Hi John, Not ruling it out at all - it's still my favourite site by a long shot However, I don't want the dust to settle there - by exploring other possibilities, we should be able to add weight to the most favourable site by finding weaknesses in the other candidates. With this in mind, I would like to have a look at the Pond Field also in an attempt to find out why the sketch map referencing that area was produced. All part of the chase Pat
Hi All, I am anxious to have a look at the Pond Field as another possibility for Brigadier General Pratt's crash site because of the sketch map appearing on page 100 of the book "Utah Beach - Sainte Mere Eglise - Sainte Marie du Mont" by Georges Bernage and Dominique Francois. Here is the sketch map again: Regular readers will recall that we had done extensive work tying up various photographs and footage in what has been now termed the 'Pond Field'. This field has the markers '3', '4', '5' and '6' marked thereon in the said sketch map above. The caption reads: Below is a GE screenshot with the pond which gives the field it's name marked 'P' and the house which is marked 'Maison Doline' on the sketch map circled in red: For those readers who may not be familiar with our previous work in this field, here are a few of the screen shots we used: Footage still below was shot from position 'C' above: The sharp eyed reader will note the difference in the position of Horsa 'H1', seen below before it was pulled back out of the hedgerow to allow access to the shortcut leading to the hospital at Chateau de Colombières two fields to the east: ...and a closer ground view from footage shot at the scene with the name 'Edna' now visible: One final screenshot from GE 'street view' of the same stretch of road today: OK, so what has led to this field being considered as a candidate for Brigadier General Pratt's crash site? During the research tying up the above photographs and footage, we purchased a high resolution copy NCAP_ACIU_US7GR_1857_4052, flown on the 12th June. The extract below shows a good clear view of the Pond Field due to a combination of a sparse tree line on the southern hedgerow and the sun shining from a low angle in the evening sky. There are however, some shadows remaining: Can anyone see another Waco in the field apart from ‘W1’ at the pond? One other thing has just occurred to me when tracking down all the above screenshots on my hard drive…why was this field photographed and filmed to such an extent? Were the Signal Corps photographers searching for Brigadier General Pratt’s crash site and stopped when they saw the Horsa ‘H1’ ("Edna") in the hedgerow? Strange… :huh: As always, comments and corrections welcomed and appreciated. Regards, Pat
Hi Pat, I was not able to see any other Waco gliders in this location and the somewhat sparse treeline does offer some good viewing. I think the reason this area was photographed so much is because it offers what every photographer looks for in a photo. The gliders offer a interesting grouping and the one stretching into the roadway offers another interesting arrangement. It would be really difficult to know if they were looking for General Pratts glider, but it is possible. Respectfully, John Szweda
The Pratt location in Bernage and Francois obviously comes from Koskimaki, published 1970. Thanks to his thoroughness and terrific research instincts, Kevin learned from Koskimaki that his source was the glider map in RwD. But the RwD map doesn't show anything about Pratt; ergo, Koskimaki is the original source. Where did Koskimaki get the additional claim from? That's the question. Pat, I can't tell from my notes what the tail number is for the lone Waco west of the Big Dipper Horsas. Was it Chicago? If I recall correctly, the MACR showed the coordinates for an LZ marker in or just south of those narrow fields just east of #6.
