September 11, 2016 at 12:29 pm
Talking to staff members, apparently a base is being prepared and it is to be moved outside into the elements 🙁
By: mark_pilkington - 9th March 2024 at 02:34
As David points out Flying Boat PBY’s are quite rare with an original / complete PBY-5 existing with the USN Museum and an equally rare PB2B surviving in Australia but a further 4 do exist with the RNZAFM having a Canadian Canso that was converted back to pure Flying Boat post war for use by TAA in PNG, while there is also the composite ex RAAF PBY4/5 at Lake Boga, and now 2 former RAAF PBY5A(M)’s (wartime conversions from Amphibian to pure Flying Boat to extend range and payload for “Black Cat” missions.
While the USN first ordered the PBY into production in the early 1930’s it was due to cease production and be replaced in service until the British Purchasing Commission placed orders for the PBY-5 Flying Boat prior to WW2 for the RAF & RAAF.
Without that RAF order its likely the PBY-5, and the later PBY-5A & -6A Amphibians would never have been built and the type would not have become the most successful / numerous Flying Boat ever built.
So I feel its very relevant to the RAF story and the RAF Museum, and ideally should be put into a Coastal Command scheme.
Equally now that we have 3 former RAAF Hudsons in preservation in Australia I would be pleased to see the RAFM example also put into Coastal Command colours.
I certainly agree that when Museums get staffed and managed by people with no apparent interest in or knowledge of the objects in the collection or the types role in service that very bad preservation outcomes can happen, we have seen a fair share of those in Australia over the years, the UK doesn’t have an exclusive experience of that unfortunately.
By: dhfan - 1st March 2024 at 17:35
It wouldn’t surprise me.
If they’d been able to build the hangar they actually wanted, rather than the melted B&Q they ended up with, they would probably have had room for both aeroplanes and corporate/management days.
By: Sabrejet - 1st March 2024 at 15:38
Wasn’t it shoved outside so that they could make room for corporate/management-type away days?
By: dhfan - 1st March 2024 at 12:11
As I recall, the head honcho, or possibly even the last few, of the RAF Museum has/had no interest or knowledge of aircraft before their appointment.
Sheer genius…
By: Prop Strike - 28th February 2024 at 11:51
There has been disquiet expressed about valuable historic aircraft pulled from the exhibition hangars and left outside at Cosford. A visit last week did little to assuage concerns, and the previously immaculate Catalina is looking rough and neglected. The ripped and tattered fabric has been pulled from the control surfaces, and it is (quote) ‘awaiting repair ”. Meanwhile the rain and damp works its way into the structure, and corrosion sets in.
It was ( see this thread) put outside as a ‘temporary measure’ in 2016, and now has gone the way of all airframes left in the UK weather, ie corrosion, mould, and the inevitable degradation and failure of fabric surfaces. The once deep orange dayglo paint is faded and turning white.
So, how many engineering hours needed to bring back to previous condition, 500 maybe ? If you pay a commercial rate of £40 per hour maybe a £20,000 bill to bring it back to how it was.
RAF Hendon gives away its aeroplanes and RAF Cosford shoves them outside to rot. Does nobody in the organisation actually like historic aircraft?