“…the larger question remains: Why is Gillespie generally so dismissive of anything that contradicts his theory? That’s not how science is supposed to work. What does that say about TIGHAR and how it operates?”

Well firstly, TIGHAR and the word ‘science’ shouldn’t be used in the same sentence. Nothing genuinely scientific about what they do.

And why is he so dismissive? Well if someone contradicting what you’ve set out means that you won’t get your expenses-paid holiday in the Pacific then I guess that’s what you do.

“…exotic pets?”

Nicely put Lobster: I think that’s the crux. Some museums (usually the best ones) are run fully by enthusiastic and knowledgeable folks, while others it would seem are now being managed by people who just want to make a name for themselves.

I did look up the dictionary meaning of the term, ‘museum’ and found that it relates to, “…a building in which objects of historical, scientific, artistic, or cultural interest are stored and exhibited.” That certainly fitted the bill for the ‘old’ RAFM, but maybe not so much the ‘new’. So maybe they just need to re-name it and avoid confusion? Then other museums can step in and exhibit our relics instead.

Nice to see this collection able to get more space under cover: it’s one of may favourites.

Looks like most of the modern data for ‘BYY is based on the incorrect CAA transcription then: that’s a lesson for us all and also demonstrates how one can trace a plagiarised source!

Re: “Whose Fox”, G-INFO record for it has the aircraft sold by Fairey 13 August 1932. but no owner detail other than being described as a Fox II, 2-seater Biplane with c/n F.1842.

Tell a lie: PPRuNe on 23rd September. Sure it was on here about the same time?

Nice spot! I have a soft spot for types such as the Sperrin. Shame it didn’t survive.