This is the place where the majority of the warbird (aircraft that have survived military service) discussions will take place. Specialized forums may be added in the new future
Post a reply

Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:07 pm

APG85 wrote:
warbird1 wrote:I know a few years ago, there was a plan to get that B-29 into ground running (ferriable) condition. I heard that they wanted to taxi it around, but not fly it. Has that plan been scrubbed?


I read the same thing in a magazine article myself...


Maybe there were originally plans to do that, but I don't think they'll
be running these engines... I was told they were "cosmetically"
restoring the engines, but not replacing any of the seals, etc. (I would
think running them with old seals would make for one heck of a
mess!).

Bela P. Havasreti

Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:45 pm

Chris Brame wrote:Now that a couple wartime photos of 42-29782 have turned up, will they be adding the name Patricia and the tail code BA that it carried during the war?


Good heavens, a CONUS training scheme!!!!!!?????? Heaven forbid :roll:
I would love to see such markings on the old girl, Chris--I like your train of thought.

Scott

Fri Nov 28, 2008 1:49 pm

snj-5 wrote: (I would
think running them with old seals would make for one heck of a
mess!).


Heck, even running them with new seals makes for one heck of a mess! :lol:

Gary

Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:43 pm

Just my two cents, but I find it kinda pathetic the "Museum of Flight" appears to be a place where the planes will never fly again... Sort of like naming a cemetary "Museum of Life"

No insult or slight intended, apologies if I offend, I just believe every capable bird should fly, at least once in a while, regardless of rarity or value. Otherwise, they are just artistically styled aluminum in a pretty pile... Don't need to fly daily, but once or twice a year is nice. Make them feel loved... Birds in gilded cages and all that...

Robbie

Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:48 pm

I believe that some are just too historic or rare to fly, so I have no problem with it. Cool to see them fly, but most important first, is that they are saved.

Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:06 pm

Personally, I like static museums. After pounding the flightline for the past 24 years, you can have the sunburn, cold, wind, rain, corrosion, cracks, and crowds. There's nothing like walking unhampered through a nice museum that beautifully restores historic aircraft. That's just me...

Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:47 pm

snj-5 wrote:
APG85 wrote:
warbird1 wrote:I know a few years ago, there was a plan to get that B-29 into ground running (ferriable) condition. I heard that they wanted to taxi it around, but not fly it. Has that plan been scrubbed?


I read the same thing in a magazine article myself...


Maybe there were originally plans to do that, but I don't think they'll
be running these engines...
I was told they were "cosmetically"
restoring the engines, but not replacing any of the seals, etc. (I would
think running them with old seals would make for one heck of a
mess!).

Bela P. Havasreti



Why not? I know of a place that can do a nice 3350 overhaul for 6 figures and they would be guaranteed at least 20 hours of ground run time! Now, you only have to multiply that times 4! :D

Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:55 pm

Robbie Roberts wrote:Just my two cents, but I find it kinda pathetic the "Museum of Flight" appears to be a place where the planes will never fly again... Sort of like naming a cemetary "Museum of Life"

No insult or slight intended, apologies if I offend, I just believe every capable bird should fly, at least once in a while, regardless of rarity or value. Otherwise, they are just artistically styled aluminum in a pretty pile... Don't need to fly daily, but once or twice a year is nice. Make them feel loved... Birds in gilded cages and all that...

Robbie


Maybe they should call it the "Museum of Almost Turned into Pots and Pans"? :lol: :roll: Because if it's not a flyer, then it would serve a more useful existence as your Mom's Pots and Pans... :roll:

Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:38 pm

Django wrote:
Robbie Roberts wrote:Just my two cents, but I find it kinda pathetic the "Museum of Flight" appears to be a place where the planes will never fly again... Sort of like naming a cemetary "Museum of Life"

No insult or slight intended, apologies if I offend, I just believe every capable bird should fly, at least once in a while, regardless of rarity or value. Otherwise, they are just artistically styled aluminum in a pretty pile... Don't need to fly daily, but once or twice a year is nice. Make them feel loved... Birds in gilded cages and all that...

Robbie


Maybe they should call it the "Museum of Almost Turned into Pots and Pans"? :lol: :roll: Because if it's not a flyer, then it would serve a more useful existence as your Mom's Pots and Pans... :roll:
:lol: :lol: That's funny. Be Careful not to poke the hornets nest with a short stick.

Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:00 pm

Obergrafeter wrote:Didn't Lacy deliver the DC-2 just a few months ago?


I think that's where I got the impression that he owned it.

Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:13 pm

Chris Brame wrote:Now that a couple wartime photos of 42-29782 have turned up, will they be adding the name Patricia and the tail code BA that it carried during the war?



Do you have these pics to share :?: Lets see :D

Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:18 pm

steve dickey wrote:
Chris Brame wrote:Now that a couple wartime photos of 42-29782 have turned up, will they be adding the name Patricia and the tail code BA that it carried during the war?



Do you have these pics to share :?: Lets see :D


Here you go:
http://www.aerovintage.com/229782-2.jpg
http://www.aerovintage.com/229782-3.jpg

Scott

Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:33 pm

Thanks :D Looks like a blown tire :?:

Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Or did they break/lose the right wheel?

The airplane was assigned to Moses Lake, Wa. at the time of the incident, and the pilot at the time this happened was John C. Reid.

Scott
Post a reply