P-82 going Bye Bye!! A very sad day at the CAF!

Tim Savage · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 8:26 pm **Posts:** 622

mustangdriver wrote:

I would great ly encourage some that have some of the stronger statements to remember that this was a decision through the USAF Board, and officials, not the men and women of the museum at Dayton. The support and donations that come to that museum help get aircraft preserved and restored like the Swoose and the Memphis Belle. Some here know only some of the story, while others know all of it. I hoped that the museum would allow the CAF to keep the P-82 there, but the board felt that there were many reasons to move it.

I am sure the General is on that board, as are probably other NMUSAF personnel. After all, it is the History board, and the NMUSAF holds all their history. Also, don't forget that the good General is the one who started this whole mess. i am not at liberty to disclose it, but if you were privy to just a few of the things that the good General has said in relation to this case, you might have a different perspective.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:10 pm

I have heard him say some choice words about s few things, but I have also heard peole say things about him without carring as well. I am one that wanted the P-82 to to stay in Texas rather than possibly go to the NASM, so I understand that frustration. But like many have said here, the owner is allowed to do what they want. So why is this different for the NMSUAF than a collector?

Before anyone jumps all over me, once again remember that I was a fan of the Twin Mustang staying where it was, but I would rather take the high road, then bash the NMUSAF over a decision. But some already have guns aimed at the museum and just need any reason at all to pul a trigger.

groundbound · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:14 pm

Mustangdriver, no matter what is said, some one will take offense to it. I mean no ill will towards anyone who volunteers at the museum. However, I think that a large public backlash towards behavior such as what has happened in relation to the P-82 is sorely needed. The precedent that is being set here is truly frightening. Maybe if more taxpayers were paying attention to how people are spending what we, the people, have entrusted them with, this crap wouldn't happen. It is a truly disgusting abuse of power. I dearly hope that the appeal goes very poorly for the Historic Board at the museum. Not the people who spend there time and energy to preserve what the board tells them to, but the ones responsible for such theivery as this. The ones out in the hangers and restoration facilities getting their hands dirty have my deep respect. The ones who pull this type of shenanigans have none of my respect. Why the CAF hasn't taken this more public is beyond me. Get loud and get vocal, NOW.

EDowning · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:20 pm

Mustangdriver wrote:

Quote:

I hoped that the museum would allow the CAF to keep the P-82 there, but the board felt that there were many reasons to move it.

I am curious. Are you speaking on behalf of the board? In the past you have indicated that your postings are your opinions. This quote would seem to indicate you have been in contact with board members regarding their feelings about the matter. In other conversations with them they have indicated to me in the past that "you in no way represent them". Has that changed?

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:22 pm

Eric, I represent myself only. My statement comes from your post actually.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:25 pm

Eric,
This is from the 5th paragraph of your post. That is what I was referring to.

"After a robust and thorough discussion, the voting members of the Heritage Board unanimously decided that, based on the history of this matter and the precedential import of the judicial determination concerning the ownership of the F-82 to the National Museum of the United States Air Force and the other Armed Services, the offer of settlement could not be accepted.”

EDowning · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:28 pm

And where in that quote do you see "they felt there were many reasons to move it"?

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:34 pm

That is how I read that post. That is what I feel it means. That is what I meant. I took that as the board saying they had reasons not to keep it there.

usaf ssgt · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:52 pm

This whole matter has the foul smell of something I stepped in out at the farm.

Shame on the USAF!

The CAF has done far more in saving and promoting the history and heritage of the Air Force, than they are being given credit for.

Preserving a static aircraft with taxpayers money is in no way comparable to restoring an aircraft to flying status with donations.

I'm ex-USAF, myself, and this action against the CAF is nothing to be proud of.

Leon

adflyer · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:03 pm

Soooooooo..... I know the plane hasn't even left Midland yet but does anyone have a clue as to where the NMUSAF plans on putting it? If they want it back so badly they must have some sort of a plan for it right?

Dan K · **Posted:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:12 pm

So, the Air Force's Heritage Board is claiming "precedential import"?

You better believe precedent exists! I recall Congress directing the US Navy to transfer ownership of the remains of one Brewster F3A to a private citizen, as it was determined to be the best option for the plane to be saved for posterity and for the US Navy to save face with the citizenry.

I am reminded of Congressman Walter Jones' concerns expressed to the Undersecretary of the Navy in the F3A's case. They certainly seem to echo our current frustration:

“This is another example of Big Government unnecessarily invading our lives. I am thrilled this matter will soon be resolved once and for all,” Jones said. “Mr. Cralley did us all a service by salvaging a rare war plane which the public can appreciate in the future, and now he will no longer be bogged down in frivolous legal battles with Uncle Sam. This just goes to show why the size and power of the federal government needs to be curbed. I fear that if I had not heard of Mr. Cralley’s situation, this patriotic American would still be engrossed in red tape all because he has a passion for historic aircraft and wanted to save this particlar Brewster Corsair from extinction.”

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:48 am

money talks & b.s. walks....

TAdan · **Posted:** Wed Mar 11, 2009 7:19 am

This is very dissapointing news.

As far as I am concerned the plane belongs with the CAF.

Nathan · **Posted:** Wed Mar 11, 2009 8:13 am

I just send an email to the museum.

I suggest everyone do the same. Might as well be heard if anything.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/main/contactus.asp

Robbie Stuart · **Posted:** Wed Mar 11, 2009 8:18 am

I too was fortunate enough to see the airplane fly down in the valley. I had looked forward to the day we could see it fly again. I am sad about the outcome of this whole mess. Just seems to me we (the CAF) got the green weenie on this deal! :evil:

Robbie

Warbird Information Exchange

P-82 going Bye Bye!! A very sad day at the CAF!

Who is online