PDA

View Full Version : BW-372 in USA



Plelv44_Mangrov
08-19-2004, 08:25 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=30267

I want finnish markings, but no, it will paint to usa markings

"No enemy plane will fly over the reich territory"
Herman G√¬∂ring

Plelv44_Mangrov
08-19-2004, 08:25 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=30267

I want finnish markings, but no, it will paint to usa markings

"No enemy plane will fly over the reich territory"
Herman G√¬∂ring

Jasko76
08-19-2004, 08:38 AM
Darn shame! No respect for Finnish history. US Navy was only too happy to get rid of the Buffalo. Plus, this very B-239 has an interesting history - 8 confirmed kills. Which US Buffalo could boast of such results? None.

Regards,

Jasko
http://users.skynet.be/orbus/Images/husein_kapetan.jpg

Cetnici su Pickice

zlin
08-19-2004, 09:07 AM
Mother nature is still kind to us all http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif WOW! what a find! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Please lets not start bashing http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/354.gif

PBNA-Boosher
08-19-2004, 10:27 AM
Come on, dammit! I'm an American, listen to me! Paint the plane in a Finnish scheme! The US doesn't deserve the plane! Give it back! Let it be in its rightful home, Finland!

Boosher
_____________________________
"So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you..."
-Gandalf

GerritJ9
08-19-2004, 10:35 AM
I agree that BW-372 belongs in a Finnish museum. Damn shame that it won't be, and even worse is the prospect that it will be restored in U.S. Navy colours http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

BullShark 71
08-19-2004, 10:40 AM
Well the only good thing for me is its about 3 miles from my house http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I guess Ill have to try to find out more on this http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Plelv44_Mangrov
08-19-2004, 11:35 AM
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/9434527.htm

"No enemy plane will fly over the reich territory"
Herman G√¬∂ring

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 11:42 AM
OK, I have been following this story since the whole thing was in WarBirds WorldWide, many years ago


If Finland wants a Buffalo, a good way for them to get one is to go get one. The fact of the matter is that the way things turned out, this aircraft is ending up in the USA

Whoever OWNS the plane should decide where it goes

How do you guys feel about the P-51Ds that are painted in US wartime colors? Most of them shouldn't be. What's the difference?

The Buffalo is an important and very very rare aircraft. Painting it in US colors is more of a tribute to those in the US Navy who died trying to fight in the Buffalo than it is an insult to Finland.

Maybe Finland should have paid off the local Russian authorities and recovered the damn airplane itself?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Jagdgeschwader2
08-19-2004, 11:45 AM
As it said here:
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/9434527.htm

*******************************************
The plane was little damaged other than bullet holes well-preserved by the lake's icy waters. For that reason and because of its historic importance it will be exhibited as it was found, Rasmussen said.
*******************************************

http://home.earthlink.net/~jagdgeschwader26/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/jagdgeschwader2s.jpg

A speck of dirt on your windscreen could turn into an enemy fighter in the time it took to look round and back again. A little smear on your goggles might hide the plane that was coming in to kill you.
Derek Robinson
From the book Piece of Cake.

Plelv44_Mangrov
08-19-2004, 11:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Maybe Finland should have paid off the local Russian authorities and recovered the damn airplane itself?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because, nobody really knows who own it, I think that is really finnish property and it should be in finland, not USA

"No enemy plane will fly over the reich territory"
Herman G√¬∂ring

Grendel-B
08-19-2004, 12:06 PM
Mang,

The plane is now property of that museum. That's it. Good thing is that it seems they'll keep it in the Finnish colours and markings, and that's the second best option that fine old plane deserves. Best would be of couse a Finnish museum, but I'm glad the absurd show of ownership fights over the plane are now over and it won't be rotting in an Irish storage forever.

Chuck,

Maybe you should make a web search with BW-372 keyword to see, that it wasn't that simple.

VirtuaaliLentoLaivue Icebreakers
http://icebreakers.compart.fi/

Finnish Virtual Pilots Association aviation history articles:
http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/

Fishu
08-19-2004, 12:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Maybe Finland should have paid off the local Russian authorities and recovered the damn airplane itself?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's see..
Whats the equation with population of 5.2 million vs. 294 million?

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 12:08 PM
In the United States, if I went and recovered an F4F from caostal waters, the US government would take it away from me.

However, this aircraft was recovered from Russian Karelia, not Finland, correct? How can Finland make a claim to it? They did not pay for the permits to locate and recover it, did they?

Just because at one time it belonged to Finland, that doesn't mean that it's theirs anymore. It wasn't recovered in Finland, and the authorities from the country in which it was recovered (eventually) got their money in permits and fees for recovery.

If Finnish Law says that any military object belonging to Finland stays Finnish property even in foreign countries, that may be one thing, but that doesn't sound like it will stand up to International Law to me, because Finland cannot Dictate Russian Law.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Obi_Kwiet
08-19-2004, 12:30 PM
I'd leave it in the Finnish colors, but it is US, built so I don't realy mide it either way. I see some anti-US sentiment going on...

taisto_s
08-19-2004, 12:38 PM
That plane looks beautiful, floating on the surface of that lake...

Red_Storm
08-19-2004, 02:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
In the United States, if I went and recovered an F4F from caostal waters, the US government would take it away from me.

