Shoo Shoo Shoo Baby B-17

Glen · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2007 11:55 pm

What is the latest on the Restoration of the Belle ? Have they made that much head way on her ? Dose anybody have updated pictures ?

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:01 am

She has been made the center of attention in the shop. The rear fuselage has been stripped inside and out. It looks like it did when it was on the factory line. Corrosion is turning out to be not as bad as expected. Wings are in good shape, there is corrosion around the skin of the ball turret, but it looks like most of the original skin is going to be just fine. The forward fuselage and cockpit are next on the list to be stripped. I have not been in the shop for a little while, so that might have been started already.

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:32 am

great completion & display plans, it's evident alot of fore thought went into them!!!

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:51 am

If there was ever a U.S. military owned and operated warbird, wouldnt Shoo Shoo Baby be it? I mean if that was the case.

Or could we see some of the other Air Force base collections become airborne? Well, I mean, these collections have ALOT of aircraft in them. So obiviouslly even if some way, the museums had the funding, drive, and ok to go along with it, what could we see brought back to the air?

Im guessing, more than likely the heavy Bombers would be the first. But again there is a big "To Do" list before hand.

TAdan · **Posted:** Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:07 am

[quote="Warbird Kid"]If there was ever a U.S. military owned and operated warbird, wouldnt Shoo Shoo Baby be it? I mean if that was the case.

quote]

QF-4's. :wink:

I do know what you mean though.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:06 am

It's not so much a matter of funding, but one of goals of the museums. That military museums are mainly goaled at restoring examples of their aircraft, vehicles, and weapons for future generations to study. Their goal is not to fly them. Ther has been much discussion on where Shoo Shoo baby is going after the Belle is put out on display. The answer is no where. She is staying at the NMUSAF in Dayton and indoors. The big question is which building is she going to be in. I talked to some of the guys on the board, and the decission is yet to be made as to if the Belle or the baby will be in the WWII Gallery, and which will be in the Conference Center Hall(which will be open to the public). I think that some of the aircraft that are gate guards at different places should be restored to static display, or when possible sold to someone that would operate them in flying display. But as for the museums that are static, there is nothing wrong with staying that way. The National Museums should not fly their collections.
As for warbird kids question, I have mxed feelings about it. I want to see the most complete restorations possible, and if that involves bringing it all the way to flight status, then cool beans.

RMAllnutt · **Posted:** Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:17 am

Jack Cook wrote:

No bashing in any way. The AFM is a awesome place!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I tjust hink that using airworthy components for a museum display
is wasteful of these precious resource. They can do wonderful
work with non-airworthy compnents. A perfect example are EVGs P-38 and 2 ME-109s. All 3 restored to impeciable standards and never to fly.
That's a waste

Especially as so much original material was discarded!

Richard

ZeamerB17 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:16 am

I'm all for flying the warbirds. I cringe whenever one is crashed, however. History is lost, not to mention the human toll.
Just think how you'd feel if they flew the Belle or Shoo Shoo, or, say Boeing Bee and something happened. Wouldn't be quite so cool, then.

Dave

Warbird Information Exchange

Shoo Shoo Shoo Baby B-17

Who is online