NASM Garber Facility Cave-In (Roof + 2 Much Snow).

[Garth]

Just heard on the news that one of the NASM buildings at Garber/Suitland has collapsed under the snow. Think it was either Building 21 or Building 24. No idea what's in them, but since Phase II is still under construction at Dulles they haven't started moving the non-display artifacts over yet.

[Garth]

WTOP has a story up:

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1885349

No artifacts thought to be damaged, but the building is too unstable to enter.

[mustangdriver]

The same thing happened near by to a corporate jet hangar. I'm glad that the NASM is getting more space soon.

[51fixer]

The same thing happened near by to a corporate jet hangar. I'm glad that the NASM is getting more space soon.

I saw some photos from the inside of the corporate hangar.
Roof sheared off along hangar door side of the building.
The tails of at least 5 Gulfstreams were crushed and all the noses were about 15+ feet in the air. Several other jets were in there as well.
Probably $250-300 mil worth of A/C destroyed.

Rich

[richkolasa]

Probably $250-300 mil worth of A/C destroyed.

Rich

Why do I have the feeling that somehow we taxpayers will wind up paying for replacements...

Rich

[RickH]

The Wicked Witch of the West conjured up a little spell to destroy those evil corporate carbon footprinted jets !

[RMAllnutt]

Probably $250-300 mil worth of A/C destroyed.

Rich

Why do I have the feeling that somehow we taxpayers will wind up paying for replacements...

Rich

That's daft... the owners insurance will cover it, both the hangar and the aircraft. There are bound to be law suits though.

Richard

[Obergrafeter]

darn Global Warming.

[51fixer]

Probably $250-300 mil worth of A/C destroyed.

Rich

Why do I have the feeling that somehow we taxpayers will wind up paying for replacements...

Rich

That's daft... the owners insurance will cover it, both the hangar and the aircraft. There are bound to be law suits though.

Richard

My point isn't about the insurance, but that a hangar full of A/C were destroyed where it was assumed they would be safe.
The $250-300 mil cost will probably increase with loss of use/revenue factored in. Also will crew and mechanics get laid off?
We have our discussions here about static vs flying for warbirds. Sitting on the ground is not without it's hazards.
Rich

[mustangdriver]

Well it's a bit different. These aircraft were in General aviation hangars. Many if not most static museums are in more substantial buildings than what these privately owned aircraft were in. For example the NMNA museum buildings are hurricane proof. THe NMUSAF is also a tornado shelter as it is tornado proof. The NASM is a building and even the UH that appears to be a hangar is built to a higher level that GA hangars are. There are many flying museums that also have facilities that are more than just a hangar. Not that I am putting down a museum that is in a hangar, just that there are different options out there if the museum has the ability to do so.

[Warbird Kid]

Im sure many museums are well built and protected from the elements. But remember, nothing is ever "blank"-proof to the point of invincible. If a big enough snow-storm, tornado, hurricane, or what have you comes through, mother nature will win. She does everytime. But I agree that the national musuems are much more protected and reinforced than others.

[RickH]

I heard about this unsinkable ship, once.....

You might have a point , Chris,... if the museum was located in Cheyenne Mountain! Nothing is perfect and design standards are meant to cover a certain level, exceed that level, and anything is possible.

Lone Star is a case in point. The hangar door waas backed by a series of plates that can lift up and create about a 2-3 ft flood wall. Doesn't work too well when the flood level reaches 6 ft.

[mustangdriver]

Oh for sure. I didn't mean to sound like it was a fortress just that some places are built differently. GA Hangars like the ones in Dulles that were damaged are not built to take much in the way of punishment. That's all I meant. Nothing is forever safe. Aircraft that are static and well cared for are still in need to be kept out of harms way with regards to fires, drunk drivers as the Air Zoo found out years ago, mother nature, and whatever else. Nothing is "_proof"

[bdk]

I think this has more to do with the building codes than anything else. Unreinforced masonary construction was OK in earthquake zones (like Los Angeles) in the 1930s, but could not be built now. Note that there either were not codes or they were not enforced in Haiti.

You can also design for the once in 100 years storm, but you don't know if the once in 1000 years storm will come tomorrow or 1001 years from now. Not only that, but it can snow two inches more or less a mile away in the same storm. You can't design for everything- a building great for snow load might crumble in an earthquake. There are too many competing design considerations.

Luckily the global warming argument has been updated to explain that not only does it get too hot due to global warming but there can be record snows as well.

[PinecastleAAF]

Why do I have the feeling that somehow we taxpayers will wind up paying for replacements...

Tell us how you really feel. What a deft segue, snow to taxes.