Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:17 pm
once again, another question from the uninformed..
has anyone thought to attempt to salvage Kee Birds original engines, or the rebuilt ones that were installed before the takeoff attempt? or were those the same unreliable variants that you're already dealing with?
B
has anyone thought to attempt to salvage Kee Birds original engines, or the rebuilt ones that were installed before the takeoff attempt? or were those the same unreliable variants that you're already dealing with?
B
Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:35 pm
This was a thoughtful question....I certainly don't have all the answers about the cost/reward issue with Fifi. I will say that she is the Queen of the Fleet, and, when flying, generates significant income...in overall impact on the CAF I would venture to say that we benefit to the tune of a half to almost a million bucks a year because of a flying Fifi. Membership increased dramatically, units that host Fifi prosper, the B-29/B-24 Squadron prospers, and the entire CAF gets publicity/exposure that simply can't be bought at any price.
I have, like Gary, and like ALL members of the General Staff, great sympathy for units in the CAF struggling to maintain/restore their own airplanes. However, the impact of a B-29 vs even another Mustang is so much greater. With limited dollars it is only prudent business sense to put those dollars to use where they will generate the most return.
As an example of the impact Fifi can have, I recall that in the late 1990's, the B-29/B-24 Squadron was approached by the organizers of the Paris Airshow. A million dollars was dangled as the all-time greatest "appearance fee" that I believe any CAF airplane was promised if we could have flown the Atlantic and been at the Paris show. Unfortunately, engine problems (surprise, surprise) ended that particular episode. Whether the CAF would have allowed the airplane to fly to France is another issue. The B-24 did go to England so there was precedent...
Gary has done incredible amounts of legwork/headwork/hands-on work to make Fifi a reliable airplane that, given the right (Wright?) engines, will grace the skies again. He's explained the hybrid engine idea to me, he's checked with all who are potentially involved in the effort...it will work. I wish the two million dollars would have appeared, but I think we can say now we are able to begin the project in a meaningful way.
Old Shep
I have, like Gary, and like ALL members of the General Staff, great sympathy for units in the CAF struggling to maintain/restore their own airplanes. However, the impact of a B-29 vs even another Mustang is so much greater. With limited dollars it is only prudent business sense to put those dollars to use where they will generate the most return.
As an example of the impact Fifi can have, I recall that in the late 1990's, the B-29/B-24 Squadron was approached by the organizers of the Paris Airshow. A million dollars was dangled as the all-time greatest "appearance fee" that I believe any CAF airplane was promised if we could have flown the Atlantic and been at the Paris show. Unfortunately, engine problems (surprise, surprise) ended that particular episode. Whether the CAF would have allowed the airplane to fly to France is another issue. The B-24 did go to England so there was precedent...
Gary has done incredible amounts of legwork/headwork/hands-on work to make Fifi a reliable airplane that, given the right (Wright?) engines, will grace the skies again. He's explained the hybrid engine idea to me, he's checked with all who are potentially involved in the effort...it will work. I wish the two million dollars would have appeared, but I think we can say now we are able to begin the project in a meaningful way.
Old Shep
Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:36 pm
This was a thoughtful question....I certainly don't have all the answers about the cost/reward issue with Fifi. I will say that she is the Queen of the Fleet, and, when flying, generates significant income...in overall impact on the CAF I would venture to say that we benefit to the tune of a half to almost a million bucks a year because of a flying Fifi. Membership increased dramatically, units that host Fifi prosper, the B-29/B-24 Squadron prospers, and the entire CAF gets publicity/exposure that simply can't be bought at any price.
I have, like Gary, and like ALL members of the General Staff, great sympathy for units in the CAF struggling to maintain/restore their own airplanes. However, the impact of a B-29 vs even another Mustang is so much greater. With limited dollars it is only prudent business sense to put those dollars to use where they will generate the most return.
As an example of the impact Fifi can have, I recall that in the late 1990's, the B-29/B-24 Squadron was approached by the organizers of the Paris Airshow. A million dollars was dangled as the all-time greatest "appearance fee" that I believe any CAF airplane was promised if we could have flown the Atlantic and been at the Paris show. Unfortunately, engine problems (surprise, surprise) ended that particular episode. Whether the CAF would have allowed the airplane to fly to France is another issue. The B-24 did go to England so there was precedent...
Gary has done incredible amounts of legwork/headwork/hands-on work to make Fifi a reliable airplane that, given the right (Wright?) engines, will grace the skies again. He's explained the hybrid engine idea to me, he's checked with all who are potentially involved in the effort...it will work. I wish the two million dollars would have appeared, but I think we can say now we are able to begin the project in a meaningful way.
Old Shep
I have, like Gary, and like ALL members of the General Staff, great sympathy for units in the CAF struggling to maintain/restore their own airplanes. However, the impact of a B-29 vs even another Mustang is so much greater. With limited dollars it is only prudent business sense to put those dollars to use where they will generate the most return.
As an example of the impact Fifi can have, I recall that in the late 1990's, the B-29/B-24 Squadron was approached by the organizers of the Paris Airshow. A million dollars was dangled as the all-time greatest "appearance fee" that I believe any CAF airplane was promised if we could have flown the Atlantic and been at the Paris show. Unfortunately, engine problems (surprise, surprise) ended that particular episode. Whether the CAF would have allowed the airplane to fly to France is another issue. The B-24 did go to England so there was precedent...
Gary has done incredible amounts of legwork/headwork/hands-on work to make Fifi a reliable airplane that, given the right (Wright?) engines, will grace the skies again. He's explained the hybrid engine idea to me, he's checked with all who are potentially involved in the effort...it will work. I wish the two million dollars would have appeared, but I think we can say now we are able to begin the project in a meaningful way.
