badger
The point I was trying to make was who cares about the shape of the building the most important thing is to get the aircraft undercover.
A whole lot of people care. The shape of the building at Cosford is totally wrong for displaying historic aircaft in their supposed environment. The shape may, and probably does, give orgasms to arty types, ‘learned’ architectural organisations, esoteric design magazines and building judging panels but does nothing to promote aircraft. And these are aircraft that have had a great amount of work done on their structures and paint schemes, aircraft that have been brought back to a state that is supposedly representative of the way they appeared when in use. Why not the building they are displayed in as well?
A traditional hangar says more about it’s function than can ever be inferred from the collapser that is now blighting Cosford’s airfield. Also, as with the aircraft there, a traditional type hangar would be instrumental in evoking the ‘nostalgia’ element from the visitors. Dad, or grandad, can walk around aircraft exhibits waxing lyrical about ‘the good old days’ to youngsters and how they used to work on/fly this or that. Wouldn’t it be a much more powerful experience if the building these memory-jogging airframes were in was also part of the ‘history’.
Further, no explantion is necessary as you approach a traditional type aircraft hangar, you know what you’re about to experience, the building itself declaims it. But the twisted tin-can lying on the ground at Cosford, well . . . Any building that needs some academic to explain what it repesents is not worth the effort that has gone into it. And I bet that the strange shape will have to be explained over and over and over again when it finally opens to the public. Wouldn’t need to do that if it were, like the aircraft, historic.
😡
Sign In
