Sun Jun 04, 2006 12:07 pm
I bet you a brand new buffalo nickel that money isn't the problem getting those guns into the states.
The federal tax stamp is the easy part. I have one and so does my brother-in-law. We got our guns from and still shoot with the county sherriff's dept up in Oklahoma where we grew up.
Heres the thing though....
1.It is against federal law to fly with a functional machine gun installed. (so why worry them to begin with)
2.The state of California passed a law banning any new .50 cals from being imported and owned in the state.
(I think thats where they might run into problems)
If you aready owned one you were grandfathered in, but no new guns can be brought in....
All that said, the guns are the very least of the problems the crew are up against in restoring this beast.
Oh, and the bendix turret? Put it in a museum where it belongs and fly with a dummy. One gear down malfunction on concrete and it doesnt exist anymore.
The federal tax stamp is the easy part. I have one and so does my brother-in-law. We got our guns from and still shoot with the county sherriff's dept up in Oklahoma where we grew up.
Heres the thing though....
1.It is against federal law to fly with a functional machine gun installed. (so why worry them to begin with)
2.The state of California passed a law banning any new .50 cals from being imported and owned in the state.
(I think thats where they might run into problems)
If you aready owned one you were grandfathered in, but no new guns can be brought in....
All that said, the guns are the very least of the problems the crew are up against in restoring this beast.
Oh, and the bendix turret? Put it in a museum where it belongs and fly with a dummy. One gear down malfunction on concrete and it doesnt exist anymore.
Sun Jun 04, 2006 12:29 pm
If Tallichet has established any type of legitimate museum organization, he can have the guns registered with the museum (on a Form 10 I believe) and retain them as artifacts. A lot of old WWII "bring back" weapons that were never registered after the war end up in museums via this type of transfer all the time. It keeps them from having to be cut. The guns from the B-17 aren't in the current registry so I don't believe it would be a transfer process so to speak.
Unless I'm mistaken, the 50-calibers recovered with the B-25 were retained intact by the museum in Birmingham in this way.
Unless I'm mistaken, the 50-calibers recovered with the B-25 were retained intact by the museum in Birmingham in this way.
Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:37 pm
Dumb question, well three actually,
1. Will 'Swamp Ghost' become its official name?
2. What does PNG stand for?
3. Where is the PNG?
1. Will 'Swamp Ghost' become its official name?
2. What does PNG stand for?
3. Where is the PNG?
Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:54 pm
systemofadown1162 wrote:Dumb question, well three actually,
1. Will 'Swamp Ghost' become its official name?
2. What does PNG stand for?
3. Where is the PNG?
2: Papua New Guinea.
3: It's north of Australia. See these maps.
John
Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:22 pm
Oh
Thanks
Freedom
Mon Jun 05, 2006 1:38 am
Randy Haskin wrote:frankspeaks wrote:The guns would have to be replaced with fakes anyway...or at least dummy right side receivers as the BATF is kinda strange about that kind of thing...and its the right side receivers that have the serial numbers associating them with the airplane to begin with.
Why don't the owners of the airplane work with local government and law enforcement to get permission to own several Title 2 firearms??
I've never understood this...it's not that difficult to own a machine gun (it is just expensive to purchase in the first place), there are just many hoops to jump through with local law enforcement where the guns will be "stationed". Unlike popular belief, there is not a special "license" required to own machine guns.
Of course, your mileage may vary if you're in a non-freedom loving state like Mass, New York, or Illinois, but I imagine that if the reason you're applying for the tax stamp for the guns is for the historical significance of an aircraft...well, that will open some different doors.
Non-Freedom Loving State
Were was your State in 1776 or in the Civil War?
This site is for Warbirds not gun control.
P.S. I'm a NRA Member.
Re: Freedom
Mon Jun 05, 2006 2:28 am
phil65 wrote:
Non-Freedom Loving State
Were was your State in 1776 or in the Civil War?
This site is for Warbirds not gun control.
P.S. I'm a NRA Member.
Sorry, didnt mean to get even close to a gun control discussion.
I'm sure he didnt mean to impune the great state of Mass.
Alot of folks dont know the laws and the only dumb question is the one left unasked so.......
( Us NRA pukes gotta stick together
)
Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:58 am
As this seems to be the place for daft questions about this, I have a couple to add:
1. I saw the photo of the turret here
http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b ... eview.html
Are all these Bendix turrets that sleek, close-to-fuselage shape? Or has it been crushed in the impact? I have never seen one before, so don't know what they're meant to look like. I mean the belly turrets on most B-17s seem much deeper where someone can sit in it. Was this a different style, perhaps lying prone above it?
2. Are any of the crew who crashed in this aircraft still alive today?
This whole escapade would make a very good documentary if handled right. I hope someone's filming all this.
Just an aside, I met a very interesting young English chap in April who used to be in the Royal Marine Commandoes, but left last year and he moved to Guadalcanal where he spent five months. He actually spoke a bit of pidgin and was living with the locals all that time. His job was diving, and he had an interest also in old aircraft. He was saying how difficult the locals are in the region to get to know, but he managed to make some good friends there at the time and said that just before he was to leave to come to NZ a few of them felt enough of a bond with him to tell him they knew of several aircraft wrecks he hadn't seen. They told him they have some they show the tourists, and others are only known about by themselves, the villagers. They consider them very special and important, and do not what anyone from outside touching them or taking them. He said he wasn't sure if he believed it but in the end a coule of them took him, sworn to secrecy, into the jungle and showed him a Zero sitting there which they said no-one knew about at all. he reckoned it was in really good condition too. He said he swore on his life he'd never tell anyone where it was, and i believe him. They told him they knew of loads more really good wrecks sitting in the jungle which they wouldn't show him. I have no reason to doubt this, why would they lie?
