WIX Archives

Objections to airframe retrievals?

Posted by Tony C on Mon Jul 21, 2003 03:00:19 PM

Hi all,
With the known objections to airframe retrieval by both the USN and the RAF, I was wondering if anybody knows just what these organisations have against the recovery of any airframe?

Are there specifics or is each case dealt with separately but with ultimately the same negative response?

From my point of view, if a wreck contains human remains and if any surviving relatives have objections, then I agree that the site should be considered as a War Grave and treated as such for all eternity, regardless of how rare that particular airframe may be!

However, if the surviving relatives agree, do these organisations still object and if so why?
What if there are no surviving relatives and no objections have been raised, what would any objection be based on?

If the Dutch Air Force can recover (and I assume fund) crashed airframes, why not the RAF or the USN?

Reasons?

I assume (again) that the Dutch recoveries are not purely down to munications still on board but are led by other objectives!

Would this be correct and again, can anybody shed any light on why the RAF do not get involved?

Is it government or MOD policy?

After all, doesn't the USAF have a policy of actively going after and recovering lost airmen?

It appears to me, that there are no problems opening tombs in Egypt, recovering part of a certain ship including personal effects or even recovering bodies from Everest, some that have lain undisturbed for 80 odd years, but it seems somehow unacceptable to disturb the wreck of someone who has fought and died for his country!

Surely that person deserves the right to be returned to their loved ones and laid to rest?

I understand that this will be a uneasy subject to some but I would be interested in other points of view as well as the reasons for the stance of the RAF and USN.

Tony

Follow Ups: