The PT Boat Forum
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi
» Forum Category: PT Boats of WWII
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi?cid=101&fct=showf
» Forum Name: PT Boats - General
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi?fct=gotoforum&cid=101&fid=102
» Topic:
Video Update on PT305 Status
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboardr.cgi?cid=101&fid=102&tid=5100
Hello Gents,
I came across this today on Youtube and thought you may be interested in hearing. The 305 was unceremoniously yanked from the water and shrink wrapped by the WW2 Museum. They let the lease of their boathouse go and pretty much fired most of the ships docents save for 1 or 2. I think all of the volunteers were told their services were no longer needed. It really angers me to see them treat this wonderful PT Boat like yesterday's garbage. Anyway watch for yourself the video news story and form your own opinion. I feel bad for all the fine people who spent countless hours and money restoring the 305 only to have this happen because of some bean counter at the museum felt that the boat ddnt make them enough money. Disgusting!
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4iwY60cqlg[/url]
Jerry Gilmartin
PT658 Crewman
Portland OR
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Feb 26, 2022 - 10:41pm
Total Posts: 1473 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
Jerry
This seems to be a odd decision considering it’s the beginning of the tourist season and covid looks to be less of a concern now. The last time we were down there the 305 was still in the annex and you had to see her through the windows. I have been wanting to head back down there to take a ride but looks like I missed that window. Hope they get to the point they will start giving rides again. At least they didn’t move her back for a static display at the museum, so maybe the decision is only temporary.
Thanks!
Jeff
Posted By: Jeff H | Posted on: Feb 27, 2022 - 5:33am
Total Posts: 32 | Joined: Jun 7, 2019 - 6:00am
Thanks for sharing that Jerry. I didn't realize that the museum had a limited planned run time. I'm surprised they made that investment with no long term intent on keeping her. The museum seemed to be the perfect home for her. Hopefully she finds a good home where people can experience all the great work that went into her.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Feb 27, 2022 - 5:24pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
All,
We had a chance to speak with Stephen Watson, President & CEO of the WWII Museum after the Pearl Harbor Day Commemoration Ceremony. I asked about the 305 and he said it was very expensive to operate it had a longer run on the water than originally planned. He also told us that the plan was to put her back in the restoration pavilion for all the see.
As an aside, we stayed at the Higgins Hotel and loved it.
Bob
Ron16PT224 2nd Gen
Bob Stanton
Posted By: Robert J Stanton | Posted on: Feb 28, 2022 - 6:46am
Total Posts: 19 | Joined: Jun 21, 2012 - 8:48am
Thanks for the update Bob. I am glad to hear they are planning on keeping her for display. Her story needs to be told. A lot of dedicated hard work and donations went into that boat. She deserves to live on and her legacy shared.
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Feb 28, 2022 - 9:21am
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Hope for the best for the PT boat. Leaving her tarped doesn't make any money for anyone. Sad day for us PT boat lovers.
Bill P Reese
Posted By: billpr | Posted on: Feb 28, 2022 - 4:01pm
Total Posts: 83 | Joined: Mar 19, 2017 - 4:34pm
Thanks Jerry and Bob. I put in some hours of research helping a nice gentleman there, he sent me a cool t-shirt that I enjoy wearing. I love surprises in the mail like that! It beats the heck out of bills.
Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Feb 28, 2022 - 4:05pm
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am
You know you have to take what they say about it being "very expensive to operate" with a large grain of salt, especially when we know exactly how much it costs to operate and have been doing just fine on a relative shoestring budget compared to the 305 here in Portland, operating the 658. I don't buy that line of BS at all. Also, the part where they say it was only originally planned to operate for 2 years sure sounds suspect to me. It just is an excuse if you ask me. Ask all those volunteers who put their blood sweat and tears into restoring the 305 if they were ever told that the museum only planned to operate it for 2 years? I am willing to bet this is the first they are hearing of that whopper! Yeah this whole thing stinks in my opinion. Cursed Bean counters making all the decisions with no regard for history or honoring the vets.
Jerry Gilmartin
PT658 Crewman
Portland OR
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Mar 2, 2022 - 12:48am
Total Posts: 1473 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
I am sad to see these posts. My son and I had the great privilege to ride her and had a great time!! . Gave us a little taste of what my Dad's life in the war was like and the engine room. The boat was full to capacity and with the cost to board her not sure how they were losing money. however this was in 2019 before covid. i agree there is something fishy going on here. Perhaps the history Revisionists ? I better stop before i get too cynical. .
Scott Campbell 2nd gen,PT 248
Ron 20
Posted By: Scott C | Posted on: Mar 11, 2022 - 4:38pm
Total Posts: 108 | Joined: Nov 20, 2019 - 4:34pm
Jerry, I agree with your statement about the cost to operate compared to the 658. The WWII Museum also charged a hefty fee to take a ride. It is expensive to keep a USCG certified vessel operating to carry passengers, but the fees offset that cost let alone donations. The 486 was able to sail for more than 48 years carrying passengers on her original 1943 Elco built bottom. With the full restoration the 305 received, she could sail for a long time!
Former crew member of the Big Blue Sightseer ex-PT 486
Posted By: Gerry McGovern | Posted on: Apr 5, 2022 - 6:51am
Total Posts: 78 | Joined: Oct 7, 2016 - 1:47pm
Jerry;
I agree it’s disgusting. The thing they are trying to hide, is the museum as a whole took a financial hit with COVID, that seems to be the excuse for everything that isn’t 45’s fault. Don’t look forward, or think out of the box, find an excuse and someone or something else to blame difficulties on.
