WIX Archives

Answers and Reasons

Posted by Ross McNeill on Sat Mar 08, 2003 06:16:58 PM

In reply top My views posted by Cees Broere on Fri Mar 07, 2003 04:21:47 AM

Thanks Cees and Jerry for the responses.

I had chosen the example to try to bring home the time, effort and expense involved in a salt water restoration to those who saw it as a simple recovery task.

Airctaft construction does not normally consider the long term effects of galvanic corrosion so parts of the structure will have decayed to protect others i.e. magnesium and aluminium components in contact with other materials will have completely decayed.

This means that the engine will no longer be the complete specimen that entered the water.

Cast parts will have had the saline water enter the stucture of the material and unless washed out and replaced will dry out when exposed to air and spall crack the object in a few years.

Both Jerry and Cees have noted the need to flush the salts from the engine. This involves a complete strip down and lengthy immersion procedure.

So for our complete engine we must damage it by strip down (losing all the original gaskets, clearances etc), immerse in various chemical solutions for several months, even years before finally repairing the damage we caused in the strip down and sourcing new componets to replace the decayed items.

At the last estimate I had for this process for an actual Merlin was going to take 18 months and cost a ball park figure of ?127,000 from a conservator. This was just to slow the corrosion down to dry land levels.

By all means recover the sea artefacts but please only if the procedures and money are available to conserve the recovery from the moment it breaks the surface.

At these costs, and due to the fact that the conservation process will alter the completeness of the artefact, might the money and effort be better spent in new/replica build.

Regards
Ross

Follow Ups: