deleted post due to arguing

[mustangdriver]

I think that we sort of agree. I think that sometimes that David's Belle is not depicted as what it is, the movie aircraft. Lighting is an issue when the buildings are as large as the ones at the museum. I know that no place is perfect.

[TAdan]

Must've been one heck of an accident! Her wings, rear fuselage and paint all fell off!

Pic from last friday.

[JDK]

Interestingly, there's always been a degree of misrepresentation in the Memphis Belle story, right back to the first film and the reason for the aircraft 'coming home' (First to complete 25 missions? Actually, no.) Read up about it - as ever the truth's given away by the weasel words...

I don't think anyone's likely to have a problem with operating an aircraft painted as Memphis Belle. It's representing it as the Memphis Belle that's the issue.

The general public's very undiscriminating, and it's all-too easy to 'help them along' with a minor misunderstanding and increase the status of the aircraft. I'm sure there's people who 'know' they've touched Gorge Bush's TBM or Douglas Bader's Spitfire at an airshow despite the fact they've been clearly signposted as (only) being 'in the colo(u)rs of...'

Regards,

[TAdan]

Interestingly, there's always been a degree of misrepresentation in the Memphis Belle story, right back to the first film and the reason for the aircraft 'coming home' (First to complete 25 missions? Actually, no.) Read up about it - as ever the truth's given away by the weasel words...

I was glad the museum and tour guide did a very good job of explaining the inaccuracies in the story and that Hells Angels was the first to 25, but that the Belle was simply more famous due to the war time documentary, press, etc.

[JDK]

I was glad the museum and tour guide did a very good job of explaining the inaccuracies in the story and that Hells Angels was the first to 25, but that the Belle was simply more famous due to the war time documentary, press, etc.

Good job. It's a hard job (as I know) to get the story overwith the caveats.

IIRC, the first aircraft Wyler focussed on was lost before completing the tour, and the team also lost a photographer in another aircraft. It really was tough, but in this case, despite death, the show needed to go on too. They then 'bet' on the Belle, but awkwardly for Wyler & Co, another aircraft, whose name is known to historians (but not the public) came in with 25 down first. Because of the film, Belle and crew got to go and do the tour; so the correct statement is 'the Belle was the first B-17 to fly 25 missions and then go home.'

[TAdan]

Because of the film, Belle and crew got to go and do the tour; so the correct statement is 'the Belle was the first B-17 to fly 25 missions and then go home.'

That is exactly what the tour guide said

[Jack Cook]

We should start a campaign to get Tallichet to repaint his has "H*ll's Angel"!!!

[Jerry O'Neill]

I was glad the museum and tour guide did a very good job of explaining the inaccuracies in the story and that Hells Angels was the first to 25, but that the Belle was simply more famous due to the war time documentary, press, etc.

Good job. It's a hard job (as I know) to get the story overwith the caveats.

IIRC, the first aircraft Wyler focussed on was lost before completing the tour, and the team also lost a photographer in another aircraft. It really was tough, but in this case, despite death, the show needed to go on too. They then 'bet' on the Belle, but awkwardly for Wyler & Co, another aircraft, whose name is known to historians (but not the public) came in with 25 down first. Because of the film, Belle and crew got to go and do the tour; so the correct statement is 'the Belle was the first B-17 to fly 25 missions and then go home.'

Of course, once the "Belle" made "the grade" for the documentary, many additional scenes were then shot of the crew, both in the air and on the ground, to help in editing and to tell the story better. Why waste all the footage on the crew if they were lost before the "Belle" made the magic mark!
Jerry

[bipe215]

I was glad the museum and tour guide did a very good job of explaining the inaccuracies in the story and that Hells Angels was the first to 25, but that the Belle was simply more famous due to the war time documentary, press, etc.

Good job. It's a hard job (as I know) to get the story overwith the caveats.

IIRC, the first aircraft Wyler focussed on was lost before completing the tour, and the team also lost a photographer in another aircraft. It really was tough, but in this case, despite death, the show needed to go on too. They then 'bet' on the Belle, but awkwardly for Wyler & Co, another aircraft, whose name is known to historians (but not the public) came in with 25 down first. Because of the film, Belle and crew got to go and do the tour; so the correct statement is 'the Belle was the first B-17 to fly 25 missions and then go home.'

Of course, once the "Belle" made "the grade" for the documentary, many additional scenes were then shot of the crew, both in the air and on the ground, to help in editing and to tell the story better. Why waste all the footage on the crew if they were lost before the "Belle" made the magic mark!
Jerry

Don't forget that the Belle did not have the same complete crew for all 25 missions either.

Steve G

[gregv]

We should start a campaign to get Tallichet to repaint his has "H*ll's Angel"!!!

Speaking of copyrights, there might be some issue with using that name as well....

gv

[APG85]

For us that are die hard aviation people, we all know which B-17 it was that was involved in the accident. But for the common person, all they know is that there is a B-17 named memphis Belle. As far as the belle nose art on the aircraft, the NMUSAF has stated that they have the rights to them both. We can sit here and argue for ever, but usually if the original warbird is around, you don't see another painted the same way. This airplane is time and time again advertised as the real Belle, and I don't think it is right. I have family members who have told me about being in the real Memphis Belle and they were in David's aircraft. NOT the real thing. The people that advertise it at shows, sometimes don't go as far to tell people that this is not the real thing as well. I just think that it is a respect thing. I have worked on both of the aircraft. And would just prefer to see David's painted in a different paint scheme so that it is a non issue.

I completely agree!! Isn't Tallichets's plane a B-17G? Why is it set up as an F model anyway (seems odd IMO). P.S. I think the NMUSAF is perfectly lit for the way the aircraft are displayed...

[Nathan]

Hi all,

May I make a suggestion? Can we just get along here? Had I known this would have started a heated debate I wouldn't have posted it. It's my fault and I want to say I am sorry.

[Mike]

I completely agree!! Isn't Tallichets's plane a B-17G? Why is it set up as an F model anyway (seems odd IMO).

Because of the movie in 1989, when it played the part of the 'Belle'.

[aerovin]

Re: N3703G--just to amplify, the mods to make it resemble an "F" were started long before the movie was ever conceived. The chin patch turret patch was removed and a tail "stinger" replaced the "Cheyenne" pumpkin tail back in the early 1980s. There were several in the Tallichet group who wanted the airplane rebuilt to an "F" configuration partly because there was but one other "F" out there potentially flying (N17W). The longer blown nose glass was added later. It looks pretty good as an "F".

As for the USAFM and "protecting" the name: good luck with that. Too much effort for too little result and just leaving a bad impression all around.

Last edited by aerovin on Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[APG85]

I completely agree!! Isn't Tallichets's plane a B-17G? Why is it set up as an F model anyway (seems odd IMO).

Because of the movie in 1989, when it played the part of the 'Belle'.

Oh, yea. Thanks...