Where did you read this?
It’s in New Scientist Why the World Won’t end on Sept 10.
They’re lying. We’re all doooomed.
I too would like to die in piece. This way it is one very, very small flat piece.
Where did you read this?
It’s in New Scientist Why the World Won’t end on Sept 10.
They’re lying. We’re all doooomed.
I too would like to die in piece. This way it is one very, very small flat piece.
Well, well. Setty designed the Avro-Duigan/Seabird. That is very good to know.
BTW – the first article is by Nick Forder – he is the curator in charge of the aircraft collection at the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry (MoSI). Might be worth contacting him direct.
Allan
Eric,
Thanks – I’ve just cross checked a number of trusted sources and that’s exactly the same story in them all.
Two points to add – the floats were all made at Windermere (by Borwicks) and the short (just over fours months) flying life might be why it is thought that Waterbird and Waterhen are the same aircraft. Waterbird never got a Flight write up but Waterhen was featured in Flight in Dec 1912
There is also a photo of the collapased hangar in Flight.
Mark, sorry I can’t find any specific references to the designers of the aircraft. Most of what I have seems to deal with correspondence between AV and HV Roe and Wakefield – but then Wakefield did sue them for supplying a faulty engine.
In the period you are looking at, AJ Jackson’s Putnam also mentions a Farman type aircraft built for Maurice Edwards in Bolton.
The Avro-Duigan was originally fitted with the Alvaston engine and later re-egined with a 35hp ENV.
After Duigan returned to Australia, the aircraft was sold for £180 to the Lakes Flying Company. The floats and modification to the fuselage for the Gnome engine were carried out locally by Borwicks. It then became Seabird. See Flight article on July 19 1913
There were other aircraft at Windermere: Gnosspelius’ two aircraft, the Lakes Monoplane and other from different sources such as the Deperdussin in my Avatar – none had a connection to Avro.
I’ll do some more gentle digging. A good friend is the acknowledged expert on this subject. I’ll ask if he has the info you need.
Allan
I don’t particularly like or rate these actual paintings – the experts quoted below are over egging it a lot, to say the least either in general art criticism or popularity terms. They certainly do not equate in any way to the Mona Lisa.
Hear hear. Surely Constable’s Haywain, the Tate’s Turners etc are for more important/relevant.
Well apart from anything else, the paintings are a good investment. Something I doubt preserving an old RAF airfield will ever be.
The paintings aren’t ‘on the open market’ and once bought by Britain in the form of the NG and NGS, presumably there’d be a few words if they tried to sell them on, quickly or later.
They’ve been an investment for the Duke but will not be for the galleries who will buy them. They will have consitutions which prevent sale – if they close the collections are given free to other National collections. There was a huge fuss recently when Bury Council sold a Lowry from its museum. They were expelled from the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) and, as a result, were not allowed to apply for some grants.
Translating the BBC’s report, it seems that the Duke’s decided to dangle a price tag with a deadline out of the blue, for paintings currently on public show since 1945. If the gallery cough up, they get the option of getting shafted again – sorry another chance to buy the second painting which they are also already showing – and, bonus, to keep showing the rest of the collection. And the Duke clears a cool 100 mil without even any ‘moving the paintings cost’.
A bit simplistic. Unlikely to have landed it “out of the blue”. He’s probably been in talks for a few months and agreed a short deadline to get attentionf or the fundraising campaign. Nothing creates a crisis like a short deadline. But the deadline for the next one is four years. Why? I suspect donors might drop a large sum from a crisis fund and then agree that they can give a smaller sum every year for four years to secure the next one, from revenue.
I think he’s got a good grip of how people fund “saving art for the nation” – to use that horrid phrase.
Now, on the other hand can he sell them ‘on the open market’? No. If there was an attempt to sell them overseas, then:
Yes, he can sell it on the open market. The way it works is all 50-year-old art needs a licence to be allowed overseas – even on loan. If an overseas buyer wins an auction for these and they are deemed important, then the liecence to export is deferred. That allows for it to be saved for the nation. If nobody comes up with the money then it can be assumed “the nation” didn’t really want it and it goes overseas. See this explanation from the BBC
However, in this case, if the paintings are really worth £300m, then by the time there is a post auction intervention the galleries would have to raise a lot more money. The Duke’s gift for the nation is the difference between what he is asking and what they’d go for at auction. (Mind you, quite easy to be generous when you still get £100m!)
Well donate them to the nation, then.
Yes – I’m with you on that. Strike me he is in the classic upper-class position: asset-rich and cash poor and wants a bit more disposable to indulge his interests.
My views? The whole thing makes me very uncomfortable. First, this happened recently with the Duke of Northumberland’s Madonna painting. If it works, then I’d lay good money that another Duke will cash in. Where is the money going to keep coming from?
Also the idea that it is possible to find that much money for two paintings when so many other museums (good ones – designated and/or accredited) struggle for a few thousands. There is a huge inequality in funding. Getting money for art is comparatively easy compared even to Shakespeare or Wordsworth manuscripts or books – for which objects there are no organisations similar to the Art Fund.
And then obviously aircraft are seen as modern, industrial, dirty – hey, lets just be very grateful for those who do put money towards the things we’re interested in.
Allan
Pondskater’s post seems to indicate that it was an Avro product but I may be drawing an erroneous conclusion from his silence on the point.
Silent ‘cos I’m still away from home and all my files/books on the subject. ;):)
One point – two Windermere aircraft were Waterbird, built by Avro, flew Nov 1911 and destroyed when a hangar collapsed on it and Waterhen, built by Lakes Flying Co, a slightly larger version of Waterbird to take passengers and still flying by 1916. Jane’s has merged the two into one aircraft. Oh the joys of early aircraft research.
More later this evening.
Allan
The naming of early aircraft does vary considerably in different references and I’m away from my files at the moment, so reluctant to add confusion.
But the aircraft I’m referring to was commissioned from A V Roe by Edward Wakefield of Kendal. He wanted it to follow the basic layout of the USA’s Curtiss machine – hence sometimes known as Avro-Curtis. Once at Windermere it was known simply as Waterbird. It had a Gnome 50hp engine and flew (from the lake) in Nov 1911 piloted by H Stanley Adams.
It was later replaced by Waterhen which was very similar but slightly larger and more capable of carrying passengers.
To add confusion, some references claim Cdr Schwann’s Avro D floatplane was the first flight from water at Barrow (also Nov 1911), but it crashed after a lurch into the air – not a valid flight, but sometimes claimed as such, particularly since Waterbird’s flight is often overlooked.
I’m genuinely interested in whether your contact’s grandfather worked on the Waterbird design.
For Waterbird pics see page from Flight magazine 1912
I’ll look up more dcetail tonight.
Allan
There were other aircraft which came from A V Roe’s works at around the time. One was an “Avro-Curtis” which, after being test flown on land, was fitted with floats to become Britain’s first sucessful floatplane and named “Waterbird”.
As the name implies, the design was based on the sucessful Curtis floatplane. I’ll see if there is any info about who at Avros did the dsign work on it.
Allan
Bryan,
I can’t believe there are only three colour photos! But I can believe they are elusive. I wonder if any of the early Atlantic crossings were recorded in colour on arrival in the USA?
This fine list of the Empire boats , which I’m sure you know well, has three colour images but I think the one of Awarua towards the end is hand tinted. I presume the others are two of your three?
Allan
The Imperial Airways archive is part of the BA Museum Collection: http://www.bamuseum.com/index.html as indeed are the BEA, BOAC material.
Not delved into their material so not sure of the range or depth of the collection but the website has full contact details.
All the best
Allan
One wonders at what must have happened in France & Flanders in 1914-1918 which so many people who were there never talked about.
Indeed. I wonder if that is the more likely – if dull – reason for silence.
The Duke of Kent’s death in the Sunderland certainly raises some questions, not all are easy to answer.
I’ll state clearly here that I am not a conspiracy theorist but I’ve spoken to well regarded historians who are also certain that not all the answers have been given about this crash.
The things that give the conspiracy ground are the silence of the surviving tail gunner who never spoke about the incident and allegations that the initial investigation results were very different from the final report. Fertile ground for conspiracy but evidence is needed for the new theories.
The truth is out there – as somebody said once.
Very sad. Just by seeing his name on the cover of a book one could tell so much about the quality and depth of the contents. He will be missed.
Allan
Saro Cloud – search and yea shall find.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=70979
See post 12 for a photo of the Saro Cloud at the Military Museum Prague-Kbely
Allan
Isn’t there a Saro Cloud in Prague?