Warbird Information Exchange

Well it was a few reasons. Some of the veterans stated that at one time they remember it being OD over Gray. Folks are not sure if the plane was indeed delivered OD over grey or if the veterans remembered wrong. There do not seem to be any photos of SSB in OD over grey and Boeing production numbers seem to indicate that the plane was delivered in BMF. When the museum got wind that some vets thought it was OD over gray at one point they thought it may solve the problems of the patch work and put it in the OD over gray.

As far as Swoose, they are still working on it, but are focused on the Belle.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

well put Warbird Kid!

Why I wonder is the nine O nine painted in that type of green? I always saw the od green, aluminum etc. Was that a green used during a short span of aircraft?

_________________
" I am a nobody in aviation, but somebody to my family."

Nine O Nine started out the regular OD over gray. However over time it became a war weary aircraft. It flew many missions like 140 without losing a crew member and over the period of it's career the OD faded giving it an overall tan look. The Collings Foundation did it right when they chose that color as this is pretty much how it looked.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

i do really love that paint. It makes it stand out. I wonder if they would ever consider repainting it to the original od green and see how that would look

_________________
" I am a nobody in aviation, but somebody to my family."

Hey Chris...as you always seem to have an inside knowledge of the doings at the NMUSAF, I'm curious as to whether the staff there have given any thought to what they will do for a "G" model B-17 if SSSB does go to Udvar-Hazy? It just does not make a lot of sense to have traded her for the Swoose when SSSB is an actual combat veteran aircraft. Eventually having the Swoose and The Belle on dispaly will be nice, but not having a "G" model with them seems to leave a gaping hole in their collection. Ya think the Udvar-Hazy folks would throw "Flak Bait" into the deal to make the transfer of SSSB a little less painful

_________________
Earn my respect and never lose it.
Demand my respect and never gain it. -Me

...just another plane dreamer.

I'm going to disagree with you here... yes, Shoo Shoo Shoo Baby is a combat vet (and Bert Stiles flew one mission in her... hated it enough to complain bitterly about the plane in "Serenade"), but in terms of significance, the AFM is coming out so far ahead on this deal it's not even funny. And I don't mean that in a demeaning way- I think what they're doing with the Belle and the Swoose is utterly fantastic, and those birds deserve to hold pride of place even among such worthy stablemates as Bockscar. I don't have any insight to what may happen with Shoo Shoo Shoo Baby when it gets to Udvar-Hazy, but knowing the standards the Smithsonian has for it's aircraft, I would not be surprised to see her lose her OD/NG coat. If they do that, I certainly hope they drag the Stratoliner outside for a group pic with her!

cheers,

Lynn

I agree with Lynn. I think the NMUSAF is coming out ahead. I am a huge fan of SSB, and part of me will be sorry to see it go if it indeed goes that way, but seeing it go to the NASM ensures that it will be well cared for and given a place of honor at UH. Memphis Belle will be where it belongs at Wright Pat, and the Swoose will be icing on the cake.
Now I did hear another theory, and I will leave it at just hangar talk for right now, and that was that the NASM would get a B-17 currently on outdoor display and Dayton's B-17's would remain where they are. Like I said, I would mark that up to hangar chat at this point.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

I mean no ill words toward anyone ... and please do no take anything personal ...

from 1999 thru 2006, while still living in both NJ & Ohio I visited the museum more times than I can imagine ... on my first visit, it appeared to be nothing more than two hangers with airplanes packed in like sardines and very little of a museum.

Since 2007, after moving from NJ to Ohio permanently, I have been a weekly Museum Volunteer.

I realize that many here are what I would call "warbird purists" in the most respectfull way.

However, in order to display all 3 B-17's in the WWII gallery, what should be removed? The gallery is about as filled as I would like.

I have mentioned here before, what makes me most proud, as a veteran of '52-'56 is the number of displays that tell the story behind the planes.

The visitors that come through and spend considerable time reading the historical displays is a tribute not only to our veterans of all conflicts, but to the history of our great military.

In books and institutions of learning, history can not be changed, but it can be removed and for those youngsters and adults who have never heard of stories on display at NMUSAF, it is an enlightening experience that many have expressed to not only myself but other volunteers as well.

As a side note, two of my co-volunteers are a F-4 Fighter pilot (101 combat missions) and an F-105 Fighter pilot. Both take time to inspire many of our visitors.

No hard feeling gang ... just my 2 cents.

_________________
Jerry
S/Sgt. - USAF Radio Operator '52-'56
C-119 "Flying Boxcar" - Korea & Japan

Volunteer: National Museum of the US Air Force (2007-2016)
LTM 381st Bomb Group Memorial Association

There are several G models on outside display that must come inside at some point before they just rot away. A G model could either go to Dayton or to the NASM. I still like the thought of Swamp Ghost making a permanent home in Dayton. A long shot I know.

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!

Let;s not forget that there is an F model on outdoor display as well.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Offut AFB. Is that the one?

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!

THat is the one!

Just a heads up. Both wings are on and she is on her gear.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

[quote="Misterg97"]
However, in order to display all 3 B-17's in the WWII gallery, what should be removed? The gallery is about as filled as I would like.

quote]

Jerry, I was thinking the exact same thing. As big a "wow" factor as it would be to see them all together, how much difference would it make to overall mission of the NMUSAF to have "G" model B-17 sitting next to an "F" next to a "D"? My guess is probably not much. And if you're going to do that, why not pull in the B-24J from Barksdale, park it next to SB so you can have a "D" and "J" there? Same result, right? As much as we "purists" might like to see it, I'm not sure how practical that is. Especially when there are large chunks of the USAF story that still need better telling (read: more money) at the museum (airlift anyone?).

But of course I think the glib answer would be, "Perhaps the NMUSAF should build another hangar?"

Your other observation is also well taken. When I first went to the museum as a kid, it was two hangars joined by a restaurant and the off-site hangar. It has really grown in a positive way in the interim and is a first rate institution.

Wow, awesome! Things are happening fast there. At this point Chris, do they have a timetable for the Belle? Are we looking at 3 more years or longer?

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!

Good points Jerry. They should not remove anything from the WW2 area. If anything an addition the the WW2 gallery would probably be the answer.

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!