Warbird Information Exchange

I don't have much to add -- another voice saying "Yay!" or "How sad" seems pointless -- but this news did prompt me to dig into my air museum pamphlet file and reflect on how things change, for better or worse.









August

We did a stop there a couple years ago with the bombers and were the biggest draw that they had since the airshows stopped. The attendance numbers for the museum were nothing like they expected (low). As Chuck mentioned the insurance excuse was just that, an excuse. It is a great facility no doubt, but the whole foundation of the "Air Zoo" was just that, air, not "ground zoo". It is tragic to see a perfectly airworthy P-47 sitting there, drained of all her fluids, never to fly again. There are plenty of static 47's out there all around the globe. anyway...off the soapbox

jim

When my wife and I were there many, many years ago, before they built the new museum, it was a small, friendly place where everybody there was willing to stop and talk with you and you could get decent pictures of all the planes. They didn't even charge me for my wife when they realized that she had absolutely no interest in airplanes and was just with me so she didn't have to sit in the hot car (it was summer).

We went back -3- summers ago, after getting over the sticker shock of getting in, over $50 for our family of -3-, I was very disapointed with how dark and crammed the new and origional buildings were. Even with a 28mm wide angle lens, I could not get back far enough to get the complete Corsair in the picture, and every picture, except the ones of the jets outside the old building, had to be taken as a time exposure. Maybe they just got too big and were not ready to handle it.

_________________
May all your bent wings be F2G Corsairs!

I have mixed emotions about this one. I used to volunteer as a tour guide at the Zoo, but just kind of faded away a couple of years ago. The place just wasn't the same after the warbirds were grounded, and after they opened the new building, they seemed to be more focused on being an "info-tainment attraction" than an aviation history museum. I'm trying not to be overly critical..I understand that the move was a financial necessity. Without sizable private financial backing, the little old "Air Zoo" simply couldn't survive..and those sources of funding won't be around all that much longer.

I do hope to see the Bearcat and Tigercat flying again. The Tigercat is an award-winning restoration, and the Bearcat hasn't even flown since being completely rebuilt after a belly-landing in '95.

Interestingly, I talked to a couple of Air Zoo personel at our model club meeting last night (one of whom is the director of the new Space Science Center) and niether of them knew anything about the sale.

Man, does that brochure bring back memories..I ran across a copy while moving a couple of months ago. The Zoo was just like that when I first visited in December of '84.


SN

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the Air Zoo fly their stuff again. What I am saying is that it is a shame to break up this collection regardless of static or flying. It would be like breaking up the planes of fame collection. And just to point out, no airplanes on static display are not as stated in this thread collecting bird poop and rotting away. Now that being said, it would be sweet to see a cat flight like back in the day.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

I believe you are making reference to a previous post of mine.

My original comment was that static aircraft either collect dust (on indoor display) or bird poop (on outdoor display). I was under the impression that the Air Zoo has aircraft on both indoor and outdoor display. Was that an incorrect assumption?

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

I remember the Bearcat when it had the Royal Thai silver with checkerboard tail. That was one neat paint scheme! The Bearcat looks really great in silver, IMO.

I know that some of you guys hate static display, and that is fine. I don't get it as another aircraft is saved from the scrap man, and static is just as important as flying, but that is all our own opinions. But like it or not, you will not find dust on the aircraft at the Air Zoo. THey are kept in pristine condition. The only aircraft outside at the Airzoo the last time I was there was an F-84, B-57, and a Lear jet. The rest of this very large collection is indoors and on display.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

The POF collection has not been unchanged- the Ki-84 went to Japan many years ago, the FM-2 (now listed on Courtesy's site) was sold a few years back, as was the PR Mk. XIX Spitfire, a static Zero and the Me-262. Some of these aircraft like the Me-262 were not owned by the museum, even though they were on loan for so long people thought they were. There are also new aircraft on loan (for instance from the Friedkin collection). In the mean time, a few more aircraft have been obtained and/or restored and a significant amount of hangar and display construction has occurred. This included the opening and closing of an air race museum in Reno and the opening of the Grand Canyon museum in Valle. So in conclusion, POF does not have an unchanging collection of displays, and apparently neither does the Ground Zoo.

If aircraft that were restored to flying condition (no small task!) can be sold off and returned to the air, isn't that a good thing?

MD, I don't hate static displays...I'm building one, for crying out loud.

I dislike the permanent grounding of airworthy and potentially airworthy warbirds. Don't you?

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

So, bdk, who exactly was the owner then?

Living in Kalamazoo, I have been growing increasingly frustrated with the Air Zoo for a number of years. In the late 90s, the Air Zoo unvelied plans for a museum called the "Legacy of Flight." It was to be an $80 million (yes, you read that right) project that would essentially be an aviation-themed amusement park. I was told that the Air Zoo had well over 6 figures of research and consulting done on the project, only to see it flame out when the community showed little interest in supporting such a large financial project. After this, discussions began to move the collection to Springfield, MO. It was aorund this time that the "insurance" issues with the flying aircraft came up. Coincidence?

After all this, the "Legacy of Flight" concept was abandoned, and the warbirds were grounded. A scaled back version of the LOF became what is now the New Air Zoo, which is still basically an aviation themed tourist trap. Yes, the 4-D Theater is a very poignant tribute to the bomber pilots and crewman of WWII. But the other rides and attractions have no educational value whatsoever and are their for entertainment only. They are basically carnival rides, and the aircraft seem to just be there as a sideshow. Half of the old facility was recently converted into the Space Center, which is actually pretty cool, but significantly reduces the amount of display space the museum has for aircraft. And I'm sure they could have reduced the space needed for the Space Center by simply nixing the carnival "Moon Bounce." Currently, the other half of that facility is used to display a couple aircraft, but they are crammed together and it is difficult to even view them, let alone take photographs.

One thing I've often wondered about the grounding of the warbirds was whether it was done in order to save money to build a new static museum. It might just be the timing of the grounding in conjunction with the amusemenseum park project that makes me a little suspicious. I'm not saying that insurance wasn't an issue, because it very well could have been. Another thing that could have impacted the grounding of the warbirds was the fact that alot of the restorations were getting "old." The aircraft are all very high-time and hadn't been restored since the early-mid 80s and had accumulated alot of flying time since then. It may have been that they were in need of significant restoration, and the Air Zoo didn't want to, or couldn't afford to spend the money to do it.

Alot of people seem to have this hope that the museum will fly its fighter aircraft again. After seeing the recent events unfold, I can say with almost 100% confidence that as long as the fighter aircraft are owned by the Air Zoo, they will not be flown. The Air Zoo had an auction a couple of years ago, in which they parted with their entire spares inventory for the flying aircraft. Prop blades, engines, wheels, tires, etc. They're all gone. Not exactly an optimistic sign, is it?

After seeing the Tigercat and Bearcat for sale, I sent an email to the director of the Air Zoo, Bob Ellis. The reason for selling the aircraft, as suggested by an earlier post, is that these aircraft are not as hsitorically significant as many of the other aircraft in the collection. I was told that under no circumstance would the P-47, Hellcat, Corsair, P-40, Wildcat and Airacobra be sold. It appears that they are there to stay, probably static forever. I was also told that the museum will be looking to thin its collection in other areas.

On the bright side, the Trimotor is being restored to fly in Alma, MI. They expect it to be in the air in 2009, and hope to be able to secure insurance that will allow them to fly customers again. Also, attendance did double within the last year, so maybe something good will come of that.

Sorry for the long post, rant over. I hope this clears some things up about the state of things in Kalamazoo.

_________________
Matt

Thanks for the info, Kid. That's too bad about those aircraft staying unsold and static. I would really like to have seen the Hellcat and P-39 sold and returned to flying condition, since they are so rare. When that P-39 was grounded that seriously impacted the world's population of flyable Airacobras (two at that time). It's too bad the CAF's former airplane will never have air again underneath it's wings.

Unfortunately, it sounds like the realities of funding a large aviation park are very stark. I don't really blame them for what they did, as airplanes and warbirds specifically are very, very expensive. It was a lot cheaper to operate the Air Zoo as a flying museum back in the 70's and 80's, as warbirds were relatively inexpensive and cheap to operate. Now, they pretty much require a millionaire's bank account. The fact that Kalamazoo is not a hot tourist destination probably didn't help matters out. It's too bad that they couldn't have moved the entire collection to somewhere where there is a local tourist population that could support it.

Sometimes it is. Not all of the time.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director