old iron wrote:
Ilyushkin Sturmovik
I am really looking forward to this one. I remember reading the
blog post NASM put out years ago where they announced they were going to restore it.
JohnB wrote:
Not an terribly historic type per se, unless the Jeopardy category is "Post war short range airliners'. Memorable for having nose gear and pressurization, and they had a long career, but not exactly earth shaking.
I'll give you that it's not the most historic airplane in the collection, but there's one other aspect you're forgetting: it was the "first private aircraft ever used by a candidate during a presidential campaign".
[1] Its role as a precedent setter is important. It also plugs a gap in their collection as NASM's only other presidential aircraft is a
H-13. Given that the American president is such a symbol of the country, it would seem to be fitting to display it in the "national collection". Furthermore, given NMUSAF's monopoly on the subject, it would also help solve the problem of telling visitors: "You want to see a presidential aircraft? Go to NMUSAF."
JohnB wrote:
To tell visitors, "Yeah the B-17 is great, go to Dayton to see it" misses the point of a national collection. Most of the people who go there will likely only go to one aviation museum in their lives, so having the "greatest hits" is justified.
One counterpoint to that is some of the stories I've heard about guests walking into NMUSAF and being upset that they don't have a Corsair or an F-14. To be fair, this is not exactly a perfect comparison as NASM has far, far more claim to a B-17 than NMUSAF does to a naval aircraft. However, just because a visitor expects to see it, doesn't mean it should be there.
It's also worth noting that NASM is on the East coast of the United States, so if most people will only go to one aviation museum in their lifetimes, there's a good chance for some people it will be either the San Diego Air and Space Museum or the Museum of Flight. When the Space Shuttles were retired one of the key points that led to the California Science Center receiving Endeavour was the desire to have an example accessible on the West coast.
[2]JohnB wrote:
Also, as the national collection, it shouldn't be a repository of war booty...especially the technically interesting odd balls that played no part in the war.
My long held opinion is to repatriate war booty to their homelands, so they can be appreciated by the descendents of the people that created and flew them.
NASM has done a bit of this. The
Emily was sent back to Japan and they traded a
Typhoon to the RAF Museum for a
Hurricane. The National Naval Aviation Museum also
did the same thing with an Ar 196.
JohnB wrote:
Other countries have a right to appreciate their national heritage.
If there were 2 B-17s or Spitfires left in the world, wouldn't you want them to be in their home countries to be most appreciated?
You are very correct. Other countries
do have a right to appreciate their national heritage. (Indeed, I wish there was more consideration of this in the context of recoveries from the
Southwest Pacific and
South America.) However, it isn't like the foreign aircraft NASM has in storage are iconic examples like a Zero or a Bf 109. The stuff they have is much more oddball that isn't quite as key a part of their national heritage. Again, not that they don't have a legitimate claim to it, but the situation is not quite so comparable.
However, to circle back to the point about access above, there is an argument that the history belongs not just to a certain country, but humanity as a whole. I am reminded of the situation when the Museum of Science and Industry set about restoring U-505:
Wikipedia wrote:
Nearly every removable part had been stripped from the boat's interior by the time she went to the museum; she was in no condition to serve as an exhibit, so Museum director Lohr asked for replacements from the German manufacturers who had supplied the boat's original components and parts. Admiral Gallery reports in his autobiography Eight Bells and All's Well that every company supplied the requested parts without charge. Most included letters to the effect that the manufacturers wanted her to be a credit to German technology.
(Source:
Wikipedia)
I've sometimes thought we should replicate it to help restore some of the aircraft Vietnam captured at the end of the Vietnam War and are now on display. (e.g. the
aircraft at the War Remnants Museum) I doubt it would ever happen though.
Thanks for raising the points you have. This is a very interesting discussion and really made me have to think deeply about the subject.
JimH wrote:
The NASM has been after Witchcraft for quite a long time. They were willing to trade the P-61 at one point.
I'm going to catch some hate for this one, but I'm glad that didn't happen. A more or less
time capsule airplane for one that served with a foreign country for decades overseas and has probably been restored multiple times over the years is not a trade of equivalent value. Besides, it's one of only two (technically one, since the other is an LB-30) remaining flying B-24s. If anything, NASM should have gone after one of the static display examples.