Warbird Information Exchange

Some news on the Geneseo B-23:
http://members3.boardhost.com/1941AirMu ... 83224.html

Also the monthly airshow meetings are going to start this month. From rumors there will NOT be a shortage of aircraft coming to, "THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF" 2009.

I can't wait to see what the Corsair line-up will be.

-Nate

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

Great news!

It's always good to hear about a bird getting some TLC.


SN

Awsome!

Looks like the Dragon has found a good home.

_________________
Share your story: Rutgers Oral History Archive http://oralhistory.rutgers.edu/

Considering Geneseo was my home and where I grew up and my interest in the long-term viability of the 1941 Historic Aircraft Group, I have some serious concerns with this transaction and project. With this diatribe, I mean absolutely no disrespect to the HAG and the CAF, nor Courtesy Aircraft if they indeed acted as an intermediary to the sale – I just have to say this to get it off my chest.

I really think that the 1941 HAG is making a poor decision in investing capital and time into this aircraft. Though I believe that every plane deserves to be “saved” – I believe that there are some out there that really can’t be to the level truly needed, and will just need to be stored until the time where they can be by the RIGHT group or person. I think this B-23 is in that category.

I certainly have always liked the Douglas B-23 Dragon, but I am one of the few diehard warbird enthusiasts out there that can say that (and I am sure WIX has a greater concentration of them than any other place). Most of the general “casual enthusiast” population and tourist population could care less to say the least. To say that the B-23 was a bit of a footnote in the history of WWII is accurate I’d say. Granted, it is an antique plane and has its place in aviation history, but to call it a desirable warbird in today’s market is a stretch.

We know that the CAF B-23 is in tough shape. Years of storage after major corrosion issues were found have not been kind on her. Even a static restoration would be difficult to accomplish, but their temptation to fly it makes me think that logic will never reign. Consider the cost of transportation of the aircraft along with the disassembly and reassembly alone -- those costs alone concern me, but then again I have no idea how much the sale cost… so add that to my concern.

Now, I look at the 1941 Historic Aircraft Group and see an organization who has struggled since creation in the 1990’s. Never building the critical mass of the National Warplane Museum, the organization hasn’t experienced the meteoric rise the NWM had since it split from that group in Geneseo. The first several years of the airshow at Geneseo after the Wings of Eagles show moved to Batavia, NY then to Elmira were low on attendance, but had significant expenses to cover and as a result left the organization in debt for a time. Granted, the airshows of the past few years have had fairly healthy attendance numbers, but the expenses involved have also increased. The airshow has never been a money-making endeavor and based on national airshow numbers from 2008 and the state of the current economy, I fear that the future shows have a hard journey ahead.

1941 HAG is stating that the plane will be a major tourist attraction, but again I fear that no one will care if the plane is a B-23 or a C-47 – and they already have a C-47. The infrastructure of the museum itself leads a lot to be desired and granted they have had limited money to upgrade – couldn’t some of the money that will be invested in the B-23 be put to better use on the physical property?

And then, let’s talk about the restoration and mechanical capability of the group. I certainly agree that there are some fantastic mechanics and volunteers there at HAG, but I fear that the burden of keeping a C-47 (revenue generator), C-45, Staggerwing, and the other odd aircraft they have will either put the B-23 on the backburner, or worse, the B-23 will take the front burner because of its newness, and the others will suffer.

In an era where museums are cutting back and making more informed and reasonable growth, acquisition, and restoration decisions (even those capitalized by wealthy owners), I feel this is a bad call for HAG and I fear that they are kidding themselves with the plane.

I don’t want to sound pompous with this, but many of the folks who call the Genesee valley home still think that the warbird world revolves around Geneseo and it will sustain for years to come – no matter what the case is. Since I left there and “went out into the world” I have been able to see that the warbird world is far larger and tougher than they all think. Companies do NOT sponsor warbirds or museums like they used to and people are far more frugal than ever. Just because there were folks that gave to the “dream” that was the B-17 Fuddy Duddy back in 1985 does not mean the same will be true with a B-23. There you had a FLYING example of the most famous WWII aircraft in the world (short of the P-51) and there were still many WWII vets with us that had money to devote to “their plane”. That is unfortunately not true any longer.

Yes, I believe warbirds are fun to work on and work with, but there has to be a limit on the number of obscure restorations and money pumped into them until a focus on the future planning, growth, or even survival of the museum is paid. I seriously fear that this plane is putting the museum on a path that it shouldn’t be going down – at least not until it has made some significant effort in developing a plan of how they are going to survive.

Now, I know I’ll get a lot of flack for this and people will say “how can you object to saving a warbird??” Well, I have thought about that and think that some of us are the problem with why museums fail or groups fall apart. We are so quick to invest a certain romantic passion behind any and all warbirds that we all start building this collective “group think” that it’ll all work out in the end and people from far and wide will travel to our little cornfield and gaze on the obscure warbird because that’s what WE’D do. A thousand hockey moms from Buffalo don’t care… rich lawyers from NYC don’t care… and even airline pilots (for the most part) don’t either. Field of Dreams this isn’t – and just because you build it (or truck it in) doesn’t mean they will come. 1941 HAG doesn’t have the capital of the Collings Foundation or Yanks Air Museum to take that chance…

That’s my .02. Flame on.

_________________
Ryan Keough
Stow, MA

Ryan...I don't know anything about:
1) The B-23 deal
2) Geneseo
3) 1941 HAG

That said, your post would make even me think twice about the B-23 deal.
You explained your thoughts exceptionally well. Well enough for me to understand your point, anyway.
Very educational post. Thanks for the insights (that I lack) into the situation.

Mudge the appreciative

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

Ryan:
Very eloquent and well said. I agree with many of your points. I think the B-23 is a great plane, but considering the condition of this one, it might be next to impossible for a small museum to do what they plan to do with it.
I would much rather see that money go to something like one of the Hawkins and Powers Privateers. They are flyable and would take a lot less work to bring current and do any repairs.
Again, I admire your thoughts and insight on this topic. Good job!

Well said Ryan and I agree with you 100%. As a 1941 HAG member and a person who loves Geneseo I feel there are better options for the amount of money and effort that is going into this project.

Eric

_________________
The air resounds from the Rolls-Royce roar!
To an enemy the warning is dire: here only eagles soar,
and the last thing he'll see is a mirrored Spitfire!

I must add that much of the money going towards the B-23 was donated.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

I have one question - when the B-23 finally arrives back in New York, will it be inside or outside? The B-23 is currently in outside storage at Midland, where it is presumbly continuing to get corrosion and deteriorate. If the B-23 will be inside with HAG, is it not a better fate than where it currently resides? Even if the B-23 project proves to be too much and they eventually have to sell it, it will have been cared for a little better than what the CAF was able to do with it, right?

I'm not knocking the CAF, they are working with extremely limited resources and I completely understand the constraints with which they have to operate under.

BTW, to illustrate the large road ahead of 1941 HAG in regards to this B-23, I recall that Gary said in a thread a while back that the CAF estimated it would take in excess of 1 Million dollars to restore it back to airworthy condition. Granted, HAG is going to restore it to static, but even that, will surely take a lot of money. Somehow, I don't think that small $ 30,000 or $ 50,000 donations will put much dent in the static restoration costs, IMO.

I am glad that the B-23 will presumably be cared for, though, but I'm still undecided whether this sale will be mutually benenficial for the B-23's long term care and the long term health of the 1941 HAG group. That B-23 project is sure to suck all of the 1941 group's money and resources for quite some time. Whether HAG can find enough volunteers, sponsors, and donors to see this restoration, albeit a static one, to completion, remains to be seen. I wish them lots of luck on this monumental project.

Another question- if the 1941 HAG is so interested in a possible B-23 flyer, why didn't they buy the ex- Mike Bogue one out at Ione, California. It's a flyer, and could be brought up to airworthy condition in a relatively short time and at a MUCH cheaper cost than what is required with the soon-to-be ex-CAF example. I also believe there is another B-23 flyer in decent condition out at Moses Lake, Washington that could have been bought as well.

Ryan, I think you make some very good and valid points, however, I'm looking at this acquisition a little differently. Maybe I have a little bit more of a rosy view of things and maybe I don't know the hard reality of what is really happening as I can only rely on what the museum newsletters offer.

I look at the B-23 as a step in the right direction for the museum. It's a move that will get a historic aircraft onto the field, and certainly an uncommon type. While the general public will not know the significance (or lack there of) of this particular type, they may impressed by the size and the fact that it's a bomber. Also, it can have some marketability, ie. see one of only 6 surviving Dragons! (I don't know how many are still around but you get the idea) Right now, the museum is mostly made up of transport types and small aircraft that probably don't really impress the general public much, so hopefully having bomber on the field will help.

As for the costs, it was stated that they have received a $20,000 donation towards the aircraft. I don't know what the final agreed to price was but this covers at least 40% of the cost, excluding the recovery and transport. I don't think there's much more bang for the buck that they could get when it comes to warbirds. Let's face it, for the cost of the B-23 (purchase price and shipping fees), what could you get in the warbird world? An L-5, an L-19, maybe a PT of some type. You're certainly not going to get anything that will draw the crowds. I personally would love to see them pursue an Avenger or B-25 since a connection can be made with the general public on those types and they don't cost absurd amounts. Just about any larger bomber or fighter and you're easily talking half a million plus.

