Rhinebeck Museum trouble

[watchman]

I have no axe to grind on either side of this debate (assuming there is a debate - the thread here does only contain one side of the story) but will post here as an interested observer. I do not know anyone at or connected with Old Rhinebeck, but perhaps my perspective can be of some help, as my job is running a decent-sized museum.

Not too long ago I paid my first and long awaited visit to Rhinebeck, and loved the air show side of the experience. What a magical airfield, what a magical set of airplanes, what a show!

However, I was somewhat surprised and disturbed by the general state of the facility, the poor condition of many buildings, and particularly several aircraft and engines in the earth floored "display" hangars. There were some true historical treasures literally rotting away. This neglect seemed at odds with the great reputation of Old Rhinebeck in the aviation community.

As a strictly impartial observer the Spirit of St Louis project seemed like a bad idea to me... don't get me wrong, the quality of workmanship was utterly outstanding, but I left wondering why so much resource was being invested in the replica project, while some true historical treasures rotted away close by - and investment was so obviously needed in other areas.

It seemed to me that the last thing the Aerodrome needed was another airplane (it already has wonderful airplane resources). There seemed to be a lot of other things that were crying out for resources. On the evidence of what I have seen, the first things I would invest in at Old Rhinebeck would be some professional marketing materials and a much improved main retail facility... not yet another airplane (and as a side issue, one that would pose some serious operational safety issues).

I was curious to understand the financial position of the operation and looked up their previously submitted Form 990s on the web. If you want to see them yourself they can be accessed through Guidestar.

www.guidestar.com

(You will need to register and use the search facility).

Not surprisingly given what I had seen at the airfield, I learned that Old Rhinebeck is being run on a shoestring budget. As far as I can see, it is an operation teetering right on the edge of economic viability, and is extremely cash-poor.

As an impartial observer, I can understand any efforts being made by Rhinebeck's leadership to cut costs that are not ABSOLUTELY necessary, and a drive seek to increase all sources of income wherever possible. For that is what is desparately needed for the place to survive (and ultimately prosper).

However, again as an impartial observer, it seems that pissing off your volunteers is not a good start...

It is sad to see this very public breakdown of relations at Old Rhinebeck, because what the place obviously needs is a united effort to deal with the fundamental issues that face the aerodrome. I hope that a solution can be found, that the right leadership will come to the fore, and that the wonderful volunteers can find happiness.

[baldeagle]

As I stated in a previous post, I grew up at the Aerodrome, and have many fond memories of the place. I have since gone into the business of restoring vintage aircraft, and know a lot of people in the vintage aircraft world, many through my Rhinebeck connections. I have gotten e-mails recently from Italy, France, England, Canada, and Australia, not to mention all over the US, regarding the troubles at Rhinebeck. I'm sure that if a fresh start was made at the Aerodrome, with a new board and director that could show their dedication to the vision of Cole Palen, then all of the energy and emotion that has been shown on this forum and elsewhere would be put to use supporting Old Rhinebeck. As it is any support is waning rapidly, and I wish that the people who are at the center of this controversy would step aside and allow a new start to be made. I hate to see all of this stuff that's happening, but it's time for them to step away and let a new start be made. Staying will only make it worse. Maybe a committee of people from other museums could be put together to set up a new board, who could serve a two year term and then be re-elected (or not, or others elected) by a vote of the museum members. I haven't been a member for several years, but would gladly join again if I had a vote on the leadership. I'm quite sure I'm not alone in this regard.
Don't let it keep spinning down like this, please.

AK

[Dave_Watts]

Hi all,

I think Watchman makes a good point with the state of the relics and treasures at Rhinebeck. I was there in the spring and felt the engines in the leaky unheated sheds warranted better treatment. I'm sure near to nothing was spent purchasing them and that's how they are being treated. If these engines were sold on the open market they might get a reality check as to their real value and treat them a bit better. I know they may not have much of a budget, but to disassemble conduct preservation and reassemble the engines only takes some dedicated volunteers and I can't imagine they can't find some old A&P's that would love to help out. I'm sure many of us would help out if we were only closer to Rhinebeck. They may even be able to find folks outside of New York that would be willing to restore or at least conduct preservation on these engines. Some of the engines may be able to have work done on them by the original manufacturers. Cadillac made Libertys for example. I know this is an ambitious idea, but give it a try, be careful, try one engine at a time.