And I doubt he was lying as his twin brother was sitting there with us, who'd not been in the islands but backed up a lot of his story.
Anyway, all i was thinking is it goes to show there could be a lot more really good quality wrecks out there which we'll never know about and nor will the scrappers or souvenir hunters. I kind of like that, the villagers respect what the planes stood for, and are their custodians, like their own private jungle museum.
1. I saw the photo of the turret here
http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b ... eview.html
Are all these Bendix turrets that sleek, close-to-fuselage shape? Or has it been crushed in the impact? I have never seen one before, so don't know what they're meant to look like. I mean the belly turrets on most B-17s seem much deeper where someone can sit in it. Was this a different style, perhaps lying prone above it?
2. Are any of the crew who crashed in this aircraft still alive today?
This whole escapade would make a very good documentary if handled right. I hope someone's filming all this.
Just an aside, I met a very interesting young English chap in April who used to be in the Royal Marine Commandoes, but left last year and he moved to Guadalcanal where he spent five months. He actually spoke a bit of pidgin and was living with the locals all that time. His job was diving, and he had an interest also in old aircraft. He was saying how difficult the locals are in the region to get to know, but he managed to make some good friends there at the time and said that just before he was to leave to come to NZ a few of them felt enough of a bond with him to tell him they knew of several aircraft wrecks he hadn't seen. They told him they have some they show the tourists, and others are only known about by themselves, the villagers. They consider them very special and important, and do not what anyone from outside touching them or taking them. He said he wasn't sure if he believed it but in the end a coule of them took him, sworn to secrecy, into the jungle and showed him a Zero sitting there which they said no-one knew about at all. he reckoned it was in really good condition too. He said he swore on his life he'd never tell anyone where it was, and i believe him. They told him they knew of loads more really good wrecks sitting in the jungle which they wouldn't show him. I have no reason to doubt this, why would they lie?
And I doubt he was lying as his twin brother was sitting there with us, who'd not been in the islands but backed up a lot of his story.
Anyway, all i was thinking is it goes to show there could be a lot more really good quality wrecks out there which we'll never know about and nor will the scrappers or souvenir hunters. I kind of like that, the villagers respect what the planes stood for, and are their custodians, like their own private jungle museum.
Re: Freedom
Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:14 am
phil65 wrote:Were was your State in 1776 or in the Civil War?
Well, in the last 10 years I've lived in Nevada, Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Georgia, so take your pick. Is that a prerequisite for having a valid opinion?
phil65 wrote:This site is for Warbirds not gun control.
P.S. I'm a NRA Member.
True, but firearms are mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and warbirds are not.
My point was, for warbird owners who wanted to keep real machine guns, the Federal Laws are not difficult to navigate (didn't know about the prohibition of functional machine guns on aircraft, though). It is the states that have significant differences in their laws, and I was pointing out the locales which are more stringent. Massachussets, for all its historical significance in creating a free nation, is not firearm friendly by any means...as are the other states mentioned (HOW could I forget California?!).
Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:43 am
Dave, here are some reference pics of both turrets on a B-17E. Yes, the gunner lay in the prone position inside the fuselage when operating the remote belly turret.
Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:56 am
Thanks, interesting stuff.
Re: Freedom
Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:54 am
Randy Haskin wrote:phil65 wrote:This site is for Warbirds not gun control.
P.S. I'm a NRA Member.
True, but firearms are mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and warbirds are not.
There Not?
D@mn you Ben Franklin!
Re: Freedom
Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:05 am
Randy Haskin wrote:phil65 wrote:Were was your State in 1776 or in the Civil War?
Well, in the last 10 years I've lived in Nevada, Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Georgia, so take your pick. Is that a prerequisite for having a valid opinion?phil65 wrote:This site is for Warbirds not gun control.
P.S. I'm a NRA Member.
True, but firearms are mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and warbirds are not.
My point was, for warbird owners who wanted to keep real machine guns, the Federal Laws are not difficult to navigate (didn't know about the prohibition of functional machine guns on aircraft, though). It is the states that have significant differences in their laws, and I was pointing out the locales which are more stringent. Massachussets, for all its historical significance in creating a free nation, is not firearm friendly by any means...as are the other states mentioned (HOW could I forget California?!).
Five States in ten years
Did you get kicked out or leave on your own 
And how did you forget California
Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:06 am
systemofadown1162 wrote:[There Not?
D@mn you Ben Franklin!
Ben Franklin? Someone wasn't paying attention in history classes. Try James Madison
Re: Freedom
Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:09 am
systemofadown1162 wrote:Randy Haskin wrote:phil65 wrote:This site is for Warbirds not gun control.
P.S. I'm a NRA Member.
True, but firearms are mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and warbirds are not.
There Not?
D@mn you Ben Franklin!
Pursuit of Happness