However, this aircraft was recovered from Russian Karelia, not Finland, correct? How can Finland make a claim to it? They did not pay for the permits to locate and recover it, did they?

Just because at one time it belonged to Finland, that doesn't mean that it's theirs anymore. It wasn't recovered in Finland, and the authorities from the country in which it was recovered (eventually) got their money in permits and fees for recovery.

If Finnish Law says that any military object belonging to Finland stays Finnish property even in foreign countries, that may be one thing, but that doesn't sound like it will stand up to International Law to me, because Finland cannot Dictate Russian Law.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't take it so personally.

---

CHDT
08-19-2004, 02:25 PM
According to Gibbage on Simhq, the Brewster will keep its rather well preserved finish (with real victory marks what is extremely rare) rather than being painted with a fake USN finish (I say "fake" because this aircraft have of course a full metric instrumentation).

That's a very wise decision from the Pensacola museum!!!

Cheers,

CHDT
08-19-2004, 02:27 PM
According to Gibbage on Simhq, the Brewster will keep its original rather well preserved Finish colors.

THat's good news!

Loki-PF
08-19-2004, 03:17 PM
Lets not cry too much for the Finns eh? Afterall they were the ones who traded the bloody thing for three other obsolete planes in the first place!

Loki-PF
08-19-2004, 03:20 PM
QQQ Lets not cry too much for the Finns eh? Afterall they were the ones who traded the bloody thing for three other obsolete planes in the first place! QQQ

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 03:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Red_Storm:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
In the United States, if I went and recovered an F4F from caostal waters, the US government would take it away from me.

However, this aircraft was recovered from Russian Karelia, not Finland, correct? How can Finland make a claim to it? They did not pay for the permits to locate and recover it, did they?

Just because at one time it belonged to Finland, that doesn't mean that it's theirs anymore. It wasn't recovered in Finland, and the authorities from the country in which it was recovered (eventually) got their money in permits and fees for recovery.

If Finnish Law says that any military object belonging to Finland stays Finnish property even in foreign countries, that may be one thing, but that doesn't sound like it will stand up to International Law to me, because Finland cannot Dictate Russian Law.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't take it so personally.

---<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How does my post imply that I am taking it personally? Have I seemed angry or upset to you?

I simply explained why I feel Finland has no claim to the aircraft. Do you think that every time somebody explains their thinking on a subject that the person has now taken the subject personally?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 03:23 PM
Grendel

I am holding in my hands the Warbirds Worldwide magazine I bought in 2000 that covers this aircraft's recovery. I have known about this for 5 years http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif It was recovered in 1998, Kottman was strongarmed out of the plane, and it was sold to an "Irish Company". The Russian Federation doesn't care- they got their money. Nothing will ever come of the subject of whether or not the aircraft was removed from Russia legally or not.

[This message was edited by Chuck_Older on Thu August 19 2004 at 03:19 PM.]

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 03:25 PM
duplicate

[This message was edited by Chuck_Older on Thu August 19 2004 at 03:12 PM.]

VOL_Hans
08-19-2004, 04:03 PM
That plane belongs in Finnish hands...

I would propose a compromise for the aircraft that could make EVERYBODY happy...

Take it to the United States, and do the structural repair work needed on the aircraft. While it's getting stripped apart, examine the parts, record them all, and set to work on some reproductions. If you can do it with an ME-262...

Next, send the origional back to Finnland [Even though I'm American and MY country MADE it...Finnland BOUGHT it! It's thiers D### it!]

And let the Finns decide if they want to re paint the aircraft.

http://www.altitude.us/missions/The%20Volunteers/hanssig.jpg

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 04:09 PM
duplicate! Jeez

[This message was edited by Chuck_Older on Thu August 19 2004 at 03:20 PM.]

Chuck_Older
08-19-2004, 04:10 PM
this forum really stinks today
duplicate again

[This message was edited by Chuck_Older on Thu August 19 2004 at 03:20 PM.]

FI WILLIE
08-19-2004, 04:26 PM
Here are the contact adresses for the Naval Museum in Pensacola
[urlhttp://naval.aviation.museum/visit/visit_contact.html[/url]

I sent them a nice e-mail stating my opinion on the matter and I figure they will do as they damn well please.

It would be nice to see it displayed as it was when it was shot down IMHO.

Virtus Junxit,
Mors Non Separabit.
http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RQAAAGcT2og50!y1f7NgYX4rH0SBKAJ0*TnOdC3*WtgnO6hGP KX5PiB5W62XzquB*!VrAP7Zdv0N0X0XoOghYlsdCNgJc9MWMJg aWb0iiKk/109g2%20small.jpg
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati


(When all else fails, play dead.)
http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0QADWAvYSnGZaJjyZNeiWgIEGvdX5tvNMbEyaBCk7k0umnkdtM fvXk7UORkarzGe3nPMS77RyIzTPhfsJQW!gr!MM82pBzaYVzoz WAgBwaSg/******ss.gif

Gibbage1
08-19-2004, 05:31 PM
OK. Make sure to also inform every country that ever found a P-51, P-47, P-38, or other US aircraft to give them back. Lol. Thats just such a funny notion, now is it?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VOL_Hans:
That plane belongs in Finnish hands...

I would propose a compromise for the aircraft that could make EVERYBODY happy...

Take it to the United States, and do the structural repair work needed on the aircraft. While it's getting stripped apart, examine the parts, record them all, and set to work on some reproductions. If you can do it with an ME-262...

