Talk:Commemorative Air Force

Untitled

George W. Bush (later president 43) grew up in Midland. When CAF moved to Midland, George H. W. Bush was president 41. Co-incidence?

On the other hand, Midland probably has a dry climate suitable for the preservation of historic aircraft. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 203.12.97.47 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 24 November 2004 (UTC)

• Why are there so many idiots on wiki. TX is not dry, it's hot and humid. Midland was probably chosen because it was a larger airport with more space available to the CAF. Not everything is a conspiracy involving the President. PPGMD
  • Texas is a big place. The only idiotic statement one can make about its weather is one that assumes Texas has the same weather everywhere. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:47, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• As someone who lives in West Texas (inc Midland) its rather dry (its a dry heat as the joke goes). —the preceding unsigned comment is by Candrade (talk • contribs) 07:14, 16 February 2005 (UTC)

Good grief. I guess the Bushs are responsible for the Black Death too.

Midland was chosen because of the available space. The CAF has a huge operational area now and can expand at will in the future. The former CAF headquarters in Harlingen was too small and shared space with Harlingen International Airport (now Rio Grande Valley International Airport). The CAF tried to work out a deal and wanted to buy more land in Harlingen, but city officials planned to expand their airport and make it a regional hub for the Valley (in which they somewhat succeeded). Agreement couldn't be reached, and the CAF started looking elsewhere and found an enthusiastic partner in Midland. I believe they seriously looked at Corpus Christi, but there just wasn't the same space available as at Midland.

Good for Midland, but too bad for Airsho visitors, perhaps. In the old days, you could combine a trip to the CAF with visits to South Padre Island and Mexico. With all due respect to Midland-- there ain't much there. 169.253.4.21 (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Texxasfinn

In an article about the Confederate Flag in the Washington Post, a slide show of the display of the Confederate Flag from 1938 to today is included. One of the photos, dated September 1946, shows two men, J. W. "Mike" Holton and Albert T. McSorley, both 'Colonels,' holding a Confederate Battle Flag in front of the Confederate Air Force headquarters in New Bern, North Carolina. The headquarters is on the site of a Civil War battle. A sign behind and overhead reads "Confederate Air Force Headquarters, organized March 25, 1946, New Bern, N. C.," on a historic battleground. This photo would contradict evidence of when the CAF was formed. Can anyone explain this?

Rating now Start

• has pic
• has multiple links, internal and external
• has sections headings and refs
• has sub-headings

Meets one of the four.LanceBarber 05:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Updated to B-class and mid importance, meets all for LanceBarber 07:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

colonels

Aren't all the members (officers? disciples?)named as honourary Colonels? Think it is worth a mention, but I'm not sure of my facts. Epeeist smudge 14:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Almost right... but those "Colonels" pay BIG bucks, thousands, for the rank, and plus they have to be certified pilots, and pay for the training for the aircraft they will be flying. Someone will have the answer for us. LanceBarber 07:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Not so, Lance. Anyone with money can become a "Colonel." $160/year. CAF membership page All members are "Colonels" expressly so that no member outranks another. Uncle Milty 15:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

How about I edit "Today, the Commemorative Air Force is comprised of over 11,000 members, each given the honorary rank of Colonel, several hundred of whom serve as pilots and flight or maintenance crew members committed to preserving World War II American aviation heritage" Would that be correct? Epeeist smudge 13:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

photos

Wiki-commons do not have much on CAF, is there anyone out there that would like to donate and upload some pics of CAF's aircraft so we can enhance the article.?? LanceBarber 07:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Confederate Imagery

This article does an incredibly poor job of addressing the controversy surrounding the CAF's name and the organization's history. While the name "Confederate Air Force" was indeed always used as a tongue-in-cheek moniker, the association with the Confederacy and the 'South' in general was much stronger than depicted in this article. An entire 'myth' was developed about the CAF and its founder and leader, Colonel Beauregard CULPEPER-- not "Throckmorton," as the article currently inaccurately and oddly states. Culpeper was a white-bearded, General Robert E. Lee look-alike. The women's auxillary was known as "Culpeper's Angels." Early Air Shows (before the 'Airsho' age) featured raids by "yankee" aircraft. CAF colonels' uniforms had a large confederate flag on their back, and a common variant of officers' pinned-on 'wings' was a set of wings with a rebel flag in the center. The organization was not racist, openly or otherwise, but it was overwhelmingly white and southern, and made no apologies about its symbolic association with southern heritage, which to members was all in good fun.

As the CAF expanded further and further beyond Texas and the deep south, and as public sentiment in the U.S. about depiction of Confederate imagery changed, the flag and other items were perceived by some members to become liabilities. Generational change played a role in this as well, as the actual WW II generation began retiring from active membership and younger men largely took over. The flag on the uniform was the first to go. Older members still proudly wore their old uniforms at Airshos, but newer members were issued grey uniforms with no flags. The airman's 'wings' were then changed, and finally all Confederate imagery was removed from official material, although the name remained. Colonel Culpeper receded further into the background and was, de facto, retired as well.

Finally, after acrimonious debate, the name was changed. Many members, maybe even a majority, opposed this nod to political correctness, but the organization's leaders were concerned that in the 21st Century, the ability to attract needed revenue and the public's good graces was more important than historical legacy. The "Al Sharpton" argument factored prominently in this decision, as in-- it only takes one Al Sharpton to choose to make an issue out of the name for the CAF's reputation to be permanently trashed.

That was it. The old name was gone, the organization had radically changed, the old Headquarters at Harlingen had been abandoned for Midland, and the Airshos were changed as well. The end of an era.

A final point-- CAF planes did NOT feature a USAF star and roundel on one side and a Confederate flag on the other, unless a few planes were painted this way in the earliest days of the organization. I have seen pictures of the P-51 and P-38 in old, white CAF schemes with a stylized CAF logo featuring the flag on the tail, but those dates from the 1960s when the CAF was still very small.

When I get a chance, I'll revise the article.

How I'd love to go back in time and see one of the late 1980s Airshows, when the emphasis was on large-scale WWII recreated battles and the CAF was still chock-full of German aircraft for the recreations; incredible! 169.253.4.21 (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC) TexxasFinn

I agree 100% with your point, and I'll add this to it. The whole idea behind the name was, as the founding members were beginning their search for aircraft (along about the time they were bidding on the two F8F Bearcats surplused by the Navy--they began by attempting to obtain at least one example of each major fighter type used by the U.S. Army Air Forces and Navy/Marines), they (as the article mentions) discovered no attempt was being made by the U.S. Government to coordinate the preservation of any WWII type aircraft for museum purposes. What they came across was, literally, wholesale mass distruction of the vast aerial armada the nation had produced in the form of surplus sales to salvage scrap metal dealers. All of the original members had been, in some capacity, associated with these aircraft during the war, and their mass distruction sans any sense of posterity angered them. Also, the group were all "southern gentlemen" from the Rio Grande Valley of South Texas, and it struck them that the orders to destroy the aircraft had come from the "Yankees" in Washington, D.C.! Thus the notion of a "rebellion" against those orders spawned the association with the Confederacy. I can't remember how many times I read this story in CAF publications of the late 1960s and 1970s. And as TexxasFinn points out, a grand lore grew from these humble beginnings. I have to disagree, though, about the Commander's name. As I remember it, his name was "Jethro T. Culpepper." Way back somewhere in my garage, I still have some copies of some of the CAF's brochures of the 1970s (I know I have one advertising "Airshow '73" which I am thankful I was able to attend at Harlingen). I'll try to dig them out to check the C.O.'s name for sure, but I'd bet money on "Jethro T. Culpepper." I understand why they did it (money...in this day and age, in aviation everything is ALWAYS about the money!), but it was truly a sad day when the CAF gave up the name "Confederate Air Force."192.100.69.146 (talk) 07:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)CBsHellcat

As far as money goes, the organization actually lost a lot of longtime donors after the name change, because they didn't like bowing to political "correctness". ColDickPeters (talk) 05:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

From what I have been able to find and research -- and gleaned from a few members -- the so-called "majority vote" (which was about 54%)for the name change, was largely due to the fact more and more wings were based, and members coming from, non-Southern states. Thus -- along with the fear of loss of funding from corporate sponsors squeamish about the name -- what started as a little "tongue in cheek" joke, and lead to a proud tradition, became a casualty of political-correctness. From what I heard, some members resigned in disgust. And a few of them said along the lines of "Given how it came about, if there was going to be a name change, then it ought to have been to 'Cowardly Air Force'." Hey, it occurred to me that maybe to start another "tongue in cheek" joke that will lead to another proud tradition in lines of the original? Well, perhaps the Southern state wings should "secede" from the "Commemorative Air Force" and the "Rebels" re-assume its original and proper name: The Confederate Air Force! TexasReb (talk) 21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

They were right to change the name, and it was definitely the correct thing to do. And it's a story too old to even discuss. 98.194.39.86 (talk) 00:44, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Squadron listing

This seems to be a long list of relatively little (notable) content, could it be precised?GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

CAF origins

wasn't the CAF started with a P-51 and not a P-40? Wingman1 (talk) 02:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I just checked their history page, and it looks like you are correct. I'll fix that (and the expired ref link). --| Uncle Milty | talk | 11:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

CAF aircraft listing

According to Martin Caidin's book Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38, the CAF has - or, at least, had - a P-38 Lightning amongst their craft when they were operating out of Rebel Field.

Does anyone know if they still have it - or, if not, what happened to it?

--Special Operative MACAVITY^{Debrief me} 07:10, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I used to have a handful of photos from back in the old days at Rebel Field. I'm pretty sure the P-38 they had (back when ALL the airplanes were painted overall white with red/white/blue trim on wingtips and tail surface tips) was none other than N25Y - better known today as Lefty Gardner's "White Lightnin'". When that aircraft was first acquired, it had a radar/pathfinder nose on it which was later swapped for the more familiar fighter nose. The aircraft at that time also had the standard deep "L" model engine cowlings which were later swapped out with earlier lower-profile "F/G/H" model cowlings (Lefty raced the airplane back then). Some of those photos of Rebel Field were published in Air Classics Magazine in the late 1970s and early 80s. Ahh, those were the days!192.100.69.170 (talk) 02:28, 5 May 2011 (UTC)CBsHellcat

Absolutely right. That P-38 was one of the orignal CAF ghost squadron aircraft. Even after the move to Harlingen, Gardner still kept it out at the old Rebel Field in Mercedes sometimes. Great plane, still　flying after all these years. 219.166.182.129 (talk) 02:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)TexxasFinn

The original CAF P-38 was damaged in a forced landing and subsequently bought and repaired by Red Bull. It's now based in Austria and is a promo aircraft for the brand. Seriously. Glad that it was repaired, but such a shame that this warbird wound up with so sad a fate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.22 (talk) 12:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

1946 North Carolina-based CAF?

Is there any connection to the "Confederate Air Force" organized by Col. J.W. “Mike” Holton and Col. Albert T. McSorley in 1946, apparently once based at New Bern's Coastal Carolina Regional Airport?--Pharos (talk) 23:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

No. No idea what the 1946 thing was about, but it has zero connection with Lloyd Nolan, Lefty Gardner, and the CAF in south Texas in the 60's. 169.252.4.22 (talk) 12:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

What are these?

Two terms/phrases/names/titles are used without explanation, definition, or clarification.

First, who or what is the "Tora! Tora! Tora! Gang"?::'They' are only mentioned in the captions of two photos.

Second, what is the "Ghost Squadron"?::It's mentioned once in a paragraph near the end of the article.

The expansion, and inclusion, of these two items would, I think, add to this already interesting article/entry. 2600:8800:50B:6700:C23F:D5FF:FEC5:89B6 (talk) 01:38, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Commemorative Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090512173732/http://www.azcaf.org/pages/aircraft_bios/B-17G_FlyFort.html to http://www.azcaf.org/pages/aircraft_bios/B-17G_FlyFort.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:52, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Crash in the news

This needs to be in the article: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dallas-air-show-crash-world-war-ii-military-aircraft-texas/ Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:49, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

The crash has been in the article since yesterday. BilCat (talk) 04:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't see it down there under "incidents". I thought it might be more prominent. (They are all fatal crashes.) Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries. BilCat (talk) 05:09, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

RfC: Should the article include defunct units?

A number of CAF units have been disestablished over the years. Should these units be included in the article and how? Should they be included in a subsection of the wings and squadrons or a similar section of former units? –Noha307 (talk) 23:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Comment: See a section on the list of surviving Supermarine Spitfires talk page for a discussion of a similar issue that may be relevant. –Noha307 (talk) 23:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@Noha307 what prompted this RfC? I'm not seeing any discussion or disagreement? Why not just be WP:BOLD and implement it? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 08:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

(Summoned by bot) ditto CaptainEek's comment. Pincrete (talk) 09:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

You are correct that there isn't any disagreement, I was just conflicted on which position was appropriate and was hoping for some additional input. My apologies if this is not the appropriate use for an RfC. –Noha307 (talk) 19:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

RfCs are for soliciting outside comment when there has been a disagreement and additional perspectives are needed. They are generally not suitable when there has been no disagreement, as outsiders will have a hard time gauging the merits of each position when they aren't laid out well. I'm going to remove the RfC tag and would suggest asking for advice somewhere like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 00:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)