Taras wrote:
I do not represent the National Naval Aviation Museum in any way, shape or form.
Yes, I realize that Taras. Since you work closely with them, I just thought you might have an insider perspective on why they do things that seemingly don't make sense to us outsiders.
Taras wrote:
It is my belief that they represent the 300 million or so Americans that would like to see the airplanes. There are many museums in their system that wish to display SBD’s, Wildcats, and others, but there just aren’t enough of any of the aircraft. There for sure isn’t enough money to do all that every museum would like. So, I think, they weigh all their options and assess their resources to try to present the best they can to the American public.
I would expect them to do that. I just don't understand why they don't sell one or two of their aircraft. The new civilian owner could make a PR campaign out of their newly acquired Lake Michigan bird and thank the U.S. Navy and Naval Museum for their cooperation, etc through interviews, aviation articles and displays while the aircraft participate at airshows. Just think how many people could be exposed to the Lake Michigan/Naval Museum story by displaying a Wildcat or SBD at Oshkosh or Reno or wherever. It could get 100's of thousands of eyes, perhaps more for a televised event. It just seems that a flying "history display" could really reach out and touch more people than being contained in the Pensacola back lot, out of sight and not seen by many people.
Taras wrote:
We may not always agree with the way they do things, but they have really done an outstanding job.
I agree 100%. I'm a big supporter of their Museum and it's really fantastic everything they have done. No arguments there!
Taras wrote:
As for this airplane (Otay SB2C), I would think they want to add it to the “American” public collection without having to remove other important aircraft from that collection.
Perhaps, but really how many SBD's does the Navy need to tell the story of the Battle of Midway? They have, what, like 7 to 10 of those birds? It wouldn't kill them to sell 1 or 2. The Wildcat is not a rare airplane, at least as much as the SBD. I think it would probably get more money on the open market. They have multiples of them as well. I could understand if they didn't want to part with a Hellcat (very rare) or a birdcage Corsair (extremely rare) or something along those lines, but SBD's and F4F's? Added to this, I'm assuming there are many, many more SBD's and F4F's that haven't been recovered, right? Is 1 or 2 being sold off going to kill the Museum when they have a potential for 20 or 30 with future recoveries?
Taras wrote:
For awhile there was a trading program, it seemed to rely on what the Federal Government was willing to release; things such as helicopters and more modern aircraft were common, but it seemed to turn in to a lot of red tape.
HHHmmm, I wonder if this is the real reason why they haven't released any Lake Michigan birds, except for those 2 Wildcats? With all the bureaucratic red tape and political in-fighting over control of the airplanes, is this the real reason? I thought most of that had been resolved with the new NHC (or whatever it's called these days) and the "New Sheriff" in town.
Keep in mind, Taras, my rant is not directed at you. It's just frustrating to us outsiders when the Naval Museum claims they have no money when they have an easy solution in sight - they could sell some of their multiples of SBD's, F4F's, TBM's, etc. Also, another approach might be to "auction off" the rights to recover the Lake birds? They could make a HUGE killing off of that. I have talked to several warbird owners in the past who would put up serious money if they knew they could get a clear, unencumbered, unrestricted title from the Navy for those planes. Put in the stipulation that only A&T would be authorized to do the recovery, so you know it would be done professionally and safely, and you could safeguard measures to protect the plane.
I guess all of us have been frustrated in the past because:
1) the old NHC policies were totally asinine and made no sense
2) the Navy has done a huge disservice to itself in the past with it's bungling of past recovery operations
3) the Navy is not very good at public relations/communications when it comes to explaining it's policies and decisions regarding the Lake birds.
All of that has changed with the new leadership. I certainly support the Navy, Pensacola, and all of their efforts at recovery. And, we all support you, Taras - you are an excellent spokesperson for the recovery of underwater airplanes. I salute all of your hard work and dedication to preserve our Heritage, and I hope you are able to continue - whether you are doing it for profit or not, it doesn't matter. The fact that these priceless pieces of history can now be restored and preserved is all that matters.
Thanks, Taras, for your valuable inputs here as well as keeping us informed on what is going on.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
