Your of course right Albert Driver: My attitude can be construed as defeatist and not helped by Mig15s post as it sums ups the situation that existed in part of the BA management structure at the time he made his offer.
They would have been totally nonplussed at how to respond. Amazed anyone would make the offer without payment and totally without any understanding that peserving their history would be of interest outside some 'nuts' within the company.

Another reason for my less than 'positive' attitude is that within BA there are many who do passionately care about preserving the Company Heritage and not just out of a sense of 'History' but as something that can work for the company in Marketing, Advertising and Promotion. But if those working from the inside cannot stop acts of corporate vandalism who can!

Whilst this thread is about the Aircraft Collection, the loss of BEA and BOAC Heritage Material has wider implications than just the Aviation History Community - BEA were early Adopters and Developers in Aviation Specific Computing as well as more General Business Aplications, Telecommunications Systems and Networks. Use and development of Ground Transport Operations both Bus and Truck. In all these cases echoes of this pioneering work still exist in todays Airlines and Transport Industries. So much of this has been lost and because so many of the 'people who were there' are no longer with us, it is well nigh impossible to 'reconstruct the story'.

So from my viewpoint and I accept today (especially) that I am in a non-positive frame of mind, the fate of the Aircraft Collection is another lost cause in the 'long defeat' over the British Airways Heritage.
When the RAF and others 'woke up' to what had already been lost and what was in clear and present danger of disappearing, they did start to do something (too slow one might say)! BA perversely seemed to go the other way!
As for Cosford - It is not for me to defend them further - they are big enough to do it themselves. But even if they are deemed not totally blameless (and I remain to be convinced that any blame can be attached), as this was not the 'National Airliner Collection', the Company who's name it bore is the primary Culprit.
DIH

I have a great deal of sympathy with all you say, Opssys, and I'm certainly not going to defend BA's record on the conservation of its heritage. But at the end of the day BA is an airline, and one that is currently fighting for survival and short of cash for anything that is not part of the core operation. The RAF Museum on the other hand exists only for the purpose of preserving and displaying historic aircraft. To say, as John Francis has, that the MOD can't continue to support the BA collection at Cosford until all other ways to preserve these aircraft complete have been exhausted flies in the face of everything the Museum was created for. RAF aircraft were saved for the RAF Museum by non-RAF personnel but the RAF Museum won't delay the destruction of a unique collection of non-RAF aircraft until private funding becomes available again, as it surely will, to preserve them. What kind of a museum policy and attitude is that? What kind of barbarian Directorate? Given that BA has abandoned its Collection why does Cosford necessarily have to connive in its destruction?
Both BA and Cosford have stated that the aircraft are to be "moved to other museums", "disassembled and re-assembled", "found new homes", "deconstructed and reconstructed" etc etc. These are downright untruths and both organisations (and that means the Directors who made these misleading statements) should be held to account for their dishonesty.

Aah Yes as Albert Driver states BA is a Commercial Organisation operating in many markets which in 'normal' times (whenever those are) are 'cut throat' and at the same time in a period when fuel prices are high and variable, with both internal and external costs rising!

Believe it or not I do have considerable sympathy the Board and Senior Management at BA whilst they attempt to deal with this situation (the phrase once uttered by an IBM Chairman does come to mind - 'How do you make an Elephant Tap Dance' when he was trying to restructure IBM to enable it to react to difficult commercial circumstances).

However BA has enjoyed extremely profitable periods and has, many times, blown money on expensive exercises which proved futile!
But even when annoucing excellent profits has never given any real consistent thought to heritage matters.

Although far, far, too late, I am sure that a reasonable 'Heritage Policy' even if implemented as late as the early 1990's could have mobilised a lot of BA retired Engineers to help with the Aircraft at Cosford - Providing Transport too/from a Heathrow area Location could have been arranged.
People like MIG15 were willing to assist.
Even non-Engineering volunteers, where BA or non-company could have been used for the less skilled jobs and done it for transport and an Airline Meal :-).
This would have been low cost and given BA some positive Publicity (which is always something PR want).

As we accept BA is entirely a commercial organisation, (then despite my belief they could have benefited from the Collection in ways that would show some tangible result) and found the cost of supporting the Airliner Collection a burden, then a decade ago there were some alternatives. If you like they could have given it to the 'Nation' with a one-off never to be repeated money donation. This would have forced several Government, NGO's concerned with Heritage and Cosford to take on-board the idea of a 'National Airliner Collection'

But all of that is in the past - What survives, whether complete, or as remains are going to good homes.

I said I wouldn't defend Cosford further: But as their ultimate master is the MoD, I suggest this tends to 'focus' the Museums priorities!

Note to Albert Driver:
I suspect that over a few pints we could end up 'issuing a joint statement' that would accommodate our differing views. But a thread based conversation isn't going to achieve that :-)
DIH

All good points.

