NASM moving their B-17

[Garth]

My interpretation is that "transferred" does NOT mean a loan, but a trade.

It depends on how you want to parse and interpret that statement. There is no museum called "The Udvar-Hazy Center". There's The National Air and Space Museum, which has a facility called the "Udvar-Hazy Center".

If the term "transferred" was used in conjunction with "NASM". I'd assume a trade as well. However using "Udvar-Hazy" seems more in line with a change of location, rather than ownership.

[Garth]

Exterior restoration? That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. The Belle is going through a complete restoration.

I don't mean to come off as bashing but they want SSB because the work that was done by the guys in Dover is top notch, and they can put it on display as is.

"Exterior restoration" is pretty precise language, probably lifted directly from whatever agreement NASM has with NMUSAF. It would indicate that when the exterior of the Belle is done, SSSB heads East. Considering all the discussion, dissension and wrangling over the terms of the deal, and that Swoose was a transfer of title in exchange for a loan, NASM's lawyers were probably worried that NMUSAF would try to retain SSSB for as long as possible under the pretext that some small part of the Belle restoration (like missing interior equipment) was incomplete.

Absolutely true on the second part. And why not? As has been pointed out, NASM has a huge backlog of restorations and the construction of Phase II has only recently started (with fundraising incomplete). It means that NASM doesn't have to choose between high-priority projects. From the WWII-era alone NASM has an A-26, B-25 (which may be in the process of being prepped for an interim display), P-61 (which is on display with completion of restoration planned for after Phase II is complete) and a B-26 in various conditions that it wants to run through. Plus many others (SB2C being restored, TBM and even an S-43 sitting in storage). As a project manager it strikes me that the museums are working together to level resources across their projects. NASM's resources for doing this aren't limitless, the SSSB deal means that they don't have to choose between restoring Swoose (or doing a less comprehensive restoration on another B-17) and restoring Flak Bait.

[Ken]

Didn't someone mention a clause stated during the original return of SSSB that her return was contingent on her being displayed by the AF Museum? Was there any truth to this or did I get the info wrong?

[Garth]

Didn't someone mention a clause stated during the original return of SSSB that her return was contingent on her being displayed by the AF Museum? Was there any truth to this or did I get the info wrong?

I don't recall reading that in any of the earlier threads but such an agreement, if worded as you remember, wouldn't preclude SSSB being displayed by the NMUSAF at NASM.

It might actually explain why there wasn't a change in ownership/title.

This is why lawyers seldom go hungry, btw ...

[mustangdriver]

Hello,

My take is the same as Django: The NASM has a tremendous backlog of aircraft to restore, with none starting until after the new restoration building is built is finished in another couple of years. While the Swoose I understand was one of the early aircraft to be going into the restoration cycle, the scale of that restoration would have been similar to the Enola Gay, which took most of ten years. I think the NASM curators (I heard by a vote of 5-4) decided to let the Swoose, despite being the rarer and more historic aircraft, for to NMUSAF with the understanding that SSSB would come to Udvar Hazy.

While there is some disagreement among those of us who are particular fans of NASM about the loss of Swoose, I think it is a good arrangement. Udvar Hazy still has a lot of empty space in their WWII section, and the SSSB would nicely complement the Enola Gay, with which it would presumably overlap wings.

NASM is an amazingly generous museum. It has often given aircraft to other museums without wrangling for a trade. Note the B-17 that is the topic of this thread and the P-75 and Avro Saucer given to NMUSAF; to my knowledge, in all cases this was done without asking for anything in rerurn.

Kevin
.

While the NASM has indeed loaned several aircraft to several museums, it is a partnership. Take a walk through UH building and tell me how many aircraft are on laon from the NMUSAF there. About 1/4 of the building. Same with the NMNA. The B-17 in this thread IS a trade, they just didn't give the Swoose over to the USAFM with no string. They are getting one that is complete and a combat vet

[mustangdriver]

Didn't someone mention a clause stated during the original return of SSSB that her return was contingent on her being displayed by the AF Museum? Was there any truth to this or did I get the info wrong?

I don't recall reading that in any of the earlier threads but such an agreement, if worded as you remember, wouldn't preclude SSSB being displayed by the NMUSAF at NASM.

It might actually explain why there wasn't a change in ownership/title.

This is why lawyers seldom go hungry, btw ...

SSB will be on loan to the NASM

[old iron]

While the NASM has indeed loaned several aircraft to several museums, it is a partnership. Take a walk through UH building and tell me how many aircraft are on laon from the NMUSAF there. About 1/4 of the building. Same with the NMNA. The B-17 in this thread IS a trade, they just didn't give the Swoose over to the USAFM with no string. They are getting one that is complete and a combat vet

To my knowledge the only aircraft at UH that is on loan (i.e., not owned by NASM) is the Wright Model B reproduction, which is on loan from The Wright Experience.

[mustangdriver]

While the NASM has indeed loaned several aircraft to several museums, it is a partnership. Take a walk through UH building and tell me how many aircraft are on laon from the NMUSAF there. About 1/4 of the building. Same with the NMNA. The B-17 in this thread IS a trade, they just didn't give the Swoose over to the USAFM with no string. They are getting one that is complete and a combat vet

To my knowledge the only aircraft at UH that is on loan (i.e., not owned by NASM) is the Wright Model B reproduction, which is on loan from The Wright Experience.

You may want to take a closer look. Most of the Air force aircraft in their collection is there because of the NMUSAF.

[Shay]

You may want to take a closer look. Most of the Air force aircraft in their collection is there because of the NMUSAF.

And the majority of all perserved Axis aircraft are here today because of the NASM. IIRC Neither of the 2 B-17, that the NASM had ownership of, did the NMUSAF have a hand in saving or preserving,..........til now.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

[mustangdriver]

Shay you are right, and I mean no disrespect, I am just pointing out that the NASm does indeed get pleny of help fropm other museums. It is not a one way deal for them.

[Pat Carry]

Hey Chris, Since SSB is going to leave when the Memphis Belle is finished, if the museum wants to have a G model on display to represent that stage of the war why dont they take one that is rotting away outside in various locations across the US and put it on display? Good idea?

[mustangdriver]

I was all for keeping SSB, I mean what better G model to have? I still wish that one of the ones at the bases was going to be sent to NASM instead. I don't think they are going to get another G model. Just the D and the F.

[Pat Carry]

I agree Chris but if SSB does in fact depart for the NASM someday one of those other G models out there should come to Dayton. Then, if Paul Allen would be so kind as to donate his E model or if the museum could somehow obtain Swamp Ghost which would be even better, the museum would have D thru G models. Now that would be a site to see!

[mustangdriver]

Now you are talking.

[Pat Carry]

If that should ever come to pass I promise to stop complaining about the dark aircraft galleries! Hey Chris, do you ever see/talk to Jerry Rep?