Across America, one finds museums of all types, from heavily bureaucratized, subsidized and supposedly professionally curated (e.g. the Smithsonian museums) to a host of local and semiformal facilities.
Many museums are excellent, educational and enjoyable. But many, of whatever scale or supposed prestige, also show evidence upon even cursory inspection of startling basic-competence problems. False "facts," even about basic subjects, abound, as my work on this subject in many major newspapers has glimpsed.
Milwaukee's General Mitchell International Airport offers first-time visitors a nice surprise — a free aviation museum, named like the airport for Billy Mitchell, the Army officer who passionately advocated air power during and after World War I, and though initially court-martialed for his effort, was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor and is remembered by history as a visionary.
The Mitchell Gallery of Flight's modest space offers exhibits on Mitchell and other Milwaukee and Wisconsin aviation greats — such as Apollo 13 hero Jim Lovell and USAF Capt. Lance Sijan, posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for Vietnam service — and provides a short general survey of aviation and its history. It's a fine idea, and the gallery is apparently organized and maintained by volunteers.
Even my brief walkthrough — about 15 minutes, reading only maybe a quarter of what's there — found embarrassing factual errors, some so obvious that one knowing nothing about aviation should spot them immediately. Together, they show that while thanking gallery volunteers for their concept and effort generally, we should ask them to shake out some cobwebs, focus and bear down to best accomplish their good educational mission.
In space devoted to Lovell there appear two errors, one showing apparent blindness and/or daftness, and the other, simple ignorance of famous history and machinery.
A handsomely embroidered patch commemorates Apollo 13's 25th anniversary in 1995. Bizarrely, the patch states the years defining the anniversary — which are obviously 1970 (Apollo 13, April 11-17, 1970) and 1995 — as "1969" and 1995.
Did no one notice that 1969 1) is not the year of Apollo 13 (it was, rather, of Apollos 11 and 12); 2) is not even 1995 minus 25; 3) is not even a multiple of five, as must be the case for something 25 years before 1995?
Immediately adjacent to this display, there are two models of the F-4 Phantom II. Both are labeled "F4H-1" — an early designation for this jet, before the shift to F-4C, F-4E, F-4J, etc. among the Navy, Air Force and Marines. One model is labeled "Phantom II" and the other "Phantom I." Why? The FH-1 Phantom (I) was the first regularly operational Navy carrier jet, a plane about as different in appearance, among other things, from the F-4 Phantom II as another carrier jet could be.
The Phantom II is arguably the most famous, diversely developed, used, accomplished fighter plane America ever produced, with the biggest production run and longest active service and also holds a record in three U.S. service branches. Yet the gallery-keepers seem to not only ignore elements of their own display just inches apart, but to not know the difference between the very separate historic Phantoms.
A multilayered example of lack of language facility and/or more factual ignorance is seen with the B-29 model declaring that a B-29 "dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima." How many A-bombs does the staff think were dropped there? Did they mean to write something like "…dropped on Hiroshima the [history's] first atom bomb"? Even this, while better, would be factually wrong, since "the bomb" was successfully tested weeks earlier in New Mexico, at famous Trinity Site. Any number of correct, educational constructions are easily written.
Some impetus for this column comes from gallery staff's attitude and behavior, notwithstanding my praise above for the museum's presence. During the two weeks after my visit, I tried a few times to establish communication and to provide this information to the museum as a free favor. By generally failing to respond — then by intent refusal to behave responsibly or even adultly once phone contact was made — staff made clear they weren't interested in criticism or errors, and thus not serious about their supposed mission.
This, combined with evident incompetence, raises the question whether the gallery is someone's loose, casual hobby happening to enjoy prime public space that should not be taken seriously, or a serious attempt at aerospace and historical education.
Mark W. Powell, of Arlington, Va., is a licensed pilot, master parachutist and general aerospace fan who has been published in a number of U.S. and Canadian newspapers.,”Mark W. Powell”
“