ChoxPondskater, don’t get me started on the photography business, it disgusts me!
I don’t know what planet the people at Hendon live on but they’re clearly disinterested in making any effort to make the RAF/MoD’s brilliant photographic archives easily available to the public. Likewise, they’re trying to charge ridiculous amounts of money to publish photographs (or at least the photos that they care to make available) so that they’ve effectively ensured that they’ll never be published ever again. Publishers I work for don’t even bother dealing with RAFM as they know it’s a lost cause.
They seem to be completely clueless (or simply don’t care) what shoestring budgets aviation publishers work to, and that nobody could afford to pay their charges. So the photographs will be hidden away forever even though they were of course paid for by the taxpayer. I don’t know how the RAFM has claimed the right to whatever remains of the RAF’s photography archives, or how they’ve claimed the right to charge for what used to be entirely free. Certainly it’s no way to foster the proliferation of information and history, it’s just a good way to ensure that these artefacts are lost forever, just because some smart alec at Hendon thought (wrongly) that they could make a fast buck.
ChoxIf you want peace and quiet, you’re in the wrong century.
Exactly! Heaven forbid that a museum was a stuffy old place full of dusty exhibits and dull information. It’s got to be a theme park these days. I’m not too blind to know that the vast majority of people want this kind of “experience” now but it’s just my opinion and I’m pretty sure that it’s shared by others too, and not just the “old folks” either (I’m only 46 myself so I can’t be accused of just being some miserable old fogey, well, I guess I can, but you know what I mean!). It’s just the way things are now. The typical punter has the attention span of a goldfish and can’t look at anything with any interest unless it lights-up or makes a noise. Naturally, now that museums are obliged to attract as many people as possible they have to cater for the interests of the majority, hence the theme park approach. I don’t imagine it will change in fact I’m sure it will get worse. It’s just a shame that things have drifted this way, not least because it only serves to foster the notion that the more obscure exhibits will eventually be regarded as redundant. It’s like I said previously – you can see what future generations will be saddled with – a homogenised, sterile hall with a couple of working plastic replicas that the kids can move by wiggling a joystick. All nice and safe and highly entertaining but of course it won’t tell anyone anything about aviation or the history of the RAF, but then, as is increasingly the case now, most people who go to these places don’t even want to know such things – they just want an entertaining day out. That’s fine of course but I really don’t know how we’ve reached a stage where museums are obliged to be part of this process. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were two venues, one being a museum and the other being a theme park, then we’d all be happy?!
Choxhowever sadly Managers see one model or mark as much the same as another
Exactly, so why are these muppets given these jobs? They ain’t fit for purpose.
and if he runs down the exhibit hall screaming and getting in somebodies way, I’m happy to be old fashioned enough to smack his backside
That’s fine but you’re assuming that all parents/kids are the same as you and of course they’re not. What you actually get is kids running around looking for something to do, while their parents just ignore them. Last time I went there were three kids playing chase/hide n seek round the Tornado! It’s just ridiculous I was almost on the point of going to complain but what would be the point, you’d just get platitudes.
Parents are always looking at places to take the kids
Exactly. Just wish they’d take ’em somewhere else. It’s completely wrong to use important museums as entertainment venues and it’s just as wrong for the museum authorities to portray them in the same way. These people that run places like Hendon and seriously think that they should be making the place into some “interactive entertainment venue” should be fired. It’s a disgrace. It’s happening everywhere – every museum has to be reinvented as an amusement centre for kids. What the hell is wrong with this country? Does everything have to be dumbed-down?
