Warbird Information Exchange

I'm a docent at the AirZoo, and I'd like to make a few comments regarding posts to this thread.

#1 The lighting in the new facility has been partially addressed...it's lighter in there now than it was when the facility opened. Some still find it too dark, and the best way to voice that concern is to fill out the visitor survey card when you visit. The staff at the museum read those cards, and respond to them.

#2 The last that I heard, the museum hasn't completely given up on the idea of flying SOME of the aircraft in the collection. Those aircraft in the original building are there because they still have access to the airport, and may fly again if money permits. The aircraft in the new building will not be flying again, as I understand it.

#3 The pink P-40 was Sue Parish's airplane. I don't know that anyone besides Sue flew that aircraft routinely. It was Sue's wish that the aircraft be put on display in the new building, and that it remain as it's painted. Live with it.

#4 I've made this point before, and I'll make it again. The museum was faced with a financial decision...something had to be done to safeguard the collection. The decision was made to (at least temporarily) stop flying and build the new facility IN ORDER TO SAVE THE ENTIRE COLLECTION. The museum as it was once run was not self-supporting. In designing and building the new facility, the museum board of directors wanted to reach out to an audience beyond the traditional aviation buffs (that is, you folks on this board). They've done that in a fantastic way. There are many more people viewing the aircraft, and enjoying the aircraft, then there were back when the museum was flying aircraft. In my opinion, that is far more important. I don't know if flying anything other than the Tri-Motor is in the museum's future...but I'm darned proud to be associated with it, and to help bring enjoyment to so many people.

John

tim, point made!! yecch!! hot pink?? that's darn near blasphemous!! might as well put a moustache on the mona lisa too!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

John C
Most of us are very SAD to see airworthy aircraft be grounded. I sure those who work for / with the zoo are far more saddened by this then we are. The members have a lot better understanding of the checkbook of the zoo then we do and what was actions were needed. No ill was meant to the museum or the people who run / work at it. We are happy they are being taken care of in a hanger, not out in the elements slowly corroding away.

Pink would not be my color of choice for an A/C, but it was not mine and it gave that P-40 a unique personality. I remember it being flow by Sue and I will miss seeing them grace the skies.

I hope to visit the museum this summer. I’ve wanted to visit for a long time. The Airplanes in the dark seems to be a trend.

I visited Henden in England and had a hard time seeing a Me-110, He-111, Ju-88 and Bf-109E because they had the lights off. Then I went to the Air Force Museum and they had the B-10 in the darks and you could only view it from the front, no way to walk around it. It’s very sad when you go to a museum and you can’t see the a/c, especially when you pay good money to enter.

Tim

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

The fact is that the museum operated for many years in large part because large sums of money were donated by a few wealthy people (those who started the museum). As those folks aged, the realization came that the museum could not continue to exist on that same footing. It had to be self-supporting. There was lots of thought that went into the decision to stop flying...it wasn't made lightly. And yes, given my preference I'd like to see the cats and some of the other A/C fly again. But given a choice between keeping the collection intact but not flying vs having the collection sold off piece-by-piece to keep a few of the more famous airframes flying for a few more years...I'd opt in a minute to do exactly what the board of directors did. The fact that the aircraft aren't flying is more than compensated for (in my opinion) by the facts that the collection is still together and cared for and that MANY more people are enjoying them, and learning about them. Even when the aircraft were flying, you would see them at an airshow but not necessarily learn anything about them or the people who flew them in harms way. In their current status they serve as a lasting tribute to those who flew them and the deeds they performed for our country...I've been to lots of airshows myself and there is no history lesson to be had in that environment. What the Airzoo has to offer now is, again in my opinion, more valuable to the general public and especially to young people than seeing an aircraft fly which when the day is done they won't know any more about than when the day started.

I'll stop now. It's rather clear to me that most of you would rather "keep them flying at any cost", and you're entitled to your opinion. But please don't slam the Airzoo for having a different opinion.

John

PS I forgot to add...the aircraft are quite accessible compared to other places I've been. Especially in the new facility, which is one reason there is so much open floor space.

The short term plan is to get the Tri-motor flying next year sometime. That was a great public awareness and participation vehicle.

Others at the museum are working to arrange a warbird or two to fly locally on an incremental basis. Cost being the limiting factor.

Remember, many of the wardirds not in the new facility are still kept in near airworthy condition. Particularly the Cat Flight. Hmmmmm.........?

(Just my 2 cents)