The CAF "Tramp Stamps" (a photo essay)

[Taylor Stevenson]

Chris- I know about attention to detail, believe me. The CAFs goal is to keep their aircraft flying for future generations, and at our size we will never have all 100% authentic everything. It is a worthy goal but not practical.

Griping is a waste of time. Save your breath and do something more productive. The problem on WIX is we seem to have some people who grip for gripings sake and bring things up over and over. (Not talking about you Chris). Like I said before people, do something more productive.

[Jack Cook]

No, Taylor you're referring to me. You'll note that I've for the most part stayed out of this thread.
But with this little jab (plus a few others) in my direction I'll respond to you in a wee bit

[the330thbg]

[John Beyl]

Taylor if gripping means getting that logo off of sentimental journey than so be it.

Chris,

Something productive people learn very early in their lives is griping will brand an individual as a 'pelican' who does nothing but eat everything in sight, $hit all over the place and constantly squawk while adding absolutely ZERO to the bottom line...just like the useless bird does. On the other hand when productive people come to the plate with a complaint, which happens on a regular basis, they also bring a solution or a legitimate proposal to the issue at hand. Since you seem to have a certain degree of education and are one of the most outspoken people against the logo stickers, especially those on Sentimental Journey, in order to get the stickers removed from the airplanes, what is your specific plan to address all the reasons they were branded while still fulfilling the goals set forth when the branding was initiated?

I would personally like to hear from somebody in the CAF if the numbers prove the stickers are working or not (Provided they are tracking the numbers now and have reliable historical data to compare it to). I'm guessing the answer to that question is the data is not being tracked and there would be nothing to compare it to anyway.

I'll go on record as saying I'm not sure how well the logo stickers are meeting their goal. I've spent a lot of time in front of the Red Tail answering questions and about every third or fourth question is, "Is this your airplane?" Keep in mind the logo is in clear view on both sides of the airplane. Let's call this my information gathering stage. I don't have a specific plan to initiate removal of the stickers yet. That said you don't hear me whining about them either.

I have had moderately lengthy conversations with Taylor’s Dad regarding ways to make the CAF self reliant without the need of member dues and donations. Perhaps they were ideas before the organization was ready for them and they likely still are as there has been no action to move in that direction. My question remains: If this is a legitimate business, then operate it like one. If it's a charity, they're doing exactly what they charitable organizations do. Which makes more money, a typical charity or a legitimate business? Which is in control of its destiny...which is controlled?

As far as the authenticity zealots go…if it looks like a Mustang, sounds like a Mustang, smells like a Mustang (You getting the idea?)…it is a Mustang and nothing is going to confuse it with anything else, especially an inaccurate paint scheme or some sticker on its side. I’ve yet to have somebody ask me what the airplane was because they were confused by the paint scheme or the sticker on the side. Don’t get me wrong; I love a great full blown totally bitch’n restoration as much as the next guy, probably more, but there is also a time and a place for them, and for nicely restored airplanes that may lack some of the authenticity.

My fingers are tired...nuff said!

John
CC Red Tail.

[Young Shep]

I would personally like to hear from somebody in the CAF if the numbers prove the stickers are working or not (Provided they are tracking the numbers now and have reliable historical data to compare it to). I'm guessing the answer to that question is the data is not being tracked and there would be nothing to compare it to anyway.

I think there actually are metrics that have been put in place, but not sure if they are tracking "joined because of the Wings logo". I think that it is particularly difficult to tie membership numbers to specific facets of an overall campaign when members can sign-up online, in person, at various wing, etc. But, if membership is up I think it's fair to draw a correlation between establishing a more visible presence at aviation events (that presence includes the logo, look of uniformity, Hangar 57).

[mustangwatcher]

Except that most of the people on here in one way or another work on or support warbirds. You are right they don't owe us. You know who they owe? They owe the veterans to make sure they are getting details right. They owe the future generations to make sure they get it right. And what's the first thing you see on a plane? The paintscheme. If you screw that up then you risk losing the integrity of the organization the support of the die hard warbird folks or as you call them arm chair quarter backs and you compromise what you are doing.

I agree, if ANYONE knows that paint jobs arent precise its those that flew them!! so you are going to sit there and tell me that those veterans really care that any of the CAF aircraft have a sticker on them?!?!? NO, they just want to walk around them and hear them fly. For the love of pete invasion stripes were put on with paint rollers!!!! they weren't put on with laser lights and straight edges. Same for the camo, as long as it looks like the ocean or whatever it's trying to mimick.

Logos are going to stay, no matter what you or anyone else says. I for one work on various types of warbirds and I dont find them offensive! Next thing you know you'll be b*tching about people using MS hardware instead of the original AN stuff.

[Nathan]

Except that most of the people on here in one way or another work on or support warbirds. You are right they don't owe us. You know who they owe? They owe the veterans to make sure they are getting details right. They owe the future generations to make sure they get it right. And what's the first thing you see on a plane? The paintscheme. If you screw that up then you risk losing the integrity of the organization the support of the die hard warbird folks or as you call them arm chair quarter backs and you compromise what you are doing.

