The trouble with (most) aircraft museums
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: over here
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woooo, Genghis, that's scary - what about his parting shot....
"I don't believe I took more than five years off my life."
Reminds me of the piece I read the other day about the ladies who used to paint the instrument dials in the Wartime factories, and were licking the tips of the brushes to get a nice point on them - many of whom later died from radiation induced illnesses.
So, going a little off-topic, what about all the warbirds flying around with vintage instruments? There must be serious H+S issues with the pilots, engineers and any overhaul shop that deals with them, unless the dials now use some sort of non-hazardous paint.
"I don't believe I took more than five years off my life."
Reminds me of the piece I read the other day about the ladies who used to paint the instrument dials in the Wartime factories, and were licking the tips of the brushes to get a nice point on them - many of whom later died from radiation induced illnesses.
So, going a little off-topic, what about all the warbirds flying around with vintage instruments? There must be serious H+S issues with the pilots, engineers and any overhaul shop that deals with them, unless the dials now use some sort of non-hazardous paint.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thread this.
Having travelled widely, visiting a/c museums, the good old British ones are the most uptight by far. Some is legislation, some is British 'you aren't alowed to have fun' attitudes.
Almost everywhere I've been though, when I've asked politely, had some idea what I'm talking about, I 've almost always had a great response from the staff.
Genghis' initial points stand though. The arm's length aproach encorages (over)reverence and ignorance. We need more artifacts that can be handelled, as well as preserved.
Museums have 3 functions 1. To preserve 2. To display / present and 3. To enthuse. Number 1 works against 2 / 3 often, and Museum Curators get little thanks for getting 2 and 3 right, so major on 1. They also seem to like 1 over 2 and 3 too!
To be specific. I'm working on a book on the Walrus and Stranraer. The RAAF Museum alowed me full access to their superbly restored Walrus, and I crawled all over it. The RAF Museum can't let anyone in their Seagull V because of 'instrament radiation risks'. We were very helpfully allowed to take pics through the opened side windows of the cockpit, ladder provided by the RAFM. We were allowed into the Stranraer for not more than 15 minutes - this despite the fact it now has NO instraments at all fitted! Why? Legislation run wild. The irony was neither us, nor the member of staff were wearing a radiation badge, which would alow actual risks and doses to be evaluated.
Hope this helps,
Cheers
James
Having travelled widely, visiting a/c museums, the good old British ones are the most uptight by far. Some is legislation, some is British 'you aren't alowed to have fun' attitudes.
Almost everywhere I've been though, when I've asked politely, had some idea what I'm talking about, I 've almost always had a great response from the staff.
Genghis' initial points stand though. The arm's length aproach encorages (over)reverence and ignorance. We need more artifacts that can be handelled, as well as preserved.
Museums have 3 functions 1. To preserve 2. To display / present and 3. To enthuse. Number 1 works against 2 / 3 often, and Museum Curators get little thanks for getting 2 and 3 right, so major on 1. They also seem to like 1 over 2 and 3 too!
To be specific. I'm working on a book on the Walrus and Stranraer. The RAAF Museum alowed me full access to their superbly restored Walrus, and I crawled all over it. The RAF Museum can't let anyone in their Seagull V because of 'instrament radiation risks'. We were very helpfully allowed to take pics through the opened side windows of the cockpit, ladder provided by the RAFM. We were allowed into the Stranraer for not more than 15 minutes - this despite the fact it now has NO instraments at all fitted! Why? Legislation run wild. The irony was neither us, nor the member of staff were wearing a radiation badge, which would alow actual risks and doses to be evaluated.
Hope this helps,
Cheers
James
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think perhaps it would be wise to think not what people want but what they can have.
Some of the great things we see at museums are, or will be, priceless treasures. The fact is that kids, and their parents, if they are not aviation minded, do not know how to treat these riches. They think that they SHOULD be able to sit in, handle, push, pull, turn, this way or that without any regard for the item. It is also understandable. But we have a duty to protect them.
I have been to Brooklands recently as well as East Fortune, and in each case the exhibits are pretty well untouchable. I have to agree with that. However, at Brooklands I was allowed to sit in the Harrier, which was parked next to the Clerget Camel which they knew I had flown. I suppose I have to admit that it was maybe considered somewhat more desireable for me to do so, but the fact is that they will allow kids to have a sit in the Harrier too - under very strict supervision. But for how much longer? Wear and tear will always eventually take it's toll.
But they cannot touch the 'bouncing bomb' anymore than they could climb into the cockpit of Roland Beamont's record breaking trans-atlantic Canberra at East Fortune. The fear that these relics are now rare and irreplaceable is a very real one.
I would not hide the fact that when someone asks me if I would like to sit at the controls of anything, I would never refuse. I could never have done that when the inviation came to 'handle' the controls of 'AF' (Concorde) at LHR. It was a thrill, as much for me as for Flying Lawyer and PPRuNe Dispatcher, and neither of us was in a mood to refuse.
Anyway, people clambering over aeroplanes can cause any amount of damage and I would prefer that kids and adults alike can SEE but only sometimes touch. That way we preserve them not only for this generation but for many generations to come.
By the way. I also recently went to the FAST museum at F'boro and although it is only 4 or 5 weeks old it already has some remarkable items on display. It is situated in the white building in front of the famous 'black sheds.' It used to be the Farborough Balloon Factory where the great J.W.Dunne built his swept wing glider in 1908. Dunne is mentioned, as he should be, and they have some wonderful designs that were used for testing way back in the early 1900's and many of the subsequent years. The outside display of a T7 Hunter, the Cockpit of Bucc, a complete Lightning and another Hunter is great.
But...............all the exhibits are protected. You can get close - and that is IMHO how it should be.
CP
Some of the great things we see at museums are, or will be, priceless treasures. The fact is that kids, and their parents, if they are not aviation minded, do not know how to treat these riches. They think that they SHOULD be able to sit in, handle, push, pull, turn, this way or that without any regard for the item. It is also understandable. But we have a duty to protect them.
I have been to Brooklands recently as well as East Fortune, and in each case the exhibits are pretty well untouchable. I have to agree with that. However, at Brooklands I was allowed to sit in the Harrier, which was parked next to the Clerget Camel which they knew I had flown. I suppose I have to admit that it was maybe considered somewhat more desireable for me to do so, but the fact is that they will allow kids to have a sit in the Harrier too - under very strict supervision. But for how much longer? Wear and tear will always eventually take it's toll.
But they cannot touch the 'bouncing bomb' anymore than they could climb into the cockpit of Roland Beamont's record breaking trans-atlantic Canberra at East Fortune. The fear that these relics are now rare and irreplaceable is a very real one.
I would not hide the fact that when someone asks me if I would like to sit at the controls of anything, I would never refuse. I could never have done that when the inviation came to 'handle' the controls of 'AF' (Concorde) at LHR. It was a thrill, as much for me as for Flying Lawyer and PPRuNe Dispatcher, and neither of us was in a mood to refuse.
Anyway, people clambering over aeroplanes can cause any amount of damage and I would prefer that kids and adults alike can SEE but only sometimes touch. That way we preserve them not only for this generation but for many generations to come.
By the way. I also recently went to the FAST museum at F'boro and although it is only 4 or 5 weeks old it already has some remarkable items on display. It is situated in the white building in front of the famous 'black sheds.' It used to be the Farborough Balloon Factory where the great J.W.Dunne built his swept wing glider in 1908. Dunne is mentioned, as he should be, and they have some wonderful designs that were used for testing way back in the early 1900's and many of the subsequent years. The outside display of a T7 Hunter, the Cockpit of Bucc, a complete Lightning and another Hunter is great.
But...............all the exhibits are protected. You can get close - and that is IMHO how it should be.
CP
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi CamelPilot,
Good post. But I don't see where it says you can have only one example of the artifact. A good museum to me has an historic aircraft (agreed, protected from casual touching) and one or two duplicates or replicas that the public can play with. There's got to be a use for all those JPs and Vampires!
Working in a museum, as I do, I know that people get so much more out of a visit when they get to relate to something directly. That is often a chance to touch or handle. I'm afraid I'm with the kids who regard a museum of glass boxes as 'borring' - they are; and we have a duty to educate and inform. Part of that is to avoid the UK museum mantra of 'don't touch' and figure ways that people can touch without damage - replicas, spares, 'handling collections', supervised access, can all be part of the deal.
Cheers
James
Good post. But I don't see where it says you can have only one example of the artifact. A good museum to me has an historic aircraft (agreed, protected from casual touching) and one or two duplicates or replicas that the public can play with. There's got to be a use for all those JPs and Vampires!
Working in a museum, as I do, I know that people get so much more out of a visit when they get to relate to something directly. That is often a chance to touch or handle. I'm afraid I'm with the kids who regard a museum of glass boxes as 'borring' - they are; and we have a duty to educate and inform. Part of that is to avoid the UK museum mantra of 'don't touch' and figure ways that people can touch without damage - replicas, spares, 'handling collections', supervised access, can all be part of the deal.
Cheers
James
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post CamelPilot - the museum I used to be involved with would love to let people clamber into aircraft but the litigation aspect with the radiation has scupperd that despite the fact that we knew (after testing) the radiation was negligible. We had a small airliner which was to be converted to a hands on exhibit complete with access ramps but again issues re litigation come into the frame. And yes everything has to be bolted down!
You don't necessarily have to touch - a bit of atmosphere goes down well so sound, vision and surrounding exhibits all can help to bring an exhibit to life. Have to be careful though as on special event days we've included sound and watched a hangar full of people empty as they rush outside to see what has just "flown" over
You don't necessarily have to touch - a bit of atmosphere goes down well so sound, vision and surrounding exhibits all can help to bring an exhibit to life. Have to be careful though as on special event days we've included sound and watched a hangar full of people empty as they rush outside to see what has just "flown" over
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Oshkosh, WI
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might be said that the trouble with (most) aircraft enthusiasts is that they imagine aircraft museums are run for their personal benefit... aircraft Museums are in fact visited by a broad cross-section of society... ages, interests, sexes, social backgrounds etc Typically less than 10% is an aircraft enthusiast.
One of the challenges of running an aircraft museum (this happens to be my job) is how in the heck you keep everyone happy, because their wants and desires are so diverse.
Anyway to speak to the discussion of whether or not to let people in cockpits, we have a spectrum of opinion. At one end is the person who would like "ultimate access" - no barriers, open cockpits, heck you can even take it flying if you want... At the other end of the spectrum is the "zero access" person who would like to keep the artifact in a hermetically sealed vacuum cut off from nasty things like humidity, light and all those ugly people.
Neither end of the spectrum is wholly appropriate. In the first example, the museum is failing in its duty to care and preserve the artifact for the benefit of future generations. In the second example the museum is failing in its duty to provide access to the artifact. What is the use of having it if no-one can ever learn from it?
Most museums are trying to strike the best possible balance between what, as someone has already mentioned, are ultimately irreconcilable goals.
Anyway, as it relates to cockpits, I offer one potential way to mitigate the problem. It gives you a reasonable amount of access to the cockpit of an aeroplane that no curator in his right mind is going to let thousands of people clamber inside. It's free, and you can do it all around the world as many times as you want (but you will need QuickTime).
XP-51 cockpit
One of the challenges of running an aircraft museum (this happens to be my job) is how in the heck you keep everyone happy, because their wants and desires are so diverse.
Anyway to speak to the discussion of whether or not to let people in cockpits, we have a spectrum of opinion. At one end is the person who would like "ultimate access" - no barriers, open cockpits, heck you can even take it flying if you want... At the other end of the spectrum is the "zero access" person who would like to keep the artifact in a hermetically sealed vacuum cut off from nasty things like humidity, light and all those ugly people.
Neither end of the spectrum is wholly appropriate. In the first example, the museum is failing in its duty to care and preserve the artifact for the benefit of future generations. In the second example the museum is failing in its duty to provide access to the artifact. What is the use of having it if no-one can ever learn from it?
Most museums are trying to strike the best possible balance between what, as someone has already mentioned, are ultimately irreconcilable goals.
Anyway, as it relates to cockpits, I offer one potential way to mitigate the problem. It gives you a reasonable amount of access to the cockpit of an aeroplane that no curator in his right mind is going to let thousands of people clamber inside. It's free, and you can do it all around the world as many times as you want (but you will need QuickTime).
XP-51 cockpit
Moderator
Thread Starter
Two questions if I may...
(1) I always thought that a primary purpose of museums, any museums, is to educate. Now if visiting some kinds of museum, I accept that "history and what the items look like" is the main part of that education, but surely it's a lot deeper than that with any kind of technology museum, aeroplanes included.
(2) Surely it's not beyond the whit of man to make the inside of a cockpit - all cockpits, clearly visible to visitors, even if they can't sensibly be allowed to sit in them? Even a crude plywood mock-up, with some 1:1 photographs of the panels and controls stuck in it would be better than 'nowt.
And on the subject, there are a lot of other parts of flying machines that are worth inspecting close-up, as well as the cockpit. Helicopter rotor hubs, flap mechanisms, etc. etc. That C152 chopped in half at the Science museum is a good example of a way forward in my opinion - no way to treat a valuable antique, but a constructive way of disposing of one of Mr Cessna's less enjoyable products.
G
(1) I always thought that a primary purpose of museums, any museums, is to educate. Now if visiting some kinds of museum, I accept that "history and what the items look like" is the main part of that education, but surely it's a lot deeper than that with any kind of technology museum, aeroplanes included.
(2) Surely it's not beyond the whit of man to make the inside of a cockpit - all cockpits, clearly visible to visitors, even if they can't sensibly be allowed to sit in them? Even a crude plywood mock-up, with some 1:1 photographs of the panels and controls stuck in it would be better than 'nowt.
And on the subject, there are a lot of other parts of flying machines that are worth inspecting close-up, as well as the cockpit. Helicopter rotor hubs, flap mechanisms, etc. etc. That C152 chopped in half at the Science museum is a good example of a way forward in my opinion - no way to treat a valuable antique, but a constructive way of disposing of one of Mr Cessna's less enjoyable products.
G
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Usually Oz
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This H&S cr*p about luminous instruments on a one-off inspection is a masked load of codswallop by folk with little to do.
What next; somebody next to me in the bus sues me because the got cancer from my wristwatch??
I fly a number of old a/c with luminous instruments and just like those who flew them in full-time service haven't started to glow yet!
The poor girls who painted the faces as a job are another matter; my heart goes out to them and their loved ones.
BTW I'm told that the GBP500 or so per year for museums to own and calibrate a Geiger counter to check instrument radiation will send a few under if somebody doesn't see reason soon.
In this case; "Only in the UK!"
G'day
What next; somebody next to me in the bus sues me because the got cancer from my wristwatch??
I fly a number of old a/c with luminous instruments and just like those who flew them in full-time service haven't started to glow yet!
The poor girls who painted the faces as a job are another matter; my heart goes out to them and their loved ones.
BTW I'm told that the GBP500 or so per year for museums to own and calibrate a Geiger counter to check instrument radiation will send a few under if somebody doesn't see reason soon.
In this case; "Only in the UK!"
G'day
AerBabe
Yes, it's going ok, he doesn't spend that much time at the museum now as he has become a part time wage slave.
Next time I talk to him, I'll mention you to him.
