I don’t think “trumping” is a concept that even Cosford would engage in. It’s not a competition. Likewise, I’m not sure there’s any question as to how interesting you might consider XT597 to be. The point is, it was the first British Phantom to arrive in the UK and it was the last to fly. It was also a research aircraft and a chase/calibration aircraft that supported many other programmes. So by any standards it’s a very significant aeroplane. Yes, it might not be any more significant than many other test aircraft but that’s irrelevant – the point is that it still exists and is in danger of being scrapped. Arguing that it might be better placed at Boscombe Down or Old Sarum also misses the point – Boscombe Down didn’t want it and Old Sarum couldn’t have it, hence it’s purchase by Everett. However, Cosford could take it, as it is directly connected with the RAF of course, it is directly connected with the Cold War, and directly connected with test and research work. So it fits three very clear categories that Cosford embraces. My gripe is that a lump of Lufwaffe wreckage doesn’t, therefore I find Cosford’s complete disinterest in XT597 remarkable.

Tin, I do indeed think the CH-53 is a bizarre exhibit – and I’m certainly not the only person who thinks so. Much as I like looking at it, I have no idea why it’s there. Same applies to the others that you mention, although I accept that if it is a Cold War collection (rather than RAF), then aircraft such as the MiG-21, F-111, etc., are suitable candidates. Even so, out of all the potential Cold War icons, I don’t know how the CH-53 merits a space in a very crowded hall. As for connections with the RAF. I was trying to explain that defining such matters is very subjective. It really depends on what position the RAFM chooses to adopt. Either it can be a strict policy of exhibiting only aircraft that have actually flown in RAF service, or it is widened to embrace any aircraft that has some sort of connection with the RAF. If the former policy applies then there is no logical way that restoring Luftwaffe wreckage can be justified. If the latter policy is adopted, then I’d want to know why Cosford wilfully show no interest in acquiring XT597. Either way, their position seems questionable to me. I don’t think RAFM is misguided to have a Fokker, 109, etc., but I do think they can’t change their position to suit their taste/mood. If it’s strictly RAF then fine, in which case they can’t defend the CH-53, Dornier, Fokker, etc. If it’s a broader remit, then how can they defend ignoring XT597, especially when they have a research aircraft collection?

WH904 – doesn’t a far more deadly war need realistically to result in it being more ‘deadly’ ?
No it doesn’t. I think I mentioned this before but it’s foolish to equate historical significance with the amount of violence expelled. It really doesn’t follow that because bombs were actually dropped in WWII, the Cold War is somehow less important. It’s more important because the conflict successfully prevented the destruction of the United Kingdom – no matter what figures on WWII death and destruction one might choose to use, they don’t compere to complete oblivion. But because no physical blows were exchanged and no lives were directly lost, the Cold War is almost dismissed as somehow less important. Don’t get me wrong, I’m old enough and wise enough to understand the importance of WWII in our history, but it’s ridiculous to continue this obsession with the era when it’s at the expense of everything else. I keep returning to this point but it’s an important one – the lump of Luftwaffe wreckage is of no direct relevance to the RAFM, whereas XT597 is… and yet it is the former that has attracted the attention and money. There can be only one reason for this, and it is the persistence of the notion that WWII is more important than any post-war era. This is nonsensical, and it’s not the kind of attitude that should be adopted by the RAFM. That’s my point.

I think you’re right – the biggest problem seems to be the rumoured price of the airframe, with or without engines. The big worry is that the price will come down as the aircraft deteriorates until it becomes little more than scrap value. It’s a sorry business 🙁

I’d be tempted to say that their collecting policy is wrong then! Unless I’m completely crazy, there is no way that a lump of Luftwaffe wreckage is in any way appropriate for the RAF Museum. With that kind of logic one could acquire almost anything, as pretty-much any aeroplane can be associated with the RAF’s history somehow. May as well get a BAC-111 because the ETPS had one, or a Viscount (same reason), or go completely crazy and get a Boeing 757 because a RNZAF machine displayed at an RAF base once. Where does one draw the line? Clearly, the Dornier has no direct connection with the RAF (other than in the way that RAF fighters once intercepted them) whereas XT597 was one of the first examples of the its type – one of the most significant post-war RAF aircraft, and one that was used in support of many other RAF programmes. Okay, the test aircraft are not really an integral part of the RAFM collection in some senses, but given that they have the collection, it seems absurd to take no interest in what would have been a very significant addition to the fleet, especially when they see fit to spend money of German wreckage which is in no way relevant to either research programmes or the RAF’s history.

I fear that it is a symptom of the age-old problem that far too many people still think history ended in 1945. Somehow, there is still a belief that WWII relics are more important that post-war artefacts. Not only is this notion completely crazy, it excludes a huge chunk of the RAF’s history and periods when the RAF has been just as active (if not more so) than during WWII. It also encourages the flawed notion that the Cold War was somehow less important than WWII even though it was of course just as important. It would be foolish to imagine that because aircraft did not drop bombs or fire guns, a very real (and far more deadly) war was being engaged. And yet, it still often looks as if there’s a slight obsession with WWII at the expense of everything else. Quite honestly I can’t see how else one could regard Cosford’s attitude.

They have a Phantom. Why would they go after another when their current stated policy is to rationalise the existing collection?
Because XT597 is a rare test aircraft, not just a generic Phantom. Given that Cosford has a test aircraft collection, it would have been a far more logical use of funds than spending money on Luftwaffe wreckage.

Thanks for bringing these matters to everyone’s attention. The “double exposure” printing is a mystery and I will look into this. I’m also horrified to hear that some issues on sale have been spoiled by printing issues. There also seems to be some difficulty in obtaining copies in certain areas.

The Jaguar edition was the first Icons issue to be published by Key, so I suppose some teething problems were only to be expected. I’ll do my best to ensure that these issues are addressed before the next edition emerges!

Wow! An aircraft that was one of the RAF’s most successful, capable and valuable aircraft ever “did a whole lot of nothing” and the Shackleton “did very little”. I sometimes wonder whether some aircraft enthusiasts actually know anything about the aircraft that they enthuse about?! 🙂