I agree, if ANYONE knows that paint jobs arent precise its those that flew them!! so you are going to sit there and tell me that those veterans really care that any of the CAF aircraft have a sticker on them?!?!? NO, they just want to walk around them and hear them fly. For the love of pete invasion stripes were put on with paint rollers!!!! they weren't put on with laser lights and straight edges. Same for the camo, as long as it looks like the ocean or whatever it's trying to mimick.

Logos are going to stay, no matter what you or anyone else says. I for one work on various types of warbirds and I dont find them offensive! Next thing you know you'll be b*tching about people using MS hardware instead of the original AN stuff.

Calm down guys wow. Only people stating their opinions and likes and dislikes. I myself have a few friends who are historians and they have spent most of their lives dedicated to researching aircraft markings. Im sure they would take this thread as a double edged sword. The research is out there.

[gregv]

Without taking any sides in this issue, I am wondering if tailoring/adjusting the logo to suit each individual aircraft would defeat the entire purpose of the "branding"?

Obviously this would slightly increase the cost per unit, so to speak, but it would help blend the logo into the overall scheme. Again, though, maybe that isn't the point.

Also, if one or two of the CAF fleet were to be painted up in distinctive (non-military) CAF "house colors" (kinda like they used to be....), would that take any pressure off of "branding" the rest of them, or perhaps reduce the size/conspicuity of the logo required?

Again, these are questions, not suggestions.

greg v.

[Taylor Stevenson]

No, Taylor you're referring to me. You'll note that I've for the most part stayed out of this thread.
But with this little jab (plus a few others) in my direction I'll respond to you in a wee bit

Jack you are one of many. Respond if you wish, but please bring up new points if you do, I've heard your others. This is not intended to be offensive, just defending a position.

[JDK]

As I think most people recognise, in the main scheme of things, it's not a big deal, so let's not get personal folks.

Secondly, I think it fair to say that most of the posters here contribute to aviation preservation in their own way, and rarely is that just telling others they've 'got it wrong'. Ech of us choses where we invest our time, money and energy, and part of that decision is the perception of the organisations we might deal with.

...But sadly a lot of warbirds are incorrectly painted or marked anyway whether it be with the CAF or not. Europe, New Zealand, and Australia seem to be getting it right everytime. They have the most authentic warbirds in the world!

Hi Nathan, I'd like to agree, but there are truly horribly painted warbirds everywhere I've been (and sadly still rolling out of paintshops in the above countries) as well as great examples which set benchmarks of accuracy.

However as touched on before, most countries are working to good standards of restoration quality nowadays for fliers to airworthy standards, and the occasional dud scheme or unpopular brand thankfully does not actually reflect a compromise of that standard.

Regards,

[Jack Cook]

Believe it or not I understand the reasoning being the BSUDs. But the way it was done is obtrusive and ugly! So Taylor you don't need to splain it anymore I not listening to you. I tuned you out when you told me to "Knock it off" and "Get in line". Sorry but no can do. The holier than thou attitude just turns me off. My occasional jabs at those ugly decals is more direction at you than the CAF. My outlook on the CAF BTW has flip flopped over the past few years. H*ll couple years ago I though ol Ober got bit by a rabid Jack-a-lope or something! He was always kicking the CAF in the shorts. You were alway replying "My dad wants to talk to you!" But dang 2 years later I think he's a whole lot smarter than a lotta folks out there! Gary Austin's hard work on the B-24A and his postive can-do open minded hard working self got the CAF huge and positive coverage worldwide. A whole lot more, BTW, than any decal could. I even paid in on the MG fund for the B-24A and got my name on a plaque on one of them. Now isn't that a hoot! But seeing Gary turned on by so many folks like a pack of jackels seriously pisses me off! I admit that it has jaded my perception and opinions. I think guys like Don and his Texas Raider gang, the Yellow Rose gang, the P-51C crew and the others who get their hands dirty are awesome and have done a amazing job!! But, from where I stand the HQ bunch is just a gang of vipers.
Brad on the other hand, I swear is THE sharpest knife in the drawer. Having him in the B-25 with us was a whole bunch of fun! Reread what he wrote many times! He should be running the joint!

I feel that there are a lot of 'armchair' members who do nothing but complain about minute details filled with resentment of those who actively participate. Get involved, or get a life.

That's the superior attitude I'm talking about I'll just assume you're not refering to me here because I've paid my dues in full from the military side to the wardbird side and I have the tshirt.
If there was one thing I could say that sums it up the best it would be
The fact remains the everybody knows who the Confederate Air Force is. But who the h*ll are these Commerative guys?? A decal will never fix that!
Rant over and flame suit on...............

