I think possibly this is one of those ideas that sounds good in theory but reality would dictate to many problems to make happen.
If it was a unique peice of artwork the logistics would be relatively simple to achieve in terms of moving and storing the item securely.
Lets say a national organisation decided X airframe was to be placed under national ownership (for want of a better word) does that necesarily mean that there would be a home for it. An aircraft the size of a Hunter or for most modern single/two seat military jets that might be possible to achieve. Although as stated the Thud at Duxford remains dismantled, thankfully undercover.
But going back to the Beverly where would the organisation stand then?
Most museums are run on limited budgets, even the RAFM so who funds the compulsary purchase orders. Who funds the dismantling, transportation, reassembly of the airframe. And secondly who funds the undercover storage for the display of the aircraft. As Ben stated in the case of the Bev nobody else wanted it so what does that suggest?
So what Im saying would we be left with an organisation which would only take on smaller airframes?
Additionally would the “national museums” want or be able to care fpr all these at risk aircraft they find themselves with. Would we find ourselves with collections that are over stretched so either a) existing airframes suffer or b) opening hours reduce to fund this?
My main concern for aircraft preservation is the larger aircraft types we use. I think we are crying out for a RAF VC10 to be preserved. Will it happen????????? I hope so but it will be a huge undertaking.
Sign In
