Bye bye P-82... :-(

[Taylor Stevenson]

Well at least it's finally over, but both organizations are going to have black eyes for years to come.

agreed

[Bill Greenwood]

I can see that the AF museum might not want to see something they had donated or loaned to a museum go onto the private market.

And I don't think the CAF did a great job of caring for the plane. From my standpoint sometimes funds are being spent for planes or projects that have practically no historic significance, that should have gone to support/restore the great WW II combat planes that were the foundation of the CAF for so many years. As for as I know, the decision to trade/sell the P-82 was made by staff and never put to a vote of the membership. I am not sure about this, but I am a life member and I never knew of the deal until the problems arose. Whatever happened, no matter how good or bad the intentions of those involved, in the end we lost a valuable HISTORIC AIRPLANE, and I we lost the paperwork and public relations end of it also. It was sort of like two guys in white shirts having a mudball fight; in the end neither winner or loser look too good.

The CAF may have taken a combative stance with the AF when all this came up, thinking (not knowing) that they had clear titile and were in the right, and thinking that the AF was in effect, going back on their word.

HOWEVER, IN THE END, AS IT IS NOW THE AF MUSEUM HAS TAKEN A PLANE THAT DOESN'T SEEM VERY IMPORTANT TO THEM , AND PREVENTED THE CAF from ever restoring it to flying condition.

This seems to be the insistance of that one general, who I never heard of before.

COULD NOT SOME COMPROMISE HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT AT ALL. PERHAPS THE CAF KEEPING THE PLANE FOR 20 MORE YEARS WHILE BEING RESTORED THEN WILLINGLY RETURNING IT TO AF? I don't know, but it seems a waste.

I think I know what the CAF view is of the AF Museum, or that one guy is, Iwonder what their museum really thinks of the CAF?

[Obergrafeter]

For once Taylor and me see eye to eye. Yes originally the CAF was going to trade the P-82, but afer the MUSAF bitched the CAF was going to keep it and restore it. Yes Taylor knows better than most the goings on in making this happen. The money for restoration was there and not coming out of another CAF pocket. Seems to me we lost the court case on the NMUSAF home court. Don't tell me there is no home court in Federal
Court. If not lets try it in San Antonio.

[Robbie Stuart]

This whole Da-n deal just makes me sick! I am glad I got to see the aircraft fly. I hope it will be well taken care of, & displayed properly. If it can't fly, then at least keep it looking good.

[airnutz]

Just goes to show ya', no matter how right you think you are...it's never a good idea to tell a General to go f*ck himself!

[Garth]

Yes originally the CAF was going to trade the P-82, but afer the MUSAF bitched the CAF was going to keep it and restore it.

Without knowing the relative bargaining positions of the CAF and NMUSAF and how they changed throughout the episode (if anyone wants to post them, it would be appreciated), the summary above seems to mirror what I've read here and elsewhere.

It seems to me that actual ownership and possession were two different issues and should have been addressed as such. Even if the ownership was in dispute, there was (iirc) no doubt that the aircraft had been placed into the CAF's custody for the purpose of care and operation. So long as the aircraft was being properly cared for, the issue of ownership could be dealt with separately.

Why, then, did NMUSAF determine it needed to retake physical possession of the aircraft, when a simple C&D and injunction on the sale/trade would have sufficed? It seems to me there are a couple possible answers to this. One, the NMUSAF has either definitive or potential plans to do something with the aircraft (maybe trade it to another museum?) or Two, NMUSAF decided that it needed to set an example and throw its weight around to discourage other custodians of its property from trying to claim that they have ownership rights.

Possibly both. There have been a number of "repossessions" or ambiguous-terms trades by NMUSAF/USAF over the last few years. Memphis Belle being brought to Dayton, the A-12 that was moved from Minnesota to the CIA, the F-82, the Swoose-for-SSSB/B-17 to be named later swap with NASM.

Airplanes and artifacts are increasingly being treated like currency/barter goods. Getting the F-82 both gives NMUSAF a fairly-rare yet redundant artifact it can trade for something it wants, and sets a precedent (possibly a series of precedents) for future repossessions.

[Mudge]

Getting the F-82 both gives NMUSAF a fairly-rare yet redundant artifact it can trade for something it wants, and sets a precedent (possibly a series of precedents) for future repossessions.

Why would the NMUSAF need to "trade" for something it wants when, it would appear, that it can merely "repossess" something it wants.
What the he!!...the Navy seems to have that procedure down to an art form.

Mudge the cynic

[Jesse C.]

Well, at least it won't be wearing a Tramp Stamp!

So, now that all this is done, any updates on the ones that will fly?

[Taylor Stevenson]

id take a girl with a tramp stamp (CAF) over the ones doomed to be pole dancers (NMUSAF)

[Garth]

Why would the NMUSAF need to "trade" for something it wants when, it would appear, that it can merely "repossess" something it wants.

Mudge the cynic

There are certain things that the NMUSAF wants, but can't just claim ownership of.

The Space Shuttle Atlantis, for instance. NMUSAF desperately wants it, even has space for it mapped out in their new building. But if NASM decides it's going to claim ALL the Orbiters (as it does with other space artifacts, like Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules), NMUSAF is going to have to pony up a bit to get it.

[Pogo]

id take a girl with a tramp stamp (CAF) over the ones doomed to be pole dancers (NMUSAF)

Gotta admit, the boy has a way with words.

[Xrayist]

As for their day in court, lets see how even that was. The CAF had to pay lawyers to represent them, while the general could order as many lawyers, clerks, and aids that he wanted to use for the case, with us taxpayers footing that bill. He who has the money usually wins in court.
I picture this plane being put someplace like Silver Hill to be restored in what, about 90-100 years from now?

[Taylor Stevenson]

Well at least if the NMUSAF puts her next to one of their others we'll see the only P-82 formation that will ever occur again.

[jet1]

Well at least if the NMUSAF puts her next to one of their others we'll see the only P-82 formation that will ever occur again.

its nicely stored OUTSIDE in the fresh air.....where it can DETERIORATE into its base materials. "on your left you will see a lump of metal that was once a proud aircraft, and next to it is another..."
well you get the idea...
Im still trying to figure out EXACTLY WHEN we lost our country "of the people, by the people and for the people"

Last edited by jet1 on Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Jack Cook]

maybe they'll trade it for a P-38 and then ground that one instead