Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:45 pm
Hellcat wrote:This may be a terrible analogy, but in my neck of the woods, people with horses, who love them dearly, but cannot take care of them, gladly, yet sadly, give the horses to others who can take care of them. Sounds like your mossie will have a better home. And you still get money and such in return. IMHO
Reasonable point, but the comparison's not really valid - an aircraft in proper storage has an indefinite opportunity to be pulled out and restored in the future - a horse has a very finite life! (Of course my Canadian wife points out that Calgurians understand horses and know Mosquitoes as nasty big stingy things...
)
The only major thing I can see to object to is public servants refusing to explain their actions because they had a debate in camera. I'm sorry, but that's not good enough - they are not a private organisation, and while certain items might be held to be confidential, the citizens of Calgary aren't being well served by their elected body.
I'd like to know more details of the deal(s), and Peter, while it's important to look at worst case scenarios, you've really overcooked your concerns, IMHO. It's not that bad. I can think of one shop in the UK where I'd send my Hurricane to be rebuilt, if I had one, the money and could do the deal - it would be the best option.
Regards,
Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:54 pm
Reasonable point, but the comparison's not really valid - an aircraft in proper storage has an indefinite opportunity to be pulled out and restored in the future - a horse has a very finite life! (Of course my Canadian wife points out that Calgurians understand horses and know Mosquitoes as nasty big stingy things... )
Well friend, maybe you're reading into it more than I am, from what I understand is that this museum is doing nothing with it. Other than storage, which is fine, but personally, if the potential new owner is going to robustly restore the airplane back to life, then I give them my full support. I'd like to see the thing properly restored in my lifetime. And re-read my post ... "terrible analogy", but a point made with reasonable for-thought ....
Re: slight correction
Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:06 am
peter wrote:I was informed that not only is the Mosquito bomber being sold, BUT the Hawker Hurricane is to go to the UK as well to be rebuilt to static display and then return to Canada!
As most of you know when an aircraft is taken on as a restoration project, parts go missing or are discarded or swapped out for parts from other aircraft to make a static project. What will return to Canada will be a Hurricane Yes but nothing like what left as far as a complete and original aircraft is.
Peter, I think if you take a look at the USAFM Hurricane in Dayton that was rebuilt to static display standard in the UK, I think you'll find it to be of the highest possible quality, and light years ahead of anything that could be done in Calgary.
Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:49 am
Hellcat wrote:Well friend, maybe you're reading into it more than I am, from what I understand is that this museum is doing nothing with it.
Storage inside is not 'nothing'. Ask anyone paying for hangarage, or the cost of proper museum storage. From my post over on Key:
Not to argue, just to clarify.
The primary (that is, 'most important' job) of a museum or gallery is to preserve the artefacts. Keeping it in as warehouse, under good (if not ideal) conditions is 90% of that job. If it had been kept, stored and protected from degeneration, you have options in the future. That's why most national collections (not just of aircraft) have large storage facilities. If you sell it, you don't have any options in the future. As is often mentioned by some private collectors, 'we' are just looking after the thing for future generations.
Britain and Canada have literally thousands of priceless, irreplaceable items in museum stores that should never be sold or traded, and are 'key' parts of the heritage of each country. They are accessible for genuine research, in most cases, and will be available for the future people and visitors of those countries.
Just some basic heritage theory.
... if the potential new owner is going to robustly restore the airplane back to life, then I give them my full support. I'd like to see the thing properly restored in my lifetime.
I agree it would be great to see it restored in our lifetimes. But leaving it storage (rather than outside) isn't a failure, either. Heritage and proper preservation for future generations isn't about instant gratification for you or I.
Regards,
Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:35 am
JDK wrote:But leaving it storage (rather than outside) isn't a failure, either. Heritage and proper preservation for future generations isn't about instant gratification for you or I.
hear hear!
greg v.
Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:46 am
JDK you make some good points...
I am not going to speak to this aircraft specifically as I just don't have enough detail to comment intelligently.
But what this is really about is history and who it belongs to...
If history is for the highest bidder what does that say about where our society has gone...not to mention the artifacts we like to make our focus are those that people gave their lives in to defend qualities like, freedom and equality.
A private collector has every right to demand what he or she wishes for something, they also have the full right to control who gets to see it.
So as more aircraft fall out of the reach of museums...they fall out of reach of the public. The children who will never be inspired by them, the ever shrinking number of veterans that created the history we all celebrate. The public at large that never see them so have no reason to care.
Now not all collectors are created equal...some as JDK pointed out see themselves as caretakers of the future of the aircraft...others are speculators and opportunists, not to mention everything in between.
But to say we need to continue to repeat mistakes of the past and its good for historical aviation is not right etheir.
Most museums can no longer compete with the private sector, when an aircraft leaves a country it is gone to the bulk of the public of that country.
Canada's culutral property legislation has rarely been invoked...but protecting our heritage is the governments repsonsibility.
As far as the free flow of aircraft between Canada, England and the USA...come on now there are more Mustangs, Corsairs and Spitfires in California, heck likely Washington, than all of Canada. The trade has been very one way and in the case of the Mossie, the Heritage status...if invoked... can easily be justified. The country is 6000km (+/-) wide and only (4) in the nation.
Considering the history the aircraft represents, both commercial and military, it is important.
But it all circles back to...Who does a countries history belong to??? The highest bidder?
Tom H
I am not going to speak to this aircraft specifically as I just don't have enough detail to comment intelligently.
But what this is really about is history and who it belongs to...
If history is for the highest bidder what does that say about where our society has gone...not to mention the artifacts we like to make our focus are those that people gave their lives in to defend qualities like, freedom and equality.
A private collector has every right to demand what he or she wishes for something, they also have the full right to control who gets to see it.
So as more aircraft fall out of the reach of museums...they fall out of reach of the public. The children who will never be inspired by them, the ever shrinking number of veterans that created the history we all celebrate. The public at large that never see them so have no reason to care.
Now not all collectors are created equal...some as JDK pointed out see themselves as caretakers of the future of the aircraft...others are speculators and opportunists, not to mention everything in between.
But to say we need to continue to repeat mistakes of the past and its good for historical aviation is not right etheir.
Most museums can no longer compete with the private sector, when an aircraft leaves a country it is gone to the bulk of the public of that country.
Canada's culutral property legislation has rarely been invoked...but protecting our heritage is the governments repsonsibility.
As far as the free flow of aircraft between Canada, England and the USA...come on now there are more Mustangs, Corsairs and Spitfires in California, heck likely Washington, than all of Canada. The trade has been very one way and in the case of the Mossie, the Heritage status...if invoked... can easily be justified. The country is 6000km (+/-) wide and only (4) in the nation.
Considering the history the aircraft represents, both commercial and military, it is important.
But it all circles back to...Who does a countries history belong to??? The highest bidder?
Tom H
Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:40 am
Hi everyone,
My way of seeing things is that we never “own” any history we are just custodians of it for a future generation. Nothing lasts forever, particularly museums. What happens is the private collector, highest bidder or not, usually has the desire to preserve the history for future generations. Sometimes it can be other motives, but more often than not, there are good intentions. If that means they get to say who sees it then fair enough. I might not see it in my lifetime, but short of that person coming over all Howard Hughes, somebody will see it and reports will creep out about how it is being cared for.
My personal opinion is that I wouldn’t care who had it tucked away so long as it was being cared for.
The aircraft that once was thought of to have a lifespan measured in hours, now has a lifespan that if cared for correctly outlasts that of its caretaker. At that point it becomes available for someone else to take care of it, possibly the public.
When the Mosquito was towards the ends of their career in the UK they were burnt, mutilated and used in cheap stunts in film. The ones that survived this ended up in museums, and private collections where the money was to keep them safe. The ones in other nations again had a hard life. Australia was pretty much the same as the UK, while in Canada, the survey work kept them busy.
These aircraft then spent years on farms, scrap heaps and where they fell. They were hardly thought of as heritage then were they? When talked about in government circles the heritage question often comes about hand in hand with pound/dollar signs.
The trade between Canada is very often one way - but the mighty reason behind this is due to Canada’s role during the war, and its post war use of the vast amount of aircraft it had, and to some extent still has.
Lancasters… more in one country than anywhere else, with nearly 50% of the world’s population. Bolingbrokes. Ansons. Then the rare stuff.
