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

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

Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:12 pm

PhantomII wrote:
Misterg97 wrote:
PhantomII wrote:I'm sure they wouldnt do this but it would be nice if the NMUSAF repurposed the old R&D and Presidential hangars back to their original purpose and make them an annex again. It would be an opportunity to display items like SSSB plus several other aircraft that have been off display and in storage for years.


I don't remember the exact amount but the cost of transporting visitors to the annex was tremendous ... Keeping in mind there is NO admission fee .


I can imagine it was by no means cheap. It's too bad people would probably balk at paying to see something like that, I wouldnt hesitate to pay if needed to make it happen.


That's not the issue ... if memory is correct ... as 'The National Museum of the US Air Force' any fees charged need to go to Washington and not be allowed to stay local. That's one of the reasons there is no admission charge.

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 11:20 am

Just watched the interview. Count me surprised. Am I the only one who thinks displaying her "in flight" is dumb?

Shoo Shoo Baby's old display wasn't bad. Memphis Belle was a bomber - open up the bay and lay out examples of her ordnance.

I guess I can't complain. At least the Belle is getting the attention she deserves. It's is nice to see finally her with the correct nose.

-G
www.gblume.com

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:45 pm

"Am I the only one who thinks displaying her "in flight" is dumb? "

They don't want us getting our grubby hands on it.... :lol:

Think I will go to the unveil, never been to Dayton.

Phil
Last edited by phil65 on Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:51 pm

I generally dislike elevated, and hung aircraft displays. In some museums it is understandable due to space constraints, and for some displays like long winged gliders it makes sense, but in some places it does not make sense. It does not make sense for this B-17. Among others the B-52 at Dayton is elevated and the Enola Gay at UH is elevated (likely to prevent vandals or folks throwing "blood" or other things on it, but happy to be corrected). Quantico is about the worse, great museum, but many of the elevated aircraft in the main display areas are directly above you and you can just see the belly, and several in the main entrance atrium are WAY up there. New Orleans WWII museum is a fair compromise with some catwalks to get above and in between the suspended aircraft, but I much prefer aircraft on their wheels and at ground level (and no barricades, but I understand the need to keep the commoners out at some places).

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:03 pm

phil65 wrote:
Think I will go to the unveil, never been to Dayton.

Phil


Phil, I rarely say "you could spend a whole day there" about any place, but if you are like most enthusiasts on here, please allow a full day at Dayton. You could really spend a full day there and feel rushed. It is massive, and a full day with a second day to go back for your personal highlights would be better. If Mrs.Phil65 or other companions do not share your enthusiasm, bribe them or give them alternatives for the day (or leave them at home). If you say to yourself I will do it quick and budget @ 3 hours you will be disappointed. If time is an issue, walk through all 4 buildings first, force your self not to stop (you will fail) and select where you want to back to of you have a particular theme or era that has your most interest.

Everyone should do one trip there. That impressive. Go!!!!

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:09 pm

the Enola Gay at UH is elevated (likely to prevent vandals or folks throwing "blood" or other things on it, but happy to be corrected)


That's exactly it.

The Smithsonian has had a problem with vandals from the get-go. Had a nice long debate with some professors on that subject some years back. Ignorance of the masses is all it is. Bock's Car doesn't have this problem because the average person isn't aware she existed.

I think my wife is more perceptive than me. After I posted she noted that Memphis Belle is arguably the most famous bomber aside from Enola Gay and that the Air Force might just be trying to play it safe.

That's probably all it is.

I understand their caution, but still, it's annoying that a few nutjobs have to ruin it for the rest of us.

Oh, and Phil65, SanDiego89 is right on the money. Dayton is the ultimate pilgrimage for aviation nuts and it's worth taking all the time you can. (Though, I have a feeling the crowds are going to be huge come May.)

-G
http://www.gblume.com

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:13 pm

I'm thinking three days... :wink:
Go to Wright-Patterson and to Urbana to see the Champaign Lady B-17.... 8)

Did I miss anything ?

Phil

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:27 pm

My understanding is that Enola Gay is elevated to allow visitors to get a clean and level view into her cockpit from the catwalk.

Her being elevated doesn’t completely mitigate the risk of damage from some nutter. It may not allow easy access into the planes interior, but I showed up at NASM Dulles on opening day 2003 only about 20 minutes after that guy put a dent into her forward fusage by winging it with a jar of “blood” ...

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:21 pm

An elevated Enola Gay also allows more aircraft to be placed under the wngs. This is importnat if you are to get a B-17 and ultimately a B-24 also in the limited space available for WWII aircraft.

(What is really needed is a separate WWII building)

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 6:06 pm

They're sticking the Belle up in the rafters so all you can see is the belly? Are you @#$%&ing kidding me? :x

Glad I didn't make plans to attend the big unveiling.

SN

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:35 pm

I'm thinking three days... :wink:
Go to Wright-Patterson and to Urbana to see the Champaign Lady B-17.... 8)

Did I miss anything ?

Phil


The Waco Museum in Troy Ohio.

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:56 pm

I only have 3 days.... :lol:

Phil

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:00 pm

phil65 wrote:I'm thinking three days... :wink:
Go to Wright-Patterson and to Urbana to see the Champaign Lady B-17.... 8)

Did I miss anything ?

Phil


The last time I was there I did four days, one afternoon was spent at Urbana seeing the B-17 and flying in a B-25. This was the only time I've been through the museum and felt like I wasn't rushed. And that was before the latest hangar was open and not seeing the Presidential/R&D stuff...

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

Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:02 pm

phil65 wrote:I'm thinking three days... :wink:
Go to Wright-Patterson and to Urbana to see the Champaign Lady B-17.... 8)

Did I miss anything ?

Phil


Only about half the museum...

C2j

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

Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:08 am

Don't care for elevated a/c if they are too high to see well, but it sounds like they're putting it on (low?) stands not hanging it from the rafters.

That might look very cool if it really does look like it's in flight. Maybe dip one wing slightly for effect.
Attachments
Fortress1.jpeg
Post a reply