Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Wed Apr 01, 2026 1:55 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: B-29 44-69972 Doc Update
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:30 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:34 pm
Posts: 2940
Image

Quote:
The historic B-29 airplane known as "Doc" won't be returning to the Kansas Aviation Museum.

Lon Smith, the museum's executive director, said Tuesday that many visitors didn't realize "Doc" was on loan and owned by a resident of Cleveland, Ohio.

The owner, Tony Mazzolini, could not guarantee the airplane would stay at the museum for more than two years, Smith said. So the museum abandoned plans for a permanent hangar last summer.

"Doc" remains in Wichita as restoration of the 1945 plane continues, piece by piece.

Earlier this month, the museum filed court papers asking permission to redistribute about $23,000 in funds given to the "Doc" hangar for other projects.

Smith said plans to build a permanent home for the plane named after the "Snow White" character came close to completion before falling apart in August.

With help of local investors, Smith said, the museum secured a $500,000 loan to be repaid in five years.

The museum, with an annual budget of $350,000, found a designer, established plans, secured building and historical restoration permits and was ready to build the hangar.

"We wanted a commitment to keep the plane at the museum for 10 years," Smith said. "But the owner would only to guarantee two years."

Mazzolini, 76, said he wanted "Doc" to fly, not sit in Wichita.

"It was meant to be a working plane that we could fly around the country and let people see as a part of history," Mazzolini said. "It shouldn't be a static exhibit."

Not knowing when the plane would be available for viewing made the hefty investment less enticing to the museum, Smith said.

"When you're dealing with businesses they want sure things — not maybes," Smith said.

John Shark, one of the Wichita volunteers who has helped work on the restoration the past eight years, said flying the plane adds costs to housing it.

"If you're talking about building a hangar for a plane that's going to sit full of gas and be flying compared to just sitting, then it's about double the cost," Shark said.

The aviation museum had collected more than $41,000 in donations. Many were made in such small amounts it was impossible to track the donors, court records say.

Donors gave permission for about $17,000 to be used for other purposes.

Those include refurbishing buildings on 15 acres being donated by Spirit, which will house other museum restoration projects. Those facilities will free archive and exhibit areas in the main museum, Smith said.

One donor asked for $1,000 to be returned.

The museum is asking a Sedgwick County District Court judge to release the restrictions on the remaining funds, for which donors couldn't be identified.

Smith said the museum still provides free storage and office space for the U.S. Aviation Museum, a nonprofit organization overseeing the "Doc" restoration.

Work such as re-skinning wings and rebuilding seats is underway in other locations, Shark said. The plane is in a secure area where volunteers can't work on it.

Mazzolini said the plane is in storage on one of the properties owned by Spirit, Boeing or McConnell Air Force Base.

But the restoration needs a temporary hangar where crews can access it to replace a right wing spur cap that's essential to getting the plane off the ground.

"If we had everything we needed, we could finish this in less than two years," Shark said.



Read more: http://www.kansas.com/2011/02/22/173162 ... z1EmwOoFfL

Found it here:
http://www.kansas.com/2011/02/22/173162 ... keep.html#


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:38 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:42 pm
Posts: 2708
Location: NP, NJ, USA
Sounds like the up hill battle continues. Seems like a crummy situation for all involved. The Museum, the volunteers and owner.

I hope Doc will finally get finished sooner rather than later.

_________________
Share your story: Rutgers Oral History Archive http://oralhistory.rutgers.edu/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:16 am 
Offline
Account Suspended
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:06 pm
Posts: 2713
Good Grief.., I could see this coming several miles away!

:(

_________________
S.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:41 pm
Posts: 692
Location: Palm Coast, Florida
That's a shame. if I had the means to help them out, I would but someone needs to be kicked in the junk over this.

_________________
"According to the map, we've only gone 4 inches."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:30 am 
Offline
Account Suspended
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:06 pm
Posts: 2713
Where is a link to the beautiful B-29 being restored to static in Washington's Boeing facility?

Functional turrets etc?

What a fine job that is.

_________________
S.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:54 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:10 am
Posts: 9721
Location: Pittsburgher misplaced in Oshkosh
Sounds like one group wanted to keep it static, and another wanted it to fly. This is one that needs to fly in my opinion. That was the whole idea of this project.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:40 pm
Posts: 101
Location: Fort Worth, TX
As much as I would reaaally love to see the Collings Foundation get a 105 in the air, I think this would make a perfect fallback project. If anyone could get this bird back in the air and tour it, it would be them. hint hint hint. At least one could dream....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:03 am
Posts: 173
If Collings Foundation got it I wonder how long it would be before they said they had "the only flying B-29 in the world" and put it on their posters and website like they do with there B-24?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:40 pm
Posts: 101
Location: Fort Worth, TX
LOL..well they do have the only B-24J. I love both the Collings Foundation and the Confed...I mean Commerative Air Force. (still not used to that nomenclature.) Although, Ole 927 was a C-87 in the beginning wasn't she?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:56 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 3:08 pm
Posts: 4542
Location: chicago
Ziiiiiiiiiiiiing! Hahaha! :lol:

No, Ol 927 was a B-24A originally.

I would love to see Doc in the air in formation with FIFI someday. Can you imagine?

_________________
.
.
Sure, Charles Lindbergh flew the plane... but Tom Rutledge built the engine!

Visit Django Studios online or Facebook!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 2:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:40 pm
Posts: 101
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Now that would be a site to see. What's the story with Fertile Myrtle?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:45 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:04 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Merchantville, NJ
mustangdriver wrote:
Sounds like one group wanted to keep it static, and another wanted it to fly. This is one that needs to fly in my opinion. That was the whole idea of this project.


I agree- if the owner says fly her, then make it so! FiFi needs a travelling companion! And, if B-29s are anything like rabbits, getting two of them flying together could lead to more! ;)

Scott

_________________
1942 Dodge WC-51 Weapons Carrier
I am a reenactor, have been since the early 1980s, and I am an aviation enthusiast, PILOT, A&P mechanic, and military vehicle owner. I have restored cars, trucks, and antique radios. These are MY hobbies- What are YOURS?.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:26 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:08 pm
Posts: 1182
Location: Tulsa, OK
I could be wrong, but I sure don't see this as a dispute between a museum that wants a static only exhibit, and an owner who wants a flying aircraft. I see it more as a museum that is getting ready to invest heavily in a capital asset- namely, a purpose-built building that would have to be made big enough to easily get a B-29 in and out- wanting assurances that they aren't going to build that building only to have the owner decide to base the aircraft somewhere else three years down the road. I would think that there would be plenty of reason to build a big hangar if you knew that you would have the B-29 during the off-season- say, from October through April every year. Visitors could get up close and personal, volunteers could help with maintenance, and you would be the home to one of only two flying B-29s. But to invest in that building, and to make it purpose-built, you would need more of a commitment than "It'll be here during the offseason for two years."

From the owner's perspective, it could just be that he is reluctant to make a long-term commitment to keep the aircraft in Wichita, especially if something came along for him like it did for the CAF with Cavanaugh. If a better deal comes along, there is no reason to expect him to lock himself in long-term.

It sure sounds to me (not knowing any better) like there was no dispute between the museum and the owner about the aircraft flying. Just a conflict of desires in terms of long vs. short-term commitment.

Either way, I am sure glad that they are making progress, even if it is slow, and that it will eventually fly. With as much trouble as the owner had getting that aircraft out of China Lake and into the hands of a PRIVATE owner, I sure doubt that he is going to be excited to sell it or give it up to another organization this close to the finish line.

To someone else who asked about Fertile Myrtle- IIRC, I sure think that the only thing keeping that flying is time, money, and being higher up on Kermit's priority list. I think there are about a dozen aircraft ahead of it in the restoration queue, from what one of the WIX contributors who works for Kermit said in a previous thread. If someone really has a burr under their saddle to have a flying B-29, there is always the one out at Aero Trader available- right now!

kevin

_________________
FOUND the elusive DT-built B-24! Woo-hoo!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:46 pm
Posts: 612
Location: Arizona
That would be SWEET if the Collings got a hold of her. PLUS, I can see even MORE possibilities if they have her. :D

Scott

_________________
Scott Dunkirk
AZGCLHU Inc.

http://arizonagroundcrew.org/

1940's Army Air Force ground crew living history
(A 501 C 3 organization)
(IYAMYAS)

"Yes sir, it's suppose to look like that"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:15 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 5757
Location: Waukegan,Illinois
cco23i wrote:
That would be SWEET if the Collings got a hold of her. PLUS, I can see even MORE possibilities if they have her. :D

Scott

A B-29 has been on the Collings wish list for awhile now. It would be nice if they obtained Doc but I'm thinking they would like it as a donation aircraft. Will that happen?

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!


Last edited by Pat Carry on Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 57 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group