Bill Greenwood wrote:
The CAF, long a resource for these great old planes, has changed their policy last year. It think it is driven by economics, but they are going to the Korean War and Vietnam next. It may not be financially succesful in the long run. Are individuals or even museums going to own or operate many F-86s or B-52s.
With all due respect, Mr. Greenwood, and perhaps I've misinterpreted the above comment, but the CAF has indeed changed their policy to
include Korean and Vietnam era airplanes, but not to abandon the WWII era. I would think that our efforts on FIFI, the PBJ, Texas Raiders, Lady Lodestar, and so on to get them back in the air and flying with the rest of our WWII fleet are good indications that we have every intention to continue to honor the vets that are responsible for our freedoms and teach the youngsters about their sacrifice and heroism. Just like you do with your Spitfire.
I agree that the costs of owning or operating F-86's or B-52's would be difficult at best (which I don't think is our current plan), but I think it's fair to say that those very words were used when the WWII generation aircraft were available to people. That is one of the reasons that there are so few of them today and why there are so many aluminum cans.
Organizations such as the CAF, the Collings Foundation, the Doc Restoration Team, EAA Warbirds, etc., and individuals like you should understand more than anyone what will happen to all of these Warbirds, from WWII to Vietnam, if we don't preserve them in some way.
I don't know how we, at the CAF, will go about handling the preservation and display of the later era aircraft (not really my area to make those decisions here), but I fully support ANY activity that keeps them from the smelter.
Sorry for the rant, that is just my two cents worth.
Gary Austin
Crew Chief, B-29/B-24 Squadron
CAF