Minister announces funding for Australian National Aerospace Centre

Well done April’s fools joke, you certainly tricked me.

Good laugh, wish it were true.

Wouldn’t it be great to have all the aircraft the AWM have on display.

Ross,

The one advantage of a central Museum is a critical mass for funding and building infrastructure, one RAAF Museum provides for a core of staff and resources to achieve the task, a cluster of larger buildings in one location, a single site to manage public access/security (a unique defence issue) simply providing duplicate locations with toilets, offices, airconditioning all adds up, and can lead to none of the outcomes being achieved anywhere, particularly by a department such as Defence that is constantly being squeezed by the costs to run the “sharp end”.

At least at Point Cook the RAAF have belatedly (in the 1980’s after 60 years of existance) started to collect and preserve historic aircraft from their own operations, a central RAAF Museum at Point Cook creates the best chance for regional museum campuses at Amberley, Wagga etc to be established and ran with curatorial and other support from the main museum.

Without that central RAAF museum at Point Cook, Australia probably would not have the Boston, Demon or Seagull V preserved.

Despite that, regional RAAF Museums (such as Wagga) continue to suffer the problems of storage, staff, funding etc, and overseas examples exist in Canada and the UK of local base projects or collections being dispersed by an incoming CO unsympathetic to the heritage activities, and the lack of a central RAAF Museum at Point Cook would not improve the viability of those regional base museums.

The example best shown of a central museum is with the NMUSAF in the USA ,which then supports collections at active bases as a series of “reserve collections” and allowing for representative examples to be preserved and displayed in their operational settings.

In the same way the National Air and Space Museum in the US shows the outcomes that can be achieved with the scale and concentration of effort, of a central main museum.

In Australia today we have an un-co-ordinated series of state based volunteer museums, 3 major State Museum collections in Qld, NSW and Vic, along with the federally funded AWM and the three formal Service Museums at Point Cook, Nowra and Oakey, followed by some un-official base collections, along with two specialist flying collections and the wider private owner operator of warbirds and vintage aircraft.

With all of that Military aviation is reasonably catered for, and certainly in terms of post war aircraft preservation and perhaps WW2 examples, but little of the prewar and WW1 aircraft.

Even worse is civilian aviation which is far less catered for, particularly pre-war examples, and while the AWM and RAAF Museum can place a roof over large aircraft others cannot so easily raise the funds for buildings etc, the Qantas Founders Museum is in a dry location to preserve a 707 and 747 but the day will come when they need to be put under cover.

Without the efforts of volunteer and private groups we would not have any Wackett trainers perserved in Australia, no Beaufighters preserved, no B-24, no Lincoln, even no DH-60!, but it is dis-appointing that a country that has played such an important role in the pioneering of aviation, and relied on it so much for its own development – has not done more at a Government level to preserve its aviation heritage.

While the UK has the British Aircraft Preservation Council, and Canada has the Canadian Aircraft Preservation Association, the Australian museum’s lack any formal and real co-ordination and organisation, a previous Museum Association achieved little real outcomes and has fallen by the wayside.

Australia does have a central National Maritime Museum in Darling Harbour, as well as over 100 regional museums around the States, it not only preserves large ships perhaps unable to be undertaken by the smaller regional museums, but acts as a central curatorial and lobbying support for those regional museums.

It supported the funding applications to restore the historic Gem Murray River Paddlesteamer at Swan Hill, and oversaw the restoration project, it distributes over $500k per annum in Maritime Museum grants to the regional maritime museums, – imagine what a similar grant system could do to help our volunteer and regional aviation museums?

I do support a central Aviation Museum for Australia as I think it is the launching pad for management of the wider “Distributed” museum model, there are some fantastic collections out there, the Bull Creek collection with its Lancaster, Wackett, Moth minor and Anson, the Camden collection with its Beaufighter, Vengeance, Moth minor and Mosquito, the SA Collection with its DH60’s, Anson and Battle, the QAM with its DC-3, Ventura and KS-3 Wackett, Darwin with its B-25, Syd Beck and the P-39, these are all collections with duplicate airframes, but with some unique aircraft as their “jewels in the crown”, to attract both the general public and enthusiast alike.

