Why don't we buy a Mossie for the BBMF?

[andyl999]

I was at the Virginia Beach Military Aviation Museum last week:-

Military Aviation Museum | Home (http://www.militaryaviationmuseum.org/)

Certainly I can recommend a visit if you are in the area as the planes are easily accessible to a point where you can walk up to them in the hanger and actually touch them. Spitfire, Hurricane, Aerocobra etc etc. All in suburb condition.

However what took my eye was an immaculate Mosquito, it last flew in July this year and like any of the planes in this collection is up for sale:-

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v616/andyl999/flying/P1030430_zpse77f3c43.jpg

Va. Beach museum owner selling plane collection | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com (http://hamptonroads.com/2013/06/va-beach-museum-owner-selling-plane-collection)

I began to think and realised that the UK actually is quite a rich nation wouldn't it be great if our Leader put his hand in his pocket (or discounted the Indian aid by a few million) and handed it over to the BBMF to add to their flying collection?

What's your views?

[Trim Stab]

Well our PM certainly has no power or jurisdiction to do such a thing with tax-payers money.

However, it would certainly be a nice gesture on behalf of many of those multi-billionaires who live in UK but don't pay UK taxes. It would certainly get them a lot of very favourable publicity.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Hint, hint.;)

[wokkamate]

in the grand scheme of things it won't cost too much will it?

'The only airworthy Mosquito in the world' - it would be lovely to see it flying in formation with the Lancaster, the Spitfire and the Hurricane........

[GeeRam]

I began to think and realised that the UK actually is quite a rich nation wouldn't it be great if our Leader put his hand in his pocket (or discounted the Indian aid by a few million) and handed it over to the BBMF to add to their flying collection?

What's your views?

Well, Jerry would want at least US$10m for it for a start.........which would be a bit of an issue.

The other big issue is this a/c couldn't be operated on a UK CAA permit, because it's effectively a new build that hasn't been built to original specs (modern glue) so even though the BBMF operate on mil reg, I'm not sure how support from BAe to the BBMF would be arranged unless BAe did the new calcs inspections etc to OK it etc.........any currect/ex-BAe bods on here care to comment on such a theoretical proposition...?

BBMF came oh so close to getting RR299, but it sadly crashed a few months short of being handed over to the flight by BAe at the end of that years display season or so the story goes.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The other big issue is this a/c couldn't be operated on a UK CAA permit

Would be the perfect excuse to have the entire CAA management taken out and shot. God knows they deserve it.

(disclaimer - joke. O Tempora O Mores)

[Wensleydale]

The country must be broke - the football clubs only spent £630,000,000 on new players during this transfer window!

(I wonder how much of this we will get in tax? - charge the clubs VAT at 20% and we could get 633 Squadron - never mind a solitary Mossie).

[GeeRam]

'The only airworthy Mosquito in the world' - it would be lovely to see it flying in formation with the Lancaster, the Spitfire and the Hurricane........

That's already happened......... just not with 'our' Lanc, Spit or Hurri ;)

[andyl999]

Yes I understand all the issues but this is an opportunity?

The BBMF I think has stagnated and a Mossie would fit in nicely (along with a few more WW2 planes).

Concerning the PM and what he can do, he appears to be able to magic money to many places including monies to kidnappers etc. There are many sources of government monies that are routed to obscure uses, however I understand the politics.

Perhaps we could have a Vodafone Mosquito?

[ORAC]

'The only airworthy Mosquito in the world' bNzDg_6uLZQ

Mosquito FB.26 N114KA is based at Virgina Beach painted in Royal Air Force markings as KA114. Manufactured in Canada in 1945 KA114 never saw combat in Second World War and in 1948 was sold to a farmer in Alberta, Canada, where it deteriorated in a field until purchased by the Canadian Museum of Flight and Transport in 1978. It was bought by the Military Aviation Museum in 2004. Restoration work was done over an eight year period by AVspec in New Zealand. Most of the metal parts were reused, and Glyn Powell, of Auckland, New Zealand built the new fuselage, wings, and tail sections from wood. It took almost three years to build the wooden airframe. The Mosquito is painted with the markings of 487 Squadron RNZAF as EG-Y in honor of the Royal New Zealand unit flying Mosquitos during WWII. Registered in New Zealand as ZK-MOS the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued the aircraft a Certificate of Airworthiness in September 2012. It took its first flight in over 60 years on 29 September at Ardmore Airport near Auckland, New Zealand. It arrived in Virginia Beach in March 2013 and was registered in the United States as N114KA, it received its FAA Certificate of Airworthiness on 30 April 2013. It is the only airworthy de Havilland Mosquito.

[Dan Gerous]

Couldn't we sell a couple of the BBMF Spitfires to pay for it. It would certainly make a welcome change to the current displays.

[GeeRam]

It is the only airworthy de Havilland Mosquito.

The trouble is it's in danger of not being airworthy as jerry has now parked his entire collection, and sold off/selling off a lot of it.

There were rumours that Rod Lewis had done a deal to buy the Mossie, but that doesn't appear to have happened, and Jerry seems to be more keen on the idea of parking KA114 up indefinately than selling it on to someone who will fly it...........although I'm sure if the required US$10m was forthcoming it would be sold in a flash.

It's possible that by the end of the year, the only airworthy Mosquito may be a different one as the first post restoration flight of Bob Jens B.35, VR796 in Canada is getting very close.

Recent photo.....

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b376/CVEICH/IMG_2385_zpsafb845bd.jpg

Sadly though the rumour is this aircraft after having a close on 20 year restoration back to flying condition, will undertake a single flight and then be permantley grounded......

Again leaving the world without a flying Mossie :rolleyes:

[CoffmanStarter]

Name forward Fox3 for the ferry trip :ok:

[NutLoose]

The BBMF I think has stagnated

Well it's only going to get worse LOL, it's not exactly a growing market is it, there are only so few British types we operated during the war and only a finite amount of those airworthy, as for Stagnation, well they added a DAK and a couple of Chippies which are display aircraft in their own right, as well as useful trainers / hacks.

As said the Mossie has not been done to a recognised approval, hence why it couldn't do its delivery via here in its way to the USA.

Wasn't there originally plans i read somewhere for the BBMF to have been gifted the BAe Mossie before its tragic loss? It wasn't far from coming to fruition at the time.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Thanks Coffman - I'm certainly up for it.:ok:
I've ferried a Cessna 152 across the Pond via Greenland; a Mossie should be a doddle.
My granddad was in charge of the engine electrics at Salisbury Hall during WWII, so there's a family link too.

[Chainkicker]

The BBMF I think has stagnated and a Mossie would fit in nicely (along with a few more WW2 planes).

Hmmm, is that really true though?
Hats off to the crews on Saturday at Dartmouth, particularly the Lanc who transited nice and low over my back garden, (50.496N, 3.547W on the way to Bournemouth presumably).
Shivers down my spine for ages at the engine sound and even a black labrador woofing at them as they went over :cool::cool:

[Unixman]

I wonder whether an approach to the Heritage Lottery Fund might be in order?

[newt]

Could the owner be persuaded to loan the aircraft to the BBMF? That way it would be preseved at no cost to him:ok::ok::ok::ok:

[Wander00]

Take the money from the tin Triangle pot - oh what heresy. I'll get my coat!

[WH904]

BBMF obviously doesn't have enough funding to acquire a Mosquito. Besides, the Lancaster was a pretty big exception to the "BBMF" mission, but to add another non BofB aircraft to the collection would be stretching a point. Likewise, the general public knows what a Lancaster and Spitfire look like (and a Hurricane to some degree) but a Mosquito? Maybe not.

Personally, I don't know why the whole lot isn't sold off. It's not as if they wouldn't re-appear in civilian hands, and the cost of operating the Flight could be saved. BBMF is a great idea and I agree with its aims, but as the subject of this thread illustrates, you get into a situation where lots of aircraft have a legitimate claim to preservation and operation by the RAF. It would be difficult to argue that a Spitfire is somehow more significant than lots of other aircraft types, so given that the RAF can't operate them all, why operate any at all?

[Old Ned]

There was a p*ss-poor (imho) documentary on the box a short while ago about the ex-NZ Mossie, now at Virginia Beach. The whole thing was a missed opportunity, and I would liked to have seen more op footage and also something about the Hornet (the "metal" Mossie).

I think Guy Gibson was killed in a Mossie, while acting as a Master Bomber. Still a rumour about him being shot down by friendly fire, but I dare say that is also on Prune somewhere.

Pip pip ;)

ON

[NutLoose]

you get into a situation where lots of aircraft have a legitimate claim to preservation and operation by the RAF. It would be difficult to argue that a Spitfire is somehow more significant than lots of other aircraft types

Possibly because, you would be pondering the question whether we should be adding a ME410 to join the BBMF Heinkel 111, ME109 and FW190 fighters.

:ugh:


..

[GeeRam]

and I would liked to have seen more op footage and also something about the Hornet (the "metal" Mossie).

Hornet wasn't really a metal Mossie at all. It just took the early birth of composite to the next stage. It pretty much followed the Mossie, in terms of build, with the exception of some of the ally wing skins being bonded to the wood structure.

[GeeRam]

Possibly because, you would be pondering the question whether we should be adding a ME410 to join the BBMF Heinkel 111, ME109 and FW190 fighters.

Well that very possibility did come close to happening with the Me109G 'Black 6' as this was technically a MOD owned a/c. It's post restoration operation by BBMF was considered, but deemed 'inappropiate'.

[andyl999]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v616/andyl999/flying/P1030451_zpse2c30135.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v616/andyl999/flying/P1030449_zps49e4cada.jpg

[andyl999]

"It would be difficult to argue that a Spitfire is somehow more significant than lots of other aircraft types, so given that the RAF can't operate them all, why operate any at all?"

May I suggest that that is defeatist talk?

[Waddo Plumber]

But does the RAF have tradesmen qualified to work on wooden primary structure aircraft? I remember this coming to the fore in 1986 when I was at Coningsby, and a mosquito was suggested. The only similarity with the other BBMF aircraft was the Merlin engine and some systems. Since no-one available had experience of casein glued wooden structures, the idea was quietly dropped.

[andyl999]

If some civilian engineers can do it in New Zealand then surely the RAF would be able to support this plane?

