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

Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:12 am

RyanShort1 wrote: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?


Wrong question. The real question is, if we enjoy speculating in our spare time, what harm does it do?

JDK wrote:<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.


I'm with you this far.

Like the ghastly 60s hairdos in 60s war movies, modern restorations of original nose art will almost certainly become obviously 'fake' when time intervenes.


That's a short run view. The hairstyles become obviously fake when a little time intervenes, as it now has. When a few more centuries intervenes and folks lose track of the evolution of 20th-century hairstyles, they will become much LESS obviously fake. But, see below.

How we painted or engraved our heart's desires on our weapons is part of everyone's history, and is priceless.


Here you jump the tracks. It would be more accurate to say "How we painted or engraved our heart's desires on our weapons is historical trivia probably irrelevant to anything important." Not every relic or bit of information about the past is a priceless treasure. We cannot foresee with certainty which relics from the not-so-distant past will be regarded as recording important "stuff about humanity" for the distant future, but the chances of a piece of fighter plane nose art telling any future historian anything relevant to the big picture of WWII are pretty remote. I'm a preservationist too, but in the scheme of things, I'd call the loss of these nose panels no big deal.

August

?????

Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:13 am

We may need a separate sticky thread for bantering gibberish :idea:
Except August always seems to have something good to say.
I actually forgot what this thread was about and had to got back to page 1 and find out :shock: :? :twisted:
Last edited by Jack Cook on Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

ha ha

Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:48 am

its all good,at least everybody here hopefully stands for one thing, these aircraft need to be recovered and restored and hopefully put back in the air. I personally feel that I will waite with my mouth shut for now on until I see some new good news regaurding the recovery of naval aircraft by the public or interested parties...good by..

Tue Nov 04, 2008 10:34 am

k5083 wrote:
RyanShort1 wrote: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?


Wrong question. The real question is, if we enjoy speculating in our spare time, what harm does it do?

August


A certain B-17 comes to mind.

Care to guess why information seemed to dry up all of the sudden?

WIX has it's usefulness in a tremendous way, but undisciplined posting can also have effects.

If Chris really does know something about to come up, it's great that he didn't say what it was. However, teasing about knowing something can have the same effect as telling! :shock:

Ryan

??

Tue Nov 04, 2008 10:51 am

However, teasing about knowing something can have the same effect as telling!

Plus it makes you look bad, pisses folks off and get threads going sideways :idea:

Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:44 am

RyanShort1 wrote:Care to guess why information seemed to dry up all of the sudden?


Oooh! Oooh, I think I know this one! Let me see ... I think it's ...

Because some people got a greatly inflated notion of the importance of this forum and of things posted to it?

How'd I do? Did I get it right?

August

Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:55 am

k5083 wrote:Because some people got a greatly inflated notion of the importance of this forum and of things posted to it?

August


I wouldn't dispute that at all, but it DID affect the B-17 mentioned apparently, has had other affects before, and has been noticed for good or bad by different organizations - as certain pulled threads, and other threads that have had positive results have shown. According to my Google alerts there weren't too many other places where it was being talked about at the time.

Ryan

Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:02 pm

Sorry to interupt the way off topic stuff and I am fresh out of Gibberish!

I noticed on DM that the ducting on the bottom for the supercharger was gone, was it blown out by the impact on the water?

Also, what do the resto shops do with the replaced items? Chuck them out or sell them off for souvenirs?

Ok, back to your regularly scheduled Gibberish and Banter!

Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:05 pm

JDK wrote: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.
An attempt has been made to preserve the nose art once the peeling/bubbling was noticed. I believe it was the Smithsonian that recommended spraying clear lacquer over the top of the artwork. Only time will tell how effective any measure will be. It still looks great though.

???

Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:08 pm

Sorry to interupt the way off topic stuff and I am fresh out of Gibberish!

:prayer: :prayer: :prayer: :prayer: :prayer:

Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:58 pm

k5083 wrote: I'm a preservationist too, but in the scheme of things, I'd call the loss of these nose panels no big deal.

August


How can you say that???? :shock: :roll: I see it as the most important identifying aspect of the plane and makes it more "special" than say a factory fresh example that crashed on a training missing right out of the box.

Absoulutely those panels should be preserved. Those cowlings should be fairly easily replaceable. And I don't think anyone honestly thinks that any of the original paint should be saved on the final product. But important easily removable and replaceble panels like the cowling with the nose art... well, IMO, it would be historically reckless to have even the slightest cavalier attitude towards their preservation. They need to be preserved for the world to see the real thing (nose art) in a museum or a traveling display with the flying aircraft.

How many surviving fighter nose art panels even exist? I only know of 1 other on that other OD P-47 that was in the pacific.

Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:22 pm

Django wrote:Absoulutely those panels should be preserved. Those cowlings should be fairly easily replaceable.
Form away! :wink:

Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:29 pm

Django wrote:How can you say that???? :shock: :roll: I see it as ...


You kind of answered your own question there. I can "say that" if I don't "see it" the same as you. I do not see the nose art as the most identifying aspect of the plane (whatever that means); I do not think the nose art, as such, makes the plane more special. I agree with you that the plane's operational history makes it more special, but the logical conclusion of that is that the entire aircraft should be preserved and not restored, and I don't see anyone advocating that. Nor do I, because even with its history, the airframe is not that significant.

I don't know of any other preserved fighter nose art. And the historical record is hardly the worse for it. It's fun, and worth preserving if it truly is easy and cheap to replace the cowlings. Just not worth getting bent out of shape about.

August

Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:39 pm

Identifying aspect as in it's part of it's provenance. It is NAMED. It's not just a bu no.

Typical response from an attorney to typical comments from a creative person. ;) :lol: Hahaha!

Have you ever seen the CAF nose art panels in person? I have a feeling it might alter your perspective.

Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:41 pm

bdk wrote:
Django wrote:Absoulutely those panels should be preserved. Those cowlings should be fairly easily replaceable.
Form away! :wink:


If we had an original to go by, we could do it. For a static aircraft though... we aren't licensed A&Ps. Although my partner Kevin was a fabricator in the Air Force for many years.
Post a reply