Stumbled upon this, but not sure how new it is - from the most recent Ordnance Museum Foundation meeting?

Neil

www.panzermuseum.com/t...useum.html

Tiger I Returning to Aberdeen

If you've been wondering about what's happened to the Tiger I tank that used to be at the U.S. Army Ordnance Museum at Aberdeen, we have an update for you!

According to Dr. William Atwater, the museum's director, the museum's Tiger I - which has been in England undergoing restoration - was scheduled to return to the museum in November 2006, transported in a U.S. Air Force C-5 Galaxy aircraft.

Unfortunately, the aircraft that was scheduled to transport the Tiger was the one that crashed at Dover Air Force Base on 3 April (fortunately, however, all 17 crew members survived). The crash and the demands for air transport to support military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan completely upset the transport timetable. However, Dr. Atwater expected the Tiger to return to Aberdeen in 2007 on a date yet to be determined.

In a bit of related news, Dr. Atwater also said that the Ordnance Museum would be moving from Aberdeen to Ft. Lee, Virginia. Everything - including the 16" coastal artillery gun and the German Leopold railway gun - will be moved there to a new 175,000 square foot facility the Army is planning to build. The move is scheduled to take place in 2009.

I am pretty sure that did not come from an announcement at the December Foundation meeting. Most of it matches with what I have been told.

I don't know if the C-5 that crashed was actually the aircraft that was scheduled to bring the Tiger 'home' but I believe that the crash, along with the subsequent disruption of the scheduled flights (There was a short grounding of ALL C-5s until they determined if it was a fleetwide problem. That is pretty normal after a catistrophic accident) took any slack out of the flying schedule for the near future.

I will not speculate on future plans but rest assured when I find out from the folks at Aberdeen about any firm plans for the Tiger I will let folks here know.

I guess using a ship never crossed their minds ....

Yes it did. I've heard one proposal was to use an ocean going barge but that the risk was deamed un acceptable. I believe that since it won't fit in a standard container that rules out most ships that haul cargo across the Atlantic.

There are other concerns I can't go into now (I'm not trying to be secretive but have been asked not to speculate, and want to stay in good graces so I can pass on solid information when it is available) but it has been thought out and at least to me the reasons make sense.

sorry folks but we want to keep it here in england, we are short of tiger1s and have only two king tigers, you couldn't look after it properly first time so no second chance
Dennis

jtrowbridge5 wrote:

sorry folks but we want to keep it here in england, we are short of tiger1s and have only two king tigers, you couldn't look after it properly first time so no second chance Dennis

Not funny and I will only respond to say that the plans are to bring it back sooner rather than later.

jtrowbridge5 wrote:

sorry folks but we want to keep it here in england, we are short of tiger1s and have only two king tigers, you couldn't look after it properly first time so no second chance Dennis

You jest but I suspect some museums may have taken a similar attitude with regard to the items they were "lent" by the Ordnance Museum - although I have noted an apparent centralization of some of these loaners into Kevin Wheatcroft's hands, hopefully in anticipation of their return I can hope?...

Neil

Hey,

Nobody wants a Tiger in this country more than me! But if Kevin Wheatcroft will restore it and run it in England, he can have it. I will pay good money to fly over and see it, especiially if it is protected from the weather!

Cheers,

Richard Isner

my post was only a joke but as bob seems to be serious ,we still see lots of priceless German tanks stood in the open in one of the richest countries in the world just rusting away.so money really cant be the problem maybe a massive lack of enthusiasm
Dennis

Reminds me of of a guy who owns a very rare car,
Since he owns it he can do what he wants with it (Leave it out doors and exposed to the elements or chop it up and put a modern engine in it with cool wheels that go round and round ) even though the eventual demise will be a loss to everyone. I doubt very seriously APG would do anything but treat this tiger with the utmost care after her restoration.
The statement of Richard's "Paying good money to fly over...." kinda makes me think if people are willing to pay to fly that far to see this kind of rarity then why not give to APG/Patton or other museums to restore them here at home so the whole "Whose tank is it ?? " argument never arises. It would be nice if the museums would kind of establish an "Adopt a Tank" program so you can donate to a specific vehicle too. Maybe even get a tasteful sponsor that won't overshadow the piece it self. Just a thought. Too many rare vehicles are slowly being eaten away by rust and neglect.

