1. British Aviation Preservation Council

Despite being the cornerstone to the UK’s aviation heritage, very few people outside the movement (readers of Flypast and Aeroplane Monthly) know of its existence.  My proposal is for this organisation to be given funds required to raise the profile of both the BAPC and the plight of our aviation heritage – this by establishing both a compressive website and the creation of additional promotional material.   Hopefully this would also prompt the BAPC to be more proactive and political in its campaigning to save our aviation heritage.

Most museums and aviation heritage groups (Airfield Research Group, etc) struggle with the very basics – including marketing and publicity.  My proposal would extend to a “Heritage Awareness Fund”.  This would help pay for the printing of publicity material and its distribution.  For every museum able to afford leaflets and brochures another struggles.  Individual awards upto a suggested £2k would be available to established or emerging collections. 

2. Airframe Restoration Fund

While some museums fight to secure funds for capital projects (expansion), the welfare of individual airframes is often overlooked.  Most museums and individuals struggle to finance the restoration or refurbishment of individual airframes – often relying on volunteers, whose quality of work is sometimes (though rarely) below that expected or exhibited by the national museums.  Unlike the criteria and timescales often associated with capital funding, application to this fund should be fast and straightforward - directed at British airframes that are accessible by the public.  Budgets up to £50K would be available - priority to be given to airframes in danger of being lost.  For “emergencies” like the sole surviving Blackburn Beverley there is already in place an emergency fund (that resulted in the former Queen’s Flight Wessex being secured by the International Helicopter Museum.

2. Fire Breathing Spitfire

There are very few individuals for whom the elliptical curves of the Supermarine Spitfire does not instil a sense of immense pride and affection.  However this does not alter the fact that the Spitfire was designed to kill – its eight Browning 303 machine guns equally effective against both metal and flesh.  We (those too young to remember the war) have been brought up on an inert object of modern warfare – its guns either silenced or deleted.  My proposal is that for a one-off event a static displayed Spitfire based at Duxford be fitted with eight working Browning 303 machine guns and loaded with blank ammunition – this to show what the Spitfire was like armed and dangerous.  The aircraft would thereafter be positioned in front of Duxford’s Aircraft Test Butt (Air Ministry Drawing No.4982/38).  Obviously, safety would be of paramount importance with the guns firing into a wall of sand and with the public positioned behind the airframe. 

I’m not sure how much this proposal would cost to implement but I would suggest that the live firing could be staged during one of Duxford’s airshows – an interlude in the flying program.  

3. Waddington Viewing Area Expansion

This proposal will result in two valuable airframes being housed on the site of Waddington’s (well established and popular) Public Viewing Area.  The structure required needs to be just large enough to accommodate Waddington’s Vulcan and the HP Victor (currently based at RAF Marham).  The aforementioned Victor is in danger of being scrapped, and as there are only five examples remaining, it would be beneficial if this aircraft (currently stored outside) was dismantled and moved to a new home.  I would suggest either Waddington or East Midlands Aero Park.  As well as securing the future of two valuable airframes this new structure would also offer a sheltered, raised viewing area.  It is desirable to incorporate the existing shop/café into this new build structure. This museum will also include the history of RAF Waddington.  The only problem with this proposal is that a new bypass is being built near the viewing area, which might impede expansion.  It is also rumoured that Waddington’s Vulcan will be permanently displayed outside on a new purpose built hard standing.

4. RAF Fire Service Museum

This is a collection that deserves HLF funding.  The history of the Royal Air Force extends beyond its aircrew and flying machines - however there are some aspects of the RAF that are in dire need of promotion and preservation.  I would include in this list the RAF Fire Service.  Collected over a number of years the Manston Fire Museum is owned by Sgt Steve Shirley (currently posted to RAF Waddington).  

Steve’s collection is housed at the Defence Fire Fighting Training School at former RAF Manston and apart from a number of civilian appliances contains a broad selection of former RAF vehicles.  I would have no problem in awarding this collection a sizable amount of funding, but would recommend that Steve concentrate on the RAF element of his collection – hence the name change.

