Switch to full style
This is the place where the majority of the warbird (aircraft that have survived military service) discussions will take place. Specialized forums may be added in the new future
Post a reply

?

Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:41 pm

I was thinking the same thing,hoping for something positive....

Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:15 pm

bdk wrote:So how much of the Mona Lisa's visible paint is original?

You should be asking about his Last Supper, which won't even stay stuck to the wall. Leo and his eggs. ;)
bdk wrote:While it would be nice to duplicate the scheme, this isn't the Mona Lisa. How important is it to have the actual original paint (except to a bunch of Anoraks)? By how much does that increase the value- I suggest it is worth much more as a restored and flying plane, even with non-original paint, compared to what it is worth now as a stinky wreck (and yes, it does smell very fishy).

<Donning Anorak> There's more to 'value' than cash or zooming about. Most recreations of nose art, like the (in-)famous d-day stripes are far too neat. if we want to know how nose are really was, we need to have originals to look at. We are currently creating a sanitised, 'neat' and tidied up version of W.W.II with the current hardware restorations. At the end of the day, they're tools, and like stone age flints or bronze age daggers, original examples tell us stuff about humanity that replica's don't. Like the ghastly 60s hairdos in 60s war movies, modern restorations of original nose art will almost certainly become obviously 'fake' when time intervenes. How we painted or engraved our heart's desires on our weapons is part of everyone's history, and is priceless.

It's easy to be a critic, but proper conservation (yup, that rare word again) means the paint wouldn't have peeled off.

By all means restore the aircraft to fly, (big thumbs up) and recreate the nose art; but spend a little on a piece of history and preserve the original panel by conserving it as well - although it sounds as if it's too late.

Heaven preserve us from the extremes of cowboys flyers and dusty anoraks.

;)

Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:39 pm

warbird1 wrote:
mustangdriver wrote:I think you may see things happen....


Do you know something that we don't?


I am sure others may know as well. Good things may be coming.

Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:42 pm

So is this nose art a total loss?

hey

Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:43 pm

you're killing me with suspense! spill the beans or get the big wig in on this topic and have him spill the beans....

Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:57 pm

I really can't, I have been sworn not too, just keep some positive thoughts about the NHS and their policies. We may see a change.

Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:09 pm

mustangdriver wrote:I really can't, I have been sworn not too, just keep some positive thoughts about the NHS and their policies. We may see a change.


What kind of time frame are we looking at before these changes? Are we talking soon, like months, or years away?

Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:14 pm

Like a few months. I really can't go into much. Just keep an open mind with the NMNA.

navy

Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:48 am

what would it take to tempt you to spill the beans....a p 40? how about a me262? what if we gave you a combat veteran b29...would that work? darn!

Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:30 am

Ha Ha very tempting, but when the stuff does happen you will thank me that I didn't spill the beans. I don't want to hurt anything from going on until it takes place.

????

Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:21 am

:shock: :shock: :idea: :idea: :?: :?: :?:
The bantering gibbersh has me lost :roll: :roll:

Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:28 am

Mustangdriver, why the suspesnse ? The matter of historical artifact recovery has now been written into public law. In the past there was no mechanism to allow recovery of an aircraft, certainly not with uniform guidelines.

Congress fixed that, now, all recoverys must be permitted by the service that originally owned the aircraft. A permit process has now been created.

You must now apply to Maxwell or the NHC for a permit to recover. You must also disclose the serial or BuNo as part of the permit process. There the similiarity ends. Maxwell rubberstamps your permit and off you go. The NHC, however, will look at the permit application and determine if the BuNo submitted has historical significance to the Navy. I mean if you find a generic Hellcat that wasn't David McCampbell's you will probably be issued a permit to recover.

The guy at NHC who was such a pain is gone. The retired Admiral now running NHC appears to be taking a much more practical approach to this matter.

Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:35 am

Rumors are indeed "out there" that seem promising regarding the NHC and future recoveries. But why should we go on speculating? Really now, what good does it do?

Ryan.

Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:43 am

RickH wrote:Mustangdriver, why the suspesnse ? The matter of historical artifact recovery has now been written into public law. In the past there was no mechanism to allow recovery of an aircraft, certainly not with uniform guidelines.

Congress fixed that, now, all recoverys must be permitted by the service that originally owned the aircraft. A permit process has now been created.

You must now apply to Maxwell or the NHC for a permit to recover. You must also disclose the serial or BuNo as part of the permit process. There the similiarity ends. Maxwell rubberstamps your permit and off you go. The NHC, however, will look at the permit application and determine if the BuNo submitted has historical significance to the Navy. I mean if you find a generic Hellcat that wasn't David McCampbell's you will probably be issued a permit to recover.

The guy at NHC who was such a pain is gone. The retired Admiral now running NHC appears to be taking a much more practical approach to this matter.


Well I am sure that you know everything, so nevermind.

Re: ????

Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:44 am

Jack Cook wrote::shock: :shock: :idea: :idea: :?: :?: :?:
The bantering gibbersh has me lost :roll: :roll:


So sorry to have wasted your time. :roll:
Post a reply