Hi John & Don, Yes, the Horsa protruding from the hedgerow would indeed make a photographer stop and shoot some pictures. Once out of the jeep, its then very probable that he ambled into the field and shot some more footage. I note with interest that on page 49 of his book "Sainte Mere Eglise", Alexandre Renaud, wartime mayor of the town, has the photograph of the protruding Horsa’s starboard side mis-captioned (IMHO): I wonder if there was another Horsa on the D15 road also protruding from a hedgerow with which he confused the photograph of 'Edna'? Just a thought. Don, are you looking at that Waco as a candidate for the Brigadier General Pratt crash site? In any event here is the extract from NCAP_ACIU_US7GR_1857_4052 flown on the 12th June with the 'Big Dipper' Horsa grouping on the marshland west of Vierville: Image Credit: RCAHMS/www.aerial.rcahms.gov.uk The Waco I think you are referring to is marked circled '1' on the left of the extract. Below is a zoomed view: Image Credit: RCAHMS/www.aerial.rcahms.gov.uk I cannot recall that we ever established the tail (serial) number of this Waco... We did find some ground photographs from the Harold Palmer and Willie Hein albums on the The WWII 300th Combat Engineers site, one of which is reproduced below with the kind permission of the site owners Brad Peters and Jan Ross: Image Credit: The WWII 300th Combat Engineers / www.300thcombatengineersinwwii.com The photograph was taken I suspect from the position on the aerial extract marked circled '1' but I am less sure of this that the other photographs taken by Palmer and Hein at the same location. Here are the others, with more and more certainty on my part as the photographers walked towards Vierville from positions 2, 3, 4 and 5: Image Credit: The WWII 300th Combat Engineers / www.300thcombatengineersinwwii.com Image Credit: The WWII 300th Combat Engineers / www.300thcombatengineersinwwii.com Image Credit: The WWII 300th Combat Engineers / www.300thcombatengineersinwwii.com Image Credit: The WWII 300th Combat Engineers / www.300thcombatengineersinwwii.com I cannot see the tail number on the Waco marked '1' in the ground shot, but as I say, I am not sure it is the same as that marked '1' in the aerial extract. It just feels right The 'Rommel's Asparagus' pole in front of the starboard side wing worried me until I realised it's shadow, which must be pointing east like the others as indicated by the black specks in the zoomed aerial extract, is hidden by the raised cockpit and starboard wing. If this is not the Waco you are looking for, let me have more details and I'll track it down. Regards, Pat
Thanks, Pat, that presentation deserved another look. Nice job (then and now). I recalled the story about half right. No tail number as you say, but just my earlier guess that the lone Waco might be 42-56506, Chicago, Chalk 32. In the MACR the tug pilot gives release point as 49-21-50N; 1-16-00W and says that is on the LZ. I never noticed before, but the glider landing map on Bando's site (as you know, I have long been enamored over this 101AB produced map) shows a symbol at very close to that spot - about 350 yards ENE (maybe 91.3-38.6). The symbol looks to me like a lit light bulb. Is this intended to represent the location of the glider landing lights? Anyway, aircrew and both 101AB passengers are listed as POW, so you can see how the isolated location of this Waco attracted my speculation. Thinking about it some more, however, makes it impossible to eliminate from consideration as Chalk #32 several other Wacos E and NE of the lone Waco including four in the field I have described as the Bando light symbol field. I still favor a more isolated location to explain losing the whole group as POWs. Until someone finds info to make a better case, I'll take the traditional Pratt location. It does make me wonder, however, that if that is the correct Pratt location and, as I suspect, most or all of those Wacos to the east of there are from Chicago, why did those Wacos keep going? Did they miss the LZ because the lights were knocked out early and without the lights they had to guess in the dark? Was there groundfire in reaction to Murphy and the early part of the serial and they kept going a smidge, preferring to land in the dark and take their chances rather than settle down in the middle of a firefight?
