UK military museums - what's going on?

Trouble is they then crash them Sea Vixen, Firefly and a couple of Sea Fury!
Mechanical failures all of them and the Sea Fury’s engine failure, notoriously complicated Bristol Hercules!

TM was once run by the Army, but privately run. So who owns it? Who owns the conservatorship of the RACs history.
Isn’t the FAA Historic Flight a private concern now, I think I read somewhere it was signed over so the RN doesn’t have responsibility anymore.
 
Mechanical failures all of them and the Sea Fury’s engine failure, notoriously complicated Bristol Hercules!

TM was once run by the Army, but privately run. So who owns it? Who owns the conservatorship of the RACs history.
Isn’t the FAA Historic Flight a private concern now, I think I read somewhere it was signed over so the RN doesn’t have responsibility anymore.
The RN Historic Flt is no longer RN owned but run as a charity, I think the flying Swordfish had to go on the CAA aircraft register. RAF BofB Flt is still run as an RAF Unit complete with blue suits working on the aircraft. I do wonder how long this will last though, next round of cuts? as with departure of the last of WW2 generation current RAF management seem keen to drop the past.
 
The RN Historic Flt is no longer RN owned but run as a charity, I think the flying Swordfish had to go on the CAA aircraft register. RAF BofB Flt is still run as an RAF Unit complete with blue suits working on the aircraft. I do wonder how long this will last though, next round of cuts? as with departure of the last of WW2 generation current RAF management seem keen to drop the past.
How many times have we heard the Red Arrows will go soon…..
 
How many times have we heard the Red Arrows will go soon…..
Red Arrows now go on to 2030, no doubt the withdraw of Mk1 Hawks from RAF/RN use, other than Reds, has something to do with this to provide a pool of replacement a/c and spares. There is some talk of British aircraft industry working on a training a/c for the international market so may be this is linked to 2030. However, with the current situation when the RAF cannot be provided with adequate operational a/c (think P8, Wedgetail and scraping of the C-130J fleet) the purchase of minimum 14 a/c for a flying circus is a dream. I do not think the Reds flying the US T7 Red Hawk is an option do you? Yes, to bin the Reds would be a major political decision (think headlines Daily Wail, Express and Telegraph) so it will not be revised any time soon.

I am just thinking out loud what will go in the next round of RAF cuts! the BofB Memorial Chapel at the former RAF Biggin Hill was seen an RAF shrine but that went for the chop and is being run by civilians to save it from being demolished.
 
The RN Historic Flt is no longer RN owned but run as a charity, I think the flying Swordfish had to go on the CAA aircraft register. RAF BofB Flt is still run as an RAF Unit complete with blue suits working on the aircraft. I do wonder how long this will last though, next round of cuts? as with departure of the last of WW2 generation current RAF management seem keen to drop the past.
A long time ago I got the tour of the historic flight, the museum next door is worth the jaunt
 
For those interested in British Regimental Museums, the King's Own Scottish Borderers museum in the Barracks, Berwick Upon Tweed (their former Depot and RHQ), is well worth a visit.
As is The Highlanders museum in Fort George, Ardersier.
 
For those interested in British Regimental Museums, the King's Own Scottish Borderers museum in the Barracks, Berwick Upon Tweed (their former Depot and RHQ), is well worth a visit.
As is The Highlanders museum in Fort George, Ardersier.
With the formation back in 2006, these museums suffered a cut in mod funding. Everyone in Scots knows that the castles the fort sauchiehall street and of course the KOSB barracks depend on constant funding and support.
The support can be financial and physical, it also helps when you get outsiders in to assist upkeep running and avoiding pitfalls.

If anyone wishes to see a great painting go to Edinburgh castle,they moved the statue of sir Douglas Haig to
9CF3DD2E-7759-4BBC-8F1C-83791676055A.jpeg
prevent potential vandals
 
So, with all that cash coming in..... do Wargaming decide how it's spent.... does Tamiya?
 
The argument that "World of Tanks is encouraging Bovington to make videos and the videos are not fact-checked therefore the World of Tanks partnership is flawed" seems a bit specious to me. The Tank Museum is supposed to be the repository of knowledge, encouraging that they share their knowledge more seems laudible, and who are we in WoT to tell Bovington that they're doing it wrong? If the Friends of the Museum want to complain that the videos are giving bad information, it seems to me they should complain to the msueum about the giving of bad information, regardless of who is funding or encouraging them.

That said, as far as I know and granted, I'm on the American side of the house, we have not advised or encouraged Bovington to make their videos. It seems to me that Bovington on their own figured out that it was a very sensible thing to do, and they are not alone in doing them. The Swedish and German musea, for example, have their own youtube channels. The Americans also started, but they have serious man-hour issues and have had to stop for a while and instead have settled for relying on third parties such as myself or Sofilein. Some years ago, when Bov. were starting tank chats, they asked me for my opinion on how to improve their product, given I have some small experience in the subject. I gave them two pieces of advice: 1) Stay away from information which is easily googleable, because there's no point. Folks can google it. 2) The big advantage they have over anyone else on youtube doing videos on some vehicle (eg Matsimus, Lindy, etc) is that they have the artifacts and unpublished photos, and they should show those items, inside and out. Outside of commenting on some videos when mistakes were made with respect to American vehicles (eg M46, M10), that was the extent of my involvement with the concept, and I don't believe my EU counterpart has had more on the subject of TTM's Youtube channel.

I would observe that not every museum relationship we have is premised on dollars. I would rate World of Tank's relationship with the Ontario Regiment Museum as closer and more accessible than that with Bovington, and not a single dollar is changing hands with the exception that we sponsored a film crew to document an event that the museum were doing anyway, and we handed the money straight to the film company. (Watch here, we rolled about 50 vehicles downtown for Remembrance Day) )

It's not as big in terms of scale as Bovington, hence no dollars need be involved, but both sides have seen the partnership as highly beneficial. We were there last weekend, they're not letting us drive (Yes, drive) APCs or play 'real-world-world-of-tanks' in MBTs at their own cost of fuel and maintenance just for the fun of it (Though they are certainly having fun).
I'm currently in D.C, attending an event by a different museum which has been trying to get us back out for years. (COVID and Twitchcon have interfered of late), and they're not charging us for the privilege of giving them publicity to our audience. And you'd be surprised how many folks simply don't know that a tank museum is having an event five miles from their home.

I thus would not go as far as to say that the WoT relationship with Bovington is purely a financial transaction. Our relationships with other musea is evidence that there are plenty enough legitimate reasons to work with WoT other than sponsorship dollars.
 
Last edited:
The argument that "World of Tanks is encouraging Bovington to make videos and the videos are not fact-checked therefore the World of Tanks partnership is flawed" seems a bit specious to me. The Tank Museum is supposed to be the repository of knowledge, encouraging that they share their knowledge more seems laudible, and who are we in WoT to tell Bovington that they're doing it wrong? If the Friends of the Museum want to complain that the videos are giving bad information, it seems to me they should complain to the msueum about the giving of bad information, regardless of who is funding or encouraging them.

That said, as far as I know and granted, I'm on the American side of the house, we have not advised or encouraged Bovington to make their videos. It seems to me that Bovington on their own figured out that it was a very sensible thing to do, and they are not alone in doing them. The Swedish and German musea, for example, have their own youtube channels. The Americans also started, but they have serious man-hour issues and have had to stop for a while and instead have settled for relying on third parties such as myself or Sofilein. Some years ago, when Bov. were starting tank chats, they asked me for my opinion on how to improve their product, given I have some small experience in the subject. I gave them two pieces of advice: 1) Stay away from information which is easily googleable, because there's no point. Folks can google it. 2) The big advantage they have over anyone else on youtube doing videos on some vehicle (eg Matsimus, Lindy, etc) is that they have the artifacts and unpublished photos, and they should show those items, inside and out. Outside of commenting on some videos when mistakes were made with respect to American vehicles (eg M46, M10), that was the extent of my involvement with the concept, and I don't believe my EU counterpart has had more on the subject of TTM's Youtube channel.

I would observe that not every museum relationship we have is premised on dollars. I would rate World of Tank's relationship with the Ontario Regiment Museum as closer and more accessible than that with Bovington, and not a single dollar is changing hands with the exception that we sponsored a film crew to document an event that the museum were doing anyway, and we handed the money straight to the film company. (Watch here, we rolled about 50 vehicles downtown for Remembrance Day) )

It's not as big in terms of scale as Bovington, hence no dollars need be involved, but both sides have seen the partnership as highly beneficial. We were there last weekend, they're not letting us drive (Yes, drive) APCs or play 'real-world-world-of-tanks' in MBTs at their own cost of fuel and maintenance just for the fun of it (Though they are certainly having fun).
I'm currently in D.C, attending an event by a different museum which has been trying to get us back out for years. (COVID and Twitchcon have interfered of late), and they're not charging us for the privilege of giving them publicity to our audience. And you'd be surprised how many folks simply don't know that a tank museum is having an event five miles from their home.

I thus would not go as far as to say that the WoT relationship with Bovington is purely a financial transaction. Our relationships with other musea is evidence that there are plenty enough legitimate reasons to work with WoT other than sponsorship dollars.
Thanks for taking the time to tell us, much appreciated.
 
The argument that "World of Tanks is encouraging Bovington to make videos and the videos are not fact-checked therefore the World of Tanks partnership is flawed" seems a bit specious to me. The Tank Museum is supposed to be the repository of knowledge, encouraging that they share their knowledge more seems laudible, and who are we in WoT to tell Bovington that they're doing it wrong? If the Friends of the Museum want to complain that the videos are giving bad information, it seems to me they should complain to the msueum about the giving of bad information, regardless of who is funding or encouraging them.

That said, as far as I know and granted, I'm on the American side of the house, we have not advised or encouraged Bovington to make their videos. It seems to me that Bovington on their own figured out that it was a very sensible thing to do, and they are not alone in doing them. The Swedish and German musea, for example, have their own youtube channels. The Americans also started, but they have serious man-hour issues and have had to stop for a while and instead have settled for relying on third parties such as myself or Sofilein. Some years ago, when Bov. were starting tank chats, they asked me for my opinion on how to improve their product, given I have some small experience in the subject. I gave them two pieces of advice: 1) Stay away from information which is easily googleable, because there's no point. Folks can google it. 2) The big advantage they have over anyone else on youtube doing videos on some vehicle (eg Matsimus, Lindy, etc) is that they have the artifacts and unpublished photos, and they should show those items, inside and out. Outside of commenting on some videos when mistakes were made with respect to American vehicles (eg M46, M10), that was the extent of my involvement with the concept, and I don't believe my EU counterpart has had more on the subject of TTM's Youtube channel.

I would observe that not every museum relationship we have is premised on dollars. I would rate World of Tank's relationship with the Ontario Regiment Museum as closer and more accessible than that with Bovington, and not a single dollar is changing hands with the exception that we sponsored a film crew to document an event that the museum were doing anyway, and we handed the money straight to the film company. (Watch here, we rolled about 50 vehicles downtown for Remembrance Day) )

It's not as big in terms of scale as Bovington, hence no dollars need be involved, but both sides have seen the partnership as highly beneficial. We were there last weekend, they're not letting us drive (Yes, drive) APCs or play 'real-world-world-of-tanks' in MBTs at their own cost of fuel and maintenance just for the fun of it (Though they are certainly having fun).
I'm currently in D.C, attending an event by a different museum which has been trying to get us back out for years. (COVID and Twitchcon have interfered of late), and they're not charging us for the privilege of giving them publicity to our audience. And you'd be surprised how many folks simply don't know that a tank museum is having an event five miles from their home.

I thus would not go as far as to say that the WoT relationship with Bovington is purely a financial transaction. Our relationships with other musea is evidence that there are plenty enough legitimate reasons to work with WoT other than sponsorship dollars.

Thanks,
I wonder if the negativity I heard of from some FoTM is due to branding going everywhere, and if stuff that is a museum problem, is being attributed to WG.
I mean we all remember sky blue A.12 Matilda's.
 

stantheman

Old-Salt
Thanks for that video California Tanker. Very moving to watch that, and as an ex Tankie from the UK I would have given almost anything to have been on that parade.
 

oldnotbold

War Hero
With the formation back in 2006, these museums suffered a cut in mod funding. Everyone in Scots knows that the castles the fort sauchiehall street and of course the KOSB barracks depend on constant funding and support.
The support can be financial and physical, it also helps when you get outsiders in to assist upkeep running and avoiding pitfalls.

If anyone wishes to see a great painting go to Edinburgh castle,they moved the statue of sir Douglas Haig to prevent potential vandals

The money issue will get worse as MOD just isn't interested. The last brief that they gave to the AMOT conference - online - looked very much like the brigadier who spoke had told his junior CS to attend the whole thing and to take notes so that he could name check each of the preceding briefs, rather than actually saying anything useful or helpful. I understand that MOD supports one museum per cap badge and the curators that are left are now paid by grants from MOD rather than as salaried CS, which makes them more vulnerable over time. Nor do the regiments have those reservoirs of retired people in the area and local depots to help out.
 
Trouble is they then crash them Sea Vixen, Firefly and a couple of Sea Fury!

I was at Cranfield one day when the Vixen came in to land - it caught my attention as I had never seen one flying before.

For some reason it swerved off the runway still moving fast and was now crossing a field of wheat stubble leaving a trail of fire behind it.

It did appear to have short, stubby undercarriage so maybe it was not fully down.
 
The money issue will get worse as MOD just isn't interested.
Are they not interested, or not able to be interested?

In a time when despite being regularly told that we're one of the top economies in the world we're also being asked to sell our assets to top up care costs for elderly and disabled relatives, or told that we can't justify the cost of letting pilots actually fly an ever smaller number of airframes, I'd suggest that the public would jump on any suggestion that they should contribute to the cost of museum curators to look after a lot of scrap metal no matter how evocative it might be to those with a personal connection to it.

My experience is that the British love their heritage in all its forms, until you tell them how much it costs to maintain it and ask them to pay for it.
 

Latest Threads

Top