Yes, it's going ok, he doesn't spend that much time at the museum now as he has become a part time wage slave.
Next time I talk to him, I'll mention you to him.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Folks:
First post to PPRUNE.
The matter of letting the public get close to aircraft is a difficult one.
I have been fortunate enough to visit several museums in the UK and have invariably been impressed with the condition of the displays and the obvious dedication on the part of the staff. Unfortunately, if you want to get close and take some detail pictures or touch the aircraft, you are generally not able to do so regardless of the quality of your pleading, grovelling, or snivelling.
Like so many of us, I would have needed to wear a bib if I had the opportunity to sit in the cockpit of a Spit and have my picture taken!
While I was disappointed at the time, I have changed my thought pattern, and now I think this is a good thing!
I've come to that position after a visit to the USAF Museum in Dayton a few years ago where I was very impressed with the ability to get up close and touch one of the "X Planes" on display. It was wonderful to run my hand across the fuselage and feel the quality of the riveting, observe how well it was constructed, daydream a little and think of what these aircraft had done for the advancement of high speed flight, and have a sort of "spitual communion" with the people that designed, built, and flew this famous aircraft.
Then, I noticed just below one of the windows, some brainless jerk had taken a key, or knife blade and carved his & hers initials inside a heart.....just like it was a tree in the middle of a picnic ground. Made me wish I could string the little weasel up by the neck with piano wire!
Regrettably, I observed the same sort of defacement of aeronautical history at the space museum in Houston, Texas. At one point of my tour, I was touching one of the early Mercury Program capsules that I had watched being launched on TV as a child. During my reverie thinking back at how far I had come since sitting in front of the television and now being able to actually lay hands on this piece of engineering, I noted all manner of scratches and "spoor" left by visitors who really didn't have a clue of the significance of what they were looking at.
Call me a radical, but I say "Lock 'em up" and don't let the great unwashed get their mitts on these aircraft. If they are allowed to touch them, it should be under very close supervision to prevent idiots from damaging them to impress their girlfriends!
Regards to all,
Fog
First post to PPRUNE.
The matter of letting the public get close to aircraft is a difficult one.
I have been fortunate enough to visit several museums in the UK and have invariably been impressed with the condition of the displays and the obvious dedication on the part of the staff. Unfortunately, if you want to get close and take some detail pictures or touch the aircraft, you are generally not able to do so regardless of the quality of your pleading, grovelling, or snivelling.
Like so many of us, I would have needed to wear a bib if I had the opportunity to sit in the cockpit of a Spit and have my picture taken!
While I was disappointed at the time, I have changed my thought pattern, and now I think this is a good thing!
I've come to that position after a visit to the USAF Museum in Dayton a few years ago where I was very impressed with the ability to get up close and touch one of the "X Planes" on display. It was wonderful to run my hand across the fuselage and feel the quality of the riveting, observe how well it was constructed, daydream a little and think of what these aircraft had done for the advancement of high speed flight, and have a sort of "spitual communion" with the people that designed, built, and flew this famous aircraft.
Then, I noticed just below one of the windows, some brainless jerk had taken a key, or knife blade and carved his & hers initials inside a heart.....just like it was a tree in the middle of a picnic ground. Made me wish I could string the little weasel up by the neck with piano wire!
Regrettably, I observed the same sort of defacement of aeronautical history at the space museum in Houston, Texas. At one point of my tour, I was touching one of the early Mercury Program capsules that I had watched being launched on TV as a child. During my reverie thinking back at how far I had come since sitting in front of the television and now being able to actually lay hands on this piece of engineering, I noted all manner of scratches and "spoor" left by visitors who really didn't have a clue of the significance of what they were looking at.
Call me a radical, but I say "Lock 'em up" and don't let the great unwashed get their mitts on these aircraft. If they are allowed to touch them, it should be under very close supervision to prevent idiots from damaging them to impress their girlfriends!
Regards to all,
Fog
