Buried aircraft

[Ed Russell]

NOT Spitfires

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/11811170

[Julien]

Quite a story. There are other Hinds in Museums, I wonder how they got on.

[Max Headroom]

Allegedly there was a hanger full of privately owned Hinds stored in North Wales. Someone had been to the Baltic states and picked up abandoned ex-Soviet stuff.

 

Trevor 

[tonywood]

The ex Hawarden (North Wales) Mi 24 were sold, one was used by BAE Systems and is at Midland Air Museum, Coventry. The other is at Dunsfold, Surrey. 

Another Hind in the UK is the ex Iraqi one at RAF Spadeadam. 

[exdraken]

Interesting stuff gentlemen!

Thanks!

[Wafu]

On 1/1/2020 at 1:14 PM, Max Headroom said:

Allegedly there was a hanger full of privately owned Hinds stored in North Wales. Someone had been to the Baltic states and picked up abandoned ex-Soviet stuff.

 

Trevor 

Is that for when Wales goes for independence, the Welsh armed forces😂😂😂

[Julien]

10 hours ago, Wafu said:

Is that for when Wales goes for independence, the Welsh armed forces😂😂😂

 

Ground forces  

[Whitewolf]

On 1/2/2020 at 4:20 PM, tonywood said:

The ex Hawarden (North Wales) Mi 24 were sold, one was used by BAE Systems and is at Midland Air Museum, Coventry. The other is at Dunsfold, Surrey. 

Another Hind in the UK is the ex Iraqi one at RAF Spadeadam. 

There is a Hind at the Helicopter museum in Somerset. 

[Julien]

15 minutes ago, Stealthman said:

There is a Hind at the Helicopter museum in Somerset. 

Also one at Coventry

 

 

[JohnT]

On 03/01/2020 at 23:03, Julien said:

Ground forces  

Julien

from your photo I suppose that even might be styled as “Self Defence Ground Forces” given what is rumoured darkly about the fate of sheep in Wales

[ivand]

15 minutes ago, JohnT said:

what is rumoured darkly about the fate of sheep in Wales

... where men are men and sheep are scared...

[Aardvark]

On 1/1/2020 at 7:53 AM, Ed Russell said:

NOT Spitfires

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/11811170

Why was it simply impossible to remove asbestos and give them to the museum without asbestos?

🤔

On 1/4/2020 at 2:03 AM, Julien said:

On 1/3/2020 at 3:37 PM, Wafu said:

the Welsh armed forces😂😂😂

 

Ground forces  

Rational use ...... in case of failure with the use of rocket launcher, the commander will not remain hungry!😁

 

B.R.

Serge

 

 

[Ed Russell]

11 minutes ago, Aardvark said:

Why was it simply impossible to remove asbestos and give them to the museum without asbestos?

Well you can't tell from the  somewhat uninformed article (note the picture!) but one might think it was a question of cost.

Asbestos is a problem - the AWM have had a Ki-54 body for years wrapped up in plastic because it was full of asbestos but they carefully cleaned it and it's on display (sort of) so it can be done.

[Aardvark]

25 minutes ago, Ed Russell said:

Well you can't tell from the  somewhat uninformed article (note the picture!)

Yes, yes....Mi-28 Havoc not the same thing as Mi-24 😁....I drew attention to this, but did not generate sarcasm 😁, because as I wrote earlier, a drop in journalism is an international phenomenon.

29 minutes ago, Ed Russell said:

Asbestos is a problem - the AWM have had a Ki-54 body for years wrapped up in plastic because it was full of asbestos but they carefully cleaned it and it's on display (sort of) so it can be done.

I do not think that cleaning from asbestos is more expensive than cleaning from radiation, as was the case with Lockheed XF-90, but of course the uniqueness of the Ki-51 and Lockheed XF-90 is not comparable to the Mi-24.

But on the other hand, it seems that in Australia, in museums, it’s just full of Mi-24 or offers to bring the Mi-24 to Australia for free by first removing asbestos from it! 🤔

This is not my business, of course, but I was always surprised how the military destroyed equipment, give some of the equipment to the museum, let the museum have an exchange fund!  What prevented some Australian F-111s from being left in the exchange fund of museums and then exchanged for the same decommissioned Su-24 or other military equipment?

😕

In which museum can I see the next F-111 and Su-24?  What is not interesting?  In my opinion, the Tu-144 and Concord standing nearby in one of the German museums prove the exact opposite.

😔

 

B.R.

Serge

 

P.S.

But they did not write anything about the fate of two Mi-8s .... something tells me that they still fly, even despite asbestos if it is inside, of course ....

