Dave Stadt wrote:
"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

=K=5=D=H= wrote:

because we display the airplane
both in the Museum and at air shows and fly-ins.


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

I'm appalled to see your group is flying this priceless airplane.
Sooner or later someone will crack it up and there will be one less for
future generations to see. Please put pressure on your group to ground
it permanently and preserve it forever so out great-great grandchildren
and all future generations can have the opportunity to see the real
thing and not some replica.

73, Bill W6WRT

An airplane that is not flown is so much scrap metal. They were designed
and built to be flown and in the air is where they belong. If someone wants
a static display let them build a replica.



Add to that the fact that this 'priceless airplane' is only such
*because* this group invested heavily in its existence. Without their
contribution of time, effort, money and hardship, it would--in
fact--(still) be only so much scrap metal.

jak

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

I'm appalled to see your group is flying this priceless airplane.
Sooner or later someone will crack it up and there will be one less for
future generations to see. Please put pressure on your group to ground
it permanently and preserve it forever so out great-great grandchildren
and all future generations can have the opportunity to see the real
thing and not some replica.

73, Bill W6WRT

An airplane that is not flown is so much scrap metal. They were
designed and built to be flown and in the air is where they belong.
If someone wants a static display let them build a replica.


Add to that the fact that this 'priceless airplane' is only such
*because* this group invested heavily in its existence. Without their
contribution of time, effort, money and hardship, it would--in
fact--(still) be only so much scrap metal.

jak

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring the pot"
comes to mind.

-Chuck

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

Bill Turner wrote:
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

Well, I am sorry to hear that Bill. You obviously aren't familiar
with the major causes of loss in restorable antique aircraft:

(In approximate order)

1) lack of people willing to pay for restoration
2) hanger fires
3) natural disasters.

I have seen a few rare aircraft that have crashed, and guess what?
As soon as they get the pilot out, they go back into restoration.

There seems to be loads of money available to restore antique aircraft
to flight, but little available for restoration to static display.

And in my opinion, that is exactly how it should be. Whoever pays
the freight gets to decide how the plane is used. Everyone else
is just a spectator.

-Chuck

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

If you feel that way you should purchase them and put them in a museum.
Most would not have survived and will not survive without the intent to fly.
Not much money available for the restoration of static displays. Lotsa
money available for flying restorations. Glaicer girl is an excellent
example.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in
:



If you feel that way you should purchase them and put them in a museum.
Most would not have survived and will not survive without the intent to
fly. Not much money available for the restoration of static displays.
Lotsa money available for flying restorations. Glaicer girl is an
excellent example.


And the Memphis Belle is an example of a static display going down the tubes.
Still not finished and now moved to Dayton, the US Air Force museum due to
lack of funds to keep the Belle in condition. Those machines were meant to
fly and should be flown. It's really sad to see them rot away on the ground.
In the air they are living history, and give peole a chance to experience the
ground pounding thunder of their mighty engines as they soar overhead. And
very ocaisonally one may get the opportunity to fly in one of them if they
are very lucky as a friend of mine did a few years ago in one of the last
Lancaster bombers left flying.

--
Panzer

"Panzer240" wrote in message
...
"Dave Stadt" wrote in
:



If you feel that way you should purchase them and put them in a museum.
Most would not have survived and will not survive without the intent to
fly. Not much money available for the restoration of static displays.
Lotsa money available for flying restorations. Glaicer girl is an
excellent example.


And the Memphis Belle is an example of a static display going down the
tubes.
Still not finished and now moved to Dayton, the US Air Force museum due to
lack of funds to keep the Belle in condition. Those machines were meant to
fly and should be flown. It's really sad to see them rot away on the
ground.
In the air they are living history, and give peole a chance to experience
the
ground pounding thunder of their mighty engines as they soar overhead. And
very ocaisonally one may get the opportunity to fly in one of them if they
are very lucky as a friend of mine did a few years ago in one of the last
Lancaster bombers left flying.

--
Panzer


Another grounded B-17G is parked outside at the Tulare, CA Airport
URL:
http://ben92252-01.tripod.com/index.htm
--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !

You can see "Preston's Pride" a B17G at the Tulare, CA Airport if you go to
the Visalia, CA - DX Convention URL:
http://www.dxconvention.org/

The 57th Annual DX Convention - A must for DXers -- April 21, 22 & 23 2006
--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !

"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:jqmUf.13996$6a1.4829@fed1read04...

Another grounded B-17G is parked outside at the Tulare, CA Airport
URL:
http://ben92252-01.tripod.com/index.htm
--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !

Panzer240 wrote:
"Dave Stadt" wrote in
:


If you feel that way you should purchase them and put them in a museum.
Most would not have survived and will not survive without the intent to
fly. Not much money available for the restoration of static displays.
Lotsa money available for flying restorations. Glaicer girl is an
excellent example.


And the Memphis Belle is an example of a static display going down the tubes.
Still not finished and now moved to Dayton, the US Air Force museum due to
lack of funds to keep the Belle in condition. Those machines were meant to
fly and should be flown. It's really sad to see them rot away on the ground.
In the air they are living history, and give peole a chance to experience the
ground pounding thunder of their mighty engines as they soar overhead. And
very ocaisonally one may get the opportunity to fly in one of them if they
are very lucky as a friend of mine did a few years ago in one of the last
Lancaster bombers left flying.

Aww...that's too bad. I only saw her once back in the 80's and she
looked fine back then. I guess I should have questioned (in my mind
anyway) the wisdom of keeping her in open air beside--no, in the middle
of (Mud Island - Memphis)--the Mississippi River; but they went to a lot
of trouble to get her there. It's a shame to have abandoned the effort.

This is a case of perhaps a machine which should only be static
displayed. She's not one of the thousands of anonymous 17's remembered
only by their dwindling numbers of surviving crew; but rather a piece of
history with an unparalleled combat record at the time of her retirement.

She's done her bit...

jak

Wow... didn't realize the scope of this...
In that case, it seems there are plenty of people here who think you are an
idiot also.
So agree to disagree and be done with it.
rb


"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill