You have a point, but it can be overdone. Hopefully care is taken to calculate the likely effects on such airframes, but could hanging at a certain dramatic angles add to risk of distortion over time? If the attitude in which they are hung is at odds with the flying capabilities of the exhibit when “live”, it can be rather misleading to spectators. I am for example, delighted to see the following rare machine on display – but am not a fan of how it is now exhibited.

Tim

They were a bit surprised when it started dripping oil!!

Pretty certain it’s originally G-BAGJ (G-SFTA was a later registration for the same airframe.) In spite of it’s current colour scheme it was always civil aircraft

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/HistoricalMaterial/G-BAGJ.pdf

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/HistoricalMaterial/G-SFTA.pdf

https://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodules/ginfo/ginfo_photo.aspx?regmark=G-BAGJ&imgname=G-BAGJ001&imgtype=jpg

In fact NEAM’s website confirms that!

http://www.nelsam.org.uk/NEAM/Exhibits/History/GBAGJ.htm

I’m surpised there has been no comment on the plans for the GW building outlined in the new FP. These include the hanging of airframes…….

A case of yesterday’s news is today’s fish and chip paper?

I haven’t seen it yet, but my initial reaction is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! The beauty of the GW hangar was it’s authentic feeling. I hate hanging airframes

Back to the P-40, I found this on the Barnet Building Control site:

http://acolaidpublic.barnet.gov.uk/online-applications/buildingControlDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_BARNE_BCAPR_194315

“Change of Use From Exhibition Space to Office and Educational Facilities on the Upper Gallery and Removal of Cinema for New Kittyhawk Display”

Presumably PK664? I didn’t realise it wasn’t in the Science Museum anymore. Or do the RAFM have another mk 22?

This relates more to the P-40 than Flt Sgt Copping, but on the thread on the GW hangar closure, it is noted by jeepman that the P-40 gets a mention in the RAF Museum annual accounts for 2012/13, on P11 (p14 of the PDF)

Also in 2012 the Museum undertook a joint project with Kennet Aviation to recover RAF Kittyhawk ET574 from the Egyptian desert in exchange for one the Spitfires from the Museum’s collection. The aircraft has been successfully retrieved and is presently in secure storage.

http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/10228-Royal-Air-force-Museum-2012-13-for-web.pdf

Not ‘new’ news but the first time I recall seeing this being acknowledged by the RAFM. Apologies if mentioned before, but i couldn’t see it.

Interesting thread; I would think that it would depend on when the putative decision on the Typhoon was made; if it was early on – or the Typhoon went the way of the Tornado in mid-41 – I’d expect that it would almost have to be replaced by the P40 or the Hurricane IIc or IV. If it was around the start of 1943, then perhaps the P47 if it could be supplied in large enough numbers or licensed in?

P-47 is a good shout, the RAF in the Far East used them for pretty much the same role as the Typhoon.