Looks like the Armor and Cavalry Museum is being scaled back

Neil_Baumgardner

Maybe just a little... But a 1/3 reduction in estimated cost, now to come from private funds rather than public... And a slightly smaller footprint.

According to the changedetection.com log 68.166.223.4/comparecache.html of www.armorcavalrymuseum.../Plan.html the following has changed:

Dimensions:
Was - 106,000 Sq. Ft. plus expansion and separate Maintenance Facility
Now - ~100,000 Sq. Ft.

Estimated Cost:
Was - $75,000,000
Now - $50,000,000

Source of Funds:
Was - Public Funds
Now - Private Funds (hmm... wonder what happened to the FY11 MILCON?)

This was the plan back in March
www.ledger-enquirer.co...useum.html

Neil

C_Sherman · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 590

Shocked. Just shocked.

I seem to recall that I wasn't the only one here who was skeptical about their plans, some time back. I'm sad to discover that we were right. I recognize that I'm very cynical about stuff like this, but I always hold onto a glimmer of hope that I might be wrong.

Wait for it. There will be more cuts, the schedule with slip to the right...and what eventually is built will be a far cry from what was advertised. And more vehicles will be left in storage, probably in less desirable conditions than they were in previously. Typical empire-building and "my toys" behavior from otherwise grown-up government functionaries.

Chuck

Doug_Kibbey

I shocked, I tell you....shocked!.

We're going to be relying on members' photographic records for some time to come.

armyjunk2 · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Sep 22, 2006 Posts: 1416

Was there any point to this move? Other than to burn up tax dollars...

"And more vehicles will be left in storage, probably in less desirable conditions than they were in previously."
Is this possible? Leaving then in a field with open hatches for 65 years is pretty bad.

Doug_Kibbey

armyjunk2 wrote:

Was there any point to this move? Other than to burn up tax dollars...

The schools were moved under BRAC. Ownership of the school artifacts (meaning, their museums) follow the school, and the schools will not be denied their toys, even if they aren't in a position to share with the other children.

armyjunk2 · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Sep 22, 2006 Posts: 1416

i knew that but still a waste, they have money to burn....

the_shadock

well, old and historical artifacts are not that precious... we could still find another survivor elsewhere for a particular model, even if the tank itself is unique.

Let's say, for example, there are many other T6 Shermans with spigot mortars in swamps and bogs in Russia...

Pierre-Olivier

Doug_Kibbey

...and you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a T5, Phase I anymore.

Dontos

Most of you know how I feel, so I won't go into a heated venting session, since at this point it would serve no purpose.

The truth is nobody 'in a position to do anything' really cares. After all there really is no Armor Center anymore. The Senior officials sold out for the 'party line' long ago to ensure promotion. No real pride, just 'lipservice'.....

Don

C_Sherman · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 590

armyjunk2 wrote:

Was there any point to this move? Other than to burn up tax dollars...

"And more vehicles will be left in storage, probably in less desirable conditions than they were in previously."
Is this possible? Leaving then in a field with open hatches for 65 years is pretty bad.

Ahem.

"Typical empire-building and "my toys" behavior from otherwise grown-up government functionaries."

Government in the US is rapidly becoming so venal and self-serving as to be functionally unrecognizable from communist and socialist autocracies. More than ever, government is being used to fulfill the petty ambitions and tyrant-fantasies of senior government employees. The old "government as public service" paradigm has faded, and "position as a means of gaining unrestrained bureaucratic power" has become the norm at every level from local to Federal.

The point of my cynical rant is the the vehicles were moved because some government officials perceived a means by which they could retain or gain additional power (usually in the form of additional money) by moving them. Patronage is also a powerful force, and someone had to be paid to move them, to construct the new location (such as it is), etc. The vehicles are moving because someone saw a personal benefit and could wrap it in an official justification.

Evidence? How about the fact that the vehicles are moving from an existing facility (with a local support structure and volunteer curators) to a new location that has no existing facility to accommodate the artifacts. This, instead of waiting for the new facility to be constructed and ready. Thus the artifacts are effectively held as hostages used to negotiate the release of additional funds for construction at the new location. And if they deteriorate in the time needed to obtain funds and complete construction? Well, these are just the unavoidable casualties of self-advancement in the 'service' of the US government.

/rant

Chuck

Joe_D

I have seen the storage lot at Sand Hill, Fort Benning,

It is not good, in fact down right disheartening. I hope my contact can alleviate a little of the the deterioration of the AFVs there. Really sad state of affairs.

piney

whole deal S**KS for both the museums, somebody needs to follow the money trail here and find out whose pockets got lined. never made it to Knox, but I got to Aberdeen about 10 times and I got my slides and my memories

Doug_Kibbey

piney wrote:

whole deal S**KS for both the museums, somebody needs to follow the money trail here and find out whose pockets got lined. never made it to Knox, but I got to Aberdeen about 10 times and I got my slides and my memories

And you've got this great community of people who collectively have been pretty much everywhere and are demonstrably good about sharing. It's what this forum is all about, when you get right down to it.

Might not be the same thing as crawling all over a particular exhibit yourself, but it's very likely that someone here with the same perspective has. And more than likely, he took pictures. I've never seen anyone denied use of pictures among this community when someone first asked.

With the passing of these two museums into dormancy, the best resource we now have for recent info regarding vehicles in these collections is each other. That's what we're all about, anyway.

<Moderator and forum advocate mode off>

Dontos

Unfortunately I think the real casualties of this all this, besides the vehicles are the generations of veterans & their families.

On a daily basis, visitors include the aging veterans who stop to experience perhaps that one last time, a glimpse of their past. They openly share those experiences with family who can't really appreciate the storys, but when visiting the museum, they see the vehicle and installation where 'Dad,'Grand Pa', or 'Great Grand Pa' spent his youth to prepare before going off to Europe or Asia.

The sight of the period vehicles, being able to touch them, helps to bring it all back.

I've seen & heard many of those 'rememberances' and each one helps to reenforce why I enjoy being a volunteer. Its not about me, but those who served long before me.

Hopefully the new facility will become a reality to continue to 'preserve & tell the story'.

Personally I don't know of any veteran tankers who in their right mind would ever consider visiting Ft Benning (!?) to experience their Armor History past because there is no association to that installation.

The 'new' generation of tankers will establish that with their service but its ashame that all this BRAC stuff will be lost upon the aging vets who have no association to Ft Benning,.....AND I AM ONE OF THEM.

Regards
Don

Doug_Kibbey

What Don said.

The collection is important, we all appreciate it. However, for actual U.S. Armor veterans, the place is at least as, if not more, important to the legacy of their memories of service in that branch.

I do not picture any Armor veterans going to Ft. Benning to get in touch with their history, unless that history includes a past assignment there.

It's true the schools and the collections do not exist for the sole purpose of providing venues for reminiscences of old soldiers, but those facilities with extensive histories and and almost exclusive link to a particular branch (say a Ft. Sill to Arty, by way of example) not to mention an already existing infrastructure for display and cadre of dedicated personnel who have and continue to be willing to perform steady and dedicated service to preserving the past should not be sacrificed so readily in the name of power or precedence. To do so is an enormous dis-service to the tradition and legacy of service that they exist to preserve.