How was The B-26 Flak Bait Saved

[Cherrybomber13]

Were any B 26's used in Russia? or as lend lease birds?

[mustangdriver]

http://www.yukon-news.com/news/13051/

I guess they did. Anyone know about where this one is.

[Steve Nelson]

I know some Marauders were lend-leased to Great Britain, but I've never heard of them being used by the Russians. Wikipedia (yeah, I know) lists the only operators as the U.S., Great Britain, Free France, South Africa, and Portugal postwar (never heard of that one!)

Of course a number of B-26s were lost en route to Alaska (including the fabled Million Dollar Valley Marauders, source of the Weeks, MAPS, and Pima airframes.) But I believe all those were USAAF aircraft destined for service in the Aleutians.

SN

[rreis]

I know some Marauders were lend-leased to Great Britain, but I've never heard of them being used by the Russians. Wikipedia (yeah, I know) lists the only operators as the U.S., Great Britain, Free France, South Africa, and Portugal postwar (never heard of that one!)

ahah, Portugal operated the Douglas B-26 Invader in Africa, not the Martin B26 Marauder.

I'll go to wiki and correct it.

[John Dupre]

I must confess that I touched Flak Bait when I visited the NASM some years ago. I hope that it will be assembled and displayed sooner rather than later. I have always liked the Marauder.

As for Carol Jean I think it would be great for it to be displayed as is, not so much to represent a wartime B-25 but a post war "warbird". I would hope that several other warbirds could be retired as is and displayed when the time comes. Let's see what an authentic Mustang looks like next to a warbird Mustang. (Great excuse for a museum to have two of something as well.) The whole warbird and military collectors phenomenon is something that really needs more study from a sociological stand point. I doubt the Romans had Carthaginian re-enactors gathering on weekends, so why is the whole broad experience of militaria collecting such a big part of our culture?

As for different museums approaches to preservation/restoration they ebb and flow and not always in a good way. I remember when I was first interested in warbirds reading about how the USAF museum diassembled an engine (something that was not routinely done as apparently they were treated as solid lumps rather than as machines in thier own right) and was surprised to find corrosion. That led to all the best museums around the world treating their engines to the same restoration/ preservation processes as the airframes. Fast forward 30 years and not long ago some higher up in the NASM was making the point disassembling engines for preservation was a waste of time since their normal oil coating was all that was necessary! Anyone that knows aircraft engines can tell you that inactivity leads to more corrosion than anything else.

The preservation or restoration question is always a complex one but if nothing is ever restored then the skills necessary to do so will become lost; restoration not only brings back the artifact but preserves the skills as well.

[rreis]

As for Carol Jean I think it would be great for it to be displayed as is, not so much to represent a wartime B-25 but a post war "warbird". I would hope that several other warbirds could be retired as is and displayed when the time comes. Let's see what an authentic Mustang looks like next to a warbird Mustang. (Great excuse for a museum to have two of something as well.) The whole warbird and military collectors phenomenon is something that really needs more study from a sociological stand point. I doubt the Romans had Carthaginian re-enactors gathering on weekends, so why is the whole broad experience of militaria collecting such a big part of our culture?.

well, they recreated historical battles in the Coliseum... but I don't think the re-enactors were "volunteers" in the sense we use today...

for instance...

http://www.mariamilani.com/colosseum/co ... achiae.htm

PS: I wholly agree with the gist of your post.

[JDK]

well, they recreated historical battles in the Coliseum... but I don't think the re-enactors were "volunteers" in the sense we use today...

Hah! That's what I thought of, too. And yes, interesting points, John.

[ZeamerB17]

It sure would be nice to see Flak Bait reassembled and preserved as-is.

A B-17E in the Southwest Pacific - 41-2472 Guinea Pig, that flew with the 7th and 19th BGs is claimed to have flown over 200 missions.

I don't know if those were all combat missions, or exactly what, however.

[JDK]

A B-17E in the Southwest Pacific - 41-2472 Guinea Pig, that flew with the 7th and 19th BGs is claimed to have flown over 200 missions.

I don't know if those were all combat missions, or exactly what, however.

Interesting. It's not indexed in Steve Birdsall & Roger Freeman's 'Claims to Fame the B-17 Flying Fortress'. I don't think they claim to cover all high-mission B-17s. Then there's: http://www.jenforum.net/wwii/messages/20957.html

[ZeamerB17]

Here's a pic of Guinea Pig:

Boeing B-17E "Flying Fortress" at the 13th Air Depot Group, Tontouta Airbase in Noumea, New Caledonia. 20 November 1943.
Markings on the plane signify 210 bombing missions, 23 planes, and 3 ships.

[SaxMan]

I was working at the NASM last night, coordinating 30 entertainers who were performing for a group that rented out the museum. I managed to sneak off for a few moments into some of the galleries. I was appalled at how much Flak Bait had deteriorated since the last time I visited the museum nearly 20 years ago. Besides the rubbed off paint at the nose and back of the nose section, a lot of the mission markings showed evidence of being rubbed off as well. I imagine if the plane is reassembled at U-H, they are going to have to restore the exterior of the nose section, instead of it being preserved as a time capsule.

In general, a lot of the planes had significant amounts of dust on them. The Boeing 247, for example (a personal favorite of mine) had enough dust that the wing surfaces looked grey, and the glass was clouded up. After visiting U-H, the downtown museum seems small. It seems the D.C. museum these days is aimed more for families with children as an educational experienced, while Udvar-Hazy tends to cater more towards the serious aviation enthusiast.

[ww2John]

@ saxman - As a long-time member, but not being on the NASM staff, I propose it might be safe to assume the demographics of visitors to the two museum sites have at least as much to do with access, as to who you think the museums might be "aimed" at:
a. the NASM on the Mall is downtown, by other tourist sites/museums and easily accessible by public transportation.
b. Udvar-Hazy is definitely not any of those three "family visitor" things. It also is far larger, so a wider range of their collection can be displayed there.
Both locations are amazingly terrific places to visit for warbirds.

[Fouga23]

http://www.yukon-news.com/news/13051/

I guess they did. Anyone know about where this one is.

I too would like to know what became of it

[Ken]

bump due to good photos ...

[hang the expense]

For that matter, I've always wondered why the "Strawberry Bitch" was earmarked for preservation. Seems like they'd want a Ploesti veteran or one with a more illustrious combat record..and a more politically correct name. I'm not complaining, mind you, just curious. SB is one of my favorite aircraft (my girlfriend considers it her namesake.)

SN

We as a country didn't suffer that leftist pc nonsense back then. That plane may have been the only one in any shape at the time.There is a picture somewhere of an aerial view of airplanes set aside for preservation(I don't know if it was the Chicago pic or not) but the funding was cut and a large number of the planes were cut up. Fate is what saved the ones we have now and nothing more.909,out house mouse, milk run mable all returned, hells angles, knockout dropper etc.it goes on and on.Besides the nose art on the Strawberry B I t c h was second to none.