kalamazookid wrote:
You know, I see where Capt. Grumply makes his points. It is kind of disappointing to see projects like the AT-11/C-45 abandoned when they could have flown. I think the area where we differ is that I think telling the story of local aviation history is every bit as important as telling the larger story. I think the Franklin glider, the B-24 project and the PB4Y are every bit as important, if not more so, than having flyable trainer/liaison aircraft. I might be in the minority with this viewpoint, but if these aircraft and exhibits lead to more visitors, I'm all for it.
I would love to see the C-45 and the AT-11 both fly someday with the Yankee Air Force. If that doesn't happen for the sake of getting the PB4Y and other aircraft indoors however, I'm all for it. Maybe by giving the A-7 and potentially other aircraft away, the museum is doing those particular airframes a service by allowing them to be potentially displayed indoors elsewhere. Although, maybe I'm just an optimist and am missing the point... I can see where it would be frustrating for a member. I was a member for the Air Zoo for a long period of time and when they became more amusement and tourist based, I withdrew my membership. I just hope Yankee doesn't go down the same path and continues to preserve aviation history in the same high quality they have done so with the B-17, B-25, and C-47. Maybe I'm missing the "point", but as long as these aircraft stay airworthy with the museum I will view them as at least a favorably successful story.