Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Thu May 15, 2025 12:33 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:22 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:34 pm
Posts: 2923
Quote:
Airpower Museum Escapes Demolition by Federal Aviation Administration

Lawmakers worked to prevent demolition at Airpower Museum John Rizzo

FAA will work with the New York State Department of Transportation to preserve the museum and comply with national safety regulations.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) plans to meet national safety standards by demolishing two hangars at Republic Airport, one of which houses the American Airpower Museum, have been scraped due to community resistance and the work of local lawmakers.
“The FAA does not have the legal authority to compel the [airport] to demolish the structure," said Catherine Lang, acting associate administrator for airports at the FAA, in a letter. "You have helped reinforce and highlight the point that many interested parties oppose demolition."
The FAA was going to demolish the hangers in order to expand the runway and meet other safety criteria dictated by Congress's Runway Safety Program, statutes mandated for all airports providing commercial services. According to Lang, the hanger the museum occupies at Republic Airport prevents the airport from complying with three minimum safety standards involving runway space.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, and Rep. Steve Israel, D- Huntington, responded by drafting language for a FAA reauthorization bill that would state that the FAA has the authority to use federal funds to relocate the museum, instead of demolishing it. They also contacted New York State’s Historic Preservation Office to designate the hangar eligible for the National Registry of Historic Places.
According to the offices of the local legislators, the FAA originally said it did not have the authority to utilize funding from the federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) to move the museum, but was permitted under statute to demolish the structure.
Lang's recent letter said federal funds could in fact be used, under the AIP, to relocate the hanger and that no new legislative provisions are necessary to establish AIP eligibility.
“This a monumental win for not only Long Island, but for veterans across the country and the proud aviation history of our armed services,” Schumer said.
The airport is currently under review required by the National Environmental Policy Act, after which the FAA will work with the New York State Department of Transportation to determine how to meet both the safety standards and preserve the museum.
Lang said there is an alternative that could satisfy the safety standards without impacting the museum's current location involving the installation of Engineered Materials Arresting System beds and a minor runway alteration, but more analysis is required before that solution is enacted.
At Monday's announcement about the plan change, Schumer and Israel were joined by Josephine Raichele of West Babylon, who worked at the hangar when it was manufacturing the P-47 Thunderbolt, the primary fighter aircraft during World War II.
“The work of Long Islanders helped win us World War II and the Cold War, and the American Airpower Museum enshrines that history," Israel said. "We’re not just preserving a building, we’re preserving history."

Found it here:
http://farmingdale.patch.com/articles/a ... nistration


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:35 pm 
Offline
Account Suspended
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:06 pm
Posts: 2713
Glad to see this come to a happy end!.. for now

The EMAS system is utilized at LGA. Basically a softened concrete that turns to powdery gravel if a plane were to run over it.., thus preventing the aircraft from either going into the drink or onto the highway.

Perhaps Midway should look into this?
:shock:
S.

_________________
S.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:20 pm
Posts: 855
Location: Lincoln, California
It is so rare that the general media gets something correct about aviation. The FAA does not demolish hangars. The FAA requires that certain airports have obstacle free areas around an airport's runways if it is to meet certain standards. The airport operator can choose to meet those standards however they want to...move the runway, close the runway, move the hangars, demolish the hangars, etc. Some standards have been tightened, evidently, thus causing this action. The point of what was done here is that the FAA found out from its boss that trust fund airport money could be used to the move the hangars. The operator of the Republic Airport holds the future of the hangars in its hands, not the FAA.

But, then again, I was informed by the article that the P-47 was "the primary fighter aircraft during World War II," which will be good to know.

_________________
Scott Thompson
Aero Vintage Books
http://www.aerovintage.com
WIX Subscriber Since July 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 936
Location: Deer Park, NY
The AAM's Hangar #3 is about 250' to the displaced threshold of Rwy 19. At the opposite end, Rwy 1, there is only about 500' of overrun and then you are on Rt109 with businesses beyond it. They don't want to 'extend' the runway. What they want to do is basically slide it north where they have plenty of room, thus resulting in more overrun on the south (Rwy1) end, and the approach end of Rwy 19 now on top of what is the displaced threshold. This will result in aircraft in the landing flare only 250 feet from the museum. Add the fact that there is a high amount of student pilots and a predominantly right crosswind toward the hangars, and you get the picture.

If you look at aerial pics of the field, you will see that 1-19 has a slight angle into Hangars #2 and #3. That part of the airport has not been modified since WW2. Hangar #2 dates back to 1928 when it was a grass field! AJ2's Grumman/Republic thread has pics of the hangars in it's heyday.

I'm still not sure what the end result will be, can they move that 1943 hangar lock stock and barrel? Or build a new one elsewhere on the field? We'll see. In any case those hangars are the last remnants of Republic Aviation, are historic in their own right and I'd hate to see them demo'd.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:55 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:10 pm
Posts: 3245
Location: New York
One of the nice things about the museum location now is that on a day when things are flying, visitors are closer to the action than typical airshow distances; you can get tight shots of fighters landing on 19 with lenses in the 200mm to 300mm range. Of course, this is exactly the problem. However they resolve it, we should enjoy the present situation while it lasts.

August


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:54 pm
Posts: 326
Location: Little Rock, AR
Hey guys-

EMAS is a wonderful solution for something like this. Most air carrier runways have to have 1000' of safety area off each end, but you are allowed to reduce the amount to around 600' if you have an EMAS in place. It's a great way to reduce the amount of land needed for safety areas without having to buy a bunch of (suddenly expensive) property outside the fence, if you're lengthening the runway. It can be expensive as heck but it's worth it.

And I think Midway installed one after that SW incident a few years ago...

Cheers-

Brandon

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], kalamazookid, Warbird Kid and 315 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group