As for the airshows, I know that at least the last 3 years have either broke even or have been profitable. The museum is not in debt at this time and I don't believe they'll go broke from this acquisition. I attended this week's past membership meeting and it sounds like they want to get a new crew of volunteers involved to help with the B-23, separate from their other aircraft. Now I know wanting and getting are two different things but they're at least aware of the fact that this project will potentially cut into other aircraft maintenance.

I think the best point you made was about the museum grounds, which I agree with you 100%. Something certainly needs to be done to improve the look and feel of the museum if they wish to become a tourist destination and not just a hangar full of aircraft. It is for that reason that at the last meeting I spoke with Austin and offered my planning services to develop a strategic plan for the museum grounds and facilities. I'll be examining all of the facilities and hopefully will come up with a phased plan that will help to take the museum from a haphazard group of hangars and buildings into a facility that will help attract visitors, tell stories of the aircraft, and meet the needs of day to day operations. I would like to let you know that they have recieved a $100,000 grant to help improve the facilities. I believe they mentioned it will be used for improvements to the parking lot (actual paving!) signage, and a few other items. The group does know that the facilties need to be greatly improved, it's just a matter of money and time.

Good point, the 1941 HAG does indeed have a hangar and presumably the B-23 will be inside. Though I am not sure if that will put the C-119 or DC-3 outside...



I thought the same thing... though both of those aircraft are executive configured, I'd say that they have a better chance of seeing air under their wings and would be a better investment -- albeit an upfront lump sum than the cost spread out over years.



I did notice the $20,000 donation - and I'd be curious as to who gave it. I'm not claiming that there's something fishy, but I'd expect that it was from one of the founders or board members (if I am wrong, I'd like to know of course!). Yes, it's a significant amount -- but is that money coming in because of the B-23 alone? If they hadn't started the B-23 campaign, would that $20k have been put to an engine replacement fund for the C-47? They've had issues with engines previously and if they have another problem, they'll be well on their way to a static museum. I still have this feeling that they need to "crawl before they walk" and prove a sound track record with the continued maintenance and operation of the aircraft they already have and develop a potential revenue stream from that. How? What about finishing the Harvard and instead of doling out profits to traveling groups like Warbird Adventures or NATG, keeping some of it in house? Same with the C-47 -- look at the success the American Airpower Museum on L.I. has had with theirs -- offer an experience behind a flight and you've got an attraction. But remember, the FAA will only work with you if you play along and develop a sound training program and maintenance program. How many museum visitors would it take to equal a plane load of "flight experience" participants at even $100 per person? How long would it take to get those visitors? Right now, and at least for the future as the B-23 arrives, how much more of a premium will visitors pay to see a B-23? Nothing I expect. How many more people are going to visit because of the B-23... not many more than currently I expect. So what benefit does it really bring? Currently their sole revenue streams are the airshow, membership, and tours. I suspect (if they experience what other organizations are right now) that membership numbers decrease slightly each year. What if the show has a complete rain-out one year? Will museum guests make up the remaining amount? It would be very tough to market and get them through -- and in reality, you can't raise tour prices by much -- for it's far from being a Fantasy of Flight and a $30 per person charge.

You certainly know of the Aerospace museum in Buffalo... they had some significant aircraft, but attendance never really reached critical mass and they were in the middle of a tourist zone. I know they had an issue with getting kicked out of their building... but even before that, they still had a difficult time. I guess I am just trying to make the point that unique aircraft doesn't assure future success or signify positive movement.



I salute you for the effort and wish you the best of luck, but several have marched the same path before you and have been met with little in the way of results. Strategic plans are crucial and great, but until the organization and it's leadership fully adopts and adheres to the plan, it's merely words on paper. You might remember that there was a model of what the NWM "was to become" for many years in the 1941 hangar... it was built by planners in 1989 and never saw much of any progress toward it. Other members have proposed the same over the years, but everyone seems to care more about turning wrenches and making flyovers of parades than actually building a museum that's more than some hangars with airplanes and parts. I'm glad to hear the $100,000 grant came in, but then again it made me sad to know it's going toward the blasted parking lot and roadway again. Big Tree Lane is such a burden for them... private road of that size makes it tough. They could really use an upgrade of the interior of the hangar from the '41 hangar through the main one.

My sincere hope is that there are more younger people with enthusiasm and leadership potential out there like yourself Ken -- I'd be right there except that there's not much in the way of aviation employment in WNY.

