RickH wrote:
Nope, I think its great that it is finally being taken care of the way it should have been all along. If mgmt had not decided that they wanted the other two airplanes then the B-24 would still be sitting on the parade ground at Lackland.
Now if we could get the people who "control " (their words ) all of these other priceless relics to think about long term preservation ( other than those that are actually at Dayton ) it would be great. Replace the real ones with fiberglass the way that the Brits did with the Spitfires, do something please, but get them out of the weather. There are aircraft that have no business out in the weather but they continue to be allowed to deteriorate. Why is a real former flying P-38 allowed to sit outside on a pole. Most people couldn't teel the difference from a real one to a fiberglass replica. Why not sell or trade said aircraft to someone who would care for it , expend mass amponts of funding on it, and preserve it for generations in its own element ? The NMUSAF would then have large amounts of cashflow to enhance further the main museum.
By General Metcalf's own admission they "control" over 3000 aircraft ! This is ridiculous, they can't possibly oversee that many aircraft successfully, and the condition of many reflect the curren t policies.
No, I don'think I would care for any of their "KoolAid", thanks anyway, I prefer my own drink. We get aircraft and make them fly in spite of the other guys policies !
Rick I know that you are not a fan of the NMUSAF because of the deal with the F-105, but when taking on a project like that you have to understad that there is a chance that the museum would be against it. They are very careful when dealing aircraft of a higher technology than the piston aircraft. You are angry about the way that they did it, but if you had a chance to do the same to get the aircraft, you would of. I think what you guys do is great. I have many hours working on "909" as well. Both museums are important the flying and non flying. The NMUSAF keeps to use your stats 3,000 aircraft on static display. Remember that some museums are made up of only what is on loan to them from national air museums. We do our best, and are improving the conditions of many of these aricraft. There is also alot of politics involved. Anytime we tell a local group or air museum that they need to improve the status of the aircraft, or that we are going to remove it from their custody, we have a fight with the local government, lawyers, and it gives us more bad P.R. Just for doing what you are saying we should do. I do agree with you that fiberglass replicas should replace most of the gate guards with the exception(maybe) of the P-38 at Mcguire AFB. That aircraft is cared for to high standards, and is a source of moral for the guys at that baase. If these planes come off of gate guard duty, they are most likely going to be static display in museums because they are still owned by the national museums. Remeber that the NMUSAF had a very cool way to deal with people that wanted aircraft, until that was abused. I was there to see it first hand.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
..."Hey Gary! Man, you should take a break. You deserve it. Oh, by the way, we reeeeeaaly wish you'd get that thing done so that we can fly it." My answer is pretty much the same as always...I'm trying. (But in reality, during this past week, I've just been struggling with staying focused on the project. Maybe I'll get my mind back into it soon. I know that lots and lots of folks are relying on me.)
Perhaps I'll be able to give y'all short photo update later today or early tomorrow.
