Warbirds Spares in RNZAF Storage

[skyhawkdon]

I stand corrected. What year was this?

[curtiss]

I got a repairable P40 ammo bay door , a pile of new Anson ailerons (which eventually went to Bill ) plus an assortment of other parts.

It was some years ago though , but it would be interesting to know what the current disposal policy is.

[baz62]

Dec 17, 2012 14:14:38 GMT 12 skyhawkdon said:

I stand corrected. What year was this?

1990s I think Don. I saw the photos in Flypast and couldn't believe my eyes. There was some Harvard stuff too i think?

[denysjones]

I'd have to trawl through the old accounting records in a bid to find the date but if it was sufficiently long ago that the IRD recording keeping limit has passed they may well have gone by now.

The one thing I can say is that it happened on the watch of a different director of the museum than the incumbent.

Based on the fact that Hudson and Anson parts were the bulk of the is has to be after those two were completed.

So I'd say something like 5years or so after the Hudson roll out?

DaveM2 might be able to ask Graham O about it as he and I were in touch at the time it happened.

[beagle]

So I take it one day in the future as I drive down Jones Road as I do on the way home from work, I will see some big bulldozer pushing Weedon down to some rubble.
I think there might be some people around CHCH at the moment that are specialists at that.

[madmac]

It was 1998, march or April I think.

[ngatimozart]

Well it's bloody criminal and in my opinion disgraceful especially from an organisation that is supposed to be conserving history. Rant off.

[Dave Homewood]

I am sure that the current staff members at the Air Force Museum of New Zealand would really not appreciate this thread, with the actions of past staff members 15 years ago being brought up here and labelled as "criminal" acts. Such a statement infers that criminal activity occurred, and such statements either need to be backed up with hard evidence or simply not posted. Watch the language guys, or this thread will possibly disappear!!

[craig]

Dave the FACT is, this apparently happened!!!!
To bury it simply because it might hurt some ones feelings is ridiculous. While it may not have been legally "criminal" it certainly was morally. More so given the relatively recent past (1998). There is no way parts should have been scraped in this era. I hope you don't censor this thread simply because members don't all have the same view as you.
PS check the dictionary definition of criminal and it fits

[chasper]

I would certainly hope that open discussion about what has occurred in the past may help to ensure that such actions are not repeated. I spent a number of years in the US as a DOD contractor, mainly with the USAF, and also visited a number of restorers including various CAF locations. I was impressed with the level of support between all parties when it came to restorations,. Everyone seemed to be on the same page and worked towards the common goal of preserving what they had.
Only wish this could happen here.

[jaybee]

I think you will find that Dave's comment is more directed at steering clear of the boundary between fair comment and defamation rather than how the items were disposed of. And from a readers's perspective, I support that.

[craig]

It will be sad day if we ever get to the point where certain restorers restrict the availability of surplus critical items to other restorers in order to preserve the rarity of their own aircraft.

[McFly]

I took the liberty of informing a college at the Air Force Museum of this particular thread and offered to post a reply if warranted. They agreed to the following being posted and I trust this answers some of the questions raised and for others they have included their email address.

Afternoon Marty

I'm aware of where things stand with this particular thread and some of it makes interesting reading.

I regularly review the forum to look out for the Museum's interests, and it never fails to amaze me how much conjecture and assumption there is out there about the Museum's activities and policies. As passionate enthusiasts, the forum members will inevitably have some strong views about our activities and these are often aired on the forum.

I am surprised however that no-one ever thinks to contact the Museum to seek clarification, particularly about the more controversial issues. We are not a secret society, indeed we have an email address specifically set up for public enquiries ([e-mail]) and we are more than happy to answer questions, not only of a historic research nature, but about the organisation as well. Obviously, there will be occasions where 'commercial in confidence' rules will apply but where this is not an issue we will endeavour to answer as best we can and as soon as we can. Alternatively, anyone who feels strongly enough about any particular issue, is welcome to write to the Director to seek clarification.

We acknowledge the unfortunate events of 1998, but that was another time. The Air Force Museum has changed beyond all recognition since then and our view on the disposal of surplus material is very different now.

If it's OK with you, I would prefer to use the Museum's existing lines of communication, as stated above, as the main methods of answering questions from the public. I think it would be a full time job having to deal with what would probably be a constant stream of questions via the forum, and I just don't have time for that. I have noted the many positive comments on the forum about the Museum's expansion and our restoration activities. These are most welcome - remember we are enthusiasts too, that's why we do what we do.

Thanks and regards.

Darren.

[Dave Homewood]

Hi Darren, thank you for your input, I appreciate it.

Darren wrote: I regularly review the forum to look out for the Museum's interests, and it never fails to amaze me how much conjecture and assumption there is out there about the Museum's activities and policies. As passionate enthusiasts, the forum members will inevitably have some strong views about our activities and these are often aired on the forum.

I am surprised however that no-one ever thinks to contact the Museum to seek clarification, particularly about the more controversial issues.

Knowing full well that the Air Force Museum of New Zealand has many staff members who read this forum, some avidly, I am surprised that none of them think to either email me directly or make a post themself on such threads that they think are putting across conjecture, assumptions or just plain rubbish, to make the necessary corrections known and public.

Apart from one infamous thread that ended up being removed at the insistence of the Museum after a threat of legal action from a third party, this is the only thread that I can recall seeing any official reaction to, in order to clarify things, ever.

Sure, as you have said you don't personally have the time to answer every query here on the forum, but I would really appreciate it that if a thread on the forum is ringing alarm bells with you or other Museum staff for one reason or another, that something be done asap to make amends rather than leaving the wrong information on record for all to see for eternity on the thread.

I am sure you're aware that we have direct input here on the forum from numerous other aviation museums, aviation collectiors, businesses, organisations, clubs and pilots, etc, either from them posting first hand as members or they email statements to me to post on their behalf. This ensures that the correct and official information is recorded for the fans and enthusiasts to read, ensuring that all the fluff and hearsay that gets posted from the fringes is eliminated and corrected.

That is, I think, why this forum has somehow grown to be NZ's most popular online resource for kiwi aviation news, information and history - because so much of the info comes directly from the source, not filtered through media PR gurus and the inevitable Chinese whispers around the airfield smoko rooms.

Having all these museums, groups and individuals involved with the forum to ensure we get the right messages out there is really important. Important to the forum, to the museum/group/person that the topic is about, and to me personally.

I have said it many times, but in case you have missed it, the Air Force Musuem of New Zealand is pretty much one of my favourite places on the planet. I have always loved the museum, it holds a special place in my heart as a place to visit, and also as a superb resource. I have nothing but good things toi say about the place from my experiences as a visitor, as a user of the research archive, and assomeone who used to regulalrly visit the restoration workshops (as well as do some official jobs of the musuem occasionally).

I have a huge respect for the staff past and present, paid and voluntary, who have achieved amazing results in the preservation of RNZAF history, from the management level, to the archivists, to the restoration staff, to the guides and all the others who keep the place running so well.

The very reason I set up this forum was to have a place to keep the history of the RNZAF alive through discussion, exchange of ideas and photos and documents, etc. Everything else you see on the forum was tacked on later but RNZAF history and news is what it's all about. The forum has attracted most of the top historians on the subject, and many hundreds more who have lived that history, and many more who today continue to serve in the RNZAF. There also seems to be many other likeminded enthusiasts, a lot of whom belong to groups like the AHSNZ, the NZ Warbirds and many other aviation museums. So I would hate to see the forum thought of by the staff at Wigram as being detrimental to the cause of what Wigram is all about, preserving and sharing RNZAF history.

As you say many of the posters here are enthusiasts who may post things not quite right (I probably more than most). But if no-one points it out that this is wrong, no-one here will ever know. We need the input of those who are being wronged in order to make it right.

Darren wrote:
We acknowledge the unfortunate events of 1998, but that was another time. The Air Force Museum has changed beyond all recognition since then and our view on the disposal of surplus material is very different now.

This is the sentiment that I rather clumsily was trying to put across in my post last night. Sorry if it was confused, I'd just got out of hospital and had had a very trying day. I think the saying is don't blame the sons for the sins of the fathers. What happened 15 years back happened, and right or wrong, let's move on as a new generation of people have made sure it shouldn't happen again.

Darren wrote:
I have noted the many positive comments on the forum about the Museum's expansion and our restoration activities. These are most welcome - remember we are enthusiasts too, that's why we do what we do.

I wholehearetedly congratulate all involved in the new expansion, it is a wonderful step for the museum, and I enjoy the very occaisonal updates we get here on it.

In terms of positive comments, I would like to hope that at least most of my own posts about the musuem have been positive, well meaning and polite. I cannot think of many things I have ever found negative about the museum.

I have always had a very positive opinion of the RNZAF Museum/AFMNZ, even if the feeling has not apparently been mutual. If we are 'going wrong' anywhere here on the forum, it would be much better to hear directly from museum staff and have it addressed to nip it in the bud.