The Neptune was a gift from the Dutch and even during my time there rumours regarding selling it off were rife
Doesn’t surprise me. You get the impression that Cosford aren’t interested in the aircraft at all. You’d think that they’d have the good grace to look after an aircraft that has been presented as a gift but it seems not. At worst they could have refurbished it as an RAF machine (I seem to recall there were a few late Neptunes that were pretty-much to the same standard in RAF service?) but even if they didn’t there are acres of space at Cosford and it’s a very interesting aircraft. But I guess it doesn’t fit-in with the museum’s fancy projection drawings of silly themes, interactive displays and all the other “modern presentation” garbage that they’re primarily interested in. It’s a great pity that places like Cosford and Hendon cannot be run by serious historians who know precisely what they’re looking after and how important their exhibits are. But these days they are inevitably run by the person who can give the best PR presentation. I have no doubt that things will only get worse. I’m sure that in a few decades from now these places will be completely different. The aircraft will be withdrawn from public view (because of health & safety – somebody could run through the barriers and bang his head on the fuselage so the aircraft had better be removed – you know how it goes), the information will all be gone because the visitors have attention spans that last no more than thirty seconds, so it’ll become a plastic virtual interactive experience, and in effect they’ll become theme parks. Guess I don’t care really as I’ll be dead and buried but you have to marvel at how everything has to cater for the lowest common denominator. Sad business.
ChoxHave to say that after my last visit to RAFM last year, I don’t have any appetite to go again for a long time.
I don’t have any problem with the development Typhoon being on show as long as they replace it when an operational airframe becomes available, but there’s no guarantee that they will. I do have a problem with Bf-109’s USAF Mustangs, Spanish flying boats and development EH-101’s and so on. If a museum is supposedly dedicated to the RAF, I don’t expect to see valuable space given to non-RAF aircraft and I’ve never understood why they’ve done this both now and in the past. It’s not as if there’s a shortage of RAF aircraft looking for a good home indoors.
But the thing that really put me off was the way in which Hendon seems to have become a kid’s playground. I don’t want to walk round a museum and have to listen to kids shouting, nor do I expect to happen across a cafe in the middle of the place with people sat with push chairs and babies rolling around on the floor.
I really don’t buy into this “interactive” business and this obsession with making every museum an activity centre for kids. Surely, if a child is going to a museum then he/she should be going there to examine artefacts and glean information, not go for amusement. It’s not Alton Towers for heaven’s sake, it’s the RAF Museum! Personally, I think that if a kid is incapable of appreciating stuffy old museum exhibits without bursting into tears, then he should be in a playground, not Hendon – simple as that.
I totally object to the way that significant and important centres like Hendon have been dumbed-down to cater for idiots with the attention span of a goldfish. That’s not the purpose of museums but I guess we’ve got into a situation where it’s all about figures, and Hendon probably just want to get as many people as they can through the doors, regardless of what a turn-off it is for so many of the people who do go – and subsequently don’t go again.
As for the poor old Beverley, I think that just about sums-up Hendon’s attitude. They destroy a valuable aircraft because they supposedly can’t afford to preserve it. Complete rubbish of course, they could have saved it if they wanted to but they didn’t want to spend the money. This raises the question as to what a museum is for if it becomes standard policy to simply dispose of exhibits when they can’t be bothered to preserve them any longer. Wonder what would happen if the Natural History Museum started throwing-out their dinosaur skeletons if they decided they were too much trouble to preserve?
The “plastic” Spitfire and Hurricane oustide sum-up Hendon nicely. They’re all about presentation and popularity rather than historical preservation.
As for Cosford, I have mixed feeling about the way things are going there. I accept that the new Cold War hall is a good step and it’s enabled some important aircraft to find shelter, and even the crowded layout has some advantages as it enables visitors to see aircraft from very unsual angles. But the whole museum is becoming very different to how it was and I get the impression that they’re desperately trying to copy Hendon’s approach, so I can only assume that Cosford will also become a playground which is devoted to entertainment rather than information. What’s betting that the Dutch Neptune gets chopped before too long when Cosford lose interest in it, just like they did with their Vulcan B1? If they leave it long enough, they’ll be able to claim that it’s “beyond economic repair” yet again and it’ll be dumped, just like some of those airliners which were destroyed for no reason whatsoever. Plenty of available space but some idiot must have decided that they looked untidy, so they get scrapped. Who are these morons that make these decisions?
I think their whole attitude stinks!
ChoxAlan’s story (written by the man himself) is also featured in my book Hunter – A Complete History published by Crecy last year.
It was done simply because Alan was frustrated by the official attitude towards the RAF’s anniversary which wasn’t being celebrated with any great enthusiasm. In true fighter pilot spirit he decided to take things into his own hands. It’s a pity that there are not more people like him still around in the RAF.
ChoxI assume it’s the A15 with traffic
Yep, that’s the place – before they built that hideous fence! 🙂
ChoxThree of my oldies:-
ChoxWow! Some brilliant photos there! I’ve seen b&w shots of the F-101’s and F-100F at that show before but never in stunning colour – brilliant!
I’m not sure where the white V-Bombers are at though – it’s not St. Mawgan and looking at the background I’d be inclined to say it was the west side of Biggin Hill, but as far as I know the public/static were/are always on the other side of the runway?
The blue dye under the Hunters is fascinating too, and as for that JP… awesome!
ChoxGreat photo Scorpion – u can see what my problem is though – it all get’s a little muddled behind those cans, it’s really difficult to work-out precisely what goes where!
Thanks John I’ll PM you
ChoxBizarre – love to see more of that!
Speaking of target tugs, anyone know where I might find any decent close-up pictures of the TT20’s target gear – particularly the sleeve holders under the fuselage? I’ve been wanting to build a decent model of a TT20 for ages but finding details of precisely what the gear is like is a nightmare. There’s a drawing from the Meteor’s manual floating around but even that doesn’t show every detail.
ChoxRe- Binbrook, it transpires that dayglow also appeared on one other Lightning around 1967 – 5 squadron’s T5 had dayglow trainer bands applied for a while.
As for the lovely Hunter shot above, I’d guess it was Valley as it is a 4FTS machine.
ChoxMine three:p
ChoxXL569 – you can never tell with these people. We might well find that in a couple of weeks, they’ve miraculously found some more money from somewhere. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they’ve deliberately held-off from mentioning any other developments for the time being.
ChoxVX927, I would suggest that you avoid wasting your time arguing with Moggy on this matter any longer. I’ve asked the Administrator to step-in and stop this nonsense so that we can hopefully restore the thread to a discussion of XH558 and/or Vulcans in general.
Naturally, I have no objection to discussing or arguing any points with anyone when appropriate. I have stated the “accepted wisdom” on the Falklands subject and simply stated that this was from my position as a well-known author on the subject of Vulcans. Moggy seems to have taken this as some sort of ego trip, which of course it wasn’t, I was merely trying to emphasise that expressing one’s view is fine, but that there is an accepted (ie well-published) view on the subject which has been in print for decades, therefore there is no reason to assume that it is in any way inaccurate, otherwise it would have been challenged repeatedly.
To be accused of talking “hot air” is of course offensive. I take the point that to accuse Sharkey Ward of the same crime is no better, but then Sharkey put himself into the firing line through his published comments and has been accused of being more than a little “pro-Navy” far too many times for my comment to be seen as unfair. I suspect he would freely admit to his unashamed pro-Navy ramblings if he was asked!
It’s like I said previously, if Moggy thinks his views are substantially different to everyone else’s, then why doesn’t he seek to get them published like the rest of us do, and be prepared to take the criticism of readers and reviewers like the rest of us, if or when he is proved to be wrong? I think that is a rather more respectable way of contradicting someone than simply making nasty remarks to them on a forum?
Anyway, back to the Vulcan. Much as I’m often the first to criticise TVOC, I have to say that they’ve done a splendid job with the feature in today’s Mail, with a good write-up (most of which actually makes sense for a change!) and even a two-page spread of 558’s flight deck. Good stuff indeed, so well done to whoever made it happen. Glad to see that Lady T has stepped-in with some words of encouragement too. I hope that all these pledges of support are used as much as possible and not simply wasted. I do find it remarkable though that Sir Richard can offer his words of support but can’t stick his hand in his pocket. It’s not as if he’d miss a few bob, is it?!
ChoxYou ought to have some issues with it Page, as the more you look at it, the more you realise what a mess it is! It’s not exactly awful but for a modern mainstream kit of the Canberra costing nearly £30 I think they ought to have done a whole lot better!
Sign In