[WH904]

Not defeatist Andy, just realistic. Like I said, it's not as if the BBMF fleet wouldn't survive without the RAF because we know they would, therefore it seems absurd to continue spending money on them. The RAFAT struggles to survive as we know, and they are the RAF's "flagship" PR team, therefore it seems crazy to continue throwing money at aircraft that would still be flying around even if BBMF was wrapped-up.

Okay, we wouldn't have aircraft to perform commemorative flypasts but really, for the number of times this is necessary it would be cheaper to simply pay for a civilian owner to do it.

The Mosquito question emphasises the point, in that one can suggest lots of very significant aircraft that should be retained and flown, and as much as the BoB is an important historical event that should be remembered, it seems to imply that other RAF campaigns are therefore less important, not least the Cold War which was arguably way more significant, and much more relevant to younger people.

[andyl999]

Maybe we should all move on from the BBMF name and just say WW2MF?

This Country (the UK) has still quite large financial resources, if you look at the monies poured into the RBS, which incidentally 80% was forwarded to an Irish bank it makes a mockery of us not flying historically famous planes to our Country.

It's more than flypasts, the aircraft are there for generations to see and hear, if you like, it's in our Genes.

Concerning this Mosquito, it's an opportunity, it won't come up often, it's part of our heritage, dare I also say that BBMF has seven Spitfires, what if they grounded one and had a Mosquito?

Now I do realise that in a H&S, PC world we can come up with a multitude of reasons not to do things but if DH in WW2 had the same ethos then the Mossie would never have been built.

Let's please focus on the positives?

[thing]

I've ferried a Cessna 152 across the Pond via Greenland

:eek::eek: My hat sir is most certainly doffed to you.

[pontifex]

Waddo Plummer is quite correct. A Mossie was well within the BBMF's grasp but the initiative failed due to the extra manpower that would be needed to maintain it and, believe it or not, concern that, in the future, there could be noone suitably qualified or with the necessary background the fly it to the required standard. Maddening but true as I believed (and still do) that it was the finest of all the aircraft that were spawned by the war.

[NutLoose]

For the last time...


IT CANNOT FLY IN THE UK BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN MANUFACTURED TO A RECOGNISED STANDARD, HENCE IT COULDN'T FLY HERE ON ITS WAY TO THE STATES.

So all this BBMF operating it will never happen..... Period

It will be a travesty if it is grounded after so much work has gone into getting her into the sky, a bit like Kermit Week's one, such a waste..... And don't get me started on the Christmas Tree illuminated Sunderland.

GeeRam, that would have been Black 9 :O

[thing]

Bit dodgy until it reached single engine safety speed which was quite high so I've heard. Loose a donk with a war load on at take off and it was a short drop to a hard stop.

[Wensleydale]

But does the RAF have tradesmen qualified to work on wooden primary structure
aircraft?


I can see the advert now....

"RAF requires workers qualified to use a plane". :O

[snapper1]

Surely the Blenheim (with its new nose) that's just been rolled-out at Duxford would be more appropriate for the BBMF?

[GeeRam]

IT CANNOT FLY IN THE UK BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN MANUFACTURED TO A RECOGNISED STANDARD, HENCE IT COULDN'T FLY HERE ON ITS WAY TO THE STATES.

Not strictly true. Jerry did have plans to bring it to the UK en-route to the USA for a summer display season, had the restoration been finished as was originally envisaged the year before. It could have flown here on it's US registration for up to 6 months quite easily, but, it wasn't finished in time, and more critically, Jerry had run out of money to bring it here, as can be seen by it's virtually being grounded or sold within a few months of it being out back together in the USA. The lack of money was the real reason it didn't come to the UK.


GeeRam, that would have been Black 9

What would have been Black 9.....:confused:

[brokenlink]

WH904 - In actual fact the BBMF does not cost a huge amount of taxpayers money to run as it receives a significant amount of support from industry who are more than happy to be associated with AND support the flight which reduces the running costs.

[Archimedes]

Gee Ram - I suspect that NL is referring to the fact that when inverted, the number 6 becomes the number 9...

[Easy Street]

I would rather have the BBMF than the Reds on any day of the week!

Whether the RAF turns out to be the fabled 100-year experiment or endures for centuries to come, I think it's likely that WW2 (in its entirety, not just the BofB) will forever rank as the Service's finest episode. For me, the BBMF is our HMS Victory. Perhaps a better name for it would be the RAF Memorial Squadron - with Battle of Britain and Bomber flights! A Mossie would be fantastic and would be a great airshow performer. Perhaps someone might build one from scratch to CAA's satisfaction and gift it to the nation?!

As for the symbolism of the Spitfire, well, yes, aviation history buffs will always point to facts like the Hurricane shooting down more bombers, the Mustang's range tipping the balance in the Allied bomber offensive, etc. The reason why the Spitfire will remain the enduring symbol of the RAF for the rest of the Service's days, despite the academic arguments, is that it caught the imagination of so many - whether the young boy watching dogfights above Kent or the Luftwaffe fighter pilot who had never experienced real fear on a mission before. And it has continued to capture the imagination ever since.

