RAF Museum disposals

[bentwaters81tfw]

Not forgetting that the Science Museum at Wroughton wants to divest itself of some of it's larger airframes.

Space, manpower and money are the real issues here.

Do we have any large airfields coming up for disposal with several hangars, where these priceless objects could be displayed?

[Tony C]

In an 'ideal world', I'd shut Hendon, sell the land and move the entire collection to Cosford and use the money from the sale, for purchases, maintenance . I'd then make the position of Director of the RAF Museum, a Service position to be run by either a Air or Air Vice Marshall, thereby getting rid of the 'public/private sectors from running the site and would want to make the position seen as a premier position within the RAF. I would also make it a Recruitment centre and might even consider having just RAF personnel and volunteers, in all the other positions on site.

 

As for space and I realise that this would mean the relocating of the Engineering section on site, there are currently 3 additional hangars which could used for display purposes plus space for two more to be built, if required, 1 on the grassed area behind the 'Test Flight' hangar and another where the Hercules is currently situated! These would be built in line with the other hangars already there and NOT an Architects' fancy! On top of this, there are various buildings dotted around the site which could be used for the paintings, medals and all other display items!

 

I would also keep the airfield open for the purposes of airshows, maybe two or three a year, to allow a form of additional income and may even allow a third party aviation related company, similar to TFC/Air Leasing/OFMC, to lease land on the airfield, south of the runway, build maintenance hangars and too operate flights!

 

As for the collection, I would have a BoB Hangar similar to the one now disposed off, at Hendon, a Test Flight Hangar, A World War One and Inter War period Hangar along the lines of the Grahame Whyte building, a hangar for the Axis aircraft currently owned by the collection, a Bomber/Coastal Command Hanger, a 1945-1960's Hangar and a 1970's to date Hangar!

 

As for the 'Disposals' List, I'd pretty much go along with TEXANTOMCAT's post!

 

Happy to be shot down in flames but please 1) I am no architect, 2) I have no building experience and 3) note my opening line, 'In an ideal world'

Edited January 8, 2021 by Tony C

[bentwaters81tfw]

^Now you are being silly.....that makes far too much sense.

[Dave Fleming]

On 30/12/2020 at 10:45, IV(AC)Plumb said:

Maybe the P1127 could go back to the RAF and go to the Harrier heritage center at Wittering?

 

I expect permanent transfer to the Science Museum - for the RAFM it was only representative of the Harrier until they got a proper one. For the SM, it's an important and popular airframe

[Dave Fleming]

On 06/01/2021 at 15:42, TEXANTOMCAT said:

 

Vickers Vimy replica F8614                                              Originality/Significance - again - limited RAF use but cant see why you would dispose of it

 

Because they filled the Graeme White hanger up with 'interpretive displays' and they don't have any room for it.

[Dave Fleming]

There is a move at RAFM to tell the story of the Royal Air Force through it's people rather than just it's airframes. What happens when you put a social historian in charge I suppose, but that's why they are moving from 'grab one of everything' policy that previous staff had. 

[Adam Poultney]

6 hours ago, cherry268 said:

If I remember correctly XL318 is at Hendon because it was the last flying 617 squadron Vulcan. I also think it was assembled in situ and the building built round it,  

Could be, but that in itself doesn't make it worthy of preservation. I think it was also chosen in favour of XL443 which was originally allocated to the museum (might have been destined for Cosford but then Falkands Vulcan was aquired idk)

 

[cherry268]

2 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

Could be, but that in itself doesn't make it worthy of preservation. I think it was also chosen in favour of XL443 which was originally allocated to the museum (might have been destined for Cosford but then Falkands Vulcan was aquired idk)

 

I only made the statement as to the significance why XL318 was chosen to be in Hendon.  According to my source XL443 was allocated to the museum on the same day as XL318. As XL318 was moved in February well before the Falklands was invaded  XL443, which didn't fly with 617sqn, was presumably going to Cosford.

[Kushan_Farsight]

@Tony C no chance of that happening, there is a scary level of logic and reason used in your decision making process.

 

One thing that i think is almost a great feature a lot of these museums seem to miss is just how the VARIETY of former aircraft is what makes them so unique. if we avoid kit and single engine civil aircraft, we probably only see a handful of 'new designs' come out per decade now. In the past, you seemed to get 20 or 30 new aircraft designs in a SINGLE YEAR.  Prototypes, one offs, bizzare sub variants, they can be some of the most interesting exhibits at a museum, and whilst its nice seeing some of the 'iconic' vehicles, if all you do is fill all the museums with the 'top 10' planes, then whats the point of visiting multiple places, its all the same stuff just rearranged in different places. 

 

I think the importance of Air Shows is certainly one to not be understated. I love jets and anything with wings and im down cosford every couple of months. But im a minority among friends. However, come the annual airshow, i will get nearly a dozen friends along at times to set up a few deck chairs and beers for the afternoon. Half the time they will see something flying that they  haven't seen before, and within the week or so, will be back at the air museum having a look around with renewed interest.  I hope only that Health & Safety restrictions, insurance , and aging air-frames, does not make this a thing of the past.  

 

[IanC]

On 1/7/2021 at 1:41 PM, Giorgio N said:

 

You're not going to change that with a museum, the relative importance of a type for the general public is function of its exposure in the mass culture and since aviation museums really only attract those who have this specific interest, they can't hope to reach those who don't.

 

 

But that is the objective. For their survival, museums such as the RAFM have to attract much wider, more diverse and more educationally varied audiences. Not so easy when your collection is focused on a niche subject, considered by many to be unfashionable. Hence the accent on 'storytelling' which puts people, rather than objects and technology, at the centre. The key is to try and reach out and find some common interest by using the collections as creatively as possible. It may just be an annoying fad to some, but others will say it's the only way to attract as many people as possible, especially the young, and build audiences who will then keep coming back - and spend money!

 

 

[wellsprop]

2 hours ago, IanC said:

 

But that is the objective. For their survival, museums such as the RAFM have to attract much wider, more diverse and more educationally varied audiences. Not so easy when your collection is focused on a niche subject, considered by many to be unfashionable. Hence the accent on 'storytelling' which puts people, rather than objects and technology, at the centre. The key is to try and reach out and find some common interest by using the collections as creatively as possible. It may just be an annoying fad to some, but others will say it's the only way to attract as many people as possible, especially the young, and build audiences who will then keep coming back - and spend money!

 

 

 

Agreed. "We" (here on Britmodeller) represent a very very very small section of museum visitors.

 

I think the Fleet Air Arm Museum does incredibly well displaying the FAA's history, however, I think it also has to be acknowledged that, without knowledge in depth of the FAA, it can seem like just a collection of aircraft.

 

It's, understandably, very hard for many people (the average person) to engage with a collection of machines. Having volunteered at events for school children at the FAAM, I can vouch for how challenging it can be!

 

My memory of going to Cosford (it's been a few years since I went last!) is that it isn't particularly logically laid out and some the aircraft seem totally irrelevant (MH53 for example, which has absolutely no relevance to the RAF).

 

The V bomber display and the prototypes Hall are simply fantastic though.

[Tony C]

Just out of interest, is there an inventory anywhere, which lists which airframes that the RAFM holds at Hendon, Cosford, the reserve collection and what has been loaned and too whom?

 

Ta

[bentwaters81tfw]

https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research/default.aspx

[It's a disease]

My kid didn’t care what the aircraft were that she was looking at! She wanted to play in the tunnel!

(Of the tornado at Hendon)

and on the swings outside......she was impressed by all of the things much as I was at her age........the buccaneer cockpit, that was really cool! I know it isn’t in the list but, it was my first buccaneer! without these “things” to see regardless of importance, the whole tower falls. I learn new things, impossible if you streamline too much!

 

hendon is on my doorstep near enough about an hour away on a good day, it’s the museum of choice for me to pass my love of aviation down the line!

(hopefully! She seems keen on

air-peees and that is the spark we need for the future of all museums.

it takes one a/c type to secure the passion, and that type just may be on the list?

 

im gutted to hear they may be offing the trainer? 190.

on my last photo Recce (before baby was mobile!) I moved past the 190 with a hope to getting back to it someday.

 

I was not aware at the time just how significant it was!

a unique airframe.

 

there is plenty of space on the ceiling!

hang em up like we did/do!

 

Failing that.....

Welcome to the BMAPS

(britmodeller aviation protection society) grab your pitchforks people!

