“Could someone please explain to me why moving of the United States Armor Center from Fort Knox, Kentucky to Fort Benning, Georgia is reason for the Patton Museum to lose over 200 tank exhibits?”
Harold Hall
Harold Hall
Genesis
Until several years ago I have always been one of those people who have taken history for granted. Don’t get me wrong, over the years history has interested me a little at times I suppose, but now as an adult I would give anything to be able to talk to my grandparents about their childhood experiences growing up and much more. As a youngster, I think that I may have visited a museum or two during grade school field trips, I can’t remember much about those places because my main interest back then was science fiction; I was by far a Star Wars “junkie” for most of my childhood. Yet now as an adult I appreciate things a whole lot more.
The General George S Patton Jr. Museum on Fort Knox offers a lot of that rich military history I crave. It was in 1999 when I first visited the Patton Museum and today I am glad to see that the Museum is still at Fort Knox and not moved to Fort Benning, Georgia as rumored. During that first visit, I remember seeing more tanks, artillery, jeeps, and armored vehicles than I could have ever imagined; almost 300 to be exact. It was an awesome site to see so many historical pieces of armor from World War I and World War II that had been preserved and placed on display. There had been speculation that the museum could leave 2010. In February of 2010, an Associated Press article reported how the Army had decided to keep the museum at Knox. (Schreiner 8). Following discussions with top level army officials U.S. Rep Ron Lewis said that the museum would remain a part of Fort Knox’s heritage and that a $40 million expansion by museum backers was being funded. (8). |
| New billboard sign for the Patton Museum. June 2011 |
Although the building is formally named the General George S Patton Jr. Museum, it has fondly become known as the Patton Museum. (Schreiner 8). The Patton Museum was originally opened in 1949, its purpose was not only to honor the famous general to which it was aptly named, but also to preserve many of the historical artifacts and archival items related to Mechanized Cavalry and Armor. When the current museum was opened in 1972, it featured tanks and other armored vehicles from World War I to the Iraq war. (U.S.Army)
But sadly today, 75% of the tanks, artillery guns and vehicles that were at the Patton museum are now gone. Over 230 pieces of armor have been warehoused for storage and eventual shipping to Fort Benning, Georgia. I spoke with Doris Averett who has been working for the Patton Museum now for over 35 years and is the employee with the most tenure there. “I don’t like the new transformation, I don’t really understand it,” said Doris. “When you walk back there and don’t see the tanks and stuff it is very sad.” Doris said she can remember coming into work one day and seeing lines of truck taking away all of the tanks. “Armor and Cavalry has been at Fort Knox for years and all of a sudden in 2010, it’s just like everything was out of here, it brought tears to my eyes, because I was here and saw the museum grow. Now with all of the tanks and stuff gone, you kind of feel like you lost something.” Says Doris. (Averett). Doris is not alone in her sadness at seeing the Armor and Cavalry exhibits go, I too feel the loss that comes with an expectation that can no longer be met. Events like the WWII battle reenactment that took place on the museums 60th anniversary are no longer possible anymore. It is apparent to many such as Doris and myself that the armor exhibits were essential in making the museum so much of what it was; they are now gone forever.
 |
| Future plans for the Patton Museum of Leadership (completion date 2014) |
I believe that most, if not all of the armor exhibits from the General George S Patton Jr. museum must be returned back to the museum as soon as possible. The Patton museum has been a steadfast part of Fort Knox and Kentucky’s history for over 60 years. Unless all of the exhibits are returned, the Patton museum will lose its premier identity as the world’s best collection of armor and tank exhibits and it will severely hurt the museums future attendance.
Exodus
It is understandable that over the course of time some exhibits may come and go, but don’t get me wrong; there is a big difference between a couple of exhibits, and a couple hundred armored vehicles weighing thousands of tons. In my opinion, exhibits like the Elvis Presley exhibit which was known to be temporary from the start are understandable. In fact the owners of the Elvis exhibit insisted that it be returned after two years, because the museum had only been scheduled to have it for one year.” (Averett). The Elvis Presley exhibit was displayed at the museum in 2004 honoring Elvis’s enlisted service time in the United States Army during the late 1950’s. (“Army Puts Elvis Back in Uniform” 7). The display featured the “King of Rock and Roll” with assorted photos, video interviews, various documents and the actual uniforms worn by Elvis during his two year enlistment. (7).
