Thanks guys.
I’ll have to check to see where it fits and if we already have one installed in our a/c before I know it’s swapability.
cheers
Don’t forget the LC47’s in the Antarctic. 17221 the focus of this pic is with us at Ferrymead and is one of only two survivors of the ones that went to the ice.
Has anything happened to these aircraft or are they all enjoying another summer’s sun?
For Peter here’s a pic taken yesterday of the wheel we have at Ferrymead.
It came to us in the 1970s from the Para Rubber Company here in CHC and they had received it in the inter-war years as a promo piece as they were the agents for Palmer tyres.
It had been stashed in a store and the rubber has hardened and cracked to expose a steel core which has rusted and so it is in the shape it is forever.
Para had the “information” that it was from an HP. The tyre itself is marked “Palmer Cord Aero Tyre 1500 x 300”. We just eyeballed photos of a/c of the period and used humans as scale and so the HP claim seems right but perhaps someone in the UK can provide further info based on the size?
cheers
Just a couple of thoughts and questions from a humble antipodean.
I would find it strange that the lottery heritage funding people wouldn’t be most upset at the notion of the aircraft leaving the UK. I would expect that the funding provided would have had strings attached and might even have to be repaid if those were violated.
I’m sure that the application would have included words like “be displayed in he UK for the appreciation of future generations so they might understand our proud heritage ……”. These would have been used to get the funding. Hard to do that if its on the other side of the Atlantic.
I know, from personal experience, that here in NZ funds obtained from the lottery charities can only be expended on domestic costs so I’d be interested if that’s not the case in the UK, as once you let it vanish then that’s effectively spent the money offshore.
The other one is how long would North Americans be concerned about a Vulcan? Sure it would be initially novel but then I’m sure they would drift back to their types. Look at the posts I recently saw elsewhere about the suggestion of cutting up the one over there (sorry not good on all those Xxxxx serials) as its no longer high on the museum’s priorities.
Sorry folks but sitting down here I think the time has come to say it was nice, it was proved it could be done, but the time has come to stop throwing money at flying and build a museum for it.
The same sentiment has been coming through on the WIX forum, where also a poll was running at over 70% were not interested sufficiently to part with dosh towards it going to the US as they saw the money better spent getting domestic types under cover.
You should seek out “Japanese aircraft interiors 1940-1945” by Robert Mikesh it has several pages of large very good quality shots, b&w only solely
As CadMan asked, who is the legal owner of the aircraft? Is it AMS or is it perhaps the receiver or administrator of Emerald, and if so who are they?
cheers
Can someone post a list of the rege’s of the aircraft there?
thanks
Max is right about how the frame works/sits. I recall we used the same unit when we disassembled ZK-BRF at NAC’s workshops back in the 1970s. So when we re-assembled her we improvised but used the same fuseframe hardpoints as Max alludes to.
Our cradle was some borrowed units padded out to fit!
Tom,
I’d suggest you do need to know the reasons why they’re under threat as you can’t solve the problem otherwise and so as you say “work together”. You can collect the data as to the number all you like but you have to apply appropriate analysis to it to really do something.
I see two repeating issues of late.
1. They have to move as their land is wanted for other purposes
Many museums set up at their local airport as that seems right to them. That’s where aircraft flew from after all. However airfields are generally always redeveloping and hence re-assigning use to their landspace, or they are themselves closing due to noise etc as housing development near them. Others are on old airfields that once were miles from town but town has now grown out to engulf them.
So I’d have to say reason one is poor choice of location looking into the long term and I can’t see how you can fight that one unless you’ve pots of dosh to buy up your own turf and fight off the developers.
2. They’re not economically viable which I see has 2 sub parts
a: Theme
Much as we aviation enthusiasts might not want to admit it the percentage of the public who are passionate about aircraft is small when compared to those who have a passing interest and to those who don’t give a zot.
So perhaps there are just too many museums with the same old same old that you just won’t get the folks through the gate to make it pay and so you either have to diversify the range of exhibits or rationalise the number of museums.
Not slanging the aircraft or the endeavours of the groups but you find in every country there’s this happening. In the UK everyone has/wants a spitfire, meteor, hunter, buccaneer, in the US its P51s, F4Us B17s, in Aussie winjeels, sabres, meteors, and here in NZ vampires, harvards, tiger moths.
Joe average won’t track every example of an xyz but if he’s never seen an abc and you’ve got one then you may get him in the gate.
The other thing is aircraft enthusiast are mostly male and unless I’ve missed something we’re only 50% of the population so somehow you need to extend the theme so their is something to pull the girls in as well.
b:. Location location location as they say in the real estate game. You’ve got to be somewhere that the visitor can get to easily.
This if often related to this being based at airfields old and new business. Old airfields tend not to have public transport going to them and new airfields will have it but it will go to the terminal and the air museum is generally round the other side of the field.
I think you’re right in starting the thread and aiming to produce the results you’re seeking, and I hope it stimulates some good input, I just think you need to broaden the approach. You might even ask a few simple questions like
Over the last 5 years what is the trend in your gate numbers.
Over the last 5 years what is the trend in your membership numbers
Over the last 5 years what is the trend in your operating costs.
cheers
Have a look at this site Dave,
http://www.simhardware.org/page6.html
what this guy is doing is great stuff so he must be able to help you if he’s inclined to.
cheers
A couple that I’ve got a hand in one nearly there and one that’s taxing things a bit at the mo.
Just make sure you do just the once guys! We’ve done it thrree times two inbound and one outbound at about NZD2,000 a shot.
Am I allowed to be a clever dick and say my 807 beats your 708 anytime guys?
But hey good on you, welcome to the world of sad cases up to their eyeballs in damn 2BA nuts, bolts, and screws, oops and let’s not forget damn wing attachment taper pins!.
good luck!
Following on from what Bruce said above it’s important to clarify what we exactly hold at Ferrymead.
I have to say I struggle to understand why people get the fact wrong on it so often.
We have the wings (in four bits), undercarriages, engine cowls, drop tanks, fin, rudder, and assorted internal items from HR339/NZ2382. All that survives of her fuselage is the last 9-10ft.
From TE758/NZ2328 we have the fuselage, fin, rudder, and propellors.
From other sources we have two merlins and some spare wheels, spinners, and a few other bits and pieces.
You can see most of it in the attached, and as they say in the old cartoons…that’s it folks!
Bruce is entirely right, there is one heck of a lot of metal in a mossie and if it’s like our stuff and has been out in the elements for years that adds up to a lot of potential problems (= cost)
cheers