k5083 wrote:
I would like to see the Baby stripped to natural metal and refinished. I consider the decision to change her to OD a mistake. The excuse at the time was that the skin was no longer presentable, but restoration techniques have advanced, if that was even true to begin with. She doesn't have to have a mirror finish although that probably is what NMUSAF prefers.
The ranting about what the NASM does or doesn't care about, its political views etc is both uninformed and tiresome.
August
As nice as it would be to have
Shoo Shoo Baby restored to her proper color, I don't see it happening. She's completely covered inside and out - stripping all that paint would require a LOT of work. I doubt any museum would go through all that effort just to get the colors right, especially considering that, in terms of parts, she is more complete that most restorations. I seem to recall that a great deal of metal work was done on the wings, and that that was where her appearance was most ragged. Somebody else might know more as to the details there.
As for the ranting you described - I would argue that it has a valid place here. This is the community most responsible for the preservation of antique aircraft, and as such, we should feel free to openly state our opinions on such matters. JohnB is quite spot-on when he notes the shameful way the
Enola Gay's display was handled by the NASM. Likewise, the fact that priceless aircraft like
Swoose sat in storage for as long as they did sets a disturbing precedent. We may not agree on the NASM's policies, and that is fine, but I think we can agree that the record shows that they have no problem placing
Shoo Shoo Baby into indefinite storage in favor of the strange and obscure.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
)
