Bomber Command Memorial (Merged)
Please - let's steer clear of suggesting a museum as the site for the memorial. People would have to pay to get in to see it - surely not the idea; it has to be accessible to all.
Noted, however siting a memorial adjacent to a museum would be mutually beneficial.
Another possibilty (if we're going with Yorkshire - and I'll admit a certain bias) might be to site a memorial within the grounds of Allerton Park Castle. Hard by the A59/A1M junction, and historically HQ 6(RCAF) Group.
Another possibilty (if we're going with Yorkshire - and I'll admit a certain bias) might be to site a memorial within the grounds of Allerton Park Castle. Hard by the A59/A1M junction, and historically HQ 6(RCAF) Group.
Mutually-beneficial it may be, but I don't think the memorial should be seen as supporting any particular museum, either inside the grounds or out. I understand the Allerton Park Castle idea, but the same might be said for Bawtry Hall (HQ 1 Gp), or any of the other Gp HQs.
This is why, IMHO, the memorial must be on neutral ground. Three Counties have a claim to BC, plus every Gp HQ location, every airfield, and several museums; you simply can't choose any one site over the others as 'more deserving'. The National Memorial Arboretum is the way ahead!
This is why, IMHO, the memorial must be on neutral ground. Three Counties have a claim to BC, plus every Gp HQ location, every airfield, and several museums; you simply can't choose any one site over the others as 'more deserving'. The National Memorial Arboretum is the way ahead!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flamborough Head
Save petrol and take a look here:
http://www.manorhouse.clara.net/main/headland.htm
Scroll down to the photos at the bottom.
I visited Flamborough Head last year and it is accessible, albeit the village is a quaint relic of the past (no insult intended). The area is popular with tourists, ramblers and 'birders' and consequently has adequate roads (we don't need a dual carriageway) to the cliff top areas and the 2 'Landings' (North and South) with adequate car parking in all areas. Additionally, there are a number of pubs, tearooms and small restaurants in the village and places to eat and drink by the Landings.
The roads to Bridlington from the west are absolutely no problem (albeit they are not predominantly dual carriageway in the latter stages), however a good run from Nottingham (The Midlands) took only 2.5 hours. As you can see from the website above there are good hotels locally for those who would linger.
The only snag might be that it is a 'Heritage Coastline' but I suspect the White Cliffs are too!
Foldie
http://www.manorhouse.clara.net/main/headland.htm
Scroll down to the photos at the bottom.
I visited Flamborough Head last year and it is accessible, albeit the village is a quaint relic of the past (no insult intended). The area is popular with tourists, ramblers and 'birders' and consequently has adequate roads (we don't need a dual carriageway) to the cliff top areas and the 2 'Landings' (North and South) with adequate car parking in all areas. Additionally, there are a number of pubs, tearooms and small restaurants in the village and places to eat and drink by the Landings.
The roads to Bridlington from the west are absolutely no problem (albeit they are not predominantly dual carriageway in the latter stages), however a good run from Nottingham (The Midlands) took only 2.5 hours. As you can see from the website above there are good hotels locally for those who would linger.
The only snag might be that it is a 'Heritage Coastline' but I suspect the White Cliffs are too!
Foldie
I don't think the memorial should be seen as supporting any particular museum, either inside the grounds or out.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snapper,
The issue that I have with the National Memorial Arboretum is an illogical one, but here goes. I don't like the idea that some shiny has dictated that all memorials need to go in one place because thats efficient, its practical and its all the rest of that guff. Memorials are by their very nature, emotive and stirring places. I wonder (and switches are set to 'corrected' here) if making the memorial pilgrimage with all the other worthy souls puts one in the right frame of mind? It just seems all too formulaic for me, and completely at odds with the sentiment of remembrance in a unique and distinctive manner. Production line approach maybe. I'm not having a go at the site, its mind boggling and stunning, but I think there's room for a little piece of England somewhere, with 'Bomber Boys' on it, somewhere which will justify treating this awesome and humbling sacrifice with the extraordinary commitment it deserves. Thats just me initial thought.. ultimately, as long as we remember the boys in a fitting manner, then thats cool by me.
Foldie,
I've always liked the idea of a coast, a statue of men maybe, looking out to sea for returning friends. It might be more practical than East Anglia (wot with the floods an' all).
