[ARC5] NMNA F6F-3 Radio Frequencies of Equipment

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:55 PM,  <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> The last I heard, the Navy retained title to all its sunken
> and crashed aircraft and was being a bunch of
> ninnies about it.  I supposed that's changed
> for the better?  Sure hope so; leaving historic relics
> in the ground and ocean to rot away is just stupid.

Yes and no, Dave. Seems they updated their policy to allow trading
aircraft for other salvages, parts, services, etc, but still retains
ownership of all Navy aircraft as Historical Artifacts.

Here's a somewhat dated document detailing the policy and reasoning.
Some good examples of why are provided:

http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org12-7f.htm

I found the Curtis Helldiver story both amusing and amazing. The Navy
stripped the aircraft, repeatedly burned it for fire fighting
practice, then dumped it in a lake. When someone wanted to recover it,
they immediately claimed ownership. In that case, the judge ruled
against them, stating it was pretty clear that they had indeed
abandoned this aircraft.

To the Navy's credit, at least they are recovering a vast number of
these aircraft now for preservation and display. One of the SBDs on
the A&T page is also mentioned as being both at Midway and Pearl
Harbor previously. And no doubt there are some real hacks out there
who do more damage than good in a quick attempt to make a fast buck.
But if it comes down to leaving something to rot vs saving it, I tend
to come down on the side of saving it. Sometimes that means left in
place if more can be gained from a historical standpoint. Too often
though, it seems to be more a case of simply claiming it because they
can. I can see and respect both sides, but time is getting short for
many of these relics.

Apparently the Air Force 'lost' all of its records prior to 1961 and
hold no claim on such wrecks. Moral of the story: find a AAF bird if
you want to recover and retain ownership.


~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4