As many of the staff do read this forum, I think it's a huge shame that museum staff do not post here. We'd love to see official updates on the restoration projects and the current building programme here. I also think it woiuld be worth the Museum's while to take the time to answer queries too - an email query directly to the musuem will get an answer to one person, a forum query gets the answer to a multitude.

A lot more positive, first hand information could be published here by the museum staff itself, free, to a worldwide audience, using the forum as another valuable PR tool in their range of ways to make contact with the public, and thus cut down on the assumption and conjecture that apparently arises here. But, that's just a personal opinion.

Finally, I note no comment has been made on the original topic, the article that makes rather strange claims about the musuem's stores policies - nor about various forum members' subsequent defence of the musuem. We are still left wondering just what the museum makes of that report.

[ngatimozart]

I did a rant and acknowledged it in the post by the term "Rant off" at the end. If I have offended any one at the Air Force Museum or the Musum itself by my emotive comments I wholeheartedly apologise. I am ex RNZAF myself and I am passionate about the RNZAF and it's history.

[corsair67]

I have to agree with Dave; if Air Force Museum of New Zealand staff see something on this forum that they do not agree with or feel is totally incorrect, then why don't they say so either to Dave directly via e-mail or PM, or by posting something on the forum directly?

As to the events of ca.1998 - I can forgive the blokes who chopped up Bristol Fighters on the edge of Wigram in the 1920s. I can also forgive the blokes who followed a wartime agreement with the US, and allowed the melting down of hundreds of beautiful Corsairs, Hudsons, Kittyhawks, Avengers and Venturas into thousands of aluminium ingots in the late-1940s - 1960s. But I cannot ever forgive someone from a museum who allowed valuable aircraft parts to be destroyed for whatever reason - especially when museum staff are supposed to understand the value of the artifacts under their care, and are also supposed to be the guardians of our history.

I am glad that the Air Force Museum of New Zealand has learnt from this terrible decision, and I sincerely hope they do their utmost to ensure it never, ever happens again - not only for their sake - but for the sake of aviation historians and buffs all around the world.

[craig]

Karma to you Corsair67
We can only hope they have learned and procedures are in place to ensure this never happens again at any facility.
I know form personal experience how frustrating it is to discover/suspect critical parts for your restoration have been senselessly destroyed. Even more frustrating when those responsible should have known better.

[skyhawkdon]

For those that are unaware, the Air Force Museum has a Facebook page which they regularly update with news and people can ask and have answered questions. www.facebook.com/pages/Air-Force-Museum-of-New-Zealand/79683131278?ref=ts&fref=ts

I can only add to what others have said and encourage the Museum to post official updates here.

[Dave Homewood]

I have just had a very good conversation with Darren Hammond from the Air Force Museum of New Zealand, and I think perhaps a few things need to be clarified after my post above. Darren has explained to me the reasons why it is difficult for musuem staff to post here on the forum directly, as there is a chain of command (as with any military system) that all public statements must go through in order to ensure it is approved for release - and in an ongoing debate this would tie up their system and their workers immensely. I can now understand this, remembering how the system worked in the RNZAF.

However Darren reiterated that any queries about anything to do with the museum (policy, history research, whether '05 is at the museum yet, etc) that are sent to the [e-mail] will be answered and the person who receives the reply is, Darren says, most welcome to post the reply on the forum for all to see. If that generates more queries, he's happy for more questions to be sent to the same email address and more follow ups answered and posted.

In future I will be making more use of this service if I have any queries and questions about the museum and will post the answers here. I hope others will also do this please. Feel free to use this as the way to do things, that way the museum is happy and so are the forum members who get to see what is posted as a result.

On the other matter of the incident that happened in 1998, not one single member of the museum's policy staff now were involved back then. The staff are much more professionally organised and they realise the value to others of spares. The decision back then was a dreadful one but it's unlikely those who took the action back then are reading this, and it's a moot point to try to stress it shouldn't happen again because the current staff have every stringent policy in place to ensure it will not. Daren says they have no contact whatsoever with scrap dealers at the museum, and any spares they have are kept and often shared with other projects. Again, if you have any queries about the Museum's collection policies, please contact them on [e-mail] rather than asking here.

Cheers everyone.

[beagle]

Well done Dave. Good work. Easy to see you have 2-3 fingers working fine again.
clap clap clap clap
yes I have their page on my facebook too and read their latest posts and have commented on some.