Hi Don, The only reference to the position of pathfinder planted aids in the area I have come across is on page 84 of "Utah Beach - Sainte Mere Eglise - Sainte Marie du Mont" by Georges Bernage and Dominique Francois: Franqueville Farm is the correct name for 101st CP, better known in airborne circles as Lecaudy Farm. Regards, Pat
Pat, Don, The Glider Lifts chapter in George Koskimaki’s D-Day with the Screaming Eagles contains an extensive discussion about the Chicago Mission landing, much of it specifically related to General Pratt’s glider. A majority of the information is similar to what is found in Major Leon Spencer’s article, some is different. Have you reviewed Koskimaki's book in support of this discussion? In his book, Koskimaki mentions the green light “T” landing aid that the Pathfinders set up for the Chicago Mission landings. Unfortunately, I could not find any reference in the book which identifies a location for the “T”. In his book, Koskimaki’s also states: “Colonel Murphy brought his glider in near Hiesville on the proper field.” I wonder how Mr. Koskimaki defined “proper field”? r/Kevin
Hi Kevin, Interesting use of word 'proper' indeed. As I understand it, glider pilots were given a specific field as a primary landing site and told to move to others if things did not go as planned. I am wondering about that extract from the pre-invasion aerial photograph in the book "Utah Beach - Sainte Mere Eglise - Sainte Marie du Mont" by Georges Bernage and Dominique Francois, shown on 84, reproduced below again: Specifically, the black arrow at '5'. I would be pretty sure this aerial was used to brief glider pilots prior to the invasion - the label at bottom left appears to read something like "...IAL PHOTOGRAPH USED BY [line break] ?? OFFICERS FOR LANDING". If this is a correct caption and if the numbers and arrows are from the original document, then what is the black arrow at '5' pointing at? To my mind, there is a high probability that it's pointing to some form of landing aid for the glider pilots in the middle of Pratt Field. If we look at the shape of LZ 'E', the southern extent of the kidney shape appears to have been included to facilitate the inclusion of Pratt Field: The shape must have been dictated by the selection of suitable fields as close as possible to the 101st CP at Lecaudy Farm. Pratt Field is by far the largest field of all within LZ 'E' and therefore, in my view, would have been an obvious location for planting a landing aid for the gliders. Within Pratt Field then, I also wonder if the landing aid was placed in the depression both as a finding aid for the whole LZ and a warning to avoid the danger of hitting the unsafe portion of the otherwise ideal field? If someone could obtain permission from the field owner, I would be very grateful for a photograph of the area circled red in the above GE extract. Regards, Pat
Pat, Interesting discussion point about the depression in the center of Pratt Field. Frame _4052 reveals what appears to be a Waco in a depression in the center of Pratt Field, our assumed location for the landing aid. Frame _1073 confirms that this glider is indeed a Chicago Mission Waco. As you would expect, the depression is much more clearly defined in Frame_4052, which was taken from a lower altitude. If you compare the dimensions of the depression seen in Frame _4052 with the white area in the center of Pratt Field in the current Google Earth shot, you will see that they are essentially the same. Another paragraph from The Glider Lifts chapter in George Koskimaki’s D-Day with the Screaming Eagles is related to our discussion: “The field markers had been wiped out by one of the earlier gliders. The partly obscured moon was now sinking down in the western sky. It became increasingly difficult for the pilots to recognize the fields in the landing zones. Only six of them dropped into the confines of the zone. Another fifteen landed with one half a mile, while another ten landed in a closely packed group west of les Forges. The others were scattered to the east and southeast of the zone.” With regards to: “The field markers had been wiped out by one of the earlier gliders.” Perhaps this “earlier” glider is the Waco sitting in the depression in the middle of Pratt Field? With regards to: “Only six of them dropped into the confines of the zone.” Koskimaki’s statement matches what is depicted in his glider landing site map in the same chapter. His map shows only six Chicago Mission Wacos within the confines of Landing Zone E. Frame _1073 also has six Chicago Mission Wacos clearly visible in Pratt Field. However, as we have discussed, there are probably other gliders, including General Pratt’s, hidden in the hedgerows. More questions… R/Kevin
Hello .....For LZ "E" - Team E consisting of Stick 3, 502nd Parachute Infantry, Lt. D. C. Driver, Jumpmaster and Stick 2, 377th Parachute Field Artillery Bn., Lt. L. J. Hensley, Jumpmaster. ... TEAM E was scheduled to drop on DZ C at 0027 at Point 393-927 and landed approximately 0029 at point 395-895. Both sticks were together when dropped and Lt. Driver assembled his entire stick in approximately ten minutes. Lt. Hensley was missing five men on the assembly. These two teams were to mark the LZ at two points with the base stick establishing the Eureka. Eureka was established at approximately 0330 by which time the two sticks had moved to the correct LZ's. Eurekas were turned on at 0350 and reception was made with transmitting aircraft prior to 0400. Both teams established lights but those established by Lt. Driver were knocked out by a landing Glider at approximately 0420. Lt. Hensley kept his lights on until approximately 0445. By this time all echelons of gliders that were in the air had landed and the pathfinder personnel worked from this time until approximately 0800 orienting personnel and removing injured personnel from smashed gliders. ... On DZ E: Eureka established at designated point and lights set up at both designated points on scheduled time. http://www.6juin1944.com/assaut/aeropus/en_page.php?page=after_pathf_101
Hi Kevin & Patrick, My theory regarding the location of the landing aid being in the centre of Pratt Field hangs precariously on that black arrow being an original marker on the pre-invasion aerial. Even if it is, it could simply indicate something like "this is the primary landing field for LZ E" and having no significance to landing aid locations at all. I sure would like to get a ground photograph of the depression (if that's what it is). Not being an expert on such matters, but I would assume that a depression would be a good location for a lighted landing aid - visible from the sky but somewhat shielded from sight on the ground. Perhaps the pilot of Waco #3, knowing the lighted aid was in a depression, thought he could safely glide over it but failed to realise the size of the depression. Pure conjecture on my part. Thanks Patrick for the link to your page giving the locations for Team E. I presume the intention would be to not land in the same field where the landing lights were to be set up in order to avoid any enemy who might have seen the pathfinders' chutes coming down? I have marked the extract from Sheet No. 31/18 N.E. below to indicate the target coordinates for Team E's drop: Also marked on the above extract are the two arrows replicated from the pre-invasion aerial extract in red here. I assumed that the northern arrow was pointing at Chateau de Colombières as per the caption, but now having plotted it on the map extract, I am wondering if it's pointing at the centre of the field immediately to the south of the Chateau... perhaps the location of the second set of lights for LZ E. Mmm...tenuous, but possible :dodgy: Regards, Pat
Pat, I located two sources that indicate that glider landing aids were not located in the center of Pratt Field as your theory suggests. Map # 5 in Rendezvous with Destiny (RwD) provides information on the deployment of the 101st Pathfinders and their landing aids. In this map, two locations, one in the NW corner of LZ E (in the general vicinity of Pond Field) and a second one in the NE corner of the LZ (near the Team E Target Drop location), are indicated with a small circle and are labeled: “Radar and light aids here”. A second review of Koskimaki’s D-Day with the Screaming Eagles did reveal a map in The Pathfinders Lead the Way chapter that indicates the location and the alignment of two landing aids in LZ E. As expected, the “T’s” are aligned on a rough heading of 270 degrees (parallel to the line of flight of the approaching serials). One aid is positioned in the NE corner of LZ E and is labeled: "Radar and lights set up here”. The second landing aid in the NW corner of the LZ (in the general vicinity of Pond Field) is labeled: “T set up for the pre-dawn gliders”. Airborne Operations in World War II, European Theater by Dr. John C Warren (USAF Historical Division, 1956), available on line at http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090602-016.pdf includes a significant amount of information that adds to our discussion. I won’t repeat the entire portion of the text here, but Page #17 contains a detailed description of the landing aids used by the Troop Carrier Command missions. Another key quote from Warren: “They (the Chicago Mission gliders) swept into the prescribed 270 degree left turn and in the process most of them apparently lost sight of the T.” In Koskimaki’s D-Day with the Screaming Eagles, Colonel Murphy (General Pratt’s glider pilot) is quoted as saying: “Some missions, including mine, had a 270-degree pattern to our landing area.” So, assuming that the location and alignment of the glider landing aid “T” is correctly portrayed in Koskimaki’s map and that Colonel Murphy flew the left 270-pattern that he described, this would set up Chalk #1 on a southerly heading for a final approach into the northern end of Pratt Field located about one half mile south of the landing aid. I believe this information supports the case that Pratt Field is the landing site of Chalk #1 of the Chicago Mission. Also of note, Koskimaki and Warren both mention in their narratives that an “early” glider in the Chicago Mission hit and destroyed the landing aid “T” in LZ E. While the total accuracy of the glider landing pattern maps in both RwD and Koskimaki has been questioned, both of these maps indicate a single Chicago Mission Waco glider in the NW corner of LZ E in the general vicinity of Pond Field and the location of the glider landing aid “T” indicated in the Koskimaki Pathfinder map. Last week, I had the honor to again speak with George Koskimaki on the phone. Portions of our conversation revolved around the Chicago Mission landings. Specifically, he stated that based on his research he was “positive” that Chalk #1 landed in Pratt Field. With regards to the line in his book, “Colonel Murphy brought his glider in near Hiesville on the proper field,” Mr. Koskimaki told me that by “proper”, he meant the “intended” field for landing. He did not explain further, but based on the relatively long length of Pratt Field, its position relative to where Koskimaki places the landing aid, and where a glider would roll-out of a 270-degree left turn after passing the landing aid, Pratt Field is probably the best candidate to be the “intended” field. Mr. Koskimaki also stated that two bulldozers landed in Chicago Mission gliders (other sources say just one bulldozer) and this equipment was utilized by the Engineers to help clear the landing fields of gliders for later missions. Warren also stated in his text that “a detachment of glider pilots had been busy clearing the drop zone and cutting down trees (in preparation for the Keokuk Mission landings)”. These operations may have resulted in the movement of the Waco glider in the NE corner of Pratt Field noticeable when comparing NCAP Frames _1073 and _4052 (as discussed in one of earlier postings in this thread). There is a variety of good information in Warren’s Airborne Operations in World War II related to our discussions. Mr.Koskimaki utilized it as a reference when he wrote D-Day with the Screaming Eagles. It is worth reviewing, if you haven’t done so already. r/Kevin
Very nicely done, Kevin. I had never given any thought to the AEB bulldozer before. At Tonka truck size, it was very limited in its usefulness, but way better than muscle power alone. I tracked down this link to info on the equipment: http://www.questmasters.us/Clark_CA-1_No_2.html From what I see, it is almost a certainty that the equipment was loaded sans blade as in the training photo, so perhaps might be more accurately described as a tractor rather than a bulldozer - for pulling rather than pushing. Looks like a very similar model weighed almost 4200 lbs. - too much for a Waco. Wacos included aircrew as part of the cargo weight limit, so 250 lbs. each for pilot and copilot plus 210 lbs. for an operator - that's way, way too much for the Waco's approx. 3750 lb. limit. No reason the blade and related accessories couldn't have gone in another glider - heck, that's how they transported some of the 57mm and its jeep - in pairs of Wacos. Maybe that's what Murphy was referring to in his use of the term "missions." And while I'm engaged in informed speculation, maybe that explains Koskimaki's recollection of two bulldozers - was it perhaps two gliders to land one complete bulldozer? A dozer that size - 35 HP and minimal traction, even with the blade installed, couldn't push over trees of any size (depending on species, soil conditions, etc.), so I would guess pulling gliders out of the way would be an ideal use plus dragging away chopped down trees in the good LZ fields. Wonder if it was used to yank out the Horsa hanging over the road at the Pond Field. And with all the loose debris around Pratt's glider, maybe the dozer was used to extract it from the hedgerow so the jeep could be retrieved.
Don, thanks for information on the bulldozers. Your theory about two (or more) gliders carrying the components of a single bulldozer makes sense as it explains the differences between Koskimaki and other sources. In my last posting, I mentioned the “early” Chicago Mission glider that hit and destroyed the landing aid “T”. Restated here again: “Also of note, Koskimaki and Warren both mention in their narratives that an “early” glider in the Chicago Mission hit and destroyed the landing aid “T” in LZ E. While the total accuracy of the glider landing pattern maps in both RwD and Koskimaki has been questioned, both of these maps indicate a single Chicago Mission Waco glider in the NW corner of LZ E in the general vicinity of Pond Field and the location of the glider landing aid “T” indicated in the Koskimaki Pathfinder map.” Our recently acquired NACP Frame 4079 _1073 (from a mission flown at 1500 on June 6th) provides a view of the southern and northwestern portions of LZ E that includes only the SW portion of Pond Field. On the high resolution _1073 shot, at the very NE edge of the frame and just outside the cover of a cloudbank, is a Waco glider at the NE corner of the pond in Pond Field. NCAP Frame 1857_4052, (from a mission flown at 1700 on June 12th) includes a Waco glider in the same position and alignment as in _1073. Pat’s January 8th posting includes pictures of this Waco in a Frame _4052 shot of Pond Field as well as several ground photos. In all of these photos, the Waco of interest is labeled as “W1”. The presence of “W1” in Frame _1073 indicates that it can only be from a June 6th early morning mission (Chicago or Detroit). Based on the imagery currently on hand, and as Pat earlier stated, “W1” appears to be the only Waco in the vicinity of Pond Field. That makes it a good candidate to be the single Chicago Mission Waco placed in the NW corner of LZ E in the RwD and Koskimaki maps. It is also a good candidate to be the “early” glider that both Warren and Koskimaki say destroyed the glider landing aid “T”. However, a bit of uncertainty must remain based on the possibility that Detroit Mission gliders may have also landed in the area. Warren stated in his Airborne Operations in World War II, European Theater: “Three (Detroit Mission Wacos), which came down near Hiesville, may have followed aids set out on LZ E for CHICAGO”. RwD and the Koskimaki/Bando books all include a glider landing site map for the Chicago and Keokuk Missions. Have similar maps for the other Neptune glider missions ever been published? Don and Pat, based on your earlier research on Battlebus, do you have any additional information on the Horsa gliders in Pond Field? Were you able to link the Horsa (“Edna”) that went through the hedgerow with any specific glider mission? I found some information in Dr. Warren’s research related to tracking the number of Horsas from all of the Neptune glider missions that landed in or near LZ E. I plan to post this information in the next week or so on the Lecaudey Farm thread in order to keep the Waco and Horsa discussions separate. r/Kevin
Unfortunately, it's a chicken or egg question, Kevin. Warren's description of landing locations reads exactly as it would if someone with no prior knowledge was summarizing the glider map in RwD. Bob Ballintine took a good look at NARA and found nothing in the way of glider or tug pilot reports that would add to Pat Elie's work. I have heard of nothing other than what you and I have already discussed on the 101st origins of Bando's version of the glider map. On the tree chopping mention: has anyone found any "now you see 'em, now you don't" trees moving in the interim between the June 6 aerial and the ones of June 12? (first Pat numbers gliders, now he needs to number trees!). Anti-landing poles are just too small to show up well in the aerials, so it would only be useful to look for trees with a canopy adequate for casting a strong shadow. If the 101st managed to trash their loading manifests, who knows what other paperwork they disposed of after V-E Day. Still waiting for one of us to win the lottery so we can launch an expedition to Carlisle and paw through Koskimaki's research files.
