Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Sat Jul 12, 2025 2:32 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:32 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 5749
Location: Waukegan,Illinois
I think they sould have taken the A-12 from the USS Intrepid. It seems kind of weird to have the A-12 displayed on a carrier in the first place and it is now off public display for the next 18 months anyways. My 2 cents worth.

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:39 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
Whoa, Whoa, Mustang Driver. Memphis Belle would have been destroyed ?

That's a little harsh and inaccurate. The Belle was inside in her own climate controlled building where the volunteers ( some who are FEDEX line mechanics) were working to rectify past restoration mistakes and restore the Belle correctly. One of the things that they were forced to do by NMUSAF was to REMOVE all of the Belles fuel tanks. Apparently this was ordered to ensure that it would never fly again. A large amount of volunteer effort was expended to accomplish this task.

My understanding was that there wasn't an issue about the restoration so much as it was about the long term plans for display AFTER restoration. This issue was used to justify bringing the Belle to NMUSAF which was the ultimate goal.

Same thing happened to the B-36 now at Pima. The Fort Worth folks couldn't agree how or where to display the B-36 so Metcalf sent it to Arizona.


Last edited by RickH on Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:48 pm
Posts: 418
Location: Houston, Texas
The WSJ journal article is very good if you have a chance to read it, and decidedly in favor of the Minnesotans.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 171
Location: Dallas, TX
I don't understand, the USS Alambama bird is not in a museum? I guess its all a moot point to suggest one bird is better than the other. I did that early on concerning the Birmingham bird but understand that it is now getting a makeover.

I think this entire thing should have worked the other way. The USAF or USN should dictate that the appearance must maintain a minimum standard or your loan may be recalled.

Bill.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:33 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
Bill the point is that the A-12 at Mobile is in a precarious position. It is an example of a veerry rare airframe of which only a few were built and fewer survive. This airframe could have just as easily been one of the aircraft that was actually destroyed in the pavillion due to the storm surge that washed through the pavilion. Why continue to expose this rare aircraft to complete destruction. I'm not saying the Battleship Alabama guys aren't doing their best but they can't control the elements.

The MN example was outside but was being cared for and was in no real danger of total destruction as the Mobile aircraft is on an annual basis.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:54 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 3:37 pm
Posts: 2755
Location: Dayton, OH
I think the obivious reason here is that the MN A-12 was able to be put on display now. between the the AL A-12 and the one in MN which is the better of the 2 for display at the moment??

Makes me wonder if the buddy system is in full effect here??

The conspiracy theorist in me wonders "Who's in a position to make things happen and who's dad was a former director of the CIA? Hmmmm"

Seriously I don't know if it goes that far up up but it sounds to me that there is some hand shaking going on.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:06 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
Just recd this from a former USAF troop, it is Blackbird related.

Quote:
NASA kept a couple of SR 71's , I dont know if they still use them

On Jan 24, 3:22 pm, mcs...@aol.com wrote:. I was stationed at Castle
when the SR's were deactivated, and they brought one to Castle for
their ir Park, they took it to the end of the run way, drained the oil
and started it up until the engine seized. Guess they wanted to make
sure it would never fly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 171
Location: Dallas, TX
Rick,
I agree (see my first post to this thread). Just got lost with the seaweed and not in a museum talk. Thanks for the clarification.
Bill.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:32 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
Shay, I would be willing to say that the connection you mentioned is tenuous at best. I think George W. has bigger things on his plate.

I think a more plausible reason might be that the MN troops cut the wings to enable transport by C-5 from Palmdale. It would be far easier to unbolt the splices to ship to Va. than ship an uncut airframe. It would also be easier to reerect it on the other end. Afterall,...the hard work has already been done by someone else.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:21 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 3:37 pm
Posts: 2755
Location: Dayton, OH
RickH wrote:
Shay, I would be willing to say that the connection you mentioned is tenuous at best.


Rick I was only kidding :wink: (or was I? :shock: :wink: )

My main point was that it seemed that the MN A-12 was choosen out of convience.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:32 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:10 am
Posts: 9720
Location: Pittsburgher misplaced in Oshkosh
With regards to the Memphis Belle, The restoration that was done in the 90's was SUPPOSED to be the final restoration. FEDEX employees and Boeing along with a bunch of others pitched in to rebuild that aircraft. The NMUSAF gave them an entire interior for a B-17 to put in it. When it was complete it was to go into a glass display hall, instead they put up a friggin tent! O.K. the tent was to be a temporary thing. no problem. Well that turned in to a ten year thing. The Belle could have been restored once again, but if she stayed in Memphis nothing good would ever happen to her. In the final year the plane was there, $35.00 was spent on maintaining the aircraft. We have the reciepts from them.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:34 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:34 pm
Posts: 2923
A great article from the Pittsburg Post Gazette:
Fond it here:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07026/757100-51.stm

Quote:
How the CIA captured an A-12 Blackbird
Friday, January 26, 2007

By Jonathan Karp, The Wall Street Journal

The Central Intelligence Agency is closing in on a high-value landscaping target: a 1960s spy plane called the A-12 Blackbird.

The CIA plans to mount the once-secret, 102-foot-long supersonic plane on a pole at its Langley, Va., headquarters in time for the agency's 60th anniversary in September. The jet chosen for the mission is a particularly well-preserved specimen that has been at the Minnesota Air Guard Museum, next to the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport, since 1991.

Even though a moving crew began the 10-day process of dismantling the spy plane this week, volunteers who painstakingly restored it at their own expense are continuing to oppose what they consider a hijacking. Their pleas for mercy, backed by the governor and entire Minnesota congressional delegation, have fallen on deaf ears.

"Possession is nine-tenths of the law, so until they drag it away with me screaming, we have a chance," said James Goodall, an aviation buff and retired Minnesota National Guardsman who salvaged the plane and led efforts to preserve it.

The A-12 Blackbird, retired in 1968, was the forerunner to the better-known SR-71 Blackbird. The stealthy A-12 is one of the fastest aircraft ever made, capable of flying at more than three times the speed of sound and at the edge of space. The plane originated as part of a CIA program code-named "Oxcart." Of the 15 A-12s built by Lockheed Martin Corp.'s famed Skunk Works advanced projects unit, nine remain. One is on display at an Air Force base, and the others are at museums around the country.

Mr. Goodall and his supporters don't question the right of the Air Force, which controls these decommissioned warplanes, to reclaim an A-12 and lend it to the CIA as an oversize lawn ornament inside the agency compound. Instead, their two-month dogfight has been aimed at getting the Air Force to justify removing the Minnesota museum's crown jewel while three A-12s sit in Alabama, including one that has been neglected since suffering hurricane damage. Another is parked on the USS Intrepid aircraft carrier, a floating Manhattan museum that will be closed until late next year because of renovation work across the Hudson River.

The CIA, whose headquarters isn't open to the public, had no role in selecting which plane it would receive. The Air Force says the Minnesota Air National Guard doesn't have a historical connection to the A-12, and though the Minnesotans have taken good care of their A-12, the volunteer-run museum doesn't meet the Air Force's current legal requirements for its museums. For one thing, it doesn't have a salaried director. After reviewing all nine A-12s, "The only one that didn't have a legitimate rationale for its location was Minnesota's," said Terry Aitken, senior curator at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force.

That logic outrages Mr. Goodall, 61 years old, who spent 20 years in the Minnesota Air National Guard and his entire adult life smitten with the A-12. He says he became an "airplane nut" at age 5 when he saw a squadron of B-36 bombers flying over San Francisco Bay. He first glimpsed a Blackbird as an 18-year-old Air Force recruit at Edwards Air Force Base in California. It was March 10, 1964, and "it affected me forever," he says.

Over the years, Mr. Goodall became an expert, writing five books on the supersonic plane. He built a rapport with Ben Rich, who developed the Blackbird for Lockheed and eventually ran Skunk Works. Mr. Goodall says he got a tip from Mr. Rich in 1989 that the Blackbird program would be canceled. "If anyone can scrounge one, you can," he says the late Mr. Rich told him.

At the time, Mr. Goodall was the staff historian for the 133rd Airlift Wing of the Minnesota Air National Guard. He hatched a scheme to rescue an A-12 from the scrapheap in Palmdale, Calif. In 1990, Minnesota's congressional delegation backed the Air Guard museum's request, citing the fact that companies in Minnesota supplied key Blackbird components and that some Blackbird pilots hailed from the state.

The Air Force was happy to unload the A-12 to avoid a costly process of destroying the asbestos-packed plane. Once the Air Force museum agreed to the loan, Mr. Goodall arranged for two massive cargo planes from the New York Air National Guard to haul the Blackbird in pieces from California. He persuaded a local hotel to put up the flight and moving crews free of charge for 10 days. "The Air Force estimated the move would cost $500,000. I got it done for $27,000. That makes me the deal-of-the-century guy," Mr. Goodall says.

Back in St. Paul, he marshaled volunteers and corporate donations for restoration work. He then spent years -- and thousands of his own dollars, he says -- scrounging for cockpit instruments, at one point swapping a prized ejection seat from his private collection to get a supersonic speedometer known as a Mach meter.

All was well until last November, when the museum got a letter from Mr. Aitken, the Air Force museum curator, invoking a provision of the loan agreement that allows the Air Force to reclaim its plane by giving 60 days' notice. The only reason Mr. Aitken cited for the decision was the need to "satisfy current exhibit requirements."

Distressed local Air Guard commanders appealed to save the A-12, calling it a "labor of love." Mr. Aitken replied that the plane didn't conform to the air park's primary mission, which is to commemorate the state guard wing's history, and said it would be better suited at the CIA. Mr. Goodall, who is now retired in Seattle but returns to the Twin Cities occasionally to visit his beloved Blackbird, energized the opposition movement by urging guardsmen and the museum's civilian nonprofit foundation to enlist Minnesota and national politicians. He also mobilized support from former A-12 pilots.