Diggers,
The advantage of a site like Bicester (ahh, Bisto!) is that it does encourage extra footfall because it has extra potential for suitably dignified 'attractions' (and I use the word advisadly). A suitable comparison would be with what the Mary Rose Trust is trying to achieve. They have the vesssel, and they have the education aspect too, in the form of a great 'museum' / visitor centre. If getting the word out to as many folk as possible about the sacrifice is up there on the list of priorities, Bisto has to be up there on the list of candidates. Its all down to the 'feel' of the site.. what do we want to achieve? Somewhere for reflection and solitude, somewhere to remember.. or somewhere where their sacrifice will never ever be forgotten and as many people as possible knowing what they went through? This I suspect, is going to be more a long term aim, and the site needs to be there still, in say, 100- 150 years plus. We have to go into this with that vision, that level of certainty and committment. Bisto offers, potentially, the chance to place the memorial in secure surroundings where its future is guaranteed.
As I said, its all about what we are trying to achieve, as much as it is, where we are trying to achieve it. I think that if we get one right, the other will follow naturally. Which though, has more priority? Feel, or Location? Heart, or head?
The issue that I have with the National Memorial Arboretum is an illogical one, but here goes. I don't like the idea that some shiny has dictated that all memorials need to go in one place because thats efficient, its practical and its all the rest of that guff. Memorials are by their very nature, emotive and stirring places. I wonder (and switches are set to 'corrected' here) if making the memorial pilgrimage with all the other worthy souls puts one in the right frame of mind? It just seems all too formulaic for me, and completely at odds with the sentiment of remembrance in a unique and distinctive manner. Production line approach maybe. I'm not having a go at the site, its mind boggling and stunning, but I think there's room for a little piece of England somewhere, with 'Bomber Boys' on it, somewhere which will justify treating this awesome and humbling sacrifice with the extraordinary commitment it deserves. Thats just me initial thought.. ultimately, as long as we remember the boys in a fitting manner, then thats cool by me.
Foldie,
I've always liked the idea of a coast, a statue of men maybe, looking out to sea for returning friends. It might be more practical than East Anglia (wot with the floods an' all).
Diggers,
The advantage of a site like Bicester (ahh, Bisto!) is that it does encourage extra footfall because it has extra potential for suitably dignified 'attractions' (and I use the word advisadly). A suitable comparison would be with what the Mary Rose Trust is trying to achieve. They have the vesssel, and they have the education aspect too, in the form of a great 'museum' / visitor centre. If getting the word out to as many folk as possible about the sacrifice is up there on the list of priorities, Bisto has to be up there on the list of candidates. Its all down to the 'feel' of the site.. what do we want to achieve? Somewhere for reflection and solitude, somewhere to remember.. or somewhere where their sacrifice will never ever be forgotten and as many people as possible knowing what they went through? This I suspect, is going to be more a long term aim, and the site needs to be there still, in say, 100- 150 years plus. We have to go into this with that vision, that level of certainty and committment. Bisto offers, potentially, the chance to place the memorial in secure surroundings where its future is guaranteed.
As I said, its all about what we are trying to achieve, as much as it is, where we are trying to achieve it. I think that if we get one right, the other will follow naturally. Which though, has more priority? Feel, or Location? Heart, or head?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In that case, are we saying that we don't want additional visitors? It might lack purity, but without visitors, do we run the risk of making a glorious white elephant? Long after we're all dead, do we want their memory to live on, healthily?
The colocated 'attractions' would of course, not include candy floss or anything like that. They would be in keeping with the feel of the site, discrete and not overpowering, as the Bisto Boys have affirmed, if we did want to put the memorial there.
The colocated 'attractions' would of course, not include candy floss or anything like that. They would be in keeping with the feel of the site, discrete and not overpowering, as the Bisto Boys have affirmed, if we did want to put the memorial there.
Forget, this memorial is to those who gave their lives in the biggest, longest, costliest campaign that the RAF has fought, or is ever likely to fight. It was fought to ensure victory over tyranny, and to borrow WSC's quote: 'never was so much owed by so many to so many'. In decades, aye and centuries to come, this story, this sacrifice must pass down through the generations. Special as it will be to the survivors, to the next of kin, to those of later generations who have served, in time all of those people will themselves be memories, but this memorial will live on. It will either be a mystery, witness the Napoleonic POW Eagle monument featured earlier in the thread, or it will be a well known and well loved part of our heritage in itself, telling a familiar tragic but proud story that all will have learned. I know which outcome that I would prefer.
I am with Al R on the NMA. It is a great location for the new Armed Force Memorial but I feel it is wrong for a potential Bomber Command Memorial. IMHO there is a danger that the relevance will be lost amongst all the other memorials.
The site of an extant museum might be an option given careful selection. What about East Kirkby? (Although I would have reservations wrt remoteness/accessibility). Where the Panton(?) Bros might be on side and might offer some land in perpetuity (don't know them and am only surmising).
I am also against the N. Yorks coastal location, it's just too remote I am afraid and too, well, Yorkshire. (Not that I am against Yorkshire in anyway, I have served at a few Yorkshire stations in my time and had a great time at each one). If this is aimed at a "national" memorial to those who paid the ultimate price then it should be with many of the other national memorials. London. Easy to get to from all parts of the country. The focus of national remembrance. Any surviving veterans coming from overseas will (generally) land at Heathrow or Gatwick so ease of travel from overseas as well. In one of the Royal parks which would protect it in perpetuity and also mean that, given the right location, it would get the odd flypast or two each year.
Strangely I am also attracted to the Bicester option, but there is no guarantee that the preservation of Bicester will succeed in the longer term. With Broone and Broon in charge I think that such a "brownfield" site has many £££s value to the Treasury if it is sold off for housing. Although at least 1 operational bomber squadon flew from there flying, IIRC, Bolton Paul Overstrands. At least Bicester is safe from global warming unlike some of the East Anglian airfields
The site of an extant museum might be an option given careful selection. What about East Kirkby? (Although I would have reservations wrt remoteness/accessibility). Where the Panton(?) Bros might be on side and might offer some land in perpetuity (don't know them and am only surmising).
I am also against the N. Yorks coastal location, it's just too remote I am afraid and too, well, Yorkshire. (Not that I am against Yorkshire in anyway, I have served at a few Yorkshire stations in my time and had a great time at each one). If this is aimed at a "national" memorial to those who paid the ultimate price then it should be with many of the other national memorials. London. Easy to get to from all parts of the country. The focus of national remembrance. Any surviving veterans coming from overseas will (generally) land at Heathrow or Gatwick so ease of travel from overseas as well. In one of the Royal parks which would protect it in perpetuity and also mean that, given the right location, it would get the odd flypast or two each year.
Strangely I am also attracted to the Bicester option, but there is no guarantee that the preservation of Bicester will succeed in the longer term. With Broone and Broon in charge I think that such a "brownfield" site has many £££s value to the Treasury if it is sold off for housing. Although at least 1 operational bomber squadon flew from there flying, IIRC, Bolton Paul Overstrands. At least Bicester is safe from global warming unlike some of the East Anglian airfields
Al R, I have no difficulty with a co-location such as Bicester, per se, since, as already been discussed the airfield has both relevance and access. My point regarding YAM is that it already exists, with collections relevant to BC operations, i.e. the Airgunners collection, and 'Friday the 13th'.
I agree with you regarding Alrewas; I would hate the National Memorial Arboretum to become a collection of memorials, much like a theme park. The BC memorial deserves a place in its own right. If, as foldingwings suggests, Flamorough Head has suitable infrastructure, a symmetry with Capel could be beneficial.
On reflection, Stonefall Cemetery stands out (for me at least) as a tribute to sacrifice. It is a resting, and restful, place, for remembering individuals, much like all such CWGC sites and smaller plots, and deserves to be left undisturbed.
I agree with you regarding Alrewas; I would hate the National Memorial Arboretum to become a collection of memorials, much like a theme park. The BC memorial deserves a place in its own right. If, as foldingwings suggests, Flamorough Head has suitable infrastructure, a symmetry with Capel could be beneficial.
On reflection, Stonefall Cemetery stands out (for me at least) as a tribute to sacrifice. It is a resting, and restful, place, for remembering individuals, much like all such CWGC sites and smaller plots, and deserves to be left undisturbed.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm just heading out the door, but if I could pick up very quickly on the comment made by Roland about Bisto, I think I'm right in saying that there is strong local political support to maintain the site, and that the MoD to get stuffed, with regards to selling the site for housing. The site as it now stands, is preserved, officially. The problem could be the issue of an impasse between the MoD not wanting to give it away (in effect) and their inability to sell it for housing. The MoD could of course, override everything still, and issue a CPO.. maybe?
Chuggers,
You know more about this.. could you advise either way?
Chuggers,
You know more about this.. could you advise either way?
Al R et al;
I'm sorry, but to borrow Duncan Bannatyne's phrase from 'Dragons' Den'; I'm out.
I am as great an advocate for a BC memorial as any (it's long overdue), but Bicester is not the place; it was never an operational airfield, and it hardly springs to anyone's mind (Joe Public, anyway) as having a deep association with BC.
The comments about 'theme park' and 'production line' for the National Memorial Arboretum are hopelessly wide of the mark; just look at the positive comments about it on another thread on pprune. I'm sure the relatives of the 16000 on the new Armed Forces memorial won't agree with you (and nor do I - there are the names of several colleauges of mine on there).
Putting a BC memorial at an exisiting museum, be it Elvington or East Kirkby or wherever is also wrong. It needs to have free entry and not support any other cause, however worthwhile; it must 'stand alone'.
Good luck in your endeavours, but this is not the way ahead.
I'm sorry, but to borrow Duncan Bannatyne's phrase from 'Dragons' Den'; I'm out.
I am as great an advocate for a BC memorial as any (it's long overdue), but Bicester is not the place; it was never an operational airfield, and it hardly springs to anyone's mind (Joe Public, anyway) as having a deep association with BC.
The comments about 'theme park' and 'production line' for the National Memorial Arboretum are hopelessly wide of the mark; just look at the positive comments about it on another thread on pprune. I'm sure the relatives of the 16000 on the new Armed Forces memorial won't agree with you (and nor do I - there are the names of several colleauges of mine on there).
Putting a BC memorial at an exisiting museum, be it Elvington or East Kirkby or wherever is also wrong. It needs to have free entry and not support any other cause, however worthwhile; it must 'stand alone'.
Good luck in your endeavours, but this is not the way ahead.
I am not advocating placing a memorial within an existing museum, snapper41, merely to place it near a known, and relevant landmark. Perhaps 'co-located' was the wrong expression. A BC memorial could be established within the vicinity of Elvington, outwith the YAM, and therefore not subject to an entry fee. Such proximity would benefit both concerns, naturally, but would that be so terrible? Incidently, there is a precident at Elvington - the memorial to the two Free French Halifax squadrons which operated from RAF Elvington is in the nearby village.
Last edited by diginagain; 14th Nov 2007 at 10:21.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snapper,
Please feel free to voice your opinion but please do not withdraw. Your voice as a veteran of Bomber Command is extremely valuable and I too agree with you on the subject of locating a memorial within a 'theme park'. Bicester will not get my vote unless somebody convinces me very strongly that it is the right location.
However, I also agree with the comment above about the NMA. I would not want the impact of what we plan to be lost amongst a sea of memorials albeit they each hold value in their own right.
I am a staunch advocate for a coastal 'landfall' location (a la BoB at Capel le Ferne) whether that eventually is Flamborough Head or not remains to be seen. I also think YAM has its merits (inside or outside the gate) but not at the expense of a neutral and memorable (to them that used it) site on the coast.
Stick with it, Snapper, we are only at the ideas stage and haven't even considered how we will afford what is eventually decided.
Foldie
Please feel free to voice your opinion but please do not withdraw. Your voice as a veteran of Bomber Command is extremely valuable and I too agree with you on the subject of locating a memorial within a 'theme park'. Bicester will not get my vote unless somebody convinces me very strongly that it is the right location.
However, I also agree with the comment above about the NMA. I would not want the impact of what we plan to be lost amongst a sea of memorials albeit they each hold value in their own right.
I am a staunch advocate for a coastal 'landfall' location (a la BoB at Capel le Ferne) whether that eventually is Flamborough Head or not remains to be seen. I also think YAM has its merits (inside or outside the gate) but not at the expense of a neutral and memorable (to them that used it) site on the coast.
Stick with it, Snapper, we are only at the ideas stage and haven't even considered how we will afford what is eventually decided.
Foldie
Not a BC veteran, but currently serving - I'm only 43!
But that's a point I've made before; where do the veterans want a memorial? We can argue this until the cows come home, but it's their voice that counts. If they say 'we want it at the 02 threshold of Woolfox Lodge/Ludford Magna/Mepal' (etc etc), that's ok by me.
Cart before horse here, I think.
But that's a point I've made before; where do the veterans want a memorial? We can argue this until the cows come home, but it's their voice that counts. If they say 'we want it at the 02 threshold of Woolfox Lodge/Ludford Magna/Mepal' (etc etc), that's ok by me.
Cart before horse here, I think.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BCA has an executive meeting today, I dropped the secretary a line this morning. I asked for matters of guidance and one or two other things as well. The people to ask, are of course, the surviving veterans. RAFA placed an editorial piece about the petition in the latest issue of Air Mail, and as we can see, the response wasn’t great. I wonder if the activists who are the tip of the iceberg are the ones who are polarized, and the vast majority are just too busy getting on with their lives, not so much to care, but rather, content to let others make the decisions.. as were we all about the National Memorial and Capel, and I suspect, many other sites. We will ask the BCA and other organisations to sound out their members in a manner that they deem appropriate and those members of course, have elected officials who’s job it is to represent them also.
But ultimately, and this will sound tw
ttish, we must remember that this is a memorial to those who CAN’T have their say about where it should go. Long after all of us have died, we need to have a site that will be available for all and one that will achieve its aim and not mine, not the ‘committee’ or any the surviving veterans. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, and I hope I’m not construed as such, but just as we need to canvas everyone’s opinion, all of our sentiments ultimately (based on personal perspective) have to be subordinate to that of the of ‘the memorial’ and its well being in 250 years. Nelson never fought his finest battle in Trafalger Square, but that is where his memory lives on best for instance. In the future, matters which are important now may not be so vital then. What will be important though, will be the environs.. for instance, can we conceive of our memorial being stick in a domestic cul de sac, or in a sea of industrial units? What might be the perfect green field site now, may not be in the future- which is why the attractions of somewhere like Bisto (which can be secured) or the coast (which can’t be spoiled) have merit.
The issue of public faces is one that is critical. We need not only military distinguished personalities, but also political and cultural icons to sell the idea. I was on the phone to the BBC this morning, and although I haven’t yet approached anyone (it would be presumptious for me to do so), a few more names were mentioned as asides. We need to appeal to as many demographic groups as possible.. it’ll make penetration of the idea easier and it’ll overcome the objection that its just another case of military duffers looking after their own again. Given the undeniable political angle to this, we need the sell to be from peers as much as anyone.
Snapper,
Don’t go!!!
The site will be dignified and in keeping and any peripheral attractions will be as appropriate as are for instance, other memorials at the NMA. I am not being disrespectful to that humbling place, we all have friends who are now there for ever more, but by way of justification, BCs sacrifice was staggering by any stretch of the imagination. If we can have a memorial for fluffy animals killed in war, in Park lane, I don’t think its too much to ask for the 56,000 fallen to have one of their own either. I hope you continue to make a contribution mate.. if you go, it’ll be just me and all the old giffers, like Foldie, Airborne, Forget and Chuggers. I’ve just realised, I’m the gnr there. I hope they’re not overawed.
But ultimately, and this will sound tw
ttish, we must remember that this is a memorial to those who CAN’T have their say about where it should go. Long after all of us have died, we need to have a site that will be available for all and one that will achieve its aim and not mine, not the ‘committee’ or any the surviving veterans. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, and I hope I’m not construed as such, but just as we need to canvas everyone’s opinion, all of our sentiments ultimately (based on personal perspective) have to be subordinate to that of the of ‘the memorial’ and its well being in 250 years. Nelson never fought his finest battle in Trafalger Square, but that is where his memory lives on best for instance. In the future, matters which are important now may not be so vital then. What will be important though, will be the environs.. for instance, can we conceive of our memorial being stick in a domestic cul de sac, or in a sea of industrial units? What might be the perfect green field site now, may not be in the future- which is why the attractions of somewhere like Bisto (which can be secured) or the coast (which can’t be spoiled) have merit.The issue of public faces is one that is critical. We need not only military distinguished personalities, but also political and cultural icons to sell the idea. I was on the phone to the BBC this morning, and although I haven’t yet approached anyone (it would be presumptious for me to do so), a few more names were mentioned as asides. We need to appeal to as many demographic groups as possible.. it’ll make penetration of the idea easier and it’ll overcome the objection that its just another case of military duffers looking after their own again. Given the undeniable political angle to this, we need the sell to be from peers as much as anyone.
Snapper,
Don’t go!!!
The site will be dignified and in keeping and any peripheral attractions will be as appropriate as are for instance, other memorials at the NMA. I am not being disrespectful to that humbling place, we all have friends who are now there for ever more, but by way of justification, BCs sacrifice was staggering by any stretch of the imagination. If we can have a memorial for fluffy animals killed in war, in Park lane, I don’t think its too much to ask for the 56,000 fallen to have one of their own either. I hope you continue to make a contribution mate.. if you go, it’ll be just me and all the old giffers, like Foldie, Airborne, Forget and Chuggers. I’ve just realised, I’m the gnr there. I hope they’re not overawed.
Snapper.
Totally agree.
Ask the surviving crews, through this site, and all their connections and associations, where they would like this Memorial to be sited. Also where they think the crews who will be remembered would have liked it to be! They are the ones who count, not us! Most of us are young enough to be able to travel anywhere to pay our respects, they on the other hand....
My vote however would go to somewhere within easy driving distance of the A1. Afterall, it runs through all three " Bomber Counties"
Totally agree.
Ask the surviving crews, through this site, and all their connections and associations, where they would like this Memorial to be sited. Also where they think the crews who will be remembered would have liked it to be! They are the ones who count, not us! Most of us are young enough to be able to travel anywhere to pay our respects, they on the other hand....
My vote however would go to somewhere within easy driving distance of the A1. Afterall, it runs through all three " Bomber Counties"