Planes on sticks.

[den]

I hate seeing old planes mounted on pedestals in parks, in front of airports and such, where they are allowed to deteriorate in the weather.

Old planes should be flying or in museums. This is my Planes Not On Sticks icon..

Comments

[arcturax.livejournal.com]

Damn right. Wright Patterson has only one plane on a stick and that is because it will probably never fly again and was damaged to begin with.

The rest of their planes are indoors except for a few that are kept outside but are well cared for.

They have some really neat planes to, including one with propellers on the rear, a Russian MIG covered in nuke labels and scary red writing, a stealth fighter and the vaunted SR-71 blackbird, the real deal. The plane that is still classified enough that they removed every square inch of the cockpit interior before putting it up on display.

Next to it is the starter box, which contains a V12 engine which is needed to produce enough power to start up the main engines on that thing.

[makovette.livejournal.com]

I take it this then (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26428&item=2478649358) is right out?

CYa!
Mako

Blame james_b for this :-D

[blush10ac.livejournal.com]

When I was a child we were traveling across country (USA) and got caught in torrencial rain (somewhere in Utah), we stopped at a museum that was an old commercial airliner in a hanger that kids were allowed to play in. It was so cool to sit in the cockpit and be able to play with all the switches and levers. It's the only one I ever heard of like that, but I can't imagine any kid who wouldn't love it.

[targaff.livejournal.com]

I'm somewhat torn - I know the gate guards at Salmesbury, for example (a Canberra and a Lightning, IIRC) were both out of commission before they were put there, and furthermore they do hold a degree of importance for the place because they're representative of what the airfield's been about (Salmesbury was one of the main places for the Canberra at least in latter years).

If the location managers do make an effort to maintain and protect the aircraft, is it really that different to putting them in a museum?

Hmmm... ground displays

[camstone.livejournal.com]

There comes a point when a aircraft body becomes not flight worthy, be it from structural creep damage, or material deteriorration. At that point, if it's a landmark aircraft... better on a pedestal than in a junk yard.

Yes, we'd probably rather see them in a static display on the ground, or suspended by wires... but planes in the public arena allow those who have never seen a plane, to walk around them and imagine them in flight.

It's like the Blue Angel's A2 #4 plane I saw in front of Lakehurst NAS last week... a beautiful thing to see, and well cared for... but it should never fly again.

Funny plane story

[ursuscal.livejournal.com]

I fulfilled my lifelong fantasy of being able to see and touch an original "flying wing" prototype (a two-seat, four-prop model) at an airshow years ago. That prototype, of course, led to the YB-39, and later the 8 jet engine YB-49, which was killed by corrupt Lockheed officials in league with corrupt Pentagon bloats. But that's another story.

Earlier this week I read with great amusement a story about how the Mexican Air Force filmed UFOs near the border. MEXICAN AIR FORCE??? I almost snarfed my coffed out my snout. I picture this rickety biplane with chickens falling out of it on takeoff. Mwahahahahaha!