SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Only known surviving Dornier 17 to be raised from the English Channel

Page 1 of 4

Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Only known surviving Dornier 17 to be raised from the English Channel (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=204132)

JU_88

05-03-13 04:41 AM

Only known surviving Dornier 17 to be raised from the English Channel

Cool, I hope they restore it - although its not really clear in the artical :)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...ery-grave.html

And its destined for a new Home at Hendon RAF museum, little more than an hour from where I live..... excuse me but I think one of these is in order :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5MfDn_27X0

Jimbuna

05-03-13 06:31 AM

Will certainly make another trip to Hendon worthwhile :cool:

BossMark

05-03-13 06:36 AM

Hope they can restore it

AVGWarhawk

05-03-13 07:18 AM

I can not recall seeing a aircraft that was not restored when displayed at any museum I have visited. Effort to recover the craft is enough to warrant a full restoration. I would think the aircraft would get a proper restoration down to every detail. Many years it will take but it will be done IMO.

Herr-Berbunch

05-03-13 07:26 AM

Here is the original thread hereabouts of finding it with the plan to raise it. I'm glad it's got this far, and obviously a full restoration would be great. :)

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=182331

And two more.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=182351
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=182408

And some BBC videos of it -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22394606
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22386431
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22380915

Jimbuna

05-03-13 07:46 AM

I notice the Germans aren't too hopeful regarding its condition...aluminium and salt water certainly don't compliment each other.

Herr-Berbunch

05-03-13 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2050668)

I notice the Germans aren't too hopeful regarding its condition...aluminium and salt water certainly don't compliment each other.

No, but the aluminium oxide doesn't flake like iron oxide, in fact it forms a nice skin which acts to protect the rest of the aluminium from the water. :sunny:

Jimbuna

05-03-13 08:00 AM

Hopefully that will be the case but either way they'll have to be doing the equivalent to treading on eggshells whilst raising her.

AVGWarhawk

05-03-13 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2050668)

I notice the Germans aren't too hopeful regarding its condition...aluminium and salt water certainly don't compliment each other.

I'm thinking those involved are not hopeful for great condition but enough to warrant a restoration. Many aircraft here in the state have been restored with much of nothing left that resembled the aircraft. Perhaps the ocean life that lives on the surfaces(coral) protected the aircraft to some degree?

Jimbuna

05-03-13 08:21 AM

Reminds me of this Halifax at Hendon...

http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/102/img1225x.jpg

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/7499/img1228g.jpg

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7307/img1233ry.jpg

http://www.archieraf.co.uk/archie/10...continued.html

AVGWarhawk

05-03-13 08:46 AM

Jim,

Was the plane left in this condition?

Hottentot

05-03-13 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk (Post 2050696)

Many aircraft here in the state have been restored with much of nothing left that resembled the aircraft.

And many aircraft after the restoration have resembled nothing like what the aircraft in question was. That's what I'm most worried about in this case too.

Dowly

05-03-13 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hottentot (Post 2050755)

And many aircraft after the restoration have resembled nothing like what the aircraft in question was. That's what I'm most worried about in this case too.

Yeah, this was my first thought too.

Herr-Berbunch

05-03-13 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hottentot (Post 2050755)

And many aircraft after the restoration have resembled nothing like what the aircraft in question was. That's what I'm most worried about in this case too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly (Post 2050762)

Yeah, this was my first thought too.

But then your second thought was, 'Many aircraft here in the states have been restored from much of nothing left that resembled the aircraft when it was recovered.'

:yep:

AVGWarhawk

05-03-13 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hottentot (Post 2050755)

And many aircraft after the restoration have resembled nothing like what the aircraft in question was. That's what I'm most worried about in this case too.

Can you point me to those? For the life of me, I do not believe 1000's spent to restore a P-40 it would look like a Sopwith Camel when completed. :hmmm: :haha:

Hottentot

05-03-13 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch (Post 2050776)

But then your second thought was, 'Many aircraft here in the states have been restored from much of nothing left that resembled the aircraft when it was recovered.'

I understood what he meant, thank you very much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk (Post 2050786)

Can you point me to those? For the life of me, I do not believe 1000's spent to restore a P-40 it would look like a Sopwith Camel when completed.

Every time you restore an aircraft, you make choices like that. Sometimes it sparks an outrage, like the rumor of BW-372 getting painted in Navy colors in which it never served. Sometimes it's more subtle like removing the red star from a P-39 that saw use in Russia. And on everyday case it's covering the marks that make the object an individual object and thus a museum piece.

Take this plane, for example. It's a plane which by the looks of it was shot down. It's a question of if it's going to be treated as such, or made a generic Dornier 17 to represent all Dornier 17s. As the article says "the propellers clearly show the damage inflicted during the bomber's fateful final landing, experts have said". Are they going to repair that damage? How about any marks of the battle that took place before the plane's fate?

This plane has a story. By restoring it they can either honor it or ignore it. I hope they go with the former, because as an object without a story it would be not much more than a lawn ornament.

Herr-Berbunch

05-03-13 11:22 AM

But as the only Do-17 it has the stories of all of the Do-17s, no matter how the restoration goes.

AVGWarhawk

05-03-13 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hottentot (Post 2050825)

I understood what he meant, thank you very much.

Every time you restore an aircraft, you make choices like that. Sometimes it sparks an outrage, like the rumor of BW-372 getting painted in Navy colors in which it never served. Sometimes it's more subtle like removing the red star from a P-39 that saw use in Russia. And on everyday case it's covering the marks that make the object an individual object and thus a museum piece.

Take this plane, for example. It's a plane which by the looks of it was shot down. It's a question of if it's going to be treated as such, or made a generic Dornier 17 to represent all Dornier 17s. As the article says "the propellers clearly show the damage inflicted during the bomber's fateful final landing, experts have said". Are they going to repair that damage? How about any marks of the battle that took place before the plane's fate?

This plane has a story. By restoring it they can either honor it or ignore it. I hope they go with the former, because as an object without a story it would be not much more than a lawn ornament.

Under, what I would call normal circumstances, the aircraft in question is "restored" to what it looked like the day it went down. However, there is a difference between "fixing up" and "restoring". Restoring anything means returning it back to what is was like out of the factory. Doing anything is modifying...to the purest. However, planes have a different appeal when "restored" to the unit it was from. Pictures of the battle damage are enough to tell it's story. A museum will only spend so much. For me, spending anything on it at all is enough for me to be glad it was pulled from the depths and but on display.

AVGWarhawk

05-03-13 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch (Post 2050829)

But as the only Do-17 it has the stories of all of the Do-17s, no matter how the restoration goes.

:up:

This is why restoration and fixing up have two different meanings.

Hottentot

05-03-13 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch (Post 2050829)

But as the only Do-17 it has the stories of all of the Do-17s, no matter how the restoration goes.

That's why it's tricky. What I'm most afraid of is that they'll give it a shiny new paint job, fix all the dents and scratches and make it look like it just came out of factory. Far too many museum planes (or any other objects, for that matter) look like that, as if they weren't ever used anywhere. Sure, they are pretty and it's nice to have your photo taken in front of one. But that's about it.

Personally I'm hoping they'll treat this as it is and fix the damage caused by the years under water, but not the damage caused in battle, like the engines.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:21 PM.

Page 1 of 4

Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page