For example I wouldn’t be tempted to ‘restore’ the Halifax that is on display at Hendon; it is a far more interesting and evocative exhibit displayed as it is. To restore it would destroy or hide much of the original fabric of a genuine wartime aircraft lost on an actual operation. However I would also find it hard to criticise the restoration of the Halifax in Canada. If another Halifax were recovered to the United Kingdom in a condition that would make a full restoration possible, even if that involved a lot of new-build components, then I would probably think it was a good idea, depending on its historic ‘significance’.

Another thing that always occurs to me about ‘data plate’ Spitfire restorations is that because these are relatively common the supply of spare parts to support the ‘genuine’ Spitfires must be much easier and affordable. Also would there be calls to ground these ‘genuine’ flying Spitfires if they represented a larger proportion, or the whole proportion, of a smaller pool of flying Spitfires? Would they be too irreplaceable to ‘risk’ flying them?

Having said all that I still think the most moving exhibit in the Battle-of-Britain hall at Hendon is the incomplete Hurricane displayed in virtually ‘as found’ condition.

Fully agreed: however it’s interesting how times have changed: when the Halifax was recovered, my impression at that time was that most people (me included) wanted it restored to as near to ‘new’ condition as possible. Over the intervening years I’ve come to realise what a close call that was.

And I concur regarding the Hurricane vignette: I always take a few photos of it because I find it so much more interesting than a bright, clean version would be. I suspect some of that is my technical background coming out, but I also think it brings to mind what actually happened to that machine, its pilot, and many thousands more like it. As such it’s a far better exhibit than a different type of display would be.