Thought I’d just posted a nice shot of a Corsair, but have just seen your first shot – absolutely stunning!
Here’s the last batch from Maracay. It’s a really interesting place to visit.
There can’t be too many museums with three Queen Airs…
Here’s the last batch from Maracay. It’s a really interesting place to visit.
There can’t be too many museums with three Queen Airs…
A few more photos from Maracay. The problem with the Canberras speaks for itself….
A few more photos from Maracay. The problem with the Canberras speaks for itself….
Pagen01, yes, I did get shots of the Canberras and I’ll post more photos from the museum soon. However, don’t build your hopes up, the museum has erected metal canopy covers over both aircraft rendering a half decent shot nigh on impossible. I guess it’s to protect the aircraft, but imagine a Canberra with a baseball hat on! Not a good look…
Here’s a few more from Venezuela. There can’t be too many military Bensen B8s around!
[QUOTE=CADman;1843618]Planning to visit Madrid this year and hopping to visit the Spanish Air Force museum at Cuatro Vientos and also the FIO collection.
If that’s how you plan to get there, lots of respect and good luck to you!
I’ll try and keep this brief. Went to Duxford today and my 4-year old loved entering the DAS aircraft, the exploding bridge of the ‘spy game’, the land warfare hall, the interactive aviation theory and sitting in the cockpit of the USAF MC130. In short, getting involved and variety.
Earlier in the week we paid a family visit to the Mosquito Aircraft Museum. We went inside the Heron where I extended and put back one of the tables (if there was a sign about not touching I missed it). My 4-yr old then did this and unfortunately it caught him out and sprang back with a bang. The MAM volunteer then castigated my son extremely strictly and implied I was an irresponsible parent – twice (the second time referring to me as my mother’s husband!) and then went on an extended spiel about how kids break everything in the museum. The upshot was my son was very upset and wanted to leave the museum and go home immediately.
Fortunately, we experienced the other extreme when we went to hangar 3 in the museum. A volunteer came up to us, asked my son if he wanted to sit in the Hornet Moth, did a bit of roleplay with the teddy bear in its cockpit about whether my son could come in or not, and told my son to move the joystick while getting him to see how the aircraft responded. He then got gas masks and other objects out of a display cabinet to show my son. Result – my son was enthralled, though it did take a long time for him to recover from the Heron’s volunteer (when told to take the stick he was very reticent due to the telling off he’d had), and has talked about this the last few days. The same volunteer was also remaking the model cabinets so the models were child height rather than 5ft up.
If a little time and effort is invested in the young it can go a long way. There’s no guarantee they’ll sustain this interest, but the likelihood is less if there’s no involvement and interaction and they’re made to feel unwelcome or tolerated at best.
In reply to the discussion about the AAC1 v Ju52 and previous about the C2.111 v He111, there appears to be a purist view of what a collection should hold. The bottom line for museums is feet through the door and those feet can be divided into 3 groups:
1) those there for a day out with little or no knowledge in aviation
2) those with varying degrees of interest and knowledge of aviation
3) and those who are well clued up.
It’s probably fair to say at larger museums most visitors fall into the first 2 categories. To what extent are these people aware of, let alone bothered by the slight differences license-built aircraft have? Any awareness of the aircraft is more likely to equate it with the original aircraft which can only be a good thing , surely?
I fully agree with with Sadsack and am surprised by some of the responses he has got. If I my cast my eye back to when I was a child – I remember when the AAC1 arrived and the thrill of seeing a tri-motor and being able to go into it, likewise a highlight of going to Southend was the C2.111. I loved aviation as a child and these aircraft enhanced my interest rather than diminished it even though I knew they were not ‘original’. Also, is there anyone here growing up in the 70s who didn’t relish a trip to Blackbushe?
These aircraft stimulate interest and enhance enjoyment. How many families have you heard discuss the differences between a Vampire and a Venom (lovely aircraft though they are) compared to talking about a trimotor or a Heinkel He111?
Yes, these aircraft are not the real deal in the literal sense of the word, but aren’t real aircraft preferable to fibre glass replicas, and surely the fact that they are representative of major historical types of some consequence? Finally, is it wrong to have more than on show in the country particularly as certain aircraft are represented in almost every museum?
For the interest we all share to prosper, don’t we need variety and points of interest to sustain this? Surely, license-built types are a way of achieving this when the originals are not ten a penny.
In reply to the discussion about the AAC1 v Ju52 and previous about the C2.111 v He111, there appears to be a purist view of what a collection should hold. The bottom line for museums is feet through the door and those feet can be divided into 3 groups:
1) those there for a day out with little or no knowledge in aviation
2) those with varying degrees of interest and knowledge of aviation
3) and those who are well clued up.
It’s probably fair to say at larger museums most visitors fall into the first 2 categories. To what extent are these people aware of, let alone bothered by the slight differences license-built aircraft have? Any awareness of the aircraft is more likely to equate it with the original aircraft which can only be a good thing , surely?
I fully agree with with Sadsack and am surprised by some of the responses he has got. If I my cast my eye back to when I was a child – I remember when the AAC1 arrived and the thrill of seeing a tri-motor and being able to go into it, likewise a highlight of going to Southend was the C2.111. I loved aviation as a child and these aircraft enhanced my interest rather than diminished it even though I knew they were not ‘original’. Also, is there anyone here growing up in the 70s who didn’t relish a trip to Blackbushe?
These aircraft stimulate interest and enhance enjoyment. How many families have you heard discuss the differences between a Vampire and a Venom (lovely aircraft though they are) compared to talking about a trimotor or a Heinkel He111?
Yes, these aircraft are not the real deal in the literal sense of the word, but aren’t real aircraft preferable to fibre glass replicas, and surely the fact that they are representative of major historical types of some consequence? Finally, is it wrong to have more than on show in the country particularly as certain aircraft are represented in almost every museum?
For the interest we all share to prosper, don’t we need variety and points of interest to sustain this? Surely, license-built types are a way of achieving this when the originals are not ten a penny.
A couple more:
Duxford 1985
Brienne le Chateau 1986
A couple more:
Duxford 1985
Brienne le Chateau 1986
Been meaning to dig this out for a while after seeing the photos of XV500 being scrapped. Here it is at Lakenheath in 1984.
Been meaning to dig this out for a while after seeing the photos of XV500 being scrapped. Here it is at Lakenheath in 1984.