I’m certainly not proposing a central museum be created to rape and pillage them of those significant displays, but rather one be created to increase the focus and awareness of our aviation heritage and to undertake tasks the existing museums cannot, projects such as acquisition and return of a Sandringham? or other large scale projects, and to provide for co-ordinated grants, funding support and curatoral support, as is already done for Maritime heritage in this country.

A central National museum could encourage and support loans and exchanges between the regional museums, and better improve the preservation of aircraft, engines and artifacts in their care.

regards

Mark Pilkington

Actually I,m amazed the RAAF funded Museum at Point Cook still doesn,t have a P40 or Spitfire in it,s stables.Seeing they and the Boomerang saw much more service than the Mustang.

Old Spitty

Ask your self this question, “where did these aeroplanes make their biggest contribution to the defence of Australia. I suggest it in the NT and WA.

Thus I suggest the best place to display them would be in an annex of the RAAF Museum in Darwin, NT.

Likewise if you were going to display an F111 then I suggest the best place would be in an annex of the RAAF museum in S.E Queensland, likely at Ipswich (Amberley being part of the city of Ipswich).

I recently went to the RAAF Museum at Point Cook. Nice display and all, however I don’t think many of the larger display items had any historical connection with Pt Cook, save the RAAF Museum is located there.

It’s difficult to get your head around a concept of “Big is not better” or “Having them located in one place is better than in distributed annexes”

cheers
Ross

Ross,

I do agree with a distributed National Collection and even a Campus approach to a National Aviation Museum outcome given the size of Australia and the storys best told in their original locations and settings, but I’m sorry but I dont see anything obvious about the Gold Coast as “the” obvious choice at all for a single display location?

To me a single large collection in one place that just caters to the tourist market would just be tacky. The Gold Coast is a tacky place that caters to toursists – see the connection

Re the Brisbane Line comment, the Brisbane Line went from Brisbane to Adelaide, all south of that would be fought for, all above (ie 3/4 of Australia would be allowed to be taken by the Nips (Japs).

What I was aluding to was that there is the whole of Australia to consider not just SE Queensland, NSW and VIC.

I promote Queensland because really it is the best part of Australia and also because for years Victorians and NSW’ers used to say go to QLD and wind your watch back 100 years.

As I identified and you have expanded, the very early days of aviation in Australia were closely identified with Victoria as was the CAC/GAF.

There is plenty of scope within each state to play to their strengths with regards to their aviation history.

The real shame is that governments seem to respond to lobbying and pressure groups and thus “someday” we are likely to see a large single museum stuck somewhere that pleases one lobby group that ignores the others.

The decentralised approach is the one that would provide the best overall outcome, however it is difficult for governments to deal with many groups. We need a lobby group that supports this proposal.

cheers
Ross

I knew Garrett was from that band. His political career has been great because it means we’re no longer getting bombarded by his awful songs.

So if “Member of the Order of Australia” equates to AM, I guess Australia no longer gives out the Air Medal, which also equates to AM?

Getting back the proper Honours system was very popular here and one of the many Labour wrongs that National has put right again. We’re not a republic, we have a Queen, so the Queen’s system is what we should use. And yes, I think Peter Jackson would be very deserved of a knighthood, his services to aviation alone would do it.

Has Peter Garrett got an Air Medal??

Dave,

Our current Minister for the Environment, Peter Garrett, was the lead singer of Australian rock band “Midnight Oil”, whose song lyrics, and his own activities, were very much environmentally focused.

He was awarded Australia’s civilian honour the Member of the Order of Australia (AM) in June 2003,

For service to the community as a prominent advocate for environmental conservation and protection, and to the music industry

Australia replaced the British Imperial Honours system in 1975 with the Order of Australia, which has a number of levels, with the “member” being the 2nd lowest of the 4 levels of the general division, there is a duplicate military division with the same 4 levels.

I know NZ has recently re-introduced the Imperial system, how long before we see “Sir” Peter Jackson – “For creative and innovative services to the film industry and old aeroplanes” smiles

regards

Mark Pilkington

Has Peter Garrett got an Air Medal??

Just beign dense but was his an april fools?
Matt

Yes, the “Media Release” from Minister Peter Carrott in the first post of this thread is an April Fools Day Joke.
(posted at 12.57pm on the 31st unintentionally due to KP clock variations)

The Australian Heritage Minister is actualy Peter Garrett AM, and the National Aerospace Centre in Canberra is a long dead proposal.

