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
Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:12 pm
Recently there was a string about a meeting at NNAM members
of thr warbird community and the navy. I can't find it nowq.
What am I missing?
Help,
Owen
Mon Apr 29, 2019 10:12 am
Mon Apr 29, 2019 10:44 am
It seems hard to separate the change in policy from the discovery of those Devastators by Paul Allen's group.
Tom P.
Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:53 pm
I agree the timing is convenient, but if it results in some TBDs coming up, some more SBDs out of Lake Michigan before they get eaten by zebra mussels, and some of the excess in the Navy system being transferred out to folks who want to voluntarily spend millions on these aircraft, who cares about why the policy is changing? I'm super stoked that they are doing it.
kevin
Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:08 pm
It really is time to bring up a couple Devastors and several Wildcats, Dauntlesses and Avengers. Yes, Avengers are now valuable enough to raise from Lake Michigan. Air Force also needs to release some of their treasure and bring the rest indoors.
Flyable WW II aircraft help tremendously with their recruiting efforts. Lots of youngsters learn about that ancestors military service through air shows, fly-ins , etc. The Navy gains nothing with them sitting on the bottom of a lake somewhere.
Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:09 pm
It really is time to bring up a couple Devastors and several Wildcats, Dauntlesses and Avengers. Yes, Avengers are now valuable enough to raise from Lake Michigan. Air Force also needs to release some of their treasure and bring the rest indoors.
Flyable WW II aircraft help tremendously with their recruiting efforts. Lots of youngsters learn about that ancestors military service through air shows, fly-ins , etc. The Navy gains nothing with them sitting on the bottom of a lake somewhere.
Tue Apr 30, 2019 2:54 pm
Let's see how this program goes. It will be super critical for the first partners under this program to do well with the artifacts they receive. Which also means that we as enthusiasts need to support those organizations and their efforts. The next step would be for the USAF Museum to release some of the excess WWII aircraft that they have sitting in outside displays around the country. For example, the Barksdale B-24, the California B-24M, the several B-17s, the Mustang, P-38, several B-29s, and other aircraft that are slowly deteriorating despite some organizations' best efforts. If those were released and titles transferred, organizations would bring them inside and restore them (at least to indoor static) that would better ensure their long-term preservation. Starting with the Barksdale B-24, that airframe has been outside since 1944, first in Tulsa and later in Louisiana. It undoubtedly needs to come inside.
kevin
Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:59 pm
The Air Force has taken some steps to preserve warbirds; restoring the Memphis Belle, and getting the ex-Grissom B-17 restored under cover in Georgia and replacing the Lackland B-24 with a replica (yes, I know many were against sending it to the UK, but I've seen it at Duxford, they did a great job and it's hard to name a more appropriate place for it. I've seen the replica at Lackland and I was hard pressed to tell it was a replica. It's certainly good enough for its role at the Lackland parade ground).
One problem will be convincing units, bases, generals/VIPs that it's in
everyone's (not just some wealthy collector or well connected group) best interest to get the aircraft indoors....even if it means losing them to another location.
But let's look beyond the simple (but well intentioned) "let's get them out of the weather" sentiment.
-Are there enough well funded museums (groups) with the commitment (and dollars) to properly restore and house any static bombers released by the Air Force?
-Is there enough business for more ride operations to allow bombers restored to flight status to pay their way?
The hard facts are there may not be enough quality homes for all the bombers held by the Air Force.
Last edited by
JohnB on Wed May 01, 2019 11:01 am, edited 2 times in total.
Wed May 01, 2019 8:29 am
JohnB you make an excellent point. I would suspect that there is a ceiling for successful ride programs, at least those that do well. But it has been my experience that even in a mid-sized market (Tulsa, OK) where we get at least 2 B-17s and sometimes 3 touring through a year, those operations don't have any trouble selling out their flights. This year we have had the CAF with Lil, Doc is coming in May, and I know that Aluminum Overcast will be here at some point in the summer. It is likely that another B-17 will come as well. I think there is some market for additional flight operations. But I also think there is most likely a number of museums who are unwilling to invest the capital necessary to house something like a B-29 or a B-17 that they don't own outright. Transfer title, and I think that you are much more likely to see the investment happen. And in all reality, we are talking about something less than 30 airframes total (I'm guessing) if you include the B-17s, B-24s, B-29s, and the couple of fighters that the NMUSAF still owns. I'm not thinking that every one of them will find a new home, but I'd be willing to bet that most would. Especially the 17s and the 24s, which are one degree of magnitude smaller than the 29s.
You raise an excellent point, though. Kudos to the NMUSAF for working gradually to get some of those airframes under cover. It would sure be nice, though, in a perfect world, to see all of the 75+ year old airplanes out of the weather in their late retirement.
kevin
Wed May 01, 2019 12:27 pm
The Barksdale B-24 hits close to home. I grew up in the 80's spending many weekends at the Yankee Air Museum and even spent some time as an adult volunteering. As the last intact Ford built B-24 in the US, I'm sure they would jump at the chance to acquire it...as that has been their goal since their inception. I'd love to see it happen, but I'm not holding my breath. At this point, the only realistic hope is that the NMUSAF loans it to them for static display and restoration...but again, I still wouldn't put money on that happening. Nice to daydream about though.
Wed May 01, 2019 12:34 pm
GarryW wrote:The Barksdale B-24 hits close to home. I grew up in the 80's spending many weekends at the Yankee Air Museum and even spent some time as an adult volunteering. As the last intact Ford built B-24 in the US, I'm sure they would jump at the chance to acquire it...as that has been their goal since their inception. I'd love to see it happen, but I'm not holding my breath. At this point, the only realistic hope is that the NMUSAF loans it to them for static display and restoration...but again, I still wouldn't put money on that happening. Nice to daydream about though.
It is indeed the holy grail for Yankee, I join you in that daydream.
Wed May 01, 2019 11:55 pm
To me that's a good home for it. Has the Smithsonian expressed any interest in getting a B-24, though?
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
phpBB Mobile / SEO by Artodia.