[Obergrafeter]

Dang Jack you darn near brought a tear to my eye. He11 I didn't think anybody was listening while that camel got his big ol ugly nose under the tent. I can tell you one thing though that at Airsho I wasn't alone in my bitchin. The troops are not happy (the little guys, not the big fighter and bomber guys) in droves and I don't think they will take much more of the BS without calling for someones head. (Kinda like the tea parties....don't get much press but they are out there, trust me I aint alone)

[JDK]

... Gary Austin's hard work on the B-24A and his postive can-do open minded hard working self got the CAF huge and positive coverage worldwide. A whole lot more, BTW, than any decal could.
...
I admit that it has jaded my perception and opinions. I think guys like Don and his Texas Raider gang, the Yellow Rose gang, the P-51C crew and the others who get their hands dirty are awesome and have done a amazing job!!

Hear hear. I have to say Gary's attitude, openness and approcability on the web, not to mention his ability to turn a word and modesty were a great plus for the CAF's credability for me.

For that reason alone - and Jack's mention of the guys weighing in on the gun 'sponsorship' - Ol 927 will be a 'special' warbird to me.

And yes, lets hear it for the guys keeping the chapters going and the 'planes flying safely.

I have no opinion on the whole CAF 'head office' thing, as recounted here. But every branch n' head office organisation I've seen the branch guys think the guys in h/o aren't worth their coffee bill, but generally, they are - it's just a different task and look - different, not better or worse. Equally sometimes the h/o guys can forget they're there just providing a hub for the wheel, and without the spokes and rim, they'd roll real slow...

It's also worth noting that if you and the CAF don't see eye to eye there are alternatives these days - a point important to any potential volunteer and sponsor and the CAF.

Regards,

[Old Shep]

"Once more into the breach, Horatio...." Gary and I just exchanged emails and we both chuckled that the "tramp stamp" appelation has now received near universal acclaim on WIX at least. Well, they aren't going away tomorrow, and, to answer John Beyl's query if their "impact" is being tracked in some way...like Young Shep pointed out, there is no way to precisely say that because the Red-Tailed Mustang has a logo on it that the CAF gained one member or two, or twenty, or lost six, or anything like that. The intent of the logo was for identity and exposure: the CAF has gained in visibility with the aviation public (no one should be able to argue that) and the membership numbers have remained more or less steady. So....

Lynn's comments deserve a closer look, since he took a swipe at "the LEADERSHIP" of the CAF lacking the "same commitment to authenticity and education" as others in the warbird world have. He also made some suggestions. As I am part of the infamous "LEADERSHIP," allow me to make a comment.

First, the Global Ends statement of the CAF, adopted after 14 months of work by the General Staff, makes "education" the paramount reason for the existence of the organization. Each unit, as I said at the General Membership meeting, is supposed to be working to assure that they are using the airplanes as a means to educate. John's Tuskegee Airmen Mustang is a classic example of an airplane being used as our Ends statement says it should. Not all units have moved beyond the "flying club" phase and made the shift to educating the public but I believe almost all of them realize that this is the only goal we can have and hope to attract any kind of corporate or philanthropic support. The EAA Young Eagles program is sort of the model for how this should work.

Second point, grouping the airplanes....very hard to do at an airshow when the airplanes appear at different times. At SnF the CAF airplanes (and member-owned warbirds) were grouped by the Hangar 57 HQ tent: at Oshkosh CAF airplanes were placed in three different locations for sponsorship reasons and wider exposure to the crowds (not everyone makes it to the Warbird area at Osh: go figure.). At airshows I've been to over the last twenty-five years, grouping is easy to do if your group arrives at the same time, otherwise it is a big imposition on the hard-working marshalers...

Your next point, Hangar 57 does exactly that....a Steve Brown idea FYI.

Continuing, the need for a replacement to the twenty year old CAF "Blue Book" has been talked about many times. The fact is that such publications are very expensive and can become out of date pretty quickly. We are thinking of ways to do something, but with the advent of the 'Web, there is sentiment that a better site there will replace a soft-cover book.

And, speaking of the CAF 'web site....my good friend Randy Wilson (HQ's unpaid volunteer IT person and on-site historian since the CAF Museum doesn't have one of those types) has linked articles he and I wrote for the Dispatch over the course of the years about almost all the CAF airplanes. If you can't find information about the airplanes on the website, let me know, or let Randy know. It should be available....

Bill Crump and Phil McKenna both use photos of our airplanes in exchange for use of their pictures in our materials and they give us plenty of attribution.

"targetted advertising for each aircraft history page" sorta lost me. I like the idea of more commercial support for the airplanes however...Give me a better explanation of what you mean so I can take the idea to those evil folks at HQ.

Finally, Django...great job on the nose art on "Ol 927"....the fact that you felt your offer of further help at the CAF because of your professional skills as a graphic designer were being ignored....well, my son, Young Shep, is in the same kind of business, and he made the same kind of offer, and I guess he can say he was ignored too! Fact of the matter: we have a paid person on staff that handles our publications and graphic design. Our experience with well-meaning volunteers in this area has been less than good. So, it isn't that I'm thrilled with all the graphic design work the CAF does, but we do have a person we are paying to do the job and we are going to work with that person.

Whew! That's a bunch for even a verbose school teacher to write. Over to you gents...

Old Shep

[TAdan]

It is just a sticker. It might be ugly... but it is just a sticker.