Tom HSince when do visitors not pay? It depends up the circumstances: A visitor to a museum would pay (assuming it was not a “free” museum. A visitor to my home would of course not pay.
Similarly if I am a hotel “guest”, I pay, of course I do!!
I just object to this reduction of everyone to this lowest common denominator: the customer.
English is rich in words, use them in the appropriate context.
There I feel better now!!!
Planemike
Appreciate your point but I think you missed mine.
English is a language rich with words…but how they are used and the perception of their meaning changes when you throw a few thousand miles into the equation and the context of their use in a specific region.
But as TwinOtter pointed out quite well…its not what we call those that visit our facility its how we treat them and if we listen to them.
We do our best to treat everyone well and try to take input and apply it in a practical manner to keep people interested and excited about our history.
Tom H
Tom HI’ll stop now, I know I’ve gone a long way from David Burke’s original posting and I apologise for that. It’s just something I feel very strongly about.
Kev
Its well you do because I think you are correct that is what is remembered…the touch, the feel, the experience.
Its why we have such a compartively tight collections policy, why the vast majority of our aircraft are not roped off and why we have interactive exhibits and audio visuals to add to the experience. Here kids (and adults) can try on a battle dress, a chute pack, sit in an ejection seat, run their hands on a .50 cal…they can get in some of our aircraft on their own so they can see what it was like.
In my opinion, and that shared by our board, the aircraft are only the tools that allowed people to make the history. As time passes we cannot restore the people only the tools so the tools must tell their story.
Tom
Tom HTwin Otter
Your information was most helpful in confirming our planning as we are forced to transition away from having an operating airport and are destined to be an off airport museum.
I find the customer vs visitor conversation amusing…mainly as it is a geographic difference.
In my part of the world people take offense to being a “visitor” and prefer to be referred to as a “customer”.
As one gentlemen rather bluntly put it…visitors don’t pay! Customers do.
Its semantics in the end but I meant no offense and appreciate that as much as we are the same we are somewhat different.
Planemike
I appreciate your point but…
Most that come to our museum are not hard core aviation types, they are interested, curious or casual enthusiasts. Their spouses and children are often, very often, more interested in the toilets and other amenities and can easily be put off visiting again if not up to an industry standard.
From the business side the enthusiast is about 25-30% of our market and while we do our best to be sure every person coming here has a great experience we do have to pay special attention to the needs of the dominant portion of the market…and if we can get them returning we have a darn good shot at making them enthusiasts and create more enthusiasts and persons that appreciate the amazing history of aviation.
The business side of the Heritage industry sucks…I sometimes find the passion almost beaten out of me. But I always seem to recover as the mission of preserving and educating is too important to let it slide.
And yes while I am staff I was a volunteer for 15years before becoming ED and as ED I am compensated for 160hrs a month and end up working 250-300hrs a month to keep our facility on track and operating successfully.
Things unfortunately are just not as black and white as I wish they were.
Tom
Tom HFirst things first
Been meaning to thank Twin Otter and Newark for sharing some information with the Alberta Aviation Museum in Edmonton, Alberta.
After reviewing the info we have very much in common from size of collection to the challenges we face.
Kev 35
Your questions were excellent and ones we faced over 20 years ago and have stuck to the decisions since.
A major pitfalls as I have seen as the Executive Director of a fair sized facility are:
1) So many museums over reach in attempting to tell the WHOLE history of aviation…and as a result miss their own specific regional and local history.
I view aviation history as a set of encyclopaedias…it takes the set to tell the whole story…one or two volumes will tell a countries, a chapter the local/regional story.
We know form day one that we could not tell the whole history or even that of Canada (which is huge) so we have concentrated on ours
First Edmonton, Second Canada’s North as it related to Edmonton, Canada as it relates to the first two.
It is all we can do as a private not for profit to tell our history…its up to the Nationals to tell the countries…but we have a hell of history to deal with in our mandate. (45 aircraft and not 1/2 way through the acquisition list)
2) Most heritage operations do not work together. This is beyond loans of aircraft/artefacts or parts. Even in sharing of information, business opportunities we rarely work together to our mutual benefit.
A shame really…there is much we could do working with each other.
There are many great points on this thread and I have saved it for printing for my boards…required reading in my mind.
I think private museums must remember our first duty is to survive and that means taking care of business…the customer.
Because if we don’t survive we can’t preserve anything, we cannot educate future generations or pass on the amazing histories we care take.
My thoughts and opinions
A happy new year to all from Canada’s West
Tom H
Tom HGlad you enjoyed the Namao airshow, it was a great one.
Traffic has been forced off the airport….long story but this is not a free market situation is the best way to describe it without getting winded.
There has been a tremendous amount of mis information and dirty politics around the issue and it has divided the city.
Edmonton was for most of the 20th century one of the busiest aviation centres in Canada, soon there will be nothing left of that great heritage, except what we can maintain.
Tom
Tom HThanks everyone I am now researching the sites suggested to try and get additional information.
Tom
Tom HMorning Peter
The current plan for Blatchford Field (Edmonton City Centre Airport) is a phased shut down. The first runway closed a few months ago and the crash in usage has been frightening, I would expect it will collapse within the next 2-5 years and likely closer to the 2.
The final nail was the recent Municipal election which ended any chance of the decision being changed…so now we implement contingencies.
Shame to see this happen to Canada’s first licensed airfield to become just another sub division.
Tom
Tom HThanks for the information everyone.
We have a tough row ahead and all information is helpful.
Tom
Tom HThanks
PM on the way
Tom
Tom HTo be greedy as much as I can…
The airport closure is a major and we are hoping not fatal change to our operations.
We are not surprised and have been developing contingencies while the debate has raged, but nothing beats real world input from someone who is there or has been there.
Our current facility useage (total) is in the area of 150,000 to 170,000 per year. Museum attendance is 50,000 ish excluding special events and education programming.
Our education programming offers Kindergarten to Grade 12 programming (30 modules) and attracts roughly 8-10,000 students per year.
We run 25-30 special events per year.
Do as you can guess I’m trying to narrow down the real world effects of losing the operational runways.
Did your museum start off with an operating airport and then have it shut down?
Alternatively was it always unserviceable?
How far from a major centre are you located?
Rough idea on attendance? Paid or overall
Do you offer education programming? How has it been affected?
Appreciate any information and the link provided.
Tom
Tom HThanks everyone for your input
I appreciate all the points of view and will be summarizing all I learn into a report for our next board meeting.
Tom
Tom H“In short. If it is of high historical value, I don’t believe it should be flown. If it is anything else – then keep the options open.”
Here we agree mostly…
If the aircraft is irreplaceable due to it’s rarity or specific provenance it should not be flown.
But if an aircraft is being operated and representing a period of time or part of the historical story I feel it should be as right as possible within operating limitations as noted above.
Tom
Tom HRichw_82
“To what point? If it still being operated, then it is still making it’s own history, and pandering to its past (unless it’s a highly significant past) achieves nothing other than satisfying someones personal opinion of how it should be presented.”
If we were talking a private owner I would agree…but a museum (in my mind) is different. We have a mandate to present history within the context of our mission statement.
It is also part of our job to create enthusiasm and interest in our history and frankly sometimes the best way to do that is using an operating aircraft to reach the public…so what you may call pandering I look at as presenting and marketing.
As to its presentation, that’s why we have a curator…to keep us on track and make the best presentation possible.
So I see a balance needing to be found.
Tom
Tom HAppreciate the input….
But here is the problem when creating a policy.
As written the curator is out of the equation as is the board.
Now I am all in favor of flying aircraft but as a museum it is our responsibility to insure that what is presented is as accurate as possible and reflect the history we are showcasing.
So the way it is written all of this is thrown out and the authority becomes the maintainer.
My belief is that the aircraft should remain as original as possible/practical within the bounds of safety, regulations and the servicing requirements and the decisions around those points be handled by professionals in the field.
But the appearance, equipment, colours and similar historic presentations be handled by the Curator and the board with all approvals going through the Curator on historical issues and through the Board on overall process and needs.
I see the need within the policy to create a sub category of artifacts that are continuing to be operated where the curator remains in control of the historic presence and historic value of the artifact, the maintainer retains control on the required servicing, regulatory requirements and operational safety of the artifact and the Board retain control over both.
As such the artifact would retain the historic presence mandated, remain a safe operational asset and have a system of justification, accountability and control while continuing to treat the aircraft as an artifact.
Thoughts…opinions?
Tom
Tom HJust an update on our celebrations of the
British Commonwealth Air Training Plan
December 17th
We unveiled our BCATP exhibit in a very well covered press conference that featured all of the region TV, Radio and print media.
Most were shocked at the scope and scale of the BCATP program and the effects it had on the Second World War as well as its lasting postwar effects.
February 23rd
We unveiled the second stage of the exhibit..
Building the BCATP an exhibit that covers the construction side of the program and its extent and depth.
From 5 airbases in 1939 to over 230 by the end of 1941…everything from the runways to the sewers had to be built and the exhibit covers with a broad brush everything that had to happen.
The third stage is near…we hope to unveil “The Women of the BCATP” by the end of April which will outline in a broad brush their important contribution to the program.
On the challenging side
The Spirit of Edmonton BCATP tour
This program of traveling 4100km across (3) Provinces to visit the remaining 38 BCATP bases in Alberta Manitoba and Saskatchewan is having difficulty raising the needed funds to complete the 14day program.
Currently we are $10,000 short of the required budget but are pushing hard to stay on target for a mid May launch.
For more information on the Alberta Aviation Museum or to view our newletter please visit albertaaviationmuseum.com.
You can see our initial BCATP display on the link under “Whats Happening”.
The exhibit combines conventional display with digital photos running on computer, our BCATP aircraft with interactive flight simulators beside them
(Tiger Moth with the Tiger Moth/Anson with the Anson) and feature the backgrounds, scenery and aircraft types of 1944 Edmonton.
For detailed information on the Spirit of Edmonton BCATP Tour please e-mail me direct at [email]eahs.execdirector@shawbiz.ca[/email] for the tour route and details.
This is too important an anniversary to let pass unnoticed.
Tom
Sign In
