Barksdale B-29 photos

[wendovertom]

Does anyone have recent photos of the B-29 at Barksdale / 8th Air Force museum? Any interior photos by chance?

Thanks,

Tom P.

[adflyer]

From about a year ago. The best I can do...





And the -17 and -24 for grins

[wendovertom]

Thank you! Tail looks a bit rough. Although I think that the B-29 at Hill AFB is in about the same state.

Tom P.

[peter]

Boy the tail turret looks a bit sad. Is she next in line for repair after the B17?

[b29flteng]

What waste of good airframes.....

[Cherrybomber13]

They belong indoors... Why would you keep a B-24 outside this day in age? The B-29 looks sad. Whats the story here with the elevators and the cowls missing etc, before we all jump to conclusions and hang the volunteers that may be working on them?

[mustangdriver]

What waste of good airframes.....

And where should they be? Who is willing to help on them? What museum is willing to step up and build a facility to house these? I don't mean to sound short, but My fear is that larger planes like these are going to have a hard time finding homes in the future.

[Jiggersfromsphilly]

What waste of good airframes.....

And where should they be? Who is willing to help on them? What museum is willing to step up and build a facility to house these? I don't mean to sound short, but My fear is that larger planes like these are going to have a hard time finding homes in the future.

Agreed !

[JohnB]

This won't be a surprise, but I understand the B-17 is pretty well stripped inside. Some of the parts were in a base museum.

[mustangdriver]

I think this one was flown in to the museum years back. I think that was the story I got.

[Cherrybomber13]

Mustangdriver;

I for one will ditch 1/2 our collection if someone wants to give us a B-24, B-17 or B-29 for indoor Static Display. I'm sure if asked around the Museum community that you would find no problem getting indoor space for most WW2 twin engine bomber (B-25, Martin B-26, A-20) or 4 Engine Heavy Bomber (B-17,B-24,B-29).

I'm not trying to start a war here but If a historic airplane is not going to be flown then it belongs in a museum of some sort, leaving these fragile objects from history to sit outside is just irresponsible to historical preservation. That's my opinion.

For must museums the price to acquire, transport become the bigger stumbling blocks. An aircraft can be on display while being restored even if that is done slowly. My real fear is that as attrition eats these air-frames up from the weather, they just will be no more. Who will be restoring the statics when the memory has pretty much faded? As I'm sure you know, building static planes takes a special kind of love knowing it will never fly.

[mustangdriver]

I can tell you that it just isn't that easy. A B-17 for example take alot of money to move, restore and care for.

Let's use you museum for example. If the NMUSAF said OK we want to give you the B-17 at Barksdale. What would you do? Are you saying that you guys can afford to go and take apart the B-17, transport it, rebuild it, restore it, then place it on indoor display? If you do then I beg you to go ahead and ask Dayton for the plane. You'd better have trucks ready because you will pretty much get it. You are also better off then alot of other museums if you can do this. I really feel that we are in a time that is going to see many smaller musems close. I hope these planes can find a safe home.

[Cherrybomber13]

Mustangdriver

I don't disagree with you, please understand that. I think we have the same passion for these beasties and want to see them safe. What cracks me up is the US Military has plenty of trucks, cranes and flatbeds that helping a non profit better display their history should be a no brainer. But as I have found in the past they are no help. The money spent loading and moving a B-17 would cover the monies need to restore it (static). We have the space and I can get a crew together if I need to Whats their phone #?

[mustangdriver]

It's all good. I'll shoot you a PM for a phone number

[Ploesti]

Mustangdriver

I don't disagree with you, please understand that. I think we have the same passion for these beasties and want to see them safe. What cracks me up is the US Military has plenty of trucks, cranes and flatbeds that helping a non profit better display their history should be a no brainer. But as I have found in the past they are no help. The money spent loading and moving a B-17 would cover the monies need to restore it (static). We have the space and I can get a crew together if I need to Whats their phone #?

Outstanding! Go get one! Best attitude I've read here in a long, long time. Any idea seems better than what's happening to those planes sitting outside falling apart. You guys work out the details for acquiring one of those birds for a static display indoors somewhere safe and I could be easily talked into helping a bit financially. As I would hope some others here would be happy to assist as well. I really like the idea of helping out with saving some of these outdoor dying aircraft. This is far different than sending money to help a restoration or expedition to raise a warbird out of water or out of a jungle. These are aircraft that are right there within easy reach and most are in very recoverable shape. I'm not interested in donating money to a new paint job on a static warbird that will continue to sit outside and will still fall apart in time. I'd rather help out getting one inside somewhere where it has a chance to survive. The MNUSAF would be fools not to allow a ligitimate group to acquire one of these aircraft for proper display indoors if possible. Sign me up when you guys get the logistics hammered out. Best of luck