The Air Space Vulcan

Firebird, like you I’m a chartered engineer….once I couldn’t spell engineer now I are one and so on. However if you are designing “hangers” it must be a bit limiting. I would have thought “hangars” would give you more scope. Just a thought.

A hangar is something you put an aeroplane in….don’t have one of those on the CV.

A hanger is something you hang something from, something I’ve had to do lots of, and yes it is a bit limiting sometimes, but it pays the bills, and a structure that has a 1000Te load hanging from it can be a bit interesting 😉 .
And are they not hanging aeroplanes in this new building, which I did hint at with the roof analysis comment 😉

Thought’s indeed….. 😎

AirSpace or whatever it’s called….????

Q.E.D. It’s more tone than anything. I see you’ve edited though, which I appreciate.

Firebird, like you I’m a chartered engineer….once I couldn’t spell engineer now I are one and so on. However if you are designing “hangers” it must be a bit limiting. I would have thought “hangars” would give you more scope. Just a thought.

What’s with all the rolly eyes Mr Firebird?

Did I make any sarcy comment on IWM, AirSpace or whatever it’s called….????

Don’t think so.

I was merely highlighting the fact that the Architects could have supplied you with something that made the exhibit arrangement more easy to understand. By they are architects of course so that would be going against their MO… 😀

But what do I know, I’m just a dumb engineer that designs and draws airports, terminal buildings and hangers for a living…… 😎

Whizz-bang software……. :rolleyes:

Hardly, plain old Autocad or Microstation, as 90%+ of Architectural practices in the UK will be using one of the other, chances are whichever one it is the Engineers will be using the other one :rolleyes:
Cross sections added would have given a clearer picture, rather than just a mutli-level plan :rolleyes:
Depending on whether they used ACAD or Microstation, 3D would be fun though, but it would take a while to put all the aircraft into 3D Studio Max though in addition to the building….. 😉
The analysis model of the roof loading will look much more interesting 😎

What’s with all the rolly eyes Mr Firebird? If it’s more powerful than CorelDraw, it’s ‘whizzbang’ to me. I’m no marketing man, I’m here for my own interest. That said, I’d appreciate it if we could have at least one thread or even post relating to AirSpace, or the IWM, or any museum for that matter, without attracting the apparently obligatory and supremely unhelpful sarcastic comments.

Not to give away any trade secrets, but I spent a couple of hours over Christmas cutting out tiny little exhibit-shaped bits of card…. but that was for visualisation purposes for the intermediate-sized objects; the aircraft planning you see online was indeed done with some sort of whizz-bang software.

Whizz-bang software……. :rolleyes:

Hardly, plain old Autocad or Microstation, as 90%+ of Architectural practices in the UK will be using one of the other, chances are whichever one it is the Engineers will be using the other one :rolleyes:
Cross sections added would have given a clearer picture, rather than just a mutli-level plan :rolleyes:
Depending on whether they used ACAD or Microstation, 3D would be fun though, but it would take a while to put all the aircraft into 3D Studio Max though in addition to the building….. 😉
The analysis model of the roof loading will look much more interesting 😎

Jeez, what a load of moaners.

Roll on the airshow season. Cabin fever seems to be setting in.

Moggy

I can’t quite get my head around the problem with having the restoration/storage area at the end by the door. The permanent airspace exhibits will be as ‘permanent’ as those in the AAM, and presumably the conservation area will have ‘exhibits’ come and go- so does this not mean it makes perfect sense to arrange the building as in the plans?

Erm, discuss 🙂

When, for instance the Victor and what remains of the Shackleton are restored (Is it still a fuselage ‘walk through’, with the wings stored elsewhere?)- will the front area become an extension to the airspace exhibition?

Thanks for the replies so far- watching with interest!

You can’t get your head around it because there is no problem with that arrangement. A redisplay, should it be required, would involve tractoring those aeroplanes out of the front area, followed by those exhibits that require moving. I’m not clear on future plans for the front area, but as far as I know it will initially be used to get what we can under cover.

silly me

Who?

you’re right – it wasn’t Roger Richards – it was Foster Norman

wasn’t it Roger Richards?

Who?

No it was Ivor Noclue

Urm…

A stunning piece of design!

Stick the restoration area in the front, blocking the only access for moving exhibits in and out.

Makes about as much sense as constructing a large concrete building with a fixed glass front that requires the removal of that entire frontage every time you want to change the exhibits around.

Now who’d be daft enough to come up with an idea like that…………..?

wasn’t it Roger Richards?

The sad thing is looking at the plan both the Victor & Shacleton will both be throw out into the cold again adter thoer restorations are complete.

Might as well not bother and scrap them both now, as in 5-10 years time they will no better off as they are now.

Put STARS & BARS on, then they might find cover for them.

The sad thing is looking at the plan both the Victor & Shacleton will both be throw out into the cold again adter thoer restorations are complete.

Might as well not bother and scrap them both now, as in 5-10 years time they will no better off as they are now.

I can’t quite get my head around the problem with having the restoration/storage area at the end by the door. The permanent airspace exhibits will be as ‘permanent’ as those in the AAM, and presumably the conservation area will have ‘exhibits’ come and go- so does this not mean it makes perfect sense to arrange the building as in the plans?

Erm, discuss 🙂

When, for instance the Victor and what remains of the Shackleton are restored (Is it still a fuselage ‘walk through’, with the wings stored elsewhere?)- will the front area become an extension to the airspace exhibition?

Thanks for the replies so far- watching with interest!

A stunning piece of design!

Stick the restoration area in the front, blocking the only access for moving exhibits in and out.

Makes about as much sense as constructing a large concrete building with a fixed glass front that requires the removal of that entire frontage every time you want to change the exhibits around.

Now who’d be daft enough to come up with an idea like that…………..?

Well someone obviously did though I doubt he/she would be willing to admit it 😀

The Valiant is at Hendon not Duxford soon to be chopped up and sent via Royal Mail to Cosford never to be seen again as it was lost in the post.

I thought the Valiant was off to to Cosford! Maybe there is another one, at Gaydon. Just a thought!!!!!

I believe the forward blank ‘apron’ area will be available to accomodate those future conservation projects that do not yet have access to funding and resources, but clearly even this space is limited. However, with all of the AirSpace aircraft installed, the existing hangar space (H5, parts of H4 etc etc) will be available for a reshuffle to ensure maximum ‘undercoverage’.

Will the Vasity be going under cover, or will another historic aeroplane be left outside to rot to the point of being beyond reclamation ?