I’m sorry if it did not become more obvious towards the end that it was not genuine or true, as was the intention?

But the offer of an F111 to each of the museum’s for swap and return of the Maurice Farman Shorthorn, Seagull V and Bristol Beaufighter still stands –

smiles

Mark Pilkington

Just beign dense but was his an april fools?
Matt

Actually I,m amazed the RAAF funded Museum at Point Cook still doesn,t have a P40 or Spitfire in it,s stables.Seeing they and the Boomerang saw much more service than the Mustang.

QldSpitty,

Point Cook have a P40E, A29-28, its fuselage was restored by Jack McDonald years ago and was originally a cockpit section with Pearce Dunn’s Warbirds Museum at Mildura, the wings have been built new by Precision Aerospace at Wangaratta as part of the A-20 Boston swaps.

They also had two Spitfire remains dug out of the mudflats up north but I’m not sure of the current condition of those wrecks, and their viability for restoration. I would agree a Spitfire (mark V preferably) is missing from the collection, Ian Whitneys, now in the NMUSAF, was a 54 squadron veteran from Darwin, and would have made an excellent project.

Regards

Mark Pilkington

Actually I,m amazed the RAAF funded Museum at Point Cook still doesn,t have a P40 or Spitfire in it,s stables.Seeing they and the Boomerang saw much more service than the Mustang.

If we are just going to have a bunch of statics on display in one place to act as a tourist attraction, then I guess that the Gold Coast is the obvious choice for a location.

Ross,

I do agree with a distributed National Collection and even a Campus approach to a National Aviation Museum outcome given the size of Australia and the storys best told in their original locations and settings, but I’m sorry but I dont see anything obvious about the Gold Coast as “the” obvious choice at all for a single display location?

It is merely one of many tourism destinations in Australia, and already over catered for with 5 “manufactured” tourism attractions?

Would you also propose to relocate the Echuca Paddle Steamers and Whalf to GC along with the Soveriegn Hill Gold Museum and AWM simply to concentrate tourism into the GC further? why not Ayers Rock too and be done with it?

The GC is irrelevent to Australian Aviation History.

I personally think a prime National Aviation Museum could still be created, along with one or two campus collections, however I doubt either outcomes will ever now happen.

Were a prime Museum to be created I still consider Point Cook to be the “obvious” choice with its intact 1914 and 1920’s infrastructure, an intact WW1 and 1916 Seaplane base on the Southern Tarmac, its strong early role in both early military and civil aviation, its strong association with a number of important National Flights and aviation personalities, and the fact that a number of its remaining buildings are at least 7 years older than the oldest aviation buildings anywhere else in Australia.

Point Cook is clearly Australia’s most important National Aviation Heritage site, perhaps followed by Richmond/Ham Common, although the oldest surviving building at that site is unfortunately now a very young 1937 building, with Longreach, Essendon and Ballarat being the next most historical intact aviation sites with significant and important surviving built infrastructure.

The Department of Defence administered civil aviation from Melbourne via the Civil Air Board until the creation of the Department of Civil Aviation in the 1930’s and many air worthiness and other civilian licence and engineering aspects were managed at Point Cook and later Essendon.

Victoria also played some other small roles in Australian aviation in the form of:

The first successful Balloon flight in Australia 1858
The first successful powered Flight – 1910
The first Australian built powered flight – 1910
The first passenger (powered) flight in Australia- 1911*
The first paying passenger (powered) flight in Australia – 1911*
The first cross-country flight – 1911*
The first military flight – 1914*
The first south north crossing of Australia- 1919*
The first civilian licence refresher courses in Australia – 1919*
The first civilian licence training courses in Australia – 1923*
The first air-sea search and rescue flight in Australia – 1920*
The first circumnavigation of Australia- 1924*
The first international flight of an Australian aircraft – 1926*
The first non-stop east-west crossing of Australia (Kingsford Smith)- 1928*
The first emergency use of a parachute – 1929*
The first crop dusting trials in Australia – 1930*
The first Airmail to PNG (Ulm) – 1934*
Creation of CAC – 1936
Creation of Ansett – 1937
Creation of DAP/GAF – 1940
Creation of TAA – 1946

Thats in no way to minimise the achievements undertaken in other states, and in particular Qld and NSW, however all of those historical events marked (*) occurred at or near Point Cook and I could not see the relevence of the Gold Coast as an appropriate site from any logical point of view, other than to saturate an existing tourism market over those in other states?

