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 Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:25 am

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  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Bolivian Sabre at NASM
PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:58 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:48 pm
Posts: 1625
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
A volunteer was showing some pictures he took on a visit to the National Air and Space Museum over the Thanksgiving holiday at the museum today and something caught my eye. After a quick bit of searching, it appears NASM has acquired a former Bolivian Air Force F-86F, 52-4689, FAB-658:
[Link to Image]
(Source: Facebook)

Given the history of the airframe, the fact that the picture first appeared in a post on the Latin American Aviation Historical Society Facebook page and the attribution on the photo is Latin American aviation expert Dan Hagedorn, it seems reasonable to conclude that they may be creating a new exhibit about aviation in Latin America.

I must admit, I find it surprising that they'd add an F-86, given that they already have another one. True, it's an "F" variant and they have an "A", but I'm not sure there sufficient difference between the two variants (as compared razorback vs. bubble canopy P-47s at NMUSAF) that I would have made the same decision. (Not that I am against Sabres, mind you. Just that NASM has limited resources.) Of course, there is also the possibility that they are just "holding" it for another organization, like the CH-46 on display. If they are going to make an exhibit, it makes me kind of wish they could have bought Connie Edward's time capsule P-51D when it came up for sale.

_________________
Tri-State Warbird Museum Collections Manager & Museum Attendant

Warbird Philosophy Webmaster


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:18 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:27 am
Posts: 5228
Location: Eastern Washington
The NASM seems to have its own criteria for collecting.
After all, it is the "national collection", yet it has been in no hurry to add a B-17 or B-24 to its collection, arguably two of the most important aircraft in U.S. history.
Yes,I know they are getting Shoo Shoo Baby from W-P, but how long as the Dulles facility been open?

Yes, some are preserved elsewhere, but given their role in WWII, deserve to be in the national collection.
It would have nice to add them while the people who built, flew and maintained them were still alive.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:18 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:27 am
Posts: 5228
Location: Eastern Washington
Double post

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:18 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:19 pm
Posts: 1378
658 has an interesting USAF history prior to passing to the FAV (and onwards to the FAB). Bearing in mind that the NASM F-86A commemorates the use of the "F-86" during the Korean War, it might be good to see the F-86F used as an exhibit to remember the folks who served and died on this type during the wider Cold War around the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:35 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:31 pm
Posts: 1089
Location: Caribou, Maine
Sorry, pushed the submit button twice.

_________________
Kevin McCartney


Last edited by old iron on Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:35 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:31 pm
Posts: 1089
Location: Caribou, Maine
The F-86F will be part of the Modern Military Aviation gallery, scheduled to open in late 2025 at the main museum building on the mall. This will be in Gallery 213, which previously housed the Time and Navigation exhibit. In addition to the F-86, this gallery will also include the Bell UH-1H, an F/A-18 nose section, 1:100 USS Enterprise (CVN-65) model, and an assemblage of missiles and drones. My guess is that this will be a long-term exhibit, likely there for decades.

I am not sure why the NASM has accessioned a second F-86, but suppose that the F-86A is considered in good company with the MiG-15 at UH. The refurbished exhibits at the main museum will retain the Lockheed U-2C (an upgraded U-2A) immediately outside the 213 gallery.

_________________
Kevin McCartney


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:26 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 7:11 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: 16 mi. N of DFW Airport
'4689 was owned by Vintage Flying Museum for many years. I was Crew Chief. Sad to see her go, but glad she'll finally receive a proper restoration.

_________________
Dean Hemphill, K5DH
Lake Dallas, Republic of Texas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 2:54 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:48 pm
Posts: 1625
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
JohnB wrote:
After all, it is the "national collection", yet it has been in no hurry to add a B-17 or B-24 to its collection, arguably two of the most important aircraft in U.S. history.

Yes, some are preserved elsewhere, but given their role in WWII, deserve to be in the national collection.