Yes but the money we're talking about is absolute peanuts to a large airline. Probably a tiny fraction of a typical BA telly commercial. I'd have thought the good publicity alone would be work the poultry investment - but I guess it's probably considered that the 'audience' isn't big enough.

I'm sure they used to send their apprentices to Cosford for this very purpose ?--could be wrong of course, but I seem to recall speaking to those who had done a compulsory stint at the place. They actually enjoyed it by the way--not surprisingly !.

You say it was 10 years ago, Mig15, that you made the offer to do some conservation work on the BA Collection. That puts it firmly in the Bob Ayling era of the ethnic tails and contempt for anything reflecting BA's past. Another great Ayling legacy, then. Thanks Bob.

The RAF Museum have a unfortunate history of scrapping exhibits in the past where money has become tight.
They scrapped the Beverley at Hendon, and the last remaining Vulcan B.1 and Victor B.1 bombers in the 1980s/90s.
So you could say some the bad feeling and blame directed towards them about these sad events is understandable.

Given that all the exhibits are now owned officially by the Museum, and not the RAF, is the RAFM in anyway a self-supporting organisation now in terms of exhibit upkeep?

John Francis of RAFM said, "The Museum is funded by
the Ministry of Defence and MOD money cannot be spent on civil
airliners."

Now, given all the spin currently being put out by BA and RAFM, is this correct?

Mig You seem to know even less about RAF aircraft than I do but I can assure you quite categorically that Avro Yorks were flown by the RAF. My father was a RAF pilot and he flew RAF Yorks.

Ouch Dx, seems to have hit a nerve...those of us that know you realise the affinity that you have with the York. The guardians of our aviation heritage should make a call DX...there is one York at Duxford and another at Cosford, both under cover. There are no Brits under cover at this time, scrap one of the Yorks to make way for a Brit...seems fair to me (TIC)
I seem to remember that the RAF had a few Brits as well, but not the one at Cosford. The last operator of G-AOVF was IAS if my memory serves me right. Ironic that it is now in BOAC colours, the forbear of the operator who has now walked away from their aircraft at Cosford. (G-AOVF did operate for BOAC so I can see why it was painted in BOAC colours)
Trouble is that Transport Aircraft tend to be on the large side. If we are looking for a museum to hold them how about a national commercial aircraft museum? Are there any potential sites? Thoughts on a postcard please.

Temps

Well, in fact, the first four of those types have been operated by the UK military.

According to their own collections policy, which is available at: http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/london/p...20division.doc
British Airways aircraft are legitimate objects for their collection.
"THE PURPOSE OF THE ARTEFACTS COLLECTION
11. To build up a material record of the objects used, worn or operated by the personnel of the organisations stated in the policy aim outlined above. The military forces and other bodies covered by that statement to receive priority as below:
[ sub-paras a - k ]
l) British Airways and its predecessors."

In the days of dodgy digital cameras ... a GPS approach proving flight in BAC 1-11 XX105 at Leuchars (the go around part)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...g/climbout.jpg

Thanks for that link, Sedburgh. What a wealth of information lies within the RAF Museum's collections policy on the site.
Look at the following: FAFM/DCM/2/6/3/1 ACQUISITION & DISPOSAL POLICY
DISPOSAL
20. Disposal will not be undertaken principally for financial reasons (either to raise money for any purpose or to reduce expenditure).

So why include four aircraft which were Military? The York was originally built for the RAF. I had a feeling the Jetstream was also used by the RAF but, as with the Britannia and Comet, wasn't too sure so didn't mention them. The York at Duxford is only partially complete - it has no wings :{ but does have a very nice paint scheme which I believe is Dan Air but could well be wrong. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...and2004009.jpg
The one at Cosford is complete and a fascinating shade of dark green :ugh: I have a photo on my other computer but can't retrieve it at the moment.
Temps, your idea of a dedicated museum is an excellent one and one I feel should be explored further. Whilst in NO way decrying the invaluable contribution of the Spitfire to our history, It does seem that almost every museum has at least one of them perhaps to the detriment of other, equally worthy, potential exhibits. It sometimes seems that, like the silly assumption by some, that all pilots were men and no women pilots paid any contribution to the war effort, the only aircraft in the war, with the possible exception of the Lancaster, was the Spitfire. Elvington is the only place, so far, where I have seen a specific memorial to the women.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...t/553e06c5.jpg
GCC thanks for the info.

The Jetstream served the RAF for over 20 years in the Navigation training role, first at Finningley and then at Cranwell.
There were retired from service in 2004/5.

The Britannia was an RAF transport as was the Comet and there was an RAF Jetstream at Coford on the pan yesterday in addition to BAe G-BBYM.
G-APFJ had 3 of it's 4 angines lying on the grass, the other was nowhere in sight. G-ARVM looked to be deteriorating as did G-APFJ. The Valiant looked in a bit of a state too. G-AVMO was looking bedraggled and oddly G-ARPH, the Trident looked fine !


If I might add, anyone who doesn't know that the Comet, Britannia and Jetstream served with the RAF has nothin meaningful to add here.

I sure hope so, but they have to go under cover or we will be having a similar conversation in 10 years when they are being chopped up.....


Temps

Why? I am not afraid to admit that I don't know everything and am still learning. Not only am I still learning, I hope to continue to do so to the end of my life. I'm sure Mig and most other people would probably agree with me. To amend slightly a quotation from a present I was given: "We don't stop learning because we grow old, we grow old because we stop learning." I, and I would think many other people, will never achieve the depth of knowledge which Tempsford has, but it won't stop me trying to learn more. :ok:
Mig you are forgiven, as Temps said, I have a special affinity with the York and would really love to be able to see one flying but I fear that is most unlikely to happen. :{
I hope to be able to visit Cosford again as soon as the children have returned to school - it's much more peaceful then and easier to get to the "Hands-on" exhibits :E :ok:

DX
I am sure that no one intended to take this thread to a 'personal' level (DID WE!!). From previous experience, there are some thread posters who are very swift to pick up on anything they feel is incorrect. Perhaps too quick and too cutting on occasion..... Why, I know not. (not more 'willy waving'!!) As you say, we are always learning and the fact that the aircraft knowledge of some is perhaps less than others should not preclude them for contributing to threads. My sad story involves being the third generation aviation in my family. My three sons are also in the industry as well. Yes, I know, I should have warned them off. However, their level of overall aviation knowledge is excellent and in most cases, far better than mine. Yes, I have created monsters!
The aviation knowledge exhibited on PPRUNE is quite staggering. How some have manged to keep a thread going on Cocpkit/Flight Deck pictures for so long is a testament to the knowlegde of PPRUNERS. The speed in which quite obscure questions are answered never ceases to amaze me and the support given by most in the form of indicating where resources and information can be obtained is, again, excellent.
Whilst flattered that my limited knowledge (and believe me it is VERY limited) has assisted some, I am mindful of the great depth of knowlege of some PPRUNERS. My excuse is 50 years of aviation background. It was inevitable that some 'knowledge' would be retained, albeit limited.
So, fellow PPRUNERS, the next time a mail is posted by someone who may not have as much aviation knowledge as you, 'cut em some slack' and help them with a positive response and try not to exhibit it in a way that you know more than they do. Perhaps you do, but the person asking the question may be able to help you one day in a field that you are not perhaps so knowledgeable in.

Temps

This is symptomatic of the difficulty we have in the UK for recognising important parts of our heritage. We are happy to preserve old houses and warehouses because it is easier and relatively cheap, but given the opportunity to preserve aircraft that have contributed to the economic welfare of the UK by carrying business men and women who won orders for British businesses there is no corporate sponsorship to be found.

The other difficulty is the sheer size of the product we are interested in preserving. How long before we need space to preserve a B747-100 srs in BOAC colours, or better still a 747-200 in BCal colours :D and where in heavens name would it be housed? Far easier to tug at distant memories and preserve another 10 Spitfires!!

Are we going to be able to find a home for the present and the future large commercial aircraft that are part of the history of UK aviation; DC10-30 for BCal, DC-10-10 for Laker; Lockheed 1011 Tristar for BA, B767 and B757 again for BA etc etc. Heaven knows where we will ever house an A380!!

Look at the difficulties that the Bristol Aero Collection has recently had re the move of their Britannia from Kemble.

If the Spitfire tugs at the heartstrings for its deeds in 1940 then surely the heart strings of the general public can be pulled for aircraft that took them on their first trips to far off places on holiday or business? It needs one site to be developed for this purpose and it needs an airfield with a good runway and lots of development potential for a museum to grow in the future.

I have many photos to remind me of the missing a/c types and airlines at work, but others are not so fortunate and it would be good if they could at least see the aircraft on the ground.

SN,
Well said.
Temps

G-APFJ Boeing 707 to be scrapped RAF Museum in Cosford UK
 

I read on a website (http://www.aviation-friends-cologne..../Boeing707.htm) that the RAF museum in Cosford is going to scrap their Boeing 707, G-APFJ this year.

See link: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1011294/L/

I find this a disgrace. Why is it that allmost no transport aircraft are being kept (convair 880 / 990, Boeing 707, DC-8). Looks like we have to rely on Mr. Travolta and others to preserve a piece of history.

Cosford's Trident is also to be scrapped. The nose of the Trident,and that of the 707,plus the complete Viscount,and the complete BAC111 are all to be moved to East Fortune in Scotland. These all still belong to British Airways,and the rumour is that the RAF want them out.

This is a shame,but as happened when the Concorde was moved to East Fortune,other aircraft there have received their marching orders. I know that at least the Miles Monarch,which belongs to the Aircraft Preservation Society of Scotland (APSS),will be looking for pastures new. I personally value the aircraft they presently have,and they're possibly thinking that the airliners will draw more visitors. A very sad day.

I noticed there is already a discussion going on this under:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=205716

Sorry for the repost here. Still good the highlight this terrible decision.

Well, it is the RAF Museum and the RAF never operated the 707 so it isn't really an appropriate exhibit. I do not know how it arrived at Cosford, but presumably the museum was inveigled to take it and now there are no funds forthcoming to maintain and retain it, so unless an appropriate home is found for it (and funding) then it will have to go. If any enthusiasts feel strongly enough about it then they will presumably go out and find the cash to preserve these aircraft.

YS

sentry......................................... ;)

Used a development of the KC135 airframe, inception of which pre-dated the 707. Different fuselage cross section to the 707. For an account of the development of the 707 and its successors see:

Wide-Body; The making of the Boeing 747 (ISBN: 0340599839)
Irving, Clive

My original statement stands.

YS

Seems the RAF and MOD have an axe to grind with civil aviation at present.
See threads on Monarch pulling out of GIB.

At the end of the day there is only one person accountable and that is Tony Bliar.

Yellow Sun

E-3 and variants are developed from the 707 not the KC-135, so technically yes the RAF has operated the 707.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/e-3.htm

AFAIK,
The "Civil" a/c were? owned by BA..[Belfast excepted] not the RAF...sooooo.. IF these a/c should be preserved, then the [previous] owners should cough up. :E
bb

I cant help thinking that the RAFM didnt get a Concorde, so they are throwing their airliners out of the cot.

All a bit sad really.......

That said, the new, and pretty gopping if the truth be known, hangar at Cosford makes the place a little crowded, and a cull of some sorts was probably required. It would have been nice for all of the airframes to find a home in a complete condition.

Oh for the love of God - Tony Blair responsible for scrapping of BA707 ?
Helllllloooo earth to pprune.
BA haven't maintained the airframes for years. They are starting to deteriorate seriously and they do not belong to the RAF. Not the fault of Tony Blair.

Anyone going to Cosford this weekend? Could you let us know what is happening to the 707?

Also can you get near the VC10 at the moment? How bad is the corrosion? Accepting that the thin fairings will be rotten, what about the main structure that can be seen?

Thanks.

I was there last week, they were working on the 707. The engines and a few panels were off, lying on the grass. Tail held up with railway sleepers. Looked a bit sad... :{

I was there on Good Friday.
G-APFJ B707-436 - engines on ground, fenced off needing a respray :(
(last survivor of this mark)
G-ARVM VC10 - untouched but looking a little bedraggled but still a beauty
G-AVMO BAC111 - looking in need of TLC but still very much in one piece
G-ALWF Viscount - amazing machine - needing a bit of care and maintenence
G-ARPH Trident 1C - looked the best of the lot - so best to scrap it !
(last survivor of this mark)

The Comet and Britannia belong to the RAF I believe and look OK but need to be indoors.

Why East Fortune doesn't want the backbone of the EDI-LHR shuttle is beyond me. It looks really good for it's age. Incidentally the Belfast next to the VC10 looks immaculate.

Hurry while there's still time. You now only have photos and memories for the children...........

SKP 1E,
I agree with your astonishment about the Trident not being wanted by East Fortune given the strong Shuttle connection. Yet RAFM Cosford now seems to be suggesting they are taking the whole 707 airframe rather than just the cockpit. Why the 707, with no local connection that I'm aware of, but not PH?
Of course that may be completely wrong, given the RAFM's previous misleading statements on what is happening.

http://www.artistic.flyer.co.uk/C1.jpg
http://www.artistic.flyer.co.uk/C2.jpg
http://www.artistic.flyer.co.uk/C4.jpg
http://www.artistic.flyer.co.uk/C6.jpg
The Viscount GALWF is at Duxford, the Cosford one is GAMON I think.

Thanks TM
Looking at those photos I'm not convinced that the VC10 is too corroded to be saved. I remember seeing VC10 parts being milled out of solid metal. The reason they they were not successful commercially was because they were built too strong. I think it's just another example of the all the spin and misinformation currently being put about by the RAFM.
Work on the 707 seems to have stopped? When was the photo taken?

Easter Monday 17 Apr 06

Signs on the 707 fencing do not suggest that the cockpit only is to survive, but I got the feeling that the RAFM is walking on eggs when it comes to public info about the whole thing.

I am surprised that the small collection at Manchester Intl did not get the BAC 1-11 as it was very much part of the Manchester scene in the 70s. Perhaps they have their hands full with their new (ex Heathrow) Trident, and have run out of realestate.