NASCARAirforce
Topic Author
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:36 pm

Along the subject of the thunderbirds, blue angels being cancelled due to budget cuts hitting the military. Will this also cause the closure or change to the operation of the military air museums located on military bases where the general public has free admission?

Such as

Museum of the U.S. Air Force at Wright Pat
Museum of Naval Aviation at Pennsacola
Museum of Army Aviation at Ft. Rucker
Pima Air Museum Tucson
Warner Robbins Air Museum
etc
 
boeingfixer
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:02 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Wed Feb 20, 2013 11:04 pm

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Thread starter):
Such as

Museum of the U.S. Air Force at Wright Pat
Museum of Naval Aviation at Pennsacola
Museum of Army Aviation at Ft. Rucker
Pima Air Museum Tucson
Warner Robbins Air Museum
etc

The Pima Air & Space Museum is not government funded and has an admission fee.

Cheers,

John
Cheers, John YYC
 
NASCARAirforce
Topic Author
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:12 am

I was there in 1999, I don't recall paying an admission fee - but I guess thats probably a good thing and won't get effected.
 
boeingfixer
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:02 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:01 pm

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 2):
I was there in 1999, I don't recall paying an admission fee - but I guess thats probably a good thing and won't get effected.

Looking at your profile, if your age is correct, you wouldn't have paid to get into Pima in 1999 as I'm sure your parents paid for you   

I've been to Pima several times since 1992 and had to pay an admission fee every time.

The only aviation museums that would be affected by any sort of Sequestration would be government only institutions. Pima is operated by the Arizona Aerospace Foundation which is a public non-profit foundation.

Getting back on topic, I don't think Sequestration would affect any of the US Government Aviation Museums.

Cheers,

John
Cheers, John YYC
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 2938
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 6:21 pm

BTW who exactly operates and funds the Smithsonian museum in Washington ? Any chance that they might start charging admission for entry one day ?
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 2556
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:24 pm

Quoting alberchico (Reply 4):
BTW who exactly operates and funds the Smithsonian museum in Washington ?

The US Government operates the museums of the Smithsonian.
From: http://newsdesk.si.edu/factsheets/fa...bout-smithsonian-institution-short

Quote:
The Smithsonian’s federal appropriation for fiscal year 2013 is $856.8 million. The Institution is about 65 percent federally funded. In addition, the Smithsonian has trust funds, which include both contributions from private sources (corporations, foundations and individuals) and revenues from Smithsonian Enterprises (stores, restaurants, IMAX theaters, gift catalog, etc.).
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
User avatar
n901wa
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:38 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:51 pm

I was just at the Museum of Aviation at Warner Robbins, and a Very Nice Lady that worked there showed me a List of Aircraft that will be leaving in 2 phases. She said it was due to the Cuts in the Budget. As staff get cut, the amount of Aircraft that they have has to be downsized, so they are trying to keep what is more related to Georiga Aviation. From what I recall on the list, the first round of Acft leaving are the E.E Lightning ( already gone to Pima ) the HH-34J, EC-121, EC-135, F-100F and RF-101. I can't remember what was on the second phase. She did say a KC-135R was getting brought in.

I hope they can all find new homes, but I worry the larger acft like the Connie ( that Looks in Good shape ), and EC-135 will be hard to move.
 
Galaxy5007
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:35 pm

I volunteer at the AMC Museum at Dover AFB. The cuts are going to hurt us as far as support is concerned, meaning restoration work will be limited, and we probably won't be able to paint any of our outside aircraft this year. We are still supposed to get C-5A 69-0014 next month, but this whole fiasco has everything frozen and on hold. We should still get some funding from the USAF to "museumize" the C-5. Since we only have two paid employees, it won't affect staff to much.

You would think that someone would propose the idea of separately dealing with the DoD budget (rather than having it wrapped into the entire picture as they do now) so that our military doesn't suffer from the morons in Congress. Our country doesn't need a weakened image because nobody wants to compromise!

Quoting n901wa (Reply 6):
She said it was due to the Cuts in the Budget.