Avro Yorks. A substantial amount of a Lincoln. A Bristol 170 Freighter. Massive parts of two B-36 Peacemakers.
Then the working stuff. A-26’s still firefighting. Catalinas. God knows how many Norsemen and Beech 18’s.
Okay, so maybe Canada doesn’t have the high profile stuff, like vast amounts of Spitfires, Mustangs, and Corsairs, but I don’t see how low numbers can justify heritage status. This would mean that should an individual get himself a Spitfire from outside Canada, it would instantly become part of Canada’s heritage!
Heritage is something that really does me in. Here’s why.
Take the Lancaster as an example. You have some 430 odd aircraft that was built in Canada, but nowhere near that number saw service. The first one flew on ops in late 1943 with the war being over in may 1945. Over 10,000 Canadians died in bomber command, in seven years of war. So all the survivors now are painted up as veterans of this conflict, with the 20 years of saving lives and patrolling the northern skies, is being painted out in favour of kill markings, mission indicators and roundels.
THIS, not the movement of an aircraft is a loss of heritage.
Was the Mossie going to be put back into Spartan Air Service colours? I doubt it.
Let it be sold. Let it be restored. To hold it back, based on whether it has heritage or not is pure madness. I’d rather have memories of a Mosquito looking its best (though thundering down the valleys in Scotland like in 633 Sqn is unlikely) which we all would probably agree is in the air, rather than on its belly in storage.
Who knows, such is life it could end up back in Canada in a few years…
Regards,
Ric
My way of seeing things is that we never “own” any history we are just custodians of it for a future generation. Nothing lasts forever, particularly museums. What happens is the private collector, highest bidder or not, usually has the desire to preserve the history for future generations. Sometimes it can be other motives, but more often than not, there are good intentions. If that means they get to say who sees it then fair enough. I might not see it in my lifetime, but short of that person coming over all Howard Hughes, somebody will see it and reports will creep out about how it is being cared for.
My personal opinion is that I wouldn’t care who had it tucked away so long as it was being cared for.
The aircraft that once was thought of to have a lifespan measured in hours, now has a lifespan that if cared for correctly outlasts that of its caretaker. At that point it becomes available for someone else to take care of it, possibly the public.
When the Mosquito was towards the ends of their career in the UK they were burnt, mutilated and used in cheap stunts in film. The ones that survived this ended up in museums, and private collections where the money was to keep them safe. The ones in other nations again had a hard life. Australia was pretty much the same as the UK, while in Canada, the survey work kept them busy.
These aircraft then spent years on farms, scrap heaps and where they fell. They were hardly thought of as heritage then were they? When talked about in government circles the heritage question often comes about hand in hand with pound/dollar signs.
The trade between Canada is very often one way - but the mighty reason behind this is due to Canada’s role during the war, and its post war use of the vast amount of aircraft it had, and to some extent still has.
Lancasters… more in one country than anywhere else, with nearly 50% of the world’s population. Bolingbrokes. Ansons. Then the rare stuff.
Avro Yorks. A substantial amount of a Lincoln. A Bristol 170 Freighter. Massive parts of two B-36 Peacemakers.
Then the working stuff. A-26’s still firefighting. Catalinas. God knows how many Norsemen and Beech 18’s.
Okay, so maybe Canada doesn’t have the high profile stuff, like vast amounts of Spitfires, Mustangs, and Corsairs, but I don’t see how low numbers can justify heritage status. This would mean that should an individual get himself a Spitfire from outside Canada, it would instantly become part of Canada’s heritage!
Heritage is something that really does me in. Here’s why.
Take the Lancaster as an example. You have some 430 odd aircraft that was built in Canada, but nowhere near that number saw service. The first one flew on ops in late 1943 with the war being over in may 1945. Over 10,000 Canadians died in bomber command, in seven years of war. So all the survivors now are painted up as veterans of this conflict, with the 20 years of saving lives and patrolling the northern skies, is being painted out in favour of kill markings, mission indicators and roundels.
THIS, not the movement of an aircraft is a loss of heritage.
Was the Mossie going to be put back into Spartan Air Service colours? I doubt it.
Let it be sold. Let it be restored. To hold it back, based on whether it has heritage or not is pure madness. I’d rather have memories of a Mosquito looking its best (though thundering down the valleys in Scotland like in 633 Sqn is unlikely) which we all would probably agree is in the air, rather than on its belly in storage.
