The relevance of Concorde to Scottish Aviation History?
Little to none, but it was audacious to get it. Again, I think it could present a problem in the future, and the risk of the museum being ‘Concorde and some lesser aircraft’ is something to consider.
As for the F-4S, XT852 would have been a better airframe as it ticks the ‘noteworthy aircraft’ box, but that is another rant for another time.
The museum should move on the likes of the Morane Criquet and use the cash to get some serious work done on the Beaufighter or alternatively send it back to Portugal where it really belongs .
Surely that depends on how you think the museum should be looking forward, which is perhaps a conversation a few museums should be having. The latest work to the exhibits at EF suggests, Concorde aside (which I can see being a bit of a millstone in the long run), that the museum is focusing more on the history tied up in the land and premises it occupies. If so, than it could get away with shedding a few more airframes whilst it is at it! The Czech MiG 15 had me lost, and whilst the Komet is a great talking point for the overall weirdness of the design and for being the “wee plane” that attracts a few pokes and prods, it again it doesn’t quite make sense to have it at EF specifically. The MiG would make more sense in a Cold War collection for sure, but within a stones’ throw of a Spitfire it effectively turns that corner of the hangar into the ‘and all others’ section. I would happily see East Fortune be more orientated towards Scotland’s air history in general, and I think the absence of a Shackleton is most glaringly obvious at the moment.
I did hear chat that some of the airframes would come to Chambers Street to join the Bulldog and the autogyros.
Getting up and close to the aircraft is good, but letting your kids meddle with the exhibits is not so good. My partner’s father also clunked his head on the Twin Pioneer. If you want to create that sort of environment then I think a few more curators are needed, even if they have to take the place of feckless parents at times. I also think the fast jet hanger was a bit crammed, making it difficult to take in the full might of the Lightning, to give one example.
Those photos take me back to being a boy. I would go there with my older brothers (I’m 25) when we visited my grandparents in Edinburgh. I remember that continuous plank of wood that ran around the exhibits, and I especially remember my brother being told off for putting a foot beyond it. It seems like they have lost some exhibits along the way, as I didn’t clock either of the gliders, that blue copter or the autogyro when I was last there. I was also amazed that you could go up and prod the aircraft now, and witnessed several people spin the prop on the front of the Komet (no wonder the thing sucked, have you seen the wee tiny propellor ken?) and saw a kid have a hearty tug at the rudders on the Beechcraft.
Makes me wonder if the acquisition of Concorde was worth it…
The APSS shed was all shut up when I was there, and at the time I didn’t know what it was. I was informed that the rest of the 707 was in the APSS shed, because the curator was certain that an entire 707 was brought onsite then chopped down to fit in the Concorde hangar.
Errrr… right enough…
I agree that what they get done is amazing. I don’t recognise that photo, above, of the Auster. Is that an older display with the original Auster?
I quite enjoyed the layout of the museum, but it is a bit chaotic. There is something fun about stumbling across airframes set out the way they are, but I thought, for example, that the Spitfire looked a bit neglected in a corner boxed in by fast jets.
Are there any photos out there of the APSS building interior? I tried to grap a look when I was up there checking out the Viscount wings, but with no luck. Oddly the curator I spoke to suggested that there was nothing up there to see, and never once mentioned the APSS.
Respect is not a word I can prescribe to music, but even if I could the same problem would arise because I’d still have to “respect” an individual’s music whether I liked it or not, simply because it was of a genre I liked. Which simply makes no sense to me. So we’ll have to agree to differ..
Missed this before…
There are bands that I don’t like, within genres that I do like. For example I like a lot of progressive rock, and I really enjoy the music of Gentle Giant, Yes, Genesis, Van Der Graaf Generator, Soft Machine, Gong etc. I don’t like the music of Emerson Lake and Palmer that much. I respect them as musicians, but I don’t like the music they made together. I don’t think they are bad, just not something I can get into.
Google Books sometimes lets you preview a book, but thee is no such luck for any of the Wrecks and Relics releases.
Daft laddie question, but aren’t these books going to get smaller with each release? It appears that even in the ’90s you could find substantially more airframes rotting away than you can now. No doubt tougher waste handling laws (WEEE directive et al) limits what you can leave to rot. The exceptions, Predannack and Long Marsden spring to mind, are well documented.
There is a point where, in the name of playing devil’s advocate, you end up doing TIGHAR’s work for them.
Perhaps “confirmed by aviation experts on the Keypublishing online forums” caveat will appear in their next presentations. :stupid:
I was there earlier this year. A good museum, and it is good to hear that the hangars are in for some restoration work. Ideally the Vulcan, BAC-111 and Comet need to come indoors though, and I had heard that they were planning to build a bigger hangar just off site (as the site has some sort of preservation order) and put together a cold war exhibit. However it sounds like the current curator isn’t in the business of acquiring new airframes.
Now for the obligatory “how was the Beaufighter looking?”
Any ‘analysis’ that involves drawing lines in MS Paint over a photograph is not analysis. TIGHAR are not qualified for any real analysis, and frankly the work in this thread is probably of a higher standard.
When it is all said and done, why is it that only the DIY toilet window cover would survive from Amelia’s aircraft? Why that bit? Why nothing else?
“Rob (top) flying alongside two UK Navy Blue Angels in Smyrna, Tennessee in one of his signature tricks”
A last minute replacement for the Reds?
I thought Britain First was simply the BNP in a new clothes…….
Flat caps and flasher macs by the looks of it.
Anyway, a ‘turned on’ friend of mine posted a Russell Brand video on Facebook. Luckily corporate IT blocks Youtube content so I didn’t have to see it. My ‘friend’ is one of the angry “we are the 45%” Scots Nats that are wanting a new referendum in the next four weeks etc etc… a workshy hard-done-by whiner. I knew he would get into the Brand rubbish and lo, I was proven right. This guy is angry in a fairly abstract way. He wants to ‘end Tory rule’ yet will only vote SNP or, presumably, demonstrate Brand’s method of voter apathy. “The tories dinnae care about us working class Scots, ken?”, which again becomes a hair-shirt wearing competition and something of a farce. Although, I doubt the conservatives really do care about thick Fifers.
Britain First talk a good game. They have the ‘click bait’ market down pat.
Gumtree seems a bit low key for this sort of thing. Plan to make the deal in the local Tesco carpark?
Saw him talking Boll.. ,er Politics on telly a while ago, and it was like he was on some strange mission to insert the word “paradigm” into every sentence. I s’pose it will impress the Yoof though innit.
In half those cases he was probably using the word in the wrong context or completely incorrectly. The man has a penchant for the malapropism.
Or as he would say, “yeah, well the fing about big corporations is that they are well malapropostic as Keats would have put it”.
The “We are the 45” crowd up here are making me a bit angry as of late, as is the presence of Jim Murphy in news outlets.