Dornier Do 17 Two Years On Lecture (12/05/2015)

I also think it would look great right side up. Would be a pity if it ended up upside down again.

Don’t see why the wings couldnt be supported by a number of thick toughened glass trestles to allow the Dornier to be displayed the right way up. Seems a shame to go to all the trouble of recovering it and then display it upside down when the cockpit and nose area (and their relationship to the shoulder wing) is probably the most distinctive part of the aircraft

I also think it would look great right side up. Would be a pity if it ended up upside down again.

Given the refusal to restore the Halifax, I don’t see them ever attempting a restoration of this other wreck.

I’d like to see it the right way up at least!

Fourthed. It almost negates the point of recovering it if it’s displayed as it appeared on the seabed. Likewise I would like to see it in its correct orientation with some subtle reconstruction of the missing sections (maybe out of clear plastic) so that it returns to it’s original overall shape.

But given that the ‘as found’ option would be a lot less budget-stretching and – in a sense – more ‘authentic’, I can see why they’re tempted.

[QUOTE=Duggy;2295289]They should of looked after this one better.

Didn’t the RAF burn a ‘217 some time in 1957, along with a Hampden?

I’d like to see it the right way up at least!

I would third that. Would be great to see the Do17 upright with a recontructed canopy and nose glazing

But I expect the structural support a badly corroded shoulder winged plane would need to have to be shown the right way up would be much more than upside down in some sort of ‘as found’ diorama.

Duggy. There is a heck of a lot that should have been preserved. But war hardens attitudes and hindsight is always far too late.

They should of looked after this one better.

Shame there’s no one on here who could help bring an extinct aircraft type back…!

I’d like to see it the right way up at least!

I’d second that.

I can’t help thinking though, that while the remains are still pretty “complete” that a new-build one should be made, and incorporating as many original parts as possible.

I’d like to see it the right way up at least!

RAFM speaker was at pains to make it clear that no decision on style or route had been made and all sketches were outline.

In format the images projected on the screen were “back of fag packet style”.

A recurring theme was no restoration and laid out as found on the sea bed eg upside down. Area to the side with nose glazing and notional interactive displays.

Ross

I can’t imagine ‘as new’ is a viable option, given both the cost and the amount of original material that would need removing.

Hopefully we’ll see an ‘as is’, but with some missing areas reconstructed. And then hopefully someone will build a full scale replica at some point 🙂

Thanks Ross,
What were the options?

Display as is albeit conserved
or
Put together but non restored
or
Reconstructed to as “new”

Just curious
Cees

I attended the talk.

The statement was that display mode was still to be decided – various options were under consideration.

The slide that accompanied this was a block graphic showing a couple of outlines.

Ross

Any new information regarding the conservation and eventual restoration?
Cees