WIX Archives
Re: Objections to airframe retrievals?- Ah this is where it
Posted by John Parker on Wed Jul 23, 2003 03:51:38 AM
In reply top Re: Objections to airframe retrievals? posted by Rob Rohr on Tue Jul 22, 2003 04:32:19 PM
: Hi Tony,
:
: If you have been following the whole mess up here in Maine
: then you know how I feel about the two FAA/RN Corsairs. B
: oth of these planes contain Human remains. I have talk to
: the princapals invovled with this mess and have offer to t
: ake them to three differrent sites that have wrecks with n
: o remains, but they are bond and determine to try and rais
: e these two.
:
: As for the US policy they are always looking to recover an
: y remains just look at Nam and Laos.
:
: Cheers Rob
Thanks for this Rob. Well this area is a real can of worms. I think it involves issues from a few different threads on this site ( recovery of military property, The PNG threads about theft vs need and recovery of human remains).
Recently a pilot died and a group of Remains recovery personnel from Hawaii were injured in the crash of a helicopter investigating a wartimr B24 crash in PNG. The US often participates in these sort of recovery expeditions and recovers and identifies the remains of any crew members they can. Australia also regularly participates in similar actions and the respective governments/ defence departments actively actively promote their activities in the press as bringing home to their final resting place the long missing airmen ( I am by the way totally in agreement with this activity).
However this is where it gets difficult. Can it not be said that this activity is exactly the activity condemmed in relation to the missing aircrew in the Corsairs. These great young men went off to fly during a war in a forign country and lost their lives as surely as the men on the B24 in PNG. In one case we are condeming the disturbance of a war grave whilst on the other hand officially conducting exactly the same act. First point
Second point
If the RAF Museum goes to Iceland and brings back a Battle wreck or the Canadians go to Norway and get a Halifax or any other of a thousand other such deals it is great but if individuals do it this is seen as somehow shady (Iam not talking about outright theft just legitimate deals) It all smacks a little of double standards.
The common playing field should be an internationally agreed policy on this ( No it won't happen but it would be nice).
The policy could include the following points about wrecks.
1) Does the wreck contain remains - if not interested party negoiates deal with owner - if no owner - with government at fair price. ( Govt has first rights but must recover and restore or sell).
2) If remains on board contact relatives if known and on their agreement recover remains by govt agency then dispose of machine as per above or respect relatives wishes and leave wreck alone.
3) If remains are on board but unknown or no relatives as per 2 above and bury remains as per current practice. Then recover machine as per 1.
We just need a consistant and just process.
What does every one else think
Regards
John Parker
Follow Ups:
- Re: Objections to airframe retrievals? - Ross McNeill Wed Jul 23, 2003 06:10:09 AM
- Re: Objections to airframe retrievals? - Richard Woods Wed Jul 23, 2003 07:05:10 AM