Some people will argue that change is inevitable and that museums are no exception. I can agree to a point, however unlike the Elvis Presley exhibit which was temporary from the beginning, the armor exhibits to me were the main attractions. The Patton Museum was listed as one of the 10 most visited sites in Kentucky and over the past five years it had been the busiest army museum. (“Parts of Patton Museum moving to Benning”). According to the museums then director Christopher Kolakowsi, the Patton Museum has one of the largest military collections in the world and also contains some of the Army’s rarest pieces. He also thinks that it is too early to tell if the decrease in armor will affect the amount of visitors. He also believes that the museum’s new focus should compensate for the loss of armor and be an even bigger draw. I among others would have to disagree with the director’s optimism; I believe that the loss of the tank and armor exhibits will undoubtedly hurt the museums future attendance simply because the whole genre of the museum will have to change. Everyone from the “die hard” tank enthusiasts to the average tourist will now have to go to Fort Benning Georgia to see what used to be right here in Kentucky. The new focus of the Patton museum that Kolakowsi spoke of is a concept that begins with the colonial army in 1775 and chronologically works itself to present day; however that new concept does not include any new armor exhibits to replace the lost ones. I can compare this to someone coming into the Smithsonian institute one day and saying that all exhibits related to aviation and space exploration had to go. (“Parts of Patton Museum moving to Benning
So why exactly is the Patton Museum losing over 230 of its armor exhibits and having to change its entire 60 year focus? In a 2010 Officer Review Magazine interview, the Museums then director Len Dyer explained that the Patton Museum is the property of the United States Army and that it is officially known as the Armor Museum and not the Patton Museum which was dedicated in honor of General George S. Patton Jr. But it’s more than just a museum he stressed; it’s a classroom. (Titus 1). Dyer also believes that the true value of the museum is the support it provides for training soldiers. With that statement from Dyer it has been made clear that the Patton Museum is Army owned and there for subject to government not private management. It also appears that according to the Army, the primary function of the Patton Museum is to train soldiers first, then entertain tourists second. I found this revelation a little disheartening, but it explains in part why the Army has lost little sleep in its making its decision to move the exhibits. Later Dyer goes on to explain that, “the bottom line is we’ve been directed by the Center of Military History, which manages and controls the collection, that there will only be one…Armor Museum and from the (Training and Doctrine Command) perspective it stays with the (Armor) School.” (1).
As I am made clear the symbiotic connection between the museums armor exhibits and the Army’s Armor Center, it becomes apparent just how important the exhibits are to the army’s heritage. The Armor Center itself is the home base and proponent for the Armor branch which has each and anything to do with tanks, armored vehicles and the personnel associated with them. Both officer and enlisted personnel who include tankers, tank mechanics and cavalry scouts are trained and managed for both their professional development and career progression. For over 80 years, Fort Knox has been the location for the Armor Center. Although tankers and scouts can be stationed all over the world, the Armor Center is where they all have gotten their official start in the world of Armor.
So why move the Armor Center at all? I discovered the catalyst for the move in the Department of Defense’s (DoD), 2005 Base Realignment and Closure Commissions (BRAC) Report. In the report The BRAC Commission recommended to drastically realign Fort Knox, this recommendation was in turn supported by the Secretary of Defense. (DoD, 13).
Realign Fort Knox, KY, by relocating the Armor Center and School to Fort Benning, GA, to accommodate the activation of an Infantry Brigade Combat Team (BCT) at Fort Knox, KY…
Secretary of Defense, 2005 DoD BRAC Commission Report
The Secretary of Defense justifies how the move will enhance the military’s value and improve its training and deployment capabilities. He goes on to explain how it will also better utilize training resources and cost savings. (13). I think the last part of his recommendation was the “icing on the cake,” it is what probably caught the president and congress’s attention the most; “cost savings.” The commission lists the “One-Time Cost” of the move as being $773.1M, with an annual recurring cost savings of $123.3M. In other words the move would pay for itself in a little over 6 years. (13). I must admit though, as a fiscal conservative that makes a lot of sense to me and the truth be told, it’s hard to argue with both congress and the president when it comes to money, especially when they are in agreement. Ultimately cost savings was not the only reason for the move, the Secretary goes on to illustrate other operational reasons such as the consolidation of the two major Army centers, Infantry and Armor into one center called the Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCOE). The MCOE has the objective of maximizing the Army’s consolidation to improve combined arms integrations. (Young 137).
As if things couldn’t seem to get worse for those who oppose realignment, a 2008 article from the Economic Development Journal seemed to put to rest any job and tax revenue fears that may exist. In his article, Brad Richardson tells how the BRAC realignment would bring in 4000 plus new permanent job positions, an estimated $250 in new payroll, an estimated 12,000 new residents (a large percentage of whom would live off post), and $800 million + in new construction on post. (1). It would so seem that the loss of the Armor Center did not come without some benefit for Fort Knox who in return would receive what appears to be a huge “windfall.”Fort Knox will welcome the Army’s Human Resource Center of Excellence, numerous other smaller headquarters commands, and a deployable combat infantry brigade. Housed in a 900,000-square-foot complex, the Center of Excellence will feature a highly skilled, well-paid white collar workforce made up largely of human resource, information management, and information technology professionals. This event has the potential to equal Toyota’s initial economic impact of 1986 when Toyota Motor Manufacturing first announced that it would build an assembly plant in Georgetown, KY. The initial projections of 3,200 jobs, $180 million in new payroll, and an $800 million capital investment by Toyota were more than realized, much more. In fact, by the late 90’s Toyota’s expansion had resulted in nearly 8,000 jobs, $470 million in new payroll, and a $4.5 billion investment by Toyota, nearly tripling all original estimates.
