dark light

Keith Gaff

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 12 posts - 46 through 57 (of 57 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: EE Canberra – Post your Pictures here #1185896
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Karinga Canberras

    In 1986 the Australian military carried out tests on the experimental Karinga cluster bomb at Woomera using several Canberras as targets. The first image depicts Canberra A84-220 being placed on the range. The white paint on the fuselage allows fragmentation damage to be easily seen.

    http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z208/kgaff_2007/canberra1.jpg

    The second shot shows 229 after it had received a number of hits. The Karinga could certainly make a mess.

    http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z208/kgaff_2007/canberra2.jpg

    The final act in the process was to fill the aircraft with fuel oil which caused extremely damaging fires when the aircraft were hit again. It’s safe to say that these aircraft did not survive.

    http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z208/kgaff_2007/canberra3.jpg

    in reply to: May Day F-111 #1189653
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    May Day F-111

    No, I don’t know the rationale behind why this particular F-111 was chosen.

    in reply to: May Day F-111 #1189671
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    May Day F-111

    I don’t know if the RAAF Museum will receive a C-model but one thing is for sure: one F-111 is great: two just represents a storage problem.

    in reply to: Exeter CAACU Meteors and Mossies #1231039
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    CAACU Mosquitoes and Meteors

    There is a book entitled “The Long Drag” that was published a few years ago detailing the history of RAF target towing. It’s still available in Australia, so it’s most likely still around in England. It details some of the 3 CAACU aircraft and a whole lot more.

    Keith Gaff
    Secretary
    Friends of the RAAF Museum

    in reply to: RAFM, faded glory ? #1237401
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    RAFM faded glory

    My, my ,my what an explosion I touched off. At last count it’s claimed that I have made a silly; and ignorant post, that I lack an understanding of visitor demographics; that I have exceeded the bounds of my office and God forbid I have sought to suppress the right of free speech on this forum.

    I’ve been a busy boy; no wonder I feel pooped.

    All I did gentlemen was to add a dissenting voice and from the aggressive responses I am beginning to wonder just who is trying to suppress whom. My thanks to the kind soul who added some words of support.

    I’ve heard lots of opinion and subjective comment but only Graham Simons has shown me any proof. I’m sure Graham has researched the subject and I may have missed it in his posts but I would like to know who owns those additional buildings near the RAFM site.

    I haven’t been to the RAFM for around 5 years and it looked fine then; so I would really like to see some examples of what’s been claimed in this thread.

    As for visitor demographics CHOX is correct. It’s always all about getting bodies through the door. From long experience I can tell you that enthusiasts make up only a small proportion of museum visitors. The majority are families, schools and tour groups. You could not maintain such a facility based upon the needs of a small section of the population; it has to have broader appeal and easy access which is why it should stay in London.

    Finally JDK, if you feel I’ve over stepped my mark; you are free to make the point at the Friends of the RAAF Museum AGM on the 19th of April. Just notify me through the proper channels and I will put the matter on the Agenda. After all; it’s not me publicly calling for the dismissal of one of the most senior and respected members of the international aviation preservation community.

    Regards,

    Keith Gaff
    Secretary; Friends of the RAAF Museum

    in reply to: RAFM, faded glory ? #1160755
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    RAFM faded glory

    I’ve read through the comments on this thread and frankly I’m appalled. I first visited the RAF Museum in 1974 and Hendon was not an airfield at that time: it was a paddock with the remains of the end of one runway on it. Hendon has always been a museum and that’s not a dirty word despite what some aviation enthusiasts think.

    The Blackburn Beverley was not part of the RAF Museum; it was owned by the RAF and the cost of restoring this ravaged airframe and housing it would have been prohibitive. You simply cannot save everything.

    As for moving the collection elsewhere; at what point did anyone think this was a good idea?. Where to, how and who pays. It simply isn’t going to happen. All you would achieve is to see the last piece of Hendon disappear under houses.

    The lighting has always been an issue but I can think of far worse; the RNZAF Museum at Wigram is the proverbial black inside of a black cat and some parts of the Australian War Memorial require a seeing eye dog. It’s part of a museological trend that has swept the world.

    As for sacking Dr. Michael Fopp what do you wish to do: run him out of town on a rail in sack cloth and ashes. Is that how you treat someone who has dedicated years of his life to the preservation of aviation?.

    Collectively gentlemen you should hang your heads in shame. I suspect, unlike many of you; I’ve met Michael Fopp and Jack Bruce. I found them both personable, professional and highly experienced gentlemen.

    You have in England with the RAFM one of the great aircraft collections of the world and you should cherish it and nurture it. It isn’t perfect, but then no museum is. Join the Friends of the RAF Museum if you can and lend a hand. That will achieve far more than venting your spleen here.

    Keith Gaff
    Secretary
    Friends of the RAAF Museum; Point Cook

    in reply to: Why don't aircraft museums sell some aeroplanes …. #1178385
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Why don’t museums sell aeroplanes

    The collection policy of the Moorabbin Air Museum is or, possibly, was that of collecting aircraft which are Australian designed and/or built or aircraft which had substantially contributed to the history of Australian aviation. There was always the option to say no to a particular aircraft and during my tenure as President of the Moorabbin Air Museum we often did. For instance, there was no way we would have chased a Boeing 707 despite it’s strong association with QANTAS.

    Keith Gaff

    in reply to: Why don't aircraft museums sell some aeroplanes …. #1178395
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Why don’t museums sell aircraft

    I was very interested to read the comments of those deemed experts on this subject and in fact I was more than interested to see who was nominated as an expert on this matter. I rarely comment on the events surrounding the proposed Beaufighter sale but in the light of the comments on this forum I thought you should hear from the person who really is qualified to comment on the story: the person who was going to sell the Moorabbin Beaufighter: me.

    Firstly a little background. Over the years Moorabbin sold quite a few aircraft including a Wirraway (which was used to fund the initial display hangar construction), a Mk1 Beaufighter, a Meteor Mk 8, Avro Anson and a Dehavilland Dove. There was clearly precendent for selling aircraft to fund various operations within the museum. When one of the many overblown proposals for an Australian National Aviation Museum fell over in the mid 1980’s the, then, museum administration decided to rely upon our own resources to save the aircraft in our care rather than wait for another pipe dream proposal. That’s when the Wirraway was sold to fund the initial stage of the hangar.

    Various attempts were made to raise funds for a second hangar to house the remainder of the aircraft on site (an extension to the original hangar was completed several years after the initial construction) but to no avail; although the local municipal council donated $25,000 and Moorabbin Airport donated $2,500 to the fund.

    When Moorabbin Airport was leased to private hands the new landlords made it perfectly clear to myself that the museum had to lift it’s game and the second hangar proposal slipped right into that concept. The museum sought funding from the Victorian State Government Community Support Fund and we were told that we could receive up to $500,000; but our contribution would be an additional $500,000 due in 90 days and that is where the proposal to sell the Beaufighter came from.

    Was I happy about the idea; no; but I did see the cold hard reality of the museum’s situation; a situation which has not improved with the passing years and has been exacabated by various events during that time.

    While members were happy to let most aircraft sales pass without comment selling the Beaufighter generated a huge amount of controversy; not that it ever got close to being sold. I likened the process to putting the Mona Lisa on eBay: everyone went “Yeah right”. There seemed to be this belief that the Beaufighter was the museums star attraction and that the whole business would fall over without it. From years of experience I can tell you that as enthusiasts we may care; but the average visitor has no idea what a Beau is and couldn’t care less if it disappeared and was replaced by something else.

    The sad fact is that, had the sale proceeded, I have no doubt the second hangar would have been constructed, despite claims to the contrary and the museum could have achieved real financial independence.

    None of that happened; the aircraft are still outside and more have been added and to top it off the latest proposal for a pseudo Australian National Aviation Museum has just fallen on it’s face.

    I have been asked if, had I had another chance, would I do things differently and the answer is no. What was proposed by the administration I led would have been effective and decisive in the long term; but it certainly wasn’t popular.

    Keith Gaff

    in reply to: Japanese/Indonesian puzzle (includes flying boat) #1314029
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Japanese/Indonesian Puzzle

    The Mavis started out as an aircraft captured by the Indonesians. It then fell into Dutch hands and finally it was held by the British who eventually scrapped it. The Hickory is a bit of a mystery. The fuselage marking does not tally with Indonesian insignia of the day. Indonesian aircraft were marked either with a red and white rectangular marking or a red and white roundel.

    in reply to: Early Hurricane I in German Hands #1325673
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Early Hurricane 1 in German markings

    Hey, Luftwaffe fans, what about this Hurricane in Luftwaffe markings… Any guess which Erprobungstelle it was tested?:)

    [EMAIL=”[IMG]http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z208/kgaff_2007/hurricanegerman.jpg%5B…]”]http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z208/kgaff_2007/hurricanegerman.jpg[/EMAIL]

    Hello Gretza,

    The only Erprobungstelle that tested this Hurricane was Warner Brothers. The aircraft is a Canadian built Hurricane painted up to represent a Bf 109 for the wartime movie “Captains of the Clouds” starring James Cagney. Cagney plays a knockabout Canadian bush pilot who ends up ferrying Lockheed Hudson bombers to England. Because the movie was made during the war and in brilliant colour it is a visual feast for aircraft enthusiasts. It’s a pity that the story line is rather average. It plays on Australian pay TV every so often and if you get a chance to see it you should.

    in reply to: Lurking in the brambles! #1284039
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Lurking in the brambles

    I found this on another web site. It was taken in New Zealand in the mid-1960’s. It’s enough to make a grown man weep.

    in reply to: Dayglo Paint #1315487
    Keith Gaff
    Participant

    Dayglo Paint

    The RAAF had a long association with Dayglo paint. It was used on CAC Winjeels for much of their service lives and Vampire T.35’s but the most spectacular use was by Trans Australia Airlines (TAA) on their Vickers Viscounts. The entire fin and rudder was painted Dayglo. The practice didn’t last long because the painted rapidly faded.

    Regards from Australia
    Keith Gaff

Viewing 12 posts - 46 through 57 (of 57 total)