Okay, maybe we shouldn’t scrap Sally B, but for the past few weeks now I’ve been reading messages posted on this forum. It would appear that we all have a healthy appreciation of all things aviation and in particular our own aeronautical heritage. The photography is also very much appreciated and no doubt the age of digital photography has improved many a photographer.
But with every message and with every photograph posted I fear that this forum confirms our failure in which the United Kingdom’s own precious heritage is being sacrificed through this obsession with America’s Flying Legends.
We live in a country with a rich and diverse aeronautical heritage. Yet, this obsession with brightly coloured foreign airframes has and is having a detrimental and damaging effect on our own heritage. Looking at any display line up at Duxford and it was appear that we are slow in either persuading the likes of the OFMC or TFC to swap their American charges with British designed and built airframes, or they are sacrificing our heritage so these few individuals can fly fast piston-engined Cadillacs.
Wednesday, 17th December 2003 marked the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brothers first powered flight – not that many in the UK paid much attention. The commemorative events in the USA were overshadowed by the conviction in the UK of Ian Huntley for murdering Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. Perhaps we do take the magic of flight for granted. Or perhaps the media’s obsession with the evil of one man (that over a community’s wish to move on) pushed other stories or events down the running order. But I digress…
Why is our aviation heritage so important?
Today there are only a handful of surviving veterans of The Great War (1914-1918). In 25 years time there will be a similar number of elderly veterans of the Second World War (1939-1945). Those who remember or who bore witnessed are our greatest assets – those we look up to with pride or for an insight into what happened. Yet, when the last solder, sailor, airmen, or wartime evacuee has passed away what is left will become exponentially more valuable. The problem is that by then it maybe too late. If we are to consolidate our history beyond the grave then we need to increase our heritage portfolio and not cast away the physical attributes in the same manner we have done in the recent past.
Whose Heritage – Whose Priority!
Our aviation heritage – that we know and love – extends beyond the contours of the Spitfire and Hurricane. Yet, despite our rich and diverse heritage the biggest issue we face is the waste of valuable resources (funding) expended on the preservation of foreign aircraft. This has become a national scandal of epic proportions.
Question: why is it that we are spending what valuable resources (funds and manpower) that are available on preserving the aeronautical heritage of other nations, while our own heritage crumbles into obscurity? In writing this I highlight the ever-increasing perception that our aviation heritage (both physically and intellectually) is being sacrificed over that from other nations. this essay also highlights the dangerous practice of “Top Shelf Aeronautica” – what use to be called “Spitfire Snobbery”, which is being practiced by the very institutions that we ultimately rely on to protect our heritage (see also “Big is Beautiful” below).
Take for example Duxford – renowned as being the biggest and best aviation heritage site in Europe. Despite being a major Battle of Britain aerodrome, 50% of the aircraft of display (static or airworthy) are foreign. My first visit to Duxford was on November 6th 1995. At the time builders had just started on the construction of the American Air Museum. Despite this costly activity I was concerned by the condition of the Avro Shackleton and Handley Page Victor, both of which had been left exposed to the elements.
Eight years later and the same two British aircraft remain outside and in a deteriorating or worst condition. This while the IWM not only opened the American Air Museum, but also expanded this collection of America’s heritage. We know funds are limited, yet the Imperial War Museum saw, as a priority, the preservation or conservation of more popular foreign airframes over more vulnerable (and valuable) British aircraft, whose future survival is now jeopardised.
My concern is that we are not only sacrificing our own physical heritage, but we are also enforcing the perception that we either never had an aviation industry worthy of preservation or that the aeronautical exploits of other countries outclassed or surpassed our own.
At this point it must be noted that private individuals or organisations are not exempt from this criticism. If anything they are the real culprits – they more than most have the ability (funds) to preserve our heritage, yet choose to turn the aforementioned Flying Legends display into a celebration of American airpower. I must add at this point that my criticism is not anti-American in context or content. It is largely directed at those in authority (OFMC, TFC, IWM, RAF Museum and Heritage Lottery Fund management) who desire to preserve the heritage of other nations (using scarce resources and even scarcer funds) this while our own heritage is increasingly at risk.
This I guess is due in part to the misguided believe that sexy fighters and bombers sell, and that America produces the best porn (P51Ds and P47Ds).
AirSpace
As most of you will know the Imperial War Museum are going to create a new attraction at Duxford – based on Hangar One (the Super Hangar). What amazed me was a leaflet, which I guess most of you recently received through either Flypast or Aeroplane Monthly. The Imperial War Museum want your money so they can preserve “our” heritage. The leaflet reads: ‘What you do today could inspire generations to come’.
The leaflet continues: …it’s a sad fact that the future of this heritage is not yet secure. A number of the aircraft are housed out-of-doors (never knew you could house something outside?). Indeed without vital conservation work, they would be lost to the nation forever. The Premise behind AirSpace is that those airframes currently in danger of being lost will be saved. Yet, if you look at the same leaflet an accompanying floor plan excludes both the aforementioned Victor and Shackleton. The new AirSpace museum will also exclude the VC10, Trident, BAC111 and Bristol Britannia, which will remain outside – until they’re scrapped or until the IWM build another structure to pollute the Duxford skyline.
The Premise behind AirSpace is that construction work will result only in a 40% increase of floor space. It appears that ancillary displays and a conservation centre will take up precious space, which could be used to house additional airframes. So where does that leave the Shackleton and Victor? It is reported that the Shackleton will be sectioned, with both wings being removed and stored elsewhere on site. I’m also concerned about mixing airframe restoration and display facilities in the same building – all it takes is one small accident and we could loose an entire collection.
Now if I was a high-paid executive of the Imperial War Museum, I would have (a) considered constructing an identical Super Hanger (bolted onto the east side of the existing structure) or (b) extended the length of the said existing structure. I would have replaced the ends with large glass panels (just like the American Air Museum and what is proposed for the new AirSpace Museum). The premise behind these proposals is that there would be a 100% and not 40% increase of floor space. Perhaps as a result those large [and British designed and built] airframes currently “house out-of-doors” could be guaranteed a brighter future.
Big is Beautiful
Rumour has it that when HeavyLift went into receivership, the owners offered its last airworthy Short Belfast to the Imperial War Museum for a mere £4,000 (to cover the cost of fuel). This offer was polity refused on the grounds of cost (how much did the IWM spend on the American Air Museum?). What is worrying (****ing annoying) is that Duxford are in a better position than most to offer this airframe a ‘sheltered’ home. In recent years, a number of [British] large airframes have been scrapped, yet the Duxford Aviation Society has proved that large airframes can be preserved by bodies who are sometimes more ‘focused’ or ‘mission orientated’ than their national counterparts.
Thumbing through the pages of Flypast and Aeroplane Monthly it is easy to identify the problem areas. We know that large British designed and built aircraft are scrapped at an alarming rate. RAF transport aircraft are particularly at risk – why? Because we still suffer from Spitfire Snobbery. Museums need to attract visitors – both to secure funds and to impress funders.
A lumbering old transport, whose faded paintwork does little to detract from years of accumulated bird droppings, will always be less attractive than an easily identifiable Spitfire or Hurricane (even if they are fibreglass replicas).
The RAF Museum’s Blackburn Beverley was scrapped we are told because it was too costly to move to Cosford. We are also told that the airframe was unstable. In reality the RAF Museum’s Blackburn Beverley was scrapped because it wasn’t sexy enough for Hendon’s new image. Fact: a Spitfire will always outsell a lumbering old cargo plane. No matter, according to the RAF Museum this airframe was in fact owned by the MoD – so weren’t to blame.
Imagine if those with money and influence stopped and thought about their actions (or lack thereof). No matter how prestigious or charismatic, with every foreign airframe that pollutes the skies above Duxford the more likely our own heritage is consigned to the history books and cultural obscurity. I’m not in any way trying to diminish the contribution of our allies during World War Two, but to sacrifice our own heritage will only result in future generations questioning our own aeronautical and engineering exploits and abilities. And yes, it was the Royal Navy and not a US submarine that secured an enigma machine from a German U Boat during the war. And yes, the British did land on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day – Steve Spielberg and Hollywood take note.
Imagine if someone had the balls to create a replica DH Albatross or Airspeed Envoy or even a humble Vickers Virginia, nay a Fairey Long Range Monoplane. What if all that money and engineering talent was diverted from rebuilding yet another Spitfire and directed towards building a Wellington, Halifax or Mosquito. What if that instead of being excited by the visit of a Lockheed Constellation, we directed our efforts at putting back into the air an Vickers Viscount – after saying that, how many people know what one is? How many care? As long as your £2.50 Duxford burger doesn’t give you the ****s, who cares what flies above our heads?
Discuss…
Phillip Rhodes – http://www.driffieldaerodrome.co.uk
By: Scott WRG Edito - 14th September 2004 at 00:54
Hi Scott,
It’s been brought to my attention that some people have misunderstood my post about ‘getting back what you ask for’. First off I’d like to count CM and yourselves as friends, even (especially) when we don’t agree! 😀
I of course consider you a friend as well and I’m sorry if post seemed overly critical. I learned awhile ago to not take things personally in regards to online forums and e-mail.
I created the WIX forum as an international community to bring us all together to discuss a subject we all love. I don’t care if your British, American, Canadian, Japanese, or whatever, if you like warbirds then WIX has a place for you. If you have an opinion your welcome to express it. As long as you don’t commit a personal attack then your welcome to post. If you don’t like someones opinion then either discuss it or ignore it.
I’m going to stop now… end rant.
By: Arabella-Cox - 13th September 2004 at 19:51
Hello HP!
Thanks for your comments on our work with ‘Sally-B’, we do try! Annie said that she bumped into you on Friday at DX, and that how ravishing you both looked! Sad to say, yes, the money ran out and I never did finish the course..damn shame as I was so close too!
We have followed your progress and growing aquisitions with interest, you lucky bugger! Gald to hear that Alan is doing well too! Last time I saw Alan was at Costco in Essex!
Would love to meet up with you both one day, and I would most certainly enjoy a flight in one of your beauties! (Any chance Annie could get one too?)
Drop us a line sometime or contact Annie at the Sittingbourne Office, be good to go through old times again! 😎
Be Safe & Happy Landings,
Best Regards,
Keith & Annie :diablo:
By: JDK - 13th September 2004 at 18:28
people have thier own opinions and one of the things that make forums like Flypast and WIX great is the ability to air your opinion and hear others that might differ from yours. If you want to hear your own opinion spoken back at you then find a mirror. We are all different and we all deserve to have our opinions respected, even if you don’t agree with it.
Hi Scott,
It’s been brought to my attention that some people have misunderstood my post about ‘getting back what you ask for’. First off I’d like to count CM and yourselves as friends, even (especially) when we don’t agree! 😀 However, what I meant was if you are rude about ‘the British’ or ‘the Americans’ (etc) you’ll hit raw nerves and short circuit any meaningful discussion. Throwing teddies and then having a high profile leaving do because the teddies come back doesn’t help anything, doesn’t make you (or the other correspondants) look clever!
As for respecting other opinions. Absolutely – IF that person is prepared to respect other opinions / points of view themselves and if the opinion is based on / in reality. otherwise you are respecting something (the opinion) which simply makes you look silly too! I can’t and won’t respect an opinion which isn’t capable of standing up and defending itself..
I’ll always raise a glass to diversity in opinions, ideas, aircraft, facial hair ;), and ways of doing things. Just don’t expect me to raise the glass or agree ‘becase that’s how we do it and ours is better than yours.’ No, mate.
I’m not pointing any fingers (and I’m happy in my glass house :D) just trying to clarify some thoughts.
In international aviation fellowship,
By: Hairyplane - 13th September 2004 at 16:44
Hello Dambuster!
Hi Keith,
We met up with the missus at Duxford on the Friday, we being 2 ex-Rochester instructors ( I wore a blue uniform like yours once – remember?).
We remember that you were particularly competent but learned that you didn’t finish your PPL.
Much the pity but then without volunteers like you, Sally B wouldn’t/ couldn’t be a viable operation.
Do you fancy defecting to Old Warden and polishing my growing fleet? A good investment in view of the proposed heavy metal in 06(ish)??!!
Just kidding – you stay where you are but come and claim a flight anyway.
HP
By: adwwebber - 13th September 2004 at 10:22
Although not as involved in the preservsation side of things as some of you undoudtably are, and prefering the jets as well. I still think that preservation of aircraft is important regardless of type and nationality. The airframes to me are symbols of the times when they were active in the roles they were designed to fulfill.They are part of our history and as others have said if you take away the sacrifices and hardship suffered by the pilots, ground crew and designers and others to create a character for those aircraft as a group or individual airframes they are only bits of metal.
Fact is someone will always disagree with something whatever Duxford or any other museum decides to do. That is the nature of the beast. I do however think its important to remember the individual remits of those museums.
One sad fact is that through out the whole preservation scene there is a growing tendency towards a political atmosphere. We should and could work together to achieve the end goal. Preservation of our history all around the world.
By: Locobuster - 13th September 2004 at 04:44
Being new here I’ve steered clear of responding to this thread, but now I would like to say one thing:
I view the warbird community and aviation enthusiasts as a worldwide collection of people with like interests. I don’t think that nationality has any real bearing unless you choose to make it a point of contention. Quite honestly, what good does it serve to waste all of the time and energy complaining about something being too “American” or too “British” when we’re all trying to accomplish basically the same thing?
I will admit that I am not as well versed on the RAF as I am the USAAF, that’s one of the reasons I came here, to learn more and to be exposed to new things. Turns out I’ve made several new friends in the few days I have been a member and it’s been mutually beneficial for all of us, isn’t that why forums like this were created?
As for the original question of “Whose heritage is this?” I submit it is all of ours. “What takes priority?” Preserving history and helping others to do the same.
By: Peter - 13th September 2004 at 02:00
Hear Hear….!
By: Scott WRG Edito - 13th September 2004 at 00:06
*Sigh*
Finally, CM ‘left’ (for the second time) because he chose to take his toys and sulk. No one was forced out. He made some wild accusations told people how they should do things, and got the response he asked for.
I find it interesting that CM is being critisized for doing something that some former WIX member have done. I just recieved an e-mail from a soon to be former member of WIX requesting his posts and profile be removed.
I think we all need to grow up a little and realize that people have thier own opinions and one of the things that make forums like Flypast and WIX great is the ability to air your opinion and hear others that might differ from yours. If you want to hear your own opinion spoken back at you then find a mirror. We are all different and we all deserve to have our opinions respected, even if you don’t agree with it.
As for the WIX forum being American centric or Flypast being anti-american then I think people need to quit whining and work at changing the situation. If you want to see more UK-centered topics then post about UK topics. I don’t know about Flypast but on the WIX board the people who complain the most are the ones that post the least. And some, instead of working to improve the base of information in the forum chose to go elsewhere.
Now you are entitled to do what you will, both the UK and the USA are free countries, but I’m getting tired of people who spend all thier time complaining about a problem and make no effort to solve it.
This is just my personal opinion.
By: Arabella-Cox - 11th September 2004 at 18:52
Well, Boys & Girls….I have been watching over this thread the past few days, and thought that I would add my two pennorth’
Last weekend, I spent more than a few hours showing folks over the inside of ‘Sally-B’, as I do quite often. During the course of the day, I had the great priviledge of being able to show a number of WWII veterans our aeroplane, and being able to chat to them about their experiences during that conflict. In that list of chaps I met were bomb-aimers from IX and 617 Squadrons, a Battle of Britain veteran, a USAAF P-47 Thunderbolt & P-51 Mustang pilot who flew from Duxford on B-17 Escort missions during the war, a couple of Polish pilots, a Czech pilot, as well as oodles of our supporters club members. The look on the faces of these individuals as they were shown around, and the comments they made about the aircraft are all that you need to help keep these historic aircraft flying, wether they carry Stars ‘n’ bars or roundels.
When I thanked the Battle of Britain veteran for all he did to give me the freedoms I enjoy today, he just coughed and said “It was nothing, your’e very welcome” Such a gent, as they all were, and such an honour for me to meet them all. I feel very privileged to meet these folks, and have the opportunity to say ‘Thank You’ to them. For my wife & I (who helps with Sally as well) it’s not the country of origin of the aeroplane that matters, it’s what it represents. Thousands of young men gave their all in all types of aeroplanes from many Countries to give me the right to say all of this, and I am old enough to remember when our skies were not graced by the many we see now. So thank you to the veterans that flew & serviced them, the crews that flew them and did not return, the fortunate individuals who can afford to operate what we have left, and to those supporters and enthusiasts who help by their attendance at Air Shows to keep ’em flying. 🙂
My wife & I also support other types of historic aircraft as well as ‘Sally-B’, so our support is not one sided, but our involvement with Sally has given us the chances we may not have otherwise have had to meet veterans, chat with them and the pleasure our tours around ‘Sally-B’ gives them is always an honour. Our heritage is always a priority, wherever it originates.
Regards all,
Keith
By: trumper - 11th September 2004 at 10:57
Although words and pictures are invaluable,a few minutes of beautiful sounds and sights of flying aircraft can spark so much enthuiasm,thoughts,feelings,how many people enjoyed hearing Black 6 BF 109,alas now can’t,pictures and words can’t replace that.
By: John C - 11th September 2004 at 00:23
Sorry Kev – I’m afraid I’m going have to agree with you 🙂
JC
Mellow…..
By: kev35 - 10th September 2004 at 23:51
A contrary viewpoint.
Our heritage, collective or individual, is about much, much more than the airframes. 58,000 young Americans died serving in the 8th Air Force. I’m grateful for the sacrifice of those men and for the efforts of millions of others from around the world. For me, their stories are the most important part of the Heritage. Without the people the aircraft would be nothing. No Spitfire or P 51 was ever scrambled to intercept the enemy without the pilot and the efforts of a huge number of other people. NEVER. We can new build or not, preserve or restore but it is the people that give it all meaning. A Spitfire is dragged out of the ground forty, fifty or sixty years after it met its end, but it is the life of the pilot which gave meaning to the loss.
Now for the contrary bit. I love seeing historic aircraft, but I’ve said before that I’d swap every memory of aircraft I have seen flying to be able to record the stories of people who put air under their wings during wartime.
The debt we owe is to the people, not the machinery. That’s why so many of us spend so much of our time researching individuals or Squadron histories. The people bring it all to life.
MH434. An incredible piece of history, but nothing till you learn of the people involved, both during wartime and now in peace.
Probably not a popular viewpoint but its mine.
Regards,
kev35
By: JDK - 10th September 2004 at 20:56
Grey Gray.
Corrected. Thank you BWB, for your effort, thought and input. 😀
Cheers
By: Merlin3945 - 10th September 2004 at 19:11
Crazy Mainer,
I have only skimmed the surface of what the other posts said as I dont have time to read all of them at the moment but I would urge you to stay with us because your opinions and views are very important to all of us and those who ask or wish you to leave becasue of this need to get a life.
I understand where you are coming from on the “New Build” aspect of things but to have a true warbird you really need a substanial part of the aircrfat there already. I belive it has been suggested that a firewall or dataplate section can be enough to start a build.
Does anyone know more on this subject.
But what is really wrong in Britain is there are those who do and those who dont. Those who do (own or rebuild Warbirds) have enough money to make it happen. And those who Dont mostly dont have the money to rebuild or fly warbirds but we do research them or collect part etc etc. Hell I have even known a couple of guys to dress up in period flying kit and reenact scenes of days gone by.
But it all comes down to MONEY in the end which a lot of us dont have.
By: bentwingbomber - 10th September 2004 at 18:50
I absolutely agree with Duxfordhawk’s post above. Incidentally, I rather think that the (in fact THAT) Bearcat does have quite a lot of UK history. Having watched master aerobatic pilots put it through its paces at many, many UK shows, Stephen Gray, Stefan Karwoski (sp?) being just two, over the last 20(?) years, I think that’s some history to remember…
Cheers
Stephen Grey.
With an e.
Ta 😀
By: Peter - 10th September 2004 at 15:03
crazy miner
Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion,whatever the input it is always great to be able to share your/our opinions openly on a public forum for all others to agree/disagree and comment on. If everyone left this forum over little disagreements, thered be noone left!
If you still wish to leave then the welcome mat is always out if you want to return..!
By: John C - 10th September 2004 at 12:45
Actually any criticism becomes void if the Nation [1] concerned has little interest in preservation (dynamic or static). One would have little basis for complaint if an individual or organisation from another country were to take on the preservation of a foreign marque due to a lack of interest from it’s place of birth.
JC
[1] By “Nation” I mean the collective group of Government, Private Enterprise and individuals. Would I be far off if I were to think that as a Nation, the UK had very little interest in the preservation of it’s aviation history up until 35 years ago? Or was the immediate post war period just too close to the event and everyone would rather put it all behind them? Was the National Interest more into stopping the USSR from bombing us back to the Stoneage rather than saving 15 year old obsolete airframes from being melted down and turned into Valiants and Hunters? Who then would have thought that we would be remembering a vanished British Aviation Industry in 40 years time… Just a few more thoughts!
By: Phillip Rhodes - 10th September 2004 at 12:39
As the person who posted the original message I think it would be better if I responded to the comments made, and also to make it clear that my comments were not and should not be read as being anti-American. Nor do I see American aircraft as being inferior – far from it. I will respond in full over the weekend. Regarding CRAZYMAINER. I have never met this chap, but I would say he is a well respected person within this forum and and would would ask him not to take my comments personnaly. I am concerned at the lack of respect our (UK) aviation heritage has received in the UK. Cheer Up. And please don’t leave this forum.
Phillip Rhodes
By: duxfordhawk - 10th September 2004 at 11:55
I absolutely agree with Duxfordhawk’s post above. Incidentally, I rather think that the (in fact THAT) Bearcat does have quite a lot of UK history. Having watched master aerobatic pilots put it through its paces at many, many UK shows, Stephen Gray, Stefan Karwoski (sp?) being just two, over the last 20(?) years, I think that’s some history to remember…
Cheers
I agree i myself have seen some great shows from her and briefly TFCs other Bearcat,At the time i was only thinking War history but why should’nt peace time history count also?.
By: JDK - 10th September 2004 at 11:36
Is it really better or worse? Is it really about national collections or international approaches?
Just doing some research, I came across this in the front of Leslie Hunt’s 1967 ‘Veteran & Vintage Aircraft.’:
“Where, today, will you see a Hampden, Halifax, Whitley, Stirling? To see a Fairey Battle you must go to Canada; the world’s only Typhoon is (in store) in the U.S.A.”
Well, there’s a clear improvement:
A complete Hampden is to be seen in BC, Canada, and the potential for two or three more to be rebuilt from wrecks exists.
The Halifax is a real resurection. A complete wreck at Hendon; from Norway, the aircraft at Trenton, in Canada; a replica in Yorkshire.
There is effort being put into recreating a Whitley. The Stirling is still missing, but who knows? On the above, it is possible…
The Fairey Battle is back. The Canadians have looked after theirs (albeit in store); the RAF Museum, though treating it badly by shoving in an unlit corner, have a complete good looking well restored Battle, parts from Iceland; and the Belgians have found a good home for and are restoring the other Battle survivor, that, yet again, no-one in the U.K. wanted to pay for. The Belgians quite rightly see it as an important a/c to them as their aircrew also suffered appalling losses in 1940 on this machine.
The Typhoon is ‘back’ and on display at Hendon (arguably where it belongs).
So, where are we? One short quote from 1967 – and a remeasure today. Constructive input from the USA, Iceland, Canada, Norway, Belgium, and Holland to achieve this for British aircraft. We haven’t got everything, but we’ve not done badly, and it’s been an international achievement.
Leslie Hunt also quotes some other figures. Spitfires built: 23,000. 101 Survivors in 1967. Messerschmitt Bf109 33,000 14+ survivors, in ’67. Vickers Wellington 11,500 – ONE survivor in ’67 (two now) Hawker Hurricane; 14,200 – 1967 netted 17. The only minuses in his shor selection I can see are Airspeed Oxford 8,800 seven survivors in 67 (about the same today, but no fliers – anyone?) and Anson – 11,000, 30 1967 survivors – again any count today?
Food for thought.
Sign In
September 8, 2004 at 2:59 pm