SWAMPY GHOST QUESTION - from one who was there

Discussion about the history of B-17E 'Swamp Ghost' and its recovery.


Joined:Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:20 am
Re: SWAMPY GHOST QUESTION - from one who was there

Post by Ranuguri » Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:21 am

Buzzking wrote:
Ranuguri wrote:
Buzzking wrote:My turn,

Now for you Justin your really need to go and read the War Surplus Laws they state if the item in this case Swamp Ghost was lost durning a combat then they are still belong to the US Goverment. Please don't say I have no idea what I'm talking about because at this very time I'm dealing with the US Goverment on aircraft lost in North Africa durning Combat Missions.

For the benefit of Buzzking, the United States Government transferred to Australia which subsequently handed this responsibilty to the Administration of the Territory of Papua New Guinea in 1950 all rights and possession to surplus American war material on land and in the sea within the territorial limits of the Territory. In 1952, the Administrator's Executive Council passed the War Surplus Material Act of 1952 formalizing this matter. Therefore from that date, the United States Government was no longer the owner of any war surplus material that originated from the United States. To say that the US Government still owns any material within Papua New Guinea that originated during World War Two is grossly inaccurate. This Act was designed to return Papua New Guinea to its original condition prior to 1942 in that war surplus material of every nature, both Japanese and Allied was to be recovered and disposed. The Territory was to receive a royalty from all sales. From 1952 until the early 1960s, many salvage companies operated in Papua New Guinea and tons of war surplus material was recovered, smeltered andf sold. Since 1976, The Independent State of Papua New Guinea is therefore well within its rights to do whatever it thinks fit. In the past, it has acted quite responsibly, although in recent years, money has brought co-operation into disrepute.[/b]
I guess you didn't read what I said then I said aircraft lost DURNING COMBAT MISSIONS not a wreck yes that is what the WMSA of 52 did but the US Goverment never gave up ownership of Combat lost Aircraft for the simple fact many of them contain human remains. Please don't tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about I'm in the process of getting permission to do recoverys in North Africa and Libya and have run into this problem with the Dept. of Defence

North Africa is not Papua New Guinea. Appears as if you do not know what you are talking about insofar as the latter as my comments are directed at aircraft of all descriptions, be they wrecked beside a landing field, abandoned elsewhere as a result of a crash-landing, and lost or missing on combat missions, or non-combat flights within Papua New Guinea. The War Surplus Material Act covers EVERYTHING in Papua New Guinea including missing combat AND non-combat aircraft. The United States Department of Defense through the US Army works in closely with the PNG Government and seeks the authority of the PNG Government to enter PNG to conduct search and recovery operations. A representative of the PNG Government (in this case a member of the National Museum) is present at most times during these operations and the US Army has never had a problem with this requirement. These operations are solely for the recovery of human remains and associated personal effects and there is extraordinary co-operation between both Governments. The only item of a military value, such as pistols that are permitted to be exported are those that may be required during the identification process. The wreckage of the aircraft is not of concern and once all the recoverable remains and personal effects have been removed and the crash-site is deemed closed, the disposition of the wreckage is at the discretion of the Papua New Guinea Government. At least two rusty pistols were taken back to Hawaii and on the completion of the identification process, were subsequently returned to Papua New Guinea. The serial plate of a B-24 was removed in the early 1980s but this item was subsequently returned to PNG. This information has been provided to me by the former curator at the National Museum in Port Moresby who worked closely with the United States Government's Central Identification Laboratory of the US Army for 10 years on all matters pertaining to US missing aircraft, both combat and non-combat. At no stage did the United States Government notified him or the PNG Government that the ownership of these missing combat and non-combat wrecks were still vested in the United States. There is a big difference with dealings between two governments compared with dealings between a government and a private individual.

1st Lieutenant
Joined:Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:28 am


Post by West-Front » Wed Sep 10, 2008 5:03 pm

Andy in West Oz wrote:Of all the people to lead the recovery, I am glad it was Rob Greinert. From what I have seen over the years, he knows the rules, he respects the locals and he respects the heritage. Can't do any better than that.CheersAndy
http://www.pacificwrecks.com/forum/view ... f=9&t=1944

1st Lieutenant
Joined:Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:28 am

Re: SWAMPY GHOST QUESTION - from one who was there

Post by West-Front » Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:04 am

Swamp Ghost sale illegal

THE National Executive Council (NEC) decision to allow the Swamp Ghost wreck to be exported is an illegal decision and the NEC has actually participated in that conspiracy by giving an approval which it has no legal power to make.

This was said in a joint statement issued yesterday by the deputy chairman of the Public Accounts Committee and Governor of Western Province Dr Bob Danaya and Member of the PAC and Governor of Eastern Highlands Mal Kela Smith.

Both governors said this decision by the NEC showed very clearly the collapse of the rule of law in Papua New Guinea.

“And, all citizens can now see that the NEC is prepared to ignore thelaw and embrace and approve illegal transactions and acquisitions of State property by foreigners who themselves have no certification to work in PNG and who on — sell our heritage for profit confident that they will never be called to account,” the governors said.

They said the NEC decision totally ignores the law and advice given by the Attorney General, the State Solicitor, the PAC, O’Briens Lawyers and the Gubon Lawyers that the sale was illegal, the export was illegal and the removal from Agaiembo swamp was illegal.

The governors said the NEC has not only endorsed a conspiracy to illegally acquired public property by foreigners who have no capacity to restore or preserve the wreck and also completely ignored the fact that the wreck is sub judice in the National Court.

“Further, the NEC submission was intentionally misleading and deceitful as it again stated that the wreck was to go to March Field Museum in California,” they said.

They said on August 4, the museum again said there was no such arrangement and also had no knowledge of the Swamp Ghost or its exporters and intended to write to the PNG Government protesting that the name of the museum was again being used without its knowledge.
The governors asked to know which destination the Swamp Ghost was going to . . . who has actually bought it and why did the NEC accept the submission without seeking confirmation.

They said the Minister for Cultural and Tourism has no jurisdiction over the wreck nor does the museum.

The only person with legal power to approve such salvage is the Governor-General acting on advice – and even he cannot approve a sale.


Post Reply