Who knows, such is life it could end up back in Canada in a few years…
Regards,
Ric
Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:16 am
I have to agree with Richard the important thing is to keep them flying if possible. When it comes to heritage its not so much a nations heritage as the history of aviation in general that is important. Currently here in Canada we have the sole flying Hurricane MKIV representing 6 Squadron RAF, its a beautiful thing restored in the UK. We also have Edward VIII Fox Moth flying restored in New Zealand. A great number of the warbirds flying in North America have benefitted from the expertise developed in Canada.
At Vintage Wings the current Hurricane restoration has relied on the expertise of great people in the UK and the USA as well as Canada. The centre spar is currently being rebuilt by a skilled craftsman from El Salvador.
The P40 being restored down in New Zealand is a real beauty as is the Corsair done in the US. I recently talked with a wonderful gentleman from Australia who had come to see the Chipmunk under resoration. He was thrilled to see it being done as he had flown this very aircraft.
What is as important as the aircraft themselves is preserving the skills needed to restore these wonderful machines. Does it matter where in the world, I think not.
At Vintage Wings the current Hurricane restoration has relied on the expertise of great people in the UK and the USA as well as Canada. The centre spar is currently being rebuilt by a skilled craftsman from El Salvador.
The P40 being restored down in New Zealand is a real beauty as is the Corsair done in the US. I recently talked with a wonderful gentleman from Australia who had come to see the Chipmunk under resoration. He was thrilled to see it being done as he had flown this very aircraft.
What is as important as the aircraft themselves is preserving the skills needed to restore these wonderful machines. Does it matter where in the world, I think not.
Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:08 am
There were three Bristol Fighters (the only airworthy ones anywhere on the planet for a brief, fleeting moment) flying together on two consecutive Saturdays in Summer 2006. One is now in New Zealand, the other, in Canada (probably never to fly again) However, it is in a National Collection, where it will hopefully be preserved for future generations and seen by millions.
A fair trade in airframes, for the benefit of all concerned.
A fair trade in airframes, for the benefit of all concerned.
Good pooints JDK and others
Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:35 am
Apologies for initial post frustration and emotions got in way of the keyboard. I think what has caused the most outcry this time is that with her being public property(taxpayer) and the meeting being behind closed doors did not go over to well.
Behind Closed Doors
Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:02 am
So, is anything happening to correct it? Is anyone doing anything about it at the local level?
Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:16 am
Latest I heard was they are trying to get a public meeting or something
For some of the press coverage regarding all this please see:
[/url]http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/01/24/mosquito-bomber.html[url]
[/url]http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/city/story.html?id=47e35e9d-05d3-46f5-9f12-6ca73c539f78[url]
[/url]http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2008/01/25/4793053-sun.html http://www.am770chqr.com/news/news_loca ... _local.cfm[url][/url]
For some of the press coverage regarding all this please see:
[/url]http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/01/24/mosquito-bomber.html[url]
[/url]http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/city/story.html?id=47e35e9d-05d3-46f5-9f12-6ca73c539f78[url]
[/url]http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2008/01/25/4793053-sun.html http://www.am770chqr.com/news/news_loca ... _local.cfm[url][/url]
Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:30 am
Mike wrote:Perhaps Ed Russell should send his Spitfire, Hurricane and Bf109 back to their countries of origin, Peter?
.
The Hurricane is in its country of origin, it was made by Canadian Car and Foundry.
Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:16 pm
Simcoe Warrior wrote:The Hurricane is in its country of origin, it was made by Canadian Car and Foundry.
And there was me thinking that Paul Mercer built it!
Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:33 pm
That we attach a high value to history?Tom H wrote:If history is for the highest bidder what does that say about where our society has gone...
Is that a bad thing? People that pay a lot of money for things generally wouldn't stand for them deteriorating and losing that value. Would you use a rare antique postage stamp to mail a letter?
So what is better in everyone's mind, leave the Mosquito where it is, unseen by the masses because it is "well preserved" in it's (run down, worn out & civilianized) current state or sell it so it can be restored and displayed so tens of thousands can see it? How is history served if nobody even knows that the artifact exists?