The Hornet was owned by a lady doctor – Dr Hamilton who travelled up from Chesterfield to fly. She once called the Finningley ATC to report her position near the MATZ and, recognising the registration, they immediately gave her clearance to continue at 800 feet through to Doncaster. “But how do you know I’m at 800 feet?” she asked. The controller cryptically replied “we have you on radar.” She couldn’t quite work out how the controller knew her height, but we did: she always flew at 800 feet, everywhere! Really lovely lady and a very nice aircraft.

Some wartime surplus parts were once found in an out building attached to the hangar. They were, IIRC, identified as Lancaster flap motors but nobody wanted them – not even the BBMF. But reading about the aircraft which were there, it now seems a little unlikely. I wonder what they were. They were taken by the builder who demolished the building for the club as part payment.

AllanK

I can’t see how you can pay a CC fee, unless it has come from a museum or collection?

I would start with OPSI – Office of Public Sector Information, who, I believe, issue CC licences. Or better, might be to talk to a publisher who has done it! I haven’t.

Example, I have a 1954 Shackleton picture in my own collection that is Air Min CC, who do I contact and make a charge to?

My reading (I am not a lawyer and the final decision is yours;)) is that 1954 material passed out of copyright in 2004. However, were it 1958, you should make an approach and find out if licence fees are due.

But don’t stress about it, ask them for help. A good friend recently uncovered some photos he really, really wanted to use for a Holocaust project he was working on. The National Collection he found them in informed him there were no Crown Copyright fees due & waived their own licensing fees for reproduction rights. They then sent the prints and refused to take payment for having the prints done. I won’t name them but it is nice to know there are humans in these places who will help, although the subject of his exhibition/website obviously played a big part.

AK

Photos from the Air Ministry, in common with Ministry of Aircraft Production and all other government departments, are covered by Crown Copyright.

Briefly, anything before June 1957 will be out of copyright (Pagen’s shorthand loosely covers that, although the Air Min survived until 1964. :))

A fuller explanation is in the handy guide Alan Clark mentioned before (post 8), the National Archives copyright guidance document (pdf format). There is a handy flow chart in appendix I which covers Crown Copyright material. More on copyright generally is available from the archives here.

As for whether people will copy them – yes some will sadly. They will be low resolution and you could write something across them to hinder copying, it is up to you.

HTH
AllanK

Those photos are amazing. The detail of the hull in particular shows a very complex hull form.

It seems to have a retractable step, multiple fairings on the chine line but is that forward “step” ventilated as well? Does anybody know the detail of the technology applied in the hull to get this beast off the water?

AllanK

It might be arguments like that that are the reason we don’t have an opt-out system. So opt-in, sign the register. A very dear friend of mine only ever had two illnesses in her life. One was a heart murmur and the other a kidney stone. The five year old girl needing a kidney and 13 year old boy desperately needing a heart didn’t mind. Doctors said both organs were perfectly suitable and we are so proud that she signed the register.

I see the humour in your post but the point is that unless you are a specialist doctor, don’t make those decisions. Let the experts decide once you no longer need those organs.

Well I thought the thing that made humans strong was compassion. Our strength comes from our intelligence, our ability to build communities and support each other.

You know, the nurse walking down a corridor, clearly doing something important who sees somebody in tears and stops with her arms outstretched to offer a hug. People who, without a second thought rush to offer support to somebody distressed, to help somebody hurt. The way a father offers a huge sacrifice for his daughter.

Without that compassion there would be no discussion here because transplants wouldn’t happen, there’d be no blood donors. I’ve seen more far far more compassion than is ever given publicity. And I like to think that the extreme views are a product of the way the media (and fora) operate rather than human nature.

So we should let the weak die to improve the gene pool?

Why not stop some people breeding? Why not encourage others to breed? Why not bring back Eugenics? :rolleyes:

Bumblebee – I have to disagree with you. I mean, peppermint? why would you do that. Just nice dark chocolate, bubbly if you must but no need for peppermint.

Oh, in the UK it is normal for patients who damaged their liver by alcohol/drugs to be thoroughly assessed to prove they have given up prior to acceptance for a transplant. An addiction team also arrange follow-up support. Whatever help she was offered to do that has failed.

And it was right that George Best was given his transplant. The shame is that he returned to drinking but have a look at the aims of the foundation he set up, it gives a balance absent in the media: http://www.georgebest.com/foundation/aims/

It would be better if there were more organs available. Sadly in the UK only 27% of the population is on the register so instead of the posturing, maybe we should be out there recruiting people to the register. The opt-in scheme has been debated but it is not here yet. There needs to be more than one in four on the register. http://www.organdonation.nhs.uk