Wed Nov 26, 2008 5:52 pm
You can also add the 22.5 percent buyer premium to that 150 grand. 
Les
Les
Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:45 pm
Who owns and operates the Neil Armstrong Air and Space Museum in Wapakoneta?
Shay
____________
Semper Fortis
Shay
____________
Semper Fortis
Wed Nov 26, 2008 10:07 pm
Shay wrote:Who owns and operates the Neil Armstrong Air and Space Museum in Wapakoneta?
The Ohio Historical Society.
Since you all keep making guesses, I'm going to throw out the NMUSAF. Hey why not? It's only libel...
Jim
P.S.: And for the record it isn't the NMUSAF, MAPS, Motts, the Ohio Historical Society, the Crawford Museum, the AirJim Museum, the Cleveland Museum of Art, the Rock'n'Roll Hall of Fame, the Peacenick Museum for Peace, International Women's Air & Space Museum, the Butler Museum, the Great Lakes Science Center, the Merry-Go-Round Museum, the William Howard Taft National Historic Site, or even the now defunct Ohio History of Flight Museum. For a while I suspected it was the Heritage Museum of Kappa Kappa Gamma...and I really hoped to pin it on the Degenhart Paperweight & Glass Museum...but Dan K is right...
Wed Nov 26, 2008 10:43 pm
AirJimL2 wrote:..and I really hoped to pin it on the Degenhart Paperweight & Glass Museum...but Dan K is right...
This is truly a historic occasion. According to SWMBO, I stopped being right about anything around 20 years ago!
So, may I pass on the pony and just go with a year's supply of Turtle Wax?
Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:52 pm
If the museum you are talking about in Columbus, Ohio is/was the "OHIO HISTORY OF FLIGHT MUSEUM" founded by Foster Lane then you are incorrect in saying they are selling everything. ALL artifacts within the museum were donated to the OHIO HISTORICAL SOCIETY and have been in storage since the museum closed. I know this as I am friends with the head curator of the OHS as we both were heavily involved with the museum when it was founded.
Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:43 pm
This is an area that I would like to interject some (hopefully) thoughtful comment to regarding our historical artifacts being in the hands of private collectors vs. "where it belongs", per say, in a public venue.
Firstly, to Tom P.'s comment of -
"It irks me that such personal links to history are hidden away in private collections - ie - the red safety plugs that were pulled from the Hiroshima bomb that were sold to a private collector who said they would be on display on his mantel for anyone who wanted to see them when they came by and visited the house. What a load of crap in my opinion."
Tom, firstly, I do agree with your feelings in certain respects, (but) a couple of thoughts.
*** and this is not a personal attack towards Tom or anyone else here***
There are many collectors (like myself) who have devoted a lifetime to not only acquiring, but (protecting) America's historical military artifacts. Furthermore, there are many collectors like myself, who have tried to find a home for such historical items in an appropriate public venue only to find that you are dealing with (in general) a very bureaocratic system and somewhat incompetent people. Supposid "Curators" and institutional heads who lack the background and some even the historical knowledge to understand what they truly are dealing with. I mean no offense to the many talented people that are a part of the museum or institutional community, but its simply a disappointing, but true fact in my (and many other collector's) experience. I have said this many times, and I will stand by it today - some of the finest, most historical material from America's history is in the hands of private collectors - and it will remain that way. Why? It certainly begs to question. While "donating" such artifacts sounds very noble and seemingly "the right thing to do", it simply is not always that easy. When you see an auction like the Tibbets material, it does ask the question of why did this material end up passing on to others in this way? I say to all who care to see material like this in a more public venue, think about this very question and figure out a way to change it. Its very easy to look upon the previous owner with a degree of loathing for not finding the "right home" for this material, but there could very well be many reasons why it ended up in this auction. Personally speaking, I would think that if museums and public institutions were in the business of acquiring and protecting America's historical artifacts, then they also would be involved in every possible way of getting this stuff (like the Tibbets auction). I wonder how many institutions were bidders on the Tibbets material? I'll go out on a limb here and say ZERO. Why?????? Hmmm, you mean to tell me that there (all) broke, or don't have the right logistical means, or they are not passionate about history - No, No, No to all. I'll finish my thoughts by saying this - I can tell you with confidence that if I walked thru the door of the Smithsonian today, with some of the material that I know of in private collections around this country, they would probably be in awe, and happy to (take it). But would they really do what it took to (acquire it)? I hope people can see my point in this dialog. Yes, its a shame the Tibbets material didn't end up where more people could enjoy it, but there is a reason why, its not just because someone didn't or wouldn't do the "right thing" with this material. This country has many private individuals to THANK for saving and preserving our American history!
One last thought for those not in the collectibles arena - Warbirds aren't the only things that are expensive to maintain and enjoy. I've invested enough in my own personal militaria collection to buy a couple T-6s at least!!
Firstly, to Tom P.'s comment of -
"It irks me that such personal links to history are hidden away in private collections - ie - the red safety plugs that were pulled from the Hiroshima bomb that were sold to a private collector who said they would be on display on his mantel for anyone who wanted to see them when they came by and visited the house. What a load of crap in my opinion."
Tom, firstly, I do agree with your feelings in certain respects, (but) a couple of thoughts.