Joe D

The US Army Ordnance Museum has suffered from a number of problems over the years, and currently faces some new ones. Historically, it was simply a collection for test, analysis & training - hence the cutaways. This frankly isnt much different from Bovington or Kubinka. The latter's collection was all outside at one point as well. And the Ordnance Museum is not alone in having lost invaluable items to scrapping - Bovington scrapped the E-100 hull in the 1950s as well. The big problem has been that it is the _Ordnance_ Museum - the museum of the Ordnance corps within the US Army. Historically, the Ordnance corps was what did the acquisition & testing of Army vehicles and artillery. However, in 1961 the Ordnance corps' responsibilities were passed to the new Army Materiel Command. This meant that the Ordnance branch lost a significant amount of power - and most importantly money!

As a result, you have the Patton Museum - very well supported by a combat branch (armor) with a large spacious museum. Instead of one large armor museum like in France, Britain or Canada - the US has two. One is relatively rich, one is relatively poor. We have the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum, but no national armor museum. Actually, we dont even have a National museum for the Army (never mind armor), although it is scheduled to be established by 2011 or so... The Ordnance branch simply hasnt had the pull in terms of money, resources, and sponsors - Ordnance isnt a combat branch, so there arent too many Ordnance generals... Now, should the museum & foundation have probably found some way to scrap together the money over the last decade or two for a new museum, probably so... But the above explains why its been difficult to do so...

The current problem facing the museum is where it will be. The DoD BRAC calls for the Ordnance branch - and the Ordnance Museum - to move to Fort Lee. The date for the museum's move seems to float somewhere between 2009 and 2012. Funding for the move & new 175,000 sf facility is TBD. The Army could end up covering all of it, its too soon to say... As a result, its hard to start fundraising if you dont know what if any shortfall there will be...

BTW, flying the Tiger over on a C-5 is a different kind of money altogether I suspect. Its more an issue of an available aircraft than money... I suspect Ordnance Museum wouldnt pay for it, and the cost to the Air Force would be relatively incidental.

Neil

Joe_D wrote:

It would be nice if the museums would kind of establish an "Adopt a Tank" program so you can donate to a specific vehicle too. Maybe even get a tasteful sponsor that won't overshadow the piece it self. Just a thought. Too many rare vehicles are slowly being eaten away by rust and neglect. Joe D

Actually Aberdeen has an 'Adopt a Tank' program. Several of the refurbs have been done with money donated under that program. For Example the M-10 was paid for with a donation from a person who's father fought in a Tank Destroyer Unit in WWII. He actually asked the unit veterans at a reunion whether he should do an M10 or an M18 (The unit used both) and the overwhelming choice was the M10.

My concern is that although some folks could afford to 'fly over there' to see a Tiger (or anything else) there is a whole segment of the population who can't. There are the Boy Scout troops and the High School WWII class that come to Aberdeen because it is 'available' Even if we moved it to Knox (or heaven forbid as one person suggested on this forum a year or so ago to Arizona where the climate is better for preservation) it would make it harder for some folks to see the collection. In some ways I think haveing multiple museums scattered around the country is better because it allows more people to see some of the actual historical vehicles.

On a related note, I think these two maps are fairly interesting:





Note the large red box on the top right on the second picture. It doesnt appear in the previous graphics (ie would be built AFTER FY 11)... I think this is the new museum complex...

You can find this in the July 2006 (& subsequent) Fort Lee townhall briefing.
www.ima.lee.army.mil/s..._07_12.pdf

Neil

Here's a closeup.



As near as I can tell, this is the area I photographed last year:



Neil

Is this the new Ordnance museum we're talking about or the new US Army museum-cum-theme park?