Both Twin Mustangs now on display at the NMUSAF

[mustangdriver]

Thanks man. I am heading down there next weekend. It looks like they got a squadron logo on her too. Very cool!

[Lynn Allen]

My crappy picture as promised:



Todd

Thanks, its better than the one I have, which is nada....

[Nathan]

.

Last edited by Nathan on Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[gtokid]

No problem Chris, just wish the pic had turned out better. Had the kids with me, and they were getting antsy. It's about as close as I could get, and didn't see a radar pod. Hopefully you can get a better look since you've got some connections there. Let me know more about the Grissom B-17, I'd like to help out.

Todd

[Brad]

Brad first off please know I reply to this meaning nothing but to be respectful, but the NMUSAF did indeed offer to let the CAF continue to operate the P-82. After the 2nd time of telling them where to go, the CAF was told that it would be static only. The first two attempts to work something out, were going to leave the CAF able to fly the P-82. It was only when court and lawyers were invloved that the "Static" terms were brought inalong with other aircraft.

Don't worry about hurting my feelings Chris, I'll be fine. Just don't pee on my foot and tell me it's raining. As you have a habit of doing, you are so fast to defend the Air Force Museum that you don't bother with the facts.

Word for word off of the court papers.

" Major General (retired) Charles Metcalf, Director of the NMUSAF, learned of the
exchange in the January 2003 issue of the magazine “Air Classics.” (Plt. Mot. Summ. J. Attach
2, Ex. 11.) He then informed Mr. Bob Rice (“Mr. Rice”), the CAF’s Executive Director, in
writing that the attempted sale of the F-82 violated the terms of the Certificate. (Id.) In the letter dated December 2, 2002, General Metcalf indicates that the F-82 was conditionally donated to the CAF Museum and the donation certificate contains the provision that the title of the F-82 would revert back to the USAF, at the Government’s option, if the F-82 was no longer used for the purpose and/or end use for which it was donated or retention was no longer desired. (Id.) In addition, General Metcalf indicates that he considers the information contained in the January 2003 issue of Air Classics as written notice that the CAF no longer wishes to retain the F-82.(Id.) Finally, the letter is considered by General Metcalf as formal notification that the NMUSAF is exercising the option to retain title to the F-82. (Id.) Then, out of an abundance of caution, the CAF cancelled the agreement to trade the F-82. (Cowan Decl. 10.) However, neither the CAF nor the AAHM agree with the Government’s position that the F-82 should be returned. (Id.) From late in 2002 until April of 2006, the USAF, represented primarily by General Metcalf, and the CAF, represented primarily by Mr. Rice, attempted to agree on ownership, possession, and operation of the F-82. The discussions between these individuals did not result in an agreement. The F-82 has not been returned to the NMUSAF and remains with the CAF. (Id.)"

"In an effort to settle this dispute, General Metcalf offered to loan the F-82 to the CAF for
static display purposes only. The CAF has apparently elected to decline this offer.The CAF also argues that forfeiture would be inequitable because the USAF explicitly gave its approval for the CAF to fly the F-82 and had knowledge of the F-82’s flying status and failed to object. In support of this argument, the CAF cites two documents. The first is the 1966 Release and DD Form 1149. This document is titled “Requisition and Invoice Shipping Document” and is merely a record that the F-82 was transferred from Lackland AFB to the CAF pursuant to the April 15, 1966 letter releasing the F-82. It is not any indication of ownership or indication that the Certificate was no longer valid."

Nathan, Chris and I are grown men. We can handle our disagreement so please stay out of it.

[Django]

Political debates aside, if you look at the shadow, you can see that there is no pod.

[mustangdriver]

Brad, You are right with regard to me being fast to defend the museum. But it comes from the museum getting bashed or thrown under the bus time and time again, and many times, on little or no facts, and then it just builds from there. Some examples:

1)The NMUSAF threatened the MARC guys into painting "The Movie Memphis Belle" the way it is today. The truth of the matter is that the Memphis Belle Memorial Association had a written agreement that the aircraft could carry the name Memphis belle, but must always have the nose art painted in a different manner to ensure that people knew it was the movie aircraft. It was the MBMA that contacted the NMUSAF with the issue that the aggreement had been violated.

2)The NMUSAF cut up the Helldiver that Mike saved and rebuilt with chain saws. That just isn't true, and the plane wasn't hacked into.