Brad Richardson, Economic Development Journal
Economic reasons not withstanding, it would appear that anyone opposing the realignment of Fort Knox would be standing in the way of progress that seems to only benefit and enhance the Fort Knox community. But what about the Armor exhibits, what about the wandering faithful who have been visiting the world’s largest military armor collection for over 60 years now? Does their opinion matter? Is there anyone else besides myself and Doris Averett who cares? Yet it comes as no surprise to me that even those who have spent time at Fort Knox, and who for the most part would seem opposed to the move like myself, are not. One such individual I found posted from the user ID Sullivan013 in the discussion room, “the Armor Centers move to Benning.” In his post Sullivan who appears to be a seasoned Cavalry officer describes why he is not opposed to the Armor Center relocating to Fort Benning, and in fact seems to be encouraged by the move.
Interesting. I spent some time on Heartbreak, Agony and Misery and Disney Barracks during Basic in 1982. I also returned for AOBC (1985). However, I spent more time at Benning for OCS in 1984 (Benning's School for Boys), and the 197th BDE (A Troop 15th Cav) from 1985-1988. I also spent some time as a TAC officer at OCS (88-89).
I can tell you there is much more maneuver area at Benning and better ranges, provided they still use Cactus Range. When I was there it had a Mortar impact area in the center of the maneuver portion of the range so you could call for fire and then maneuver around it. Perfect for a J-series Cav unit. The post is better too, with better surroundings. Columbus GA is in all ways superior to Vine Grove KY, I'm here to tell you.
As for road marching, all I can tell you is a summer's day stroll on the sand of Red Diamond Road or through the Sally Branch swamp will convince even the hardiest soul that some steep hills beside asphalt roads might not be that bad.... It's all good. Those tankers and scouts will be just fine way down in Jawja. And the Drill Sergeants will still find interesting things to walk to, over and through.
Sullivan013, military.com
I can tell you there is much more maneuver area at Benning and better ranges, provided they still use Cactus Range. When I was there it had a Mortar impact area in the center of the maneuver portion of the range so you could call for fire and then maneuver around it. Perfect for a J-series Cav unit. The post is better too, with better surroundings. Columbus GA is in all ways superior to Vine Grove KY, I'm here to tell you.
As for road marching, all I can tell you is a summer's day stroll on the sand of Red Diamond Road or through the Sally Branch swamp will convince even the hardiest soul that some steep hills beside asphalt roads might not be that bad.... It's all good. Those tankers and scouts will be just fine way down in Jawja. And the Drill Sergeants will still find interesting things to walk to, over and through.
Sullivan013, military.com
Revelations
 |
| Newly renovated Abrams auditorium. June 2011 |
It appears that even from a soldier’s point of view, one which has a history with Fort Knox dating back several decades that realignment was not always the bad thing that I was led to believe. As I continued looking for any credible sources to justify my position against the realignment or loss of museum exhibits, my stance on things began to evolve. The best I could find to accommodate my “narrow vision” were inconsolable rants and finger pointing that held little to no “grounds” for credibility. As I continued sifting through the endless bushels of “sour grapes” I started to realize how selfish I had been. Sure if I and the rest of world wanted to see the armored tank exhibits, we would have to travel to Fort Benning, Ga. Sure the Patton Museum would have to undergo a massive metamorphosis in order to compensate for its losses, but without seeing the finished product in 2014, who’s to say that the new and improved Patton Museum of Leadership will not be just as impressive as the old one. Yes, I do feel that Kentucky is losing a bit of its history, but Kentucky’s loss is Georgia’s gain right? And, with all of the economic prosperity that comes with the realignment these days, it is convincingly apparent to me that Fort Knox and Kentucky turned out to be the biggest winners of all.
Works Cited.
Averett, Doris. Personal Interview. 24 Jun. 2011
The Associated Press. “Army Puts Elvis back in Uniform.” Daily News-Record [Harrison, PA] 25 Mar. 2004: 7. Print. I.
Schreiner, Bruce. “Patton museum to remain on grounds of Fort Knox.” Altoona Mirror [Altoona, PA] 26 Feb.2006: D6. Print
Titus, David R. The National Armor and Cavalry Museum.” Officer Review Magazine 49.9 (2010): 14-15. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 11 July 2011.
Richardson, Brad. “Fort Knox 2005 BRAC.” Economic Development Journal 7.1 (2008): 18-23. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 15 July 2011.
Department of Defense (DoD). “BRAC Commission Findings and Recommendations.” 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission Report. 2005, 1. 1, Army. Brac.gov. Web. 15 July 2011.
Young, C.J. The King is dead, long live the King: The Creation of the US Army Maneuver Center of Excellence.” The Canadian Army Journal. 2010, 13.1. Web. 15 July 2011
Sullivan013. “Armor school move to Benning” military.com/forums/Army discussions/Armor). Apr. 2008. Web 21 Jul. 2011.
Associated Press. “Parts of Patton Museum moving to Benning.” Rome News Tribune. Feb. 2010. Web. Jul. 2011.
U.S. Army. General George Patton Museum. 2010. www.army.knox.mil. Web. 15 July 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment