Warbird Information Exchange

When I looked over the NMNA "Zero" back in '05, I had never heard the of the legendary Mr. Diemert, but even I could see "that thing ain't right" (to paraphrase Hank Hill.) Not only were the wing root bulges quite prominent, but the wing appeared to be built up around a BT-13 center section (the multitude of circular inspection panels were a dead giveaway, along with the fact that there was an SNV hangning nearby for comparison.)

I'm not complaining..it's certainly better than no Zero at all. I've seen sort-of restorations of "real" aircraft that looked worse.

SN

In fairness guys, there seem to be reasons why NHC has their hands tied as well as leftovers from previous situations... From what I understand, they'd still be happy to trade if certain issues could be worked out.

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

The only "trades" that I've seen the Navy "work out" have been 2 or 3 of the Lake Michigan recoveries that were traded for the work that AT and T did for their recovery services. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not aware of any other W.W. II aircraft trades in recent times, despite several warbird owners wanting to work out deals.

I'm sure the "certain issues" could be worked out given an unlimited amount of money. How about an environmental impact study costing hundreds of thousands of dollars for starters. We haven't even begun the recovery yet. My point is, sure anything can be worked out, but the Navy has made it so unbearable that it would cost many, many more times than the subsequent recovery and restoration would cost. In other words, the Navy (NHC) has made it so extremely lop-sided that it's not even funny.