Warbird Information Exchange

This could set an interesting precedent for airshows and other activities at public airfields. The ability of one party or event to effectively shut down an airfield is an interesting concept.

At my home field, they will be filming a movie in a month or so. I received a notice by mail that I will not be able to enter airport grounds or my hangar for a number of days, mostly between 6:00 PM and 8:00 AM the next day. Given that I work for a living it effectively prevents me from hangar access and from using my airplane after work for 8-10 days. No relief from hangar rent or any other accommodation was offered.

The Chino thing is somewhat similar...

just because its an air museum, doesn't mean there aren't dicks within the organization.

I wish more museums would support each other, rather then be sly and resentive of each other.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

Please everyone, sign the Petition in SUPPORT of Planes of Fame.

Get everyone you know to sign, it is important.

Sign the petition and review Yanks Air Museum on their Facebook page-
https://www.facebook.com/pg/YanksAirMuseum/reviews/

It's interesting as well that there are multiple references to the plaintiff's claiming there are no adequate protections or resolutions under the law to these "actions" by PoF, yet they continually reference items that must be approved as part of the special permit for the airshow by the County Aviation Board as part of the airshow plan (like placement of signage and traffic diversion). There are claims that are pretty specious on any level and I doubt would make it to an actual trial, but it'll be interesting to see where it goes.

Personally, even with California's extremely liberal courts, I don't see this going anywhere good for the plaintiffs because they do have other recourse - called the county - and if they had approached the county about their concerns and were turned away, then they're going to have a hard time getting a sympathetic jury. If they didn't approach the county first, then they're gonna have a hard time convincing the judge to let the case even go to a jury.

Given that the county of San Berdoo is one of the sponsoring agencies, you'll get nowhere with them. All the "He said, she said" is BS. If anybody should have been sued, it was the county for allowing this to happen as it does.

Much of what they state in the lawsuit is true. It grew from a small event that didn't infringe on anybody else, to covering the entire airport. It doesn't draw visitors to Yanks, because barricades route you around and away from them.The airport is over-run, usually empty fields are used as parking and ALL the roads are blocked and regulated by POF volunteers. While well intended, many of them are actually darn rude to the public. If you want to go to Yanks during the week of the event, you're not allowed to go down the road to their parking lot.

As for dust from parking- it IS a frellin nightmare. As fine as it is, it gets into everything.

The answer is simple: Pay Yanks and the others the loss amount they suffer for the time. Then, those same volunteers so quick to boss everybody around can go as a group to Yanks and clean up the mess the dust makes.

It's just like the Wilderness, leave it the way you found it. It doesn't matter if it is an aviation museum, or a horse and buggy museum. It doesn't matter if their buggies get driven, or stay inside. You prevent them from normal operation, make them whole again for loss. It's not like they can't afford it given the income it generates.

the yanks facebook page started to receive massive negative ratings that they now deleted the rating system on their page, and also closed the comment section.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

Flying Tigers did the same and it looks like they're deleting any other negative posts.

_________________

This I can agree with.



Not true. The ONLY times I have ever visited Yanks has been on airshow weekend. I don't know when it changed but for many years Yanks was not even open on the weekends. We used to drive up on Friday for the express purpose of going to Yanks because we knew they were going to be closed on Saturday and Sunday.



Here again, this is a county issue. I'm pretty certain PoF is not making the decision on where to park people. As for the rudeness, that is pretty much true with any similar event from coast to coast. Get that many people together and give them just a little bit of power and a few of them are bound to let it go to their heads.



Again, not true. We went to Yanks just last year during the show and only had to tell the folks directing traffic that we wanted to go to Yanks and they let us right through.



Again, this complaint should probably be directed at the county. There are water trucks spraying down the lots all day long and I'm pretty certain that PoF is meeting whatever regulations that the county has set for such things. If the regulations are inadequate for handling the issue then that needs to be brought before the county. Now I'm not saying that it would not be a good idea for PoF to reach out in good faith after the show and assist in any clean up. But Yanks makes it sound like PoF is the school bully and can just run around doing whatever it wants. I doubt that is the case. Beyond that nobody here knows if PoF has extended any olive branches or not in regards to handling these issues. If not, shame on them. But I get the sense that there is a WHOLE lot of back story that we are not privy to.

Actually, we do. It's in the complaint itself because the plaintiffs say that there was "nearly" an agreement until PoF pulled out of the meetings because they "refused" to attend the meeting because the plaintiffs wouldn't do it without their lawyers being present.

The other thing I find curious is that the plaintiffs in this case use the entity names as the aggrieved parties (and never name owners or interested parties directly), but then state that they are using "false names" for the defendant because they don't know what their "real names" are. This statement smacks of attempting to create a bias against PoF in this becuase it tries to say that PoF isn't a real entity and that it's somehow "shady" because of it. It's an interesting tactic, but it will probably blow up in their face if the judge or defendant's lawyers call this out in pre-trial.

Bump to the top. Please if you have not signed the petition do so.

Also please write a short letter to...letusfly@planesoffame.org

Thank you.

Years ago Charlie Nichols was making plans to move Yanks to northern CA. There was a vineyard and a sprawling complex planned. That all seemed to go away within the last 15 years...which, speaking now, is a shame. They have clearly benefited from the fore site of Ed Maloney, who was around long before Yanks. I just read through their Yelp page and the boycott has begun. Shutting down their Facebook page comments will do little to help them as well. While Yanks has deep pockets they still need traffic and in todays world of social media, I'm afraid they just committed suicide. The shear shortsightedness of waging a lawsuit over one of the most beloved warbird museums in the world is almost inconceivable. I would venture to say that there are enough high powered aviation attorneys willing to take this on in behalf of POF. In the end this will only bolster POF and build an even bigger following. While I'm sure the story has deeper roots, I'll say you will not find a better bunch of warbirders than the people who run POF.

The success of Planes of Fame absolutely revolves around them flying...airplanes don't generate sustainable income unless they fly. It's a simple formula. The warbird movement has never been stronger...and now is certainly not a time to wage a war with someone that could be your strongest partner.

Jim

_________________
www.spiritof44.com

I'm not jumping on anyone's band wagon as there is likely more to the story that hasn't come out and I do not think this is a good thing for anyone.

With that said, after reading the court document......does anyone know first-hand if Yanks, Flying Tigers and the other parties have legitimate concerns?

Well said, Jim. The POF folks are the finest in the business...

From my understanding they don't.

POF has spent twenty years building a business (their airshow) they have a contract with the governing authority to hold the airshow. They built the brand, made the investment, provided the employees and volunteers and the product (airplanes) to make the business profitable at great risk. Now a party comes along and wants to profit from the investment of others. Yanks could have chosen to remain open during the airshow and given a discount to airshow attendees to drive attendance to their museum and sell souvenirs. Instead I understand they are demanding a piece of the pie. if it was your business would you give up part of it because some johnny come lately said they wanted a piece of the action because they were on your street and in the same business. If you would you are a socialist. I am not.

As for Flying Tigers. They are a relatively new FBO to CNO. The POF airshow is 20 years old. Did they not know when they did their due diligence before opening that there was an airshow at the airport EVERY year? Not to mention I am pretty sure they had a large concession area as part of their FBO last year...a beer garden I think...during the airshow. One has to wonder if the benefactor of Yanks is also invested in this business to get them to participate, or does he rent them their facility? I know he used to hold a lot of hangars on the airport occupied by other businesses.