5. The Ark

A storage facility for unwanted exhibits, too large or costly to publicly display. 

Limited public access
Exhibits to include vehicles and ground equipment
Some airframes to be crated and/or disassembled 

Airframes types currently in danger include examples of: C130, VC10, Nimrod, Shackleton, Belfast, Comet, and a myriad of other transport aircraft – both military and civilian.  The concept is to prevent further loses and controversy – such as the scrapping of the RAF Museum’s Blackburn Beverley.  The location of this facility must be cost effective and secure.  It would also benefit from being located on an active airfield.  Although whimsical in nature this proposal is not too dissimilar to the facility built for the Fleet Air Arm Museum and paid for by the HLF.

6. RAF Transport Command Museum

Although there are plans to create a new display hall at the RAF Museum Cosford, I would argue that it would be beneficial to create an additional museum – dedicated to protect the oversized aircraft of the RAF Transport Command – there being additional airframes available to make this a viable proposition.   Taking airframes from a number of collections as well as recent retirements from the RAF, the proposal is collate as many airframes as possible.

My argument is that it is dangerous to place all our eggs in one basket.  No matter how popular or professional the museum, accidents and incidents do happen.  Museums close and airframes are scrapped.  Replying on a single national body to conserve an exclusive number of airframes is precarious.  I would also add that the role of the RAF Transport Command warrants it own museum.  Possible locations for such a museum include the Yorkshire Air Museum and RAF Lynham (scheduled to close in 2012).   

7. East Midlands Aero Park

This museum is ideally placed next to a regional airport that borders the M1 motorway.  This expanding collection includes the Avro Vulcan, Vickers Varsity and AW Argosy – all of which would benefit from being placed undercover.  The site has excellent potential without the danger of being expanded beyond a manageable size.  Another benefit of this collection is that it is placed next to East Midlands Airport’s runway, and offers an excellent vantage point of plane spotters.  I would have no hesitation in awarding this collection enough funds to build a display hall large enough to house their collection.  I would even go further and add that I believe that this site has more potential than that at Coventry and Bruntingthorpe.  Perhaps a merger of two or more collections would result in more airframes being displayed indoors (which is the primary objective of any museum curator).

8. Generic Display Hall Proposal

Thumbing through Aeroplane Monthly’s 2003 Museum Guide it is disconcerting at the number of airframes currently exposed to the elements.  Although the HLF have financed the construction of display halls at the RAF Museum, IWM Duxford, Yorkshire Air Museum and the Brooklands Air Museum, there are many other sites in need of a purpose build display hall.  However, one obstacle is the costs involved.  Another issue or criticism directed at the HLF is that it takes too seriously the architectural design aspect of a capital project.  Concept architecture is too expensive and results in a deficit in content over design as anyone whose visited the Imperial War Museum of the North can testify to results in too few [large] exhibits being pro.  It must be noted that good architectural design is important – we have to live what is built around us.  However, conceptual architecture is both expensive and unnecessary.

My proposal is that a common design of display hall can be established on approximately four sites – in the same way that the Air Ministry adopted a series of standard aircraft hangars in the 1930/40s, such as the T2 and Bellman.  It would also be beneficial for museums and collections work together. 

We know that it takes time for an application to be processed.  We also know that most British designed and build airframes are displayed outside.  Most collections (smaller than the Newark Air Museum) are unlikely to benefit from the HLF, partly due to the protracted and complicated nature of the application process.  My proposal is that a number of museums join forces.  My proposal is that they should also adopt a common design of display hall – designed to house airframes both large and small. 

This structure should be large enough to house two or three large (Vulcan sized) airframes and approximately twelve fighter-sized aircraft. Each display hall will be built on land already owned by the respective museum (this to reduce cost and also to contribute to the match-funding element of any application made to the HLF).  Each display hall will feature a reception area, office space, toilets and a small retail/catering area.

And that’s about it.  Most of my proposals are fairly low-key – and would easily make up for the Heritage Lottery Fund's lackluster past record – despite of recent events.