P-38 on a stick

[bdk]

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.

[jtramo]

All the arguments in the world don't matter because that P-38 is NEVER leaving that base.

[mustangdriver]

You don't see the Smithsonian keeping thier planes outside.

Yeah actually you do. THe Connie just came in, there is a C -130 outside, and several aircraft outside of theirs including the C-46 in New York.

Yes, I think this P-38 would be better off in doors, but I think it should stay at the base. I think that the attitude toward static aircraft here is scary to be honest.

[mustangdriver]

I think maybe I just am wrong in thinking that the P-38 is more cared for than some of the gate gaurds you see at other locations other than bases. Such as the random T-33 and F-84 that are in the m iddle of no wehre. All I really meant by this whole thing is that it gets better care than those, not so much a fight over static vs. flying because I think we need both.

To Brad and Matt, as I hope you know, I meant no disrespect with anything. Just discussing aircraft.

[Matt Gunsch]

My biggest complaint about the P-38 is that they took a FLYABLE P-38 and stuck it on a stick. The T-33s and F-84s out in the middle of no where were not flyable and nor are they as rare as the P-38. There are P-38s on display that were recovered from crash sites and restored for display, and of those, only one is outside.

One thing that has not been mentioned, since these are "museum" aircraft, how come they are not accessable to the public ? Here in the Phx area there are 2 F-100s, 1 F-15,1 F-16,2 F-104s,3 F-86s,3 T-33s, 1 A-7, 1 F-84 on display, of those planes, only a F-100 and a F-86D are viewable to the public. The F-86D and F-100 have been on display since the early 70s, and the F-86 is suffering from corrosion.

[gregv]

Could a mostly transparent and stylish shelter not be erected around this aircraft? It would keep it out of the elements and still serve its purpose as a gate guard.

Objectively speaking though, how many more years will this aircraft still be suitable for exterior display before it becomes too corroded to hold itself? 10? 20? 30? Logically, a fibreglass replica makes sense, and that's not bashing anyone or any organization. It would be easier to take care of, easier to replace, and still serve its symbolic purpose. Better yet, put a replica P-39 next to the replica P-38, thus paying homage to McGuire's service in the Aleutains as well.

gv

[Sixcarbs]

As a taxpayer and an warbird enthusiast, I would love to see as many surplus planes auctioned off to the public as possible. If they want to have strict licensing for some of the modern jets, fine. But the Government should recoup what money it can for them.

Let them auction off planes like the P-38 to finance static displays in their museums.

If the AF announced they were spending over 7 figures on a piece of art in front of the gate at one of their bases, people wold be outraged. Well, that's what they are doing here. The longer they leave it up there, the greater the cost of restoration.

Another point is you can't even get a good look at it when it is on a stick unless you are in a cherry picker

I wonder what the total value of all of the gate guards and non-museum static displays across the country would be if they were put up for auction?

Remember, no entity has destroyed more warbirds than the US military. How many B-17's were built, how many still exist? What happened to all of the ones that survived combat?

[airnutz]

All the arguments in the world don't matter because that P-38 is NEVER leaving that base.

Sure it will..when the corrosion finally eats through its internal support and its well kempt shiny exterior and
implodes off of that pole, it'll exit in a scrappers bin.

Last edited by airnutz on Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Jiggersfromsphilly]

I hope they stuff Raquel Welch when she dies and put her on a stick so we can still see her!

All the arguments in the world don't matter because that P-38 is NEVER leaving that base.

Sure it will..when the corrosion finally eats through its internal support and its well kempt shiny exterior and
implodes off of that pole, it'll exit in a scrappers bin.

Waiting for that response ...

[RMAllnutt]

I think that the best policy I've ever seen with respect to air force gate guards has to be that of the RAF. It hasn't always worked perfectly, and there have definitely been some rare aircraft lost (Blackburn Beverly and Gloster Javelin come to mind).

However, their policy of replacing all spitfire gate guards with fibre glass replicas in part exchange for a few original airframes, and then using the remaining spits as trade material for rarer aircraft that were not in the national museum has to be one of the more inspired decisions in RAF historic aircraft collections policy.

This has led to some of those spitfires coming into private collections, and a number have flown again... some indeed with significant combat histories. In exchange, the RAF has plenty of highly authentic looking, and far more durable gate guards, as well as some very, very rare types to fill holes in the national collection which wouldn't have the money to buy them on the open market. It's a win-win in both directions, and I think the US Air Force (and Navy) would be well advised to take note from this example to fill holes in their own collections. They don't need nearly as many original mustangs, B-17's, P-38's, SBD's etc. as they have, but could do well to get ultra-rare originals like the XP-51 or XF8F inside the fold instead. Just a thought, but it would be an excellent pairing of the private and public sectors which would benefit us all.

Cheers,
Richard

Last edited by RMAllnutt on Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[old iron]

Mustangdriver wrote:

Yeah actually you do [see Smithsonian planes outside]. THe Connie just came in, there is a C -130 outside, and several aircraft outside of theirs including the C-46 in New York.

There you go picking on NASM again when you could find some better examples of important aircraft displayed outdoors at NMUSAF, at Wright-Pat and elsewhere. Maybe you have not seen those...

[mustangdriver]

I could, but I was told that there are no NASM aircraft outside. That is not correct. Most, not all, of the NMUSAF aircraft that are in bad shape and need attention are on loan to other groups. These groups need to give the care that they once wanted to give to these aircraft. There is an F-86 at the Beaver County Airport that is in danger of being taken back due to this. But you had better believe that when the NMUSAF comes to get it, that every newspaper will be there saying how the big bad museum took away the pride and joy of the county. It is like a lose lose situation for Dayton. If they leave stuff in place and threaten , nothing happens, if they take it back, then they are evil. Look at the Memphis Belle. People actually sent Linda morgan death threats for her backing the NMUSAF for moving the aircraft.

[PbyCat-Guy]

MD ANG is all ready sending you to OTS and UPT and you haven't even taken the AFOQT yet?

This post is also available in English.

I believe PBYCat-Guy is just being an optimist and thinking positive that he has a good chance at success in realizing his dream.

I'm trying to be optimistic. If I feel like I will not be able to be selected for an A-10 pilot slot, then I have already failed. yikes, I have my foot in my mouth once agian.

Follow your dream young captain!!!! .... PASSION! is a powerful thing .... you really want to fly A-10's, then go after it. Do what needs to be done .... Just make sure you spend time with us WIXers at your airshows you attend ... BTW! no one around here ever puts their foot in their month ...