 

surely lottery funding/grants could cover these establishments?

 

My 2p well spent.

[tonyot]

As our last Aerospace `giant' and with a history that includes most of the old British aircraft manufacturers,.... it would be great if BAe could sponsor a R&D Museum to house some of the fleet from Cosford and elsewhere,.... as others have said,... to inspire future engineers. Pie in the sky probably,.... but it would be nice. Samlesbury airfield (between Preston & Blackburn)  is right next to the M6 motorway for ease of access and there is plenty of real estate there,..... they could have an entrance built on the far end of the airfield (opposite KFC!) where the Canberra`s used to be parked in the 80`s,..... so that the security of the main site is not compromised. There is even a historic house (Samlesbury Hall) for the missus to go and look around while we look at eroplanes! 

Cheers

          Tony   

[wellsprop]

@tonyot

 

Dont forget Leonardo Helicopters which still holds engineering drawings and design authority for aircraft from Fairey, Bristol (helicopters), Saunders-Roe (helicopters), Westland Aircraft/Helicopters.

 

Unfortunately, it seems modern aerospace companies are not particularly interested in funding/supporting historic aircraft (which is understandable, given how challenging the market has become in recent years). That said, Leonardo Helicopters has supported Historic Helicopters with their restorations. (I think they've also provided information to the Whirlwind Restoration Project).

 

I am hopeful about the future for historic aircraft though. In the last few years, we've seen the opening of the Jet Age Museum at Gloucester and Aerospace Bristol and the DH museum opened a new hall less than a year ago. All great museums! 

[TEXANTOMCAT]

On 1/8/2021 at 8:29 PM, wellsprop said:

 

Agreed. "We" (here on Britmodeller) represent a very very very small section of museum visitors.

 

I think the Fleet Air Arm Museum does incredibly well displaying the FAA's history, however, I think it also has to be acknowledged that, without knowledge in depth of the FAA, it can seem like just a collection of aircraft.

 

It's, understandably, very hard for many people (the average person) to engage with a collection of machines. Having volunteered at events for school children at the FAAM, I can vouch for how challenging it can be!

 

My memory of going to Cosford (it's been a few years since I went last!) is that it isn't particularly logically laid out and some the aircraft seem totally irrelevant (MH53 for example, which has absolutely no relevance to the RAF).

 

The V bomber display and the prototypes Hall are simply fantastic though.

All good points - of course the FAAM have a very successful policy of rotating exhibits from their Reserve Collection to put on display in the main halls, something which has worked very well over the years.

 

Despite my comments above, a root and branch review of the collection is no bad thing - many museums recently have been re-evaluating their inventory to evolve from a Museum of 'stuff' to something interactive, telling personal stories etc. As someone who runs a Museum in his spare time,  we took a leaf out of the wonderful Jet Age Museum's book and started using a cockpit section (which we had on display anyway) for kids to sit in - it REVOLUTIONISED our demographic and income. Museums now must be 'entertainment venues' not just repositories or educational establishments. You need to attract families as they are the core visitors

 

I understand what they were aiming at with the RAF 100 hangar at Hendon. Personally, I'd have simply glazed the other end like they did with the Sunderland end to flood the place with light and got rid of all the frankly aging diorama mannequin setups. The waste of space in the new hall is ridiculous. However, I think some aspects are clever - the wall of 'RAF hats' is inspired. The main halls in the museum are looking tired - with the exception of the GWH which is still awesome and Milestones which is now the 'age of uncertainty' - and works well - albeit the random Pima Herk is odd! 

 

Basically the RAF have two options -either theme by role or era. Its a mishmash in there.

 

After glazing the BOB hall, I would have had a good old tidy up of the main halls and a move about where required and saved about 10million - I do like the landscaping though!

