'I Agree 100% With Chuck Yeager'

[Panther_99FS]

In the Feb 2009 issue of Flight Journal magazine, in the "Tail View" column, Yeager says:

"Stop Wasting Warbirds"....

"There are many P-51s in excellent flying shape today...They are beautiful aircraft. Unfortunately, many of them are being destroyed today mostly by spoiled rich pilots at the Reno Air Races..."

[ben54b]

I have to agree also. If they want reno racers then have build there own airframes and engines from scratch...:censored::bs:

Ben

[Silver Fox]

I'd be happy if they outlawed historical aircraft.

Racing, in any form, should advance the technology... and racing 60 year old warbirds doesn't qualify on that front.

Allow turboprops in the same SHP range as powerplants and build new airframes... let's see what can be accomplished.

[wombat666]

We were at Mojave in October 1978.
I was not amused by the antics of the Whittington Brothers at all.
Idiots with too much (Drug) money and no sense of history.
Good on you General Yeager, you still have the 'Right Stuff!' in spades.
:applause::applause::applause:

[luckydog]

I'd be happy if they outlawed historical aircraft.

Racing, in any form, should advance the technology... and racing 60 year old warbirds doesn't qualify on that front.

Allow turboprops in the same SHP range as powerplants and build new airframes... let's see what can be accomplished.


:ernae::ernae:

[stiz]

but then you could argue that if that they'd spent how many millions it cost to run the planes that they should be allowed to do what they want with them?? And after all its not like theres a shortage of mustangs compared to other types :kilroy:

[HundertzehnGustav]

but then again, there are no new mustange being built, and a s long as there are none built, who will replace the ineviteable losses?

i remember that clip of the racing corsair going down in flames, and the pilot bailing "safely".

who will build a dozen new corsairs for the ones gone down?

Or that aerobatics team that took Harvards to water level and had the wheels on the water surface?
good looking stunt, but they did it over and over again, with 4+ planes in formation.

Their leader argued in the same way "there are still plenty of Harvards left, so what, we dont need to be careful..."

ah yea?
:icon31::cost1::banghead:

[stansdds]

I have mixed feelings about this issue. Aircraft were designed to fly and I enjoy seeing vintage aircraft in there element. I also enjoy the occasional ride in a vintage aircraft. On the other hand, they are old and once gone, there won't be any more of them. But what would an airshow be without these airborne beauties?

As for racing, there are accidents and sometimes aircraft end up being destroyed. It's a sad day when an aircraft, or worse yet, a pilot/crew, are lost. In the end, aircraft are private property and as such may be used as the owner sees fit, as long as both are within safety rules. The FAA can, and they have tried on more than one occasion, to ground aircraft over a set age and pilots over a set age.

[TeaSea]

The reality is, if it weren't for these spoiled little rich kids, few of these aircraft would be around, and fewer would be flying.

Spoiled little rich kids often make the world go 'round, and someone can always argue that their monies could be used more appropriately for some other just cause.

The wonder of a free market is that spoiled little rich kids get to use their money for pretty much whatever they damn well please.

Thank goodness.

[Panther_99FS]

There's spoiled rich kids who restore warbirds...

And there's spoiled rich kids who take restored warbirds and turn them into racers....

Give me the former...

[stiz]

but then, would those planes converterd into racers been flying if they hadnt?

its an agruement that cant be won really, both sides of it have valid points :engel016:

[cheezyflier]

i don't follow racing, so i can't offer a comment on the entire issue.
however, it seems sensible to me, as silverfox said, that racing should be about finding new limits with new technology. i'm not saying no to mustang racing, i'm saying that to me, there should be some sort of class run with all new technology, if there isn't one already.

[Daveroo]

i feel the same way..but not so much about the mustangs..they seem to be a dime a dozen...and i hate to see the so called "restorers" put duel controls and second seats in a single seat ac...put that 5th fuel tank back in there..even if its dummied to hide the new avionics...stop the two place mustangs please...but what bothers me about the reno airraces are the sea furies being used up...those are few and far between...and sooo many are being cut up into unrecoqnisable airframes for racing...thanks sanders bros...i live in auburn cal and i see then fly over the canyon and i admit i get excited to see them,but id rather see them in military colors and restored....tom dwelle of auburn..nella oil..he owned and flew critical mass..last i heard they are rebuilding it and bringing it back as a warbird....but it was so cut up and modified im not sure it can be done myself...

[oakfloor]

Last time I looked there were maybe? a hundred airworthy P-51's, and how many total aircraft have been destroyed at the reno airraces? not many IIRC. With all due respect to Mr. yeager he's almost 90 years old. We now have more people restoring, flying and buying, doing airshows with these old birds than ever before. But it takes lotsa money, and I think it great that they spend it on keeping them flying. How many of us remember the first time we heard a mustang flyby? and now the next generation can have the same joy we did. Granted there will always be the tragic crash, and some rich kids will always be spoiled. And oneday the last flyable 51' will make a smoking hole in the ground.. So enjoy it while you can.:mixedsmi:

[smoores]

They need to Upgrade the Sport class to the Unlimited. Planes like the Nemesis won the sport class at 489 mph. They are plenty fast and should be the only type of planes to race in that class now. The warplanes need to be preserved.

[Willy]

There's spoiled rich kids who restore warbirds...

And there's spoiled rich kids who take restored warbirds and turn them into racers....

Give me the former...


Spot on! :ernae:

[N2056]

I'd have to say I agree. Here's something I learned about a long time ago, which is related. I was lined up for a ride in a P-51...and on the day of the 'event' I got a call and was told it would not go. It was because the owner was on the east coast trying to locate an engine part. The boat racing types used Merlins back then, and apparently were going thru parts in a hurry...never was able to get it re-scheduled :banghead:

[lifejogger]

Thank God we have organizations like the Commemorative Air Force, The Collins Foundation, The Lone Star Flight Museum and others who restore the old warbirds and then keep em flying.

[EasyEd]

Hey All,

It's Christmas so I'll tread lightly but pose a few contrarian perspectives about several points made...


Racing, in any form, should advance the technology... A couple comments though.

0) Why does racing have to be about advancing technology? Maybe just racing in what earlier generations used makes for a better race in which the human element outweighs the technical element. Some might argue that the essence of racing is human against human not machine against machine. The ability to substitute technical ingenuity for a deficiency in human ability is certainly not justifiable as the ultimate criteria for the ultimate in racing of any kind. It's just some people's opinion that it is.

1) If all racing is about technology why do we test for the presence of "technology" in blood?

2) Supply and demand - if there is a big enough demand for P51s build more - it's being done with the otter - we have the technology.

3) If the demand to save WWII birds is really that great - pay for it. They can all be saved - all it takes is money.

4) Don't you have to wonder about respecting and saving the symbols of the past when humankind has virtually no ability to learn from what they represented?

Just a few thoughts as I watch out the window for the big snowstorm supposed to hit Vancouver Island any moment and add to the 20 odd inches of snow already on the ground.

No offense intended

-Ed-

[Piglet]

In a 100 years there will be no more warbirds flying. Then there will be a market for new-build warbird designs. Heck this has already started, with the 262 Project, new Yak-3's from Russia, along with I-16's etc.
But then again, they don't teach real history in schools anymore, so this may all just be a old un-PC memory...:isadizzy:

[Hals und Bein Bruch]

this is as deep as a thread gets, issues-wise, IMO

[Piglet]

Latest issue of AAHS has a story about the Pond Racer. Designed by Burt Rutan, who thinks the same as Yeager. Google Pond Racer and see what you find. :costumes: It may a future FSX project....

[researchpilot]

It such a shame the Pond Racer ended the way it did, if not then we probably would not have this as a topic right now. From memory Bob Pond had the same idea as Yeager and he commissioned Rutan to design and build the racer.

[Panther_99FS]

Interesting plane that Pond Racer!

[jbtate]

Check out "Illustrated Warbirds Guide" by Jeffery L. Ethel.
http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Classic-Warbirds-Buyers-Guide/dp/0879385448
jbtate

[smoores]

The Pond racer was the single greatest effort to save warbirds from racing. And in a sense, almost returned air racing back to the same glory as in the 30's.

[GT182]

I agree that the historical warbirds shouldn't be raced. And that includes them all, not just the P-51s. But then again it won't be long that any of the warbirds from WWII will be flying unless you're very very rich.

Hopefully, with a lotta luck, in 2009 I can get to see the jets race out at Reno. :jump:

[n4gix]

Latest issue of AAHS has a story about the Pond Racer. Designed by Burt Rutan, who thinks the same as Yeager. Google Pond Racer and see what you find. :costumes: It may a future FSX project....

Here is an FS9 version under development:

http://www.aerodynamika.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1227127382/0

[Prowler1111]

I contacted once Scaled Composites looking for permission to develop the Pond Racer for FS9, i was building this project as a personal favor to a close friend.As it turned out, Scaled Composites don´t own the PR copyright but Bob Pond, on contacting him (and i´m sorry to say...)i got very disappointed on his answer and even more on his attitude, denying permission (and in fact, threatened with legal action if i actually go ahead and make it)for a simulated version.All this happened in 2005
Best regards
Prowler

[Prowler1111]

I contacted once Scaled Composites looking for permission to develop the Pond Racer for FS9, i was building this project as a personal favor to a close friend.As it turned out, Scaled Composites don´t own the PR copyright but Bob Pond, on contacting him (and i´m sorry to say...)i got very disappointed on his answer and even more on his attitude, denying permission (and in fact, threatened with legal action if i actually go ahead and make it)for a simulated version.All this happened in 2005
Best regards
Prowler

[Odie]

This thread reminds me of the post-WW2 photos that I've seen showing row upon row of decommissioned warbirds awaiting a date with the scrap-man. Makes you wonder what if you could jump into the ole WAY-BACK machine with a pocket full of coin......

And while we're talking about saving things for historical record, I think that in our own way, simmers are helping to "keep them flying" by supporting the developers, repainters, and other tinkerers that help produce the a/c that we are now flying in FS9 and FSX and other flight sims. Tho nothing will ever replace the thrill of being able to walk-around and touch the real deal, the flightsim allows us the chance to experience to some degree what history has already laid down in the records.

Between accurate models, historically correct paints and other items that are developed for freeware and payware, we now have good representation of every era of flight. Within our PC flightsim world, we can somewhat maintain a sense of historical presence from now on. No matter what era, what country, or what a/c, I think everyone feels personally about a certain a/c. For me, it's the F-14. I watched the Big Cat from when it was first rolled out until it was retired. It'll fly on within my FS-world.

Never started out to be a museum curator, but I like to think that my personal hangar of FS9 aircraft represents parts of history that tho I didn't witness, I can still experience via the humble flight-sim.

[Willy]

I contacted once Scaled Composites looking for permission to develop the Pond Racer for FS9, i was building this project as a personal favor to a close friend.As it turned out, Scaled Composites don´t own the PR copyright but Bob Pond, on contacting him (and i´m sorry to say...)i got very disappointed on his answer and even more on his attitude, denying permission (and in fact, threatened with legal action if i actually go ahead and make it)for a simulated version.All this happened in 2005
Best regards
Prowler

Reminds me of when Paramount used to threaten legal action on FS developers for doing Star Trek stuff. As far as I know, they still do.

[Odie]

Reminds me of when Paramount used to threaten legal action on FS developers for doing Star Trek stuff. As far as I know, they still do.

If any studio has ever squeezed every cent out of a franchise, Paramount has done it with Star Trek....very agressive in terms of keeping an eye on anything that isn't officially sanctioned.

[cheezyflier]

if they like the mustang design so much, why don't they just start making them again? there is plenty of old detroit iron on the road that is patched together with reproduction parts. if the hot rod industry can do it, i see no reason that aviation couldn't do it also. there is not one part for a 68 ford mustang that you couldn't buy reproduction or rebuilt. same with the chevelle and the nova. they could do the same thing with a plane

[wombat666]

I became very pissed off with the unlimiteds when the owners began to stick 'corncobs' onto the front of their Sea Furys.
I know why (a sleeve valve radial is RPM limited) but it made a botch of a very handsome aeroplane.
IMHO, the 'Un-Limited' class should be purpose built racong aircraft following the bloodlines of the designs begun by the Granville Brothers, Matty Laird and Benny Howard, to name a few.
:kilroy:

[Bomber_12th]

I can very well see both sides, but I tend to lean more towards the direction at which accurate and substantial facts are presented, instead of just blatant remarks, as I believe Yeager's to be. I personally don't see how a person's wealth changes their piloting skills, or how they handle their warbird(s) - I have seen excellent pilots and care-holders from all walks of life.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
I'm glad that there are folks, who in this day-in-age, can keep up with the rising costs of insurance and maintenance to keep the aircraft flying, in any shape or form, and present them to folks almost entirely free of charge, or have the resources to increase the realm of authenticity in current restorations, as have the oil and business-tycoons. As an example, if it weren't for the USAF museum stepping in, we might even very well have a P-82 close to flying, thanks to actor Tom Cruise and his resources. From my viewpoint, Yeager should be thankful enough that he has had the opportunity to fly the Mustang, in recent years, due to the generosity of wealthy owners and pilots.
<o:p></o:p>
From Yeager's Reno-air-racing comment, 'many' is a very far stretch all of its own. The average number of flying P-51s is somewhere around 150 (3-4 on average are added each year), and of those I can only think of maybe 8-10 that partake in the Reno air races, probably less, of which only 4-5 actually push the limits and are highly modified. Of those, when was the last accident? Why then, I have to ask, is this being brought up when safety is actually being increased each year, as it has been for quite some time. Not just at <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Reno</st1:place></st1:City>, but in the warbird community at large. The limited amount of warbird accidents that I can think of, which have taken place at <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Reno</st1:place></st1:City> over the last decade, don't seem to be the results of pushing the aircraft to the limits either. Frankly, I would have worded it better, aimed at the specific minority of pilots/owners, of which there might only be a couple that could use some better judgment, though it is their property after all. (I have my own reasons to believe why Yeager might have said what he did, but I won't bring those up).
<o:p></o:p>
Not entirely related, but thankfully, as there are becoming less airframes to restore (they're flying instead), several restoration companies have the ability to make Mustangs (and other warbirds) from practically nothing these days. Both P-51B's, "Old Crow" and "Impatient Virgin?", which completed restoration this year, are estimated at 75-80% new-build. Currently, there are two or three more P-51B/C's being built practically from all new parts (while a couple other originals are also undergoing restoration to fly next year). Without the skills of these shops the P-51B/C would not be seeing the rebirth that it currently is, when the option of restoring an actual P-51B/C airframe is extremely minimal at best. Tri-State Aviation has built enough components for 9-10 new P-51A's, and there are multiple companies building all-new P-51D sections for new-builds - the demand is definitely there.

[Curtis P40]

How can you bump heads with Gen Yeager, he's one of my Heros. That being said, what would you rather do, walk around a muesum of old aircraft, or down a flightline with the aircraft ready to takeoff, or better yet a Flight in one, for a price. Thur my years I have built 100's of models, as a kid I had carboard wings and a tail taped to my bike, me and my buddy even built a plywood Beufighter, that saw penty of action. Now in life I've had the chance to fly in a B-17, and Collings P-51c. Thank You, to all of you that keep these aircraft flying, that's what aircraft are suppose to do. As far as "the rich Reno boys" the pilot I flew with in the P-51, Will Whiteside, flies a Yak at Reno. Mr Whiteside had already completed an hour flight in the hot July sun before my flight with another waiting behind me. He seamed like a kid in candy store, just like me, before we climbed aboard. Man what a ride, right down to the mock strafing run on CSX train, liked to have seen the face on the engineer. The Betty Jane is a beautiful aircraft inside and out, and better yet in the air.
www.teamsteadfast.com/ (http://www.teamsteadfast.com/) I'm out of hot air, Curt, Keep e'm flying

[idancesafetydance]

The reality is, if it weren't for these spoiled little rich kids, few of these aircraft would be around, and fewer would be flying.

Spoiled little rich kids often make the world go 'round, and someone can always argue that their monies could be used more appropriately for some other just cause.

The wonder of a free market is that spoiled little rich kids get to use their money for pretty much whatever they damn well please.

Thank goodness.

Damn staight


(BTW, that was pretty badass.):jump:

[TeaSea]

Panther started a wonderful thread and I did not mean for my comments to to be so in your face. Certainly everyone is entitled to their opinion....and Gen Yeager has certainly earned the right to state his (and earned it for many of us as well). However, with all due respect, Gen Yeager flew these and subsequent machines at the expense of the American taxpayer.

The reality is that the only reason these machines are flying now is because private individuals are willing to fund them. Here in the U.S. we do not provide DOD funds to anything but the basic types of heritage organizations. We fund static museums, and we provide basic information (my annual CFC donation is to the Civil War Heritage which buys up real estate near battlefields so they are not developed). We do not use our defense funds to maintain increasingly expensive aerial weapons platforms for the enjoyment of the masses. We use our Defense funding to defend the nation.

There are of course many groups that keep these aircraft flying like the CAF and the Collins foundation. I have found myself writing a check out to these folks on more than one occasion...

But, it just so happens that many of the private individuals Gen Yeager refers to are racing these platforms. More power to them. Were they not, these aircraft would long ago been recycled into environmentally friendly hybrid automobiles, and generations would not be hearing the raw power and sound of a Merlin at high rev consuming vast amounts of petrol and spewing tons of carbon emissions into the atmosphere . My Lycoming 0360 just isn't quite the same thing.

Another thing I would add is that unlike today, where we develop aircraft to last a generation or so, these warbirds were built to get through the next year or two. Their maintenance and upkeep is therefore expensive. They were not designed for economics, they were designed for raw power.

The Cessna 172 I fly was designed for economics. That's why there are so many of them around and I suspect there will be no need for spoiled rich kids to purchase them....

[NWarty]

Thanks for the publicity Fr. Bill, slowly but surely she's coming along :isadizzy:

EDIT: Eeek! Haven't posted since the new forums went up and I'm back to one post. Sheesh! :mixedsmi: