No more flying Warbirds?

[beau32]

http://www.eaa.org/news/2012/2012-04-18_title10.asp

Aparently the Government wants to stop all warbirds from flying and make them museum displays. Please be respectful and dont turn this into a political discussion....

EAA and the Warbirds of America are joining with the Commemorative Air Force, Collings Foundation, and other warbird groups in opposition of a proposed amendment to the House National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4310) that could have a devastating effect on the fleet of civilian-operated historic military aircraft.

The amendment introduced by Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) would bar the Department of Defense from loaning or gifting any U.S. military aircraft or parts to any entity except those that would put the aircraft on static display, such as in a museum. The amendment would preclude the aircraft from being loaned to private individuals, associations, or museums where there is any intent of flying the historic vintage warbirds, even at air shows or demonstrations of support for veterans.

Military branches such as the U.S. Air Force often do not donate aircraft to private groups outright; they instead "loan" them under a Defense Department provision, Section 2572 of Title 10, to individuals and groups for indefinite periods. These private individuals and groups usually restore and operate the aircraft at their own expense to demonstrate these pieces of flying history to events such as EAA AirVenture Oshkosh.

"The Department of Defense has made numerous attempts through the years to preclude any former military aircraft from being flown in civilian hands," said Doug Macnair, EAA's vice president of government relations. "This view has never been supported by any safety or security imperative and is currently being couched as a move to supposedly 'preserve' rare military aircraft. We can be assured that the U.S. military has neither the funding nor the mandate to preserve these aircraft in flying condition, which would leave the only option for them to be used as static museum displays. That would truly be a tragedy and a loss of our aviation and military heritage."

Rep. Turner's district includes Dayton, Ohio, home of the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force, which has been adamant in its attempts to ground former U.S. military aircraft. Ironically, Dayton is the same site where this week more than 20 B-25 bombers - preserved and flown by private groups and individuals - are gathering in a public spectacle to honor the 70th anniversary of the famed Doolittle Raid on Japan.

EAA and the other warbird groups are working with staff in the House's Armed Services Committee and Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, as well as the House General Aviation Caucus as the Defense Authorization Bill goes into initial committee review next week and to the House floor in early May. Although the exact language of the amendment has not been shared with the aviation community or widely on Capitol Hill, Rep. Turner plans to push the amendment despite initial congressional opposition.

EAA and Warbirds of America recommend that members contact their congressional representatives, urging them to voice their opposition to the Turner amendment and in support of maintaining the private ability to restore and fly these historic aircraft.

[clerick]

The DOD doesn't have the funds? Cancel a single F-35 and you could rebuild and maintain a lot of old warbirds.

[pembquist]

This is the kind of thing that really requires more information.  My first question would be how many "loaned" (why the quotes?) aircraft are flying vs privately owned? 

I read an article about the kind of horse trading that goes on with the military museums and private collectors under different directors and I have a suspicion that this bill comes out of the politics around that. 

I care for the hyperbole: "devastating effect" nor the exploitation of patriotism: "even at air shows or demonstrations of support for veterans," in the language of the call to arms from EAA et al.

I have no desire to see rare warbirds left outside to rot because the military or the Smithsonian doesn't have the funds so I can see the point of the "loans."  On the other hand I don't see why if these planes are so rare and valuable they should be lent out without restrictions. 

The bigger question, (which I don't think is really what is going on in this little power fight,) is what should you do with rare AC. If there is only one of a kind left is it reasonable to risk flying it?  I don't think its an easy question to answer,  I feel pretty confident that there are one of a kind private planes flying and nobody really cares.  Say there was only one original, (not built up around an original rivet found in a salt marsh,) Spitfire left in the world, how would people feel if it didn't fly? If it did and crashed? Compare that to the same situation but with a Westland Whirlwind, it seems to me there is a difference.

If I was king I would probably decide that "truly rare and historically significant," (in my opinion,) AC would be kept in flying condition but limited to static display and then I would make original 1942 rivets freely available so the rich guys wouldn't have to dig in the salt marsh and could build up a fleet of slightly less "truly rare and historically significant" AC to fly around and impress the crowds and "support veterans."

On a related note, I personally am more interested in ww2 prop aircraft than in any of the jets that have been created since.  Is this universal or is it just my age and susceptibility? How about y'all.

[icepac]

Most of the recently restored planes were restored because someone wanted a flying example.

Because of this, we have more warbirds than 30 years ago to enjoy.

[Chalenge]

I would love to have an A10 to fly! 

[hawkeye61]

Airplanes are built to be flown, not sit around. Fly 'em. Make more of them for when you crash 'em.

[bozon]

The DOD doesn't have the funds? Cancel a single F-35 and you could rebuild and maintain a lot of old warbirds.

With that kind of funs you could restore the entire 8th airforce.

[Lab Rat 3947]

speaking of Spitfires, check this out.   

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29149234/squadron-of-lost-supermarine-spitfires-found-in-burma

[Lab Rat 3947]

ignore the first link, use this one

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/04/19/buried-treasure-in-burma-squadron-lost-wwii-spitfires-to-be-exhumed/

for Spitfire lovers this must be a dream come true. Hopefully the UK will be able to retrieve them.

didn't mean to hijack thread but thought it would be of interest.   

[clerick]

ignore the first link, use this one

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/04/19/buried-treasure-in-burma-squadron-lost-wwii-spitfires-to-be-exhumed/

for Spitfire lovers this must be a dream come true. Hopefully the UK will be able to retrieve them.

didn't mean to hijack thread but thought it would be of interest.   

Old news

[earl1937]

http://www.eaa.org/news/2012/2012-04-18_title10.asp

Aparently the Government wants to stop all warbirds from flying and make them museum displays. Please be respectful and dont turn this into a political discussion....

Not sure what "they" are trying to stop from flying, just google "military aircraft for sale", and you will find a ton of used military aircraft for SALE, everything from a 1938 Rayan ST-3KR, PT-22 for $74,500.00 to a NA P-51D, $2,145,000.00 with a T-28 in the middle, $149,500.00! My guess is that "they" are trying to stop the DOD from declaring aircraft surplus, which if they are, are then open for bids from private industry or private citizens.

[Fencer51]

The only flying B-29 'FIFI' is on loan to the CAF from the government...

[Guppy35]

This is basically the airplane equivalent of the NRA sending out the latest "they're going to try and take our guns!" article.

This isn't about shutting down WW2 warbirds.  A bit tough to stop the Spitfires and Hurricanes from flying in the US since they're not US equipment and never owned by the US Government 

If anything it's more about folks trying to buy themselves an F-16, and even then you have all kinds of birds that were sold to foreign countries that if sold to a US buyer wouldn't fit either as the US Government has no claim on them.

This seems to float around every couple of years.  I wouldn't panic