Twin Otter – I have ‘Blank Canvass Syndrome’ – I have a museum to design for a 21st century audience…. oh and attract a band of volunteers……..

:confused: Surely satisfying the same funding criteria / expectations applies whatever the project context?

Everything considered a lot of hard work – good luck with it! 🙂

….. What is missing is the interest in museums (everyone hates the word ‘museum’). You (and I) need to work out a way of bringing these highly skiled and qualified people into the historic market. The CAA has brought ‘Wooden Structures’ back into the syllabus so the basic understanding exists.

NAHSI is great, but the target audience is too narrow – being aimed at improving the skills of CURRENT volunteers. It is up to the individual museums to promote themselves and reach new audiences. The skills and people are out there – YOU need to generate interest….

Lindy, I missed your post earlier; but it sounds as though you’re into some ‘Audience Development’ and ‘Widening Participation’ work!

The interesting thing with Newark’s Visitor Centre Project is that museum visitors are much more forthcoming with their feedback than the ‘enthusiast sector’.

This is providing a broader and more challenging perspective on what the visitor really wants. Ultimately everyone in the sector will have to work hard to convince the funders that they will satisfy their visitor’s expectations.

I can also recommend a good book by Graham Black, called “The Engaging Museum” – fascinating and thought provoking!

My other hobby is old automobiles. It was feared that values of very old cars from the “Brass era” (pre-1920) would drop as the old guys who remembered them passed away.
What has been found is that younger collectors still have an interest in quality cars…whatever their age.
I think we’ll see the same for historic aircraft.

The automobiles sector raises an interesting point – my father-in-law is in his mid 80s and he’s still producing / repairing parts for the vintage automobile sector, precisely because there aren’t many youngsters who’ve got the skills to produce the parts.

Yes NAHSI might be for static projects, but at least it’s teaching the basic skills to some people – likewise I believe that ‘wooden structures’ is one of their latest modules.

A further thought … are we properly training today’s youngsters to bend the metal and craft the wood, or are these vital skills being lost? 🙁

Cess – Paul Petersen is a very approachable team leader and I’m sure they will always do their best to do the right things. 🙂

I concur with Andy’s view about the positive effects that can be realised for families, relatives and even friends, when they finally ‘know’ what happened to someone who was ‘lost’ whilst serving their country.

My view comes from ongoing contact and research assistance that I’m providing for several 619 Squadron Lancaster crews. Words cannot describe the importance of the bonds of friendship and the depths of emotion that have been forged around such ‘research projects’.

Late last week I was able to help facilitate contact between families in the UK and Canada, who have a shared history in a 619 Squadron Lancaster loss. They have been trying to establish contact for years and they are now able to share their stories and information.

One final point, IMHO the nation that has the correct approach is the Netherlands – I believe that the Royal Netherlands Air Force Recovery Team is a shining example of how to approach these sensitive matters – please keep up your great work! 🙂

How did that old BT advert go – “It’s good to talk!”