JDK wrote:
Gentlemen - The word is 'conserve', rather than 'restore' or even 'dust'.
There's a lot more than dusting down etc. to retaining originality - and that's to do with ensuring that the degradation of the artefact is slowed as far as possible* for as long as possible while retaining as much of the original material in as original condition as possible. Given the originality of the aircraft, I don't think we need worry about them giving it a coat of fresh paint ~ after a good strip.
Now should this apply to say, the NASM Ta-152, which received one or more coats of paint after it was captured and evaluated--and which has gone through some amount of deterioration in storage? (And the Horten is pretty awful shape, too.)
I have a book on the restoration of the Fw190A-8 and I was impressed with how much work was put into it, including stripping the original paint and painting it in the best representation of colors it wore during it's combat history. The final result is a gleaming example inside and out-more than just "pickled" as-is. I hope the Ta-152 is given the same amount of work, including sanding through layers of paint and infrared photography to finalize the original identity, colors, and markings. (For that matter, I think the D-9 in Dayton could use some freshening up, too.)