Warbird Information Exchange

I have noticed a signifigant increase in requests from airshow promoters for the post WWII aircraft this last year. The CAF recently changed it's mission statement to include post WWII aircraft, and I flew my first CAF Vietnam Era component at Midland this year. Some shows asked me to fly the Skyraider in both the "Korea" and "Vietnam" portion of the show.

Most people have been very positive about the wider inclusion of these aircraft. However, at least one person at each show, has struck up a debate with me about the "merits" of the Vietnam War and put forth the idea that "we shouldn't be focused on glorifying these aircraft" from this "improper" war. I never hear any objections raised about the Zero, Tora, ME109, or Soviet bloc aircraft, but, then again I don't own one of these types.

I personally think the Korea and Vietnam components of the airshows will only increase in the future. As (unfortunately) we have fewer and fewer WWII vets attending, the next generations will likely fall in line.

For every person that has been offended by the Vietnam display, I have had too many to count who have come up and told me a story of being saved by the Skyraider or some other memory (usually positive, but not always) that they recalled.

Obviously, I am biased, I love the Spad and am only involved in the airshows, because of the Skyraider (I haven't ever heard a complaint when I bring the T6 or the Yale).

Any thoughts?

_________________
Eric

"I spent most of my money on alcohol, women and skyraiders....and the rest of it I just wasted."

I personally noticed that the Indiana Aviation Museum's A-37 Dragonfly hardly had any shows booked this year while their P-51 Mustang was practically gone every weekend. But this can be contributed to the Mustang's particpation in the USAF Heritage Flight with Dale Snodgrass.

I too have noticed more and more Korean/ Vietnam-era aircraft visiting air shows.

_________________
"Keep 'em Flying!"

I really think it is great that more of the Vietnam and Korean aircraft are showing up at air shows. I'm not quite sure what the "merits" of the Vietnam war have to do with anything. The reason that the "merits" have to be debated is because of politicians. Now, I don't exactly remember hearing about any politicians who flew aircraft in either one of these wars. I do remember hearing about hundreds of brave men who flew these aircraft in combat whose stories should be told. I believe that one of the best ways to tell their stories is to have the aircraft that they flew come to air shows where the younger generations can learn about the sacrifices that were made on their behalf.

-Just my thoughts

The more flyin' stuff, the better. I'm not into jets myself, 'cause I grew up during WWII and was at that "impressionable" age that made those particular a/c special to me. I can understand that those of you who were at that “impressionable” age during the Korean and Viet Nam wars, that the a/c of those eras are special to you.

To those who want to inject their political views into the airshow arena, I say,
"Pi$$ off". (Is that too subtle?)
If they don't want to see them, don't go to the airshows.

Mudge the elderly

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

Do we "glorify" the Civil War by preserving the fields of battle?
No, we preserve these battlefields to honor those who have fallen in the pursuit of freedom.

Do the people who complain or debate about "glorifying" war stand on the hallowed ground of Gettysburg and protest that it should be closed because it "glorifies" war?
I haven't seen one there yet!

By preserving the aircraft of WWII, either as flying machines or in museums, we are not glorifying the "killing machines", we are honoring the people who fought in them.

They ARE the battlefields that thousands of people stood, sat, fought and died in.

They ARE battlefields.

They are BATTLEFIELDS!

As surely as are Gettysburg or Shiloh, they are battlefields.

You can't put a mounument in a piece of sky and say this is where it happened.
You can only do that with the fuselage of an airplane.
The fragile, thin tube that held so many mens lives.

Narrow, confined battlefields, littered with shell casings...and the blood of free men who died to save the world.

Tell the ones who complain that thousands of young men gave there lives on those "glorified" war machines so that future generations would continue to have the "right" to complain.

If they aren't shamed by that, then thank them nicely for being there to protest and complain, because those men who died on those flying battlefields did so so they COULD complain. If the young men of generations past had not given their "last full measure of devotion", we all might be complaining in another language.

My two cents.

KEEP 'EM FLYING!!!!
Jerry O'Neill

_________________
"Always remember that, when you enter the ocean or the forest, you are no longer at the top of the food chain."

Might not be what you ment but........


-Representative, CDR. Randy "Duke" Cummingham, F-4 Phantom

-1992 Vice President Candidiate, Vice Admiral James Bond Stockdale, A-4 Skyhawk

-U.S. Senator, CAPT. John McCain III, A-1 Skyraider, A-4 Skyhawk

-Representaive, COL. John Kline, USMC Helicopters

To name just a few

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

The Indiana Museum's A-37 just got a new pilot this summer.
It ought to be on the circuit more in 2007.
VL

I was meaning that no politicians who were in office during either one of those wars fought. They are the ones who made the "merits" of the wars contraversial. I definitely have heard of the examples you gave. Perhaps I should have been more clear.

Speaking of Cummingham, I believe I heard something on the radio about him getting in trouble for some sort of fraud.

