If you look at the impact of the type on British aviation you have to seriously wonder if it’s actually worth preserving the number we have in the U.K.
It could be also argued that the costs involved in both housing and in some cases moving them by surface transport has been to the detriment of other more worthy aircraft that need either displaying or restoring.
While you might be right about the engineering effect that Concorde had on the British aviation industry, you have to remember what an iconic design that Concorde is, and how important that cache is on museum attendance.
As opposed to aviation nuts like us, most people do not visit museums to see Dragon Rapides or DeHavilland Comets. They go to see the items that are relevant to their lifetimes. Sadly this does not include older types as much as it once did. With each new generation the past achievements become less accessible. It’s a sad truth. Aviation is not the cutting edge field that it once was.
I was talking about this very issue with two curators from internationally recognized museums just a few days ago, and they expressed very similar sentiments.
I don’t have the facts in front of me, but I feel sure that museums which gained a concorde as an exhibit benefitted far more (in terms of visitors) from that one artifact than pretty much any other that they could put in. Having a concorde puts these museums in a special class, at least it does for the average person. It is such a beautiful design that even non-aviation minded people are drawn to it.
Museums that cater solely to the aviation enthusiast have a much harder time drawing attendees than those with a more broader appeal. It’s just the way it is.
Personally speaking, I am very glad that they did their best to save every one of the aircraft that they did. Who here could honestly admit to being willing to swing the first axe at one of these remarkable birds?
Richard
Sign In
