One perspective on the Liberty Belle loss

JDK · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:19 am

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

I personally don't look at it as we have several of them flying so if one goes down, it's not that big a loss.

Neither do I, that's not what I said. It was a point about relative rarity and history.

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

Maybe it's a New England thing were we are attached to the plane just a bit more.

Fair enough; but again, I was talking in global terms.

Just thinking about the matter.

Regards,

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:16 pm

JDK wrote:

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

I personally don't look at it as we have several of them flying so if one goes down, it's not that big a loss.

Neither do I, that's not what I said. It was a point about relative rarity and history.

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

Maybe it's a New England thing were we are attached to the plane just a bit more.

Fair enough; but again, I was talking in global terms.

Just thinking about the matter.

Regards,

Australia doesn't count :lol:

JDK · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:24 pm

JDK wrote:

Fair enough; but again, I was talking in global terms.

Just thinking about the matter.

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

Australia doesn't count :lol:

I don't know about that. The world's only flying Lockheed Hudson's here, which is a neat ride and rarer piece of history than a B-17G. (Hudsons fought in more air forces and through the whole of W.W.II than the B-17, for instance.)

But then I also went to New Zealand at Easter for the Classic Fighters airshow and Chino's May show, as well as a trip in the Colling's B-24, plus a long mountain drive to see what will be the world's only airworthy W.W.II era Avro Anson - all in the last couple of months. As I said, global.

Back to the topic, other input most welcome.

Regards,

daveymac82c · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:08 pm

Hey James,

It's been a while since I've been in touch with you, and I apologize for that. I've also been rather absent from the WIX world. And it really didn't have anything to do with the "crap" that was going on and bickering and what not. It's just the way it goes sometimes. And, I don't really have much to offer, I'm more of a listener when it comes to WIX'ing. Of course, I wish I could boast about local warbird happenings, but I'm kind of out of the loop on that too.

I digress.

My reason for posting after reading this thread, I wanted to thank James for bringing something very important to WIX.

James has a unique ability to give perspective and vast amounts of knowledge to the WIX conversation. I appreciate how he speaks so powerfully with his brain, and not with his heart. I guess you could say I'm a bit of a nerd, but I love history, and reading, and I like solid facts that are not coated with sugar or emotions. James does just that. I find myself realizing that what I am writing probably doesn't make sense; it hardly does to me, but I know that what I'm trying to say is worth saying.

I suppose I want to thank James for being a voice of rational thought, and reasonable understanding on WIX. Not to mention I also appreciate the vast knowledge he brings, and if he doesn't have it, he researches it, which I admire as well.

Well I think that's enough praise.

Geez, it really sounds like I'm brown-nosing. I don't intend to come across that way.

I suppose it's just that I've been surrounded by some really stupid people, and stupid media lately, and that James' comments in this thread were really refreshing to me. By stupid people I mean that idiots that rioted in my city after the Canucks' Stanley Cup loss this past Wednesday. And on that note, those people were not rioting because of the game, they were rioting because THAT IS what they intended to do, win or lose. Vancouver (and suburbs) are full of really, really dumb people. There are some great people here, but we have a disproportionate number of imbeciles.

Peace,

David M

P.S. Sorry for a lot of the off topic banter.

JDK · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:20 pm

Thanks David, I'll send you the five bucks promised. Canadian Tyre cash OK? :lol:

Sadly there's an infinite supply of stupid, available in most places. So that's another reason to value finding smarts, wherever and whatever they are.

Meanwhile, back to the discussion... Anyone?

Bueller?

Jollygreenslugg · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:01 pm

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

Australia doesn't count :lol:

Hmmm. I wonder if my late friend, Flt Lt Maurice Carse, RAAF would agree. He won a US DFC for his part in the destruction of the Japanese destroyer Arashio in March 1943. He was one of the hundreds of Australian airmen who was on strength and flew missions with the USAAF during the Second World War. If Australia (and by extension, any other allied nation) doesn't count, then his mast-top height bombing doesn't count. The US Government certainly thought it counted when they awarded him the DFC.

Now, back to regular programming!

Despite the fact that I have emoted in my first paragraph, I justify it as it was a response to a specific point raised, which rears its head from time to time, the idea that other nations don't count.

James, I tend to agree with you that the objective numerical reality of this loss mitigates the emotional reality for those not intimately connected with the aircraft. It could become part of a rebuild and would certainly provide enough provenance for reuse of the identity. I imagine that cost factors will be an important factor in that particular decision.

It is indeed a terrible loss, and that loss does represent an emotional reality for those involved, less so for those who have a casual interest. Thankfully a multi-ship formation can still be assembled.

James, your following point interests me;

JDK wrote:

Again, once we get past the irrational attempt to keep all our childhood's toys aspect, then the hard, thinking, work begins - what's worth preserving, and why? How do we make the choices (that the more idealistic WIX posters never consider, let alone address)? What is historical? What's going to be important historical material for 'tomorrow' that we don't even see 'today'?

I don't think that an objective answer is possible, unless a rather arbitrary set of guidelines is established. It's difficult to apply objective decision-making to a topic which is inherently subjective. My own thoughts in the first paragraph are a good example. My relationship with an Australian who served in the USAAF colours my view of the importance of his, and their efforts. Had my father served in Vietnam (for example), I may have a different idea of what is important there.

I believe that national heritage institutions have a responsibility to collate and portray the story of that nation's people in times of conflict and peace. They are free to determine the most appropriate way of doing this, and most would agree that this is being done very well in many cases, and not so well in others. Objective factors limit the ability of a national institution to 'tell the story'. As an example of this, Lancasters are used to tell the main part of the story of Bomber Command in various institutions, in a disproportionate factor to their numerical percentage. Decisions have to be made, and as airframes were available when these institutions were collecting, they were chosen. Just one example showing that arbitrary decisions must be made, and cost or practicality factors have a large part to play in such decisions.

Private groups and single individuals can do what they like. I'll expound more on this later.

Cheers,
Matt

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:53 pm

Jollygreenslugg wrote:

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

Australia doesn't count :lol:

Hmmm. I wonder if my late friend, Flt Lt Maurice Carse, RAAF would agree. He won a US DFC for his part in the destruction of the Japanese destroyer Arashio in March 1943. He was one of the hundreds of Australian airmen who was on strength and flew missions with the USAAF during the Second World War. If Australia (and by extension, any other allied nation) doesn't count, then his mast-top height bombing doesn't count. The US Government certainly thought it counted when they awarded him the DFC.

Now, back to regular programming!

Despite the fact that I have emoted in my first paragraph, I justify it as it was a response to a specific point raised, which rears its head from time to time, the idea that other nations don't count.

James, I tend to agree with you that the objective numerical reality of this loss mitigates the emotional reality for those not intimately connected with the aircraft. It could become part of a rebuild and would certainly provide enough provenance for reuse of the identity. I imagine that cost factors will be an important factor in that particular decision.

It is indeed a terrible loss, and that loss does represent an emotional reality for those involved, less so for those who have a casual interest. Thankfully a multi-ship formation can still be assembled.

James, your following point interests me;

JDK wrote:

Again, once we get past the irrational attempt to keep all our childhood's toys aspect, then the hard, thinking, work begins - what's worth preserving, and why? How do we make the choices (that the more idealistic WIX posters never consider, let alone address)? What is historical? What's going to be important historical material for 'tomorrow' that we don't even see 'today'?

I don't think that an objective answer is possible, unless a rather arbitrary set of guidelines is established. It's difficult to apply objective decision-making to a topic which is inherently subjective. My own thoughts in the first paragraph are a good example. My relationship with an Australian who served in the USAAF colours my view of the importance of his, and their efforts. Had my father served in Vietnam (for example), I may have a different idea of what is important there.

I believe that national heritage institutions have a responsibility to collate and portray the story of that nation's people in times of conflict and peace. They are free to determine the most appropriate way of doing this, and most would agree that this is being done very well in many cases, and not so well in others. Objective factors limit the ability of a national institution to 'tell the story'. As an example of this, Lancasters are used to tell the main part of the story of Bomber Command in various institutions, in a disproportionate factor to their numerical percentage. Decisions have to be made, and as airframes were available when these institutions were collecting, they were chosen. Just one example showing that arbitrary decisions must be made, and cost or practicality factors have a large part to play in such decisions.

Private groups and single individuals can do what they like. I'll expound more on this later.

Cheers,
Matt

i said this joking around. Of course all nations count. The laughing face didn't help you any? Mr. Flt Lt Maurice Carse actions are above and beyond the call of an average man. Simply put, he seemed like a great man.

richkolasa · **Posted:** Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:35 pm

My own take is that "Liberty Belle"s loss was huge because it was playing such an active part in the 'living history' warbirds movement. I've seen dozens and dozens of vets climb into her, many for their first ride since WW2. The fact that the entry door which had all of those signatures is now gone is saddening. Yes, it's all relative. It would have been better had this not happened, that's my final take on it. A whole lot of people worked very hard to bring that aircraft to city after city out of respect for our military vets, as well as all who served the war effort.

Rich

StangStung · **Posted:** Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:08 am

Quote:

Nowadays, folks in the U.S. that haven't traveled outside of CONUS may not be able to perceive the overwhelming nature of U.S. culture in what is written, researched and discussed. I think this plays a role in how they respond to the way we describe them, and in the way we talk about ourselves. When we in the U.S. talk this way, I can't help but cringe behind my monitor. They are worthy as allies, then and now, and deserve our admiration and careful respect.

Triangle P: well said and point well taken. The fact that neither major axis power made it to our shores can be attributed in great part to the efforts of our friends up north and across the seas before we even started beating our plowshares into swords. Moreover, the fact that they had to rebuild their entire infrastructure provided a great space for us to leap ahead industrially/economically. Even seventy years later this should not be overlooked. It has provided us the opportunity to have a B-17E hide out in a junk lot for years, because really it was too much trouble to turn into cans. As noted here, our friends across the pond really needed those cans so there aren't many Halifaxes around to all of our dismay. And it's allowed the kids of fellows who crewed those B-17s, -25s, etc., to find and restore them to remarkable condition. And to make high production value movies about them and ship that product around the world. I'd love to see (and hopefully will if Peter Jackson keeps it up) some movies about the Commonwealth nations and USSR contributions to the war effort on the same production level as say, Band of Brothers, or Saving Private Ryan.

All this is a way of saying, Liberty Belle's loss is undoubtedly a deep loss for the warbird community, but at least we, the Americans, have had (and continue to have) an opportunity to preserve/promote our military aviation history in this way. Our friends in the UK, former Soviet Union, and Australia/New Zealand have had less of an opporutnity. For example, within days of Liberty Belle's loss, I saw another B-17 in the air over Wisconsin (I assume Aluminum Overcast). Where else but here?

BTW, I'm going to find a way to see that Hudson in Oz. It's been a plane I've always been drawn too since I saw my first Lodestar down in Harlingen many moons ago.

Warbird Information Exchange

One perspective on the Liberty Belle loss

Who is online