Take care,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: Apr 5, 2022 - 10:25am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
All;
Currently in that area 100 Octane costs on an average $6.08 per gallon (http://www.100ll.com/). $18,240 to fill up the tanks.
Take care,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: Apr 5, 2022 - 10:28am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Duplicate msg
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: Apr 5, 2022 - 10:47am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Hello Ted
Here in Oregon we are able to purchase 100 octane through the local airport using a private tank truck and usually get a discount. We have to buy at least 1000 gallon minimum, but there are ways to reduce that cost. So it may be different now since the current administration took over. Even so if you carry 25 passengers at $500 a person does that cover the cost of gas? I still cant believe the 305 was "too expensive to operate"
Jerry
Jerry Gilmartin
PT658 Crewman
Portland OR
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 5, 2022 - 4:22pm
Total Posts: 1473 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
That brings up an interesting question. There's a big push to do away with 100LL. There is an approved alternative but I think there is some question as to how it will perform with high performance engines. I know in aircraft it's a straight transition without any required modifications. Jerry, have you been looking into this yet?
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 6, 2022 - 8:34pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
No not yet. I will ask around on the boat next Saturday. If they change it at the airport where we obtain our gas I guess we will have to deal with it then. I know there are over the counter additives you can pour into your tank to increase the lead content if it is that important to our engine operation, and we have used them in the past. I am not really the expert on this subject, but I will try to broach the subject at next opportunity.
Thanks Jerry.
Jerry Gilmartin
PT658 Crewman
Portland OR
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 8, 2022 - 1:51am
Total Posts: 1473 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
Jerry,
Here's a good link on the subject: https://aopa.org/advocacy/100-unleaded-avgas
There are unleaded alternatives now, but there is an issue with high performance engines, specifically over 500hp. The concern is detonation. It's definitely coming and hopefully they find a good alternative for you that works well.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 10, 2022 - 7:24pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
There is a substitute for 100LL, it's called G100UL.. It is approved for Spam Can's with turbos. Over 35 years ago, we in the WWII airplane world had permission to use what we called MoGas, which today is known as Clean Gas, or alcohol free unleaded high octane automobile gas. We only used it in the smaller radial engines, Continental, Jacob's, up to the Pratt & Whitney R-1350s, (wow, since when is 1350 cubic inch a small engine?) We never used it in the large radials, P&W R-2800, or Wright R-3350s! No one used them in the Allison or Rolls Royce V12s. I can't find where any of the V12 rebuilders have tried the G100UL, since they are the closest to the Packard V12s. Oh, and the new gas is projected to be 60-80 cents more a gallon! Lets face it, if you take all the running big iron WWII planes and add in the couple of PT Boats running on V-12s, they are not even a pin prick on the global petrol market! Let's hope some one can keep supplying fuel into the future!
Posted By: Stearman | Posted on: Apr 10, 2022 - 9:45pm
Total Posts: 150 | Joined: Nov 1, 2017 - 9:38pm
The Motor Macks on the boat I talked to are not against it, but they are concerned with detonation damage to these big Packards if we were to switch over to Unleaded AVGAS. We are not really thrilled about risking the integrity of the 75 year old engine until there is no other option. Just the rarity of having 3 running V12 2490 cubic inch 1850 horsepower Engines is enough of a reason to be ultra cautious. Just imagine if you have the last flyable P38 Lightning< would you want to risk it on a new type of fuel? Not me.
Jerry Gilmartin
PT658 Crewman
Portland OR
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 11, 2022 - 11:44am
Total Posts: 1473 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
Aircraft Owners & Pilots Assn (AOPA) among others will make sure that those operating high performance machines will be heard. It's not limited to warbirds. A lot of aircraft engines are at stake. There are a lot of benefits to unleaded fuel but it has to be the right mix.
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Apr 11, 2022 - 12:18pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
There is no doubt that upkeep on a 78 foot wood hulled boat is going to take plenty of maintenance. The folks at the museum I am sure knew this going into a project of this magnitude. To have such a wonderful boat that costs millions to restore sitting out of the water and not running is just horrible in my eyes. To my knowledge they were getting $400.00 a person for a ride on this Historic wonder, and I think they were licensed to carry 12 people. Doing the math that's $4800 each time you take a full boat out for a ride. Boats of this nature that played such a pivotal role during WWII are an important part of our future generations learning about the history. Can you imagine if those groups that have running airplanes, trucks, tanks, and other WWII vehicles felt this way? We would never experience what our WWII Veterans did and feel what they did some many years ago. I am certainly displeased with the Museums choice to ground this wonderful boat, but more than pleased that a much smaller venue like PT-658 in Portland Oregon continues to forge ahead through all of the problems associated with operating such a large wooden boat. They are a class act and continue to provide future generations the chance to ride a WWII PT BOAT!!!
Posted By: Frank J Andruss Sr | Posted on: Apr 11, 2022 - 12:49pm
Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am
Jerry, I think you missed the part of my post where I said: "I can't find where any of the V12 rebuilders have tried the G100UL, since they are the closest to the Packard V12s." I hope I am wrong, and some of the shops are bench testing the fuel in some Allison or Rolls Royce V12s! Cheers, Dennis
Posted By: Stearman | Posted on: Apr 11, 2022 - 8:19pm
Total Posts: 150 | Joined: Nov 1, 2017 - 9:38pm
I sincerely hope they do develop a lead free alternative that would work. Like I said I am not against it since lead is crazy bad for living things! Hopefully they will get it soon.
Jerry Gilmartin
PT658 Crewman
Portland OR
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Apr 12, 2022 - 12:27am
Total Posts: 1473 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm