Tue Sep 04, 2007 6:54 am
No the NMUSAF has said nothing about repainting the aircraft. The issue with that whole thing was with another group, not D.T.
Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:02 am
Wait a minute. MustangDriver has said that NMUSAF was copywriting the Memphis Belle name and image so that they could control its use. That came from him after someone he knows that is high up in the museum told him. Huh ? Anyway that's where all this discussion started, it's actually a rehash of an older thread.
Mustangdriver
RwdFresno
Mustangdriver
.And this is why the museum doesn't want David's airraft to carry the name anymore
RwdFresno
My goodness lets not get into that debate again.
Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:00 am
No Rick, remember we found out that the person I know was wrong. That was just a rumor, so I am told.
Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:09 am
Never saw the recant.
That means that we have 78 posts that all fall under the heading of "Oh, nevermind ".
That means that we have 78 posts that all fall under the heading of "Oh, nevermind ".
Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:55 am
Ha Ha, yeah the recant was near the end of that other thread. I was wrong for believing a rumor, although it is true that the museum did buy the rights for the Belle nose art.
Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:01 am
Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:22 am
Let me clear this up a little further. Is the museum happy about the confusion of Tallichet's B-17 with the real Memphis Belle? No. they have a disclaimer on their website about it. However they have not told D.T. that he has to paint his aircraft. I agree that a museum should not h ave that kind of power to tell one what to do with their stuff. But on the other side of this, I think that out of good taste that if a real combat veteran B-17 is around, then another should not be painted in it's markings. However if the aircraft is not around, then do it. Example is the B-17G "Chow Hound" It was lost on a mission during the war. Go ahead and use it's markings on a restored B-17 to honor it. Why restore a B-29 and paint it as the Enola Gay, when the real one is on display in NASM? That is all I meant by this whole thing.
Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:29 am
mustangdriver wrote: Why restore a B-29 and paint it as the Enola Gay, when the real one is on display in NASM? That is all I meant by this whole thing.
To Fly for the movie?
Steve
Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:02 pm
Yeah but when it was like 15 years ago, I think it is time to let it go.
Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:04 pm
mustangdriver wrote:Yeah but when it was like 15 years ago, I think it is time to let it go.
can you say
Tora! Tora! Tora!
Steve
Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:22 pm
Yeah I know Steve, but that was to simulate a whole force of planes, and how many flying kates and Vals are around? The zero was done at a time when very few if any real ones were airworthy. Even now there are only a few real ones around. Here we are talking about one plane. It;s cool that we are not all in agreement, I don't take any of this personel, but as a lesson of what others think. I do think it is an interesting subject.