megalithSorry, you can only insist on acurracy when YOU pay the bills.
In all honesty people who nit-pick about things like drop tanks on the Venom really P!ss me off:, AACF do as much for the preservation of this country’s jet and post war aviation heritage as shuttleworth do for the preservation of our pre-war heritage. Additionally they give ordinary enthusiasts the chance to actually fly in historic aircraft.
So just get real, you can’t reverse time so just be glad someone is willing to reach into thier pockets and fork out the tens of thousands of pounds needed to keep this Venom flying.
Steve
megalithI have always believed that Duxford is just one fatality away from a flying, or at least an airshow ban, that fatality would of course be a driver on the M11…………
So what would the impact of such a ban be?
1. I believe most of the airworthy aircraft would move away to alternative airfields from where they could continue operating – resulting in a reduced number and variety of aircraft on display.
2. No airshown revenue. I don’t know how important this is to Duxford’s funding but it would surely have an impact.
3. No more Classic Wings pleasure flights.
4. Lose of the kudos of being a ‘fly museum’ this might well have an impact upon Duxford’s public image and therefore visitor numbers.
These are just a few initial thoughts, without doubt the atmosphere would change, with the lose of the live airfield feel. Wether this would cause me to stop going would depend up how the atmosphere changed and the quality of what was left.
Steve.
megalithYou ask for constructive criticism;
Well let me start by saying that I find the suggestion of permanent grandstands a very DESTRUCTIVE idea. As well as hosting a very large number of vintage aircraft Duxford is also a preserved airfield.
If you think of how many thousands attend the displays and equate this with the size and number of grandstands that would be required (probably the same capacity of say a minor premier league or succesfull championship football club’s stadium) sufficient permanent grandstand would completely destroy Duxford’s ambience.
Temporary grandstands might be an idea, and a premium could be charged for those who want to pay – however I for one find £30 a fair price for admission and certainly wouldn’t pay extra to sit in a grandstand doubt; nor do I believe, in these cash strapped times many other ordinary enthuisasts would. They would doubtless become the haunt of the corporate hospitality brigades, which would I believe would again damage the ambience.
As Kev35 say ‘If it isn’t really broke why does it need fixing?’
Steve
Steve
megalithMost people would accept the phrase ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder,’ however psychologists have shown that there are things that we all tend to find beautiful.
Beauty it appears is dependent upon properties such as symmetry, complimentory colours, proportion etc. If you want to know more about the psychology of art and beauty than can I suggest two books. The first isVitruvius’s treatise on architecture that explains how proportions underpin our concept of architectural beauty. The second is Gombrich’s Art and Illusion that takes a wider brush approach to the psychology of art and with it beauty.
This would tend to support the conjecture that the afore mentioned phrase ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder,’ refers more to diffirentiating say, between two beautiful women, or the Taj Mahal and the Chrysler Building, than to one person finding Marilyn Munroes stunning whilst someone else prefers a pile of dog pooh.
Steve
megalithHi,
Is the G-AORG going to have an Air Transport Cof A? As it would be great if we could fly in her.
Steve
megalithHow could you possibly miss a Shuttleworth display. Everything from Pup to Lysander.
If possible go on a flying evening when you are more likely to see the pre first world war aircraft fly.
Beats every static collection in the world hands down!
Steve
megalithWith the extinct types, are we loking for major relics, ie cockpit sections etc?
Also are we going to include de-millitarised aircraft, or just those types originaly sold to civillian operators?
Steve
megalithPagen, I don’t like the drift of this thread – it sounds like you and me are gona be the ones expected to stump up the dosh!
But I guess that raises the question, just how do we raise the money when the time comes?
Can I make a suggestion we set up a non profit company called say ‘Save Sagitarius Ltd.’ with a nominal share capital of perhaps a quarter of a million £1 ordinary shares. We then sell the shares in blocks of 50, 100 or 250, everyone who contributes will therefore have a genuine stake in her ie part owner – this type of scheme works well in the world of steam preservation.
Once aquired we run a ‘price of a pint’ scheme allowing people to buy additional shares by paying say £3 a month (or perhaps a week) to cover her restoration costs.
I don’t know what a simple hanger say 120 foot square would cost but long term this is what we should be looking towards financing this as well.
Any one else have any ideas?
Steve
megalithMr Smith, of course it’s a compliment – you’re a star sounds a bit naff these days, so one tries to be original.
Interestingly ‘Sagitarius’ is my star sign, so if I was superstitious I might see that as a good omen.
Steve
megalithBruce, you’re a large self sustaining ball of nuclear fusion driffting through space!
megalithUltimately airliners are one of, if not, the defining factor in our modern globalised society, with surprisingly civil aviation normally taking the lead over military; compare the Boeing 247 and DC3 with the aircraft operated by the US armed forces at the time of thier introduction. The first fly by wire type to enter service was not military but the Airbus A320 and the first all composite designs to fly were gliders!
Without civil aviation the kind of globalisation we are witnessing today, just could not have happened. True there would still be empires. But the theory of imperialism (control of markets and resources) is not compatible with the sort of global free trade that has brought prosperity to so many, both in the West and increasingly in the developing world. This free trade just could not have happened without the modern airliner. Vitually everyone in our society has flown in a Boeing or Airbus, but how many though have flown in a Typhoon, Eagle or any other fast jet?
Yes, aviation has influenced how wars have been fought – perhaps even enabled them to become global. But wars would still have been fought and been equally bloody. Witness the casualty figure at Waterloo, or the estimated 40m killed by the Mongol hordes, probably exagerated but which even if only half that number, is still substantially more then the casualties from WW1.
Don’t get me wrong here I am not belittling the influence of aviation on warfare – just trying to put it into perspective. We do however often concentrate upon the martial, perhaps because it is more news worthy to report ’20 insurgents killed in allied airstrike,’ than ’20 tons of tomatos arrive at Heathrow so you can enjoy fresh out of season tomatos in December.’ Perhaps because like medieval knights in shining armour ‘Top Gun’ is glamerous.
J.Boyle is quite right airliners are too everyday for people to notice the slide of iconic types like the 707 towards extinction. However due to thier impact upon our everyday lives; how many people save all year to fly off to thier week in the sun? We really should recognise thier key role in our modern world, otherwise we will end up with a Cutty Sark scenario where the last surviving 747 is under threat, and people moaning ‘how could we, the powers that be, whoever let this happen?’.
We are talking here about saving one aircraft – which is a good start. But shouldn’t we also be saying that long term we need a national civil aviation museum, somewhere where Duxfords airliners and other key types can be preserved as testimony to the role of the airliner in shirinking the world and ultimately (hopefully) uniting humanity.
Steve.
megalithBruce, we look forward to hearing your thoughts.
This is one time when I believe that the truisum ‘you can’t save everything’ does not apply.
Something I am sure most people on this thread would agree with. This is not an obscure warbird or a footnote to aviation history, known only those whom the general population would consider aviation anoraks. But one of the foundation stones of our globalised world, and an engineering icon.
Steve
megalithLyneham Comet Action Comitee?
megalithGod this threads moving fast, you type your reply and a dozen people have already posted thier replys before you!
megalithBruce, the more historically significant has to be the Comet 1 at Cosford, being I believe the earlier airframe.
That said we are talking here about an aircraft that one can argue has had the biggest impact on humanity of any postwar aircraft:
1. Jet airliners have shrunk the world, and been one of the main enablers (if not THE main enabler) of the globalisation that dominates our world today; and the Comet is the Grand Daddy of them all.
2. The early Comet’s tragic history changed the way engineering and safety was approached and undertaken, both in aviation and in other fields.
3. From an overall perspective the Comet is one of the UK’s major contributions to the modern world and so it’s significance goes well beyond the realms of historic aviation.
For these reasons both aircraft should be seen as being up there not only with the Wright Flyer, Alcock and Brown’s Vimy, the E28/39 etc But also Penecilin, the computer and world wide web.
On reflection this should not be a ‘wouldn’t it be nice’ or end up a ‘what a pity scenario’ but should be the aeronautical equivallent of a three line whip.
Sign In