Mr. Goodall's plea: If the Air Force wants a plane to commemorate the CIA's pioneering past, it should take one that actually flew in combat. Minnesota's plane never saw action. The A-12 in Birmingham, Ala., on the other hand, photographed North Vietnamese surface-to-air missile sites in 1967, later sustained flak damage, and flew over North Korea on a spy mission in 1968 after the North Koreans captured the USS Pueblo, claiming the Navy ship had strayed into its territorial waters.

Some Minnesotans are upset that the Air Force gave short notice and didn't offer to discuss its A-12 plans. "This is a museum, a community, not a war game," said Mark Ness, vice chairman of the museum foundation and a retired Air National Guard brigadier general. Mr. Goodall knew the odds were long. The Air Force has plucked other planes despite local resistance, including a B-36 bomber taken from Fort Worth, Texas, and the celebrated World War II B-17, the Memphis Belle, from its namesake city in Tennessee.

Even as another joint appeal from Minnesota's congressional delegation was delivered to the Air Force secretary Friday, the Air Force museum told guardsmen in Minneapolis-St. Paul to prepare for the movers.

The Minnesota museum's supporters have retained a former state supreme court justice as their lawyer, but as the moving crew continued to unbolt the A-12's wings Thursday, they had yet to decide whether to seek a court injunction against the move. Mr. Goodall, who refers to the plane as "my A-12," has made his own unilateral sortie. He has removed some cockpit instruments he had donated. "No one will see them anyway if the plane is on a pole," he says. "I'll be damned if the CIA ... will get their hands on these."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:51 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
Mustangdriver you're twisting facts here. All of the interior equipment was removed when the aircraft went to the hangar at the former Memphis NAS. The aircraft was stripped down and the restoration crew that worked her at Millington began fixing 20 year, 30 year, and 40 year old damage that was caused by incorrect disassembly, vandalism, etc...

35.00 in the last year ? Probably so. How much money would you put into a project while you fought to keep said project ? The lights stayed on, the heat and Ac stayed on but the volunteers walked. Wouldn't you, why give your sweat and time just to have it jerked out from underneath you? Yes in the last year nothing much happened. All efforts were focused on trying to keep her in Memphis. They were also trying to work out a perpetually funded facility to place her in after the restoration was complete. They had their problems in getting it together, I'll give you that.

To say nothing good would come of it staying in Memphis is reaching a bit. I'll guess we'll never really know, Gen Metcalf made his decision and he has the Belle in Dayton. Case closed.

Now it's time for the Minnesotans to get theirs. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:05 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:10 am
Posts: 9720
Location: Pittsburgher misplaced in Oshkosh
Rick, They had 60 years to get it indoors, and never did. So we will. It is not like we were going to take it if they got a good facility. Memphis leaders came to the museum and basically said that they were not going to get a facility. That is why we took it. The restoration that was done in the 90's was a very cosmetic restoration. They painted the interior of the aircraft with spray paint at one point? And no, the interior equipment was given to the MBMA when they started the restoration in the 90's. When it was shipped back to us a few years ago, othing was in it, and the people in Memphis said "We didn't know you wanted that back to, and tried to sue us over the interior of the aircraft. We did not screw them out of it. The deal all along was, you can keep it there, but you need to get her indoors. The tent was temporary, so the museum was cool, and let it slide. She was getting very bad. At one point I was able to put my finger right through the floor of the aircraft. $35.00 was spent on the aircraft in the last year. That $35.00 came from me! I joined the MBMA to help the old girl. Plain and simple there was not enough interest to see the Belle in Memphis. No one is going there to see a B-17. At Wright Pat, she will be seen.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:55 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 10:21 pm
Posts: 1329
Location: Dallas TX
The thing that gets to me about the NMUSAF guys and the USAF in general is the fact that they had thousands of warbirds which THEY destroyed and now we have so few left. Warbirds of today were saved from the smelters not by the USAF but by PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS and ORGANIZATIONS!!! In specific the CAF has over 150 WWII warbirds that would have probably otherwise been melted down. Now that these planes are restored, and many flying, at the extreme cost of many induviduals, the National aviation museums (NMUSAF and the Museum of Naval Aviation) want to take them back. These military museums had 60 years to preserve these aircraft, and search for other wrecks around the world. They didnt! It sickens me to hear constantly about "ownership" issues. If you go find a plane in the bottom of a lake some where, recover and restore it, then it is yours! These military entities just want to cover their tails about the fact that they destroyed the aircraft of the past and the way they do that is by stealing them from those who invest so much in searches and recoveries. In regards to this A-12 (SR-71), I understand it is still the USAF's property, but who invested their time and money to restore and maintain it? Certainly not the USAF! The only reason they want this one is because it is arguably the best out there. For that reason it should not be allowed to rot in front of some CIA building. Take the hurricain damaged one! If you're gonna put it on a post and let it rot, take the worst one out there. Eventually these planes sitting outdoors will rot away. Its ironic that even today the Feds are destroying old warbirds, not by smeltering, but by neglect. I want to make it very clear that the people I am talking about are the few people in positions of authority at the national museums, not their staff nor the wonderful volunteers that work as hard as we do to preserve these national treasures.

Taylor

_________________
Taylor Stevenson


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 69 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group