From: sandman9 (sandman9@optonline.net)
Date: Fri Dec 03 2004 - 13:17:28 PST
There is a complete one in Montana for $150000.00
John Peterson
MTA
CJMMP
MVPA
----- Original Message -----
From: "chance wolf" <chance_wolf@shaw.ca>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [MV] UH-1H in CA F/S
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sandman9" <sandman9@optonline.net>
> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 8:47 AM
> Subject: [MV] UH-1H in CA F/S
>
>
> > http://gsaauctions.gov/gsaauctions/aucalcat/
> > John Peterson
> > MTA
> > CJMMP
> > MVPA
>
> Yup. Minus every nut, bolt, screw and washer they could nick. I just
read
> that the UH-1 'Huey' fleet is forecast to be officially retired at the end
> of FY2004, which means Davis-Monthan will be sitting on top of rows and
rows
> and rows more.
>
> They're actually at a bit of a loss to figure out what to do with them
all,
> as police departments are finding them too expensive to operate where
> something like a Jet Ranger will do just as nicely, and the FAA doesn't
want
> to see tons of them released onto the market because they don't want to
see
> the military-origin parts find their way on to regularly flying existing
> civvy-side 204s and 205s because "they're maintained to a different
> standard" (or so I remember reading - I don't claim to be any sort of
> expert.) Foreign (friendly) governments have little interest either, as
> they've been the beneficiaries of a lot of later model Bell-family ships
in
> the more modern 'Twin' configuration (Bell 212s and 412s) thanks to the
> largesse of the U.S. Government through the years, so going back to aging
> singles can't be too attractive a proposition regardless of the price.
>
> Some have been doled out to local small museums across the U.S., but if
one
> fellow I know of is any indication, the Homeland Security pricetag that
> comes with them isn't worth the trouble. He told one of our members that
> The Authorities came by something like weekly at little or no notice to
make
> sure his museum exhibit hadn't suddenly flown off its pedestal or
> disintegrated into a pile of black-market parts, so he told them to take
it
> back. If it were me, I think I probably would've suggested an appropriate
> fleshy hangar too. :)
>
> In terms of a domestic swords-into-ploughshares market, I think they run
int
> o trouble there too because of the different maintenance schedules they
had
> during their life in the military vs. what an equivalent Bell 204/205
would
> have to have undergone in x-number of years of flying over civvystreet. I
> *think* the FAA restricts non-Governmental use of the singles to things
like
> helicopter logging and pleasure flying under the 'Experimental' category,
> but doesn't allow much else. In any event, I *think* it's illegal to fly
a
> single commercially over a populated area unless it's a Gov't agency doing
> the flying (Police Dept., Dept. of Forestry., FEMA, etc., etc), so again,
> any potential commercial market seems a narrow one.
>
> I'd very much like to see some of them make it into collector hands as
> either 'Experimental' category flying restorations for those with deep
> pockets, or static examples so people can get a closeup of a huge part of
> rotary wing history (and the first new chapter in modern military mobility
> tactics) without having to travel half the country to see it. Knowing the
> rampant paranoia in official circles at the moment though, I bet they
either
> sit at Davis Monthan until they're baked into aluminum puddles, or DRMS
will
> decree they're getting into the aluminum beer can business. That would be
a
> shame. Some of those ships have some serious (and documented) history
> behind them back to the rice paddies of Vietnam, and the U.S. Gov't should
> be aware that there are people who would line up to help preserve that if
> given the opportunity.
>
> (The U.S. had something like 960-plus left on the books in FY2003 from
what
> I remember, with only some 330 of those in operational-ready condition.
> That number's set to become zero by next April.)
>
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:38:50 PDT