I am another to add to the list of enthusiasts who is in agreement with Matt – I personally have far less interest in the WWI and WWII era aircraft than I do the Cold War, simply because whilst I have the utmost repsect for all that was achieved in the name of freedom during both wars, for me, as has been raised previously, there is little more that can be said or presented about the machines of the time that would captivate my interest. The late 40’s through to the early 80’s however produced some of the most awe inspiring technology – particularly homegrown – which to me seems massively under-represented in flying form.
Yes, we have many great musea with static examples. Yes, we have the very British phenomenon of many ground running and fast taxiable jets (of which I am an active volunteer before getting caught up in the “armchair” arguement) both of which I think are invaluable resources. What we don’t seem to have is the drive to preserve some of our greatest post-war aircraft with the same level of attention as the largely piston predecessors.
I know your Spitfires and Lancasters will always have the historical and romantic edge over their younger offspring, but for a jet lover it can get dis-heartening to see Lightning, Meteor (how historic do you need to be!) Canberra, Sea Vixen , Swift etc sat out in the open slowly succumbing to the elements despite the very best efforts of the collection they reside in, whilst the old-timers are cossetted in hangars waiting for the next show season. Of course there is representation of these types, but I agree – Why 25 odd sptifires, yet 1 only 1 Meteor with only 1 more on the horizon?
This is far from a dig at anyone or any collection/group/society and was never intended to be such. Just a venting of frustration which appears to be felt by others.
I think John Lennon once sang “Just give Jets a chance”…
Sign In
