Hmm, interesting. If someone wants to go through the trouble, they can restore the flight deck and have an excellent flight simulator set up. I know one place in Toronto that has it done on an ex-UA aircraft, IIRC.
ACKattack From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 64 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 17830 times:
Since this was a major news story and thus will most likely become part of remembered US history, the Smithsonian should purchase, or receive as a donated for a tax write off for the donating company, the fuselage and display it or the whole the cockpit area. This would be to honor and remember the "Miracle on the Hudson"
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3679 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 17116 times:
Quoting ACKattack (Reply 7): Since this was a major news story and thus will most likely become part of remembered US history, the Smithsonian should purchase, or receive as a donated for a tax write off for the donating company, the fuselage and display it or the whole the cockpit area.
I note that AIG is the insurer. That being the case I think the taxpayers already own the thing and AIG should just give it to the Smithsonian as partial payback for the bailout......
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
Making a low flypast at YUL on its retirement flight to the desert in January 2008. Both pilots who flew it on it's famous 1983 flight were aboard as passengers for it's last flight...actually 2nd last, as I believe it stopped at TUS to clear customs before continuing to MHV.
Rwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2567 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 15913 times:
Quoting JetBlast (Reply 9): If I remember correct the Smithsonian does not purchase items in their collection - they are all donated. Correct me if I am wrong.
Various museums under the Smithsonian's heading have certainly made purchases, including some fairly substantial ones, over the years. But most stuff is donated or loaned. I don't know what the general policy is (other than don't spend money), but I suspect the right artifacts could get paid for in the right circumstances.
But why they'd want to pay for a beat up A320 I don't know - I really don't think it's *that* historic.
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6511 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day ago) and read 14706 times:
Quoting Lemmy (Reply 14): "The aircraft was treated with a corrosion inhibitor in the Summer of 2009."
So, ummmm ... yeah. Totally flyable.
LOL, one must wonder if there's an AirlineFax report available for that MSN (something akin to the CarFax history report here in the USA that one would get before purchasing a used car...)
I can imagine the Trade-A-Plane ad now,
"A320-214, gently used in scheduled air carrier service, 20,000 hours, 20,000 cycles, 20,000 takeoffs and 19,999 landings logged. No engines included in sale, needs updated interior, repairs to minor belly skin damage, and D-check".
Hey, I should be a salesman
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Dw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1267 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 13777 times:
Quoting Rwessel (Reply 12): But why they'd want to pay for a beat up A320 I don't know - I really don't think it's *that* historic.
Would make a nice replacement for that big plastic A320 cockpit they have. Display as is or repair to new. Frankly, I could see Airbus buying it, parting out salvageable components, and restoring the cockpit for display in DC.
Minor belly skin damage?? This airplane was gutted like a fish! You also failed to mention several dozen boat 'dings' and river silt in the instruments. I don't think I'll be buying my next airplane from you, KELPkid.
Threepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2236 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 21 hours ago) and read 13255 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 19): Yeah, what's the deal with Canadians and running twin-engined jets out of fuel?
Well, sheesh - any eejit can fly a plane with two or even one engine. You'll note that whenever we take a Boeing or an Airbus for a glide, we always fly it away once we top up the tanks. Can your man Sully say that?
But the Panamanians have us beat - they one-upped us by landing on a grass levee. Show-offs.
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.