I've never really agreed with this opinion. I understand the reasoning of them receiving national recognition at NASM, but it's not like there's only one or two on display. There's 15 B-17s and 8 B-24s on some form of display in the United States. (Same goes for their B-25, which gets brought up on the same point every once and a while.) Not to mention that Memphis Belle now has such a place of prominence at what is arguably the second most famous aviation museum in the country. Do we really need another one? Especially with space at Udvar-Hazy at a premium and the fact they are such large airplanes.

As with Sabres, I have nothing against Fortresses and Liberators and I wish NASM had all of the space and resources in the world, but unfortunately they don't. I would much rather they select something rare or unique that exists nowhere else – which is hard because they have so many deserving examples to choose from. I think my top votes might have to be either the XC-35 or JFK's Convair 240. If you want to stick to World War II, they have a BT-13, PT-19, and SNJ-4. All three are: 1) excellent, unrestored time capsules (see pictures of the SNJ-4), 2) small aircraft that can much more easily be inserted into U-H, and 3) cover a topic, flight training, that is both currently underrepresented at NASM (the only World War II trainers they have on display are primary trainers: a PT-17 and PT-22) and arguably more forgotten by the public (how many people realize that 15,000 aviators died in training accidents?). On top of that, this ignores all of the foreign equipment they have in storage: the B7A, the BV 155, the G4M fuselage, the Ju 388, etc.

So, while I respect the desire to see a B-17 or B-24 on display at NASM, their absence never really bothered me and there are many other things I would like to see first.

_________________
Tri-State Warbird Museum Collections Manager & Museum Attendant

Warbird Philosophy Webmaster


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 6:03 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:31 pm
Posts: 1089
Location: Caribou, Maine
Noah wrote:
Quote:
As with Sabres, I have nothing against Fortresses and Liberators and I wish NASM had all of the space and resources in the world, but unfortunately they don't. I would much rather they select something rare or unique that exists nowhere else – which is hard because they have so many deserving examples to choose from. I think my top votes might have to be either the XC-35 or JFK's Convair 240. If you want to stick to World War II, they have a BT-13, PT-19, and SNJ-4. All three are: 1) excellent, unrestored time capsules (see pictures of the SNJ-4), 2) small aircraft that can much more easily be inserted into U-H, and 3) cover a topic, flight training, that is both currently underrepresented at NASM (the only World War II trainers they have on display are primary trainers: a PT-17 and PT-22) and arguably more forgotten by the public (how many people realize that 15,000 aviators died in training accidents?). On top of that, this ignores all of the foreign equipment they have in storage: the B7A, the BV 155, the G4M fuselage, the Ju 388, etc.

I agree with everything you say. However, the F-86F is destined for immediate display in the National Museum Building (NMB), and that puts this in a separate class different from everything on your list. An F-86 is arguably the best choice for an aircraft in the Modern Military class that is small enough for inclusion. I have to look at this in that light.

It does appear that the pace of restorations might be picking up. There are now four aircraft in that side of the Baker restoration facility ("Flak Bait", Lincoln-Standard biplane, Ilyushkin Sturmovik and F-86F), the latter three all intended for display at NMB. There are also many aircraft, including the F4F and various of the WWI aircraft being cleaned/refurbished for NMB display in the other side of the restoration (far side of the picture provided by Noah).

There are other ongoing or soon to be treated aircraft, including the Me.109 that will be repainted in the original colors this wore when captured. When all this is done, by 2025 I hope, the talents developed among many, often younger, restoration staff will be turned toward the aircraft that we want to see restored before we did. In the meantime, the NMB is being drastically reformed into something better that the original 1976 building, and the displays there will set a new standard for other museums.

Kevin

_________________
Kevin McCartney


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 11:15 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:27 am
Posts: 5228
Location: Eastern Washington
Nothing against JFK, but a rich guy's executive configured Convair doesn't do much for me.
Not an terribly historic type per se, unless the Jeopardy category is "Post war short range airliners'. Memorable for having nose gear and pressurization, and they had a long career, but not exactly earth shaking. They were my dad's favorite type to fly.

If it gets restored, it will be seen as an attempt to court political favor from those that have the purse strings.
If JFK weren't as popular as he (or his legacy) is, we would not be having this discussion.

I would love to see more airliners preserved (at various places, not the NASM given their space limitations.
Any DC-8s preserved in the U.S.?
How about airline configured 707s (of course 4 of the 5 VIP C-137s are preserved).


You miss my point, as the "National collection", it should be the home of the greatest types produced in the country as well as those with technical innovations, like the XC-35.
To tell visitors, "Yeah the B-17 is great, go to Dayton to see it" misses the point of a national collection. Most of the people who go there will likely only go to one aviation museum in their lives, so having the "greatest hits" is justified.

Can you see the Science Museum in London telling people if they want to see a Spitfire to get in the tube and "go to Hendon".
Also, as the national collection, it shouldn't be a repository of war booty...especially the technically interesting odd balls that played no part in the war.

My long held opinion is to repatriate war booty to their homelands, so they can be appreciated by the descendents of the people that created and flew them.

This isn't done out of xenophobia, just common courtesy.
Other countries have a right to appreciate their national heritage.
If there were 2 B-17s or Spitfires left in the world, wouldn't you want them to be in their home countries to be most appreciated?

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2022 8:13 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:31 pm
Posts: 1089
Location: Caribou, Maine
JohnB wrote:
Quote:
To tell visitors, "Yeah the B-17 is great, go to Dayton to see it" misses the point of a national collection. Most of the people who go there will likely only go to one aviation museum in their lives, so having the "greatest hits" is justified.


The Shoo Shoo Shoo B-17 is being moved in pieces to UH, and I hope might be assembled there in the coming year.

The NASM collection is not just the historic and innovators, but also includes many ac of lesser value to represent the minor players. The collection is truly a cross-section of aviation history, though with a preponderance of American types.

But, what must be appreciated is that "you can't have them all". Every museum should have something not covered at NASM. A B-24 may come around, perhaps one of the two flyers will find its final destination with NASM. Due to the thorough nature of NASM restorations, a B-24 that needs substantial work would strain the resources and take away from other projects. Remember that the B-29 restoration took a great portion of the NASM restoration "budget" for a decade.

I understand that expansion of UH might happen in the 2030s (though I hope sooner). I would like to see nearly all NASM aircraft on display, and think this is possible, though perhaps not in our lifetimes.

_________________
Kevin McCartney


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2022 11:34 am 
Offline
Newly minted Mustang Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:41 pm
Posts: 1410
Location: Everywhere
The NASM has been after Witchcraft for quite a long time. They were willing to trade the P-61 at one point.

Jim

_________________
www.spiritof44.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2022 3:42 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:18 pm
Posts: 1933
Location: Meriden,Ct.
I wonder what it would take to get the NASM P-61 flying...

Phil

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2022 5:37 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:48 pm
Posts: 1625
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
old iron wrote:
Ilyushkin Sturmovik

I am really looking forward to this one. I remember reading the blog post NASM put out years ago where they announced they were going to restore it.

JohnB wrote:
Not an terribly historic type per se, unless the Jeopardy category is "Post war short range airliners'. Memorable for having nose gear and pressurization, and they had a long career, but not exactly earth shaking.

I'll give you that it's not the most historic airplane in the collection, but there's one other aspect you're forgetting: it was the "first private aircraft ever used by a candidate during a presidential campaign".[1] Its role as a precedent setter is important. It also plugs a gap in their collection as NASM's only other presidential aircraft is a H-13. Given that the American president is such a symbol of the country, it would seem to be fitting to display it in the "national collection". Furthermore, given NMUSAF's monopoly on the subject, it would also help solve the problem of telling visitors: "You want to see a presidential aircraft? Go to NMUSAF."

JohnB wrote:
To tell visitors, "Yeah the B-17 is great, go to Dayton to see it" misses the point of a national collection. Most of the people who go there will likely only go to one aviation museum in their lives, so having the "greatest hits" is justified.

One counterpoint to that is some of the stories I've heard about guests walking into NMUSAF and being upset that they don't have a Corsair or an F-14. To be fair, this is not exactly a perfect comparison as NASM has far, far more claim to a B-17 than NMUSAF does to a naval aircraft. However, just because a visitor expects to see it, doesn't mean it should be there.