Experiencing History and Cultural Heritage is about a lot more than enjoying fibreglass volcanoes, batman, movieworld, waterslides and Big Banana’s?.

History is best told where it happened, exactly like Longreach for QANTAS, in part thats why the tourists “still” go to the paddlesteamers in Echuca, and Sovereign Hill in Ballarat, Port Arthur in Hobart, and even the AWM in Canberra, despite the “obvious” importance and attraction of the Gold Coast.

I sometimes wonder if there are traces of the old ‘Brisbane Line” mentality alive and well

I’m not into parochial State rivalry as per my earlier comments in other threads in any case, (and am a strong supporter of the Queensland Air Museum as best I can be from the other end of the country), but I do note you are often the one promoting the virtues of the “Queensland” Vintage Aeroplane Group as against more National groups such as Australian Warbirds, SAAA or AAAA?, you seem to be the one constantly promoting one place (Qld) over all others?

Queensland does have important aviation stories to tell about Hinkler, Kinsford Smith, Qantas, the RAAF and USAF in WW2, and hopefully the existing displays and artifacts will be retained and added to, the development by Steve Searle at Beaudesert is promising, and with the B-25, Avengers and A-20 could focus on the US forces in Qld in WW2, hopefully his collection will be permanant and exist indefinately, and its closeness to the Gold Coast might counter the plastic and fibreglass fluff.

But there really is a lot more to Australia than just the Gold Coast and Queensland, and the majority of us seem very pleased to live and work in the rest of it.

Regards

Mark Pilkington

As far as a NAC, the problem remains that previous concepts seem to be based around the having in in one place, and it is usually suggested that it be in Canberra or Melbourne.

My suggestion is that we have a precinct of the museum in each state. I sometimes wonder if there are traces of the old ‘Brisbane Line” mentality alive and well and I think my concept would cater best for the preservation of Australia’s aviation History.

As an example, here in Queensland, we could focus on Smithy (we already have the Southern Cross, Bert Hinkler, QANTAS, and of course the RAAF in connections with the operations from Queensland into New Guinea and the Battle of the Coral Sea during WW2. We had a heavy presence of the US air forces here in Queensland during WW2

I imagine that the Victorians could focus on the very early days of aviation, the RAAF at Point Cook and the CAC at Fisherman’s bend.

NSW would have amongst other things, the operations of De Havilland at Mascott.

I think each state has its “list” of aviation actievements and these would provide the theme for each precinct of the one National Museum. I guess that Canberra would be hard pushed to come up with much, but then what’s new about that.

If we are just going to have a bunch of statics on display in one place to act as a tourist attraction, then I guess that the Gold Coast is the obvious choice for a location. Having said that I am aware of a lot of the comments recently posted on another thread on this forum about the goings on in one of the major British museums.

The QANTAS founders museum at Longreach is a good example of what I am advocating. It is a specialist museum focused on QANTAS and what a great climate to store aircraft in the open.

By the way in 1992 I did a re-enactment flight of QANTAS’s first mail run and as part of that hangared my Tiger Moth overnight in the original QANTAS hangar at Longreach – what a moment and what a thrill, I remember standing in the hangar and imagining what had happened in there all those years ago.

cheers
Ross

.
Of course my “media release” above is an April Fools day joke, and in some ways a very “sad” joke being played on a Nation with such a rich Aviation Heritage, as it seems successive Australian Government’s appear never able to deliver such an outcome despite the near 35 years of talking about it.

