately owns a plane each of: MiG-17F, MiG-21UM, MiG-23, Su-20 (Su-17M), L-39, TS-11, Let-410, Mi-24, Mi-8. As well as demilled S-75 (SA-2), S-125 (SA-3) and 3M9 (SA-6) surface-to-air missiles. Spare Klimov engines for the MiG-17 and the Mi-8 and a spare Tumanski for the MiG-21. And a rocket motor from a Scud 1B.

                                That's the kind of collection you should reach for ;)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X