I have very mixed feelings about the AAM building.
From the outside it does look spectacular BUT I always find it a total pain having to walk all the way round the back to get in when my natural inclination is to walk along the flightline and airliner display.
Once inside it feels very cramped because so many aircraft are crammed in. I accept that they are better inside than out but I do find it difficult to get a proper overview of some of the aircraft and have, on occassions, left the building and realised that I missed taking a proper look at some of the aircraft because they got lost in, what is to me, the rather confused layout inside. I meant to take a close look at Mary Alice last weekend but somehow managed to miss getting close up and didn’t realise I had forgotten to take a look until I was part way home in the car. I also find some of the suspended aircraft feel rather remote and I feel deprived of the chance of a closer look.
I do think that the design should have incorporated a viable means of removing aircraft without having to take down the front of the building. It was inevitable that aircraft would have to move in and out at some stage and it doesn’t seem very logical to have to spend what must be quite a bit of money to make this possible.
Dust is a problem in every museum. As a teenager one of my first jobs every morning at Southend was to do the rounds of everything that I could reach with a duster but after a while the dust still seemed to stick to aircraft so a wipe over with a damp rag every now and again was needed.
I find the amount of dust on the aircraft at South Kensington disappointing as it gives them a slightly unloved look and would have thought long term the accumulation of dust on hanging exhibits must add quite a bit of weight adding to the strain on hanging cables.
Cherry pickers must make it easier to dust hanging aircraft now but I remember that in the 70’s a JU-87 was badly damaged in Chicago when it was being lowered from the ceiling for cleaning.
There were staff in the Air and Space building at Duxford on Saturday cleaning aircraft with what looked like some kind of spray system which appeared to put just enough water onto the surface to be able to wipe away the more stubborn dust without getting gallons inside the aircraft.

I last went to Duxford on the Friday before Legends. On that day and my previous visit last year the food in the cafe was acceptable but the drink prices are a complete rip off. In fact on Legends arrivals day I started to suffer from dehydration simply because it was incredibly hot and I hadn’t got enough money to buy any more drinks because I hadn’t realised just how expensive they would be.
I will get round the problem next time by taking more drinks with me and returning to the car during the day to collect them. I would prefer to buy them at Duxford and give the museum a bit of profit to plough back into the museum but when they are way over priced the options, particularly in the current economic climate, are going to be take my own or not go at all.
Incidentally the last time I went to Hendon I thought the service and food there was appaling. The staff were totally disinterested in their jobs and the food was served in cold plates which immediately made the food stone cold. OK I know they are not the greatest jobs in the world but in 25 plus years in retail I always managed a bit of courtesy and a smile and if you take the bosses money you should do the job properly.

I already know about the nose wheel coversion, I think you will find that you have one from a much later Mk XVI they found that due to the extra weight of the new engine the Spit would tip on its nose without a nose wheel.

Damn and I was relying on the profit from that to pay the petrol to Shoreham so that I could deliver the bits for Avion Ancien assuming that I can still find them in my coal bunker.
Seems that all I have left is the Swiss Navy P-51 skis (no takers? – They were used for operating off the decks of carriers on Lake Geneva when it was snowing! – (honest guv!) so it looks like I will have to stay at home and find an auction site where buyers appreciate the true value of these rarities.

I ran a sales stand at the 86 Grand Prix at Brands Hatch. Getting in and out of the circuit was all but impossible so we slept in a van for 5 days. We had a friend, Keith Arney, who had a circuit shop. His advice was get up at 5.00am on qualifying and race day and creep into the hospitality unit showers before the circuit staff got in. It worked a treat as there were queues for the one public shower in the toilets even at that time.
The atmosphere was great but we never got to see a car as it was impossible to even find a space on the back of the spectator banks at Paddock Bend and we couldn’t venture too far. It was really strange sitting watching the race (and the big first corner accident) on a portable TV knowing it was all happening literally a couple of hiundred yards away from where we were sittiing.

I have undercarriage fairings for Percival Proctors, some are made of alliminum, others from paper mache.

The two Proctors we had at Southend both had paper mache U/C fairings and I understood that this was standard for all Proctors. I suppose it is possible that wartime builds were paper mache because metal was scarce and if any were built post war they may have had aluminium because metal supply had become less of a problem. The paper mache ones didn’t seem particularly strong so the other possibility is that they got damaged and the metal ones you have are replacements made up by someone later in the aircraft’s life.
Can anyone confirm please?

