Not good news for the B-17 we know as ShooShooShooBaby

[Pat Carry]

The NASM has no plans to take possession of the ShooShooShooBaby for 7 years or more. It would be a shame for a combat veteran B-17 to be in storage for all that time. Perhaps another museum could display it until such a time when it goes to the NASM.

[Xrayist]

I see it listed as being still on display at the museum in Dayton, OH. I was there about 8 years ago and it was there then.

[aerovin]

In May 2018, B-17G Shoo Shoo Baby will be pulled from display and placed in storage pending shipment to the NASM at an unspecified date. The NMUSAF will place B-17F Memphis Belle on display in its stead.

[Elwyn]

I guess the good part is we seem to have more museum quality B-17's than we can handle for the big museums.

Last edited by Elwyn on Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[pontiac58]

My question of the day is........
Whats up with the name, i see it as shoo shoo baby and shoo shoo shoo baby. Is there a reason why????? I was young when it was restored and remember going with my dad when they were restoring her.

[WIXerGreg]

If Wikipedia can be trusted:

Photographs of the bomber indicate that a third "Shoo" was added to the name at some point in May 1944 when the original aircraft commander completed his tour of duty and was replaced by another pilot

[John Dupre]

As I remember it the aircraft was named Shoo Shoo Baby after a popular song and there were wartime photos showing the name spelled that way. During the restoration it became clear either when they stripped paint or because other photos surfaced showing an extra Shoo had been added at some point after the first photos were taken. The song lyrics mimic the three shoo shoo shoos before babby.

My question of the day is........
Whats up with the name, i see it as shoo shoo baby and shoo shoo shoo baby. Is there a reason why????? I was young when it was restored and remember going with my dad when they were restoring her.

[Steve Birdsall]

When 42-32076 first went to the 91st Bomb Group it was named Shoo Shoo Baby - just the three words painted on the nose. When Tony Starcer added the Varga girl he replaced the original name with Shoo Shoo Shoo Baby, enclosed by musical notes.

[lucky52]

Maybe "The Swoose" will get fixed up soon.

[17f]

What really irritates me here is that NASM had the Swoose for what, 50, 60 years, and did NOTHING to it. She sat at Garber going downhill with no preservation. The oldest surviving B-17; the only shark tail still in existence; a combat veteran, and NASM didn`t care. They had a -G model, which granted, had no combat history, but they also let it sit around doing nothing. Then they give away the -G, and "trade" the Swoose for the Baby. Now their intention is to stick the Baby in storage for who knows how long.

What all that screams to me, is that the NASM does not care about the significance of the B-17 to aviation. They showed no interest in TWO airframes they had in their possession. But now, they are to be rewarded with a beautifully restored example.... that they will promptly stick in storage and ignore.

IMO, NASM doesn`t get a B-17. Make room in Dayton for another airframe and keep the Baby. Or at least send her to a museum that will display it properly for the public to see and enjoy. She fought for this country, and I think she deserves that amount of respect at the very least. Not to be stuffed away collecting dust somewhere and ignored.

Rant off...

[Dan Johnson II]

Seems silly not to display both 91st BG Combat vets together when the time comes.

[Chris Brame]

In May 2018, B-17G Shoo Shoo Baby will be pulled from display and placed in storage pending shipment to the NASM at an unspecified date. The NMUSAF will place B-17F Memphis Belle on display in its stead.

I'm supposed to be going to the NMUSAF next April for my cousin's wedding (she and her fiancee are both doctors in the Air Force); hope Baby will still be there. (If I can get into the restoration hangar as well, that will up the number of surviving B-17s I've seen from ten to thirteen in one shot! )

[Richard W.]

Seems silly not to display both 91st BG Combat vets together when the time comes.

I'm with you.

Every type has it's fans and pulling any a/c from display at the AF Museum would be a shame, but surely they can find room somehow?

[Pat Carry]

What really irritates me here is that NASM had the Swoose for what, 50, 60 years, and did NOTHING to it. She sat at Garber going downhill with no preservation. The oldest surviving B-17; the only shark tail still in existence; a combat veteran, and NASM didn`t care. They had a -G model, which granted, had no combat history, but they also let it sit around doing nothing. Then they give away the -G, and "trade" the Swoose for the Baby. Now their intention is to stick the Baby in storage for who knows how long.

What all that screams to me, is that the NASM does not care about the significance of the B-17 to aviation. They showed no interest in TWO airframes they had in their possession. But now, they are to be rewarded with a beautifully restored example.... that they will promptly stick in storage and ignore.

IMO, NASM doesn`t get a B-17. Make room in Dayton for another airframe and keep the Baby. Or at least send her to a museum that will display it properly for the public to see and enjoy. She fought for this country, and I think she deserves that amount of respect at the very least. Not to be stuffed away collecting dust somewhere and ignored.

Rant off...

Well stated! I totally agree.

[JohnB]

Let's see, the NASM museum has been open since 1976, and while we can't expert them to put a B-17 in the downtown location , the U-H facility has been open for what, close to 20 years?

It's pretty obvious the NASM staff doesn't care about displaying a B-17.
For years they put less historic and important types ahead of The Swoose in the restoration line (really the never used Japanese sub-based airplane and the Do 335 got attention years ago), now they're willing to put a beautifully restored historic airframe in a closet for a few years.
Yeah guys, you don't want to display a B-17 when there are still WWII veterans around to see it.

I've always assumed the staff still retain a Vietnam-era anti-military prejudice. Certainly, their handling of the Enola Gay (and the resulting controversy) displayed that.