Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: North Sea Stirling Discovery

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Battle of Britain Country
    Posts
    8,327

    North Sea Stirling Discovery

    Editor: 'Britain at War' Magazine

    A 'Key Publishing' product - Britain's Best Selling Military History Monthly

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,017
    Interesting, thanks. Lets hope that we get to see some pictures.
    Martin

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South East Essex
    Posts
    4,906
    I hope they manage an ID.
    Engine Failure:.... A condition which occurs when all fuel tanks mysteriously become filled with air.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    cambridgeshire
    Posts
    1,539
    I've emailed the chap who was interviewed via Linkedin, we'll see what transpires

    Would certainly like to see some pics

    John

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The wild west of France!
    Posts
    4,964
    Will it be at .....

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    432

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    2,532

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    cambridgeshire
    Posts
    1,539
    Had a look at the pics (didn't realise they'd been on the Stirling forum for some time!!), one of the images looks to be of the glider towing yoke, and another appears to show one of the recessed handles used to lift the fold down steps between the pilots' seats

    John

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    3,368
    no comment from the RAF museum yet? Thats where it needs to go, much as East Kirkby would be nice.
    pb::

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    2,532
    It's going nowhere - War Grave

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    cambridgeshire
    Posts
    1,539

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    3,368
    Is that confirmed? Because it will get moved if they are drilling.
    pb::

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    848
    No - because the phrase "War Grave" has no meaning in UK or International Law - just common usage.

    It is a place covered by UK law for UK nationals regardless of location and by that Act considered to have human remains unless Licence Issued.

    Under International and local law it is owned by UK and no rights have been relinquished so it is a place subject to UK interest.

    Why do you feel it should need to go RAF Museum regardless of status?

    Ross
    Last edited by Ross_McNeill; 28th August 2017 at 17:51.
    Restorer of Canberra PR.9 XH175 and anon (but looking more like 8249) Anson Mk.II

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Gloucester
    Posts
    131
    Please forgive my ignorance regarding War Graves, if the aircraft is physically in the way of the company in question, can they actually 'move' it? Or continue with this Stirling in their way and not give it a second thought? (Basically speaking)

    Richy.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,017
    Quote Originally Posted by SADSACK
    Is that confirmed? Because it will get moved if they are drilling.
    The project is to lay a subsea power cable. Deviations will be allowable to cover such circumstances. That is one of the points of having an ROV survey.
    If it were a drilling operation, movement of several tens of metres from the target is not unknown (we have done just that recently at another North Sea location ... There was a bloody Whitley sat right in the way ).
    Last edited by D1566; 29th August 2017 at 06:20.
    Martin

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Where you wish you were.
    Posts
    9,243
    Allow me to ask a (probably) naive question...
    Would UK policy prohibit a bona fide museum from removing objects from the wreck that would have little likelihood of disturbing human remains...such ad the aforementioned glider towing yoke?

    Also, what is the likelihood of the wreck still harboring human remains?

    The "war grave" status doesn't seem to be universal...witness the Swedish C-47 on display that was shot down by Russian fighters in the Cold War.
    Also, have any Spitfires been resurrected (via "data plate" rebuilds) from fatal wartime crashes?
    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,017
    Several wreck sites have been placed out of bounds as there is the possibility of human remains still being present.
    Martin

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    848
    Would UK policy prohibit a bona fide museum from removing objects from the wreck that would have little likelihood of disturbing human remains...such ad the aforementioned glider towing yoke?
    Yes - If museum was UK owned/based or UK national tasked with work. Exception is Licence Issue - but not given for explorative action to identify wreck. Any other nationality would need agreement of UK Gov - which would deffer to UK policy from Protection of Military Remains Act and International Maritime Law.

    Also, what is the likelihood of the wreck still harboring human remains?
    Policy is to assume that all wrecks contain human remains unless identity is confirmed beyond all reason and all crew (plus possible stowaways/additional crew) accounted for.

    Before the debate starts of "all remains will have decayed" look at the fabric of the snorkel parka on the B-24 wreck in the Channel on this link.

    http://www.wessexarch.co.uk/projects...-24_wa1001_art
    Edit - Put WA 1001 into the search box then go to the artefact tab

    The "war grave" status doesn't seem to be universal...witness the Swedish C-47 on display that was shot down by Russian fighters in the Cold War.
    Also, have any Spitfires been resurrected (via "data plate" rebuilds) from fatal wartime crashes?
    See my comments about "War Grave" not having any status in Law and beware of including UK recoveries taken place before the Act.

    So far I see the original exploration company carring out explorative/identification and reporting in accordance with their duty to law and with respect. A far cry from the ill informed opinion of some who have not take the time to research what the duty to law for the site is afforded.

    Ross
    Last edited by Ross_McNeill; 29th August 2017 at 08:27.
    Restorer of Canberra PR.9 XH175 and anon (but looking more like 8249) Anson Mk.II

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,017
    http://www.wessexarch.co.uk/images/w...0parka_763.jpg
    Is that not something of later origin that has landed on the wrecksite?
    Martin

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    darn sarf
    Posts
    1,391
    Curious, how did they get permission to raise the bell off the HMS Hood wreck ?, a very large and famous war grave
    Officially now a pensioner

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    848
    As I said exception by specific Licence which specifies limits - without Licence the following applies to duty holders.

    "There are two levels of protection offered by this Act, designation as a protected place or as a controlled site.

    Protected places

    The designation of protected places includes the remains of any aircraft which crashed while in military service or any vessel which sank or stranded in military service after 4 August 1914.

    Although crashed military aircraft receive automatic status as a protected place, vessels need to be specifically designated by name. The location of the wreck does not need to be known for it to be designated as a protected place.

    You are allowed to dive on an aircraft or vessel designated as a protected place, on a ‘look but do not touch’ basis only, however it is an offence to:

    conduct unlicensed diving or salvage operations
    tamper with, damage, remove or unearth any remains
    enter any hatch or other opening

    Controlled sites

    Controlled sites are specifically designated areas which cover the remains of a military aircraft or a vessel sunk or stranded in military service within the last 200 years.

    Within a controlled site, diving operations are prohibited unless you are authorised by a specific licence. It is also an offence to:

    conduct diving, salvage or excavation operations for the purposes of investigating or recording the remains
    tamper with, damage, move or unearth any remains
    enter any hatch or opening

    You can obtain further information on this Act and its administration by contacting the MOD."

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/wreck-and-salvage-law

    Ross
    Last edited by Ross_McNeill; 29th August 2017 at 09:35.
    Restorer of Canberra PR.9 XH175 and anon (but looking more like 8249) Anson Mk.II

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    big sky country
    Posts
    1,122
    Is this really a Stirling.
    From the images I have seen the identification seems to be entirely based on what is thought to be a tailwheel fork which appears to me to be manufactured as a single hoop, probably tubular, while the images of actual Stirling tail wheel forks, shown on this link http://sas.raf38group.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2562 clearly indicate the leg being an assembly of a strut, two side tubes and an aluminium bolted fitting that joins it all together, or am I missing something!


    Richard
    "Where are you from?"
    "America" Somebody laughed politely.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The wild west of France!
    Posts
    4,964
    At what depth is the aeroplane found by the National Grid ROV?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    3,368
    Had an email from the RAFM simply confirming the name of the woman who makes the decision as to whether it stays in situ or not. So nothing definite yet.
    pb::

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    9,519
    Curious, how did they get permission to raise the bell off the HMS Hood wreck?
    I think, above all, we have to be pragmatic about these things; all sites are different, and being 'respectful' towards the dead will mean managing the sites in different ways.

    The British government has neither the resources or the inclination to physically protect 'protected' sites and laws written for the law-abiding are, clearly, next to useless. Especially where there is a quick and easy profit to be made.

    While HMS Hood, by virtue of her depth and location, is reasonably safe from illegal commercial salvage operations other similar warships are not; despite their historic significance and their status, and considering the relative 'ease' of protecting them, several of the Royal Navy warships lost at the Battle of Jutland have been looted, for the want of a better word, in highly destructive salvage operations. In one case a complete bronze propeller was salvaged from one of the lost battle-cruisers (and subsequently melted-down for scrap)...

    ...surely a better way to 'protect' this wreck would have been to remove the propeller to a museum?

    While it would be nice to 'protect' this Stirling (if it turns out to be one) who is actually going to police this protected status, or prosecute those that break the law?
    WA$.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    313
    Actually physically protect this Stirling? No-one of course. It would be pure chance if someone were prosecuted for deliberately disturbing it. It has no doubt been accidentally ravaged by numerous fishing nets over the decades.

    Unlike the Jutland wrecks though this Stirling's going to have low scrap value and that is what will probably save it from illegal salvage.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Where you wish you were.
    Posts
    9,243
    Basically, the authorities make it up as they go along?
    Okay for the Hood, not okay for an aeroplane?

    There was outcry over a group (not Woods Hole, who originally found it) recovering pieces of the Titanic. On one hand you can make the argument it is a grave, on the other given the rate of deterioration, if it wasn't done now, soon there won't be anything to recover.
    I've read that the wrecks of the Prince of Wales and Repulse have been illegally salvaged (as you might expect in that part of the world) so some authorized recovery might be a good thing for a museum or a memorial.

    And let's face it, artifacts are important, whether it's china or a bell from a ship or items from a mummy's tomb.

    Given the scarcity of Stirling artifacts, that makes this instance a bit of a different situation than if the aircraft in question was a common type.
    Last edited by J Boyle; 29th August 2017 at 23:54.
    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    5,620
    I dived on a U Boat the other day (U13, a type IIB, 30m down off Lowestoft) and the prop is still in situ. There's a length of chain running along the stern and a large piece of trawl net draped over the conning tower. The outer hull has started to collapse with some large gaping holes which weren't present a year ago. That's a considerably stronger structure than an aircraft. No salvage attempt*, unlike HMS Umpire off Blakeney which was ripped apart many years back for scrap.

    I'm unconvinced that the protection is anything other than a 'get-out' for governments to not recover the numerous bodies and pieces of hardware and then trying to make it seem like it's their compassion and respect. A few bones doesn't stop wrecks from being wire-swept to level them if they're a hazard to shipping.

    It's ********. Raise them if there's a will and the finances, bury the dead if there is anything recovered and let people see history that will crumble into sweet FA otherwise with any remains being scattered, buried, smashed in the process.


    *local conditions rather than the torpedo being armed and visible with the tube open as they were trying to get a shot at HMS Weston.
    Some of my best friends are imaginary

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES