Grissom Air Museum C-47 repainted

dirtysidedown430 · **Joined:** Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:36 pm **Posts:** 336

Ah good see the paint ballers are alive and well

StangStung · **Posted:** Mon Nov 16, 2015 12:02 pm

ALOHADAVE wrote:

Here is the official AF instruction 84-103 that talks about nose art:
I'm not defending it and I don't agree with it, but having worked at an Air Force Museum for a few years I can tell you that there is an official Air Force policy not to have nose art displayed on USAFM aircraft. I don't have the exact instruction with me now, but I did read it recently. The policy was written by the USAF Museum.
The policy is selectively enforced as usual with government policies.

Expect to see this happen more often.7.3.4. Do not compromise authenticity by adding spurious names, logos, nose art, or other identifying features that violate the historical accuracy of the CMI. Do not compromise CMIs for reasons of personal edification. Do not mix markings from a variety of aircraft, i.e. using the nose art from one aircraft, the serial number of another and unit codes from a third. Ensure historical accuracy in the placement and style of markings being applied, keeping in mind the "window" or "moment" of history you are representing. Fully document the markings being applied to static display aircraft.

OK WIX'ers out there, what do you have to say about this instruction?

As mustang driver has correctly pointed out, I think you have misinterpreted what the NMUSAF reg says. The reg is trying to do the opposite of what happened in this case - it is trying to ensure historical accuracy of the underlying scheme/unit and serial numbers/nose art. The former well-documented scheme had everything this reg calls for. I cannot say the same about the current scheme, simply because I don't know.

While the NMUSAF has taken it's knocks, and rightfully so, for acts committed in the past, on the whole they're doing good things NOW with their planes. Just look at the progress made at the museum in Dayton over the last 20 years if you have any questions about that.

This whole thing smells of a petty tyrant showing that he can get something done by force of will, no matter how wrongheaded.

K5DH · **Posted:** Mon Nov 16, 2015 12:08 pm

ALOHADAVE wrote:

Here is the official AF instruction 84-103 that talks about nose art:

7.3.4. Do not compromise authenticity by adding spurious names, logos, nose art, or other identifying features that violate the historical accuracy of the CMI. Do not compromise CMIs for reasons of personal edification. Do not mix markings from a variety of aircraft, i.e. using the nose art from one aircraft, the serial number of another and unit codes from a third. Ensure historical accuracy in the placement and style of markings being applied, keeping in mind the "window" or "moment" of history you are representing. Fully document the markings being applied to static display aircraft.

OK WIX'ers out there, what do you have to say about this instruction?

After reading those instructions, it seems to me that the C-47's previous markings did not violate any part of the instructions. They were not spurious. They did not stroke the ego of anyone working at the Museum (I assume that's where they're going with "personal edification"). They were not a mixture of various aircraft. They were historically accurate. They were period-correct. They were documented. I just don't see any violation here. Of course, it may not have anything to do with actual or perceived violations of policy. When all is said and done, the Air Force owns the airplane. As the owner, they have the right to dictate how it is to be painted and displayed. In this case, it seems the AF wanted the C-47 to represent a different "window" or "moment" of history. It's their airplane; they can do that.

It's still a darned shame.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:16 pm

As another person who has a relative honored on a NMUSAF-owned aircraft (the C-47 at Robbins painted as my Great Uncle's "Saylor's Trailer" from the CBI when he was with the 10CCS - http://www.comcar.org/3rd_ComCar/10th_C ... _page1.htm ), I agree that the NMUSAF isn't against nose art - it's against spurious nose art or aircraft painted in a "representative" scheme that mixes several aircraft. Now, interesting item - the Robbins AFB aircraft was painted (initially) as "Saylor's Trailer" on one side and another airplane on the other, complete with 2 different serials. There are later pictures with the Crew Chief's name removed and the real serial number on the tail instead of the serial of the original "Trailer". They've since repainted the plane when they moved it inside as a D-Day aircraft, with the real S/N on the tail. Only problem is that the plane's not a D-Day vet. It was delivered in 1944 to the US Navy as an R4D-6 and went direct to Warner after sitting in a bone yard for 5 years.

Warbird Information Exchange

Grissom Air Museum C-47 repainted

Who is online