Warbird Information Exchange

X2 That's two votes no!

Amen Taylor.

Chunks

_________________
Jack McDonnel

T-6/SNJ Hoarder

The CAF needs to move to continue into the future. It's not the same organization it was back in the 70's or 80's....or even 90's. In order to survive and continue what they do, a move has to happen. They are not funded by billionaires with cash to fund a passion. They are funded by members and corporate donations, lots of volunteers and the average aviation enthusiast making them a destination. I could be wrong but I don't think a Wing or Squadron in Michigan, Florida or anywhere (except Midland) cares if they are located in Harlingen, Midland, Houston, DFW etc...The move to Midland was a mistake, plain and simple. The whole warbird movement/environment has changed since that move was decided and made. Lawsuits will be threatened and possibly made, but unless the powers that be at CAF HQ are brain dead, all that will be negotiated into a move. Large Metro cities will take that into consideration when offers are made.

The move to Midland was not a mistake. Locating the CAF in a major metropolitan area for the sake of tourist dollars was not part of the discussion in 1991. There was no CAF Museum worthy of the name in 1991. The existing CAF Museum, fully accredited and housing some rare and priceless exhibits, was built in Midland largely with monies raised in Midland/Odessa.

Moving HQ to a large metropolitan area, in my opinion only, WILL NOT "grow" the CAF. When the CAF has experienced growth in membership it is because the marquee airplanes like the B-29 are touring the country. Steve Brown's efforts to promote the CAF, at OSH and SnF, the existence of the Red Tail Project as a combination touring exhibit and airplane, those things grow the CAF, not visitors to the Museum.

Moving the entire CAF, lock stock and barrel, will not put the organization in the black, even if it were located in downtown New York City. I'm sure some of my acquaintances on the current General Staff would disagree with me: I would have relished that conversation six months ago.

Too many posters here have only the vaguest notion of the structure of the CAF, how it is governed, and what it has as it's primary reason to exist. Consequently, lots of misinformation is bandied about. Makes me angry. Let's let the vote of the membership happen and then go from there.

Shep, the issue here though is this isn't a "lock, stock, and barrel" move. It's just HQ. I agree with Taylor that at this point the cost may be too high due to the promised legal maneuvering that will happen now, but considering that not one Summer Staff Conference has been held at Midland in the past 5 or 6 years and that AirSho has continued to have major financial issues and continues to fail to get any real growth in attendance, I would think the savings of moving to a bigger metropolitan area would greatly outweigh any cost in fairly short order.

The only reason I think this is now an issue (financially) is the threats of lawsuits if a move is made, which I find to be very unbecoming of those in Midland and Austin who have been threatening it. To the general public, it comes off as "sour grapes" and I will guarantee you will only hurt Midland's position in the end.

Also Shep, your statement shows the underlying problem with those same public figures because they don't understand the structure of the CAF either as the articles/editorals show. They believe they alone saved the CAF by bringing it to Midland and the "gifts" they gave to them. As you rightly said, it's the touring and marketing done well outside of Midland that saved it. However, that also supports the reason to move - Midland is not helping the CAF. It may not be hurting it directly, but the B-29 and B-24 had to move out of Midland to be able to grow their own support structure and be able to do that touring, something they were finding very hard to do out of Midland because of the travel expenses. Midland has been growing by leaps and bounds since the mid-2000's, but the number of people interested in the CAF hasn't. That to me is a sign that the CAF has "maxed out" in Midland, and that is why it's time to move somewhere else that has a higher "max out" potential for local and tourist attendance to a new museum.

As an outsider with no understanding how the CAF is run, I'm probably not qualified to comment. But:

When Mr Brown says of the coming move, “The CAF National Airbase will house and serve as a stage to share a rotating group of the most significant military aviation assets in history. We expect this Airbase to become a premier destination for the chosen host city,” that is difficult to reconcile with the idea that nothing but a dozen offices will be moving from Midland, unless the CAF has other assets elsewhere that need moving (or perhaps "rotating" implies a plan to borrow assets from wings/squadrons -- and/or Midland?). I wonder if this is the source of the mistrust and accusations of doublespeak by the members and Midland area politicians. If it were more clear exactly what assets will be moved to the new base, it would be easier to assess both the future of the Midland base and the prospects for the new base really becoming a premier destination.

Just an uninformed suggestion. Because it seems to me as an observer that we have one faction saying "This move is not a big deal! What part of 'We're only moving the HQ offices' don't you understand?" And the other saying, "We don't understand the part about how this new base is going to be a world class aviation destination with no assets from Midland except ten desks."

August

At one point, all wings were supposed to rotate their aircraft to Midland for a 6 month "stay" every certain number of years. The continued climb in gas prices made it where most wings simply said no because they were responsible for paying to get the plane there and the crew back home afterward. As such, the program pretty much died in the mid-2000's as far as I can tell. It looks like they want to revive this program at the new "Superbase". Whether it'll work out or not will depend on where it's going to be and whether or not the wings will be getting any assistance with getting the planes there and upkeep on them while they sit at the base.

I think you are confusing me with someone else

_________________
Taylor Stevenson

CAPFlyer:

I don't want a pissing contest, just trying to explain some things and "defend" Midland. First, had I been on the General Staff 23 years ago, and I was of a mindset that the only thing that would 'save" the CAF was relocating to a major metropolitan center, I would have passed on the VERY generous offer (more than three million bucks plus) from Midland and tried to make things work somewhere else. However, I wasn't on the GS and those who were were not thinking of "tourism."

No one in Midland who understands the history involved would ever say that Midland "saved" the CAF. I don't think that way. Midland was there with the money when other places were not. End of story.

So Midland became the home to the CAF, which includes the Foundation (the money), the Flying Museum (the airplanes), the Airpower Museum (static exhibits), and the Headquarters (the bureaucracy). This proposed move, designed to create a "National Airbase" and not a re-created Museum, has been pitched as essentially only moving the Headquarters component. This was supposed to mollify the people in Midland: it is kind of a way of having your cake and eating it too. However, most in the community (led by the news media) did not understand the nuances of this approach. Some who I respect greatly believe this is being disingenuous by the CAF leadership: if HQ is only a relatively small part of the organization, why would another city want it so badly? That is a troubling point.

The costs involved with a move of even HQ could be significant (exclusive of any money spent to get out of lease agreements, etc), but are apparently covered. However, the Midland campus is almost "too big to fail:" closing up everything in Midland would be prohibitively expensive, even amortized over ten years. So, it stays, as home to the Museum, the Foundation, the Airsho, and the local Wing. In the future this could become "Airbase West Texas," and already the Museum has announced plans for a major upgrade and expansion. Supporting this campus and a National Airbase is another issue that I'm sure the wise heads on the General Staff have planned on, so im not worried about it if they aren't. I fervently hope that this arrangement has some traction among the local political leaders.

As to a few other points, first, in the ten years I was Airsho chairman, and the six years since, Airsho has lost money only twice (because of weather) and not much at that. Generally Airsho generates 75-100K in profit. This is not as much as Wings Over Houston, but is "not bad for a small town in West Texas." And that "small town" is one of the top five growing metropolitan areas in the country, Midland has the second highest per capita income in the COUNTRY, and it is situated on a major East-West Interstate that sees MILLIONS of people come within one mile of the CAF every year.

Moving the B-29 and B-24 out of Midland HAS NOT generated significantly more membership for that unit (direct quote from Neils Agather at a June meeting in Midland).....the local Midland CAF unit has maintained membership levels of 175-250 for all the years of its existence, so maybe the lesson learned from that is that one community can only support one unit effectively. Jim Cavenaugh deserves great credit for underwriting the cost of the new engines for FIFI, and having those two airplanes on display at his facility in Addison in "exchange" seemed then and seems so today as very fair. I'm mildly curious to know if the presence of those two airplanes has materially increased attendance at his Museum. Addison is, after all, in a major metropolitan area....

I've been working on a satisfactory outcome to this whole issue, along with a small group of very committed CAF members here, for more than five months. I liken this to a divorce: one party has decided to move on (for good or bad reasons: thoughtful people can argue those) and the other party is feeling VERY aggrieved. I would like to say that it will all turn out OK at the end of the day, but I'm not that optimistic. I can only say I will do what I can after the members vote to craft a happy ending.

It would be nice if CAF had the money to build a real retro base...similar to Weeks' Fantasy of Flight's or Yagen's facilities. FoF isn't for sale (yet ), and Hampton Beach is out of the way.

Too bad they didn't think of this in the 90s when recently closed airbases were on the market. Imagine Williams outside Phoenix or Reese in Texas...or ? Many had some old WWII building for atmosphere plus newer hangars, plenty of ramp space and lots of ops buildings.

There might have even been room for the old static displays like the ones the CAF had back in Harlingen. If they're going to have a "Superbase" I'd suggest they include a nice static museum...there seems to be many DoD ex-museum aircraft looking for a home. Give something more for visitors to look at. Imagine a couple of old Alert hangars with a F-101B or F-102...and a F-15/16 stuffed inside.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Ya know, maybe I'm totally missing part of the overall plan (I do that from time to time), but if the HQ staff wants to 'work remotely', why not simply do just that? This is a common 21st century work process. The staff, or certain individuals, could report onsite at some agreed, or agreeable, interval to keep up with local contacts.

And, if there is reason to develop a Superbase nearer to a large population, why not simply proceed with that plan? Heck, the staff could have their remote offices at this Superbase, if that suits them.

In addition, if Airsho is actually self-supporting, it should continue. A Supersho could be set up at the Superbase...

Not much would change at Midland, except the attendance of certain personnel, so no complaints could be lodged...there would be no basis.

Or, am I wrong about all this?

Carry on!
Mark

What you said C 45. My thoughts exactly.

John

Mark you are so completely wrong in trying to insert Logic into this idea. Why the SUPERBASE tag was even inserted is beyond me. There were plans for up to 6 remote bases in the works with no opposition. Why not proceed with that plan and if one of the bases grows bigger than the others so be it. Oh no there I go trying to be logical.

Sorry Taylor, misread the heading on the post I was scrolling back to.

Shep -

I'm not bashing you for this at all. Like I said, the issue I have is with those who've made loud noises in the media. Read the two links that were posted earlier. They both, in very specific words, contain quotes or opinions from people that say Midland "saved" the CAF.

As for the B-29/B-24 Squadron if I said more members, that was mistaken. I intended to say that the move was to generate more participation among the members of that unit, which in my opinion it has done.

Also, you speak of AirSho making 75-100K for the organization - there are a lot of people within the organization who'd like to see that money saved for the next year and added to the fuel allotment because that seems to be a continuing issue, it's costing the units a lot of fuel and oil money to attend AirSho but meantime ANUAC and other costs to them continue to go up. With the continued lack of a major sponsor to supplement available fuel subsidies from HQ for AirSho, I don't see how the show can grow or even maintain its current level of participation as fuel and oil prices continue to remain high and look to go higher for AVGAS in the next 3-5 years.

CAP....

I know you weren't bashing me....believe me, after my experiences with the CAF in this community over the last six months, answering your posts is a pleasure!

I want to see the CAF grow, and I want to preserve what we have in Midland, so I find myself in the middle of every argument/claim/statement. Hard to fight a two-front war!

About fuel, I "think" because this is the fiftieth anniversary Airsho, all the CAF airplanes have been invited (not just half, as it was for the last two-three years) so the fuel allotment is bigger. The major Airsho sponsor (Western National Bank) signed on for three more years, which is excellent news, but I must say in all candor that this move controversy is having a negative impact among others in the community who supported Airsho in the past. We've never had a dedicated "fuel sponsor:" on occasion we've had special sponsors for special acts. I've not been Airsho chairman for awhile so I can't really speak with absolute certainty about the budget process now, but we have always been looking for ways to add money to the fuel budget and to the overall profitability of Airsho.

Old Shep