A Time to Reflect and a Time to Prioritise 

Why is our aviation heritage so important? 

Today there are only a handful of surviving veterans of The Great War (1914-1918).  In 25 years time there will be a similar number of elderly veterans of the Second World War (1939-1945).  Those who remember or who bore witnessed are our greatest assets – those we look up to with pride or for an insight into what happened. Yet, when the last solder, sailor, airmen, or wartime evacuee has passed away what is left will become exponentially more valuable.  The problem is that by then it maybe too late.  If we are to consolidate our history beyond the grave then we need to increase our heritage portfolio and not cast away the physical attributes in the same manner we have done in the recent past.      

Whose Heritage - Whose Priority!

Our aviation heritage – that we know and love – extends beyond the contours of the Spitfire and Hurricane.  Yet, despite our rich and diverse heritage the biggest issue we face is the waste of valuable resources (funding) expended on the preservation of foreign aircraft.  This has become a national scandal of epic proportions. 

Question: why is it that we are spending what valuable resources (funds and manpower) that are available on preserving the aeronautical heritage of other nations, while our own heritage crumbles into obscurity?  In writing this I highlight the ever-increasing perception that our aviation heritage (both physically and intellectually) is being sacrificed over that from other nations.  this essay also highlights the dangerous practice of “Top Shelf Aeronautica” - what use to be called “Spitfire Snobbery”, which is being practiced by the very institutions that we ultimately rely on to protect our heritage (see also "Big is Beautiful" below).   

Take for example Duxford – renowned as being the biggest and best aviation heritage site in Europe.  Despite being a major Battle of Britain aerodrome, 50% of the aircraft of display (static or airworthy) are foreign. My first visit to Duxford was on November 6^th 1995.  At the time builders had just started on the construction of the American Air Museum.  Despite this costly activity I was concerned by the condition of the Avro Shackleton and Handley Page Victor, both of which had been left exposed to the elements.  Eight years later and the same two British aircraft remain outside and in a deteriorating or worst condition.  This while the IWM not only opened the American Air Museum, but also expanded this collection of America's heritage.  We know funds are limited, yet the Imperial War Museum saw, as a priority, the preservation or conservation of more popular foreign airframes over more vulnerable (and valuable) British aircraft, whose future survival is now jeopardised. 

My concern is that we are not only sacrificing our own physical heritage, but we are also  enforcing the perception that we either never had an aviation industry worthy of preservation or that the aeronautical exploits of other countries outclassed or surpassed our own. 

At this point it must be noted that private individuals or organisations are not exempt from this criticism.  If anything they are the real culprits – they more than most have the ability (funds) to preserve our heritage, yet choose to turn the aforementioned Flying Legends display into a celebration of American airpower.  I must add at this point that my criticism is not anti-American in context or content.  It is largely directed at those in authority (OFMC, TFC, IWM, RAF Museum and Heritage Lottery Fund management) who desire to preserve the heritage of other nations (using scarce resources and even scarcer funds) this while our own heritage is increasingly at risk. 

This I guess is due in part to the misguided believe that sexy fighters and bombers sell, and that America produces the best porn (P51Ds and P47Ds).

Big is Beautiful

Rumour has it that when HeavyLift went into receivership, the owners offered its last airworthy Short Belfast to the Imperial War Museum for a mere £4,000 (to cover the cost of fuel).  This offer was polity refused on the grounds of cost (how much did the IWM spend on the American Air Museum?).  What is worrying (fucking annoying) is that Duxford are in a better position than most to offer this airframe a ‘sheltered’ home.  In recent years, a number of [British] large airframes have been scrapped, yet the Duxford Aviation Society has proved that large airframes can be preserved by bodies who are sometimes more ‘focused’ or ‘mission orientated’ than their national counterparts. 

Thumbing through the pages of Flypast and Aeroplane Monthly it is easy to identify the problem areas.  We know that large British designed and built aircraft are scrapped at an alarming rate.  RAF transport aircraft are particularly at risk – why?  Because we still suffer from Spitfire Snobbery.  Museums need to attract visitors – both to secure funds and to impress funders.  

A lumbering old transport, whose faded paintwork does little to detract from years of accumulated bird droppings, will always be less attractive than an easily identifiable Spitfire or Hurricane (even if they are fibreglass replicas).   

The RAF Museum’s Blackburn Beverley was scrapped we are told because it was too costly to move to Cosford. We are also told that the airframe was unstable.  In reality the RAF Museum’s Blackburn Beverley was scrapped because it wasn’t sexy enough for Hendon’s new image.  Fact: a Spitfire will always outsell a lumbering old cargo plane. No matter, according to the RAF Museum this airframe was in fact owned by the MoD - so weren't to blame. 

Home