There are some elements of truth in my fabrication above, retired AVM David Evans was the chairman of the National Capital Authority and did indeed propose a National Aerospace Centre for Canberra in 2000 at a cost of $25M to $40M just for the building, and was apparantly basing its creation on the then intended closure of Point Cook and opportunity for relocation of the RAAF Museum to Canberra, and use of its collection in his NAC.

http://www.nationalcapital.gov.au/downloads/corporate/publications/misc/PZOutcomes.pdf

National Aerospace Centre
A National Aerospace Centre is proposed as a major addition to
the cultural institutions in the place of the people. The Centre will
recognise and celebrate Australian achievement in aviation, space
exploration, communications and satellite technology.
The Centre is intended to become the hub of a national and
international network of exhibition and archive centres, all focused
on the dynamic interpretation of aerospace history and ongoing
achievements in these and allied fields.
An Interim Aerospace Council of eminent Australians has been
established to advance the development of the Centre. The primary
role of the Council is to promote the concept with interest groups
and to advise the National Capital Authority on exhibition, capital
and revenue strategies, business planning, organisation structure
and the marketing and commercial aspects of the project.
Various feasibility studies have been completed addressing
objectives, exhibition and administrative requirements, siting
operations and funding. A floor area of 10,000 square metres
will be required for core exhibition spaces, offices and concessions.
In addition, it has been proposed that a parking structure be
located with the institution to cater for the parking needs it
generates and any additional parking needs related to adjacent
institutions or events.
A preferred site has been identified adjacent to the National
Science and Technology Centre. Master planning for this site
has started and includes investigating the staged construction of
the Centre. Concurrently, opportunities for private sector
investment and patronage are being explored.
An Aerospace Centre in the place of the people would demonstrate
Australia’s achievements and innovation in this exciting industry.

The NAC proposal was fiercely opposed by both the AWM and Questicon Science Museum at the time who felt it was simply duplicating their existing franchises in the National Capital of both Aviation and Technology displays. Interestingly AVM Evans was proposing displays of military aircraft such as F111’s etc derived from his own RAAF experiences, and the outcome did not seem to address the lack of civil aviation preservation at the National Level.

AVM Evans had been a strong proponent of Canberra during his time in the Chair of the NCA, and had opposed the creation of any “National” museums in the States and Regional centres ,arguing those cultural icons needed to be located in the Nation’s Capital. However that Canberra centric focus had not stopped the National Maritime Museum being previously established in Sydney, nor National museums of Wool, Rail and automobiles being established elsewhere in Australia.

The reality being that Australia is a vast country, and Canberra is not neccessarily the appropriate, best or most relevent location for all cultural activities to occur.

Since AVM Evans’ retirement from the NCA chair, the proposal has been quietly shelved in the dustbin where it belongs.

The project would have resulted in yet another high cost “Italian marble” building in the Parliamentary triangle, with significant display staff, restoration staff, and the need for other offsite storage and restoration workshop building infrastructure, and the various building and staff costs would have been well beyond the original projected $25M to $40M cost.

Unfortunately it lacked even the basic focus of whats its collection policy and real purpose was intended to be, and the building and staff costs probably would have consumed funds more correctly spent on the non-existant aircraft and artifact collection, hence the strategy to solve the RAAF’s problem of relocating the RAAF Museum from its site at Point Cook to allow that base to be redeveloped into a housing estate, and to provide a ready made collection for the National Aerospace Centre, despite it being a 100% focus on Military Aviation and directly duplicating the role and collection of the AWM.

The successful lobbying campaign to retain the RAAF Museum at Point Cook, and to retain the site as an operating airfield resulted in commitments to first retain the museum, and later the airfield at Point Cook, by the then Howard Government and so by 2001 the NAC was on shaky ground and by March 2004 the NAC was buried with the retirement of AVM Evans from the Chairmanship of the NCA.

Perhaps one day Australia will belatedly invest in a National Air Museum outcome, until then it will be left to the existing volunteer collections to preserve aircraft outside the interest of the Government run service and military museums.

Point Cook, as Australia’s most important National Aviation Heritage Site, remains the logical place to achieve such an outcome.

regards

Mark Pilkington
speaking on behalf of himself.

Just when you think that the 1st April has been cancelled because of the Global Financial Crisis. Go to the naughty corner Mark.

Shame about the spelling mistake Peter Carrot

Mark!!!

Actually we hare having it constructed to house all of Morrabins projects!!:p
The Ca15 will be a nice addition I think.

🙂 Well Done Australia…

…the Space shuttle and other delights, too. What a delightful museum you chaps are going to have and with such a large budget too. You chaps must be pleased as pun…

…wait a minute, wait a minute!!! 😮 How many hours are you chaps ahead of us? Is it April already down under? Me smells something akin to a prank, the type of which only shows up but once a year.

Cheeky Blighter!!! :rolleyes: