Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 51

Thread: Buried Spitfires Update

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    bdk, you say a crate would not survive "having all that dirt piled on it". We don't know how much dirt, if any was put on these crates, if they were in fact buried there. You are correct that dirt is heavy, but there is no reason that these crated would be buried deeply. A wooden coffin can and has survived intact when it is only a few feet below the surface.

    I have an RAF style crate for a Merlin engine, and it is fairly substantial, though I have never tried burying it. I am almost certain it could take 2 feet of earth on it.

    I have a lot of doubts if there were ever any planes buried in crates in cosmoline, but if there were, I'd bet there is much, if not most preserved. I'd buy one on that basis if the price is right.

    The story of the "core samples" sounds dubious. If you really thought that there was a crate with a factory complete Spitfire down there, would you risk drilling a hole right through the middle of it? I wouldn't, I would carefully dig down to find what was there.
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 10-26-2012 at 05:25 PM.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    12
    I would expect an engine crate to be built more stoutly than an aircraft crate. An engine is much more dense than an entire aircraft. I don't think that standard metal sea containers were used back then. A wooden crate was the equivalent. I doubt that any crates were ever designed for burial. In the case of a coffin, nowadays they are usually put in a concrete vault for just this reason. They are not typically buried right in the dirt. In any case, they are much smaller and not buried very deeply. All this is speculation of course.

    So how do you think the Spitfire market will be affected if 120 airframes are recovered in "restorable" condition?

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    Bdk,My engine crate is wooden. I assume any airplane crate would also be inthose days. And as for weight, an engine might be about 1700 lbs while the entire airplane would be around 7000 lbs. Both would have to be strong enough to support the weight when they were lifted by crane on or off ships. So the box for the entire plane would be strong also.

    In referring to a coffin, I didn't mean a high end modern metal coffiin, I meant one of the wooden ones in the old days that were buried in the earth as they were. I have seen some on tv dug up years later and were ok.

    The point is that if, THE BIG QUESTION, if these planes were buried as preserved in crates, then we have no info or even reason to believe that they were put far under ground under many feet or tons of earth.

    Digging a hole big enough to put an entire airplane crate in is a lot of work, why do you think they would do more work to bury them deeper than needed? Especially in a hot hunid climate?

    I would be ready to bet money that there are not 120 full airplanes buried down there, but if so I think there would be a lot of buyers, including govts if they are available. A good flyable Spitfire now is probably $3 million or so, and these may well be more fully origianal and equipped. If they are Mk XIVs, they are a little less desireable than a Mk IX or of course a V.
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 10-27-2012 at 09:22 AM.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    69
    Is there any new word on the Spitfires? I was under the impression they were going to start digging at the end of October.

  5. #15
    Some news from October that I somehow missed: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9638...-of-Burma.html

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    Zack, that is very interesting, and I had not seen it before. This isn't the plot of a new Bond film is it?

    Still hard to know how much if any is true. I had some doubts when reading the Spitfires are supposed to be buried "deep underground". If buried at all, why would anyone want them deep so that it requires more work to bury them and also that they are more likely to be damaged, either crushed or more likely to be flooded by ground water. So, if they were buried, it seems more likely that they would be near the surface.

    The part about the man from Belarus, and his not wanting to fly "in a very old small aircraft", but rather to see them fly from the ground really grabbed me and got my attention. I am trying to be calm and properly skeptical and logical about all this, but my pulse jumped up pretty good.

    We can always have hope.
    If these folks put real Spitfires back in the air, it will be a good thing.
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 11-12-2012 at 06:19 PM.

  7. #17
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,948
    I like the quote from the backer: "He also admits that for his company, the sums of money being gambled are “replenishable”."

    Something to consider: How big of a hole would they have had to dig? The Spit is roughly 30 feet long. Wing chord at the root looks to be about seven feet. Sans prop, the fuselage is probably five feet high at the tail. So if the plane is crated with the fuselage above the wings, we're talking about a crate about 30 x 8 x 6 feet. And there are... dozens of these things? How deep did the top of the crates need to be?

    The crate is about the size of a small recreational vehicle. We're talking a HUGE hole, about eight to ten feet deep, and about 60 feet square just for a dozen aircraft. It's going to take more than one erk with an e-tool. Even a bulldozer or two might not be sufficient. Imaging the the amount of dirt that has to be stacked up, and will be remaining after the crates are covered. This is a massive undertaking...and no one took pictures? None of the native Burmese witnessed it?

    Consider, too: How do you get those huge crates, weighing three tons or so, into the hole? You can't just drag them through freshly-dug dirt. You need a crane.

    If the British had a couple of bulldozers, it would have been a MUCH quicker job of disposal to just drive the bulldozer through the crates.

    Finally, consider: The crates are wood. They probably rotted away and collapsed fifty years ago. As they collapsed, they should have filled up from the overfilling dirt. Which means dips and even outright holes should have opened up above.

    My guess is the Brits had a dozen or so planes, bulldozed them, and buried the wreckage. Like any urban legend, it's just grown over the years....

    Ron Wanttaja
    Last edited by rwanttaja; 11-13-2012 at 12:41 AM.

  8. #18
    danielfindling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    S.E. Michigan
    Posts
    152

    Cross marketing

    Quote Originally Posted by Zack Baughman View Post
    Some news from October that I somehow missed: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9638...-of-Burma.html
    Makes you wonder if this whole thing is merely a marketing campaign for his new video game World of Warplanes. Sure can't hurt.

    Daniel Findling

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    12
    Why doesn't someone just look up the environmental impact report from when they were buried? :-)

  10. #20
    Here is the latest on the Burma Spitfires:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20515659

Posting Permissions

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