Warbird Information Exchange

There was a 336 EFS F-15E painted with it in 2003. Originally the crew chief (who was a Memphis native) named it "MB III", but I indicated to him that there had been several other aircraft carrying the name, and this jet was not the third one.

Later it was renamed "IX", so I'm wondering if there have been 8 others?

With all due respect Sabredriver, what annoys people can be very subjective. I personally find myself being annoyed by constant posts which are only links to threads on other discussion boards, YouTube videos or Ebay auctions. I accept that this is just my own irritation, and I don't criticise those who post such threads.

It is only when people presume that what they don't like happens to be what everybody doesn't like (and that a personal attack can be mounted against those who disagree) that I figure that there is a gap between what is preached and what is practiced. It is unfair to assume that what annoys you is what annoys everyone.

The beauty of discussion boards is that they allow people to discuss things. It could be perceived as arrogant and unfair to decide that people are 'mad mad mad' because they don't hold the same views that you do. That sort of behaviour could be seen as an annoying 'antic'.

To get back to the topic, I personally like what David Tallichet has done. It doesn't really bother me that 44-83546 is painted to resemble 41-24485, but it may bother some. It's a free world, we're all allowed to have personal preferences.

Unless I am able to travel half way around the world, I'll almost certainly never see a Flying Fortress in the air (or on the ground for that matter). I'm just happy that they fly somewhere.

Cheers,
Matt

You know, ya'll are probably missing the main reason that Tallichet's B-17 is still in the Belle's markings so long after the movie.

The movie paid to paint the aircraft, David likes the notoriety and as long as the paint holds up he won't spend the money for a repaint. Maybe he's waiting for another movie gig for a new repaint ?

44-83546 is one of my favorites.
She has been repainted since the movie, I think it's about 10 years ago now.
Before and after photos below.
Top photo taken at Scranton, PA. Lower at Geneseo NY.
Wouldn't mind at all if she gets another movie role.

Bill

_________________
Bill


Website

The last time I saw Memphis Belle in her old movie paint was in 1998 at the Wings of Eagles airshow in Elmira NY. The paint was heavily chipped. Although it looked kinda cool like that. Right after that it must have been repainted becasue the next year at the 1999 airshow it was in new paint and markings. So somewhere between 1998 and 1999 the movie Belle was repainted. I got pics of before and after. I guess I will ahve to dig them out.

I know I have said that I like to see authentic markings and paint on warbirds. Well, the movie Memphis Belle is an exception. Since it is a movie plane still in her movie paint I'd consider it ok. Besides, arn't most warbirds today in a paint scheme representing a different plane?


Food for thought,\
Nathan

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

Looked great in worn paint!

Cheers,
Matt

Hi Randy,

Here's Number 5, C-141 67-0074

The first photo is actually nose art that I painted.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

What happened to the flying Belle? I did not read a desciption of the accident.

Quick, someone send a note to Genl. Metcalf ! Mustang Driver has gone behind his back and been personally involved in perpetuating this Memphis Belle confusion !!

Ha Ha! Good one. I don't think that everyone thinks that I am off about this, I think I was misunderstood. I just think that if a real combat veteran is restored or being restored, then when painting a privately owned warbird, just avoid making it the same plane. Tat way we avoid all of the confusion, honor the real one for what it is, and enjoy the other for what it is. There is no disrespect meant here, and I hope that no one took it as such. As for the nose art, I painted it in the late 1990's.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

Good grief chaps! Any bloody fool could tell that DT's 17 isn't the REAL Belle just by checking the serial #'s on the carbs!




& I think RickH nailed the reason it hasn't been repainted...

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.

Well as far as I being in good taste, bad taste I think that is all up to personal opinion. I think what really gets people fired up about things is when thoughts of the government trying to "decide" what people paint or don't paint on their aircraft. The fact is, it is none of the governments business, and trying to circumvent public domain precedents for whatever reason isn't very ethical.

Heck I don't even like Tallichet and I am on his side on this issue.

Ryan

Before we get "wrapped 'round the axle" here and find another subject we can
no longer discuss...Who said the Gubmint was actively trying to prohibit DaveT's "Belle"
from displaying her colors? Reading this thread, I didn't get the impression that
Mustangdriver made it clear whether it was his and/or members of NMUSAF
opinion we were dealing with...or the NMUSAF admin. action?
Did I miss something?

_________________
He bowls overhand...He is the most interesting man in the world.
"In Peace Japan Breeds War", Eckstein, Harper and Bros., 3rd ed. 1943(1927, 1928,1942)
"Leave it to ol' Slim. I got ideas...and they're all vile, baby." South Dakota Slim
"Ahh..."The Deuce", 28,000 pounds of motherly love." quote from some Mojave Grunt
DBF

I asked the same question a few posts back and never got an answer. Has anyone any evidence that this is official NMUSAF policy?