*** and this is not a personal attack towards Tom or anyone else here***
There are many collectors (like myself) who have devoted a lifetime to not only acquiring, but (protecting) America's historical military artifacts. Furthermore, there are many collectors like myself, who have tried to find a home for such historical items in an appropriate public venue only to find that you are dealing with (in general) a very bureaocratic system and somewhat incompetent people. Supposid "Curators" and institutional heads who lack the background and some even the historical knowledge to understand what they truly are dealing with. I mean no offense to the many talented people that are a part of the museum or institutional community, but its simply a disappointing, but true fact in my (and many other collector's) experience. I have said this many times, and I will stand by it today - some of the finest, most historical material from America's history is in the hands of private collectors - and it will remain that way. Why? It certainly begs to question. While "donating" such artifacts sounds very noble and seemingly "the right thing to do", it simply is not always that easy. When you see an auction like the Tibbets material, it does ask the question of why did this material end up passing on to others in this way? I say to all who care to see material like this in a more public venue, think about this very question and figure out a way to change it. Its very easy to look upon the previous owner with a degree of loathing for not finding the "right home" for this material, but there could very well be many reasons why it ended up in this auction. Personally speaking, I would think that if museums and public institutions were in the business of acquiring and protecting America's historical artifacts, then they also would be involved in every possible way of getting this stuff (like the Tibbets auction). I wonder how many institutions were bidders on the Tibbets material? I'll go out on a limb here and say ZERO. Why?????? Hmmm, you mean to tell me that there (all) broke, or don't have the right logistical means, or they are not passionate about history - No, No, No to all. I'll finish my thoughts by saying this - I can tell you with confidence that if I walked thru the door of the Smithsonian today, with some of the material that I know of in private collections around this country, they would probably be in awe, and happy to (take it). But would they really do what it took to (acquire it)? I hope people can see my point in this dialog. Yes, its a shame the Tibbets material didn't end up where more people could enjoy it, but there is a reason why, its not just because someone didn't or wouldn't do the "right thing" with this material. This country has many private individuals to THANK for saving and preserving our American history!
One last thought for those not in the collectibles arena - Warbirds aren't the only things that are expensive to maintain and enjoy. I've invested enough in my own personal militaria collection to buy a couple T-6s at least!!
Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:57 pm
One thought I forgot to add to my previous post regarding the donation to (now sale) of the Tibetts material. In my opinion regarding this specific material (Tibbets), that if Paul donated his items to a museum for the public to see and enjoy, then it should have been moved on to another home (like the Smithsonian) in the same fashion. I do not want people to think that I didn't realize that fact in this discussion thread. My comments were relating to a generality of dealing within the historical memorabilia collecting community only. I think Paul would have been very displeased to see what happened to his personal artifacts in this regard.
Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:35 pm
wendovertom wrote:I read the interview on file at Maxwell AFB that Tibbetts did when he turned a great deal of his memorabilia over to the Air Force Historical Agency - he made it plain that his kids wanted nothing to do with the stuff
I'm surprised. A friend of mine flew the B-2 and I met Tibbets' grandson a few years ago - he was also a 509th B-2 pilot and acitve duty Lt Col. There was even a painting commissioned of the Enola Gay and a B-2 flying together to celebrate the connection.
Ken
Fri Nov 28, 2008 6:57 pm
Why, since the flighsuit is technically Government Property, doesn't the NMUSAF just take it?
Seems to apply to other areas....why not this?
KK
Seems to apply to other areas....why not this?
KK
Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:09 pm
Really?
Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:25 pm
I'm from the gumbit and I am here to help you. Just hand that suit over and I will see that no charges are brought against you. Let me have your guns also while I am here, ammo too.
Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:33 pm
As usual, not the case.
Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:34 pm
Who you all kidding if you had the choice of A flight suit or a 150k in your hand your going to keep someone's old uniform..??
Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:09 pm
Airlift48 wrote:Why, since the flighsuit is technically Government Property, doesn't the NMUSAF just take it?
Seems to apply to other areas....why not this?
KK
Typically, unless it's a high-dollar item, once it's issued Commands do not want it back.
Personal items like boots and uniform items like shirts and pants (flightsuits I imagine, anything close to the body), once washed and worn won't go back on the shelf if returned or exchanged. At the Teams I've seen brand new boots (among with other things) only worn 2 or 3 days, long enough to realise the guy got the wrong size, go into the toss bin when returned. I made a habit of swinging by the Supply dept. once a week to see what was being pitched. Sure beat it going in the dumpster.
That's dealing with issued gear. It's entirely possible that Paul Tibbets purchased the flightsuit with his own money at the base's uniform shop(clothes and sales). Not sure how it worked 60 plus years ago, but today service members get a yearly allowance for uniform upkeep.
Either way whether issued or purchased uniform items are generally considered personal property of the service member.
Shay
____________
Semper Fortis
Fri Nov 28, 2008 11:08 pm
Shay wrote:Personal items like boots and uniform items like shirts and pants (flightsuits I imagine, anything close to the body), once washed and worn won't go back on the shelf if returned or exchanged.
Shay
____________
Semper Fortis
The exception being USAF issued field jackets. I had to hand mine back in, but as they had mistakenly issued me 2, I got to keep the other one