I seriously doubt that is the reason why they would get rid of aircraft from a museum. The only reason they'd get rid of them is if they already planned to do so. It isn't a fleet of active aircraft. Retired museum aircraft don't need that much up keep and staff. Things that need to be done to continue preservation can wait for a while until the problem gets solved. But there is no way they are getting rid of aircraft due to budget cuts.
 
User avatar
n901wa
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:38 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:26 pm

Nice to hear form someone that works at a Base Museum, and I hope to get to Dover soon. I only heard this from the people at Warner Robbins. The list she showed me was a news letter, and only going by what she, and some of the others there told me. I do hope its a planned move, but again its what the people there told me and I can only go by what they were saying.
 
NASCARAirforce
Topic Author
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Fri Feb 22, 2013 1:28 am

Quoting boeingfixer (Reply 3):
Looking at your profile, if your age is correct, you wouldn't have paid to get into Pima in 1999 as I'm sure your parents paid for you

That isn't updated - I am 38 yo. I changed my profile back a couple years ago for something I said that happened at my work, that one of my bosses found out and suspected was me - so I put up the false profile and never put it back to my old profile

Quoting n901wa (Reply 6):
I was just at the Museum of Aviation at Warner Robbins, and a Very Nice Lady that worked there showed me a List of Aircraft that will be leaving in 2 phases. She said it was due to the Cuts in the Budget. As staff get cut, the amount of Aircraft that they have has to be downsized, so they are trying to keep what is more related to Georiga Aviation. From what I recall on the list, the first round of Acft leaving are the E.E Lightning ( already gone to Pima ) the HH-34J, EC-121, EC-135, F-100F and RF-101. I can't remember what was on the second phase. She did say a KC-135R was getting brought in.

I hope they can all find new homes, but I worry the larger acft like the Connie ( that Looks in Good shape ), and EC-135 will be hard to move.

I am glad I got there when I did on January 4. I too noticed the English Electric Lightning was gone as well as several others (look on google satellite image of the place and there were more aircraft back then). I believe there was an additonal C-130 that is gone and a couple other large transports. I could have sworn they said they were getting rid of the B-57.
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:25 pm

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Thread starter):
Museum of the U.S. Air Force at Wright Pat

They're saying that it is affecting them, but it won't cause a disruption in their hours of operation.
Also, it may have an effect on a few exhibits that are in the planning stage.

If you're a fan of the A.F. Museum, you need to download their new free app; so far it works for iPad, iPhone, and desk tops, (not sue if if it works with Windows yet, but I think it does) It takes you on a virtual tour of about 30 cockpits of different A/C in the Museum; ( you can se the B-29 cockpit on my post on MilAv)

Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
NASCARAirforce
Topic Author
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Sun Mar 10, 2013 11:39 am

Quoting Geezer (Reply 10):
They're saying that it is affecting them, but it won't cause a disruption in their hours of operation.
Also, it may have an effect on a few exhibits that are in the planning stage.

I'm assuming it might delay the building of that new hangar that is supposed to be dedicated to transport aircraft and the new presidential aircraft hangar. Is the C-17 and C-5 they have gotten recently parked outside where the EC-135, NKC-135, Hanoi Taxi and C-82 etc are parked?
 
rc135x
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:46 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:43 pm

Quoting n901wa (Reply 6):
so they are trying to keep what is more related to Georiga Aviation. From what I recall on the list, the first round of Acft leaving are the E.E Lightning ( already gone to Pima ) the HH-34J, EC-121, EC-135, F-100F and RF-101. I can't remember what was on the second phase. She did say a KC-135R was getting brought in.

The EC-135N was based at Robins AFB (along with the EC-135Y) for over a decade to support CENTCOM at MacDill AFB.

Georgia ANG flew F-100s, if I recall correctly, from 1973 or so until 1979.

Museum assets like the A-10, A-37, RB-57, WB-66, T-38, D-21, and others have a tenuous affiliation with Georgia. F-15 79-0078 from the Mass ANG was in the restoration area several months ago. Although notable (DESERT STORM MiG killer) it had no association with Georgia beyond Warner Robins ALC for PDM.

Although the museums fight amongst themselves (and with outsiders, like the F-82 issue), the greatest fear of sequestration is that one or more museum may determine that restoration of historically significant aircraft is less important than tourist "draws" such as arcade-style simulator rides, science and math education outreach, local area "news" and events, and, rather than spend money to store or transport it elsewhere, will turn it into beer cans.
KC-135A, A(RT), D, E, E(RT), Q, R, EC-135A, C, G, L, RC-135S, U, V, W, X, TC-135S, W
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:34 am

They should just start charging a small admission fee with all of it going towards the aircraft and grounds only. That way they remain not for profit and the budget they do get from uncle sammy can be used for employee pay etc.
 
flightsimer
Posts: 879
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:09 am

To give a different point of view, this whole issue is affecting more than just government museums, but private museums as well, though indirectly.

For example, I volunteer at a private museum near Pittsburgh which is a flying museum, as in, almost everything we are restoring is to flight conditions for air shows and the planes earn their keep and provide for the museum by attending air shows. Right now, our C-123K is our only flying aircraft as our L-21 is being fixed after an accident and we just sold our OV-1D.

But anyways, a lot of our airshows were military shows. Due to this 40 million dollar budget cut of all the demo teams and air shows, we have lost over half of our normal airshows. Because a lot of the private air shows counted on having these demo teams to be able to draw in the public which are ow canceled, the private air shows are now being canceled.

So now, 3/4ths of our normal airshow season has been canceled. Because our museum survives off these air shows, we are now being put at risk. So far, we have 3 shows booked this year, with one being in Canada. Last year we had 6 total, the year before that 12 and before that we were averaging 10-18 yearly.

Sure the government is saving a few million dollars, but they are costing the people a lot more in lost income than what is being saved.

[Edited 2013-03-14 19:10:09]
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:16 am

Without tracking too far off target here...both sides of the house are responsible for letting this happen. Now we gotta deal with it. Allowing this to happen doesn't 'save' any money at all and was pretty much pointless. We do not have a reserve of money in the first place...its all borrowed. I'm sure it will pass in time and we'll be seeing airshows and even more defense spending again real soon.
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:34 am

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 11):
Is the C-17 and C-5 they have gotten recently parked outside where the EC-135, NKC-135, Hanoi Taxi and C-82 etc are parked?

I haven't been there for a while, I just spent a couple of hours on their website.
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13761
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:29 pm

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 7):
You would think that someone would propose the idea of separately dealing with the DoD budget (rather than having it wrapped into the entire picture as they do now) so that our military doesn't suffer from the morons in Congress.

The DOD was intentionally made to be part of the sequestration because it was thought that it'd make sequestration an impossibility. I guess that political calculation was flawed.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
User avatar
n901wa
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:38 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:47 pm

Here's a Sad new story about the Museum of Aviation at Warner Robbins.

http://www.macon.com/2013/03/23/2409...useum-of-aviation-dropping-32.html

Hope the link works.
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2104
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:37 pm

Quoting n901wa (Reply 18):
Here's a Sad new story about the Museum of Aviation at Warner Robbins.

That is sad indeed.I have visited that museum a few times over the years and I always enjoyed it. Moving some of the aircraft to other museums or storage in AZ is unfortunate but not nearly as horrible as them scrapping the B-52 and Schwartzkpof's EC-135. It's a shame.
Here Here for Severe Clear!
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9821
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Sequestration Vs. Air Museums

Wed Mar 27, 2013 3:35 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
The DOD was intentionally made to be part of the sequestration because it was thought that it'd make sequestration an impossibility. I guess that political calculation was flawed.

It's all a matter of priorities. VP Biden just spent a million dollars on hotel bills alone, during a 2-day visit to Paris with an entourage of over 500 people. Why does he need more than a dozen or so?



Are we seriously to believe that the government can't find some bloated bureaucratic staff to cut so that the public doesn't notice a thing? But no - if that happens, it would prove the Tea Party right, and that can't be allowed to happen.

http://www.themeshreport.com/2013/03...obama-to-feds-make-sequester-hurt/

And let's not forget - since Obama became president, average household income is down 8.2%. Are we to believe that the government cannot deal with a 2.4% decrease?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests