What makes an aircraft important?

Hi All,

I think Kev & Ant make very good points. It’s the human element that brings the airframe ‘alive’. It’s that element that gives an aeroplane or aircraft it’s importance! Whether it be human scarifice or technical achievement.

I know whenever I’m lucky enough to climb into the cockpit of TA 634, several minutes go by, when I think about the aircrews who did & didn’t make it through the last war, flying these superb aeroplanes & others, too. I got a similar feeling the first time I looked through the Bomber Command Losses books. when I was doing a bit of research. To see all those aircrews that didn’t return & to see their names, rather than just saying 55,000 kia., brought a few moments of quiet contemplation.

To me an aeroplane has to have that something indefinable, that the human element brings to an airframe, whether it’s through sacrifice or achievement eg. record breaking flights etc. An aircraft is something ordinary, like an B 707. It might be technically important, but there’s no feeling to it, it’s just another man made machine, in much the same way as your car!

Cheers,
Neilly

Only been to NEAM once, probably around 8 years ago, and I must say I was extremely underwhelmed with the place. As volunteers come and go, things change but the impression then was of not caring.
Having said that, we should be grateful that they did rescue the Swift. Generally speaking, the Swift was a dog but that particular airframe is important as the the one time world speed record holder, however briefly. They’re also on a hiding to nothing anyway. Where is anybody going to find a set of Swift wings?

The original question can be looked at in two ways. There are the actual historic airframes such as:
Most if not all of the Science Museum displays.
Mosquito prototype.
Vampire at Yeovilton (first jet ever to land on an aircraft carrier)
The remains of the NEAM Swift.
I know there’s loads more but it’s late and you’ll all see what I’m getting at.

On the other hand the Fairey Delta 2 that demolished the world speed record was converted into the BAC 221.
What’s historic, the BAC 221 or the surviving FD2?
The only TSR2 that flew (grrrr, snarl etc) was shot to bits at Shoeburyness. Is XR220 an important aircraft? It never flew.
BTW I know my answer to that. As I’m still livid nearly 40 years later you can probably guess.

Both sides are equally valid. It’s just that the first is purely objective, this airframe did this or that and the other is subjective, i.e. opinions.

Totally agree with you about the NEAM Swift, It was a great shame that it was not properly finished before it was displayed at Farnborough a few years back.

DOUGHNUT

Hi Doughnut,
Yes,the NEAM Swift is the one that Lithgow took the speed record in,but it’s not displayed to the best effect.She’s currently painted in a roughly applied matt yellow,and as a consequence she looks half finished.I know she’s missing lots of internal bits (and a few external ones,ie the wings!),but I can’t help but feel she doesn’t do Lithgow or the Swift as a whole a great deal of justice.A better paint finish,roundals,stencils etc etc would work wonders for her,but alas the restoration work at NEAM seems to progress at a snail’s pace.She’s also up against a wall,which makes her difficult to appreciate even in her current state.I know NEAM have worked wonders with the fuselage since it was recovered 20-odd years ago,and I’m not trying to have a bash at them,but I can’t help but feel that a complete Swift at a more suitable location would do greater justice to Lithgow’s memory,and stand as a testemant to the last days of Supermarine.Afterall,what do ordinary folk notice,a fuselage tucked away in a dark corner,or a complete aircraft in a more accessable,flattering setting?

This thread started ‘What makes an aircraft important?’

The Sheppards Swift has been mentioned and its connection with Mike Lithgow, great but what makes an aircraft important it the fact that that actual airfarme was involved, so although it is lacking wings the NEAM Swift has got to be considered more important because Lithgow actually flew that aircraft on the day that he broke the world airspeed record. That is why it has a place in history.

DOUGHNUT

Hey steve. It would still be nice to see that Halifax flying again though wouldnt it.

Kev,

I have never had the pleasure of meeting someone like you who can put thoughts into words quite like you. Also you have a great outlook on these things and have a different way of thinking to the rest of us and I find myself admiring the way you choose your words.

Thanks Kev for a different view.

I don’t think it’s the aircraft itself that’s important – it’s the era or the event that they represent. The BBMF lancaster has worn many schemes over the years but over the Eyebrook reservoir last weekend she represented the sacrifice of Gibson and his men to the people gathered there.
Test and trials machines fascinate me – often not so much for the technology leap but for the selfless bravery of the many that were lost in them . In particular the tribulations of the DH.108
Swallow and the death of Geoffrey De Havilland I think are particularily thought provoking.
This is not to say that the image of a Boeing 757 at Gatwick isn’t important – to many thats the amazing progress we have made in flight for it to be considered almost in the same way as we would use a bus.

Re: Interesting responses 🙂

Ant.

“Even the wreckage of a P40 and a He111 were ‘coldly’ displayed,which is the first time I’ve ever viewed a wreck without some sense of loss or sadness.This gave the exhibits little historical or personal impact, and I walked away from the museum with the feeling that I’d simply been looking at bits of metal and rusty rivets.”

Exactly. it is the people that bring them alive, without that link they are just soulless pieces of metal.

“One of my reasons for being so keen on the Swift is that it would once have been flown by the likes of Mike Lithgow or Dave Morgan.Test pilots have as much of my admiration as combat pilots,and many from that era were both.I’ve recently finished reading Mach-1,the biography of Mike Lithgow,and I find it pretty incredible how he so coolly recounts his attack on the Bismarck in a Swordfish,and his brush with death when his Stringbag smacked into the Med on a night flying exercise.About 10 years after writing the book, he was killed in tragic curcumstances testing the first HS Trident airliner.For me,he’s one of the un-sung test pilots,and in a way I see the recovery of the Sheppard’s Swift as a tribute to him as much as anything else.”

Very well put Ant. And for that reason alone If I ever win the lottery you have yourself a Swift.

Regards,

kev35

All A/C are important to a degree some a/c more impotant to people than others my veiw is I can’t stand jets. But in my opinion we all too frequently praise the owners and pilots while forgetting the engineers and without them pilots would have nothing to fly would they?

Interesting responses 🙂

I have to say I agree with Kev (and those of you who agreed with him) that the people are the most important element of any machine,flying or otherwise.
A case in point was when I was up at the North East Air Museum a couple of months ago.The museum itself has quite an interesting array of airframes (some displayed to better effect than others),so from the point of view of machinery,there was plenty to look at.The only problem was that the information boards gave only the technical specs and the potted history of the airframe on display,with no information about the people involved with them,either in restoration or when the aircraft was in service.Even the wreckage of a P40 and a He111 were ‘coldly’ displayed,which is the first time I’ve ever viewed a wreck without some sense of loss or sadness.This gave the exhibits little historical or personal impact, and I walked away from the museum with the feeling that I’d simply been looking at bits of metal and rusty rivets.
One of my reasons for being so keen on the Swift is that it would once have been flown by the likes of Mike Lithgow or Dave Morgan.Test pilots have as much of my admiration as combat pilots,and many from that era were both.I’ve recently finished reading Mach-1,the biography of Mike Lithgow,and I find it pretty incredible how he so coolly recounts his attack on the Bismarck in a Swordfish,and his brush with death when his Stringbag smacked into the Med on a night flying exercise.About 10 years after writing the book, he was killed in tragic curcumstances testing the first HS Trident airliner.For me,he’s one of the un-sung test pilots,and in a way I see the recovery of the Sheppard’s Swift as a tribute to him as much as anything else.

I’d echo Kev’s sentiments – it’s not the aircraft itself that matters, it’s what it represents. That’s why I find the Hendon Halifax so thought-provoking. In her current ‘as-found’ state, she’s a memorial to the crews who didn’t come back. Much as I love watching PA474 flying, I prefer to visit East Kirkby to watch ‘611 being run up and taxied on an old bomber station. Duxford always takes my breath away. History isn’t just what you see – it’s what you hear, smell and feel too.

I think there are more reasons which can make an aircraft historically significant:

-1- The airframe itself is of an historical significance. I can think of certain prototypes or test-aircraft (like the Fairey Delta mentioned above) or aircraft which were part in a historical event (the German Constellation ‘Konrad Adenauer’, or RAF Tornado GR1 ZA447/EA ‘MiG Eater).

-2- The aircraft is representative of some historical/technological benchmark. Like a B707 (for being the world’s third jet airliner after the Comet and Tu-104), a MiG-15 (first swept-wing fighter) or a Spitfire (well, duh!).

-3- The airframe is unique because it’s only a one-off (Brabazon 🙁 , Mirage 4000) or because there are only few of that particulair type remaining (any Swift, any Javelin, any Yak-28P, any B-36).

I don’t think any museum would hire me though, since i would consider far too many aircraft worth preserving…

As eloquently put as ever, Kev, 🙂

What makes an aircraft REALLY important is if it is THE original airframe that achieved a particlar record or attended a certain event. Although great care must be exercised before attributing to much to a restored airframe, remember Washington’s axe with two new heads and three new shafts. Aviation wise I believe the real gems are those on display in the Sceince Museum in London because most of these aircraft were offered for preservation shortly after their historic flights. Alcock and Browne’s Vimy, Amy Johnson’s DH60, the Supermarine S6, the Whittle Jet. Prototypes such as the Mosquito and Harrier/P1128. Cosfords record breakers Meteor, Hunter and Fairly Delta.
This is off course a British perspective what do our European and USA members think.

DOUGHNUT

Ant.

For me it is the people. For without them any airframe would be an insignificant lump of scrap metal. A Spitfire is a beautiful piece of machinery, but that’s all it is until you put it into the context of the people who flew them. Johnson, Doe, ‘Grumpy’ Unwin, Brian Lane, and the countless thousands of of others. A Lancaster is nothing until you consider the air and ground crews. They are inextricably linked.

But to answer your question I would say all of them, or, none of them. It’s sad to see airframes in a state of disrepair or neglect, but it’s not the end of the world. Perhaps I have a different perspective. Let’s say the Lancaster has fallen into disrepair, is the last of her kind and halfway to the smelters. I would look at the airframe and remember her in better days with affection. Much as one does with a relative. My mom died three years ago, but I can’t think of her without smiling. I choose not to remember the bad times when she was very ill, but the best of times. I believe I would feel very much the same about an aircraft.

Don’t think it’s quite the answer expected.

Regards,

kev35

In my opinion there are two things that can make an aircraft important. The first is that it has made a good contribution to aviation in that it ushered in some new era or technology (i.e. the DC-3 in terms of airliner travel or the 707 bringing the jet age to airliner travel at it was ment to be…..sorry but the Comet isn’t what brought proper jet age travel about to me though it was the pioneering aircraft in that respect).

Or, and I suppose this relates more to military aircraft the contribution a particular aircraft has made in one or many wars. A good example being the B-17 over Europe during the 2nd World War.

Just my opinion though.