Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 31

Thread: Air(lack of)Space

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,495

    Air(lack of)Space

    Seems like that they can't fit all the aircraft in the Hangar that they had hoped, Looks like the Buccaneer and Viscount will be moved out when the Comet and Hastings are completed.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    EGTK
    Posts
    7,757
    Poor planning?
    The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its original size.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rose Tinted Vulcan Glasses On!
    Posts
    491
    Bad planning, shame on you. I hope Lottery money is not involved in this venture?
    The Return of The Vulcan - Thursday 18th October 2007..Oh and again Monday 14th April 2008!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    EGTK
    Posts
    7,757
    Not saying it was just suggesting it may have been. I would not point the finger if it was, because of their shape it is easy to underestimate the space an aircraft will take up
    The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its original size.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rose Tinted Vulcan Glasses On!
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by mike currill
    Not saying it was just suggesting it may have been. I would not point the finger if it was, because of their shape it is easy to underestimate the space an aircraft will take up
    People/companies need to be made accountable when using public money. Next we will have the Valiant in a veil, because its the right thing to do!
    The Return of The Vulcan - Thursday 18th October 2007..Oh and again Monday 14th April 2008!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    8,182
    Have they run out of wire to hang them with? I would have thought a 19 million plus building could afford to buy some models and try it for size before hand !

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,420
    seems very strange that they can't fit in what they expected - wasn't the layout shown on various plans of AirSpace on the website - did somebody get their scales mixed up then?? - we need to know.....


    Having said that they do seem to have learnt from the obvious mistakes in the AAM. The hanging wires seem much less obtrusive - perhaps because there weren't (IIRC) any of those flying trapeze thingies - and also the wires are lost in the jumble of the framework of the roof. i don't like hanging aeroplanes but AirSpace seemed much better than the AAM in this regard.
    jeepman

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Closer than you think !
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by mike currill
    Not saying it was just suggesting it may have been. I would not point the finger if it was, because of their shape it is easy to underestimate the space an aircraft will take up
    No it isn't, not if you understand how aircraft move on the ground and how to position them. Any way they should have had enough practice over the years.
    All you need to take into account is swept wing growth, pivot point overhang, wing tip hight, tail hight, nose clearance to ground and maximum turning radius and there you go, simple.....

    mick

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    8,182
    Merlin - has any of that got anything to do with whether a £19 million pound hangar will actually fit in the aircraft planned for it? Surely that kind of money ensures that things go pretty much as planned ?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by merlin70
    Why don't you all wait and see what can and can't be fitted in, before blurting out alegations and potentially libelous comments. Little wonder many of the pilots, owners, operators, maintenance staff et al no longer post here.

    When all the planned airframes have been completed and placed in their final positions, informed debate about the Airspace experience can ensue.

    If you really don't like it save up, buy some airframes, spend twenty years doing them up, buy an historic airfield, build some hangars, attract in some aircraft restoration companies and operators and then we'll compare your efforts with those at dx.

    If you don't have the dosh or the ability to do any of the above I for one do not want to hear any more of your sniping.
    I guess they wouldn't have put it in a newsletter if it wasn't to be talked about.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    1,388
    Quote Originally Posted by Vulcan903
    People/companies need to be made accountable when using public money. Next we will have the Valiant in a veil, because its the right thing to do!


    The first sentence makes complete sense and I agree. The next is such a ridiculous comment that its almost funny but actually isnt and I really despair to think what you actually mean by it.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    North Herts
    Posts
    1,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ
    Oh okay....



    Great Forum...dont say a thing unless you opinion conforms....
    Therein lies the problem. Much of what is said on this Forum is un-informed opinion. Uninformed as it is often not based upon fact, made of wild speculative notions all for the sake of waiting a few weeks to find out what the reality is. If you don't believe me, try taking a trawl through these hallowed pages. Much of the speculation on here is disporoved after an awful lot of hot air and feather ruffling. At times, this place seems more like a testosterone zone than a aviation forum.

    The good bit about the Forum is that there are still some very well informed people who visit here providing up to date access to the goings on in aviation. If I want to read the male equivalent of a 'Chick Flick', I'd buy Nuts or FHM.

    Some speculation can be interesting in small doses. Whinging and sniping simply lets on that the author doesn't know, but would like to. It generally also means that they have no way of knowing until the truth is posted on the web, proving perhaps that they are in the category of the un-informed.

    It has nothing to do with conforming.
    If you didn't like what I just posted, tough luck. I've moved on already. :-)

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Southampton-Home of the Spitfire-
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by merlin70
    Therein lies the problem. Much of what is said on this Forum is un-informed opinion. Uninformed as it is often not based upon fact, made of wild speculative notions all for the sake of waiting a few weeks to find out what the reality is. If you don't believe me, try taking a trawl through these hallowed pages. Much of the speculation on here is disporoved after an awful lot of hot air and feather ruffling. At times, this place seems more like a testosterone zone than a aviation forum.

    The good bit about the Forum is that there are still some very well informed people who visit here providing up to date access to the goings on in aviation. If I want to read the male equivalent of a 'Chick Flick', I'd buy Nuts or FHM.

    Some speculation can be interesting in small doses. Whinging and sniping simply lets on that the author doesn't know, but would like to. It generally also means that they have no way of knowing until the truth is posted on the web, proving perhaps that they are in the category of the un-informed.

    It has nothing to do with conforming.
    you assume that I am not 'informed' in my opinion???

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    267
    Oh what a surprise. Yet again a stupid thread and yet again it is on Historic forum on key. Now gents behave yourselves. save the bickering for later its pathetic that you guys do this. This thread is not doing the IWM any favours and as someone who worked under both regimes in the past I am sure that the museum is doing its best to sort this minor problem out should infact arise.
    Stop the bickering ok?
    92fis do not stur trouble these sort of threads are pointless as you well know so why start it?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Napier Sabre
    Oh what a surprise. Yet again a stupid thread and yet again it is on Historic forum on key. Now gents behave yourselves. save the bickering for later its pathetic that you guys do this. This thread is not doing the IWM any favours and as someone who worked under both regimes in the past I am sure that the museum is doing its best to sort this minor problem out should infact arise.
    Stop the bickering ok?
    92fis do not stur trouble these sort of threads are pointless as you well know so why start it?
    Who's sturring trouble, The info came from the IWM AirSpace newsletter so i'm sure if they didn't want people to know they wouldn't have said anything.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Southampton-Home of the Spitfire-
    Posts
    354
    sorry


    ill go stand in a corner....

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    4,350
    Why do all Duxford related posts generate such a fuss?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Yak 11 Fan
    Why do all Duxford related posts generate such a fuss?
    I was wondering that myself.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    267
    Y11F,
    Well put. There IS[U] Life outside Duxford.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Yak 11 Fan
    Why do all Duxford related posts generate such a fuss?
    Could it be due to the fact that the Airspace project has cost so much money?

    Quote from IWM Duxford's own PR.

    “The overall cost of 'Airspace' is in the region of £27.9 million and will have a 10,000 square metre exhibition featuring 30 classic British and Commonwealth aircraft.”

    What could that have been used for elsewhere in British aircraft preservation?

    From my understanding and comments also in IWM Duxford’s own PR material they are also one of the few organisations that have been given additional funding from the HLF to help bring Airspace to completion. See their July 2006 update on the link below.

    http://www.militaryairshows.co.uk/new.htm#duxhang

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Southampton-Home of the Spitfire-
    Posts
    354
    £27.9 Million

    I just cant see how thats value for money when in truth the aircraft exhibition space hasn't increased by that much.

    I'm so fed up with Airspace and being mugged at Duxford airshows to donate £250 so someone can have a nice new office

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    EGTK
    Posts
    7,757
    Quote Originally Posted by moocher
    No it isn't, not if you understand how aircraft move on the ground and how to position them. Any way they should have had enough practice over the years.
    All you need to take into account is swept wing growth, pivot point overhang, wing tip hight, tail hight, nose clearance to ground and maximum turning radius and there you go, simple.....

    mick
    And being careful not to forget the angle of the dangle no doubt
    The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its original size.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    EGTK
    Posts
    7,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ
    £27.9 Million

    I just cant see how thats value for money when in truth the aircraft exhibition space hasn't increased by that much.

    I'm so fed up with Airspace and being mugged at Duxford airshows to donate £250 so someone can have a nice new office
    For some reason I got the idea that Airspace was going to be an extra 10000 sq ft of space compared to the original superhangar (which isn't exactly that super as we have just had a new one built here for a certain Mr Branson that is probably half the size). The more I saw of the superhangar the more I got the impression that it was actually smaller than the old hangars.
    The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its original size.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by TwinOtter23
    Quote from IWM Duxford's own PR.

    “The overall cost of 'Airspace' is in the region of £27.9 million and will have a 10,000 square metre exhibition featuring 30 classic British and Commonwealth aircraft.”
    Just think how many Vulcans they could have got flying again with all that money.

    Then they could retire a whole row of them to Duxford! :diablo:

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    496

    The 'Price' of preservation

    “The overall cost of 'Airspace' is in the region of £27.9 million and will have a 10,000 square metre exhibition featuring 30 classic British and Commonwealth aircraft.”
    WOW a whopping £930,000.00 per aircraft under cover

    Just think how many aircraft could have been put under cover if that amount had been given to each of the regional independant museums. Plus they would have been accessable to more people around the UK without having to all travel to the centre of the universe - the south east of England.

    Don't get me wrong - I like Duxford, its atmosphere, its aircraft, its airshows, Legends in particular. However I cannot help but think the fact they have sucked up the majority of the available public funding over the last few years may now be at the point where at least some of it would have better been used if made available to more smaller museums around the country.

    Now donning my tin hat and flak jacket.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Usually somewhere....
    Posts
    3,188
    Ok so DX have said they can't in what they hoped. These things happen. I've been on an airfield and spent ages putting stuff in and out in order to get it to fit - it happens. With regard to the comments with regard to positioning - ironic considering the thread a bit further down about transverse laoding of aircrft into hangars and the use of skates. A lot of the re-organisation of Hendon involved aircraft on skates so not an impossibility for DX surely?

    No one seems to think of the people that expended time and effort restoring these aircraft, how are the people who worked on the aircraft to go inside, that now are appearing to be going outside again feeling about such news?

    Thanks 92fis for starting an interesting thread, just a shame it has been skewed.
    It is only kinky the first time...

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Somewhere between rib 1 & rib 8 (still)
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Yak 11 Fan
    Why do all Duxford related posts generate such a fuss?
    Because Duxford belongs to the people; as British taxpayers, we in theory own it, in practice our views are shrugged of, and we have no more control over it than any other state run institution, and yet as A/C enthusiasts, we are passionate about which A/C are preserved ,and indeed how that is achieved.

    It has become autonamous, and wasteful, and its direction as a museum, has been cause for concern by many; it has also become so intertwined (at face value) with the many private companies that operate from there, that to say something negative about Duxford (IWM) invokes a torrent of vitriol ,some from people who work there, and some from their friends, who wrongly believe that criticism has been levelled at them.
    Why be your own worse critic, that's what the forum is for.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    A Russian hangar...
    Posts
    521
    Perhaps just one more little bit of information - exactly why such a large and expensive building cannot do exactly what it was designed to do - would have helped prevent some of the angst expressed here.

    One can imagine that a poorly designed and hastily built shed might not be roomy enough, but I share the exasperation expressed above as this should have worked. Is there a fix?

    I am going to Dx tonight and will try to find out a bit more.

    DS
    Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    2,162
    Oh dear...

    Some good points raised here, and some utter rubbish too.

    Some of you would be advised to get your facts straight or provide solid evidence of some of the claims you have made. No concrete evidence? Don't post such allegations in public then.

    And before someone starts howling self-righteously about moderation by an IWM employee, I won't be locking this thread or editing posts, I'll leave that to the discretion of the other mods and the Webmaster.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    2,162
    Additional: claims that "someone I spoke to at Duxford once said blah blah..." won't wash. Just because someone at Duxford said so, doesn't make it true, and believe me, some of the tales I have heard from some of the staff and private operators are simply that!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES