I took my (almost 3 year old) son to the Los Angeles museum of Natural History a few weeks ago. We came to the displays with the elephants and giraffes, looked for a few moments, and then he burst out yelling, "Move! Move!" He thought he was at the zoo and that the animals weren't moving for some reason. He wanted and expected them to move and was very disappointed that they did not. I think I have the exact same gut instinct when I go to a museum with only static displays. That doesn't mean I won't go, only that the experience is less satisfying to me than it could be.
If you know much about natural history museums you know that many of the displays are 100 percent FAKE. That T-Rex? That Triceratops? ALL FAKE! You couldn't possibly expect to take fossils that are removed from the ground with plaster casts to prevent them breaking because they are so fragile and then suspend them in a realistic display (assuming dinosaurs roamed the earth without skin) .
If you go to the Field Museum in Chicago, arguably one of the best of it's type in the world, where did they get thier display of early man? Certainly they didn't skin one and call their nearest taxidermist!
Can the educational intent be met with a plastic representation? Maybe not with the Wright Flyer (although many museums do have replicas of the Wright Flyer which seem to tell the story well), but perhaps so with an aircraft on a stick or one on permanent internment in a static museum.
I've been to lots of aircraft museums all over the world with display aircraft that will never fly again. I can accept some like an SR-71 or the Space Shuttle as a non-flying display, but there is virtually no excuse in my opinion for a P-51D without any significant wartime history to be a static in a publicly owned museum. In my mind the McGuire P-38 is a travesty and an embarrassment.