Hello everyone. Very, very interesting topic here. Some of you might have seen these pictures on the Triggertime Forum a while back, but I took them off again. I am researching the 9th Infantry Division, and came in touch with a woman whose father kept diaries, and took many pictures! She wants to publish her father's diaries, and I am helping her. Her dad served in the 60th Field Artillery Battalion of the 9th Infantry Division. You can imagine my amazement when she showed me several pictures of wrecked gliders! Here are the two pictures that might be interesting for this topic: [attachment=19] Photo description written on the back says: "July 12 1944 - Near Caretan, France - Gliders wrecked in invasion 1944". [attachment=20] Photo description written on the back says: "July 12 -1944 - Near Caretan, France - Wrecked glidets from invasion". Unfortunately, the soldier does not mention these particular wrecks in his diary. The only clue I could find was this entry in his diary, on July 12th, 1944: "We went back through Carentan to Blosville and then to Division Rear at Hiesville". So, this indicates that on that day, he was in the Hiesville area, and must have taken the pictures there. At the moment, these pictures are the only ones I have. I will ask my friend to make new scans of these, more clear and detailed. When I have those, I will post them again in this thread. PS: Sorry, I seem to have problems with posting pictures? The size should be OK as well.
Hi Yuri, Thanks for sharing the photos! These two photos look like they might have been taken from the opposite sides of the same location where 2 gliders came to rest. The lower wrecked glider looks very much like it could be General Pratts glider taken after they pulled it out from the hedgerow. If you compare the earlier photo of the Officer standing in front of the glider with the cut canvas of "The Fighting Falcon" they look like a match. Take into consideration the the "Fighting Falcon " photo was taken on the 6th or 7th, and the one just posted by Yuri fromthe diary was taken on the 12th. Now look at the other glider photo with the now collapsed wings. In my opinion you can see the wreckage of the other glider (Pratts) and you can see the tail of it for sure just above the canopy of the glider. In my opinion I feel strongly that this is area 6 as marked by Pat in some of the aerials and I think if Yuri is able to get a higher resolution scan in the future, we might be able to even see the additional Waco's in the distant hedgerow (that we can see in the earlier aerial photos). Any other opinions on these photos? I am very interested in what else we can learn. Respectfully, John Szweda
Hi Yuri and John, I recall seeing these two photographs on TT when you had them up Yuri and I never could be sure one way or the other. One thing I do notice is that the jeep track leading to the bottom left would be about right if it was exiting 'Pratt Field' at the present day gateway between the recycle bins and the corner of the field. Was there not another photograph of a Horsa in the same collection? IIRC, someone on TT asked for an enlargement of the tail section. I recall being slightly more confident that that Horsa photograph could have been tagged to the 'Big Dipper' area. I have little doubt that the 'Flying Falcon' (replacement) became a tourist attraction for amateur photographers once the location of the crash became known. My guess would be that higher resolution scans will not add detail to that which is already there, but it is certainly worth a shot. Regards, Pat
Looking at the shadows cast, I would say: Photo #1, the intact Waco left wing view - not much to work with, but my best guess is the wingtip is pointing generally to the North. Even if correct, this could have a wide margin of error, so best not to assume anything more precise than somewhere between an arc encompassing 300-60 deg. A sharper image could help, but the main limitation is that the wingtip is close to the ground and thus doesn't cast much of a shadow. If my guess is correct, then the hedgerow on the photo's left edge runs about 240-60 (approx. WSW-ENE). The eastern half of the southern border of the Pratt Field fits comfortably into that range, but my stated accuracy reservations leave me queezy. Do I understand those with actual knowledge of the site that the slope fits the bins location? Photo #2, the mangled wing section - the sun is very near its peak - high noon - for July 12 (in fact my first assessment estimated the sun elevation at an angle which doesn't occur at that latitude on that date). My assessment is that the hedgerow behind the wreckage runs at about an axis of 25-205 deg (and looking NNE), with perhaps a 15 deg margin of error. With Photo #2 having crisper shadows, I am more confident in that estimate. Thus, I can categorically exclude the southern border hedgerow for this one. So, once again I call upon Mr. Geospatial Spotter Extraordinaire, Pat, to find a better candidate for the location of #2.