Heritage Lottery Fund – 10 Years On

What shade? 😉

USN Haze Gray 5H—-that any good?

Gives a smart pale grey appearance.

I strongly suggest that we start a campaign to have Duxford closed down, on account of the colour of the hangers being incorrect.

😀 :diablo: :p

I strongly suggest that we start a campaign to have Duxford closed down, on account of the colour of the hangers being incorrect.

I think that’s a bit drastic Mike.
Why not just demolish all the hangars–It could be done as part of the new Hollywood epic about Billy Fiske.

Regarding the filming of The Battle of Britain movie at Duxford, when the hangar was blown up there were several cameras trained on the hangar, but for whatever reason communications weren’t brilliant and when the director shouted “action” and the structure was blown up only one camera was rolling. 😮

What a waste – even it it was filmed. One thing though in the film the colour scheme was more accurate than it is today…

Fair comments David, good points. i was thinking of the HLF approach to buildings across the heritage sector (the museum I’m in now is a sample) but your point about aviation is a good one. For the record, I think any building putting a/c inside it on the DX ‘base’ would be good. My original point was just that Belfast trusses in the UK in wood are mindboggilingly expensive because of the change of wood prices between 1917 and today.

Cheers!

Tony – The hangar base was created by the destruction of the Belfast truss
hangar that stood on it’s site .I discussed this proposal as such at length
about a year ago. It transpires that the hangar itself was just a few months short of listing when it was destroyed therefore anything put in it’s place doesn’t necessarily need to conform to what was there.
I am greatly in favour of a re-engineered Belfast hangar using some of the existing principles of construction but making it contemporary. I base this on the premis that three buildings have been erected on site that don’t conform to it. I.e the AAM ,the T.2 which features box cladding and the HFL
hangar which is new build . I feel that the possibility is there and not to use the base is a crying shame. We shall see.

Agree lets put a sympathetically designed hangar on that base….NOW and give some nice deserving planes a spell indoors again! 🙂

JDK- I am not asking you to defend the HLF in how it spends it’s money on aircraft preservation. It’s actually the fact that ‘innovative’ buildings to house
aircraft funded by the HLF have been largely for the IWM.
Certainly Elvington,Newark,Flixton and Weston Super Mare have managed to receive funding for either wartime buildings or new build types.
Therefore the AAM is actually a ‘blip’ in the concept. I am not saying that
the building has been detrimental to the site – indeed it has made it far more
of an ‘international’ museum. I just wish they had taken seriously concerns
about access for aircraft movement . This now means that to shuffle airframes about costs a considerable sum of money because of the glass.
As for the ‘Belfast’ idea. Well after our discussion eon’s ago I did check the listed status as you mentioned. It wasn’t which opens up a number of possibilities. You also mention being faithfull to building types – well T.2 hangar’s with box cladding certainly wasn’t a feature of any wartime airfield I can recall. I don’t propose chopping down trees – simply to look at the shape that needs to be achieved and finding different ways of doing it.If this involves concrete ,glass and steel well I don’t see a problem.
Regards your opera – I don’t believe see that the majority of people
who buy Lotto tickets actually care about where the money goes. Human nature being what it is I guess that the allure of ‘X’ millions is the driving factor. You have supported you interest by going – I suggest that the best way for anyone to support their favourite cause is to direct their money towards it without relying on the HLF to decide how they want to spend it.

Tony – The hangar base was created by the destruction of the Belfast truss
hangar that stood on it’s site .I discussed this proposal as such at length
about a year ago. It transpires that the hangar itself was just a few months short of listing when it was destroyed therefore anything put in it’s place doesn’t necessarily need to conform to what was there.
I am greatly in favour of a re-engineered Belfast hangar using some of the existing principles of construction but making it contemporary. I base this on the premis that three buildings have been erected on site that don’t conform to it. I.e the AAM ,the T.2 which features box cladding and the HFL
hangar which is new build . I feel that the possibility is there and not to use the base is a crying shame. We shall see.

David,
Oh, no, not this discussion again! 😀 It’s not my argument, just a statement of how this sort of funding (generally – if you insist) works. Sure, there are exceptions, and you and I can number off examples to support points ad nausium, I was just trying to explain (not justify) how these ‘fancy’ buildings get built.

Canada TD, David and I had a long and detailed discussion to the amusement of other forumites about hangars at DX – much of which we can take as read – the threads still there somewhere. To build a replica of the Belfast truss would be cost prohibitive with wood included, and I believe that DX wouldn’t countenance (or get funding) for a ‘lookalike’ in modern materials. I may be wrong.

Back on topic – the best factors of the HLF are (IMHO):

1: they force the enthusiast idea to come up with a detailed plan, which is an essential step; so it serves a good purpose in sorting sheep from goats.

2: Match funding means that proposals have to still do half the job of cash finding themselves. So it’s a big boost for projects, but not an easy ride.

Having just gone (with Mrs JDK) to the much condemned opera house a couple of weeks ago, for £36 each, we had a grand evening out, and I’m not sure where I’d start to compare it to an airshow. I enjoyed both, it’s my money and time, and I’m appreciative that I have the opportunity to partake of both and many other things.

~ But won’t be funded because it’s not ‘interesting’.

I don’t like it, but better a ‘fancy’ building over an aircraft than a bog standard, suitable, perfectly good hangar that don’t happen becos it isn’t interesting enough to get funded. It’s a vicious cycle, but at least there’s some buildings rather than none coming out of it.

HLF? A good way of the UK govt withdrawing funding from heritage without people giving the kicking they deserve. 🙁 Many HLF projects would have been tax funded, but aren’t now. HLF suffers from fancy short term projectitus, rather than continuation funding. Keeping stuff open isn’t a HLF priority. Better than nothing.

Agreed, a building more in keeping with Duxford’s main hangars would be better IMHO. I wish Duxford would use that perfectly good hangar base (‘created’ during BoB film filming) to build a replica WW1 hangar!

The HLF was to make the arts etc more accessible to the great unwashed…great to see how the cost of opera and ballet tix have reduced (NOT!) :diablo:

The problem with HLF money is people all have their own favorite projects and when HLF donate to other projects, some people go on forums and at airshows etc saying that the money has been wasted or that certain things are unworthy of HLF cash.

Lets face it the sort of thing I describe above is hardly gonna make HLF sit up and think lets chuck more money into historic aviation is it ?

How many hangars would about £2.5 million pay for, would it have enabled the DH Hornet project to have progressed at faster rate or in a public facility? Would it have enabled an HP 42 replica (Static) to have been built? would it have enabled many small collections to upgrade their facilities in order to protect their exhibits from the elements and safeguard them for the future? (SWWAPS?) would it have covered the salvage costs of a Halifax bomber from a watery grave?

It’s not just about how much you get, it’s what you do with it that’s most important. Why pay £10’s of thousands in Architects fees when we all know what a T2 Hangar looks like and when that design fit’s just as well in that setting? I believe that if the right preservation infrastructure existed, each of these could have had access to Lottery money.

May be we need to answer a few basic questions before things will change:-

1) Where and what is the overall preservation strategy in this country?

2) Why is Aviation the poor relation to the Opera when far more people attend Airshows and visit museums than go to the Opera?

3) What can be done to improve matters? Can experts knowledge be shared better?i.e hoe to approach the Lottery, Planners, etc

4) What is the role for the enthusiast? The Mosquito Museum achived great things as has the NEAM, or must we rely on wealthy individuals and National Museums to ensure rare airframes are saved and restored (Vulcan, Comet C2 at Duxford(HO! HO!))?

The BAPC sounds like a good idea but does it really work? This forum has a great many followers, we must be able to come up with viable solutions between us!

Martin Forster

JDK – There is a slight flaw in your arguement. The Elvington T.2 hangar was funded with Lottery money amongst other funds. Neither ground breaking or
indeed inspirational but practical and appropriate. Second example is Newark.
Modern designed hangar straight out of a computer. Incredibly practical and suitable for the purpose . It doesn’t have to be visually stunning to get funding.
The Newark approach has allowed a number of significant aircraft to come undercover for a fraction of what it has cost at Duxford per aircraft.
The Air-Space project whilst worthy is an expensive way of building a hangar extension. It’s far easier to start from scratch and build a brand new hangar which is significantly larger and cheaper .I hasten to add that I have researched this. Similarily the AAM whilst visually interesting has posed some
expensive problems for the IWM. The cost of removing the glass to allow the latest additions is l money that has been taken away from the restoration projects.

As a civil engineer in a former life I spent a lot of time trying to build what architects had committed to paper but I have to say the AAM is a pretty clever building.The bold Lord Foster did a good job getting enough volume to get all the aircraft in on a relatively small footprint. The main clanger was not having access to get the B-24 and the SR-71 in without removing the screen wall. Hangar doors aren’t rocket technology are they?

Elvington too IIRC

Cees

I’m not denying it does its’ job Steve, I just think it could have been better.

If interesting is one of the desired qualities. look at the link I posted to Cosford. It’s interesting, highly suitable and environmentally friendly.
What they’re getting is all strange angles and an architects flight of fancy.
Also note that the page is still up, over a year (I think) after the other buiding was approved.

Sorry, got on my soapbox and gone off topic here.

I’ll get me coat…

simpler building would have been cheaper and more suitable.

~ But won’t be funded because it’s not ‘interesting’.

I don’t like it, but better a ‘fancy’ building over an aircraft than a bog standard, suitable, perfectly good hangar that don’t happen becos it isn’t interesting enough to get funded. It’s a vicious cycle, but at least there’s some buildings rather than none coming out of it.

HLF? A good way of the UK govt withdrawing funding from heritage without people giving the kicking they deserve. 🙁 Many HLF projects would have been tax funded, but aren’t now. HLF suffers from fancy short term projectitus, rather than continuation funding. Keeping stuff open isn’t a HLF priority. Better than nothing.

The Helicopter Museum has benefitted too…

More dosh to the “living” museums – from taxiable to flying (Shuttleworth, Cold War Jets, Wellsbourne etc) and a funding level to the smaller collections (the Cearnafon [sp?] Museum for instance could do with funding to tidy it up, as it’s not getting the revenue to cover the basics)

Finally, funding for more education of the Wartime Sacrifices over the past 90 years and our Aviation Heritage.

Oh and getting Concorde flying [ducks and runs] 🙂

JC

It’s not often I disagree with you, but I quite like it. It’s served it’s primary purpose in getting some very rare (and in some cases, unique to Europe) airframes indoors, and it also manages to capture a lot of natural light. Compare it to Hendon…