[WH904]

Well, in actual fact BBMF does cost a lot. Okay, not much in the wider scheme of things, but when it is money being spent on nothing that has any defence application, it's a waste by definition. All very nice of course, but unnecessary. If I thought for a minute that the BBMF aircraft would otherwise be lost forever then okay, that's a different matter. But when we all know they'd survive and flourish in civilian hands...

As for the wider significance of the BofB, you have to bear in mind that it's not quite so significant for a younger age group. One could argue that the V-Force is just as significant if not more so. It's a proverbial Pandora's box, when one starts making judgements as to what is significant and what isn't.

[Tankertrashnav]

Take the money from the tin Triangle pot - oh what heresy. I'll get my coat!


Hands off the tin triangle pot. Make a case for your own Mossie pot. Get lottery funding (which has to be matched £ for £ by money raised privately) so if figures quoted here can be relied on that only leaves you £5m to raise!

Good luck :ok:

[Easy Street]

you have to bear in mind that it's not quite so significant for a younger age group. One could argue that the V-Force is just as significant if not more so. It's a proverbial Pandora's box, when one starts making judgements as to what is significant and what isn't. To Joe Public, Trafalgar is the RN's greatest victory, Nelson its greatest hero, and Victory its greatest warship. There were other great victories beforehand, and many since. Irrelevant. Trafalgar is the one that has stuck and will continue to stick. And it's absolutely not a generational thing - it is sufficiently distant history now that it remains a constant.

Individual elements of WW2, whether the BofB or the Bomber offensive, may not their own have special significance to future generations. However the war as a whole will endure in our culture for centuries. It had social, technological, geopolitical and economic consequences beyond anything else on offer in the last couple of hundred years. It has been burned into permanent cultural history through film and recordings. Good vs evil. The Blitz. The Holocaust. Nuclear weapons (not ours, though). The story of WW2 will remain in our national consciousness and the RAF will be an indelible part of that.

Of course, I would like to think that the exploits of the modern RAF in Kuwait, the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya (but not Syria?) will have signficance in years to come. I would say that, because I took part in all of it. But the notion that future generations might attach more historic significance to any of that (or indeed anything the V-Force had to offer) than they would to the RAF's role in WW2 is simply fanciful. It's not a Pandora's box at all - otherwise the Navy would be wrestling with notions of preserving Falklands ships.

[Evalu8ter]

Easy,
Best we roll BN up to CGY to recognise all of those campaigns (plus CORPORATE).

Re the issue of experienced engineers v BBMF, the major depth servicing is already contracted out (to ARCO inter alia) so specific knowledge would not be required 'in house'. Just as well as the creeping hand of contractorisation is rapidly robbing the RAF on any Depth maintenance experience.....

I'd like to see a 'medium' bomber in the Flight; a Boston IV in 18 Sqn colours would do the trick....

[WH904]

Comments made by Easy illustrate my point. He obviously thinks (with some justification) that Trafalgar is perhaps the most significant campaign. Mention that to a veteran of WWII and he'd laugh his socks off. Mention it to a younger guy and he'll ask you who Hitler was.

Obviously, history is regarded differently by different people. The BoB (and presumably the bombing offensive, given the Lancaster's inclusion) are important events. But so are many others, so it's absurd to commemorate one without doing the same for others. So, like I said, it would be more sensible to just abandon the notion of having an official historic flight. No matter what you did, it would never include all the aircraft that could lay a claim to being in it.

As for the Mosquito, it's a nice idea but it's never going to happen of course. The RAFAT will probably be gone in a few years when the Hawks run out of hours. Doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that BBMF will go at the same time.

[Tankertrashnav]

I think the arguments are all getting fanciful. I have absolutely no doubt that when Joe Public is watching the Vulcan doing its display he's not thinking that this was one of the aircraft that kept the red menace at bay for all those years, he's just thinking it's a fantastic big noisy aircraft that's doing things he thought only a fighter could do, and that it's upstaged just about everything else on the programme, with the possible exception of the Reds.

[Martin the Martian]

While I agree that the Hurricanes and Spitfires could be flown and operated in civilian hands, I question that the same could be said for the Lancaster. The Sally B people are facing big funding problems, while the France-based B-17 is now grounded. If industry continued to offer the support, fine, but industry are not always so keen to support privately operated concerns, as the Vulcan To The Sky Trust have found in the past.

Having said all that, all my best wishes and good luck for the East Kirkby Lancaster and the Coventry Shackleton, and I look forward to seeing them both airborne.

[GeeRam]

Gee Ram - I suspect that NL is referring to the fact that when inverted, the number 6 becomes the number 9...

Aahhh...........with you now :ok:

(The aging brain cells are a bit slow these days.....should have worked it out really, considering I actually witnessed the event)

[WH904]

I agree with Tankertrashnav. I would imagine that 99 percent of spectators simply regard the Vulcan as being a big, noisy machine that looks pretty impressive (providing it's not a couple of miles away, as it often seems to be at most displays it performs these days!). I doubt if many have any real understanding of what the Vulcan was all about.

But this also applies to BBMF. While there are still people around who are old enough to remember WWII and its effects, then BBMF obviously has some relevance. But these days, increasing numbers of people haven't really got a clue - as we know, some school kids think Hitler was a football manager. Consequently, when the BBMF turn-up at a show, a lot of people doze off because they don't provide the same spectacle as the big, noisy stuff.

So, I go back to my earlier comments. If the BBMF don't provide a "spectacle" as such, then their purpose is to commemorate and remind us of WWII. Therefore the same argument applies to the Cold War, or any other major conflicts. So where does one draw the line? It's difficult to regard the BBMF aircraft as any more significant than lots of others.

[Samuel]

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e33/Shadblat/21324243343_zps01296484.jpg (http://s36.photobucket.com/user/Shadblat/media/21324243343_zps01296484.jpg.html)

[Waddo Plumber]

Evalu8or, third level servicing might be contractorised, but afaik first line isn't, and that is run by servicemen/women, who work the aircraft all season.

[newt]

WH904 Your argument carries little weight. The BBMF does a fantastic job in preserving the aircraft and showing them to the public whether they remember the war or not. I'm sure that the boys and girls of the BBMF, who give up many hours of their free time to maintain and display these wonderful aircraft, would be appalled to hear your views!

Any addition to the BBMF must be applauded and supported! Cost should never be a factor! As to their flourishing in civilian hands I very much doubt it! Many historic aircraft have been ruined in civilian ownership when their owners lost interest or ran out of money.

Oh and so nice of you to provide some profile information so we can be sure you know what your talking about!:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[CoffmanStarter]

Any addition to the BBMF must be applauded and supported! Cost should never be a factor! As to their flourishing in civilian hands I very much doubt it! Many historic aircraft have been ruined in civilian ownership when their owners lost interest or ran out of money.

Seconded Newt :ok:

[Evalu8ter]

Waddo P,
Exactly; looking after the AF/BF should be fine, as should fettling the Merlins and other oily bits. The specialist inspection of the wood and overhaul of the engines/props would need to be contracted out (as per today)

Sorry for any confusion....

[WH904]

Newt, you're entitled to your view of course but please don't make assertions that don't bear scrutiny. You can think what you like but when you start using phrases like "cost should never be a factor" and that the "boys of the BBMF would be appalled", then I find it hard to take your comments any more seriously than you take mine :)

[newt]

Thanks WH. You said it all in your response!!!:D

[Waddo Plumber]

Evalu8ter, it is a long time since I was associated with BBMF (1986) but, unless things have changed radically, the RAF groundcrew do a great deal more than AF/BF. Among other things, they are the ones who check many aspects of an airframe for faults, and I suspect that no one in the RAF at present has the knowledge to declare that a casein bonded joint is serviceable. They certainly didn't in 1986. As for authorising a deferred fault!.........

[Stitchbitch]

Don't fret WH904, most if not all of BBMF don't actually read Pprune. Which I found shocking. Until now. :E

WP, Newt, etc :ok:

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

If they factored in the recruiting value of small boys* who saw a Spitfire on a low pass and never needed any other advertising to get them to sign up 12 years later, the BBMF is probably quite cheap.

Watching some suit trousering the same amount for redesigning the RAF's logo hasn't quite got the same appeal.




*and girls these days.

[F4TCT]

I rather have the bbmf than the reds any day, although having been amongst a red sortie, they do actually care and want to be the best. I see enough leeming hawks and Linton tucanos over my house most days of the week,so the reds get a bit tedious.

A bbmf mossie would be great, but being a simpleton, does it matter what bloody glue has been used? Have the wings fallen off so far - no. Lets not forget, the latest airliners suffer from 'issues', yet these have been passed to fly within our country....

What benefit is it to the CAA to be so picky over things?

Don't the bbmf have enough spitfires? Including a 2seater which I've never seen fly?

More over, why do they give aircraft to companies who dismantle it to every nut and bolt to inspect it etc? This must cost huge sums, why can't the bbmf do it themselves.

Get rid of a few spitfires and fund a mossie, not asif they seem to fly them all.

Next point, RAF Scampton, home of the reds. From my last visit there, the reds seem to be on the only tenants -why?

Why can't they move elsewhere to a base will full time ATC, and sell Scampton. It's just had a new runway?...

Like I say, a simpleton talking here, please correct me...

Dan

[Avitor]

The last Mossie I saw flying was at an air show at RAF Alconbury in the 80's.

[Hangarshuffle]

No. The war is over.

[WH904]

F4TCT The RAFAT was going to move to Waddington (at some expense) but it was eventually decided that Waddington didn't have the space/logistics to accommodate the team and their aircraft (they were to have continued using Scampton's air space for flying). It's not as strange at it looks though, as there are other (non-flying) units based there and also HHA.

Like yourself I've flown in the team's displays quite a few times and there's no doubt that the team has way more impact from inside the cockpit than from the ground, but one has to take a realistic and wider view; to the typical man-in-the street, the Red Arrows are "gobsmacking" by any standards. It's just that as enthusiasts or locals, we tend to get used to them.

The problem with the BBMF issue is that so many people also fail to take a realistic view. It's fine to have a passion for WWII aircraft and for the need to remember the BofB. But this attitude doesn't reflect the interests of air show crowds (ie- the average spectator, not the enthusiast). Okay, older people might get a thrill from the BBMF but the younger folks (particularly those that the RAF is presumably aiming to impress) don't give a stuff. I know it's difficult for older people to accept that but it's true. A teenager couldn't care less about a Spitfire. So it's back to what I said earlier. If the BBMF can't "entertain" then its role is to commemorate. But the few occasions when such ceremonial duties are needed don't require an active RAF unit.

I fully understand the attitudes expressed by the pro-BBMF people but (as you can see in this thread) an awful lot of people don't really have any grasp of reality. The notion of adding another non-BoB aircraft to the unit is absurd, when the RAFAT struggles to survive... and probably will not for much longer... and despite the howls of protest that will surely follow, it's the RAFAT that matters. They are truly a national asset that does an awful lot both for industry and the RAF.

As for the CAA, that's another can of worms. Essentially, they impose their rules on the grounds of safety. All well and good, but as we all know, some rules aren't always entirely appropriate sometimes. Additionally, the CAA does sometimes use its rules to suit the agenda of some of its own members. Sadly, we're obliged to abide by their position :(

[newt]

There you go again WH904!! And this time you insult us with ageism!


"Okay, older people might get a thrill from the BBMF but the younger folks (particularly those that the RAF is presumably aiming to impress) don't give a stuff."

So you really think the younger generation hang around at airshows just to see the Reds?:ugh:

[WH904]

I know they do. Surely, you don't seriously imagine that virtually anyone under the age of about twenty has any interest in any aeroplanes other than the fast or noisy ones? As for being insulted at ageism, that would be difficult seen as I'm 51 myself ;)

[Easy Street]

you don't seriously imagine that virtually anyone under the age of about twenty has any interest in any aeroplanes other than the fast or noisy ones?I was lucky enough to be a guest at II(AC) Sqn's centenary parade, which was held outside Ely Cathedral. The flypast was, or should I say flypasts were, delivered by a BBMF Spitfire, which repeatedly beat up* the location. Judging by the open-mouthed spectators pointing their smartphones skwards, I would say that the Spit was slow enough to keep the interest between passes, and noisy enough to deliver the required impact. My son certainly thought so!

Incidentally, for those who think fast and noisy is the be-all and end-all of air displays, I suggest you get yourselves along to see the Chinook display (http://www.raf.mod.uk/chinookdisplayteam/)next year. Speaking as a FJ pilot I have to say that it is by far the most impressive and attention-grabbing display I have ever seen, certainly more so than the Vulcan. Whilst "noisy" it's not the kind of noise that appeals to jet fans - for that, the B-1B is king. The YouTube clip on the Chinook site gives an idea of the extreme manoeuvering, but you'll just have to trust me that the full visual impact of the display transcends anything the Reds have to offer!

* (whilst complying with ASOs!)

[WH904]

I accept that point, I figured somebody would say something like that. Obviously there are always exceptions to the rule. Some younger guys appreciate BBMF and lots more too. Likewise, the Chinook display is indeed magnificent. My point was a more general one. The vast majority of spectators at shows and other events haven't got a clue and simply want entertainment, not a lesson in history. Sad I guess, but undoubtedly true.

[newt]

WH904

You may claim to be 51 but you write like a 12 year old!

Now be a good boy and go watch childrens television for an hour! You never know, you might enjoy it!:ok:

[WH904]

Great contribution there, well done:rolleyes:

[Stitchbitch]

This could go on for a very long time. WH904 you have your opinion, I don't tend to agree with it, having been there I know that lots of young people admire what both teams do, perhaps you should go to an airshow and see for yourself. Better yet, stand outside the fence at coningsby on any weekend in the summer and then tell me that the only things young people are interested in are the Reds, FJs, etc.. Get there soon, BBMFs OOSD is 2023..

[WH904]

Well please don't imagine that I'm just making assumptions. I've been standing outside airfields (including Coningsby) since about 1970. I went to every Finningley show since about 1965 and most of the main shows at Waddington, Mildenhall, Greenham, Fairford, St.Mawgan, Yeovilton, Church Fenton, Binbrook, Coningsby, Lakenheath, Biggin, Farnborough and many more. I've also been working in aerospace media for thirty years, so I think it's fair to say that I have a pretty good grasp of how things are.

Okay, I'm fully aware of younger people who are very interested in all aspects of aviation (you only need to look in the ATC for that) but what I've tried to explain is that this doesn't represent the much larger majority of typical show spectators. Yes, a Spitfire roaring over a fete at close quarters is enough to get anyone's attention, but we're talking about BBMF here. We might appreciate them but the wider public, particularly youngsters want to see the fast jets and the Reds. I could throw the same invitation to you - next year, go to a big show and don't just mingle with the enthusiasts, go and watch/listen amongst the main crowds. They usually don't even know what they're looking at. For the majority, they're waiting to see the Reds.

[GeeRam]

I could throw the same invitation to you - next year, go to a big show and don't just mingle with the enthusiasts, go and watch/listen amongst the main crowds. They usually don't even know what they're looking at. For the majority, they're waiting to see the Reds.

That's pretty much always been true..... and the Reds appearing at a show with always mean bigger crowds.

However, you say go to a big show....... but those are getting fewer and fewer, almost to the point that you need to be an enthusiast to make the effort to go to one of those, thereby the Reds factor reduces, and BBMF perhaps increases. There's not exactly a wealth of RAF At Home displays anymore, and will there be anymore BofB At Home displays once Leuchars closes?
That might mean Waddo is the only RAF show left:sad:

There's no USAFE UK base days anymore, which pretty much leaves RIAT.

If requests for BBMF displays were on the wane, I would say you have a valid point, but I think you'll find that isn't the case, if anything the opposite.

If anything, you could say there's more scope for a BBMF future than the Reds, or at least a dedicated 9-ship Reds as we've known for the past 45+ years.
Perhaps a volunteer Swedish AF Historic Flight jet based idea may have been the route to take before we had scrapped everything from the past, but it's too late for that now anyway. You could argue, the antique Hawks of the Reds are close to that anyway ;)

[WH904]

almost to the point that you need to be an enthusiast to make the effort to go to one of those

I'd be inclined to agree, as that's certainly how I look at things now. From an enthusiast viewpoint the shows are not worth going to, and it's only the really eager and younger enthusiasts who seem to derive much pleasure from them, presumably because they've never known anything better.

But when I've discussed this subject before, it ultimately leads to comments from organisers, and they inevitably say (or at least imply) that enthusiasts are only a small consideration in the wider scheme of things, because the shows are aimed squarely at the general public. Naturally, the aircraft types are geared towards those with a real interest, but from a commercial point of view, they're only interested in making sure Joe Public has a "fun day out for all the family" which inevitably means the Reds, or fast jets, wing walkers and so on.

I assume that before too long Waddington will indeed be the only RAF show and on the basis of this year's I think they need to do something pretty drastic to make the show into something more meaningful for those of us who are actually interested in military aircraft, RAF, etc. As it is, the show is based on the assumption that Joe Public will be happy with all the usual show acts, fairground, blah, blah. But I can't help thinking this notion of soldiering-on with the same approach will ultimately lead nowhere. Surely, as costs increase, admission prices increase, the number of "acts" gets less, and it will get to a point where even Joe Public isn't interested any more. Then what?

As I've said, BBMF are an important part of many events but it would be wrong to assume that Joe Public (or at least most of them) have any great interest in them. Okay, they might glance at the Lancaster or fighters but you only need to watch and listen to see that they're really not interested. It's the older people who naturally appreciate the BBMF. All well and good, but when older people slowly disappear from the shows (as they already do) then BBMF is catering for a dwindling audience. My view is that it would be far cheaper to simply abandon BBMF and bring-in civilian warbird operators for any ceremonies that deserve a WWII presence.

Like I said, BoB is an important event but it's foolish to commemorate that and ignore everything else. It presents a warped vision of aerial warfare. Given that it's impossible to commemorate everything, then commemorate nothing, surely?

The RAFAT is the RAF's flagship public face and rightly so. Even they can't last much longer unless (by some miracle) some sort of industry deal can be made to support new Hawks, which I seriously doubt. So what then? It would be absurd to lose the Reds and still be financing a very selective Historic Flight that commemorates only part of WWII.

I think the problem is that a lot of people regard BBMF with huge affection (and understandably so), and recoil in horror at the very idea of losing them. But it's at odds with reality. In effect BBMF already commemorates more than just the BoB but it's absurd to suppose that every other aspect of the RAF's history is therefore not worth the same amount of attention. As I've said before, it would surely make sense (for example) to keep a Vulcan flying, given the V-Force's importance which was arguably more significant than even the BofB. But we know that's financially impossible, so it's vaguely ridiculous to then support BBMF just on the basis that they are more affordable. That's hardly the right way to look at an Historic Flight.

It's rather like where we came in here. The notion of adding a Mosquito to BBMF sounds great but surely nobody seriously imagines it's a viable proposition even if one was available? And even if it was, then what precisely does the Mosquito commemorate, and on the same basis, then where's the Defiant, Typhoon, Halifax, Stirling and everything else? There's an endless list.

I don't doubt that while BBMF survives it's a good thing, but I just wish the die-hard WWII enthusiasts could understand that WWII is just one significant event in history, but there are many others, and some are arguably just as, or more important, especially to younger generations.

Far better to simply abandon the notion of Historic Flights when we all know it's impossible to obtain and fly anything like the number of aircraft types that would rightly deserve a place in it. Sell 'em off and bring them back when they are really needed, in civilian hands. Surely, the RAFAT is a more important issue, given their huge popularity and importance for foreign relations and trade, etc. Easy for us enthusiasts to scoff at the Reds but that's because we're used to them. Worth remembering that they're the very best - truly a national treasure - and they may well soon be gone. Bit sad to be obsessing about some wild plan to get a Mosquito under those circumstances, n'est-ce pas? :)

[RedhillPhil]

I know they do. Surely, you don't seriously imagine that virtually anyone under the age of about twenty has any interest in any aeroplanes other than the fast or noisy ones? As for being insulted at ageism, that would be difficult seen as I'm 51 myself ;)

There's something in this. My eldest treated me to the RIAT show this year. I'm 63, he's 32. Whilst I was drooling over the Connie he was glued to the blokes giving rides in the Caterhams.

[B Fraser]

The YouTube clip on the Chinook site gives an idea of the extreme manoeuvering

I saw the Chinook at Yeovilton this year and was convinced that the airframe would only be fit for scrap after the display. For me, it was the star of the show.

[10Watt]

A mossie would be perfect for the display, financed by the lottery and

maintained by a newly formed group of experts whose brief would be

to keep it, and other memorial flight aircraft, in top flying condition

certified by themselves without recourse to the CAA.

lnsurance risks covered by the government.

l was stunned to see the one on display at Hendon when l visited earlier

this week, four years since my last visit.

ln `97 l remember seeing lumps of mosquito laid about on the floor at

Duxford being etch primed,etc. Same one l assume.

lt`s breathtakingly beautiful.

[Wander00]

10W - I was at the RAF Museum last Tuesday - I share your view on the Mosquito. Had to sit in the JP for nostalgic reasons and ended up explaining to a number of youngsters how the controls work and what the instruments tell - I wonder if it would not be worth having an attendant or volunteer with the JP every half hour or so explain things, which would teach the kids more than just banging the control column and rudder bar about. Maybe I am just getting old!

[mmitch]

Wander00. The RAF Museum at Hendon has (I assume it is still there) a gallery with working models that demonstrate controls and aerodynamics.
It is used mainly for school visits.
There is also a similar scheme in Air & Space at Duxford. Both appear to be popular with 'young' people of all ages.
mmitch.

[soddim]

I cannot believe that there are people posting on this forum who denigrate the BBMF. When they compare the Flight with the reds it seems to me that they have completely missed the point of why we spend a little bit of public money on preserving the memory of 'Britain's Finest Hour'. LEST WE FORGET.

Perhaps the Lancaster fogs the issue and the Mossie would obscure it more but the fact remains that the Battle of Britain still represents to all those in this country who know and respect their aviation history that this was indeed our finest hour.

I know how much people enjoy and anticipate displays by the reds and they are a very big airshow attraction; however, we keep BBMF flying for a completely different reason - we want to remember our finest hour and a great many people in our country do not want to forget the sacrifice made in defence of our country. We enjoy peace but it came at a high price for many - lest we forget.

[WH904]

Well in my defence I did pretty-much say that, if you read what I said. But I also said that it's a bit odd to commemorate only one important historical event... well, two, technically-speaking. As I said before, the events that can really be classed as commemoration (rather than simply a show) are relatively few, so it would be cheaper to simply get a civilian in to do the job when it was needed. Basically, what I'm saying is that we've come a long, long way from WWII therefore it's a bit questionable to have a unit devoted to commemorating one event, when there are others that are just as important. Given that we can't commemorate them all, perhaps it would make more sense to abandon the notion and devote what finances are left to the Reds, on the basis that they are perfectly capable of commemorating any of the RAF's past exploits - simply by being representative of the RAF as a whole. As it is, we'll probably end up with neither the BBMF or RAFAT before too long.

[soddim]

Saying it again does not make it any better nor any more likely to be right WH904!

[GeeRam]

l was stunned to see the one on display at Hendon when l visited earlier

this week, four years since my last visit.

ln `97 l remember seeing lumps of mosquito laid about on the floor at

Duxford being etch primed,etc. Same one l assume.

Well the Mosquito would have been there 4 years ago as well...... in fact it's been there since 1992 ;)
And no it's not the same one as you saw at Duxford.

And the current B.35 version that's been at Hendon since 1992 replaced the previous Mosquito T.3 TW117, which had been on display at Hendon for the previous 20 years since it first opened in 1972.

[Easy Street]

Basically, what I'm saying is that we've come a long, long way from WWII therefore it's a bit questionable to have a unit devoted to commemorating one event, when there are others that are just as important.

Well, if you repeat yourself, so will I! I disagree with your premise in bold above, and consider the RAF's role in WWII as a whole to be more important than its role in any conflict before or since (including the Cold War).

Those of a naval bent will argue all day about whether the Battle of Britain was actually 100% critical to our national survival. I don't think there is a need to get into those arguments now, save to opine that it was bloody important and marked the "beginning of the end of the beginning" to the British public and the onlooking world, to adapt and mis-apply a great Churchillism. There is absolutely no doubt that the Battle of the Atlantic was critical to our national survival, and the RAF had a major role in it (despite the best efforts of the bomber-focussed leadership). Finally, while the effectiveness of the bomber campaign has justifiably been questioned, it undoubtedly served a twin purpose both in helping the nation to keep its head held high and convincing the US that we meant business.

The V-Force did play an important role in the Cold War, albeit diminished after the advent of Polaris. We can't know for sure whether the V-Force would have reached Moscow, because they were never called upon to do so. Less clear is whether the V-Force reaching Moscow would actually have ensured our national survival. Even less clear is whether the absence of a British nuclear bomber force would have tempted the Soviets into marching westwards (especially bearing in mind that we were members of NATO). Against this level of uncertainty, I can't possibly conclude that the V-Force's contribution to the Cold War was of equal importance to the RAF's major contributions to WWII.

[WH904]

Gawd this is hard work! Easy, essentially you're agreeing with me in regarding BofB as just one in a serious of important events. That was my point - if we can't commemorate all of these events then it's slightly odd to commemorate just one of them.

Soddim, If I'm not right, I'm not seeing any arguments to the contrary... ;)