Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:32 am
is that a Midland 'pole' dancer... 
Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:56 am
OK - ignorant question here - are there standardized size/locations for the CAF brands? They seem kind of all over the place.
Somehow, I was expecting more commonality.
Mike
Somehow, I was expecting more commonality.
Mike
Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:58 am
"Expecting commonality" now you have to remember who you are dealing with. It's kind of like the goverment.........that would make to much sense.
Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:29 am
Tramps may not be the ones you want to bring home to meet mom, but they certainly are the ones you want at the party.
Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:43 am
I was a caf col until politics with hq and the tramp stamp stuff came up. You can not say that you care about the aircraft first then cover up it's paint scheme with a stupid looking logo like that. Look at sentimental journey for petes sake. That looks stupid as heck.
Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:23 am
me109me109 wrote:[
I not only think that comment is unfair, it is just plain uninformed. You cannot possibly believe that HQ does not care about the aircraft. The point is to form a brand so there are the funds to keep these historic aircraft in the air for years to come. I get really annoyed when people infer that HQ just cares about making money to go into coffer in Midland that doesn't benefit the aircraft.
Scott please tell me where you think the money from the marketing scheme goes?
AIRSHO, AIRCRAFT, INSURANCE, KEEPING THE HANGAR LIGHTS ON, YOUTH PROGRAMS, DISPATCH, ETC. ?
Airsho is a revenue generating event, if its not making money, then things need to be evaluated to see where the funds are going. If the event is not, or cannot be a funding generating entity, then consider shutting it down.
The individual units fork out a lot of money for the priviledge of cartaking the aircraft, so HQ does not shell out a dime for aircraft upkeep that are not assigned to HQ.
Where do the membership dues ($200/Colonel/year) go, and what do they do?
Museum attendence and gift shop sales support the musem itself. If it doesn't, then again, an evaluation needs to be completed. It the museum is not self supporting, stop pouring in cash to keep it open.
I've been in the CAF long enough that I've seen three uniform changes, one with each regime change. I refuse to comply with the latest business casual attire change.
Thats OK Taylor, you just keep sipping the CAF kool aid, but the CAF is not the future of warbirds.
Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:47 am
Interesting fuss by grown men over stickers.
But whose airplane, Mudge?
FWIW, I think it does the job. At Oshkosh recently, as a "well informed member of the vintage aviation press" it was the quickest way for me to know the aircraft was a member of the CAF - or not. The CAF need to be known as an organisation with a wide range of aircraft to show.
I'd maybe get het up over the sticker if the schemes underneath were any more original - many of the examples in Brad's essay are pretty average at the best (some, to be fair, are very accurate) and the 'Martlet' scheme (my favourite excuse I've heard here for that abomination being that "it was the Royal New Zealand Fleet Air Arm Scheme" - as if) is appalling. Never mind.
We are lucky that plenty of other organisations now fly complex warbirds. Some cover one side with sponsor names - and a company logo has appeared in the past on that organisation's wingtips, IIRC. Others put the rich guy's name under the cockpit rail - no comment. While others still leave off kill markings for danger of offence, or add extras (unearned) - and most add non-original names because the operators are in leerve with the hunk of metal.
Frankly I'm just grateful the CAF works, flies the aircraft, doesn't crash any nor kill people, and gives people a good time and a non-NMUSAF WIX punchbag when the dog runs from the members here. Particularly thankful for F1F1 and that funny non B-24 thang.
I just wish they'd ask someone who'd got beyond Crayola class when researching the schemes - they aren't hard to get help for free (how often can you say that) and aren't more expensive to get right - as Gary proved and got a neato scheme for that B-24Aish.
But hey, it's not actually important. Just remember to ensure mom doesn't show her tramp stamp to your new girl.
Regards,
Mudge wrote:Branding notwithstanding...I've found that it's kinda' hard to miss an airplane with or without a "brand".
But whose airplane, Mudge?
FWIW, I think it does the job. At Oshkosh recently, as a "well informed member of the vintage aviation press" it was the quickest way for me to know the aircraft was a member of the CAF - or not. The CAF need to be known as an organisation with a wide range of aircraft to show.
I'd maybe get het up over the sticker if the schemes underneath were any more original - many of the examples in Brad's essay are pretty average at the best (some, to be fair, are very accurate) and the 'Martlet' scheme (my favourite excuse I've heard here for that abomination being that "it was the Royal New Zealand Fleet Air Arm Scheme" - as if) is appalling. Never mind.
We are lucky that plenty of other organisations now fly complex warbirds. Some cover one side with sponsor names - and a company logo has appeared in the past on that organisation's wingtips, IIRC. Others put the rich guy's name under the cockpit rail - no comment. While others still leave off kill markings for danger of offence, or add extras (unearned) - and most add non-original names because the operators are in leerve with the hunk of metal.
Frankly I'm just grateful the CAF works, flies the aircraft, doesn't crash any nor kill people, and gives people a good time and a non-NMUSAF WIX punchbag when the dog runs from the members here. Particularly thankful for F1F1 and that funny non B-24 thang.
I just wish they'd ask someone who'd got beyond Crayola class when researching the schemes - they aren't hard to get help for free (how often can you say that) and aren't more expensive to get right - as Gary proved and got a neato scheme for that B-24Aish.
But hey, it's not actually important. Just remember to ensure mom doesn't show her tramp stamp to your new girl.
Regards,
Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:52 am
Two Words....LIGHTEN UP!
Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:56 am
The good old CAF
[img][img]http://i630.photobucket.com/albums/uu23/randalmcfarlane/Rebel1.jpg[/img]
..and the new CAF [without a tag!]
[/img]
[img][img]http://i630.photobucket.com/albums/uu23/randalmcfarlane/Rebel1.jpg[/img]
..and the new CAF [without a tag!]
[/img]
Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:46 am
Gee can I post here 
I prefer big ugly stupid decal. But hey whatever Some of them look good but not the case for the ones on the airplanes.
I noticed a "member" BUSD (big ugly stupid decal) on a airplane.
Taylor when's yours going on the L-5?? I'd have assumed you'd be first in line to get one
By the way "Tramp Stamp"
term is meant to insult the logo.
I prefer big ugly stupid decal. But hey whatever
Some of them look good but not the case for the ones on the airplanes.
I noticed a "member" BUSD (big ugly stupid decal) on a airplane.
Taylor when's yours going on the L-5?? I'd have assumed you'd be first in line to get one
Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:13 am
The Tora group stamps should be done in Japanese....
Lynn
Lynn
Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:33 am
Lynn Allen wrote:The Tora group stamps should be done in Japanese....
Lynn
Now THAT is the funniest thing I've heard on this board in a LONG time!
Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:23 am
skymstr02 wrote:Thats OK Taylor, you just keep sipping the CAF kool aid, but the CAF is not the future of warbirds.
Wow, with members like you, who needs enemies?
Taylor, keep fighting the good fight.
Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:01 am
Good Grief kids!!!!!!
Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:12 am
You might expect Taylor to put a "Member Owned" tramp stamp on his plane, but that's HIS option. Putting one on his plane doesn't mean he supports the CAF any more or less. I put one on the U-11, for now, but it is easier to remove from the painted metal than the fabric.
Putting them on the CAF owned aircraft was not an option. There were comments on other threads about the P-40's new paint scheme, and lack of the CAF brand wings, but if you notice, they are on her now. CAF aircraft that showed up without them had them applied at Airsho. They were applied by the professionals from the company that made them. So the CAF is not exempting any aircraft.
We somehow got very lucky, I think, in that only an outline was chosen for the Yellow Rose. It was more difficult to apply as a lot of little pieces kept sticking to the position holding tape.
The wings size, shape, and location has been an evolution. At first it was said decide what size and location and you can do that. Then it became apparent that there was not any standardization, so HQ started deciding size and location (and SUGGESTING same for member owned, but not pushing it at all). The earlier full-color wings were probably more expensive to produce, so the more standard black and white came along.
I'm not a big fan of the tramp stamps, but I understand the reasoning for them right now. Hopefully we can get away from them sometime in the future. I'd rather fly a plane with the decal on it than see it sold off or sitting on the ground. The decal doesn't cover nearly as much of the paint scheme as a bunch of sponsor names. Oh, and the Yellow Rose has removed all the ego names from the pilot and co-pilot sides, and relocated the sponsor names to a bomb bay door. Many of us wanted to leave them off all together, but we are working that way. At least they don't show when the doors are closed. In their place we put the names of the crew who were flying 8U when she crashed after a mid-air. I also just removed the yellow Commemorative Air Force, N-number, and North American B-25 Mitchell and S/N from the side under the tail. The paint didn't come out quite right, but will be fixed. It's not easy to shoot flat paint in a 20 knot wind on a humid day! In it's place is now 2" letters and numbers, in a more subdued whitish gray.
Lastly, this was my first time to fly the B-25 during an air show. Yes, it was a blast! Manuvers great! It was also cool flying on the SB2C for a photo mission after the show. In 33 years I've never flown on the Helldiver in formation. The Big Tailed Beast is sure graceful in the air!
Putting them on the CAF owned aircraft was not an option. There were comments on other threads about the P-40's new paint scheme, and lack of the CAF brand wings, but if you notice, they are on her now. CAF aircraft that showed up without them had them applied at Airsho. They were applied by the professionals from the company that made them. So the CAF is not exempting any aircraft.
We somehow got very lucky, I think, in that only an outline was chosen for the Yellow Rose. It was more difficult to apply as a lot of little pieces kept sticking to the position holding tape.
The wings size, shape, and location has been an evolution. At first it was said decide what size and location and you can do that. Then it became apparent that there was not any standardization, so HQ started deciding size and location (and SUGGESTING same for member owned, but not pushing it at all). The earlier full-color wings were probably more expensive to produce, so the more standard black and white came along.
I'm not a big fan of the tramp stamps, but I understand the reasoning for them right now. Hopefully we can get away from them sometime in the future. I'd rather fly a plane with the decal on it than see it sold off or sitting on the ground. The decal doesn't cover nearly as much of the paint scheme as a bunch of sponsor names. Oh, and the Yellow Rose has removed all the ego names from the pilot and co-pilot sides, and relocated the sponsor names to a bomb bay door. Many of us wanted to leave them off all together, but we are working that way. At least they don't show when the doors are closed. In their place we put the names of the crew who were flying 8U when she crashed after a mid-air. I also just removed the yellow Commemorative Air Force, N-number, and North American B-25 Mitchell and S/N from the side under the tail. The paint didn't come out quite right, but will be fixed. It's not easy to shoot flat paint in a 20 knot wind on a humid day! In it's place is now 2" letters and numbers, in a more subdued whitish gray.
Lastly, this was my first time to fly the B-25 during an air show. Yes, it was a blast! Manuvers great! It was also cool flying on the SB2C for a photo mission after the show. In 33 years I've never flown on the Helldiver in formation. The Big Tailed Beast is sure graceful in the air!