 

[rayprit]

Moving away from Helicopters and sheep, other known buried aircraft can be found world wide...………….saddam buried his airforce in the desert...……………………...see here:

 

https://www.wearethemighty.com/history/iraq-buried-air-force-desert

 

And what ever happened to the F117 Stealth fighter?  Plus other top secret American projects?      the F117s even have grave markers with there serial numbers on, see here:

 

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-mysterious-area-51-graveyards-where-secret-military-5974678

[Max Headroom]

‘Area 51’ is a place full of mysteries (possibly).

 

There was one project from the 80’s that was buried there, only to be dig up several years ago for exhibition. Can’t for the life of me remember what it was called, but looked for all the world like an overturned bathtub with stub wings!

 

Trevor

[iainpeden]

3 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

‘Area 51’ is a place full of mysteries (possibly).

 

There was one project from the 80’s that was buried there, only to be dig up several years ago for exhibition. Can’t for the life of me remember what it was called, but looked for all the world like an overturned bathtub with stub wings!

 

Trevor

I think you may be referring to the Tacit Blue project.

[Max Headroom]

56 minutes ago, iainpeden said:

I think you may be referring to the Tacit Blue project.

By jove that’s it!

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Tacit_Blue

 

Very 1950’s B movie!

 

Trevor

[Bell209]

On 1/23/2020 at 8:14 PM, Aardvark said:

What prevented some Australian F-111s from being left in the exchange fund of museums and then exchanged for the same decommissioned Su-24 or other military equipment?

START II requirements. The F-111s were all delivered with nuclear weapon delivery capability and the US retained overall say on what happened to them. The F-111Cs lost that when they went through the AUP refit but the F-111Gs were still (notionally) capable of nuke delivery and were required to be destroyed (all but the one still in the RAAF inventory at the RAAF Museum). The Russian satellites were given the opportunity to see them lined up in their burial pits before they were covered over and that area will remain a 'no-go' zone to the public for may years to come.

[Bell209]

On 1/23/2020 at 8:14 PM, Aardvark said:

In which museum can I see the next F-111

You mean where can you see an F-111? Several museums in the US (The Museum of the USAF has three), the South Australian Aviation Museum, Queensland Air Museum, RAAF Museum (F-111C and G), Australian War Memorial (not on permanent display yet), Northern Territory Aviation Museum, RAAF Base Wagga main gate, RAAF Base Amberley main gate, RAAF Amberley Aviation Heritage Centre, Fighter World (RAAF Base Williamtown) and the Evans Head Aviation Heritage Museum.

[Aardvark]

5 hours ago, Bell209 said:

START II requirements.

????

What does the 

START II (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty)  on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms.

(also not ratified)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/START_II

have to do with tactical weapons?

Tactical nuclear weapons can be carried by all MiGs from 21 to 29, many Su, Mirage, F-15 and many other aircraft, this does not prevent them from taking places in museums after serving and removing the appropriate equipment and not under a layer of sand. In addition, all these issues can be fully resolved by the relevant treaties by including in them a clause on bringing the aircraft into non-flying condition and using it as a museum exhibit.

5 hours ago, Bell209 said:

The Russian satellites were given the opportunity to see them lined up in their burial pits before they were covered over and that area will remain a 'no-go' zone to the public for may years to come.

Given the state of the Russian satellite constellation and the number of accidents that occurred with the launch of the satellites, the Russians have nothing more to do than follow the Australian F-111 buried in the desert! 😉

Do not wishful thinking!  😁 If Russian satellites fly over these territories, then there are other reasons for this and not the observation of the old F-111s whose construction has been partially studied in the USSR since the time of the Vietnam War.😉

5 hours ago, Bell209 said:

You mean where can you see an F-111?

No, I'm mean where can we see an F-111 with Su-24?  Answer - nowhere!

But at the same time, we may well see the MiG-25 and Tornado nearby in one of the Baltic museums. Polish and Czech museums are doing a lot in this direction, which, as I understand it, are actively involved in intra-museum exchanges. It all depends on the indifference and active position of both the leadership of the local museums and the aviation community of the country.

 

 

That is, referring to the situation with the Mi-24, nothing prevented from carrying out decontamination work and leaving these helicopters in museums in Australia.

 

B.R.

Serge

[Whitewolf]

On 1/23/2020 at 12:48 PM, Max Headroom said:

‘Area 51’ is a place full of mysteries (possibly).

 

There was one project from the 80’s that was buried there, only to be dig up several years ago for exhibition. Can’t for the life of me remember what it was called, but looked for all the world like an overturned bathtub with stub wings!