F1 is a huge money making business which is designed to line the pockets of a few people who already have more money than they could ever spend.
The paying spectator is insignificant. I can remember plans being kicked around to run F1 behind closed doors solely for the benefit of television simply because that is where the bulk of the money is generated.
Similarly it has been suggested in recent years that there was no automatic right for Britiain to expect to host a Grand Prix. The plan was to target F1 more at the Arab world and the Far East where there appeared to be much more money to be made but recent events may have forced a rethink on that strategy.
The people who run F1 will always change the rules to ensure that it is entertaining simply to ensure that companies wish to continue to buy the TV rights. I am not entirely sure whether some of the rule changes are for better or for worse but the one thing F1 does need is a greater number of overtaking opportunities. The various rule changes have been marginally successful in acheiving this but there is a limit to what can be acheived by tinkering with car specs so it has been suggested elsewhere that perhaps it is the design of circuits that needs to change. I don’t think there is an easy answer.
Of course we could go back to the old ways where cars had no wings and relied solely on mechanical grip and remove every driver aid. It would be a lot slower and there would still be quicker teams (those with more money to spend on development) and slower less monied teams BUT it would be more entertaining, it should produce more overtaking and narrow the gap between the front and back of the grid and it should allow drivers to display their car control skills so that a great driver in a less than perfect car might just get the occassional win. Of course it will never happen for all sorts of reasons but I would like to see how some of the modern drivers would cope driving something like a Maserati 250F to the limit. I have no doubt that some would be fine but others may not be so competent.
Monaco – a place full of F1 tradition as well as money will always be on the F1 calender for as long as those with money want it to be simply because at the end of the day – Money talks!

Sorry to hear of this.
There is one fairly obvious outlet for these items. The aircraft should be fairly noticeable but Franklin Mint RR Silver Ghosts are almost two a penny so it won’t stand out unless it has some very specific marks or damage.

I.M.H.O. I don’t think you can compare motor racing ie F1 with airshows when it comes to safety of the general public, . Lincoln .7

I think there are many comparisons in that both are events where there is some danger to the public in the event of an accident and both aviation and motorsport have gone way over the top on what are called Health and Safety measures. Both have now put the public so far away from the action that I no longer feel involved.

“A jet at an airshow is possibly travelling at several times the max of a F1 car. If these fly by wire suffer a failure, they can go anyway they wish, they are not programmed to automaticaly fly away from the crowds.”

A good deal of the debris from a car or an aircraft tends to travel in the same direction as the vehicle was travelling when the accident started so there is a case for ensuring that aircraft don’t fly over or towards the crowd during manouvres. There is also a case for high debris fencing at points of highest risk on race circuits BUT in my view there is no case for putting the crowd so far away from the action that you have covered EVERY risk no matter how small and there is no case for putting motor racing inside a continuous wire netting cage.

“Even the wheels of the F1 cars are wired into the bodyworks at some point or other so they cannot fly off into the crowd.”

Please don’t kid yourself that F1 cars don’t shed large parts in the event of an accident. The wheel restraints work to an extent but the G forces in any high speed accident are such that the wheel tethers can and do break on occassions. A spinning car will shed parts in all directions so it poses no less a danger than an out of control aircraft. They can never be 100% safe. There have been occassions when cars have gone over the highest debris fence. At Donnington in the 90’s there was an incident where a touring car cleared the fence so it doesn’t have to be an open wheeled car.

“It’s a shame Senna had to die prior to more priority being given to safety.”

Senna’s death had little to do with a lack of safety in F1 at that time. It was more to do with a set of circumstances which combined to cause his death. A bump in the track is said to have lifted the car wheels off the ground causing the initial loss of control. Others had hit that bump many times with no problem so wrong place at the wrong time. Some of the debris from the car is supposed to have penetrated his crash helmet and no amount of safety measures can ever prevent such a freak occurence.
Senna’s death was exceptionally high profile because by that time it was very unusual for F1 drivers to die in an accident mainly because safety had improved hugely since the 60’s and 70’s mainly due to the efforts of Jackie Stewart and others.
There is also another arguement that modern F1 drivers are more prepared to risk an accident rather than concede a corner because the cars are allegedly so safe now that the risk of SERIOUS injury is minimal.