B-17 My gal sal

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:45 pm

I noticed on the display that area is bare metal

aerovin · **Posted:** Sat Dec 01, 2012 10:17 am

Chris Brame wrote:

Quote:

Crew members from SSB that were on hand stated that they thought it had been painted OD at one point.

I see the data block on the old photo looks like O/D with black stenciling - was that factory original?

Shoo Shoo Baby was one of the first off the production line at Boeing to be left bare aluminum; on the production line, the data blocks were added prior to painting and then masked for the actual painting. In this case, the data block information was added to the pre-applied patch of olive drab, but the overall olive drab paint was never added, thus the OD data block. A fine but notable point of interest.

res6kgcr · **Posted:** Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:03 pm

Friends,

In a way I agree with runninwild. If it is your plane you can do whatever you want with it, personally I like “Baby Blanket Blue” for Lou IV. But a museum has a duty to present the past as accurately as possible. But then you get into what you do with a no name plane or a famous plane like SHOO SHOO SHOO BABY that would need a lot of time and money to keep it up in its original service condition.

Lynn if you have a better photo of “The Return of Mission Number 1” than this:

It might help tell if they were over painted with EDSG and Sky for it looks to me that part of the black wing walk strips are over painted on 41-9013 which were pre-painted before final assembly. The same is the case with the fabric covered control surfaces which also look like they also have been partly over painted.

And it is obvious that each one is painted differently to no set pattern.

Best regards to all

Tom

JimH · **Posted:** Sat Dec 01, 2012 4:24 pm

My Gal Sal was a wreck and was restored from the ground up to static condition. Shoo Shoo Baby was a complete airframe sans engines sitting on its gear in France. Shoo Shoo should have had the same treatment as the Belle. As Mike so aptly put I need more time polishing

. My opinion means squat...but they essentially had a whole combat veteran B-17 and did a hodge podge restoration (albeit a nice restoration) to make it airworthy for, 3 maybe 4 flights. So under the same guise, why don't they make the Belle flyable for a couple flights? Why not you ask? because that philosphy has changed. The argument for painting it revolved around the skin not being presentable, BUT, if you look at the photos published in the restoration booklet alot of the skin was replaced to make it airworthy, not to mention new wings. Whatever, it's a pointless discussion as the airplane will always be wrong. In 50 years people will look upon MGS and SSB and not know the difference nor care what color it is...I think it would be fair to say 99% of the population don't care now, it's just us idiots that debate it to no end. The next time you go to the Museum look at the C-47 and C-46 which are OD, then look at SSB.

Jim

runninwild · **Joined:** Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:13 pm **Posts:** 25

I apologize for my impertinence in my previous post, but I perceive a lack of understanding of the actual situation with MGS. The aircraft WAS a total wreck when recovered, almost unrecognizable as an aircraft. Mr. Ready and his crew of volunteers spent 12 years to get it to the condition it was in when we got it. It looked terrific and still does. They had 12 years, we have 4 months to ready it for display. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the National WWII Museum to display any complete airframes on its gear. There is just no room. We had to make a number of major structural repairs and modifications to the airframe in order to make the airframe safe and sound enough to hang 50 ft over the heads of the viewing public. Trust me, we want everything as accurate and realistic as possible, but with MGS, the paint scheme is near the bottom of our list of worries. Starting Monday, we will start the final assembly of MGS inside of the new building, and the building isn't even finished, and as JimH said, 99.9% of the public doesn't know or care if the paint scheme is correct. They will just marvel at a magnificent machine that I am extremely proud of, as we all should be.

APG85 · **Posted:** Sat Dec 01, 2012 9:03 pm

Is there a book on Shoo Shoo Baby's restoration?

JimH · **Posted:** Sat Dec 01, 2012 9:10 pm

Yes, there is a book detailing the restoration of SSB. At one point MGS had a great website that documented its restoration.

Jim

currently on ebay
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Shoo-Shoo-Baby- ... 5643f6faaa

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2012 12:53 am

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared ... 4S-023.jpg

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared ... 4S-028.jpg

The C-46, B-17, A-20, P-40, and many others are painted the same shade of OD green. There was a huge effort made by the Dover crew to nail down the correct shade of flat OD. The C-47 has more green in it. But as we all know the OD differed a lot on many variables during WWII. SSB is most likely the finest B-17 restoration completed. Just like the rest of the Warbird movement, over the years the standards have been raised. I have no doubt that Memphis Belle will set a new standard for B-17 restorations as well.

As for MGS, I am sure it will be displayed in a tasteful manner.

JimH · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2012 8:21 am

Once again Chris you miss the point or refuse to see it... The point is...Shoo Shoo Baby was a complete airframe parked in France minus its QEC's. The airplane, for all intensive purposes was original. The Dover group removed almost all of its historical provenance by restoring it airworthy condition. It is a nice airplane, but far from what it could have been as a documented combat veteran. Everytime I do a walkaround of 909 I think its cool that alittle bit of SSB is still flying, BUT it should have remained with SSB and not bastardized to make it fly. Combat veteran aircraft are scarce enough...particularly an airframe that is so well documented, including air to air shots in combat.

Jim

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2012 8:43 am

Jim, I'm simply responding to your comments on them getting the OD wrong. As far as the restoration goes, it was a different time, and things may have been done differently today, but lets not forget that it is not like they received a time capsule aircraft. To downplay the 10 year restoration they did 25 years ago (when such things were unheard of) strikes me a bit odd. Is it 100% correct? No. That said its the closest to how they were in WWII. I expect Memenphis Belle to raise the bar when it's rolled out as well.

runninwild · **Joined:** Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:13 pm **Posts:** 25

They are all still B-17's. My GTO isn't numbers matching, and a good thing since it was under 6ft of water during Katrina, but it is all Pontiac or aftermarket. No Chebbie parts. LOL. Does that make it any less of a GTO? Not in my mind, and not to 99.9% of the people who see it. We can nit pick till the cows come home but in the end it doesn't really matter. Each restoration is an individual attempt at the preservation of history, and that is what should be commended, regardless of our personal opinions. Anything is better than letting them rot, which so many have done.

aerovin · **Posted:** Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:29 am

JimH wrote:

Once again Chris you miss the point or refuse to see it... The point is...Shoo Shoo Baby was a complete airframe parked in France minus its QEC's. The airplane, for all intensive purposes was original. The Dover group removed almost all of its historical provenance by restoring it airworthy condition. It is a nice airplane, but far from what it could have been as a documented combat veteran. Everytime I do a walkaround of 909 I think its cool that alittle bit of SSB is still flying, BUT it should have remained with SSB and not bastardized to make it fly. Combat veteran aircraft are scarce enough...particularly an airframe that is so well documented, including air to air shots in combat.

Jim

Original to the state as a French IGN survey aircraft after it had been extensively modified to an airliner configuration. The fuselage bore little resemblance to a standard B-17G and the restoration team faced a huge challenge in bringing it back to that configuration.

Rocketeer · **Joined:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:16 pm **Posts:** 195

I find it rather unfortunate that a rare, detailed B-17E will be suspended in a glass building that is in a geographically prone area for hurricane damage.

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:49 am

Captain Texas wrote:

I find it rather unfortunate that a rare, detailed B-17E will be suspended in a glass building that is in a geographically prone area for hurricane damage.

I would argue that it's better than remaining on display in a disassembled state, in an area of the country that doesn't have high traffic. I'll have to see the final result to give my approval. I'm sure it will be a great display once completed.

cooper9411 · **Posted:** Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:00 am

I too would rather have it assembled and on display, but where it was in the country does have high traffic!

Warbird Information Exchange

B-17 My gal sal

Who is online