"The Swoose"!

[phil65]

https://warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-news/ ... woose.html

Phil

[Noha307]

This will be quite the interesting project, as NMUSAF will be using a combination restoration and conservation/preservation approach for, as near as I can tell, essentially the first time. Pretty much all of their projects up to this point have been straight restorations, so I'm looking forward to seeing how the new process works. From the aircraft's profile page:

The NMUSAF is beginning the restoration/conservation of the B-17D known as The Swoose. The aircraft is the only early "shark fin" B-17 known to exist and is the only surviving B-17 to have seen action in the Philippines in the opening days of World War II in the Pacific.

During its service life in combat, it was known as Ole Betsy. After seeing initial combat in the Philippines, it was evacuated to Australia in 1942. While undergoing depot repairs, the tail of another B-17D was attached to the original aircraft, and the aircraft was renamed The Swoose - a combination of a swan and a goose. At that time, new art was added to the right side of the aircraft. The aircraft never returned to combat, and ultimately became a transport aircraft for General George Brett, serving in that capacity until its retirement in December 1945. During its later service life, additional modifications were done to the aircraft wings and other structures.

In considering how best to preserve the aircraft, the NMUSAF is opting to take a combined restoration/conservation approach to bring the aircraft back to life in its transport configuration. The numerous modifications done over the years; the existence of original art and markings; and the components the NMUSAF possesses all point to this configuration being the best choice. By combining both restoration and conservation, the NMUSAF intends to preserve as much of the original markings as possible.

NMUSAF estimates the work will take at least 7 years.

Project Description/scope: This is both a restoration and conservation project. Some airframe areas need repair and restoration for structural integrity and exhibit-worthiness, while others will be conserved as-is to maintain originality. The overall aim is to present the artifact in the context in which it was received, i.e., to preserve it in the configuration of its final mission. A combination of restoration and preservation will ensure its longevity, structural and historical integrity, and safe public display in a controlled environment. This means that the aircraft's identity as The Swoose will be maintained with as much original fabric in situ as possible. The minimally invasive preservation approach is one option in the spectrum of possible restoration/preservation/conservation practice, and as in all NMUSAF restoration work assures the artifact's ethical treatment as a museum object.

Project Justification: This project strengthens the NMUSAF's identity as the premier collection of American combat aircraft and promises to increase visitorship by being the only "straight tail" B-17 on exhibit in the world. The Swoose's distinctive shape and its fascinating record of combat, reconfiguration, and transport service rounds out the Pacific Theater WWII air power story and improves the Museum's Global Reach interpretation. Preserving the plane as it was received, i.e., as a transport, respects its
integrity as an artifact, eliminates very difficult or impossible physical restoration and equipment issues, and helps tell Airmen's stories with authenticity. Airpower enthusiasts eagerly await its completion, and casual visitors will appreciate its unique story and appearance.

(Source: National Museum of the United States Air Force)

[JohnB]

I saw it in the museum restoration center shortly after its arrival in 2011.
At that time I was told the Memphis Belle had priority.
Well, you can't accuse them of rushing the job.

A family connection; my dad's A-2 Jacket has a leather patch on it showing a swan with a B-17 tail and titled "Swoose Group".
He was assigned to the 463rd BG, 15th AF. Its first commander was Frank Kurtz....former pilot of The Swoose.
In one of the pockets was an old (and undated) newspaper article announcing the arrival of the ship at Andrews for eventual inclusion into the Smithsonian.
In the other pocket was a typed B-17 checklist stapled between two sheets of clear plastic.

[Chris Brame]

Restored as a transport? Does that mean they won't be using the new-build ventral "bathtub" gun position they made for it? Paging the B-17C Project...

[gemmer]

Restored as a transport? Does that mean they won't be using the new-build ventral "bathtub" gun position they made for it? Paging the B-17C Project...

Restoring it as a transport is a cop out.

[Pat Carry]

Great news from the NMUSAF! I hope I am still around when the work is completed.

