F-82 cockpit photos

Steve · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:25 pm

Does anyone have photos of the CAF F-82 cockpits

Thanks

Steve

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:32 pm

You mean the AF's :shock:

RickH · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:34 pm

I'm with Jack ! I'm not sure Gen Metcalf allows interior pictures of his F-82.

Steve · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:36 pm

Right you are Jack.

I'm still calling it Confederate Air Force now I guess I can drop the Confederate all together

Steve

cozmo · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:41 pm

Steve wrote:

I guess I can drop the Confederate all together

Steve

Why not, the CAF did years ago. :hide:

eagle21 · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:10 pm

ANY photos of ANY part of ANY F-82 (OR P-82) EVER taken are property of the USAF and must be turned in or destroyed five minutes ago, if not sooner. :lol:

Just kidding, but still annoyed at the attitude the NMUSAF has been taking lately. It is hard to believe that those guys are representing MY Air Force. In MY Air Force we used to like airplanes that flew.

JMC [/img][/code]

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:21 pm

The P-82 is still wrapped up how it was shipped to the museum. I really haven't heard anything. Not to sound smart or go into it again and open a can of worms, but there is a group here that loves to trash the NMUSAF and NMNA when possible. Even when these places have done nothing wrong, or acted as they saw fit, others just wish to complain. There is a very long thread on here all about the A-25 that the NMUSAF hacked apart with chain saws and axes. and several pages of people complaining and slinging dirt even to the point of wanting to pull their status as a national museum. After all the yelling, it was found out that it was never hacked apart. Of course no one cares about that, it was just a chance to trash talk the place. Now this P-82 stuff, came about, part of the story was told here, and others bash the museum as usual. As a friend of many CAF members, and then later a CAF member myself I had many conversations about the aircraft, and many times I was told that the NMUSAF owned it and that was back in the 1995 time frame!! THe NMUSAF thought they owned it, the CAF thought they owned it, it had it's day in court, and the court sided with the NMUSAF. IF the CAF won there would be a ton of people here poking fun at the NMUSAF. But that didn't happen. So now we have to hear how bad the museum is for taking an airplane they own back. Do I like everything that they do in Dayton? NO. Do they have some issues? You bet. Every group does. But reading jab after jab about the same old stuff in every thread gets old.

Maybe it is easier for me to stand up for the NMUSAF because I actually go there. To me it is not a faceless name. I have many friends that I made there, and have had so many great times. If that means that I am drinking the koolaide, than I am sorry. If sticking up for them in this matter makes me bad, than I am sorry for that too. I saw a museum stand up and do somehting that anyone of us would do if we thought it was happening to our property. AS for static vs. flying, you guys know my view. We need BOTH.

ANd I am in no way saying anything bad about the CAF. The CAF is a group that started the whole warbird movement and they deserve to take pride in that. I have many great memories that involve CAF members and planes. This whole thing was just a bad situation.

RickH · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:40 pm

Hey, Chris, I've been there. Spent some time figuring out how we're going to get the F105 loaded up ! :twisted:

Taylor Stevenson · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:52 pm

mustangdriver wrote:

Not to sound smart or go into it again and open a can of worms, but there is a group here that loves to trash the NMUSAF and NMNA when possible. Even when these places have done nothing wrong, or acted as they saw fit, others just wish to complain.

Replace NMUSAF and NMNA with CAF and that statement is also true...

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:56 pm

Oh I agree and never knew that until sort of recent. I try and post positive about things, and look for the good and things, I guess. I try not to bash an organization or it's members. This whole thing was just an ugly mess for all.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:57 pm

RickH wrote:

Hey, Chris, I've been there. Spent some time figuring out how we're going to get the F105 loaded up ! :twisted:

Were you shocked to find the lack of names painted all over Shoo Shoo Baby? :lol:

retroaviation · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:19 pm

The cockpits were pretty well stripped when I saw them in Midland.

Gary

RickH · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:55 pm

Nope, wasn't shocked at all. You see, a dead static airplane that will never fly again doesn't need continual financial support to keep it in the air. Also while Shoo Shoo Baby is a static memorial to those who flew her, 909 allows loved ones to directly honor their heros by keeping one flying !

While I looked at everything, I was on a short timeline. It is an impressive museum, and well it should be. I had to spend some time measuring the door and the exhibits that have been strategicly placed around the 105 in an obvious attempt to thwart our efforts. But I figure I can snake it out of there, maybe I'll use the Navy towbar, and the USAF tug we got out of the USAF DRMO !

Steve · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:58 pm

I didn't mean to open a can of worms.

All I wanted to know is how the throttle and prop controls were laid out.

Steve

RickH · **Posted:** Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:09 pm

Alright, I'll quit....

Rick puts sharp stick away for use at a later date..... :roll:

Warbird Information Exchange

F-82 cockpit photos

Who is online