WIX Archives

Re: The odd thing is that....... (Long response)

Posted by Scott WRG Editor on Wed Dec 05, 2001 07:57:27 AM

In reply top The odd thing is that....... posted by Paul Coggan on Wed Dec 05, 2001 03:36:53 AM

Paul,

I think part of the problem is that some (and by no means all) owners only interest in the aircraft's history is to justify the money they spent or the price they ask for an airframe. In some peoples minds the warbirds field was sullied during the 80's and 90's as aircraft became investments instead of just aircraft. The prices shot up dramatically, pricing them out of reach of most mortals or even syndicates.

This has had a catch 22 effect in my opinion. The negative aspect is that the warbird is now percieved of as a rich mans toy rather that an enthusiasts devotion. However there is a definate positive aspect to this situation. The odds of any warbird being scrapped (short of a high-speed cratering impact) is almost nil. Incredibly damaged airframes are being rebuilt now, primarily because it is more cost effective than in the past. The flurry of replica productions shows that the current prices are able to foster all sorts of projects that wouldn't have happened 20 years ago.

I think the the true problem is one of relationships. I have met some owner/pilots online and they have been exceptionally warm and helpful and supportive of the registry. But the few I have met IRL have been at best dismissive if not outright condescending. There are exceptions, like the gentleman restoring a Stearman in Kissimee who talked to me for an hour about his aircraft. But that is a rarity.

I think relationships between the owners and the enthusiast needs to be improved. I get the feeling that owners don't think they need us but they do. Without us the silly governments of the world WILL eventually pass laws that will ground warbirds. And if that happens I severely doubt the owners will be able to get $2,000,000 for a Mustang.

Paul, you have my e-mail address, and I always post it in this forum. If you want to discuss this further feel free to drop me an e-mail.

Scott





: if you re-read the post I made originally almost all the p
: oints raised, and the individual aircraft mentioned are ea
: ch adequately covered by the definitions in the post!
:
: I admit it is a long post and to some people the subject i
: s as interesting as watching paint dry.
:
: Just consider this. And this is why it is so interesting t
: o me personally. I don't disagree with Tony that a lot of
: the definitions thing is about money - BUT I think an more
: valid point is that a HUGE percentage of posts of this fo
: rum are about aircraft wrecks and 'new' discoveries and RE
: COVERING these airframes - so you COULD argue that why do
: we discuss all this stuff? Does history and provenance mea
: n so little? If it did, if it DOES then why bother to go o
: ut and recover wrecks? Let's do it 'more cheaply' and just
: get a new dataplate and produce a facsimile?
:
: Tony says he's getting really tired of this? Why Tony? It
: is a subject that will continue to raise its 'ugly head'.
: Lots of people are talking about it. Certainly no dispresp
: ect meant here but if you are tired of it simply move on a
: nd don't post anymore on it - you have made some valid poi
: nts, which was the reason for my original post.
:
: I'm not trying to impose any terms on anyone, but I think
: that most serious enthusiasts do care about provenance and
: it does add to the interest and viewing pleasure!
:
: regards
:
: Paul

Follow Ups: