*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

I'm appalled to see your group is flying this priceless airplane.
Sooner or later someone will crack it up and there will be one less for
future generations to see. Please put pressure on your group to ground
it permanently and preserve it forever so out great-great grandchildren
and all future generations can have the opportunity to see the real
thing and not some replica.

73, Bill W6WRT

An airplane that is not flown is so much scrap metal. They were
designed and built to be flown and in the air is where they belong.
If someone wants a static display let them build a replica.


Add to that the fact that this 'priceless airplane' is only such
*because* this group invested heavily in its existence. Without their
contribution of time, effort, money and hardship, it would--in
fact--(still) be only so much scrap metal.

jak

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring the pot"
comes to mind.

-Chuck

In rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors notallhamsareassholes wrote:

"Mike Andrews" wrote in message
...
In rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors =K=5=D=H= wrote:

My final request is this: If you have nothing nice to
say about this effort, please say nothing. If you are
not a warbird fan, if you believe our effort is a waste
of time and money, if you think we're "glorifying" war,
if you think operating antique warplanes is dangerous
and should be outlawed, etc, etc... you're entitled to
your opinion, but I respectfully ask that you keep it
to yourself.

Up to this point I agree with everything you have to say.

But I'll say what I please about your efforts, and defend to the death
the right of others to say it, as well.

You don't have to like it, and you don't have to read it, either, but
everyone else is as entitled to state his, her, or its opinions on old
warbirds as you are.

That said, I hope you're successful in your quest.

For crying out loud Mike, was that TRULY necessary?

I think it was. Usenet is in many ways the equivalent of Speakers'
Corner in Hyde Park, London. omeone trying to foreclose comment on
his project, after he posts about it on Usenet, is in the position
of telling the folks around him at Speakers' Corner that they can
listen or not, aas they please, but they aren't to comment.

I've been doing this Usenet stuff, for work (mostly) and play since
1983 or so, well before hoi polloi had access to the big-I Internet,
and I want to keep its open flavor intact.

You have the right to have a different opinion, and (unlike k5dh), I
won't ask you to keep it to yourself.

--
Mike Andrews, W5EGO

Tired old sysadmin

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Woody wrote:

Unreal...... Lemme guess, you collect boatanchors, restore them, then
refuse to power them up? Someone once told me ham radio is a
'condition', not a hobby. I'm starting to think he was right. rb



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

Get real, rb. If someone powers up a boatanchor, it will never end up
splattered all over a hillside somewhere. Get it?

Bill, W6WRT

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

**THE-RFI-EMI-GUY** wrote:

So; if they don't fly it, don't keep it airworthy, what if a
hurricane comes along, does it just sit and wait to be ripped to
shreds? More power to them, if they fix it they should fly it. I know
of a collector of fine rare cars, he isn't afraid to send them off
to vintage races or put them on the road. I am also amazed how
collectors rebuild from almost zero remains, so even if it gets
busted up...



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

Yes, I know stupid, self-centered people too. What's your point?

Bill, W6WRT

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

Bill Turner wrote:
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

Well, I am sorry to hear that Bill. You obviously aren't familiar
with the major causes of loss in restorable antique aircraft:

(In approximate order)

1) lack of people willing to pay for restoration
2) hanger fires
3) natural disasters.

I have seen a few rare aircraft that have crashed, and guess what?
As soon as they get the pilot out, they go back into restoration.

There seems to be loads of money available to restore antique aircraft
to flight, but little available for restoration to static display.

And in my opinion, that is exactly how it should be. Whoever pays
the freight gets to decide how the plane is used. Everyone else
is just a spectator.

-Chuck

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

If you feel that way you should purchase them and put them in a museum.
Most would not have survived and will not survive without the intent to fly.
Not much money available for the restoration of static displays. Lotsa
money available for flying restorations. Glaicer girl is an excellent
example.

Heh, I'm as real as it gets, brother.
So you do collect boatanchors? Do you also have an attic full of empty radio
boxes? I'm betting you do.
But that's your choice, now isn't it? And nothing wrong with it.

On the power-up thing,
I disagree, citing that it depends on how much power is applied to it.....
:-)
Or it could catch fire and burn to the desk... or the ground... or if it
were donated to a B-17 restoration, it could very
well end up splattered all over a hillside somewhere... LOL.

And yes, *I* get it.... enjoy what you have or what's the sense in having
it??
Moth-ball a vintage plane in Tucson, AZ or some museum, and I'll NEVER get
to see it. Fly it to my local fly-in and I do...
[said while gazing up at the photo of my daughter sitting left-seat in the
Texas Raiders 17g when it was HERE at a fly-in.]

Everything is disposable and it certainly doesn't transgress to the 'other
side'.

Use it or lose it; 'cuz cars are for driving, radios are for driveling into,
and an aircraft is for flying.

There's a fine line between being a
keep-the-box-because-it-matters-to-other-boxkeepers packrat, and preserving
history.

Do *you* get it??
rb


"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Woody wrote:

Unreal...... Lemme guess, you collect boatanchors, restore them, then
refuse to power them up? Someone once told me ham radio is a
'condition', not a hobby. I'm starting to think he was right. rb



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

Get real, rb. If someone powers up a boatanchor, it will never end up
splattered all over a hillside somewhere. Get it?

Bill, W6WRT

Wow... didn't realize the scope of this...
In that case, it seems there are plenty of people here who think you are an
idiot also.
So agree to disagree and be done with it.
rb


"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Y'all don't suppose that Bill posted his little rebuttal simply
because the OP politely asked him not to? Something about "stirring
the pot" comes to mind.

-Chuck



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

No, Bill posted his little rebuttal because he thinks the OP is an
idiot but hopes he will come to his senses anyway.

Throughout history there have been many irreplaceable treasures lost
because nobody thought future generations would might like to see the
original instead of a replica. A real, genuine B-17 is a priceless
relic of an age that will never be repeated. Save it.

Mr Bill

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

**THE-RFI-EMI-GUY** wrote:

So; if they don't fly it, don't keep it airworthy, what if a
hurricane comes along, does it just sit and wait to be ripped to
shreds? More power to them, if they fix it they should fly it. I know
of a collector of fine rare cars, he isn't afraid to send them off
to vintage races or put them on the road. I am also amazed how
collectors rebuild from almost zero remains, so even if it gets
busted up...



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

Yes, I know stupid, self-centered people too. What's your point?

Bill, are you looking in the mirror as you post?





Bill, W6WRT