Steve Nelson wrote:
..and just what are the terms under which MAPS has custody of the aircraft? As much as I'd love to see a flying Marauder, it'd be a pity for the gang in Akron to have done all that work over the past couple of decades only to have the project sold out from under them.
SN
Good point, I agree with you it would be unfair if MAPS weren't compensated, this is a discussion for MARC and MAPS to work out if an acquistion were to happen. This may be the sticking point if there is a negotiation for acquiring the aircraft, and may require some very significant compensation to MAPS but thats only my opinion. I'm sure they have a contract for the work done and exhibition of the aircraft. This would be a very good reason for Collings to deny a negotiation is taking place, as the discussion is ongoing and very sensitive in regards to MAPS current contract - again only my speculation and essentially worthless - I know nothing. I'm sure they've all noticed this thread by now and may be very nervous. This discussion may have tossed everything down the drain and nixed the very thing we wanted to happen. At any rate, I appreciate that the aircraft was preserved by MARC and actively restored by MAPS, both deserve great credit for the preservation of this wonderful aircraft.
MARC has already moved several aircraft out from under MAPS that MAPS has performed a significant amount of work on. I can recall at least two SBD's and a P-40 that MARC has already moved elsewhere after MAPS had performed a large amount of work. Never been impressed with that practice. I hope that if the same happens with the B-26 that they are adequately compensated either through funds or a trade for a significant display piece to replace it.