PDA

View Full Version : Ft. Worth Might Lose Last B-36


Moses03
June 10th, 2005, 09:49
Only 4 examples left in existence and sadly, no home for this one right now.



Efforts to keep B-36 may not fly

http://www.dfw.com/images/common/spacer.gif
By Chris Vaughn
http://www.dfw.com/images/common/spacer.gif
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
http://www.dfw.com/images/common/spacer.gif

FORT WORTH - Supporters of the B-36 Peacemaker Museum group are calling on residents to mount a national campaign to keep the rare bomber in its hometown.

The Air Force, the target of the campaign, says it doesn't matter -- the Fort Worth-built bomber is still heading to the Pima Air and Space Museum in Tucson, Ariz., probably this summer.

"The Air Force decision on the B-36 remains firm, as it was made in the best interests of the aircraft," said Rob Bardua, a spokesman for the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.

The president of the B-36 museum group, retired Brig. Gen. Bill Guy, hopes pressure from the public and from the Tarrant County delegation in Congress, will influence higher-ups to rethink the decision by the director of the Air Force museum.

"We've got an uphill climb," Guy said. "We realize that. ... Usually his decisions are very valid. We feel in this case it's premature."

The B-36, one of only four of the 10-engine, Cold War bombers left, has been in Fort Worth for decades even though the Air Force owns it.

Restored from near-ruin by a group of volunteers in the mid-1990s, the plane was supposed to be the centerpiece of a museum dedicated to the rich aviation history of Fort Worth.

But fund raising by two aviation-related groups, the Peacemaker organization and the Aviation Heritage Association, has never gained momentum. The plane has remained largely hidden from public view at Lockheed Martin's plant in west Fort Worth.

In May, the Air Force museum rejected the B-36 Peacemaker Museum's request to display the aircraft at Meacham Airport and ordered it moved to Arizona.

That decision touched off an outcry similar to that in the early 1990s when the Air Force wanted to move the airplane to South Dakota. Then, the public relations campaign worked, and the Air Force gave Fort Worth another chance.

In a full-page ad in the Star-Telegram on Wednesday, B-36 supporters called on the public to write to members of Congress, the Fort Worth City Council and top Air Force leaders to reverse the decision of retired Maj. Gen. Charles Metcalf.

U.S. Rep. Kay Granger, through a spokesman, said she will continue to "work to keep it home, just as I have through the years."

City Councilman Clyde Picht, a strong supporter of the B-36, was sharply critical of the "blase" attitude of the City Council toward keeping the airplane.

"If we have a strong enough desire, we can get it reversed," Picht said.

But the decision, Bardua said, was not Metcalf's alone. Senior Air Force leaders, lawyers and top museum officials all agreed, Bardua said.

The Peacemaker group does not have the experience or finances to take care of the bomber, Metcalf wrote the group last month.

Metcalf, responding to Wednesday's ad, said, "Any calls, faxes or e-mails will still not change their status or qualify them as a museum."

A spokesman for Gen. John Jumper, the Air Force chief of staff, said that Jumper was unlikely to get involved in the dispute.

"General Metcalf is there to make those calls," Capt. Aaron Burgstein said.

To what degree a documentary made with the B-36 is hurting the cause of the Fort Worth group is unknown.

Last year, the group assisted a Canadian filmmaker in using the B-36 for filming without permission from the Air Force museum.

The museum requires groups to get approval for the use of aircraft in movies, in part to make sure the film "benefits the Air Force," Bardua said.

As it turns out, the documentary, Lost Nuke, about a training accident in 1950 that involved a nuclear weapon, implicated the Air Force in a cover-up of the incident.

But Guy said the filmmaker had authorization from Air Force public affairs at the Pentagon.

"We were never involved in that, except helping them put up some tarps so they could film in the hangar," Guy said. "Air Force public affairs authorized that."

Although not pleased with the oversight, the museum did not consider it when deciding the plane's future, Bardua said.

"The decision was based solely on providing the best long-term care and preservation of this rare aircraft," he said.

Chris Vaughn, (817) 390-7547 vaughn@star-telegram.com (vaughn@star-telegram.com)






For my money one of the best looking aircraft ever designed.


Moses

Willy
June 10th, 2005, 13:03
Sounds like the Air Force is taking a page from the Navy's book on these old aircraft and getting a bit snatchy-grabby as they call it in this neck of the woods.

There was the deal a year or so ago with the Navy wanting to confinscate a wrecked rare version Corsair from a guy who was trying to restore it. I believe after a long court battle the Navy lost that one. Could be mistaken though.

Then the Air Force Museum decided in the middle of it's current restoration, that the original B-17F "Memphis Belle" would go back to them. Don't know where they're going to put her, but it's pretty certain that it won't be Memphis where she's been for years. I agree that she don't need to be back out on Mud Island under that dome, but they should have said something before the restoration work was undertaken by the folks in the Memphis Belle group. (I donated some of my scarce cash towards her restoration)

Reckon the USAF prefers to have others do their restoration work for 'em, then take the aircraft back. :angryfir:

Willy

crashaz
June 10th, 2005, 13:08
OK I have not been to the Pima Air Museum since I was a kid... but do they now have the room inside to store the aircraft under shelter? When I was there... all the planes were sitting outside!!!


How about it P... or anyone else down Tucson way for that matter??

Wittpilot
June 10th, 2005, 18:06
My father was president of the 390th Memorial Museum, which lies whithin Pima... this information is pretty surprising to me as I always thought the Air Force & Pima didn't see quite eye to eye... However, as I have stated earlier many moons ago, the director of the USAFM seems to come off like a "hot-head" and likes to bully people around... Scuttlebut caries even among just simple loyal museum visitors. *Although it helps to have someone on the inside:wiggle: In regards to the previous question, No they do not have the facilities to put the Peacemaker indoors... Although they did have this huge plan to build many new hangers and put many of their planes indoors, those have fallen through... To give them credit though, the aircraft they have restored and put indoors like the B-29 B-24 Corsair & B-25 are excellent....
-adam

N7470
June 10th, 2005, 23:53
I've been following this B-36 for years. If it does go to Pima, it will end up like all the other aircraft out in the sun there, bleached, and covered in dust. They have enough large aircraft to care(or not care for) already, like the oldest existing B-52, a B-52A, the NB-52A at that. I'm sorry, I just can't help but notice that all the aircraft they seem to get so easily are not taken care of aside from getting the windows painted over. They did doa nice job with the JRS and PBM, however, but they are still kept outside(I think). I would be more than happy to toss that idea if they scrounged enough money to put all these aircraft in hangars, however. :D

Christopher Hill