It's also worth noting that NASM is on the East coast of the United States, so if most people will only go to one aviation museum in their lifetimes, there's a good chance for some people it will be either the San Diego Air and Space Museum or the Museum of Flight. When the Space Shuttles were retired one of the key points that led to the California Science Center receiving Endeavour was the desire to have an example accessible on the West coast.[2]

JohnB wrote:
Also, as the national collection, it shouldn't be a repository of war booty...especially the technically interesting odd balls that played no part in the war.
My long held opinion is to repatriate war booty to their homelands, so they can be appreciated by the descendents of the people that created and flew them.

NASM has done a bit of this. The Emily was sent back to Japan and they traded a Typhoon to the RAF Museum for a Hurricane. The National Naval Aviation Museum also did the same thing with an Ar 196.

JohnB wrote:
Other countries have a right to appreciate their national heritage.
If there were 2 B-17s or Spitfires left in the world, wouldn't you want them to be in their home countries to be most appreciated?

You are very correct. Other countries do have a right to appreciate their national heritage. (Indeed, I wish there was more consideration of this in the context of recoveries from the Southwest Pacific and South America.) However, it isn't like the foreign aircraft NASM has in storage are iconic examples like a Zero or a Bf 109. The stuff they have is much more oddball that isn't quite as key a part of their national heritage. Again, not that they don't have a legitimate claim to it, but the situation is not quite so comparable.

However, to circle back to the point about access above, there is an argument that the history belongs not just to a certain country, but humanity as a whole. I am reminded of the situation when the Museum of Science and Industry set about restoring U-505:
Wikipedia wrote:
Nearly every removable part had been stripped from the boat's interior by the time she went to the museum; she was in no condition to serve as an exhibit, so Museum director Lohr asked for replacements from the German manufacturers who had supplied the boat's original components and parts. Admiral Gallery reports in his autobiography Eight Bells and All's Well that every company supplied the requested parts without charge. Most included letters to the effect that the manufacturers wanted her to be a credit to German technology.

(Source: Wikipedia)

I've sometimes thought we should replicate it to help restore some of the aircraft Vietnam captured at the end of the Vietnam War and are now on display. (e.g. the aircraft at the War Remnants Museum) I doubt it would ever happen though.

Thanks for raising the points you have. This is a very interesting discussion and really made me have to think deeply about the subject.

JimH wrote:
The NASM has been after Witchcraft for quite a long time. They were willing to trade the P-61 at one point.

I'm going to catch some hate for this one, but I'm glad that didn't happen. A more or less time capsule airplane for one that served with a foreign country for decades overseas and has probably been restored multiple times over the years is not a trade of equivalent value. Besides, it's one of only two (technically one, since the other is an LB-30) remaining flying B-24s. If anything, NASM should have gone after one of the static display examples.

_________________
Tri-State Warbird Museum Collections Manager & Museum Attendant

Warbird Philosophy Webmaster


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2022 11:53 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 12:28 pm
Posts: 1157
JohnB wrote:

Any DC-8s preserved in the U.S.?



DC-8 in Los Angeles (pintle mounted) and not sure if the one in Hawaii has survived. Several others overseas.

Noha307 wrote:
JimH wrote:
The NASM has been after Witchcraft for quite a long time. They were willing to trade the P-61 at one point.

I'm going to catch some hate for this one, but I'm glad that didn't happen. A more or less time capsule airplane for one that served with a foreign country for decades overseas and has probably been restored multiple times over the years is not a trade of equivalent value. Besides, it's one of only two (technically one, since the other is an LB-30) remaining flying B-24s. If anything, NASM should have gone after one of the static display examples.......


I agree with the P-61- glad it is at UH and I love the unrestored time capsules at UH (P-38, Me-163, Black Widow, Sikorski flying boat...), and am glad to see some conservations vs restorations. Now just drag over the Sageburner F-4 and the Convair Pogo from Garber and show them as is- bird poop and all.

Also agree on the B-24- the one outside display at Barksdale (understand it is really just a shell) should really come inside for proper display, as should the one at Castle


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jim MacDonald, kalamazookid and 94 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