Just a big model?

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:48 am

This group is also responsible for the finished product that is the "VAUGHT" Corsair on display at the The National WWII Museum. This airframe was the Vought Retiree's Club F4U-4, with a fiberglass 1D nose bowl and four bladed prop. They finished the airframe as a 1A / 1D. Highly inaccurate. Don't those US Insignias look off? If they wanted to remedy this situation they'd, replace the cowling with a -4 example, and repaint it to a 44/45 era scheme.

Cherrybomber13 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:36 am

I have been patiently waiting for someone to comment on the Vaught Corsair as listed on their website... It's not like it was a hard word to verify the spelling of. I'll forgo showing this to Tori, she would be sick... 4 blade 1D. Oy vey...it's not like this was for some back water museum that museum that noone visits...

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 12:08 pm

Cherrybomber13 wrote:

I have been patiently waiting for someone to comment on the Vaught Corsair as listed on their website... It's not like it was a hard word to verify the spelling of. I'll forgo showing this to Tori, she would be sick... 4 blade 1D. Oy vey...it's not like this was for some back water museum that museum that noone visits...

Look at the exhaust setup. The airframe seems (to me) is more of a -4 than anything. Just needs the correct cowling with the scoop and an accurate paint scheme.

Cherrybomber13 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 12:21 pm

Not to pick nits but that tail wheel looks backwards.

Brad · **Joined:** Thu Apr 29, 2004 10:30 pm **Posts:** 1131

I'm certain that this museum, or any others, will be happy to paint or modify any of their airplanes in a manner you see fit for a sizable donation. I'm amazed at the number of people that want to whine about what museums and private individuals do with their stuff but don't lift a finger to help finance the work. They are happy to write emails to the museum and tell them where they went wrong and happy to tell them how they should do it. But do you ever walk in with a checkbook and say let me help you with this? The answer is nearly always no.

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 1:08 pm

It seems quite clear that this museum has been able to find deep pockets. Henceforth, I would assume that they could find the money (quickly) to remedy this gross inaccuracy. I'm not *complaining* for my own accord or ego. But more for all the kids visiting the museum and seeing something that never was, that is in essence inaccurate. Then they go home, draw pictures, build models (hopefully) and create something that is wrong. That isn't historically correct. I would figure a "National" museum such as this one would be all about historical authenticity. Especially considering the financial backing they have. The rule of thumb should be: "more money, more authenticity".

As far as the P-40 is concerned, I think it would absolutely have been nice to see the aircraft finished in it's original scheme, but thats more of the museum's discretion. Just like the Corsair. Except the scheme for the Corsair isn't accurate whatsoever for that airframe. At least the AVG flew P-40Es.

Sabremech · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 1:11 pm

Why don't they just do it right in the first place? It's not like the correct or representative information on an airplane isn't available.

David

mike furline · **Joined:** Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm **Posts:** 2635

Brad wrote:

I'm certain that this museum, or any others, will be happy to paint or modify any of their airplanes in a manner you see fit for a sizable donation. I'm amazed at the number of people that want to whine about what museums and private individuals do with their stuff but don't lift a finger to help finance the work. They are happy to write emails to the museum and tell them where they went wrong and happy to tell them how they should do it. But do you ever walk in with a checkbook and say let me help you with this? The answer is nearly always no.

I think the so called "whining" is more do to with the aircraft not being painted correctly the first time. Maybe it's just me, but I would expect any museum (regardless of content) to try to be historically accurate. When the run of the mill tourists visits the museum "that" Corsair will become accurate/authentic in their minds going forward.

If one of these was hanging in a museum it would become "fact" sooner or later.

Brad · **Joined:** Thu Apr 29, 2004 10:30 pm **Posts:** 1131

I think the point of all this is that they did what they did, with what they had, to tell a certain story and to accomplish a particular goal. I doubt seriously that somebody came along and said they just thought the three bladed prop didn't look right and just threw a four bladed one on it. It probably happened because a four bladed prop was available. If somebody was to offer to fund the correct prop then I'd bet they would love to accommodate. As for the P-40, I'd bet they are trying to tell the AVG story with it and not the Russian story. Maybe somebody with deep pockets came along with either airplane and said ill fund it all but I want it painted like this.

Cherrybomber13 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:52 pm

Brad,
If you look at their own comments regarding their code of ethics.. "We abide by The Code of Ethics of The American Institute for Conservation of Historical and Artistic Artifacts and ascribe to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum standards and best practices." Based on that, misrepresenting a level 2 or 3 aircraft, significant squadron or participant in action, is basically a crime against history. Best practice is to keep the history intact. Don't invoke the Smithsonian and then ignore their basic doctrine. As far as the F4U1-D-4-whatever, I was privy to details on the Corsair deal in 2011, it could have been sorted out if they had wanted to go to the effort.

I think what several people here would agree with, if you are going to represent history, do it properly, especially when you have the resources and artifacts. The Aleutian Tiger scheme is just as impactful as the Flying Tigers, it just doesn't have the Hollywood factor.

Our own museum is considering a repaint on one of our jet trainers but it is a level 4 air-frame with no significance, if we had a famous pilot or event attached top the bird we would never even consider the paint change.

I do not mean any disrespect to the volunteers or employees involved with the restoration work, just the poor management decision in preserving a significant part of history.

Chris Brame · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:54 pm

Could it be this one?
http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p40regis ... -hake.html

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:55 pm

Brad wrote:

I think the point of all this is that they did what they did, with what they had, to tell a certain story and to accomplish a particular goal. I doubt seriously that somebody came along and said they just thought the three bladed prop didn't look right and just threw a four bladed one on it. It probably happened because a four bladed prop was available. If somebody was to offer to fund the correct prop then I'd bet they would love to accommodate. As for the P-40, I'd bet they are trying to tell the AVG story with it and not the Russian story. Maybe somebody with deep pockets came along with either airplane and said ill fund it all but I want it painted like this.

It wasn't the NWWIIM's doing. It was the Vought Retiree Club who did what they did, with what they had. The point is when the NWWIIM acquired the airframe they should have made the appropriate corrections. Besides, a three bladed prop would still not look right on this airframe. More so I suppose if you ignore where the exhausts are. Otherwise the four bladed prop is in fact appropriate.

This is what she looked like when she was finished and on display in Texas.

So it looks like all the NWWIIM did (or I should say Flyboys did) was give it a paint job. Which is fine for what it is. But Id figure a HUGE museum like this would want to be 100% accurate. Or at least close.

My .02

lmritger · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:27 pm

Cherrybomber13 wrote:

Brad,
If you look at their own comments regarding their code of ethics.. "We abide by The Code of Ethics of The American Institute for Conservation of Historical and Artistic Artifacts and ascribe to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum standards and best practices." Based on that, misrepresenting a level 2 or 3 aircraft, significant squadron or participant in action, is basically a crime against history. Best practice is to keep the history intact. Don't invoke the Smithsonian and then ignore their basic doctrine. As far as the F4U1-D-4-whatever, I was privy to details on the Corsair deal in 2011, it could have been sorted out if they had wanted to go to the effort.

I think what several people here would agree with, if you are going to represent history, do it properly, especially when you have the resources and artifacts. The Aleutian Tiger scheme is just as impactful as the Flying Tigers, it just doesn't have the Hollywood factor.

Our own museum is considering a repaint on one of our jet trainers but it is a level 4 air-frame with no significance, if we had a famous pilot or event attached top the bird we would never even consider the paint change.

I do not mean any disrespect to the volunteers or employees involved with the restoration work, just the poor management decision in preserving a significant part of history.

RIGHT THE HE|| ON ANDREW!!!

This is the **exact** point I made in a lengthy discussion elsewhere... this airframe has a known combat history, a story worth telling to honor men who served in the winter he|| of the Aleutians campaign, and the individuals at the top in this museum decided to ignore that completely. The organization claims to further the cause of historical education, to abide by the lofty standards set by the Smithsonian, and then they turn around and not only ignore that history, but intentionally have this aircraft refinished in a scheme it never wore. What makes this aircraft special is not just that it's a P-40, but it's a genuine combat veteran of the 14th Air Force (presumably the 343rd FG). By intentionally obliterating that identity and hiding it under yet another G.D. sharkmouth, they've wiped out the ONE thing which makes this airframe unique and historically significant, and to add insult to injury, the incorrectly marked aircraft will be hung in an atrium... if that's all they're going to do, why not just hang a fiberglass replica up there which they can paint any freakin' way they want?

That is absolutely 180 degrees out from the standards they profess to embrace, and they deserve to get called out for it.

And for those who say "Well, at least it still exists, they can always redo it", tell me what, exactly, do you reckon the odds are of them taking down their Curtiss piñata and having it repainted in the scheme it's supposed to be in? I don't have an exact answer for you, but I suspect the number is somewhat lower than the odds of a smiling, stark naked Kate Upton delivering the Mega Millions jackpot to my front door.

Lynn

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:47 pm

Where does the code of ethics stand on giving people credit for achieving flight first?

This has more to do with people being tired of seeing the AVG than anything else. Here is a group of young guys that busted their butt to put together a wreck and we are bashing them over the color they painted it.

lmritger · **Posted:** Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:54 pm

No, Chris, we're not. No one in this thread is cracking on the actual team that restored it... they were, to borrow a phrase, "only following orders". And no one will deny it's in better shape than it was when it was dragged in; that team did a great job.

The problem, as I and others have explicitly stated, is with the MUSEUM ITSELF, not the restoration firm.

Lynn

Warbird Information Exchange

Just a big model?

Who is online