 

Trevor

It was the Northrop Tacit Blue - a very strange looking concept demonstrator for the B2 Spirit. I believe it was nicknamed 'Shamu' because it resembled a whale.....

[Giorgio N]

On 1/25/2020 at 4:08 PM, Aardvark said:

????

What does the 

START II (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty)  on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms.

(also not ratified)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/START_II

have to do with tactical weapons?

Tactical nuclear weapons can be carried by all MiGs from 21 to 29, many Su, Mirage, F-15 and many other aircraft, this does not prevent them from taking places in museums after serving and removing the appropriate equipment and not under a layer of sand. In addition, all these issues can be fully resolved by the relevant treaties by including in them a clause on bringing the aircraft into non-flying condition and using it as a museum exhibit.

Given the state of the Russian satellite constellation and the number of accidents that occurred with the launch of the satellites, the Russians have nothing more to do than follow the Australian F-111 buried in the desert! 😉

Do not wishful thinking!  😁 If Russian satellites fly over these territories, then there are other reasons for this and not the observation of the old F-111s whose construction has been partially studied in the USSR since the time of the Vietnam War.😉

 

 

START dealt with strategic nuclear weapons and a number of Australian F-111 were exactly this ! All F-111G were former US SAC FB-111 and while these were modified for the tactical role when delivered to Australia, they could in theory have been reactivated for the strategic strike role.

The various agreements between the US and Soviet Union, including the START series, requested that the numbers of strategic weapons could be verified by the counterpart. This led to a number of features on existing aircraft to make them identifiable by satellites but also meant that any removal from service of such weapons had to be controlled. The easiest way to do it was to agree on a number of checks by satellites and the fate of the Australian F-111G force was done according to these agreements. So yes, Soviet satellites overflying Australia also had to check that the destruction of what was considered a strategic nuclear weapon was conducted according to the agreements.

The same actually occurred for a number of tactical aircraft after the signature of CFE, the treaty on the limitation of tactical forces in Europe. I remember for example even G.91s that after retirement were specifically marked to make them identifieable from satellites as retired, so to not be included in the numbers allowed to NATO. The treaty included plenty of non nuclear capable assets and these too had to be identifiable. Whenever you see a picture of a retired aircraft carrying some unusual markings, often it's for this reason.

Edited January 31, 2020 by Giorgio N

[Aardvark]

7 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

START dealt with strategic nuclear weapons and a number of Australian F-111 were exactly this ! All F-111G were former US SAC FB-111 and while these were modified for the tactical role when delivered to Australia, they could in theory have been reactivated for the strategic strike role.

START-2 An agreement planned for signing between the USA and the Russian Federation?  I think this is right.  In that case, what does Australia have to do with it?  Or is Australia not an independent entity and is completely dependent and controlled by the USA?  In my opinion, no.  There is no Australia and in the text of the START-2 agreement in Russian, as well as in the text of the agreement on the specific mention of F-111.

Yes, in the clauses of the agreement there is mention of heavy bombers, but no more than that:

http://www.armscontrol.ru/start/rus/docs/dogovor.htm

Maybe you confuse it with the treaty on the reduction of offensive arms in Europe? ..... but what does Australia have to do with Europe that I don’t understand?

8 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

I remember for example even G.91s that after retirement were specifically marked to make them identifieable from satellites as retired, so to not be included in the numbers allowed to NATO. The treaty included plenty of non nuclear capable assets and these too had to be identifiable. Whenever you see a picture of a retired aircraft carrying some unusual markings, often it's for this reason.

Can you show an example of such marking?

 

B.R.

Serge

[EwenS]

The real answer seems to be that their destruction was mandated by the US under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITARs). See page 237 and 238 of the following. 

 

http://airpower.airforce.gov.au/APDC/media/PDF-Files/Historical Publications/HIST22-From-Controversy-to-Cutting-Edge-A-History-of-the-F-111-in-Australian-Service.pdf

 

The first line lumps all the aircraft together irrespective of model. Then it specifically refers to scrapping the F-111A & G. Given the final disposition of the  C models to museums outwith Australian Govt control, I would conclude that ITARs did not apply to the C models that were probably acquired prior to that legislation hitting the US statute books.

 

And they were buried as cutting them up would have been a health hazard due to the asbestos content see this.

https://qam.com.au/qam-content/aircraft/f-111/F-111-disposal.htm

 

The above being the product of 15 mins on Google!

 

See also the following for the final disposition of the airframes.

http://www.adf-serials.com.au/3a8.htm