NMUSAF Foundation receives 10 mil for new building

[mustangdriver]

You actually raise a good point there. I wonder what percentage of the NMUSAF collection is on display in museums open to the public vs. the ones that are only on bases behind a gate.

[Garth]

Yup after the other museum fails to take care of theirs.

As much as the NMUSAF should have a shuttle, once they're delivered to their initial awarded locations the 747 SCAs will be decommissioned. While moving them to another location is possible, there will be geographic limitations imposed by the requirement that they not be cut up (note to NMUSAF: Step away from the sawzall. Rpt, step away from the sawzall. Slowly.)

Discovery won't be able to go anywhere, but she'll also be very well maintained. I think Endeavor will be locked in place as well, can't speak to how well the CA Science Center will care for her. Atlantis could be moved (via barge) but she'll be maintained well too.

That leaves Enterprise, which is the shuttle I think you're referring to. I don't know if I agree with the sentiment that Intrepid won't be able to take care of her, but if they don't she'll be the easiest to move. So long as its to a location accessible by barge. I'd think Johnson Space Center would be the most likely candidate, if that were to happen.

NMUSAF, being decidedly landlocked (too bad the Wrights went back to Dayton instead of making the OBX their permanent base of operations ...), is basically SOL once the SCAs go away. Now there is the possibility that one of the SCAs will be maintained in either a flyable storage condition, or see actual but occasional flying duty (much as the NASA Super Guppy does). The use of an SCA to ferry that Boeing PhantomRay UAV indicates that there still may be a desire to keep one active. If that happens, then the ability to play musical shuttles will exist for as long as the SCAs and Orbiters are safe for flight (and consider that Enterprise is still fit - other than some minor corrosion that needs fixing - after 26 years on the ground).

Which wouldn't be a bad thing at all, since it would keep pressure on the recipients to maintain the Orbiters at risk of having them repo'd (like NMUSAF did with Memphis Belle).

[mustangdriver]

I am referring to two Shuttles. The first being the one going to California who now says that they need to start raising 23 million dollars to display the Shuttle. Funny, I thought part of the "deal" from NASA was that the funding needed to be in place for the construction of a facility. The CA museum has been awarded one but still needs 23 million for a building.
Then you have the one going to the Intrepid. Do I think that the Intrepid is cool? Sure. It is a great museum. however that being said even their museum director states they have trouble keeping up on taking care of all of their aircraft. So now they are getting a Shuttle on top of that.
I have no doubt that the one going to KSC or to NASM will be well cared for. I have SERIOUS doubt that the ones going to CA and to NYC will recieve the proper care.

[mustangdriver]

A 4th building is certainly an immediate need for the collection. But looking ahead it seems to me that in reality TWO buildings are really required to house all of the existing and forthcoming exhibits. For example: XC-99,C-5,C-141,KC-10, C-135 variants (e.g. E,R,K & V), E-3, E-4,C-17,C-9, T-43, YC-125, C-60, C-119, C-82, C-131, T-29, all Presidential A/C, X-1 thru X-5, XB-70, C-12, C-20, C-21,C-22, C-23, C-25, C-25, C-26,C-27,C-28, C-29, C-32, C-35,C-37, C-38, B-17D, B-17F,...to name a few. Yes, Space Shuttle too. Does the NMUSAF have a Douglas B-23 and a Lockheed RB-69 stuck away? I believe there is a Douglas C-33 (DC-2) and an O-46 in storage and didn't I see a WIX thread a note regarding the B-42 and B-43 restoration as well. The Lockheed B-37 Lexington is coming too.

Did I miss any? Nope, not a one...yeah, right. Don't forget all the exhibits hanging from the ceilings due to lack of space.

The new building will house the space and R&D aircraft, presidential, and global reach. The buildings across the field that these aircraft are in now is going to be used for the XC-99 restoration. While I have never seen plans for another building after this one, I did hear conversations about extending some of the existing buildings. Not sure how easily that can be done.

[Pat Carry]

A 4th building is certainly an immediate need for the collection. But looking ahead it seems to me that in reality TWO buildings are really required to house all of the existing and forthcoming exhibits. For example: XC-99,C-5,C-141,KC-10, C-135 variants (e.g. E,R,K & V), E-3, E-4,C-17,C-9, T-43, YC-125, C-60, C-119, C-82, C-131, T-29, all Presidential A/C, X-1 thru X-5, XB-70, C-12, C-20, C-21,C-22, C-23, C-25, C-25, C-26,C-27,C-28, C-29, C-32, C-35,C-37, C-38, B-17D, B-17F,...to name a few. Yes, Space Shuttle too. Does the NMUSAF have a Douglas B-23 and a Lockheed RB-69 stuck away? I believe there is a Douglas C-33 (DC-2) and an O-46 in storage and didn't I see a WIX thread a note regarding the B-42 and B-43 restoration as well. The Lockheed B-37 Lexington is coming too.

Did I miss any? Nope, not a one...yeah, right. Don't forget all the exhibits hanging from the ceilings due to lack of space.

The new building will house the space and R&D aircraft, presidential, and global reach. The buildings across the field that these aircraft are in now is going to be used for the XC-99 restoration. While I have never seen plans for another building after this one, I did hear conversations about extending some of the existing buildings. Not sure how easily that can be done.

Chris, all the things I have read about the new building, it does not include the R & D aircraft. Do you have insider info about this? The link I used for this thread says the Space Gallery, the Presidentail Aircraft and the Global Reach Aircraft will be going into the new building.

[Steve Nelson]

The WWII gallery will definitely need to be expanded once the Swoose, B-23 and He-111 are restored. There's also the O-46 and C-39. I suppose the Early Years gallery could be expanded and those aircraft could go with the other pre-WWII types. The Ju-52 would fit in there nicely as well, although I thought they were trying to "divest" themselves of it.

One thing I find odd is that the museum doesn't have an AT-6 among the other WWII trainers. They used to have one "back in the day," but it was taken off display when the Early Years gallery was re-organized some 20 years ago. I don't know if it's the same airframe now configured as a "Mosquito" in the Korean War Gallery or not.

SN

[Pat Carry]

The WWII gallery will definitely need to be expanded once the Swoose, B-23 and He-111 are restored. There's also the O-46 and C-39. I suppose the Early Years gallery could be expanded and those aircraft could go with the other pre-WWII types. The Ju-52 would fit in there nicely as well, although I thought they were trying to "divest" themselves of it.

One thing I find odd is that the museum doesn't have an AT-6 among the other WWII trainers. They used to have one "back in the day," but it was taken off display when the Early Years gallery was re-organized some 20 years ago. I don't know if it's the same airframe now configured as a "Mosquito" in the Korean War Gallery or not.

SN

I have always thought the same about the AT-6 being excluded from the WW2 gallery. When you think about the 10's of thousands of pilots who trained on the Texan before being sent off to one of the many fronts in WW2, it certainly should be represented there!

[mustangdriver]

They had the model lay out of the new building on display and it contained the R&D aircraft as well as the rest of the presidential. Now that the shuttle won't be there, there will be plenty of room.

That T-6 is in storage. I too find it odd that it is not on display in the WWII Gallery. The T-6 Mosquito is the real deal.
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsh ... asp?id=287

[Tim Savage]

That T-6 is in storage.

Nope. Not in storage at the NMUSAF. The T-6 that was on previously on display was a an ex-PA ANG T-6G that was made up to look like an earlier model. It was sold quite some time ago, restored out in ND and has been flying..back in its original PA ANG scheme.

[mustangdriver]

That is right she was an ex-PA ANG bird. Interesting is that there is a T-6 in storage at the NMUSAF. I wonder what it's story is. Also I wonder why they decided to not portray a WWII era T-6.

[Django]

I surprised they don't have a WWII marked T-6 on display too. While not as glamorous as the combat aircraft, you could certainly make the case that the type was the most important aircraft of the entire war.

[Steve Nelson]

The T-6 Mosquito is the real deal.

Now that you mention it, I remember seeing an unrestored T-6 with the outer wings removed in the restoration/storage hangar when I took the tour back in the mid-90s (I think it was painted silver, but not much else in the way of markings.) The tour guide said it came from Korea, but at the time I didn't realize we had used them in combat, and assumed it was an ROK trainer. I'm assuming that's the machine now restored as the Mosquito.

SN

[Pat Carry]

They had the model lay out of the new building on display and it contained the R&D aircraft as well as the rest of the presidential. Now that the shuttle won't be there, there will be plenty of room.

That T-6 is in storage. I too find it odd that it is not on display in the WWII Gallery. The T-6 Mosquito is the real deal.
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsh ... asp?id=287

It seems strange to me that the museum's website doesn't indicate the info about the R&D aircraft.