OT: Memphis Belle leaving Memphis /going to AF museum

Just doesn't seem right does it? If the AF Museum has any intention of sitting it outside that would be a shame, the weather in Memphis is better than Dayton. Cheers,

The Keeper (of too much crap!)

Wouldn't bet on it being outside longer than it takes to cycle it through renovation.

Rick MFE

i really doubt they'll display it outside. and legally, it was always thier property, if i read the terms right.

The USAF Museum plans on a complete restoration over several years.

After completed they plan to make the "Belle" the center of a new WWII display. I would assume they mean an inside display.

Tom

I live in Memphis - for 48 years. The Belle has always had problems with a "good home." Once it was a hot item, the local folks still couldn't come up with enough money to do right by the Belle. Yoman work was done "by the few, for the many" (one of our IPMS*Memphis member's father was "Mr. Memphis Belle") to keep the Belle alive enough to hold the USAFM at bay. It became a political football for a while with the mayor wanting to keep it on Mud Island, but not spend any money on it - or take care of it appropriately. I, for one, am glad to see the USAFM take the Belle back. They will do a better job - the kind of job the Memphis Belle deserves. They have the interest and the resources.

Why/how did it get to Millington? As I recall, some hundreds of thousand of dollars were raised and spent to put it on Mud Island.

I was born there and the Belle was initially at the Guard armory on a concrete block. It had a great home at the Mud Island site .As I understand it from a chance vist with volunteer at the Mud island site last year, the city wanted the land and threw the Belle out. I'd love some input from people on the ground. If so, it is better off at the AF Museum. Hugh Mills

At least the USAFM has the expertise to restore and preserve one of the most historic aircraft in this country--most municipal organizations, even the most well-meaning, cannot sustain the financial and technical demands of a complicated and somewhat fragile airplane like a B-17. Add politics (and the need for public money) to the mix, and you'll end up with nothing but faded paint, rotting tires and corroded aluminum.

Mark Schynert

"Fragile"?...it's a damn "Flying Fortress"...I'd think it was built like a friggin' brick out-house...

What really desrtoys most aircraft is the fact that they don't fly on a continual basis any longer. They were built to fly, not to sit. I remember a number of year ago when BaE had a Gr.1 Tornado on my line, and not a huge operational margin to keep it in the air. They used to have to tow it around the airfield every few days to keep the tires round for when it DID fly. When airplanes sit, they break. Don't ask me why...it just works that way.

And I'm not sure how the USAF does it, but in the Navy museums, all of the work is done by volunteers - "expert" volunteers generally from the uniformed ranks mostly, but volunteers nonetheless. For some reason the USAF may have a larger and/or more motivated collection of volunteers, but I won't go thinking they have any more moneies available for them...and they may have a correspondingly larger pool of surplus parts to draw from considering airplanes are thier main business.

Sounds like the formula that killed the project to preserve the Aircraft Carrier Belleau Wood down at New Orleans. I understand after 15 years of sitting and rotting, she has gone to the scrapyard. Too bad!

Bill Shuey

Relatively speaking WWII aircraft are fragile, from age if nothing else.

Some of it is simple, lubricants don't flow, seals dry out and become brittle, moving parts begin to corrode to each other, corrosion in general sets in.....the biggest thing is somebody isn't paying attention to all the little things that can age and isn't maintaining them. Just like a car that sits for years, usually won't ever run right again......at least not without significant work before trying to start it.

Could be NJPD volunteers.......usually a decent pool of labor to be found there.

Somehow I think the ones that are kept flying are less "fragile" than the ones that sit and do nothing. I knew a guy that owned a P-38 and kept it (and his other aircrraft) in immaculate condition - and flew them regularly. I never considered any of them "fragile".

Yeah...and we STILL can't come up with a decent material for a fuel cell, even on a modern jet fighter...

Parts are a bigger concern than labor, I should think. Anyone can turn a wrench under supervision - especially if they are just building a display.

Personally, I think the folk in Memphis are owed a pat on the back for caring for her as long as they were able. I'm sort of sorry to see them lose her after watching a similar thing happen to my community with a B-29...kudos, Memphis.

Not to the scrapyard I hope! Where'd it wind up? tia,

The Keeper (of too much crap!)

It's actually being refirbed at the Boeing plant in Witchita, I think. In the exact location on the factory floor where it was originally built. I'm not sure what is supposed to happen to it after it's completed.