B-23 Dragon on ebay recently

[warbird51]

Its a good thing the seller is a jerk. The B-23 is not a cool plane, not really historic, and not desirable to collect.

You will be glad the seller blew you off in the long run - it would have been a very bad investment.

I beg to differ, the B-23 is a really cool aircraft. Everybody that got a chance to fly it would be standing in line to fly it anywhere we wanted to take it. Not historic? It was the first U.S. bomber with a tail gun position. I could go on, but I'd be wasting my breath. Of course, I am biased towards the old lady, after crewing her for 8 years.

[Jack Cook]

Nice a/c no doubt saw her at Hillsboro a few times.

[51fixer]

Sorry if my comment went the wrong way. I meant by not historic it was not a contributor to WWII, and I do feel the plane would cost way more than its worth to get flying. It is sad, but these old birds are just sooo expensive to maintain now days... Only the most collectible aircraft are financially viable.

If collecting and restoring Warbirds was only based on balance sheet results WIX would be a very small place.
Rich

[rwdfresno]

Sorry if my comment went the wrong way. I meant by not historic it was not a contributor to WWII, and I do feel the plane would cost way more than its worth to get flying. It is sad, but these old birds are just sooo expensive to maintain now days... Only the most collectible aircraft are financially viable.

I'm trying to understand your desire to be invovled with Warbirds. 90% of your posts do nothing but paint an extreamly negative picture of warbirds talking about how they aren't worth the money, the hobby is dying, and people shouldn't waste their time. It all may very well be true, but if it is, why are you bothering? Can you tell us a little bit more about this restoration project you are working on? I'm curious what type of project it is that is motivating you to waste your time.

Ryan

[lmritger]

Sorry if my comment went the wrong way. I meant by not historic it was not a contributor to WWII, and I do feel the plane would cost way more than its worth to get flying. It is sad, but these old birds are just sooo expensive to maintain now days... Only the most collectible aircraft are financially viable.

I'm trying to understand your desire to be invovled with Warbirds. 90% of your posts do nothing but paint an extreamly negative picture of warbirds talking about how they aren't worth the money, the hobby is dying, and people shouldn't waste their time. It all may very well be true, but if it is, why are you bothering? Can you tell us a little bit more about this restoration project you are working on? I'm curious what type of project it is that is motivating you to waste your time.

Ryan

Found a photo of the poster in question:



Setting the opinion of Debbie Downer aside for a moment, here's a photo which others might find interesting... taken by Ralph Morse of LIFE in August/Sept 1941 during the Louisiana Maneuvers. This alone would be a great excuse to have a B-23 and restore it to military configuration!



Lynn

[Robbie Stuart]

Sorry if my comment went the wrong way. I meant by not historic it was not a contributor to WWII, and I do feel the plane would cost way more than its worth to get flying. It is sad, but these old birds are just sooo expensive to maintain now days... Only the most collectible aircraft are financially viable.

I'm trying to understand your desire to be invovled with Warbirds. 90% of your posts do nothing but paint an extreamly negative picture of warbirds talking about how they aren't worth the money, the hobby is dying, and people shouldn't waste their time. It all may very well be true, but if it is, why are you bothering? Can you tell us a little bit more about this restoration project you are working on? I'm curious what type of project it is that is motivating you to waste your time.

Ryan

Found a photo of the poster in question:



Setting the opinion of Debbie Downer aside for a moment, here's a photo which others might find interesting... taken by Ralph Morse of LIFE in August/Sept 1941 during the Louisiana Maneuvers. This alone would be a great excuse to have a B-23 and restore it to military configuration!



Lynn

That's a great shot. I really enjoyed crewing our ole CAF bird back in the early 80's. Pilot's loved it, plenty of power, & quite fun to fly.
Robbie
Former Crew Chief N62G

[hercules130]

The Dragon served important state side missions, such as training, coastal patrol, and cargo/personnel transport duties - a contribution to the war effort.

I am not sure but did she not see service in the Canal zone as well?

[davem]

I think the B-23 is very collectable, if I had the space in my hangar I certainly would seriously look at purchasing at the listed price.

If anyone is in the warbird movement to make money, they need to give their head a shake. Rarely does an 'investment' in any aircraft pay off, warbirds are very expensive to obtain and maintain and if you think you can buy a project, restore it and make an honest profit - good luck, it doesn't happen often. The same goes with boats or classic cars...

Warbirds are wonderful, but not as investments generally speaking. As with anything, it's worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

[rwdfresno]

So, does this mean no comment on the questions?

Ryan

Wow, you guys are brutal ! I was just trying to make the other poster feel better about not buying his B-23.

I just feel that if you are going to all the trouble to restore a warbird with limited funds it would be nice to restore one with significant wartime history that when done would provide some revenue. For instance, B-23s are so scarce that it would actually cost way more to restore it than a B-25, B-26, A-26 or similar twin bomber with a little history... Plus, it would be much easier to book airshow appearances with a WWII vet that will provide revenue to keep it flying. I understand you believe warbird collecting/restoring and finances are not related, but they are not un-related either.

Honestly, if that B-23 was free it would still be too much....

Sorry if my comment went the wrong way. I meant by not historic it was not a contributor to WWII, and I do feel the plane would cost way more than its worth to get flying. It is sad, but these old birds are just sooo expensive to maintain now days... Only the most collectible aircraft are financially viable.

I'm trying to understand your desire to be invovled with Warbirds. 90% of your posts do nothing but paint an extreamly negative picture of warbirds talking about how they aren't worth the money, the hobby is dying, and people shouldn't waste their time. It all may very well be true, but if it is, why are you bothering? Can you tell us a little bit more about this restoration project you are working on? I'm curious what type of project it is that is motivating you to waste your time.

Ryan

[warbird51]

Nice a/c no doubt saw her at Hillsboro a few times.

Yes, you did. It was a lot of fun taking the B-23 to the Portland Rose Festival Air Show in the late 80's. We even met a radio operator who flew B-23's during the war.

At least ellice_island_kid won't waste his time and money on a B-23. I guess it's not "cool" enough for him. Come to think of it, maybe we should destroy all the warbirds that doesn't meet his opinion of being worthy of anybody's money and time. That way he won't have to share his distain of any aircraft that he doesn't like.

[Nathan]

Its a good thing the seller is a jerk. The B-23 is not a cool plane, not really historic, and not desirable to collect.

You will be glad the seller blew you off in the long run - it would have been a very bad investment.

Every warbird is valuble. Rather it has combat history or not.