 

TT

[ChocolateCrisps]

15 minutes ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

Despite my comments above, a root and branch review of the collection is no bad thing - many museums recently have been re-evaluating their inventory to evolve from a Museum of 'stuff' to something interactive, telling personal stories etc. As someone who runs a Museum in his spare time,  we took a leaf out of the wonderful Jet Age Museum's book and started using a cockpit section (which we had on display anyway) for kids to sit in - it REVOLUTIONISED our demographic and income. Museums now must be 'entertainment venues' not just repositories or educational establishments. You need to attract families as they are the core visitors

 

Being, I suspect, one of the younger members on here I'd definitely agree with this - most of my memories of Hendon visits as a kid involve either the interactive zone (whatever it's actual name is), or the various aircraft/ cockpits that it's possible to sit in or walk through. Bonus points for any cockpits where you can still move the controls and play with the switches! Having also volunteered a few times more recently at events where more aircraft were opened to the public, again the kids seemed to really enjoy actually being able to go in the aircraft, rather than just look at them from outside, although obviously that could damage the aircraft long-term so it's not always feasible to do.

 

However, that doesn't entirely seem to tie up with Hendon's approach now. Speaking purely from my own experience, so others may differ, I've never been a fan of museums where you have to do lots of reading (big long walls of text on signs etc.) - and that seems to be where the RAFM is committing more of their space now, rather than interactive exhibits. I can kind of understand the reasoning behind the 'stories' approach - making the exhibits more meaningful - but certianly as a kid I wouldn't have read them, and now as an adult visitor to the museum I'm already familiar with most of them, so I'm not entirely sure who they're aiming at with their approach? Perhaps adults who are unfamiliar with the majority of the history, but then if they're there reading the stuff you've already got them to the museum - and it's the getting them there that's the hard part!

[spruecutter96]

On 1/8/2021 at 8:29 PM, wellsprop said:

It's, understandably, very hard for many people (the average person) to engage with a collection of machines. Having volunteered at events for school children at the FAAM, I can vouch for how challenging it can be!

 

Schoolkids LOVE moaning about how their school-trips have no relevance to anything. They are too young to appreciate anything that isn't currently "trendy" - to them, being up to date with the latest bit of corporate-run rubbish is the most important thing in life. They would be extremely reluctant to express any interest in a subject their mates are not into.  Unfortunately, that's just the way things are for the young-uns. 

 

Chris.  

 

PS: I once heard a schoolkid at Duxford proclaim "I thought this would be about history! It's just a load of old aircraft!!" Casting pearls before swine....

[TEXANTOMCAT]

Ah I think it depends on the kids! And - to bring the chat full circle - and how the exhibits are presented to them. I've taken nearly 16k kids round our airfield and the vast majority are fab - its great fun - I enjoy it more than they do I think! If you can engage with them then you've gottem - if its just stuff and reading then its difficult - thats why the heritage sector - not just in aviation - must cherish their volunteers they are the lifeblood of any museum as nothing brings things alive more than a person!

 

I worry though that we have all the baby boomer generation who have been able to retire at an 'earlier' ie 60/65 age than the following generation will be able to and consequently have the time, money and health to volunteer...but what happens when they drop off their perch and the subsequent generation can only retire at 68/70 + you've lost ten years of volunteering at one fowl swoop....

 

 

[Head in the clouds.]

Just when you think things can't get worse this topic pops up, bringing with it very sad news indeed.

 

We have all seen museums change as we have become older, when I was a kid it was some airframes in a field next to a Nissan hut full of old uniforms and knackered old instruments with a small cafe to stop the kids generating unwanted noise. I still like these places where I can find them, you never know what may be around a corner or under a tarp but since then I have seen museums change massively, they are, in the main professionally run with clearly defined goals. Some are run by very keen enthusiasts but these too are run along similar lines, everyone has had to climb the ladder of progress.

 

Appealing to everyone will always be hard or nigh on impposible, I could spend a lifetime looking around museums, as I imagine most of us on this site could but for some an hour and they are done.

 

One that springs to mind and is a good example in point is the Vulcan to the Sky Trust. They need no introduction here, suffice to say that they are not just putting XH558 in a hanger surrounded by other airframes but they are creating a place of education and scientific excellence, using XH558 as a springboard for this venture. Many are the engineering merits of the mighty Vulcan but I bet there are more stories of the people whom worked on them, flew them and designed them than there are rivets on the old girl.

Vulcan to the Sky Trust also have the 'Guardian' scheme, to become a member and you get goodies and advanced access to events etc, you can even get your name on Vulcan items preserved in the museum.

 

To me, most airframes on that list have a connection to the RAF and while I understand that the RAF did not actually own prototypes or research aircraft they were often working on their behalf, where would the Vulcan be without the Avro 707 series, the Victor without the HP88 or the Lightning without the Short SB5's, the list can go on forever. The question is, what are the cut off points along this line of development that are acceptable to museums.