3)The NMUSAF scrapped the the last B-32. The last B-32 was cut up before the AirForce Museum even existed.

I could go on and on. And each time these were posted, a 4 page lynch party will sound off, then someone will post that the info isn't true, or that there is another side to it, and once that is out...nothing. No one says, "Ooopss, or my bad or anything". That drives me nuts.

Brad you are very correct with those documents, however attempts were made prior to going to court and the plane was going to remain as it was with the CAF. By the time it went to court, the NMUSAF was no longer willing to allow the aircraft to fly. In my opinion the NMUSAF was more than fair. The CAF was trying to get rid of the plane, and all the way until they got to court, the NMUSAF was saying they could still keep it. When it actually went to court, the NMUSAF decided it would just take the plane back.

[mustangdriver]

I believe more equipment will be added, but they wanted to move the aircraft around so the Gallery would be in one piece.

[Misterg97]

When the 82 was brought into the gallery, she not only had no pod, but no propellers as well. That was a few weeks ago .. last Friday, they were still putting finishes touches on her when my shift ended .. The F-84 is unbelievable as I was able to get up close ..

I have no intentions of contradicting anyone or creating hard feelings ... each and everyone of you have a right to express your thoughts and I respect each and every one ... However, mine are different and from a different prespective ....

"WHAT WAS KOREA"?

A while back, I was asked that question, while volunteering in the Korea section, by a youngster perhaps an early to mid teen .. that question perhaps more than anything in the past 3+ years of volunteering has given me a true sense of the NMUSAF ..

The newly renovated Korean Section of the MFG is about to open ... and what a tremendous effort the staff has put into it .... They call it the Korean War ... not the Police Action as called when I was drafted .. as I walked thru the new gallery while going thru my duties I was amazed by all the new exhibits ... no longer will a visitor be able to go thru the area rather quickly ... It will now tell much of the history that evidently is not being taught in some of our schools throughout this great land ... Yes the planes are still there ... and thankfully, although static, they will help to tell the strory ... And by the way as one who had some time in a C-124 Globemaster, it's kind of a good feeling to see one standing tall and proud .. They had a large impact during the Korear War ... somewhere in my records, I have a photo taken at K-55 (Osan) of both a 124 and a 119 that I had flown in.

"A keeper of their stories" ..

By the way, it took me a few minutes as memories of 50+ years ago flashed thru my brain, but I did answer that question ... honeslty, truthfully and which much sadness.

I urge all ... come and take the time to visit the new Korean Gallery at the NMUSAF ... not just the great warbirds .. but read the stories behind them ..

If you got this far ... this old-timer says "Thanks" .. for listening to my 2 cents.

[mustangdriver]

Jerry, thank you for your service. I hope to see you in two weeks.

[kalamazookid]

The Twin Mustang is the NMUSAF's. That has been decided. Like it or not, no amount of pissing and moaning is going to change that.

So, if you want to see the aircraft and like that it's at the NMUSAF, go see it. If not, then don't. It's that simple. Whining, name-calling, finger-pointing and debating the legality OF SOMETHING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED isn't going to do anything productive at this point.

With that being said, it's great to see something productive being done with the actual aircraft. If anyone else has any pics of the restoration work or what it looks like now, I'd be interested to see them.

[Zachary]

Jerry just hit the nail on the head (with a 20 lb sledge)! We could argue all day about the right or wrong of who should have the F-82, and whether it should be flying or static, but what it really comes down to in the end is honoring the folks who served through the preservation of the machines that took them to war. Thanks for bringing it back into focus Jerry...

Zack

[TAdan]

Thanks for your reply Jerry. I am very glad to hear they have revamped the Korean display. I look forward to seeing it, the F-82, and hopefully you again this summer when I am out in Dayton.

[Jack Cook]

"WHAT WAS KOREA"?

That's one question I've known the answer to all my life.
That's were my cousin Jack still lies after falling in battle

[mustangdriver]

And that Jack is a debt that can't be repaid. So little is ever told about the men and women that served in Korea. I know that M*A*S*H is just a show, but I was always impressed with the herosim depicted on there. The Chopper pilots that would do anything to get a wounded man to help, the docotors(many of which were civilian doctors drafted), and the nurses. Those Aid Stations and MASH units must have been heII to work in. And this is just one of many of the aspects of the war.