I know everyone says "but what about the B-17 and the A-20, don't they make a good museum?" Well, yes -- if they were their planes. You must remember that both are some of the last assets of the Tallichet estate and the family, though understanding their importance to David while he was alive, might have to make the tough decision to sell or relocate them at ANY time. Though I'd traditionally be more positive about the chances of them staying there, the past track record suggests otherwise (Tallichet's P-47, P-39's, T-28, Rick Korffs B-25 & A-26, Bob Richardson's B-17). I just can't get my hopes up...

You all bring up very good points though -- and I hope you keep up the discussion. Hopefully such attention helps in the long run.

Thanks,
Ryan

_________________
Ryan Keough
Stow, MA

I like to throw in my .02 as well. First, as a long time member of the CAF, (20 years) it used to kill me to go to airshow and see the B-23, P-82 and Mauler sitting out rotting in the weeds. I pleaded with the Arizona Wing to possibly think of having the aircraft assigned to it. The Arizona Wing was one of the most financially successful Wings at the time along with the SoCal wing, Dixie and Minnesota groups as well but the more I delved into the costs associated with transportation and restoration, any of the three would have been devastating to our group. Even the recent departure of the C-46 was gut wrenching but inevitable. The point was made about Gary Austin stating that it would be over a million dollars to make flyable. I would at least double that since there are virtually no spares or suppliers for B-23s like there are for B-25s, T-6s etc. Everything that is corroded (which is a tremendous amount) would have to be custom made to original specs. Not only the financial burden that it would place on HAG but also the manpower issue. In todays age, NONE of the volunteer museums are getting the enthusiastic members that they have in years past. The WWII generation is nearly gone and those coming in behind are not nearly as interested as were their parents and grandparents in preserving these old planes particularly without pay. Those of us on this site are the sick exception that believe anything and everything should be restored to flying condition and I still believe that. With that being said, I really hope that HAG can put some time and effort and some money into the B-23 and turn it into something attractive. The Pima museum has a beautiful static example. I hope also that this plane does not sap the museum of all it's resources both financially and manpower wise. So the B-23 is gone, the P-82 still in limbo from the CAF point of view, maybe the Mauler can still be a viable CAF project. The Az Wing has been throwing around ideas and trying to gather some momentum to possibly have the Ju-52 assigned to them but the manpower issue confronts them as well. People just aren't coming out of the woodwork like they used to to support these grand old planes. Good Luck 1941 HAG

_________________
The more I learn about aircraft, the more I realize I still have to learn.

Ryan, I don't disagree with any of your points. However, being an optimist, a few counterpoints come to mind.
1) the asking price for the B-23 is $50K. A bargain for a complete bomber even if only for static display. A better long term investment than a derelict DC-3.
2) A great entry level opportunity for volunteers that want to learn fabric work, stripping , masking and painting, etc. (Yes I know it will also need major expertise.)
3) Activity breeds activity. A museum needs to add another aircraft from time to time to keep interest levels from getting stale. There will be a lot of excitement and probably an increase in activity across the board by this new addition.
4) most of the other aircraft are airworthy and don't need much of the entry level maintenance. They just need tons of cash to keep them insured, annualed and flying.
5) The B-23, being a project, doesn't have the yearly feeding requirements of all those flyable aircraft in the collection. It's restoration can go at a manageable pace.
6) Last , I would market it as a "Pearl Harbor bomber" as in that it represents a front line service combat aircraft from when America was attacked the first time. (tie it in to the 9/11 sentiment.) It can represent both times America was atttacked by surprise.
That's something fresh, and a little more current than just W.W.II.

Marine Air, I agree with you 100% on these items. Certainly, as long as the tools and trainers are available, that this would be a very good opportunity to have people learn a bit more about advanced skills needed to restore such a plane. As long as the environment around it is "inclusive" where neophytes are welcomed and given fun and interesting challenges and it doesn't become "exclusive" where new volunteers are relegated to duties like sweeping floors while the old guard of volunteers actually work on the plane. We all preach that "everyone is welcomed" but we all know there are quite a few times when that isn't the case -- especially if it's a flyable restoration.

And yes, exciting new events and projects can build momentum and that can certainly help too. No one ever wants anything to get stale on purpose and I think in many cases "staleness" is caused by lack of capital more than anything else. My only concern, again, is that the "new kid on the block" will get the primary attention and others will fall by the wayside.

As an aside, I was the one who unlocked this thread from a locked state. It did not break any of the WIX standards of conduct or terms of service. If anyone has a problem with that, take it up with me directly. For the sake of legality, I might as well state that the views expressed in this forum are not the expressed views of the 1941 HAG or anyone other than myself. This forum is not connected in any way with the 1941 HAG, Commemorative Air Force, or any other parties other than the Warbirds Resource Group either legally or monetarily.

_________________
Ryan Keough
Stow, MA