 

For me, the Avro 707 could sit comfortably next the the Vulcan at VTTS, or any other Vulcan for that matter, so younger generations can see how these planes are developed, designed, built and tested and come to the final product.

I do feel that most of these airframes could find a relevant home and with the right approach be more than just a collection of rivets standing to be looked at.

 

There are other considerations of space but the MOD is one of the biggest land owners in the UK, surely there is somewhere that airframes can be kept and on that note, are the current storage facilities full to capacity?

These are, on the whole, rare and unique airframes that deserve better so whomever is making the decision on their fate needs to get it right.

 

[wellsprop]

@ChocolateCrisps I totally agree (I'm another of the younger members here) , as a child I didn't appreciate the importance of the DH Vampire that was the first ever jet to land on an aircraft carrier. All I wanted to do was get in the open cockpits! In fact, I often embarrass my other half as I will ALWAYS climb in the open cockpits and play with everything I can - I queue up with the kids and everything... I'm a grown man, I have a degree and job in aerospace engineering and a mortgage. I still pretend I'm flying planes though.

 

@spruecutter96 that's not at all representative of every child. It's incredibly hard to engage most children (or adults for that matter) with a hall, packed full of aircraft and information boards with no room to move. When I've shown children around hangers with operational aircraft and allowed them to climb around the aircraft, they wouldn't stop asking questions and they didnt want to leave. Many of the applicants to the aerospace company where I work first engaged with the company at these such events.

 

@TEXANTOMCAT its very heartening to hear how many kids you shown around and how much they engage! I know how rewarding it can be, my other half doesn't want to listen to me bang on about aircraft, lots of kids are interested, especially when you start talking about doing loops and releasing flares etc.

 

I also agree with you comment about a ten-year gap with volunteers. The aerospace engineering industry can actually see this with the demographic of the employees. There are a large group in the late 50s/early 60s who are retiring early and there is that same 10 year gap between the next group of engineers. As a junior engineer, I'm having to replace those highly experienced older engineers who have retired, I've got the theory, but not the 40 years of experience!

 

 

This may be somewhat digressing from the initial topic, however, I think the relevance is the importance of having an engaging museum. Culture, attitudes and interest always change and develop and museums will have to keep up with that. The good news is, many museums do seem that they have been able to, utilising things like new technologies such as VR and flight sims - this gets engagement from a vastly wider audience and this increased engagement is key to getting more interest. 

[Meatbox8]

On 12/28/2020 at 1:01 PM, spruecutter96 said:

There will obviously be a LOT of politics involved in these choices. 

 

How can the two-seater, original FW-190 be up for consideration due to "Duplication"? I thought it is the only example in existence... There are not many original FW-190's around to begin with. Reproductions, yes, originals, no.

 

The Hendon Museum has hidden a lot of airframes of genuine historic significance. As previous posters have said, there seems to be no real policy governing which aircraft are put out on display. Additionally, for an aviation enthusiast, a very big part of Cosford's appeal is the fact that many of the airframes are completely unique to the museum. 

 

Chris. 

They probably need to make space for the creche play area.

[spruecutter96]

On 1/8/2021 at 8:29 PM, wellsprop said:

My memory of going to Cosford (it's been a few years since I went last!) is that it isn't particularly logically laid out and some the aircraft seem totally irrelevant (MH53 for example, which has absolutely no relevance to the RAF).

 

It does have a distinct relevance to the Cold War, as that's the theme of that particular part of the Cosford museum. Also, it's the only example in any European museum as far as I know.

 

Chris.  

[Aeronut]

56 minutes ago, spruecutter96 said:

It does have a distinct relevance to the Cold War, as that's the theme of that particular part of the Cosford museum. Also, it's the only example in any European museum as far as I know.

 

Chris.  

A similar state of affairs occurs at the Army Flying Museum where there is a Huey Cobra on display. Despite photos of a prototype being evaluated by the AAC at Wallop in the 60's and again in the 90's the museum still gets complaints about its relevance.  As far as the museum is concerned it fits the story of the Attack helicopter, it bookends the (ex Argentinian) Huey at the other end of the display and above all, where else in the UK are you going to see one.