Warbird Information Exchange

.
I think the Drone controller config is obviously the most historically correct for the airframe, but museums often need drawcards to get donations or entry fees and I still suspect the visitor would prefer a B-17 in WW2 garb than post war presentation, even if there are plenty of other wartime B-17s exhibited elsewhere?

In regards to presenting it as a B-17F versus a B-17G it seems it was never a full G and most of the unique G features are fibreglass in anycase? a nonstructural conversion to an F with removal of those fibreglass features and an accurate paintscheme might be sufficient?

The YB-40 is a new one on me, and obviously only of interest to enthusiasts rather than the general public, it apparantly has a second dorsal turret and therefore would seem further removed from this aircrafts current G config than an F?, it doesnt seem to be an important story to be told in this museum?

The ideal approach for most aircraft in most museums would be:

1. Display it as itself
2. Display it as a representative example of the most common role.
3. Display it as a specific example that has some significance to the area/museum

Given the purpose of the museum, then a tidied up G or a reasonable F representation would seem to be the better outcomes?

Given the shortage of F presentations I would personally lean towards the F.

Regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

Mark,you have excellent taste in your B-17 pick.The F model was the queen and fastest of the later 17s.The shark fins were the hotrods.

_________________
Hang The Expense

No bias goin' on there, eh ???

Maybe I'm particularly biased because I see, firsthand, the coming impact of UAVs on the modern battlefield and on aviation in general. It makes me curious and, as a nostalgic flyer, a little concerned. They say the F-22 may be the last of the manned fighters. (They also said the F-4 didn't need a gun, but the F-22 comment has some truth rooted amongst the hype.) Just in case you haven't seen the news, the USAF has come up with a new rating and a new set of wings to signify pesonnel trained specifically to fly UAVs. Some Guard units are trading in their F-16s for UAVs. Like it or not, this is a BIG deal and it is not going away.

Anyway, the move of this B-17 indoors isn't just about one airframe. A sharp curator could construct a stellar display around the B-17 that adequately covers the bomber aspect, but focuses on the history of drones from end to end. There's the Joe Kennedy connection. Crossroads. Vietnam Firebees. D-21. The first autolands done by airliners. Cruise missiles. Todays' Predator, Global Hawk, etc. Video and computer stuff would enhance the display and attract this gaming generation of youngsters. There's a science and math angle if you choose. He11, the aerospace industry, local university, or AF Recruiting might chip in to create the displays.

I stand by my opinions. 99% of the B-17s displayed look like bombers - if you want to attract folks, make yourself stand out by not looking like the rest. Warbird folks will always revere the airframe but the average masses that have to show up and drop money in the bucket may need more than a spiffy B-17, regardless of scheme, to choose to visit.

Ken

_________________
"Take care of the little things and the big things will take care of themselves."

When I was in Pensacola, I spent a ton of time looking at the Catalina inside at the museum that has clear skin on one side of the fuselage. Everything, or close enough to everything for my eye, it came off the assembly line with was installed, and the crew positions had mannequins dressed in flight gear. I found it to be a fascinating display, and think that would be even more true with a B-17 because they seem so big when you're on the tarmac looking up at one, but cramped once you're inside. Imagine see through skins on half of the entire plane. That would give a lot of appreciation for its construction and complexity, too.

Here is the Amarillo AAF Mechanic School version of what you just posted:


The SAC Museum near Omaha has a half-skinless B-25 on display that is quite an interesting display.

Scott

Wow! The Visible B-17!

Thanks, Scott.

I usually do not post much, as I am "Silent Bob" to Chris's "Jay". I just wanted to say thanks and please keep the ideas coming, so far we have a lot of great data to present to the board members; thanks to everyone's input.

Thanks again,
Rob

None whatsoever

_________________
Hang The Expense

While I am thinking about it, does anyone have photos of 44-83690 as a DB-17G when it was based at Eglin AFB during the 1950's? We have the photos in the Final Cut books. We are hoping there are some color photos out there, as well as some interior shots/configuration of equip, etc available. If anyone has photos, manuals, or direct experience with DB-17's please let us know. While we still do not have a decision as to which direction the restoration is going to head, it would be nice to have the info and maybe more history about 690. Any and all help is greatly appreciated!

Any idea on the decision timeline? Are you guys waiting on building construction or for access to an existing hangar?

Hi Ken, we are starting the fundraising drive now as even if we get the grant, more funds will be needed to get the B-17 restored and indoors. We do have a building to move the aircraft to for restoration work. Warbirdaid or as I call him Rob or (silent Bob), has his father coming in to help us with some organization ideas and to further assess the condition. His father and Rob have worked on major restorations and rebuilds of other B-17's and warbirds. I worked with them both at Air Heritage and can say we are lucky to have them on board with the project. As for the grants, we find out about them on Aug. 26th. As soon as we have a decision about the paint scheme of the aircraft we are going to design shirts.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Hello all! I stopped in at Grissom Air Museum today to look over '690 with my father. While I was there, I was informed that our first attempt at a restoration grant failed. On the brighter side, there are a couple of grants we can apply for this Fall. The museum was able to secure a grant for paved walkways amongst the aircraft, making our museum accessable to handicapped visitors. I was told that part of the problem in securing a grant are the people that decide tend to favor artsy projects. If anyone has any ideas on fundraising please drop us a line. We have ideas of our own, but I would like to see what the warbird community input is.


Th

Yeah that is a bit of a blow, but we are still pushing forward, and atleast the museum is getting something.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Maybe get the nose art selected and include that as part of the proposal so you can cite a specific recreation of a particular aircraft and why. I don't know how you wrote your proposal of if you included some pics or not. Some well put together visuals would probably go a long way for the "civilians" that approve the grant.

_________________
.
.
Sure, Charles Lindbergh flew the plane... but Tom Rutledge built the engine!

Visit Django Studios online or Facebook!