I think I can see how the new board is thinking of how to make money and less of the spirit of Rhinebeck and those who have been there so long. I was on the board of directors of The First Warplanes, setup and operated by Frank Ryder and although he loved the airplanes and doing the show he was really frustrated with loosing money on his airshows and vented on the board for how to make more money. He made the exact same comparisons of competing with Disney, Six Flags, etc. I think the idea has to be a balance of trying to make money and presenting the aircraft, if you get too focused on one or the other you'll "fail". I'm just surprised that the board has swung so far with their desire to make money. I can see to them all of the "old blood" is going to have to go as they will resist and "act as if they own the place", (when in truth they probably have more right to feel they are part of the place).

How did this new controversial board come into power? Doesn't someone have to vote them in?

I appreciate it if people sign their name to their postings so I know who is who when things are said. If they want to remain anonymous, say so.

Best,
Dave W.

[baldeagle]

You make some good points Watchman, and Dave also. Sounds like you have some actual experience with museums. I don't think that what's left of the "old guard" at Rhinebeck is so much resistant to change, rather they're tired of a board that runs the place like a bull in a china shop, and which has a history of making very poor decisions, and hasn't shown an ability to move the place forward (not to mention showing questionable ethics). As far as this being a one-sided thread, it's a public forum, and there can be little doubt that they're reading it. If they had a good defense they should be posting it here, but I think they realise that "homeland security" and the other things they say to the press won't fly here.

AK

[StolenCub]

Watchman, Dave and Baldeagle - all good posts. From my persepctive the board is not concentrated on "making money" - If that were their focus they would not have rejected a proven fund raiser for the board, rejected a $25,000 grant as being "too small" , forced out a man with more than 40 years of non-profit experience and a proven track record for raising money & failed to use grant money which has time constraints on it. I could go on about this.

Their real intent is simple - remove anyone connected with the original vision of the Aerodrome so they can run it the way they (the board) want without intervention. None of the firings make sense from a financial point of view. You cannot replace the people they have let go for what they were paying them. They do make sense from a politica/personall point of view.

Baldeagle's point is also spot on - this forum may be one-sided, but it's only because the other side will not weigh in. They have no defense against the points made here and any comments they do make will only expose their true position.

[StolenCub]

BTW -

Watchman. As someone connected with a museum, does tyour museum have a board of Directors/Trustees ? How are they appointed, how are their terms lengths determined ? Who votes them onto the board ?

ORA's bylaws do not provide for term limits and re-election is a matter internal to the board. Members of the ORA Museum do not get to vote or even know who is running. If a board member wants to bring in a friend from say, Long Island, who has never been to OR and never met Cole Palen, all he needs to do is ensure his other board members will vote him in.

If you wanted to bring in someone who is, say the Mayor of Tivoli, NY - a local with a proven political and financial track record, who is connected by geography and history to the Aerodrome, somone who would actually serve the museum to good purpose, you are out of luck.

I am truly interested in the questions above. I am on the board of a museum in NJ and on the board of a non-profit. Members vote for officers and trustees. There are term limits in the by-laws and failure to perform duties, like attending board meetings results in dismissal. Not so the case at OR. Is ORA an exception, or do most other museums run that way ?

[baldeagle]

And Dave, as far as farming stuff out-- I'm about to go back out to the shop after lunch, and in our shop is a 1929 Monocoupe which belongs to Old Rhinebeck. In fact it was Cole's second airplane, back in the 1950s. He sold it, bought it back in the '70s, rebuilt it, and flew it for a few years in the shows, dressed as a woman (Monocoupes were known for being flown by woman pilots). The owner of our shop, who restored and owns his own Monocoupe, made a deal with ORA, a deal arranged by Tom Polapink, to restore the ORA Monocoupe for only the cost of materials, the labor is free (and we've been working on finding sponsors to cover the material cost). Since bringing it here he has been frustrated by the lack of communication from Rhinebeck (since Tom was forced out), and by the apparent lack of knowlege of what is involved here. I really don't think such a deal would be made under today's circumstances, unfortunate as we've already talked about what other aircraft up there we'd like to work on when the 'Coupe is done (maybe finish the Sopwith Dolphin). The Monocoupe still makes progress, done as a tribute to Cole, and despite the lack of communication from ORA.
And what about the story of the two volunteers who rebuilt the Liberty engine to running condition, and the Hall-Scott on the Curtiss pusher. Sounds like invaluable help, but it is my understanding that they will no longer have anything to do with the place, because of the events discussed here.

AK

Right on boys!
Kurt Muller and John Stover Did great jobs on the Liberty V12, the Hall-Scott, and I think they were about to work on another engine when this whole thing came about. Not to mention that Tom Polapink had gotten some folks that were all set to start a committee dedicated to the rolling stock of the ORA. They would raise money within the prestigious antique automobile community, which would go to restoring the ORA's car and motorcycle collection, and build new buildings to store them. From what I understand the people that were to head the project were involved in the Greenwich car show.
As for focusing too much on one aircraft. That's not so. The fund raising committee was all set to start raising money for buildings and hangars, but there was no long range plan. One of the fundamental purposes of the ORA is to restore and create replicas of important historic aircraft. As much work probably would have gone into restoring one of the retired aircraft. Besides, from the great economic support of the members, it is evident that the spirit was wanted.
To date, the board does not have a good record for fund raising. The best results that I have seen have come from Tom Polapink. Tom had always told me that if the board had found a person that was more qualified to be the Museum director, he would step down and work as his assistant, because he only wanted the ORA to be successful.
Tom also had an education committee, made up of local teachers that were putting together an educational program, which is, I believe, essential for the charter.
As far as engines sitting in the mud, I don't know of any that are. Tom had us all putting those things on stands. And to come to think of it, I think Paul Savastano (Sp?) was cleaning them up and welding up engine stands for them. So you see work was underway to take care of these things. But no longer. There is no reason the board couldn't have put trust in us and we could have worked together to make the ORA prosper. Trust was the reason that volunteers could no longer keep their aircraft there. The board was too afraid that if something happened, the volunteers would sue the Aerodrome. No volunteer would ever sue the Aerodrome. It would negate everything they ever did for the place. No Trust! No understanding! That is why we are in the situation we are in today.

[joegertler]

Baldeagle; If it is the Velie powered Monocoupe, I still have the original Velie engine mount from that specific aircraft. Got it and the engine (I think the engine had only about 400 hours on it.) So far back, I can't remember what we traded Cole for it-probably rotary stuff.. Don't know how far along you are, but this mount is in excellent condition. Sold the engine years ago,too. Now that I'm pretty much retired, and moved to Florida-without the display room for them, I've liquidated the engines and a lot of the engine stuff. Most went into nice museum and restoration projects..But still have a lot of old engine parts, instuments and restoration parts on the storage shelves...
I'm just sick to hear of the situation and have similar feelings and experiences to those already expressed of what Cole and ORA have meant to my life. I was just thinking to myself...SO MANY memories and not a bad one in the bunch-every memory makes me smile. I can Easily understand the frustration and disappointment with the situation and wanting Somebody to be held accountable and Somebody to help straighten it out and SAVE ORA in this critical hour of need. I KNOW it can be fixed and that ORA can be financially stable and self-supporting. It isn't that complicated really. Cole did it all by himself for many years, with some good help of course, from volunteers and friends that he charismatically attracted. Almost ANY museum director/curator I've ever met, will tell you these operations are completey dependent on outside help and fund-raising, and cannot be self-sustaining. But is isn't true and Cole and some others I know proved that. It needs someone who is a "driving force" and KNOWS exactly how to do it(not guess or take several years for planning that "might help or work.") in this EXACT type of operation, or very similar. An experienced fund-raiser won't help much. An experienced aero historian won't help much. An experienced business/financial manager won't help much. Experience with restorations, costs, planning won't help that much, UNLESS you can find someone (or a SMALL team) that has (successful) experience in all those fields to take the helm with a free hand and authority and RESPECT for Cole's intentions and legacy. I believe that can be done.
Just remember that all the negative complaints (and I would probably be among the first and most vocal to make them, if I were deeply invloved up there) are going to be another liability to overcome when the time comes to get up and running again and gain what outside support and voluteerism is possible. It's kind of a Catch 22. I know you have to bring the disastrous situation to the public to try to get enough clout to get rid of those that can't and haven't,and won't, and replace them with those that can and have and will...

[mattyb]

ive been to the museum several times in the past years .following the restoration of the spirit is amazing anybody that cannot understand the importance of the spirit project has obviously not been to rhinebeck to see the obvious interest in the project ive met many people around the world that have donated to see the unbelievable talent that ken cassens has put into this project. This last year was the worst ive seen as far as the way it was run the board is so worried about money yet the camel sat all season after its trip to australia. I live in Massachussetts Why didnt the board focus on somewhere a little closer to try and attract more members. local airshows more r/c clubs that are very popular in this area have never heard of rhinebeck but thanks to the board australia has been informed the few weekends this year ive been there and talked to the ground personal other than a nice vacation in australia it didnt do much for the aerodrome ive beem going to rhinebeck for over twenty years and i cant recall to many engines laying around rotting if you pay attention in the museum hangers youll noticed there all tagged with the last service and what in the future needs to be done.to concentrate on a project like the spirit supported by the memmbers funded by the MEMBERS shows what is wanted and expected to keep cole palens dream alive.