[Xrayist]

For those of you who think it is wrong not to restore it to its combat configuration, think of this...if it had not been for the accomplishments as a "transport version", it probably would have been scrapped. The transport configuration is where it gained it fame, if you will. IMO, thinking that it should be restored to "combat" configuration, then should P-51C Excalibur III be restored to wartime configuration even though history recognizes the accomplishments it made as a non-combat aircraft? How about Conquest 1? Return to stock F8F configuration? Not to try and cause an argument here, but sometimes you have to consider what accomplishments were more important and more historically important.

[kalamazookid]

Glad to see work resuming on this! I don't have strong feelings on seeing it restored as a transport versus combat configuration - either way, this is a unique airframe that I'm looking forward to seeing conserved, restored and FINALLY displayed somewhere.

[quemerford]

I recall that the RAF Museum received similar criticism when it decided to restore Tempest NV778 in a target tug color scheme.

I always find it a great shame that folks can't see behind the "combat" side of aviation history and remember instead that every aircraft in every role deserves to be commemorated. Crews served - and died - in all theatres, and in all types of aircraft, civilian and military. To neglect any part of that rich history is to present a skewed and false impression.

History is not selective and we should not be selective about what is 'right' or 'wrong' when it comes to aviation heritage.

[Saabmeister]

Restored as a transport? Does that mean they won't be using the new-build ventral "bathtub" gun position they made for it? Paging the B-17C Project...

Restoring it as a transport is a cop out.

Attachments

opinion.JPG (32.81 KiB) Viewed 1997 times

[StangStung]

Really glad to hear this. I assume they have a significant body of B-17 knowledge built up in their restoration crew by this point. Taking apart Shoo, Shoo; restoring and displaying Memphis Belle, and now Swoose. Makes sense to use that collective knowledge while it's there. My only question is where are they going to put it?!

As for the bomber vs. transport - For museum pieces, you have to respect the provenance. It is most significant as what it was and currently is. If you tried to make it into something else, then do you really have a museum worthy artifact?

I'm glad they're being thoughtful and considerate on restoration/conservation/preservation. The original bits are only original once.

[JohnB]

The original bits are only original once.

The problem is the Swoose hasn't been original in 80 years.
To make it "original" it needs to be a bomber as it left the factory.

That term "it's only original once" started with the antique car crowd, as a way of saying some artifacts should not be restored, in other words don't replace old but serviceable paint or interior To make it perfect.
So if we take that term at it common definition, with a much modified aircraft like the Swoose, there isn't much factory original left, so that ship sailed long ago.

So if we mean that it means to be kept in its 1942-spec. That's fine, but that is not original, original (if you get my meaning).
Post delivery service use modified "original" yes, but not original in the strict sense of the word.

I can see where they are coming from, the major history of the Swoose is as a transport.

The problem comes with the fact that it is pretty much the world's only chance to have a STOCK early model B-17 on display.

The fact is that airframe achieved a measure of period fame as a transpirt. Yeah, and I guess several VIPs flew in it.

Does that trump the need/desire to have a representative of the model of B-17s that initially saw combat?
I have a hunch the powers that be figured it would be easier to keep its passenger mods than return it to a combat configuration.

Personally, I'm good either way.

My only issue is it is too bad it wasn't done when some WWII vets who flew or serviced it could have appreciated it.

Last edited by JohnB on Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Chris Brame]

Their plane, their decision... So I guess from parsing out their word salad, it'll be NMF and 1945-era markings?

If you'd like a corollary, look no further than the fine folks resurrecting 41-2595 aka Desert Rat/Tangerine - the names are all they're keeping from its "service life as a transport"; the rest is going back to stock USAAF configuration as it was for the first part of its career as a combat-ready Fort. Their plane, their decision (and yeah, it's a decision I agree with).

Hope the B-17C Project gives us a good re-creation of a shiny new Sharkfin instead.

[lucky52]

We’re the bomb racks removed?

[quemerford]

The original bits are only original once.

The problem comes with the fact that it is pretty much the world's only chance to have a STOCK early model B-17 on display.

OR, pretty much the world's only chance to see The Swoose restored in a cargo configuration.

Neither argument should be more important than the other.