Replicas
So what does a full size model teach that a large plastic kit cannot?
I wouldn’t want to see a Spitfire or Hurricane at our Museum, as it is not appropriate.
On a personal level – and it is just that, I am not a fan of such replicas; they have nothing to teach the future generation, except for the manner in which it was interpreted by the builder.
I’ll clarify that sweeping statement….! What I am saying is that I’m not a fan of replicas that deviate from the original manner of construction in any way. The original artefacts we leave behind are as important a way of learning history as any document.
Bruce
That brings up an interesting issue, Bruce.
In most large museums such as NASM Downtown and Hazy, the exhibits are roped off from the public, affording little or no access. Basically, you can’t get near the ones on the ground, and it would take a Tarzan or Cheetah to reach the ones hanging in the air like the P-51A. For all the difference it makes, all the aircraft in the museum might as well be replicas. Who would know the difference?
Yes, there’s limited access for historians and there are the archives, but for the aircraft on display that are viewed daily by the public (and I believe that NASM is the most visited museum in the United States) what difference would it really make if they were replicas and not the real McCoy? The engines are pickled, the hydraulics drained. They don’t taxi. They don’t fly. They just sit there, or hang there. Even the scruffy-looking, black P-61 just squats there in a dark corner of the hall. Hhmmm …. imagine a wax museum of aircraft. :)- Madame Whatshername’s.
Another museum I visited recently was the Champlain Museum near the Grand Canyon. My interest was the Me-109G on display. The curator was extremely kind to allow me full access for photography so I was able to check out the 109 up close. My main interest at the time was the rudder and its method of construction. To be honest with you, after checking it out up close, I couldn’t tell whether it was of wood construction or metal with fabric. Or whether it was a “real” rudder. There were obvious fabric tapes but no visible indication of cord stitching. It could have been a wood rudder, but for all I know, it could also very well have been a replica rudder that wasn’t all that faithfully reproduced.
So maybe I should eat my words about suggesting flying replicas, eh?
Somebody else on this thread asked why not a replica other than a Spitfire. Yes, why not? Why not a Westland Whirlwind? It’s surely one of the prettier fighters produced by the Brits in WW2 and there ain’t any in existence ….. and as pretty as the Hornet is, my personal opinion is that the Whirlwind is prettier. It really is unique! Wish I had the original drawings and the funding to build a flying Whirlwind replica! You’d probably need a bunch of fake cannons to ballast the nose, but what a fun airplane it would be!
Alex
Sign In
