XT597 for sale
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XT597 for sale
As mentioned elsewhere on Pprune, Phantom XT597 has suddenly appeared at Bentwaters, in Everett's collection. Rumour claims they're asking for 75K for it.
What a sorry state of affairs. A really interesting aircraft with a fascinating history, and the last active British Phantom. It was absurd and sad that QinetiQ insisted on the on-site museum being moved away (as if there was any logical reason why it couldn't have stayed on site), and doubly sad that XT597 didn't go with the rest of the collection. To find it now dumped in Everett's scrap collection is just horrifying.
One assumes that nobody will pay 75K for it so it will doubtless be left to rot at Bentwaters. Once again a significant aeroplane has been overlooked. Grim business.
What a sorry state of affairs. A really interesting aircraft with a fascinating history, and the last active British Phantom. It was absurd and sad that QinetiQ insisted on the on-site museum being moved away (as if there was any logical reason why it couldn't have stayed on site), and doubly sad that XT597 didn't go with the rest of the collection. To find it now dumped in Everett's scrap collection is just horrifying.
One assumes that nobody will pay 75K for it so it will doubtless be left to rot at Bentwaters. Once again a significant aeroplane has been overlooked. Grim business.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was it? I was under the impression that QinetiQ had the museum relocated because it was "incompatible" with activities on the airfield? Besides, it could have easily been linked to the nearby road, so whoever was responsible, it did seem rather ridiculous... or at least unnecessary.
The argument about whether or not the Boscombe Down Aviation Collection (http://www.boscombedownaviationcollection.co.uk/) should be at Boscombe and hidden from public view, or open to the public at Old Sarum is irrelevant. What a pity the F4 couldn't move to Old Sarum, be properly looked after and displayed!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, then let's say is has only been brought to people's attention recently. Guess it's even more disturbing if it quietly drifted over there all that time ago.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WID you would have thought that it would have been given to the IWM at Duxford so it could be placed next to the Javelin (ie the aircraft it replaced at the A&AEE).
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WH904
Duxford already has 2 Phantoms and the IWMs track record of keeping dupes is not great, even some of the single types have been cleared out last year.
In short there appears to a shortage of space.
Duxford already has 2 Phantoms and the IWMs track record of keeping dupes is not great, even some of the single types have been cleared out last year.
In short there appears to a shortage of space.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Duxford have already got two F-4's and, i'm led to believe and therefore not sure how true it is, that they don't have the resources or room to acquire another one, make of that what you will...
I'd sooner see XT597 transferred to Brunty, and brought back to ground running condition but, hey ho...
-RP
I'd sooner see XT597 transferred to Brunty, and brought back to ground running condition but, hey ho...
-RP
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, I'm sure that would be Duxford's response. I agree that if an indoor space can't be found for the aircraft, Bruntingthorpe would be a good alternative. I spoke to the chap who is overseeing the restoration of the former RAE Tornado at Bruntingthorpe - he says they can just about cope with the Tornado so they couldn't take on a Phantom too.
It's a very sad business. Let's hope someone steps in and that the 75K asking price isn't true.
Shame that RAFM Cosford has chucked so much money at the preservation of a lump of muck (they claim it's a Luftwaffe bomber), which has no connection with the RAF at all (apart from this absurd notion that it is connected because of the BofB. On that basis one could start preserving just about any foreign aircraft on the planet). They could have spent some of that money on saving an aircraft that was actually relevant - and one that would have fitted perfectly in their Cold War collection.
Sad that there's still a prevailing attitude that history ended in 1945.
It's a very sad business. Let's hope someone steps in and that the 75K asking price isn't true.
Shame that RAFM Cosford has chucked so much money at the preservation of a lump of muck (they claim it's a Luftwaffe bomber), which has no connection with the RAF at all (apart from this absurd notion that it is connected because of the BofB. On that basis one could start preserving just about any foreign aircraft on the planet). They could have spent some of that money on saving an aircraft that was actually relevant - and one that would have fitted perfectly in their Cold War collection.
Sad that there's still a prevailing attitude that history ended in 1945.
It is a shame, but won't be the only one in the near future. Everett apparenly have three F4 atm - XT597, XT905 and XT907, although 905 is best described as derelict.
When Leuchars shuts the doors, XT864 and XV582 will need a home. If anyone at Brunty wanted to take on an F4, suggest they need to get their interest in early, before the DSA transfer ownership of those two to their preferred contractor..........
Isn't/wasn't 582 a runner?
When Leuchars shuts the doors, XT864 and XV582 will need a home. If anyone at Brunty wanted to take on an F4, suggest they need to get their interest in early, before the DSA transfer ownership of those two to their preferred contractor..........
Isn't/wasn't 582 a runner?
Did DefenceEstates (the land managing 'agency' 
for the MoD) have some input in getting rid of the museum? Same org that has kept the ISK MR2 sat out in the elements while not being willing to loan one of the many empty hangars on Kinloss Barracks. I don't know the details but I believe they want full market rent and would rather not get any money at all than lower the price...
for the MoD) have some input in getting rid of the museum? Same org that has kept the ISK MR2 sat out in the elements while not being willing to loan one of the many empty hangars on Kinloss Barracks. I don't know the details but I believe they want full market rent and would rather not get any money at all than lower the price...
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shame that RAFM Cosford has chucked so much money at the preservation of a lump of muck (they claim it's a Luftwaffe bomber), which has no connection with the RAF at all (apart from this absurd notion that it is connected because of the BofB. On that basis one could start preserving just about any foreign aircraft on the planet). They could have spent some of that money on saving an aircraft that was actually relevant - and one that would have fitted perfectly in their Cold War collection.
Sad that there's still a prevailing attitude that history ended in 1945.
You might want to get over yourself and the misplaced vitriol about the Dornier - with that attitude the BoB ehibition at Hendon wouldn't exist, nor would Cosford have the Neptune, PBY-6A, Pucara, F111, or P51 (amongst others).
I mean, we wouldn't want that old Johnny Foreigner to have any of his kites in our museum, would we?
Last edited by ExAscoteer; 23rd Jul 2014 at 15:33.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignoring Salad's trolling, it's not a case of "getting over myself" ExAscot. I'm not the only person who finds the notion of spending RAFM on a foreign artefact (and a rubbish one at that), quite ridiculous.
You're quite right - Cosford wouldn't have an F-111, or an MH-53, but one has to ask what these are doing there, in the RAF Museum. The Neptune is a gift and it's outside, and it doesn't really affect anything. Pucara had a (short) RAF connection (well, A&AEE), but a Danish Catalina has always seemed rather bizarre. As you say, we wouldn't want "Johnny Foreigner" in the museum. It's rather like going to a fishmongers to buy a suit. Just doesn't make any sense. The RAF Museum should be about the RAF. Simples.
Naturally one can make all sorts of claims that other exhibits are relevant... bit like the proverbial piece of string. Almost anything is relevant if one takes a broad view. That's fine, but when a lot of money is being spent, it does make a lot of us wonder what's going on. Wouldn't be so bad if it was actually a Dornier, and not a lump of coal.
I also agree about the BofB Museum, obviously one can't have BofB aircraft without the Luftwaffe. But one could question what the RAFM is doing creating a BofB Museum. All very well to drift off into many interesting tangents, but they all cost money and, as demonstrated by XT597, some far more relevant aircraft can find themselves ignored as a result.
Yes, there's a Phantom at Hendon, but not the unique XT597. It would have been far more appropriate in Cosford's Test Aircraft hangar than some of the questionable exhibits they currently accommodate.
You're quite right - Cosford wouldn't have an F-111, or an MH-53, but one has to ask what these are doing there, in the RAF Museum. The Neptune is a gift and it's outside, and it doesn't really affect anything. Pucara had a (short) RAF connection (well, A&AEE), but a Danish Catalina has always seemed rather bizarre. As you say, we wouldn't want "Johnny Foreigner" in the museum. It's rather like going to a fishmongers to buy a suit. Just doesn't make any sense. The RAF Museum should be about the RAF. Simples.
Naturally one can make all sorts of claims that other exhibits are relevant... bit like the proverbial piece of string. Almost anything is relevant if one takes a broad view. That's fine, but when a lot of money is being spent, it does make a lot of us wonder what's going on. Wouldn't be so bad if it was actually a Dornier, and not a lump of coal.
I also agree about the BofB Museum, obviously one can't have BofB aircraft without the Luftwaffe. But one could question what the RAFM is doing creating a BofB Museum. All very well to drift off into many interesting tangents, but they all cost money and, as demonstrated by XT597, some far more relevant aircraft can find themselves ignored as a result.
Yes, there's a Phantom at Hendon, but not the unique XT597. It would have been far more appropriate in Cosford's Test Aircraft hangar than some of the questionable exhibits they currently accommodate.
Cosford is home to the National Cold War Exhibition, which is why the money was available for the new hangar and why there are a variety of non-RAF types in that particular location (and, indeed, a number of vehicles). The Soviet kit, the F-111, the MH-53 reside there.
The Neptune is appropriate at Cosford because of the type's connection with Coastal Command (and let us not forget 1453 Flt either); likewise the Catalina. Both came from overseas and have been left in the markings of their last owners/donors. In the case of the Dutch, the squadrons operating the Neptune were 320 and 321, which were RAF units in WW2, both of them serving in the MR role (albeit in 320's case not for the whole war), which adds to the Neptune's presence being appropriate (the Danes didn't have quite enough pilots for their own RAF 300/400-series squadron, but did attempt to form one.)
A further key point is that Cosford was the Aerospace Museum for more than the first decade of its existence, with a clear remit to cover not just the RAF's history (the early 80s Cosford visitors' guides, by the by, talk of Hendon as being a national aviation museum and 'devoted...to the complete story of the RAF' with Cosford as an 'aeronautical collection'). This is why there was a BA collection - now gone, of course - at the museum for many years as well.
This means that a number of the 'questionable exhibits' not in the Cold War exhibition are there because Cosford was the right place for them under its original remit and they are now (e.g. the Ki-100) seen as being of historic significance in their own right. It was also appropriate for aircraft from the opposition during WW2 to be displayed - is it better that the actual items are on display so that the aircraft which the RAF (and FAA) went up against can be appreciated in 1:1 scale, or should they be slightly faded photographs up on a display board, thus maintaining some sort of 'purity' to the collection?
Cosford isn't creating a BoB museum by having the Dornier (which drew in hundreds of extra visitors in the first week it was there, and is still popular) - it is there because that is where the conservation centre for the RAFM is located and it is rather in need of a spot of conservation, even if it isn't going to be rebuilt. Once the airframe has been brought into a condition where the bits can be displayed without needing the special conditions they currently reside in, the plan is - or was - to ship it down to the BoB Hall at Hendon (the Hall, of course, is to all intents and purposes a BoB Museum, but it just happens to be within a bigger museum).
As for:
Perhaps they were under the mistaken impression that the Battle of Britain was a rather important part of the RAF's history and the battle with which the public most associate the RAF?
I agree that it would be appropriate for XT597 to end up at Cosford as part of the collection; it scores both in terms of the Cold War angle and its use for testing and evaluation.
But to blame it on foreign types being preserved, and to question the validity of those types being there is pushing it, I fear, particularly when the way in which both Hendon and Cosford evolved is taken into account. Unless Qinetiq offered XT597 to the RAFM and they declined it, then blame Qinetiq for disposing of it in the way they have (although thinking about it, didn't the US previously object to Phantoms being disposed of through the likes of Everett and insist that redundant airframes were scrapped instead?)
The Neptune is appropriate at Cosford because of the type's connection with Coastal Command (and let us not forget 1453 Flt either); likewise the Catalina. Both came from overseas and have been left in the markings of their last owners/donors. In the case of the Dutch, the squadrons operating the Neptune were 320 and 321, which were RAF units in WW2, both of them serving in the MR role (albeit in 320's case not for the whole war), which adds to the Neptune's presence being appropriate (the Danes didn't have quite enough pilots for their own RAF 300/400-series squadron, but did attempt to form one.)
A further key point is that Cosford was the Aerospace Museum for more than the first decade of its existence, with a clear remit to cover not just the RAF's history (the early 80s Cosford visitors' guides, by the by, talk of Hendon as being a national aviation museum and 'devoted...to the complete story of the RAF' with Cosford as an 'aeronautical collection'). This is why there was a BA collection - now gone, of course - at the museum for many years as well.
This means that a number of the 'questionable exhibits' not in the Cold War exhibition are there because Cosford was the right place for them under its original remit and they are now (e.g. the Ki-100) seen as being of historic significance in their own right. It was also appropriate for aircraft from the opposition during WW2 to be displayed - is it better that the actual items are on display so that the aircraft which the RAF (and FAA) went up against can be appreciated in 1:1 scale, or should they be slightly faded photographs up on a display board, thus maintaining some sort of 'purity' to the collection?
Cosford isn't creating a BoB museum by having the Dornier (which drew in hundreds of extra visitors in the first week it was there, and is still popular) - it is there because that is where the conservation centre for the RAFM is located and it is rather in need of a spot of conservation, even if it isn't going to be rebuilt. Once the airframe has been brought into a condition where the bits can be displayed without needing the special conditions they currently reside in, the plan is - or was - to ship it down to the BoB Hall at Hendon (the Hall, of course, is to all intents and purposes a BoB Museum, but it just happens to be within a bigger museum).
As for:
But one could question what the RAFM is doing creating (sic) a BofB Museum.
I agree that it would be appropriate for XT597 to end up at Cosford as part of the collection; it scores both in terms of the Cold War angle and its use for testing and evaluation.
But to blame it on foreign types being preserved, and to question the validity of those types being there is pushing it, I fear, particularly when the way in which both Hendon and Cosford evolved is taken into account. Unless Qinetiq offered XT597 to the RAFM and they declined it, then blame Qinetiq for disposing of it in the way they have (although thinking about it, didn't the US previously object to Phantoms being disposed of through the likes of Everett and insist that redundant airframes were scrapped instead?)
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we're pretty-much in agreement on most points there , in fact you've repeated some of my own comments. I guess our only major difference is the more general issue of what, precisely, the RAF Museum is all about. As I said previously, one can identify many projects that are not strictly "RAF" but still of relevance, so it's a question of where one draws the line.
Personally (and it's not just my view), the Dornier saga is a step too far. Even a complete aircraft is a questionable subject if funds have to be allocated to it when there are other more important RAF artefacts to preserve, but to pour money into a lump of scrap metal is ridiculous. I was not surprised to see many visitors literally scratching their heads, wondering what all the fuss was about and what they were even looking at.
As you will have read, I wasn't "blaming" the loss of XT597 on the RAFM, I was merely highlighting the absurdity of allocating a lot of money to a project that many people think is entirely inappropriate for the RAF Museum, while a very significant Phantom has not (presumbaly) even caught RAFM's attention for so much as a millisecond. It seems to confirm the worry that for the RAF, IWM etc., history seems to largely end in 1945.
Personally, my "blame" goes entirely on QinetiQ and MoD. As ever, they have reduced a very significant artefact to just its scrap metal value. Yes, they do have a responsibility to the taxpayer to recover as much money as possible, but one would hope that they would also have an understanding of history and heritage, and would therefore handle the disposal of its assets in a more intelligent and thoughtful way. Clearly that isn't happening - as usual.
Personally (and it's not just my view), the Dornier saga is a step too far. Even a complete aircraft is a questionable subject if funds have to be allocated to it when there are other more important RAF artefacts to preserve, but to pour money into a lump of scrap metal is ridiculous. I was not surprised to see many visitors literally scratching their heads, wondering what all the fuss was about and what they were even looking at.
As you will have read, I wasn't "blaming" the loss of XT597 on the RAFM, I was merely highlighting the absurdity of allocating a lot of money to a project that many people think is entirely inappropriate for the RAF Museum, while a very significant Phantom has not (presumbaly) even caught RAFM's attention for so much as a millisecond. It seems to confirm the worry that for the RAF, IWM etc., history seems to largely end in 1945.
Personally, my "blame" goes entirely on QinetiQ and MoD. As ever, they have reduced a very significant artefact to just its scrap metal value. Yes, they do have a responsibility to the taxpayer to recover as much money as possible, but one would hope that they would also have an understanding of history and heritage, and would therefore handle the disposal of its assets in a more intelligent and thoughtful way. Clearly that isn't happening - as usual.
WH904 wrote "so it will doubtless be left to rot at Bentwaters"
That doesn't sound like much of a business plan to me.
From what I have seen, Everett's usually acquire kit that has already been pretty much left to rot by the MoD, and they usually refurbish then sell/pass it on in a much better condition than they got it.
I think they actually sold one of their Jags back to the MoD (presumably not at a loss!).
75k? well the market will determine if that is realistic I suppose.
That doesn't sound like much of a business plan to me.
From what I have seen, Everett's usually acquire kit that has already been pretty much left to rot by the MoD, and they usually refurbish then sell/pass it on in a much better condition than they got it.
I think they actually sold one of their Jags back to the MoD (presumably not at a loss!).
75k? well the market will determine if that is realistic I suppose.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,921
Received 2,842 Likes
on
1,213 Posts
The place we were hoping for it to have gone to was either the B Down Museum at their new base or Bruntingthorpe that would have breathed new life back into it, they have the aim of getting one running at some point if they can get one.
Perhaps someone could build a business case to obtain lottery funding to put it back into the air, at least for a limited period.
Then they could organise a rolling campaign to fleece the phanboi's pockets for a while.
Then they could organise a rolling campaign to fleece the phanboi's pockets for a while.