Old Shep
Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:51 pm
What strings would be attached? Would Hillary make this part of her campaign platform?mustangdriver wrote:The NMUSAF are not going to fly any of their collection, and that is 100% understadable, but why not have the USAF donate money to the CAF and help them with funding some of that collection for Heritage flights? The US navy can do the same, and so on.
I just don't see this happening! Does the USAF directly fund (i.e. with cash) the USAF Museum now?
$$$
Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:42 pm
Monseur Old Shep. Mon Du and Sacre Bleu! You have now got my attention. And if you negotiate that Paris deal again, be sure to get paid in Eurodollars, no francs or sadly Confederate money. And how much to go to Paris, Texas? For that leg I can provide close fighter air support.
Last edited by Bill Greenwood on Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:57 pm
banndit,
I may be incorrect, but from watching the NOVA video of the Kee Bird recovery effort I seem to recall that the four engines (and they are of the same unreliable type on FIFI today) that were taken up and hung on the airplane were overhauled by Rick Kriege, and two of them had never been started before they installed them due to the weather window they were going to be up against. Now, I'm IN NO WAY lessening the work and effort that was put into those four engines by a VERY dedicated man, but would they be any more dependable than what we have sitting in Midland? Those wartime 3350's were never reliable, even straight from the assembly line. Ask any mechanic that tended them during WWII and Korea how much fun engine and cylinder changes were (and how plentiful!). Gary's plan looks like the best way to keep the airplane flying in a dependable fashion, most likely much more reliable than the day she rolled out of the Renton plant.
As to retrieving the remains of Kee Bird, there are some daunting environmental issues with the local government that remain unresolved or everything would probably have been recovered years ago.
Scott
I may be incorrect, but from watching the NOVA video of the Kee Bird recovery effort I seem to recall that the four engines (and they are of the same unreliable type on FIFI today) that were taken up and hung on the airplane were overhauled by Rick Kriege, and two of them had never been started before they installed them due to the weather window they were going to be up against. Now, I'm IN NO WAY lessening the work and effort that was put into those four engines by a VERY dedicated man, but would they be any more dependable than what we have sitting in Midland? Those wartime 3350's were never reliable, even straight from the assembly line. Ask any mechanic that tended them during WWII and Korea how much fun engine and cylinder changes were (and how plentiful!). Gary's plan looks like the best way to keep the airplane flying in a dependable fashion, most likely much more reliable than the day she rolled out of the Renton plant.
As to retrieving the remains of Kee Bird, there are some daunting environmental issues with the local government that remain unresolved or everything would probably have been recovered years ago.
Scott
Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:49 pm
bdk wrote:What strings would be attached? Would Hillary make this part of her campaign platform?mustangdriver wrote:The NMUSAF are not going to fly any of their collection, and that is 100% understadable, but why not have the USAF donate money to the CAF and help them with funding some of that collection for Heritage flights? The US navy can do the same, and so on.
No the USAF does not fund the NMUSAF. I was just saying that it would be cool to see the USAF not the museum, step in and help preserve some of it's heritage that is already flying. SO each branch would have the museums that are static like the NMUSAF, NMNA, and so on, and help the ones that fly all at the same time. Everybody wins.
Sat Dec 29, 2007 3:05 pm
Well, I think the USAF through the Heritage Flight programme DOES help the flying warbirds.
So far as FiFi being the "Queen of the Fleet", I would agree that since "Carolyn" is no more, by default she's now the "Queen".
In all seriousness, Gary and Shep are right. The B-29 (and the -24 and -17's) are so HUGE and rarely seen that wherever they go they are a "people magnet". Having the big iron touring is a great PR thing for the CAF as a whole, and mostly so for the hosting units.
In a lot of ways, the CAF *is* the B-29 and B-24 and B-17's, in the public's eyes. There are so many smaller planes owned personally (Mustangs, T-6s and L-birds) that I have found the public just assumes that the smaller planes at airshows are owned by a private party. So, really, the value to the CAF of a flying B-29 is almost inestimable, because of all that a B-29 at your local airport brings with it.
I have to admit that for a long time, I wasn't that impressed with the -29 Squadron. A couple of people changed that for me, and those folks are Charlie Tilghman and Gary Austin. Seeing the hard labour they put in over the last few years and seeing Gary's posts, and having the chance to work with him (altho not long enough, dangit) really changed my mind about the -29 Squadron and what it brings to the CAF as a whole.
So far as FiFi being the "Queen of the Fleet", I would agree that since "Carolyn" is no more, by default she's now the "Queen".
In all seriousness, Gary and Shep are right. The B-29 (and the -24 and -17's) are so HUGE and rarely seen that wherever they go they are a "people magnet". Having the big iron touring is a great PR thing for the CAF as a whole, and mostly so for the hosting units.
In a lot of ways, the CAF *is* the B-29 and B-24 and B-17's, in the public's eyes. There are so many smaller planes owned personally (Mustangs, T-6s and L-birds) that I have found the public just assumes that the smaller planes at airshows are owned by a private party. So, really, the value to the CAF of a flying B-29 is almost inestimable, because of all that a B-29 at your local airport brings with it.
I have to admit that for a long time, I wasn't that impressed with the -29 Squadron. A couple of people changed that for me, and those folks are Charlie Tilghman and Gary Austin. Seeing the hard labour they put in over the last few years and seeing Gary's posts, and having the chance to work with him (altho not long enough, dangit) really changed my mind about the -29 Squadron and what it brings to the CAF as a whole.