Fri Mar 28, 2008 11:54 pm
Seems I opened up a can of worms with you guys, hope I didn't start a fire here. I'm just the dumb guy who just couldn't seem to get it at all. You guys can blame this debate on me. thanks to jack's PM, I get the BIG PICTURE!!! ... A very sad picture indeed. If anyone has photo's of BOTH P-38's in their prime, or today. I would love to see them. And then I'll fade away. What can I say? ... I'm a hard head with very little warbird experience. Learning everyday.
Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:02 am
Heya Hellcat...from one dummie to another 
While I must insist that I am much more dummer...I see the point you are making and do not see one single answer as to who may have let Mr Ethell take the -38 up that sad day. I certainly DO NOT want to hear anything at all come out of a lawyers mouth for the rest of my life 
Just seems clear as mudwater how this tragedy began in the first place.
Not sure what all this has to do with the title to this post either
Now Hellcat, would you mind passing me that there dummy trophy...it's mine and I will never relinquish it to anyone...ever
While I must insist that I am much more dummer...I see the point you are making and do not see one single answer as to who may have let Mr Ethell take the -38 up that sad day. I certainly DO NOT want to hear anything at all come out of a lawyers mouth for the rest of my life Just seems clear as mudwater how this tragedy began in the first place.
Not sure what all this has to do with the title to this post either
Now Hellcat, would you mind passing me that there dummy trophy...it's mine and I will never relinquish it to anyone...ever
Jeff
Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:53 am
Darrell, the 2 P-38s were at the museum/restoration shop in Oregon, they were handled by the man there. He acquired ownership of one of them, the green one. He let Jeff, or Mr. Ethel if you prefer, fly it several times for a total of about 7 hours as the accident report states. I don't know how long before the accident that was, but it was probably weeks or months since it was long enough for the video to come out. Not too many 38's flying back then, and Jeff's Dad had flown them in the war, so lot's of interest.
The other plane, the accident one was still owned by Mr. Pruett. Looking at it now,we don't have any way to know to what arrangements or agreements there were between Mr.Pruett and the restorer. Was the plane allowed to be flown and if so by whom ? It is obvious that Jeff did not go out and steal the plane, this was a public thing and they were flying with both planes together. One might think that with planes of this rarity or value there would be written contracts, but it is not always so. It is common to have warbirds flown by pilots other than the owners. Jeff had flown other people's planes for 20 years, he filled 6 logbooks( See the videos). I have had at least 5 other people fly mine, including the man who taught me and never had it in writing. Usually it only takes a phone call to add Kermit or Howard to your insurance. I have flown Spitfires, T-6, T-34, P-51 and never had it in writing. It is understood or hoped that verbal agreements are good and people have care and judgement. I'll bet when "Gunny" flew the Fagan P-38 there was nothing in writing unless a fee was involved to rent the plane. Sounds strange, but is has worked for years UNTIL there is a loss, and the lawsuits and claims evolve. So the short answer to your question would be the owner of the other P-38 would have had Jeff fly the planes. It was a very sad time for a lot of people that 10 gal more fuel might have made the difference. and a hard lesson. Jeff was a skilled and experienced pilot and one I respected, so if it can happen to him, it can and has happened to anyone.
I believe this is factual, but like most of us I was not there.
The other plane, the accident one was still owned by Mr. Pruett. Looking at it now,we don't have any way to know to what arrangements or agreements there were between Mr.Pruett and the restorer. Was the plane allowed to be flown and if so by whom ? It is obvious that Jeff did not go out and steal the plane, this was a public thing and they were flying with both planes together. One might think that with planes of this rarity or value there would be written contracts, but it is not always so. It is common to have warbirds flown by pilots other than the owners. Jeff had flown other people's planes for 20 years, he filled 6 logbooks( See the videos). I have had at least 5 other people fly mine, including the man who taught me and never had it in writing. Usually it only takes a phone call to add Kermit or Howard to your insurance. I have flown Spitfires, T-6, T-34, P-51 and never had it in writing. It is understood or hoped that verbal agreements are good and people have care and judgement. I'll bet when "Gunny" flew the Fagan P-38 there was nothing in writing unless a fee was involved to rent the plane. Sounds strange, but is has worked for years UNTIL there is a loss, and the lawsuits and claims evolve. So the short answer to your question would be the owner of the other P-38 would have had Jeff fly the planes. It was a very sad time for a lot of people that 10 gal more fuel might have made the difference. and a hard lesson. Jeff was a skilled and experienced pilot and one I respected, so if it can happen to him, it can and has happened to anyone.
I believe this is factual, but like most of us I was not there.
Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:20 am
My sincere apologies to anyone whom I may have offended by my comments. I meant no disrespect. I digress...
Re: ???
Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:39 pm
Jack Cook wrote:According to the current owner, N7973 was being reconditioned to flying status by Erickson Sky Crane of Tillamook, Oregon, and the intent was to place the aircraft in the Smithsonian Museum.
I have also seen this note in the accident report, and it makes me wonder. Why did Pruett want the 38 to go to the Smithsonian, given that the P-38 already in their (NASM) collection is undoubtly the best preserved time capsule around?
T J
Smithsonian
Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:57 pm
T J . I agree with you. That part about "with the intent to place it in the Smithsonian", alerted my curiosity also. I'd bet the National Air and Space Museum already had a P-38, in 1997, although I'm not sure, so why would they want another example? Note, the accident report says, "according to the current owner". I wonder if there was anything about locking it away in a static museum before the accident, and if so why restore it to flying condition? I may be overly doubtful, and I don't know the owner or any specifics, but this sounds like something said after a loss to enhance a large financial claim.
???
Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:25 pm
but this sounds like something said after a loss to enhance a large financial claim.
Did you really say that Bill
Not true at all.
I was told a number of times before the first flight that it was to be donated to the Smithsonian.
The owner was by far more interested in preserving the a/c than having someone else fly it. Remember he saved those 2 P-38s from the scrapman and safeguarded them for decades.
Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:57 pm
Wow...that's quite a statement.
sure
Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:59 pm
Jack, You picked one phrase out of my post. As I also wrote "I am not sure" and "I may be overly doubtful". You say you heard the Smithsonian plans stated before the accident, ok it points that way. But can you explain a few things to T J and myself? If the NASM as TJ writes, already had a pristine P-38 in house, as I also think they did, then why would they want another example? I don't think they collect multiple models of the same make? Also if it was only going into a static museum that never flys any of their planes, then why spend the extra time and money to restore to full flying status, such as engine service or overhauls? And the NASM does their own restoration, why not save the money and let them do it? If the owner really wanted NASM to have the plane, why not donate it in the past? I don't know this owner, even by reputation and you may, and I know people can be individual and what seems to us as eccentric, but it does raise doubts. There are cases of owners donate fully restored and flying warbirds to a static museum such a Bob Tulius with "Baby Duck" to RAF Hendon, but it is rare.
???
Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:13 pm
Sorry Bill but that's what you wrote
I don't know anything about NASM's policies are so I can't comment. I just know the owner Bruce's intent.
didn't cost him anything so why not make it perfect? If NASM turned him down I'm sure a first class museum would have stepped up and taken it.
Just someone who wanted to preserve a piece of history for future generation. why question that?
If the NASM as TJ writes, already had a pristine P-38 in house, as I also think they did, then why would they want another example?
I don't know anything about NASM's policies are so I can't comment. I just know the owner Bruce's intent.
Also if it was only going into a static museum that never flys any of their planes, then why spend the extra time and money to restore to full flying status, such as engine service or overhauls?
didn't cost him anything so why not make it perfect? If NASM turned him down I'm sure a first class museum would have stepped up and taken it.
I know people can be individual and what seems to us as eccentric
Just someone who wanted to preserve a piece of history for future generation. why question that?
Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:27 pm
I tend to agree that there are many people who want to preserve artifacts in our national museums in Washington D.C., no matter if they have several of the same items. It seems to me to be the ultimate donation. Who wouldn't want a personal artifact displayed in our national museums? It's just too bad the whole situation ended the way it did. Lessons learned I would hope.
NASM
Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:36 pm
Jack, as to why question,as you wrote. TJ raised the issue of a P-38 going to NASM, and it was one question that had also occurred to me. It has bearing on the part about who, if anyone had the legal right to fly the plane.
And it seems like you are now backing away from what you wrote about hearing plans, Before The Accident, for the plane to go into the Smithsonian, not just any good museum, but That One where it would not fly. Of course virtually Any Museum, CAF, etc would have loved to receive this plane as a donation,but that is not what the report says and it may give a different interpretation.
You say you don't know NASM policies. Have you been there or seen their books? I have several times including the tour inside the restoration shops and I can't think of a single example where they have more than one of each type. Maybe they were going to make an exception for this one person? Maybe it is only a question of semantics,of language. Maybe the owner did hope to put it in a museum, even NASM, but it was more of a wish than a plan.
And it seems like you are now backing away from what you wrote about hearing plans, Before The Accident, for the plane to go into the Smithsonian, not just any good museum, but That One where it would not fly. Of course virtually Any Museum, CAF, etc would have loved to receive this plane as a donation,but that is not what the report says and it may give a different interpretation.
You say you don't know NASM policies. Have you been there or seen their books? I have several times including the tour inside the restoration shops and I can't think of a single example where they have more than one of each type. Maybe they were going to make an exception for this one person? Maybe it is only a question of semantics,of language. Maybe the owner did hope to put it in a museum, even NASM, but it was more of a wish than a plan.
????
Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:18 pm
to go into the Smithsonian, not just any good museum
It says intent nothing more "It was his intent"
You say you don't know NASM policies. Have you been there or seen their books?
Why would they show me their books? Can I see yours
I have several times including the tour inside the restoration shops and I can't think of a single example where they have more than one of each type.
Just off the top of my head and I'm sure they're more.
B-17D & B-17G and also P-51B & P-51D
Why not a P-38J & P-38L? One a untouched time capsule and the other perfectly restored
Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:23 pm
We were at Tillamook less than 2 weeks before the crash and the P-38 you guys are talking about was just getting finished up in the restoration hangar. It had not been flown yet. My boss made an offer on the aircraft at that time. I looked it over pretty good, they did a very good job on both P-38s. We had lunch with the owner of the museum.
Mike
Mike
???
Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:27 pm
When I was there last they were finishing up the paint job.
Silver overall with blue spinners and codes. I recall the marking were specific to Bruce P's idea of honoring all P-38 pilots. Sorry no pictures just some in the salvage yard cut up smashed and burned
Silver overall with blue spinners and codes. I recall the marking were specific to Bruce P's idea of honoring all P-38 pilots. Sorry no pictures just some in the salvage yard cut up smashed and burned