Would that have any relation to the fact that you didn't win a glorious victory in that war, and some people would like all reference of it to end down in the bottom of history's vault? It seems a lot of the hurt still sits deep in regard to this war, and that gives you more of a challenge with some individuals. As time goes on and we move deeper into this century more and more things become "historical". So too with both the Korean and Vietnam war. This means that there should be a representation of these aircraft at airshows as well. I really think people will warm up to the idea more and more in the years to come, and so it becomes even more important that people such as yourself keep going to airshows in the future. As I understand from your post the number of negative feedback vs positive seems to go in your favor, which is definately worth remembering when someone gets on your case!

Best of luck with the upcoming airshows!

T J

_________________
Make my day, punk!

I would prognosticate that we will see more Korean and Vietnam era stuff in airshows as they pass from recent inventory into the category of "classics." Just like in civilian antique/classic restorations, the defininition of a classic advances, continually creeping about 30-50 years behind the present day. I notice that a lot of the younger guys are very excited about seeing F-4s and A-4s at airshows these days. Those will never be exciting to me because I will always recall my early years when those were as common at airshows as A-10s are now, but to many younger fans they are something out of the history books.

OTOH I don't believe that post-WW2 aircraft will ever rival WW2 aircraft in popularity, just as WW1 aircraft never have, for the simple reason that for sheer beauty of sight and sound, plus pivotal role in world history, no other aircraft come close to matching WW2 warbirds nor ever will.

As for politics -- politics always have been a part of airshows and always will be. People who don't want politics in airshows really mean they don't want other people's politics in them. But they may not realize it because political views are like accents, or farts: You tend not to notice your own.

August

I'm sure my kids will want to see Predator drones, but I couldn't care less.

As was stated, the WWII piston fighters will always reign supreme at airshows. That's because they are beautiful and fascinating and their role in history was so dramatic.

interesting topic - as a airshow coordinator I love to hear what people want to see.

There is a generational gap I think. People who are 40+ love to see the piston planes just as much or more as the jets. Under that age they really want to see and hear jets. One of our most successful shows featured the F-104 Starfighter team, and this year the F-16 demo team from Hill AFB. The only issue I see with jets is fuel. Sure Jet A is cheaper than 110LL but they (especially vintage jets) tend to gobble it down with wild abandon. I'd love to get a F-100 or A-37 to come to our show but fuel costs plus the appearence fee make it hard to justify.

That said, Pacific Prowler (B-25) told us when they left on sunday after the show we were the 2nd best show they had been to - period - and Wendover is less than a 10,000 guest air show! Also, people loved to see the P-51 heritage flight.

A wish list? I wish I could afford to bring the MAAM P2V out to our show! Also, when it is done, the P-61.

Keep up the comments,

Tom P.

Did the Prowler bunch indicate what they felt was their #1 show? Perhaps that event is doing it right.

In response to Jerry O'Neill: I can agree with your point that aircraft serve as physical representations for aerial battles, but I'm not quite sure that the USA's involvement in Southeast Asia meant the difference between my using English or Vietnamese on a daily basis.

I certainly respect what veterans past and pesent have done as responsible citizens for our country, but how then does one explain displaying something like a He-111 at an airshow? I don't have a problem with a Heinkel being displayed (I like the aircraft design), but for some it might be a real matter of conscience that they prefer something that reminds them of the Nazi regime not be displayed. And that's ok. A complaint doesn't require a defensive response. Not all can be pleased. That's life.

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

What a great question! Airshows have evolved and changed status many times in the last 100 years. The first aircraft display in Nashville was held at the Fairgrounds in the livestock arena and included a guy in a Curtiss Pusher doing a death defying night flying display. The military used to be heavily involved in the airshow and racing business in the 20's and thirties. They had a maneuver called the "squirrel cage" that involved 30 biplane fighters doing a series of barrell rolls, and they did their aerobatic routines in line abreast formation. COnsidered too difficult and dangerous nowadays.
Airshows, with ICAS have become more business oriented. YOu have to pay big bucks to join and display at the ICAS convention. The convention has all the big players hawking their videos and talking to customers that have a budget and are putting together acts. There are even "airshow consultants" who for a large fee will put togethre the entire show for you.
I seem to see more of these "canned airshows" where a city government has say $100,000 to $300,000 to spend and they hire a consultant to do a turnkey event just like the fireworks displays and Christmas parade type events most cities have in their budget. The canned shows often omit the local guys with the Stearmans, BT-13's and L-5's, DC-3, in favor of someone at the ICAS convention with the L-39 jet demo or yet another P-51 D.
If I wanted to do airshows full time, I would display at ICAS, and call the attendees and promote my airplane, and make really good friends with all the so called airshow consultants. If you are generous with sponsor rides and radio and tv folks you can charge more for your feesand will get more bookings.

Marine Air, I wish that all it took to have a full card for airshows was to go to ICAS and sign up. In reality it takes having a great product and then being able to sell that product to the local airshow attendees.