Kevin Brooks wrote: 
 
"Peter Duniho"  wrote in message 
... 
 
 
"Chris Schmelzer"  wrote in message 
... 
 
 
In article , 
 "Peter Gottlieb"  wrote: 
 
 
 
To show compliance with some treaty? 
 
 
[...] umm, probably not 
 
 
I dunno...Peter's guess is the most sensible suggestion I've heard yet. 
 
 
You 
 
 
have a better theory? 
 
 
 
There are treaties covering strategic delivery systems--the C-141 is not 
one. There is a treaty covering conventional forces in Europe--C-141's are 
not covered. There is no "Big Honking Cargo Plane Reduction Treaty". The 
treaty compliance approach would be viable for things like the B-52 (where 
they use that big guillotine to prove beyond a doubt that the Buff in 
question is not going to be flying anymore); it is a non-starter in the case 
of the C-141. 
 
Brooks 
 
 
 
 
Very obvious so mother Russia can verify from space.  Leaves no doubt if 
a B-52's wings are laying next to the fuselage. 
 
After WWII, surplus planes were parked at Cal Aero Field for melting 
down.  Those to be sold off had markings painted over.  Maybe something 
along those lines??  Although, putting holes through the skin couldn't 
make any buyer happy! 
 
Whoops, I take that back.  All going to the furnace had their markings 
painted over.  Time to scratch my head a little more. 
 
 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
	
		 
			
 
			
			
			
				 
            
			
			
            
            
                
			
			
		 
		
	
	
	 |