Next, send the origional back to Finnland [Even though I'm American and MY country MADE it...Finnland BOUGHT it! It's thiers D### it!]

And let the Finns decide if they want to re paint the aircraft.

http://www.altitude.us/missions/The%20Volunteers/hanssig.jpg
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Korolov
08-19-2004, 05:46 PM
Didn't they trade 3 planes to aquire this one? They traded for it, didn't they? Therefore, isn't it entirely up to those guys how it should be painted and where it should be displayed?

If you have objections to how & where it should be displayed, maybe you should buy it from them.

http://www.mechmodels.com/fbstuff/klv_sigp38shark1a.jpg

basdirks
08-19-2004, 05:51 PM
You all should be ashamed. This is not a toy you are fighting over. By claiming it to be of a particular country you bring shame on that same country and on yourself. The fact that people that do not even live in finland claim that it _must_ be brought back to finland shows why a terrible event as the second world war (which some almost sickingly endorse as something inspiring (not in this thread though)) could happen. People being patriotic over something like this and because of this taking on a conflict, (altough very light in this case), brings no good to this world. I advice some of you to start caring less, about an event you have no effect on.

Now this might have sounded a bit heavy, but it is nonsense to start getting anti-US over this, or anti-european.

basdirks
08-19-2004, 05:55 PM
This is not a toy you are fighting over. By claiming it to be of a particular country you bring shame on that same country and on yourself. The fact that people that do not even live in finland claim that it _must_ be brought back to finland shows why a terrible event as the second world war (which some almost sickingly endorse as something inspiring (not in this thread though)) could happen. People being patriotic over something like this and because of this taking on a conflict, (altough very light in this case), brings no good to this world. I advice some of you to start caring less, about an event you have no effect on.

Now this might have sounded a bit heavy, but it is nonsense to start getting anti-US over this, or anti-european.

JG7_Rall
08-19-2004, 06:13 PM
Wow, you people really need to get over it. At least its going to be restored, who cares how it's painted. As long as its flying, I'll be happy. You call yourself aviation enthusiasts but would rather bicker about what country gets to paint its markings on it rather than rejoice that a classic such as this is going to be restored. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

http://home.comcast.net/~nate.r5388/fw190sig.jpg
"Son, never ask a man if he is a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll let you know. If he isn't, don't embarrass him."
Badges!? We don't needs no stinkin' badges!
Flying online as Hutch51

JG7_Rall
08-19-2004, 06:17 PM
Wow, you people really need to get over it. At least its going to be restored, who cares how it's painted. As long as its flying, I'll be happy. You call yourself aviation enthusiasts but would rather bicker about what country gets to paint its markings on it rather than rejoice that a classic such as this is going to be restored. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif The point is is that it's gonna be flying some day, at least I hope.

http://home.comcast.net/~nate.r5388/fw190sig.jpg
"Son, never ask a man if he is a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll let you know. If he isn't, don't embarrass him."
Badges!? We don't needs no stinkin' badges!
Flying online as Hutch51

Stretch_ACL_
08-19-2004, 08:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PBNA-Boosher:
Come on, dammit! I'm an American, listen to me! Paint the plane in a Finnish scheme! The US doesn't deserve the plane! Give it back! Let it be in its rightful home, Finland!

Boosher
_____________________________
"So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you..."
-Gandalf<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This seems to have turned into another bash the USA forum. Personally I think the a/c would look great painted as an F2A-1 (no offense to those that think otherwise). For anybody who has not been to the National Museum of Naval Aviation it's a beautiful museum with nearly every aircraft ever operated by the Marines and Navy present. One obvious gap from the pre- and early-war section is the Brewster F2A. I think that ANY Buffalo in the collection would be a great addition. I do believe in preserving history but I also think this museum is awsome and anything to make it better is ok by me. For those that don't think the Buffalo is an historic a/c in American aviation history your mistaken. It was the first monoplane fighter in US Naval history. It also defeated the F4F Wildcat in the original fighter competition in which it was entered. Thats pretty important historically to me. Also, as stated earlier, the Naval Air Museum owns it so they can pretty much do as they see fit. It doesn't belong to Finland because it was found in Russia and recovered by an American who paid the bill to get it here. I think that pretty much means its no longer owned by the Finnish gov't. Many people may feel otherwise but possesion is 9/10ths of the law as they say.

Hey Boosher, I'm an American too! I think we do deserve it. It was built here as an F2A-1 for the US Navy (BuNo was even assigned) and sold to Finland to help in their fight against the Russians. Why do we not deserve it? Because it fought for another country? There are plenty of a/c around the World that are in museums of countries other than the ones they fought for. Should they all be given back? I don't think thats very reasonable now do you? If you were to check the serial numbers of every former military a/c still in existance you would probably find that many are painted very inaccurately both in country of service or in squadron or period paint schemes. Does it matter? No, at least they still exist and we can still view them in person. The fact that the Buffalo will be preserved and protected should be enough for anybody no matter what paint scheme or country its preserved in.

Stretch

"The problem is: You don't know what You don't know."

basdirks
08-20-2004, 05:16 AM
This is not a toy you are fighting over. By claiming it to be of a particular country you bring shame on that same country and on yourself. The fact that people that do not even live in finland claim that it _must_ be brought back to finland shows why a terrible event as the second world war (which some almost sickingly endorse as something inspiring (not in this thread though)) could happen. People being patriotic over something like this and because of this taking on a conflict, (altough very light in this case), brings no good to this world. I advice some of you to start caring less, about an event you have no effect on.

Now this might have sounded a bit heavy, but it is nonsense to start getting anti-US over this, or anti-european.

WOLFMondo
08-20-2004, 05:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stretch_ACL_:
It was built here as an F2A-1 for the US Navy (BuNo was even assigned) and sold to Finland to help in their fight against the Russians. Why do we not deserve it? Because it fought for another country? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As you say yourself, Finland bought it, its theres. Its not about deserving it, its about respecting the fact that is Finnish, bought, owned and maintained by Finland and fought for Finland, NOT the USA.

If were gonna simply go by where it was built:

Can the UK have all its Spitfires back from all the US museums and private owners please. It doesn't matter that they were sold legitimatly but there British and we want them back cause we deserve them. How does that logic sound? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

http://bill.nickdafish.com/sig/mondo.jpg
Wolfgaming.net. Where the Gameplay is teamplay (http://www.wolfgaming.net)
Home of WGNDedicated

Jasko76
08-20-2004, 06:03 AM
All of you who think this is some kind of US bashing thread, please get a brain.

Regards,

Jasko
http://users.skynet.be/orbus/Images/husein_kapetan.jpg

Got Milk?

Chuck_Older
08-20-2004, 08:05 AM
Listen, just because Finland bought it over 60 years ago, it doesn't mean it's still theirs.

Has anyone who thinks it's Finland's given a second's thought to the legality of all this from both Russia and Finland's side? Or just Finland's? Or what it means when a airplane is stricken from government inventory? Consider it for a minute, and what it might mean.

Do you really think that even if Finnish law says it's theirs, that they can over-ride Russian Law if Russian Law allows Russian authorities to lay claim to an object that has been abondoned by another government, that lies in Russian territory? Gimme a break! You're not thinking straight. The Russian Federation clearly felt it was theirs. They sold it. End of story.

A6Ms recovered from the South Pacific islands in the '60s didn't belong to Japan anymore, did they? So do you guys think that a wreck of a Zero that was abandoned by the Imperial Japanese Navy in 1945 on some deserted island is still Japan's?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Chuck_Older
08-20-2004, 08:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by basdirks:
This is not a toy you are fighting over. By claiming it to be of a particular country you bring shame on that same country and on yourself. The fact that people that do not even live in finland claim that it _must_ be brought back to finland shows why a terrible event as the second world war (which some almost sickingly endorse as something inspiring (not in this thread though)) could happen. People being patriotic over something like this and because of this taking on a conflict, (altough very light in this case), brings no good to this world. I advice some of you to start caring less, about an event you have no effect on.

Now this might have sounded a bit heavy, but it is nonsense to start getting anti-US over this, or anti-european.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You seem to be caring about it as much as anyone, if you don't mind me pointing it out

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

WUAF_Badsight
08-20-2004, 08:58 AM
the american who financed the search had finnish people helping , apparently they were double crossed by his partner & found out a Brewster had been discovered thru the Russian TV news

the american guy who double crossed this backer was in with dubious russians who managed to get the Brewster held by a russian business instead of the American (who had search permits & raced back to russia to see if the authorities would accept a payment for it)

the guy who did the double crossing was in america trying to sell it in America as its discovery was announced over russian media

after a while it was spotted in Ireland , then possibly later in NY

now after a lot of dealing its arrived in a US museums hands

the reason there is so much interest over a humble B239 is their rariety

.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
actual UBI post :
"If their is a good server with wonder woman views but historic planesets...let me know!" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Stretch_ACL_
08-20-2004, 09:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stretch_ACL_:
It was built here as an F2A-1 for the US Navy (BuNo was even assigned) and sold to Finland to help in their fight against the Russians. Why do we not deserve it? Because it fought for another country? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As you say yourself, Finland bought it, its theres. Its not about deserving it, its about respecting the fact that is Finnish, bought, owned and maintained by Finland and fought for Finland, NOT the USA.

If were gonna simply go by where it was built:

Can the UK have all its Spitfires back from all the US museums and private owners please. It doesn't matter that they were sold legitimatly but there British and we want them back cause we deserve them. How does that logic sound? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

http://bill.nickdafish.com/sig/mondo.jpg
http://www.wolfgaming.net
Home of WGNDedicated<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your only seeing things you want to. If you had read the whole post you would have seen: "There are plenty of a/c around the World that are in museums of countries other than the ones they fought for. Should they all be given back? I don't think thats very reasonable now do you?" This also assumes countries they were built in. It really doesn't matter who gets it as long as its preserved and protected.

For all those that say "respect the Finns" etc. I'm sure the majority of the Finns or Americans for that matter have ever heard of a Buffalo let alone care about one being argued about.

Stretch

CaptArnold
08-20-2004, 09:35 AM
Alright Children, lets all take a deep breath....exhale.....good. Now, instead of b**ching and moaning http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif over where the Buffalo goes and how it will be painted, why don't we all just stop and appreciate for a moment that a very rare piece of aviation history has been recovered and at the very least, will be restored and placed in a good mueseum. Over a decade or two ago the discovery alone of such a rare plane was considered next to impossible, with the general concensus being that the Brewster Buffalo was lost to history. Now we have this rare bird and the opportunity to restore it for future generations to see. Indeed, this is a victory for all of us in the Warbird loving community, no matter what nationality you may be. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/sonar.gif

TheEngine88
08-20-2004, 10:09 AM
So, the US should hunt down this aircraft, recover it, battle the Russian gov't to keep it, ship it to the USA, restore and repair it, and then turn it over to Finland?


That's a joke, right? If Finland wanted this planbe, Finland should have tracked it down and recovered it. seeing as how they chose not too, they don't seem too interested in the plane.

"Pain Fades, Glory lasts forever, Chicks dig scars."

PsykoOps
08-20-2004, 02:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Listen, just because Finland bought it over 60 years ago, it doesn't mean it's still theirs.

...

Do you really think that even if Finnish law says it's theirs, that they can over-ride Russian Law if Russian Law allows Russian authorities to lay claim to an object that has been abondoned by another government, that lies in Russian territory? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Abandoned? More like lost, so it's finders keepers? It was lost and we would've been more than happy to take it back.

Chuck_Older
08-20-2004, 02:50 PM
Psyko-

You are from Finland?

Could you be so kind as to quote Finnish Law to the effect that an aircraft lost in battle 60 years ago that lay as a wreck, lost to enemy action in a foreign country, remains Finnish property regardless of the Law of the country in which it was lost and later recovered?

Thank you

Also, it seems to me you are forgetting a major bit of the story.

It wasn't simply found and recovered. far from it. permits and fees were paid for the search and recovery. These monies were paid to the Russian Federation, not Finland.

Quoting the old kid's saying 'finders keepers losers weepers' ignores the fact that protocol for recovery was observed. It wasn't snatched in the night while no-one was looking. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Also, it was abandoned. It's not like the pilot just happened to forget were he parked it, Lt. Pekuri was too low to bail out, and he was on fire. So he ditched in a lake. He didn't just lose the plane in the parking lot, lol


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

meh_cd
08-20-2004, 02:53 PM
Then come and get your plane yourselves. Do we have to pay to move it back and forth now? Buy it and move it and be done with it.

Jirozaemon
08-20-2004, 03:20 PM
As far as I‚¬īm firm with international law, warships, airplanes ect. which have been lost in a conflict still belong to the country which employed them... Maybe the finish government just didn`t make the claim of their poverty or had no interest in the Buffalo.

Just my two cents

Jiro

http://www.japancollection.com/pages/reproductions/lg/239.jpg

"Feb 16 1978:

The first computer bulletin board system goes live on an S-100 motherboard and CP/M, and a Hayes 300 baud modem. Ward Christensen and Randy Seuss's Computerized Bulletin Board System still kinda runs to this day, but the Internet has taken the place that BBS's used to have.

And this is why you have no social life, loser. "

[This message was edited by Jirozaemon on Fri August 20 2004 at 02:40 PM.]

Chuck_Older
08-20-2004, 03:27 PM
Exactly!

Now complicate that with the fact that the aircraft wasn't lost in the country of ownership- it was lost in hostile territory during war and was stricken from the country's inventory. A small but important point, don't you think?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Da_Godfatha
08-20-2004, 03:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Exactly!

Now complicate that with the fact that the aircraft wasn't lost in the country of ownership- it was lost in _hostile territory during war_ and was stricken from the country's inventory. A small but important point, don't you think?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Word!! That is why the USS Arizona and Old Ironsides are still on the inventory of the US Navy. The moment a military piece of hardware is deleted from the inventory because of hostile action, when it is later found, it is considered salavged.

I for one am glad this plane has been found. BTW, the Finns have a one-off rare example of the Buffalo they tried themselves to manufacture. The one mated with capture Russian engines and wooden wings. And what of the captured P-39's in storage in Finnland? Do they belong to the Russians, Americans or Finnland? Think about it.

DaGodfatha http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Chuck_Older
08-20-2004, 05:58 PM
Well, of course the USS Constitution is not a wreck...in fact she is afloat less than 5 miles from where I sit right now, and is still commisioned http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


But the real key is whether or not this F2 has been stricken...this is unclear but from what I can determine from the stories I have read, Finland's lack of interest in it suggests it might have been.

Now, if the status of the aircraft as far as stricken or on record could be determined, then you could say with little doubt that the aircraft was either legally or illegally sold. Seems to me that the very question of it's status indicates it might have been stricken. I also consider the museum to be 'up' on law regarding the aircraft. For example, if it were the place the pilot had died, it would be a War grave and illegal to salvage. I have to think that the museum would have been satisfied that the current owner's claim to the aircraft is valid.

Aircraft still belonging to the US Navy are recovered from the Great Lakes from time to time. The US Navy claims that the aircraft are theirs. That is fine, but let's us supposed that I located an F4U in Lake Superior and got permission from the Department of the Navy to recover the aircraft and take ownership. Let's just imagine they allowed that. I pay their fees and file for my permits and receive them. After recovery, the aircraft is no longer the US Navy's; it is mine.

Kottman and Villiard pulled the right permits (sorta kinda) and greased the right palms- the aircraft was sold, ownership changed hands.

The real question as far as I'm concerned is: was the Russian Federation within International law to sell it? It seems that the law is vague (especially in the Russian Federation, it seems) enough on this point that it was arguably legal for it to be sold without Finland's consent.

A further complication is that the country was the USSR at the time of the loss, not the Russian Federation.


This whole thing fascinates me, from the recovery to the drama surrounding it's sale, to the question of real ownership.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

SwingerSpecial
08-20-2004, 07:05 PM
I fail to see at what point has the Finnish goverment or air force even opened their mouths about this whole thing? I haven't heard of them claiming ownership at any point so the whole argument is pointless.

Personally, I feel like I am in a win-win situation here, being a Finn living in Florida. I don't care who ends up with the plane, just as long as they restore it back to the FAF specifications & colours. I think this way it would be a more intresting display piece than as the US Navy fighter that was scrapped & sold right after it entered service. This plane has a good story behind it, and embracing that makes it much more intresting.

wayno7777
08-20-2004, 10:43 PM
As as how it will be restored this is what was said; <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The plane was little damaged other than bullet holes well-preserved by the lake's icy waters. For that reason and because of its historic importance it will be exhibited as it was found, Rasmussen said.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As far as the rest of the posturing goes, it's water under the bridge.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/wayno77/Dux_Wreck.jpg
Any landing you can walk away from is a good one!

FiAW_Vaijy
08-25-2004, 03:22 AM
As a Finn I must say that it's great this rare piece of aviation history was found. The guy who made it possible invested huge amount of money to search his treasures. He risked both his personal property and family life for his dream to find something unique. And finally it was worth it. It's his plane , no doubt.

One thing we have to remember is that this plane represents the maybe alltime best successed squadron of the military aviation history.Everyone who knows the history of LLv24 and particulary this plane hardly can deny that. Thats why we Finns are so worried about the destiny of this plane. Sure you understand that. It's like an icon for us. Deep feelings you know.
I think the management of the museum will appreciate the well documented history of this plane and restore it as it was in FAF. That is what museums normally do. And the museums do temporary exchanges of their exhibion stuff to other museums , so you newer know , maybe some day we can see this bird here in Finland
And what ever is the colour of the skin is it will allways remain BW-372 , or what!

Unfortunataly I do know hardly anything about the war history and succes of Buffalo in WWII
other places than Finnland. I know it was used in Pacific , but where exactly and how. Can someone put any links to read.

http://www.leosk.org/SCT/galleria/86349407.jpg

BullShark 71
09-08-2004, 08:52 PM
Well I just had a local show"Pensacola Nas Live" and the topic was the museum .I asked how the project restoration was goin ,the guy said it "wasnt under restoration it was being crated"? when I asked if I could get a peek he said "not yet" so,anyways he did say that "it will be kept in the condition it was found ","were not gonna repaint it or repair the battle damage" so anyways its still a good artifact of history wherever it ends up calling home,

WTE_Galway
09-08-2004, 10:18 PM
i do not think the issue is really about Finnish vs US colors

and most people are not complaining about it goiong to the US the main worry is the possible repaint

the debate is about whether a warbird that saw combat and achieved 8 kills should be represented as it really was or be repainted in another livery presumably to be more popular with tourists

tttiger
09-09-2004, 02:31 AM
Vaijy,

I'm hesitant to add my two cents to what may be the dumbest debate I've ever seen on this board. But...

I think if you do a Google search you will find that the Buffalo was the plane that was used by the U.S. Marine Corps pilots defending Midway during the 1942 sea battle. All of them were shot down. All the Marine pilots were trained alongside the Navy pilots at Pensacola.

The Battle of Midway is not an insignificant part of U.S. history. One might argue that it was marginally important to the outcome of the war.

It also was the aircraft that the British used to defend Singapore and Burma. The Dutch used it to defend the Dutch East Indies and the ones that survived flew in Burma with the RAF but still with Dutch markings.

I think a decision to display it at Pensacola in Finnish markings is a good compromise. Then it can be loaned out to the RAF and flown at Duxford in an air show where it likely will crash.

This is a foolish debate. It properly should be sent back to Russia. It's their war trophy, after all.

More than 1,000 Americans have died in Iraq (and who knows how many Iraqis?) and this is what you guys argue about?

Wow.

ttt

"I want the one that kills the best with the least amount of risk to me"

-- Chuck Yeager describing "The Best Airplane."

WUAF_Badsight
09-09-2004, 02:35 AM
what would you rather have TTTiger ?

a debate on how stupid it was to invade Iraq & create a muslim fundamentalism hotbed that saddam was helping to keep suppressed ,

or a Brewster national markings debate ?

.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
actual UBI post :
"If their is a good server with wonder woman views but historic planesets...let me know!" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

FiAW_Vaijy
09-09-2004, 03:34 AM
tttiger,

Good points , you really have been thinking this and I understand your concern about the casualties in war of Iraqi.Unfortunately that's an other
discussion. There are lot of really bright and newerending debates in many forums , I ques.

But however I think that this is still a forum where you can express your opinions about just this kind of issues even the level of the discussion may not be the highest.

http://www.leosk.org/SCT/galleria/86349407.jpg

Ugly_Kid
09-09-2004, 05:15 AM
The aircraft in question is B-239, it is not F2A-1, A-3 nor is it B-339. Should a museum (as in doing a job preserving history - correctly) for want of Chuck Yeager's X-1 paint a V-1, fished out of some swamp, pink and put in on a show?

Don't really now about museums but at least guys building plastic kits are pretty rectal about putting correct markings on a correct type.

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg

Chuck_Older
09-09-2004, 07:27 AM
You need a better analogy than a pink V-1, UglyKid, for many reasons I'm sure you're aware of, not the least of which is: the X-1 wasn't even pink. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Still, the fact of the matter is that many P-51s exist today that either fought in WWII in markings other than US markings, or served with other airforces than the US's after WWII. These planes are most all marked as famous P-51s from WWII, and as mounts of famous aces.

What is the difference you see between the case of this ex-Finnish aircraft recovered from a lake, and a Cavalier Mustang built twenty years after WWII?

Why shouldn't these aircraft be displayed in the manner the owners wish? Because it's a "shame" to someone? That makes little sense to me. Especially if the aircraft in question is being painted in a period correct paint scheme. There are Hispano Buchons flying around in Luftwaffe markings...there weren't any Bf 109s around at the time, so people "made do". I see absolutely no difference between these examples and the case of BW-372.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Slick750
09-09-2004, 08:24 AM
"a debate on how stupid it was to invade Iraq & create a muslim fundamentalism hotbed that saddam was helping to keep suppressed"

He was so scared himself of the fundamentalists, in his last years in power he was building mosques like crazy. Even Iraq's soldiers where "forced" to learn the friggin Koran. When he started saying he was Saladin and sent money to palestinian bombers, it looked more like appeasement then suppression to me. He knew his days where numbered, I think he was more afraid of Islamics then the U.S.

About the Brewster: should keep original paint, if not, well it might aswell be a duplicate. I think russia gave the U.S. the finger when ask to pay for all those planes they received during the war, did the finns do the same?

Ugly_Kid
09-09-2004, 12:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
You need a better analogy than a pink V-1, UglyKid, for many reasons I'm sure you're aware of, not the least of which is: the X-1 wasn't even pink. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Still, the fact of the matter is that many P-51s exist today that either fought in WWII in markings other than US markings, or served with other airforces than the US's after WWII. These planes are most all marked as famous P-51s from WWII, and as mounts of famous aces.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you want to display V-1 as X-1 then I bet pink instead of orange is the minor bang on the conscience. The point was that a museum is there for sort of preserving history, an aircraft in a static display is valuable source of information for quite a bunch of people (not only for FW-190 bar whiners) - designating it wrongly will only lead to further errors. This is different from somebody flying a warbird with modern avionics etc. and painted as he likes, it is also different from museum displaying a correct subtype with different as original but still historically correct marking. (Bouchons are defenately not displayed in Deutsches Museum painted as Emils - hey this is a Bf-109 just fresh from Battle of Britain) - For all I care they may paint it with psychedelic hippie flower power pattern if there was _B-239_ to go with them but don't go calling it something that it wasn't. I don't see any need for Russians or anybody else to go returning aircraft wrecks from Karelia before returning the effing Karelia itself. Like a leper said when leaving a brothel "It's there and it seems that it will stay there from now on!" - that's all I've got to say about the Continuation War

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg

Chuck_Older
09-09-2004, 12:43 PM
This isn't about the Russian annexation of Karelia, it's about an aircraft's paintjob http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

So how do you feel about a Cavalier Mustang painted as Howard's "Ding Hao!"?

A pink X-1 is a poor example in my opinion. may as well paint the Wright model B orange and call it a Buffalo in that case. The B-239 was a de-navalised F2A2 as far as I know, was it not? It's not as if the F2A2 and the B339 are not related aircraft, or the B-239 and the F2A2 are as dissimilar as a Pilatus and a Focke-Wulf 190.

Many museums do use replicas, by the way. A Brewster replica is in one right now

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

tttiger
09-09-2004, 01:08 PM
LOL, I was simply pointing out that, with all the world's problems, why get so passionate about the paint on an old airplane.

Didn't mean to stir up a political debate.

Just suggesting there is such a thing as perspective.

I've spent my vacations for more than 20 years diving ship and plane wrecks from WWII all over the Pacific. I can show you Betty bombers and many Zeroes, a Corsair, several Emily flying boat, a B-17 and on and on and on.

My REAL opinion on this matter: They should be left where they fell. The spot should be marked with a monument and protected. Those of us who come along later should be able to stand on the spot where soldiers fought and died and reflect on the waste of war.

Aloha,

ttt

"I want the one that kills the best with the least amount of risk to me"

-- Chuck Yeager describing "The Best Airplane."

Chuck_Older
09-09-2004, 01:30 PM
I can understand that, tiger, but on a few levels, it's very impractical, especially considering that this aircraft in question was not a War Grave at all. They were just Old Junk for so long, justifying the expense of protecting them where they fell is difficult. Who pays for the protection? the country in which it fell? The country that destroyed or lost it?
Personally, unless the wreck is a War Grave, I think recovering it and restoring it is a heck of a tribute to those who can't tell us about flying the planes anymore http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

Ugly_Kid
09-09-2004, 03:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
The B-239 was a de-navalised F2A2 as far as I know, was it not? It's not as if the F2A2 and the B339 are not related aircraft, or the B-239 and the F2A2 are as dissimilar as a Pilatus and a Focke-Wulf 190.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...was it not? Maybe it would not be that bad idea to have a correct model with correct designation in some museum to provide some correct information, eh? Sure, mix the most succesfull fighter of the WW II with the least succesfull one (funny that both of them can be found within Brewster series but you say they are not _that_ different http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg

Chuck_Older
09-09-2004, 04:42 PM
But they aren't that different. What's so funny about saying that? The US Navy de-navalised them. They even took the gunsights. Arrestor hooks, too. The B-239 was an F2A2 with US gov't equipment removed and other equipment installed by the Finns, right? As far as I know, a B-239 used to be an F2A2

And let's not forget that the B-239 was not the most succesful fighter design of WWII, it was that a single B-239 had the most verified kills of any single particular serial number aircraft http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Big difference


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/Chuck_Older/BBB3.jpg
Killers in America work seven days a week~
Clash

FiAW_Vaijy
09-10-2004, 01:44 AM
Combat use by the Finnish Air Force
Brewster B-239 enjoyed considerable success in the hands of Finnish pilots during the WW2.
"During its combat career in Finland the Buffalo is credited with 496 enemy aircraft destroyed [Soviet & German] against the loss of nineteen Buffalos, for a victory ratio of 26:1. After five years of combat attrition only eight Brewsters remained in Finnish inventory and were used in the training role until late 1948, more than ten years after the XF2A-1's first flight." - Source: _F2A Buffalo in Action_Squadron/Signal Publications, Inc. 1987

During the Continuation War Lentolaivue 24 (fighter squadron 24) was equipped with the B-239s until May 1944 when the Brewsters were transferred to H√¬§vitt√¬§j√¬§lentolaivue 26 (fighter squadron 26). Most of the pilots of the Lentolaivue 24 were Winter War combat veterans and the squadron achieved total of 459 kills with B-239s while losing fifteen Brewsters in combat.

The top scoring Brewster B-239 pilot was Hans Wind with 39 kills in B-239s. Wind scored 26 of his kills while flying B-239 designated BW-393 and Eino Luukkanen scored 7 more kills with the same plane. BW-393 is credited with 41 kills in total making it possibly the single aircraft with most air victories in the history of air warfare.

The top scoring Finnish ace Eino Juutilainen scored 34 of his 94 and half kills while flying B-239s (28 kills with BW-364).

The last flight made by the Brewster in Finnish service was in 14.9.1948.

More detailed info on Brewster kills

http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/finland.htm
http://hkkk.fi/~yrjola/war/faf/brewster.html
http://www.saunalahti.fi/~fta/BWtoFAF1.htm

Chuck ,
As far as know the Finnish brewster was not modificated from the same type as US navy used.
Im just curious , but can you name any other
plane type or squadron with victory ratio 26:1

Please read the stories behind the links , so we can continue the discussion.

http://www.leosk.org/SCT/galleria/86349407.jpg

Ugly_Kid
09-10-2004, 03:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
But they aren't that different. What's so funny about saying that? The US Navy de-navalised them. They even took the gunsights. Arrestor hooks, too. The B-239 was an F2A2 with US gov't equipment removed and other equipment installed by the Finns, right? As far as I know, a B-239 used to be an F2A2

And let's not forget that the B-239 was not the most succesful fighter design of WWII, it was that a single B-239 had the most verified kills of any single particular serial number aircraft http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Big difference
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And that's the point - it isn't and they _are_ that different, you're just oversimplifying it. To begin with it originates from A-1 and it's _not only_ de-navalized. Differences go already way past that point. Then from A-1 to A-3 of Midway there is a whole sad history of screwing up quite a good work of aircraft designing and giving it a bad name. Sort of resembles the way of P-39 prototype to the serial aircraft only worse. Maybe if you want argue that line you should first know what you're talking about, eh? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

B-239 fought through the whole war, not just one battle and it reached not only probably most verified kills for any single particular serial number, it had also arguably the best kill ratio. Fighter Squadron 24 operated it with 459 kill vs 15 losses - in that it was even more succesful than Bf-109 Gustavs (or the all 5 1/2 kills achieved by the legendary Hurricanes operated by FAF). That's two records for B-239, F2A-3 had quite an opposite record and that is exactly the difference. And the kill:loss ratio extends over the complete war.

What part of the "BW-372 is the unique surviving example of B-239" don't you understand? If there was only one example of P-51B would it be a cool thing to display it in the museum painted as just another "Glamorous Glennis"? Hmmm...just about the same as paint Black 6 as a Bouchon and put in on a display as such (and not vice versa if you get the slight difference). If I buy the only example of Elvis Presley's Mercedes from a shady handler there's no problem painting it mat black with flames and go a-chasing tails with it?

By all means they may paint it as they wish - I don't care as long as it goes historically as B-239 and represents what that stands for.

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg

[This message was edited by Ugly_Kid on Fri September 10 2004 at 04:03 AM.]

Ugly_Kid
09-10-2004, 03:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
But they aren't that different. What's so funny about saying that? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe that's the adequate depth of the history this game and this community is ready to accept, I think I'll settle for that.

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg

Obi_Kwiet
09-10-2004, 06:33 AM
Too tired to read through 4 pages of flaming... but it WILL have finnish markings. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

FiAW_Vaijy
09-10-2004, 07:30 AM
I found one more link :-)

http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/Mag/Index/1996/JJ/ssbb.html

These planes can be seen in the bottom of Pasificif you are lucky, -until they are covered with coral after couple of generations.

http://www.leosk.org/SCT/galleria/86349407.jpg