Always nice to see inside the Sunderland.

This one – ML824 – was with the French air force postwar and was then on display at Pembroke Dock through the 1960s. In the early 70’s she was acquired for the RAFM.

The one that was used as a night club and restaurant in France was another ex French aircraft, ML796, which is at Duxford.

I seem to remember that there were several years when Concorde was there but can only prove one. I even surprised myself by finding this 🙂

Thanks to Adrian for tracking the camera down – I can throw away these “lost mail” forms now. I think we have maybe shown that there is a one in 16 chance of post going astray.

Perhaps this is a sign that we need to get it passed through that last few hands quickly so that we can see the photos on there.

Allan

Recently there have been various comments that this is a Spitfire forum – I think more a Lancaster forum

I wonder if the answer to this question really stems for wartime publicity – or am I biased because I work in publicity?

It strikes me that it was the propangandists of WWII – the PR men or Spin doctors in modern terms – who first gave the Spitfire it high public profile – possibly at the expense of other aircraft. The Spitfire was successful, it was also good looking and had a great PR name – so it attracted the focus of media attention, hence the Spitfire funds etc.

That attention becomes self perpetuating and continued post war. Then fighter squadrons chose a Spitfire as a gate guard – which greatly helped the survival rate – 40+ airworthy is remarkable for one type. Most general public (then and now) seeing a single engined aircraft would call it a Spitfire. When the Tucano was introduced, the RAF’s liaison teams received several requests for information about “a low flying red and white Spitfire” but never a complaint.

To briefly consider the Lancaster – I wonder how much does its reputation and profile today depend on the Dambusters Raid and the celebration of that success at the time?

Ask anybody to name two wartime aircraft and these two will be top of the list.

Of course, this forum is not populated with a representative selection of the general public, there is a great depth and breadth of knowledge. Just looking at the discussion on this thread so far you see an interest in the whole of Bomber Command, some, frankly, obscure areas of research and even classic cars.

Spitfire Forum? – no, but if a new thread is started everytime a restored aircraft flies, then Spitfires will still be the most represented types.

Allan

Pondskater now that is a Spitfire !!!!

is it a mk3 which is my favourite, the elegant lines of that mark take some beating I have owned several of those, and looking for another as we speak.

But to make do I have a mk2 GT6 which I will take any 109 on in 😀 chocks away !

Yep – a MkIII, one of the last from 1970. The best looking and a wonderfully responsive engine, before the USA emission controls shackled it. Shame I didn’t know you were looking for one – I’ve just sold it! Don’t currently have a garage and as a result rust got into the A Posts – always nasty. Now I’ve just got boxes and boxes of Triumph spares and VW Golf outside. :confused:

Have to admit a MkII GT6 might turn my head too. Maybe I’ll get one of those rare GT6 convertibles next time. They’ve all got wings and engines so can’t be bad.

Allan

PS Sorry to Cees for thread creep – we seem to be discussing Spitfires, but only ironically, honest.

the expiry date is 09/2008, plenty of time to finish it.

Well, I say that, but bearing in mind how long it has taken us to take 15 photos, it might become an issue.

Apparently it was in The Sun so it must be true 😉

Try this article from the Lincolnshire Echo. It says the team haven’t been asked yet.

Sounds to me as if some civil servant made a daft suggestion and was stitched up by somebody else briefing against him to the press.

Best thing to do is complain loudly, say how much we all love the Reds and that will let Government know where public opinion lies. Or as Steve says – go and sign the petition.

I wasn’t going to join in with this but felt I should add something. I agree with Bruce, V Force Kid and others but should say that I myself used to question why the Halifax wasn’t restored. That was before I started to work in museums and our curators taught me how much more information is often in an original object than one which is heavily restored, and their duty to preserve as much originality as possible for future generations.

So I would like to ask the simplest of all questions: Why?

Why restore it? to make it look better, would that make a better memorial?

Why leave it alone? As has been said above, wouldn’t a lot have to be replaced in a restoration and how long would it take before somebody questioned how much knowledge was thrown away in a restoration? What would be said in 50, 100 even 150 years?

The museum is, as many complain, dark. It is also cool and dry – deliberately to aid conservation and there is a conservation programme in place.

So my personal view is that the RAF Museum is failing – failing to explain to visitors why this gem is as she is. It should be left unrestored and I agree with Cees and others that missing items should be returned. But I want to see much better interpretation to explain why there is no restoration.

Oh, a final point. Thanks to another thread on here, I spent much of my lunch hour today looking at http://www.preservedaxisaircraft.com and noticed these two aircraft, both preserved and displayed as wrecks. I mention them for balance.

BV 138 at Danemarks Flyvemuseum, Helsingör

JU-87 at Auto und Technik Museum, Sinsheim

I suspect, as Bruce says, we will continue to disagree.