TIGHAR

Historic Aircraft Recovery and Preservation => War / Service Related Aircraft topics => Topic started by: Chris Johnson on December 07, 2013, 02:14:00 PM

Title: P40-B Warhawk returns to US
Post by: Chris Johnson on December 07, 2013, 02:14:00 PM
See fox news article (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/07/rare-warplane-that-survived-pearl-harbor-attack-returning-to-us/)
Title: Re: P40-B Warhawk returns to US
Post by: Monty Fowler on December 08, 2013, 04:00:04 PM
*pinkie claps* I'm glad it's coming home to the USA, but this does give me pause: 1) It is cobbled together from a crashed P-40B (the one that was at Wheeler Field) and 2 other P-40s. I wonder how much of the "Pearl Harbor P-40B" the resultant aircraft really contains, and 2) the CollingsFoundation flies its aircraft. Is that bad in and of itself? No. Is it questionable when the aircraft is extremely rare or the last one left? To me, Yes.

LTM, who tries to keep his various bits in order,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: P40-B Warhawk returns to US
Post by: Tim Mellon on December 08, 2013, 08:52:41 PM
Monty, if the aircraft is airworthy and flyable, it should be flown. Otherwise it will decay and become a hazard. There's no half-way position, like, say, being halfway pregnant.

Title: Re: P40-B Warhawk returns to US
Post by: C.W. Herndon on December 09, 2013, 02:52:17 AM
Monty, if the aircraft is airworthy and flyable, it should be flown. Otherwise it will decay and become a hazard. There's no half-way position, like, say, being halfway pregnant.

Since this is a rare model of the P-40 and the US Air Force Museum does not appear to have one, I sure hope it doesn't become the object of a lawsuit over ownership of the aircraft like this one did. (http://www.eaa.org/news/2009/2009-11-12_caf.asp)
Title: Re: P40-B Warhawk returns to US
Post by: Monty Fowler on December 10, 2013, 09:05:40 AM
It's the government, Mr. Herndon, so anything is possible. Common sense need not apply.

Which brings up the point I raised above. I realize that there are two schools of thought on older aircraft: 1) Airplanes are meant to fly so fly 'em until the FAA says no, and 2) Airplanes belong in museums so they will last forever and future generations can see them.

While I partially agree with point 1, something that I believe needs to be factored into the fly/not fly decision is the rarity of the aircraft in question. If it's the only intact example, one good way to make it the only unintact example is to keep flying it. Airplanes are mechanical things. Mechanical things break all the time; when old mechanical things break, the results are usually catastrophic. And - Aircraft (at least the ones I'm talking about) have humans flying them. Humans make mistakes, all the time.

The reward of seeing a vintage aircraft fly should be balanced against its degree of irreplaceability. My 2 cents.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER