Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 189

Thread: Alberta Aviation Museum - The Future?

  1. #1
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,458

    Default Alberta Aviation Museum - The Future?

    I wanted to express my happiness at the closure of the City Centre, but one of the looming questions seems to be, what will happen to the onsite museum? In the (now closed) thread, I don't believe that this question was significantly addressed.

    I believe moving the museum to YEG would make the most sense. Witness the great success of the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, where a new state of the art hangar-structure was recently built - and this museum is attached to Hamilton International. Imagine a completly new facility, located at YEG where you have 6.5 million possible museum visitors per year.Thomas Hinderks, could you speak to this?

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Default

    AAAAE

    Thanks for starting the thread
    (reminded me I have to call my counter part there today!)

    " I believe moving the museum to YEG would make the most sense."

    This is not a good choice for a lot of reasons, but to get into it we open up a pretty complex subject.

    I don't have time now to start on it, but I really would like to. As soon as I am caught up on some issues today I will be glad to get in to it.

    Mods one question...should this be in the Arts and Culture section?

    Tom

  4. #4

    Default

    Has there been any consideration to consolidate with or move by the Reynolds museum?
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  5. #5
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    If it was at YEG just think of the opportunities - much more space and maybe an old Air Canada jet or two to remind us of the now bankrupt/defunct national carrier.
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  6. #6

    Default

    Chimilz
    No consideration has been given as we have (2) extremely different mandates and a move to Wetaskwin has major problems.

    SteveB

    A considerable amount of research has already been done a YEG move and background work done researching to pros and cons.

    Yes YEG has 6.5million travelers per year, but research shows travelers do not visit time intensive attractions at an International airport sites. If any travel from the terminal is involved it increases the problem. The YEG distance from the urban population is another issue that plays against it.

    EIA does a great job as an International airport, but it is not the site for everything and research from Museums in the USA and Europe supports avoiding this location.

    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 10-07-2009 at 11:55 AM.

  7. #7

    Default

    Are you forgetting about all the travelers on Hwy 2?

    I don't really believe you are truly making an effort to consider other options. You are quick to poo-poo everything. Its "ECCA or bust"

    Many museums, business, and others have had to change and adapt to a growing and changing region... Why shouldn't the Aviation Museum?

    You are saying like if the only way the Aviation Museum could succeed is by staying at an opened city center airport... There's absolutely no other way, we dont even want to consider it...

    Narrow Minded, Tunnel Vision, close minded, stubborn, unadaptable, weak, are just a few words that come to mind right now...

  8. #8

    Default

    AAAE

    Getting back to your questions and comments now that I have a little time

    CWH and AAM have some commonality and some pretty radical differences.

    First what we have in common
    :
    Collection size is similar
    Building size is similar
    Overall attendance and facility usage is similar
    The immediate Hamilton area is a similar size and demographic as Edmonton

    Now lets look at what is different:

    First up is the collections mandate:
    CWH collections mandate is Canadian (Generically WW2) Military Aircraft.
    AAM collections mandate is
    1st Edmonton's aviation history
    2nd Alberta and the North
    3rd Canada as it applies to 1 and 2
    4th The world as it applies to 1 and 2

    This is why our collection is so diverse and currently all directly relating to Edmonton
    and includes civil, commercial (about 50%) and military aircraft (about 50%) and range in age from 1918 to 1980's.

    Second is our operational mandates, which I will have to post to later.

    Tom

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Are you forgetting about all the travelers on Hwy 2?

    I don't really believe you are truly making an effort to consider other options. You are quick to poo-poo everything. Its "ECCA or bust"

    Many museums, business, and others have had to change and adapt to a growing and changing region... Why shouldn't the Aviation Museum?

    You are saying like if the only way the Aviation Museum could succeed is by staying at an opened city center airport... There's absolutely no other way, we dont even want to consider it...

    Narrow Minded, Tunnel Vision, close minded, stubborn, unadaptable, weak, are just a few words that come to mind right now...
    Medwards

    It's not quick to poo-poo, we have done the research since this mess started...there are options YEG is not a desirable one.

    Travelers on Hwy 2 are also traveling to a destination, they visit attractions at the destination...this is not just Museums, this is attractions is general, the same reasons people want downtown to be a destination, the same reason WEM is a destination.

    Much of our research has included tourism attractions and there locations and operations. The day of the spur of the moment roadside attraction has long passed. You ether are a destination of your own or you need to be part of a larger destination location.

    All I have said to this point is YEG isn't a good choice...if it was where are the other tourism attractions flocking to be there.

    I have not in this thread brought up the ECCA debate...its done. We are waiting for more information before we institute one of the several contingency plans that have been created over the last year. We now have no choice but to adapt/change and alter operations and frankly that started yesterday with select projects being temporarily halted and some cancelled.

    As far as closed minded etc etc...get off YEG, we re looking at other options but its not one of the top ones. YEG is not the answer to everything, its an International airport not a magic wand.

    Tom

  10. #10
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    835

    Default

    I really hope the museum remains at the current site, as a successful community requires more than just housing. A major cultural attraction would add vibrancy. Plus, Edmonton too quickly demolishes its heritage. Maintaining the museum as a memorial to one of the most vital North American sites in the fight against Hilter is surely appropriate.
    http://www.twitter.com/ckls

  11. #11
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,299

    Default

    Tom, it was either you or someone else who suggested Fort Edmonton Park. Whatcha think?
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  12. #12
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    At the very least, if the museum does have to move, I would expect the hangar to remain.
    Mayor Mandel is a immature childish man

  13. #13

    Default

    Green Grovenor

    Thanks, the site is very important and our first choice is to not move the existing operation if at all possible.

    SDM

    Fort Edmonton has greater potential that YEG as an example. Unfortunately it has not got the remaining room needed for the size of our operation and access moving larger aircraft in would be a nightmare.

    Our first plan is to find a way to maintain operations on the existing site
    Challenges:
    Will require a much much larger property footprint,don't know if that will be possible yet and would require cancellation of any flying operations and possibly ground running operations.

    Right now too many questions and not enough answers to know if this is the best route.

    Second is to go (2) sites, the current site as main display, education community programming, youth and senior programming as it is now-second operational aircraft and restoration.
    Challenges:
    No one has pulled this off as a self sustaining operation before. San Diego is a similar size to us and has similar operations split over (2) sites but could not exist without multiple levels of government support.

    Then there is the complication of multiple sites, duplicated services etc etc.

    Villeneuve would be the most likely second site for a lot of operational and cost effective reasons.

    And like above too many questions, not enough answers at this point.

    Third is a full move and this is not a choice we hope we have to make.
    Challenges:

    Loss of historic site
    Loss of relevance as a museum...see collections mandate above
    Loss of community involvement
    Access to Education programming
    Access for volunteers

    and a whole bunch more make this undesireable

    Last is closure or dissolution
    This of course is the most undesirable and would only be considered if all else is financially impossible.

    There are also contingency plans that are variations on these themes, but no direction can be taken till we know more.

    We are currently dealing with issues of immediate consolidation of operations, damage control and placing some things on hold awaiting more information and canceling some things till we have more information.

    We are following plans made months ago in the event a closure choice was made, these are not knee jerk or scare tactics. We always said we would live with the decision and are...now it is dealing with the decision, getting more information and then making choices.

    Any point in continuing the comparison with Canadian Warplane Heritage?

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 10-07-2009 at 12:47 PM. Reason: splng, grammar

  14. #14
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,235

    Default

    You wouldn't have the room for a runway but its a tight fit but do-able
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/sundance065/3706982899/

  15. #15

    Default

    Wrecker
    "At the very least, if the museum does have to move, I would expect the hangar to remain."

    You are absolutely right, the site as a provincial and municipal site it cannot be touched...the memorial site is also concencrated (splng) ground.

    Thanks Sundance

    But it shows all the site problems, we needed to expand before the decision on the airport was made and you can see the room issue. You can also see the access problems for transporting large aircraft.

    I also don't think Fort Edmonton would be too excited about dedicating what room they have left to a single project.

    Tom

  16. #16
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Are you forgetting about all the travelers on Hwy 2?

    I don't really believe you are truly making an effort to consider other options. You are quick to poo-poo everything. Its "ECCA or bust"

    Many museums, business, and others have had to change and adapt to a growing and changing region... Why shouldn't the Aviation Museum?

    You are saying like if the only way the Aviation Museum could succeed is by staying at an opened city center airport... There's absolutely no other way, we dont even want to consider it...

    Narrow Minded, Tunnel Vision, close minded, stubborn, unadaptable, weak, are just a few words that come to mind right now...
    Holy cow man, partularly the last sentence....

    On what basis can you draw a conclusion like that?
    On the basis of a short post made by someone in the middle of what I'm sure is a busy work day, yet still taking the time to come here and aswer questions?

    Have you ever spoken in person with him or any of the volunteers at the Museum?

    I for one take his word for it when he says things like this:
    "A considerable amount of research has already been done a YEG move and background work done researching to pros and cons."

  17. #17
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Oliver
    Posts
    3,194

    Default

    Tom, what's the status of ownership/leases for the other quarter of your hanger, along with the apron west of there that has the greenhouse or whatever that is?

    When you say you need a larger footprint, I'm just wondering if those areas are already part of your planned expansion and you're talking beyond that?

  18. #18

    Default

    IMOH, I'd say remain in place for now. If you are thinking about bringing in new planes for restoration, NOW is the time to do it, before both runways close and access is lost.

    The hangar used is historical in nature itself, and doesn't infringe on any proposed transit routes or major right of ways. There shouldn't be a need to move for quite some time, if at all.


    Moving some small parts of the collection to Fort Edmonton and setting up a 'dual site' museum would certainly increase your foot traffic at the main site at ECCA. Something to consider? Visability is key, and with redevelopment of the airport lands in the next decade or two, all eyes are on this part of the city.



    Will require a much much larger property footprint,don't know if that will be possible yet and would require cancellation of any flying operations and possibly ground running operations.

    If the City Of Edmonton is going to be ultimately responsible for administration of the redevelopment of the airport lands, I think a direct petition to double or TRIPLE the land dedicated to the museum would be realistic. I would agree with the gifting or non profit sale of this land to the museum.


    Sure, Villeneuve is always an option, but not a very good one if you ask me. It would put your facility on the same level as the Alberta Railway Museum; practically unknown...

    I realize this week has been a rough one, but kudos for staying on the horse and getting plans on paper.
    Last edited by blainehamilton; 10-07-2009 at 01:10 PM.

  19. #19
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,235

    Default

    Oh I agree Thomas, it would be tight fit the only other spot west of Whitemud is near the parking lot.

    But maybe something can be worked out at another not perfect spot the Castrol Raceway, the drag strip MIGHT be modified for a landing strip, we need a new spot for the Indy if in a couple years it isn't cancelled.

  20. #20
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Is there any chance you would look at expanding the site as part of the airport closure - so it becomes even more of a tourist destination/attraction?

    Regarding "out of town" museums I would say Reynolds, Tyrell etc. do pretty well and don't forget the Smithsonian aviation museum which is near Dulles (I seem to remember). There are also similar RAF museums in England that are close to the "middle of nowhere" but I suppose being realistic they have more pulling power based on rarity and things to see (not a poke at the fine exhibits you have).
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  21. #21

    Default

    Newfangled
    "Tom, what's the status of ownership/leases for the other quarter of your hanger, along with the apron west of there that has the greenhouse or whatever that is?"

    Our lease is in place for many years yet and it is with the City of Edmonton, there are no issues.

    Our site is basically from the airport fence to the office building on the west, from Kingsway to 100" behind our building.

    If you look at Sundance's flickr post and ignore the (2) aircraft farthest to the right thats our width. His pic cuts out our front parking lot but the rest is on target.

    As far as expansion areas, we don't know what will be available short, mid, long term...a question that needs answered before a final contingency plan can be chosen.

    blainehamilton

    "
    IMOH, I'd say remain in place for now. If you are thinking about bringing in new planes for restoration, NOW is the time to do it, before both runways close and access is lost."

    That is our exact direction at this time.

    "
    Moving some small parts of the collection to Fort Edmonton and setting up a 'dual site' museum would certainly increase your foot traffic at the main site at ECCA. Something to consider? Visability is key, and with redevelopment of the airport lands in the next decade or two, all eyes are on this part of the city."


    We did consider this in early discussions not really practical, if we go (2) site it will need to be extensive.

    "
    If the City Of Edmonton is going to be ultimately responsible for administration of the redevelopment of the airport lands, I think a direct petition to double or TRIPLE the land dedicated to the museum would be realistic. I would agree with the gifting or non profit sale of this land to the museum."

    Thanks and this is one of the things that needs answered over the next few weeks.

    "Sure, Villeneuve is always an option, but not a very good one if you ask me. It would put your facility on the same level as the Alberta Railway Museum; practically unknown..."


    Same conclusion we came to...Vill would only be considered as a 2nd site for flying and possibly restoration operations in conjunction with the current site.

    "
    I realize this week has been a rough one, but kudos for staying on the horse and getting plans on paper."

    Thanks for the kind words, the plans went on paper months ago and now we gather information, answers and then make decisions. We do need to make decisions reasonably quickly (next few months) as the actions will take a considerable period of time, but nothing knee jerk.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society






  22. #22

    Default

    Sundance

    Again thanks for the thoughts, the Castrol site gets into the same access etc issues as YEG and the operational issues of a runway that close to the Intl could be a problem, but if current plans become unviable it may be part of a back up or other plan

    SteveB
    "Is there any chance you would look at expanding the site as part of the airport closure - so it becomes even more of a tourist destination/attraction?"

    As I noted above this is currently the first choice.

    "
    Regarding "out of town" museums I would say Reynolds, Tyrell etc. do pretty well and don't forget the Smithsonian aviation museum which is near Dulles (I seem to remember). There are also similar RAF museums in England that are close to the "middle of nowhere"

    These are are fully Government funded operations that are often placed into areas for reasons other than "best business practice". As a self sustaining private not for profit location becomes a big part of both our relevance as a museum (Edmonton's History 1st...see collections notes above) and our business/financial realities.

    "
    but I suppose being realistic they have more pulling power based on rarity and things to see (not a poke at the fine exhibits you have)."

    Actually no, they have more money to market, we have aircraft that can only be seen here and many exhibits and attractions that are superior to anywhere else, just not the budget to market as extensively.

    Thanks everyone

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society




  23. #23

    Default

    The only way the museum would be viable at YEG is if it were a hub, where a lot of passengers are waiting on connecting flights. Sure you have a lot of foot traffic, but everyone is determined to get to their gate on time.

    Too bad you couldn't move out to Lancaster Park, but that is probably too far out.

    Can you please elaborate on why the museum needs a runway? I am thinking the obvious but just want to be sure. Thanks.

  24. #24
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    Tom,
    I know that Ft.Edm. is not a favored location but what if:
    their parking was moved to the east side of the bridge and the museum were placed where the current parking is located?
    Would this provide sufficient current and future space?
    Regardless of the use of the space the parking for Ft.Ed should be east with the bridge acting as sort of a visual time traveller portal

  25. #25
    You registered but never posted. username to be deleted.
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Ab
    Posts
    628

    Default

    Thomas, I was under the impression that the Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame in Wetaskiwin wasn't a part of the Reynolds Museum, but that some form of partnership between the two exists.

    If that is the case, is there an oppertunity to merge the CAHF with the Edmonton Aviation Museum and meet the needs of both organizations at one site (not neccisarily the Reynolds Museum site)? One would think that would be a mutually beneficial relationship.

  26. #26
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,295
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Thanks Tom for answering questions.

    Folks need to know that musuems can either be self sustaining and able to be a going concern, or be constantly begging for donations from all levels of government.

    The Alberta Aviation Museum is now a self sustaining going concern. The decision as of late does put some of the buisness plan the Board has into jeopardy.

    What the key is that Tom talks about is that this is a Heritage collection, at a Heritage site, relevant to the heritage it is displaying. AKA, it is an Edmonton hangar displaying Edmonton history within Edmonton, and more specifically, on the very site the history occurred.

    In the museum world, that's priceless. Imagine Tyrell in the middle of Grande Prairie. Sure, the stuff is cool, but being at or near the site where many of the discoveries happened adds to the experience.

    Just look at it from the standpoint of the work that all the volunteers and administrators put into it.

    It could move, but it does run into the very issues Tom mentioned. YEG could be a spot, but without transit access, and fast transit access for schools etc, it is dead in the water for being self sufficient.
    Onward and upward

  27. #27

    Default

    Hi again gang

    JBear

    " Too bad you couldn't move out to Lancaster Park, but that is probably too far out."

    You are right, same problems as with YEG and Vill as a primary site, am awaiting word from Military if it could be a secondary site like Vill.

    "
    Can you please elaborate on why the museum needs a runway? I am thinking the obvious but just want to be sure."

    Whole bunch of reasons but to hit the main ones
    1) Aircraft acquisition: Aircraft, the bigger they are the worse it gets are expensive to dissassemble, ground transfer, reassemble is time consuming and expesnsive, the bigger the bigger the expense. It would drive the acquisition of some aircraft beyond our ability if we cannot get them flown in before the runways are gone.

    2) Fund raising and marketing, fly in events and visiting aircraft are import ways we drive revenues and more importantly the media attention is a large portion of our marketing due to the attention events like airfest and visiting aircraft generate

    3) Education and inspiration, the Young Eagles program gets lids their first experience for free...you cannot buy that. The visiting aircraft are also a part of that inspiration...too quote the pilot that flew the CF-18 in this year, "If I had never seen the fighters at the Vanderhoof airshow I never would have wanted to fly".

    4) The most recognized Aviation Museums in the World are Museum that actively fly, like Canadian Warplane Heritage. It takes time and money to get to that point and we were just starting with the Spirit of Edmonton biplane. The plan was to expand and add some unique and only aircraft to the program that were being worked on.

    This would have magnified the International attraction and international media coverage of both the Museum and Edmonton.

    But that is now in the past unless we find a way to do a (2) location system...we will see.

    Blueline

    The thoughts are interesting, but not first choice...if existing planning is impractical it will bear review.

    danimalrex

    "
    Thomas, I was under the impression that the Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame in Wetaskiwin wasn't a part of the Reynolds Museum, but that some form of partnership between the two exists."

    You are right, sort of.
    When CAHF got the boot from Edmonton a complex partnership was created with Reynolds and CAHF, I am not privy to all the details. I do know a few years ago when I inquired about convincing them to move back (to us) it was explained that it could never happen due to the nature of the partnership. Which is why we are in the process of creating an "Edmonton Wall of Honour"

    "If that is the case, is there an oppertunity to merge the CAHF with the Edmonton Aviation Museum and meet the needs of both organizations at one site (not neccisarily the Reynolds Museum site)? One would think that would be a mutually beneficial relationship."

    So do we, but I kinda covered it in the above.

    RichardS

    Covered things very well, thank you

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society




    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 10-07-2009 at 03:51 PM.

  28. #28

    Default

    Tom,

    Thank you for your answers. I was not able to view council's debate or listen to any delegations unfortunately. Pity there was not a compromise made, maybe just keeping 1 runway open permanently. The small light at the tunnel (could be a freight train though) is that they debated this 10 years ago, and maybe they will debate it in another 10 years.

  29. #29
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,299

    Default

    So the Aviation Museum is not-for-profit. Someone mentioned looking at corporate sponsorship as a funding option?
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  30. #30
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,466

    Default

    tom,

    seeing as you in the mood to answer questions and continue to educate (one of the aviation museums roles i might note and one you do well), i would like to add a couple:

    firstly, this was previously posed but in what is now a closed thread - while it may well be in the aviation museum's best interest to have "acess to a runway" i am not sure i agree with that depending on your definition of "a runway". race cars need access to a track for an event but doesn't mean a year round track is needed for the event. if "a runway" means an operating airport, then we haven't bridged our difference of opinion and solutions even yet. but if "a runway" means the ability to access space suitable for the occassional use of "air worthy" exhibits or hosting special events, i'm not sure sufficient runway couldn't be retained to serve that kind of "dual purpose". i'm also not sure that we couldn't run 118th avenue through the airport once both runways are "gone" to look after east/west traffic which would allow Kingsway to fulfill that purpose. i can see your cessna convention "parked" in front of the chateau louis for a weekend and i can see enough asphalt for your air worthy restorations to get way more press coverage and exposure "taking over the streets" than getting in line behind a beechcraft. the only thing i don't see working is 24/7 "long term education programming that would involve actual flight" and that's the one piece i see being able to be "off site" at villeneuve. the only other thing i see being problematic - and even that depending only on roadway capacity and pilot skill - might be flying something as large as the 737 but if "compromise" is the objective even that might be a pretty reasonable price to retain everything else if the value of having it "on-site" for some of your programs remains greater than the value of having it "off-site" (which, depending on where it is, might be one h**l of a hook for the museum itself).

    secondly, if the aviation museum was to pick up some of what it needs for expansion from the adjacent airport site as it becomes redundant, would that not open up additional sources of revenue for the museum if it enabled you to tie into a cafe or a restaurant or a pub/night club with some catering facilities and licensed special events hosting etc. similar to the fort edmonton model?

    ken
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  31. #31

    Default

    SDM
    "So the Aviation Museum is not-for-profit. Someone mentioned looking at corporate sponsorship as a funding option?"

    We have done this all along, Edmonton however since 1995 has not been shall we say "aviation sympathetic" and we have had comparatively little success.
    This is inspite of what consultants and marketers have called a great program.

    We do however have some great corporate sponsors.
    I don't want to start naming them without a complete list in front of me as missing someone would be awful. But compared to Calgary (for instance) only a percentage.

    We are hoping this will change with the debate ending.


    Kcantor

    Caught your post on the other thread but couldn't reply before it closed.

    Anything is better than nothing...best case airport, worst case none.

    Love your idea (SDM had similar thoughts in the development thread) but have not had time to research the regulatory side...it is done in Australia that I know.

    The other part is how the development vision comes together.

    An idea worth exploring if possible.

    "secondly, if the aviation museum was to pick up some of what it needs for expansion from the adjacent airport site as it becomes redundant, would that not open up additional sources of revenue for the museum if it enabled you to tie into a cafe or a restaurant or a pub/night club with some catering facilities and licensed special events hosting etc. similar to the fort edmonton model?"

    This comes back to our head lease which (as I understand it and others) we cannot enter into competion with local businesses. This dates back to our original lease from the very early 1990's.

    This is why we don't offer a private pilot ground school (offered by Edmonton Flying Club and Centennial Flight School), but do offer an ultralight ground school (not offered locally).

    As things change this too may be able to be changed and open up this opportunity.

    At this time we do rentals of several areas of the facility for events from 150 to 600 capacity, but cannot do bar, catering etc.

    Thanks both SDM and Kcantor


    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 10-07-2009 at 06:10 PM. Reason: format, splng

  32. #32

    Default

    It dawns on me as I go to leave that most likely don't realize all that happens in our facility and why location is so important.

    In addition to the Museum and all the education and other programs run by the Museum.

    - (5) Veteran organizations
    - (4) Experimental/Recreational aircraft groups
    - (2) Youth organizations (approx 400kids) Royal Cadet Orgs (free for kids 12-18 )
    - (1) Air Cadet Archives and Museum (only one in Canada)
    - (1) Organization devoted to retoring a Ventura (RCAF) Patrol bomber, combat vet
    - (1) Civil Air Search and Rescue Association
    (volunteer search and rescue first searchers for all kinds of searches inc Aircraft)

    One of the reasons we are so busy here.

    Tom

  33. #33
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,458

    Default

    Tom thanks for your replies.

    One question. How feasible is it to transport an aircraft by road to an off-site airport? Would it be a burden on the museum to have to do this regularly? If not, perhaps a split museum could be avoided.

  34. #34
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AAAAE View Post
    Tom thanks for your replies.

    One question. How feasible is it to transport an aircraft by road to an off-site airport? Would it be a burden on the museum to have to do this regularly? If not, perhaps a split museum could be avoided.
    hoping that tom is home with a more relaxing dram than wednesday's, i'll jump in noting that their 737 is about 100 feet long, it's wingspan is just under 100 feet and it's almost 40 feet tall (before trying to put it on a trailer or a set of wheeled axles).

    the length might be "manageable" and power lines can be lifted (although at a cost high enough not to want to do it regularly) but the roads themselves won't take the wingspan without wiping out light standards and storefronts even without trying to turn corners... that's why tom was discussing the cost of taking apart and reassembling once you start to look at larger craft. a b-52 is about 160 feet long with a 185 foot wingspan and stands more than 40 feet tall compared to a cessna which is about 25 feet long with a 35 foot wingspan that stands under 10 feet tall.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  35. #35
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    835

    Default

    kcantor's post reminds me that at times Kingsway Avenue has been used as a runway. Tom knows the stories better than I do. I believe Wiley Post took off from Kingsway (then called Portage Avenue) in the early 1930s while setting a record for fastest round-the-world flight. NBC Radio broadcast the event live across North America.
    http://www.twitter.com/ckls

  36. #36
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Green Grovenor View Post
    kcantor's post reminds me that at times Kingsway Avenue has been used as a runway. Tom knows the stories better than I do. I believe Wiley Post took off from Kingsway (then called Portage Avenue) in the early 1930s while setting a record for fastest round-the-world flight. NBC Radio broadcast the event live across North America.
    I am all for closing CCA and would prefer to see the museum relocated to YEG as part of the terminal redevelopment and I think Edmonton should contribute 30 million bucks into it to make it happen (or EIA). That said, closing Kingsway and flying onto it would be a helluva street party!!. THAT is something this City has not seen.

    Edit: I now see the post below...did not know that happened or why.

  37. #37

    Default

    Morning

    Thanks Ken you explained the transport issue well

    Green Grovenor you are right on with the Wiley Post Story.

    Edmtrekker

    Thanks for the thoughts

    Tom

  38. #38

    Default

    Just an update...

    The future has been under much discussion through the summer between the many events we have had.

    What we know:
    1) There is an immediate need for the expansion of our facility, we have turned down the donation of better than half a dozen aircraft over the last (2) years due to lack of space and for those that have visited the facility you have seen how pressing the space problem is. The aircraft outside need to get under cover to stop the deterioration and make long term conservation affordable. In addition our increasing education programming is magnifying the space issue.

    2) The are infrastructure issues that will need dealt with soon (north apron, HVAC and other) that cannot be addressed until we are able to make solid expansion plans as they tie together (repair the apron and then tear it up to expand doesn't make sense, HVAC...for how big?)

    3) The facility has come a long way in a short period of time and is now one of the top Aviation Museums Nationally. But we need to determine what our future will be and how we can move forward...still far too many questions, but we are working on getting answers.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society

  39. #39
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,458

    Default

    Thanks for this update. Keep us posted.

  40. #40
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    577

    Default

    Out of curiosity, what's up with Namao? As far as I can tell it's still owned by the military but is no longer used, though info seems sparse. I assume it's also not in great shape if that's the case. But it is a lot closer in to the city than Villeneuve if my reading of the map is right (practically next door to St. Albert, so is on the edge of the suburban ring). It also has a notably long airstrip, which is itself probably worth preserving as a museum piece. Is it an option at all?
    Blog: http://www.stormbrew.ca/ | Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/stormbrew

  41. #41

    Default

    Graham

    thanks for the question:

    As a military base there are security restrictions in place that would cause a number of functional problems.

    Then there is the whole process of being able to operate a civilian operation on an active military base...that said inquiries are in progress.

    Lastly is the fact it is an active flying base for the Griffon Helicopters and soon Chinooks which create another series of issues.

    So while it is being looked at as a secondary site there are a lot of issues that create issues with it being a primary or single site, but when all considerations are in decisions will be made.

    Biggest problem right now is information...we are waiting on a lot of decisions and answers.

    Come September the boards of our facility have to start making some tough long term decisions...not gonna be much fun but long term issues have to be dealt with.


    Tom

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by graham View Post
    Out of curiosity, what's up with Namao? As far as I can tell it's still owned by the military but is no longer used, though info seems sparse. I assume it's also not in great shape if that's the case. But it is a lot closer in to the city than Villeneuve if my reading of the map is right (practically next door to St. Albert, so is on the edge of the suburban ring). It also has a notably long airstrip, which is itself probably worth preserving as a museum piece. Is it an option at all?
    The airstrip is no longer intact. They've built buildings on it.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  43. #43

    Default

    noodle

    There are actually (2) airstrips at CFB Edmonton Garrison

    The main, about 13-15,000 feet has buildings on it now that would shorten its useful length to about 6-8,000 feet if it was active.

    The secondary cross strip is about 6,000 feet and other than old age is intact.

    All electronic aids and other equipment (other than those needed for Helicopter use) have been removed and both are considered closed at this time.

    Tom

  44. #44

    Default

    Meh who needs electronic aids or equipment :P.

    If reopening the runway was possible would it be a temporary opening? or would the military would look at reopening it up? I doubt you would want to move the museum up to Namao?

  45. #45

    Default

    JBear

    As far as opening the runway...that would be up to the military but they could do ether as they choose, the expensive infrastructure is there and if they see a need they can just do it.

    As far as moving the museum to the site....it is being looked at as a secondary site or an alternate option not one of the top choices due to location issues described earlier.

    After flying the bi plane...electronic aids can be a very good thing. (lol)

    Ken

    I have been reading regs and such re: your boulevard occasional runway idea, boy what a complex set of issues to deal with...but not necessarily impossible...still researching.

    Tom

  46. #46
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Is it not possible to build a new runway, in a new location? I realize the expense involved, and the fact that it might not have the historical significance, but perhaps it could be a combined site with the railroad museum, which is in a bad spot....a kind of all encompasing transportation museum.

  47. #47

    Default

    Wrecker

    You have sorta been reading my mind...

    While building a runway would be financially unlikely the thought of a Edmonton Mall of Museums using part of the existing site is one that I proposed as a use to council some time back.

    There are a number of Edmonton Museums that are ether homeless (Edmonton Power) or have major space problems (Telephone Museum) and others like the Alberta Railway Museum that have locations that are killing them.

    Combining these Museums into a Smithsonian like Mall of Museums using some of the historic buildings on site and some new construction could create a true living museums complex and heritage facility.

    This could create a tremendous Tourism attraction, educational facilitiy and community resource at a minimal expense.

    In a nut shell

    Tom

  48. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Wrecker

    You have sorta been reading my mind...

    While building a runway would be financially unlikely the thought of a Edmonton Mall of Museums using part of the existing site is one that I proposed as a use to council some time back.

    There are a number of Edmonton Museums that are ether homeless (Edmonton Power) or have major space problems (Telephone Museum) and others like the Alberta Railway Museum that have locations that are killing them.

    Combining these Museums into a Smithsonian like Mall of Museums using some of the historic buildings on site and some new construction could create a true living museums complex and heritage facility.

    This could create a tremendous Tourism attraction, educational facilitiy and community resource at a minimal expense.

    In a nut shell

    Tom
    Other than the "existing site" part, I really really really like this idea
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  49. #49
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Wrecker

    You have sorta been reading my mind...

    While building a runway would be financially unlikely the thought of a Edmonton Mall of Museums using part of the existing site is one that I proposed as a use to council some time back.

    There are a number of Edmonton Museums that are ether homeless (Edmonton Power) or have major space problems (Telephone Museum) and others like the Alberta Railway Museum that have locations that are killing them.

    Combining these Museums into a Smithsonian like Mall of Museums using some of the historic buildings on site and some new construction could create a true living museums complex and heritage facility.

    This could create a tremendous Tourism attraction, educational facilitiy and community resource at a minimal expense.

    In a nut shell

    Tom
    So what we need is a large, open, urban area to construct this vast museum.....like the muni.....a centerpiece in the center of the city.

  50. #50

    Default

    Wrecker

    That is basically what I proposed to council in one of the plans I forwarded during the ECCA debate.

    It is also one that I will be pursuing personally.

    Bear in mind...this is not one building, but a series of buildings (some existing some not) that would become a walking tour and living historical facility

    Tom

  51. #51
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    ^That sounds great Tom, and I hope that others are able to see your vision. I would rather see a large impressive museum(s) at the muni (connected to lrt of course) than a residential development.

  52. #52
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    ^ How big do you think the museum has to be, that it's a one-or-the-other deal in your mind? The muni is a lot of land, more than enough for both an expanded museum as well as new residential development.
    Strathcona City Separatist

  53. #53

    Default

    ^^ I love that idea! I forget, is it the East-West runway staying open?

  54. #54
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RTA View Post
    ^ How big do you think the museum has to be, that it's a one-or-the-other deal in your mind? The muni is a lot of land, more than enough for both an expanded museum as well as new residential development.

    I'm assuming that at least one runway stays, land is set aside for lrt & NAIT. I guess that doesn't mean there couldn't be residential, it just wouldn't be the primary focus of the redevelopment. I think the msuem would become quite large, if all of the ones that have been mentioned are incorporated.

  55. #55
    You registered but never posted. username to be deleted.
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Ab
    Posts
    628

    Default

    The consolidation idea strikes me as a wonderful idea.

    Just taking a quick peek at Google Earth, I could see leaving runway 12/30 in place, and turning over everything SW of it to this consolidation. Additionally, the track from the VIA Rail station could be extended and brought into this area allowing the Railway museum to more easily shuffle cars around, or bring in special attractions through the connection to the rail yards.

    Such an arrangement would leave roughly 2/3 of the land available to future development.

  56. #56

    Default

    I believe the idea is very viable...

    Using the remaining historic hangars would cut capital costs and provide some of the needed space.

    It could be the home for the proposed Edmonton Heritage Council


    Museums that could choose to involved:
    Alberta Railway Museum
    Edmonton Police Museum
    Edmonton Fire Fighters
    Edmonton Transit
    Edmonton Power
    Edmonton Telephone Museum
    Edmonton Transit
    Loyal Edmonton Regiment Museum
    The Edmonton Geneology Group
    And a number of others.

    Can you imagine a living museum encompassing aviation, trains, buses and street cars with a walk through time of the technological age.

    The possibilities for marketing, education and operations are mind boggling.

    The bet part is I believe it could be done very economically.

    It could be based on the lands in the south east corner below runway 12/30 and even use kcantors idea of continuing 12/30 as a part time runway if the eventual full closure ever comes (still researching that one)

    The idea based on existing infastructure, the historic site and buildings combining with education and living operations would be a first...but all practically viable.

    Now you know what I do with my spare time (lol)

    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 18-08-2009 at 03:29 PM. Reason: format

  57. #57

    Default

    RTA

    The development focus was originally on the full airport...but with the changes in situations it could be altered to suit a full site or partial.

    Depends on what we have to work with.

    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 18-08-2009 at 05:08 PM. Reason: clarity

  58. #58
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    ^ Tom which runway are we talking about, the one closer to NAIT, or the one closer to the hangar? The problem people will have with keeping the one close to the hangar open is the continuence of downtown height restrictions.

  59. #59

    Default

    Wrecker

    City council choose to close runway 16/34 which is the one along the east side of the airport that runs North/South.

    Runway 12/30, which runs East/West and parallels the south border of the airport lands ,will remain open for an indefinite period of time as part of the motion that Council passed July 8 this year.

    So as far as an active runway for the time being it would be runway 12/30 as that was Council's choice and is the one I refer to when I said lands south of runway 12/30.

    All within the motion passed by Council

    Tom

  60. #60
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Far away from clueless people.
    Posts
    341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    So as far as an active runway for the time being it would be runway 12/30 as that was Council's choice and is the one I refer to when I said lands south of runway 12/30.
    I wonder if reducing (i.e. displaced threshold) the usable length of rwy 30 would be sufficient to possibly lift some of the downtown restrictions. With a length of almost 6000', surely it could be shortened to 4500' and still be usable by all types that currently use it. For instance, the piano keys would be beyond the current 34/30 intersection. It may not seem like much but would that be sufficient to lift some height restrictions? Just curious. Perhaps it's already part of a staged redevelopment proposal. Dunno.
    Slow to 160, contact tower. Slow to 160, contact tower. Slow to...ZZZZZZZZZZ.....

  61. #61

    Default

    The threshold is currently displaced pretty much as you describe. I am told the choice of runway was based on the fact height restrictions would not affect the developments in the Quarters as it stands.

    You are right both runways are 6000 ish, but the thresholds have been displaced to shorten their useful length.

    Tom

  62. #62
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Far away from clueless people.
    Posts
    341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    The threshold is currently displaced pretty much as you describe. I am told the choice of runway was based on the fact height restrictions would not affect the developments in the Quarters as it stands.

    You are right both runways are 6000 ish, but the thresholds have been displaced to shorten their useful length.

    Tom
    ??? I obviously haven't looked at the approach plates in a while. The LDA must be pretty close to what I'd proposed. That first bit about the height restrictions not affecting developments, I find interesting. With 16/34 soon to be dug up, and the localizer antenna surely not far behind, there must be RNAV approach(es) in the works. They may not be perfect but at least it's something. Couldn't imagine conducting an approach at YEG and continuing VFR to YXD below a 1000' ceiling would be a lot of fun on somedays.
    Slow to 160, contact tower. Slow to 160, contact tower. Slow to...ZZZZZZZZZZ.....

  63. #63

    Default

    YEGatc

    What can I tell you

    when I land the Bi Plane on 30 the piano keys are just past the intersection of 12/30-16/34...I'd have to look up the length in the CFS (never had to with the Bi Plane) but I think the displaced length is 5500???

    As I understand it Augmented GPS approaches are supposed to be the solution???

    Wouldn't want to be the guy figuring this one out and I agree I wouldn't do VFR in those conditions.

    But I guess it really doesn't matter...direction has been set.

    Tom

  64. #64

    Default

    An update for those interested...

    2009 was a spectacular year for the Alberta Aviation Museum...we were:
    - The most active Aviation Museum in Canada during the Centennial Celebration hosting over 30 events.

    - The Spirit of Edmonton project was a Local Regional and International success promoting our history, the Alberta Aviation Museum and Edmonton across Canada and Internationally.

    - We have become recognized as a Nationally Significant museum.
    - Added more interactives and attractions
    - Boosted attendance to new record levels

    and finally have discovered that here in Edmonton the Alberta Aviation Museum has the most advanced Education Programming of any aviation museum.

    2009 was a bench mark year anyway you look at it.

    But as we enter 2010 we are having to look at some very hard realities.

    A recent practical review shows that to complete our acquisition list and tell the story of Edmonton and Northern Alberta's aviation history we need to at least least double the size of our facility...estimating 175,000 square feet to cover the collection, archives, restoration and growing education programming.

    Space is going to be a long term problem.

    Short term (5-7years) space in now a critical problem.

    (1) aircraft is disassembled and in outdoor storage
    (1) is in process of being disassembled for removal from the display floor
    (2) aircraft are currently being stored off site
    (1) is being readied for an indefinite loan to the Nanton Lancaster Museum, departing soon
    (1) will be prepared for an indefinite loan to the Penhold Air Force Museum

    We have had to add a temporary 2nd classroom on the display floor for upcoming education program bookings.

    We are trying to find solutions and alternatives but short term minimal opportunities are appearing.

    Long term...simply not enough answers are yet available to know what will happen.

    On a brighter note...
    We have 14-16 events scheduled for 2010 and will be celebrating both:
    - The 70th Anniversary of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan
    - The 70th Anniversary of the Battle of Britain

    - Airfest 2010 is coming together well and will Celebrate the aircraft of the BCATP
    (June 25-26-27)
    - Aviation Heritage Week is also getting some unique aircraft confirmed and will run as earlier planned July 26 to August 1.

    The "Spirit of Edmonton" will take flight once again in Mid May with a 14 day, 42 community tour of the 38 remaining British Commonwealth Air Training Plan bases in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

    We are currently working on financial and in kind support for this project.

    So for 2010 there are bright lights and black clouds out there and we will be pressing forward to keep Edmonton Western Canada's Aviation Heritage place to be.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 10-01-2010 at 12:54 PM.

  65. #65
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    Hey Tom, how about purchasing one of these for the museum?
    Strathcona City Separatist

  66. #66

    Default

    Hi RTA

    Well couple probs with that one.

    First is provenance, the only shuttle piece with Edmonton or Alberta provenance is the Canadarm (First one wired here in Edmonton!) and those were spoken for before we even got a shot (USA institutions get first shot).

    Second we ain't got no room!

    Third we ain't got no money for acquisitions.

    In all seriousness we do want to eventually do a replica of the Canadarm, but we don't have the room right now.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum

  67. #67
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    Aw, nuts. =)
    Strathcona City Separatist

  68. #68
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    Tom, At one point the Space Science Centre had a replica of the Canadarm maybe still does ??
    (pre Telyou sponsorship)

  69. #69

    Default

    Thanks Blueline

    I remember theirs, wonder where it is now?

    Anyway...when we have room we would like to make one that can be operated and demonstrated...combined with a model of CFB Namao with the NASA set up there during shuttle missions.

    Many folks don't know CFB Namao, Edmonton, was the 3rd alternate site for Space Shuttle landings! That long runway was appreciated by many.

    1st was Cape Kennedy (now Canaveral)
    2nd was the Black Sands in Australia
    3rd was here

    That will be as far as we go to the realm of space. the Science centre really has the mandate to tell the larger story of space, our job is to tell the history of Aviation in:
    First Edmonton
    Second Alberta and the North
    Third Canada as it relates to the first two

    Then the world as it relates to the first three.

    There is enough there to keep a person busy for several lifetimes.

    Thomas Hinderks
    ED, AAMA

  70. #70

    Default

    If I recall correctly, Namao was to be an emergency landing site for missions launched from Vandenburg. These would be mostly military missions and would be in polar orbits. The Vandenburg shuttle launch site was shut down after the Challenger disaster.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenb...unch_Complex_6

  71. #71
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    So I was trying to read through the whole thread, thankfully it's still only about 70 posts. I was curious if there was any further thoughts and possible plans for the museum?

    I will say that I do like the Super-museum concept, especially if somehow convincing the Alberta Railway Museum to move to the site. That would have to major transportation museums on one site and could possibly allow the Edmonton Radial society to participate in a complex like this providing transportation using some street cars to get from one end of the site to the next. Also if something like this were to happen I think I would love to see LRT have a station near this complex.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  72. #72

    Default

    Edmcowboy11

    Plans for the Aviation Museum specifically are stalled until plans for the ECCA site start to happen, I guess.

    As noted we are out of room and need to expand.

    The Edmonton Museums complex is alive and well and there have been a number of meetings with government officials to see if there is an appetite to go farther...there is. Now is the time that meetings with potential partners (from the historic side) will start happening to see if there is an appetite there...loose conversation appears there is.

    This will happen only as fast as the rest of the overall site plan, but it is creeping ahead.

    LRT station makes a ton of sense for the site...and the street car (and historic bus) transport has always been a part of the plan.

    Thanks for asking

  73. #73
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Green Grovenor View Post
    I really hope the museum remains at the current site, as a successful community requires more than just housing. A major cultural attraction would add vibrancy. Plus, Edmonton too quickly demolishes its heritage. Maintaining the museum as a memorial to one of the most vital North American sites in the fight against Hilter is surely appropriate.
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  74. #74

    Default

    "I personally feel the museum could do very well at the international, especially when it gets bus service (not holding breath though on that one)"

    Well the Museum is not going anywhere as it is a Provincial Historic site, the question is if and how it can survive?

    As far as thinking that EIA would work...I'd like to know your business case because no one has pulled that off in Canada, the US or Europe with that distance from a Metro Centre with a catch basin of this size without heavy government subisdies.

    And don't bother pointing at Canadian Warplane Heritage...much closer to Metro Centre and a far larger catch basin as well as huge corporate support.

    Additional information on this discussion at:
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...+Museum+future

    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 23-05-2010 at 11:01 PM. Reason: added link

  75. #75

    Default

    Thought it time for an update

    While 2009 was a spectacular year seeing the Alberta Aviation Museum finally recognized as Nationally significant 2010 has not been so kind.

    On one hand we have bucked the trend of admissions dropping after a Centennial of Flight, mainly by continuing to run a series of events and exhibits that continue to bring new faces to the Museum.

    Education programming has jumped in leaps and bounds forcing us to create a 2nd, but temporary, classroom on the museum floor to allow us to do multiple classes per day.

    The BCATP exhibit has been extremely popular and has drawn many guests from well out of region in the 70th Anniversary of the BCATP.

    -Airfest 2010 is on line and Dedicated to the 70th Anniversary of the BCATP...June 27th.
    -Aviation Heritage Week will be headlined with the Hammond Gray Corsair (F4U) from Vintage Wings Canada.
    - The Lancaster returns Aug 16-17-18-19 this year.
    and a series of other events are scheduled for the fall.

    On the down side...
    - The BCATP Tour was almost lost due to a lack of funding but the Downtown Hotels Association, The Fath Group, Qualico and a private donor stepped up at the 11th hour to assit...thank you so much and 418"City of Edmonton' Squadron Asso that has been there all along. Now we are battling repairs on the aircraft but hope to launch soon.

    Space is now beyond critical...
    - Adding the 2nd temporary classroom meant another aircraft had to be removed, disassembled and stored
    - A Tiger Moth exhibit (1/2 scale 17' wingspan) is being gifted to another museum as we do not have room to display it.
    - (2) aircraft are now disassembled and stored on site
    - (1) is being stored off site
    - (1) Aircraft is already on loan to the Bomber Command Museum of Canada
    - (1) will be going on loan to another museum this summer
    - (1) Aircraft on loan will be departing due to the ECCA issue
    - (1) New aircraft will becoming in soon (airworthy and flying) and it will have to be stored off site
    .. in a secure hangar at a cost of several thousand dollars for the balance of the year.

    Space is the biggest problem with no solution in the foreseeable future, no decisions being made on available airport lands until the overall plan is in place.

    It is becoming harder and harder to keep the momentum created with space becoming more and more the limiting factor.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum/Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society

  76. #76
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    "I personally feel the museum could do very well at the international, especially when it gets bus service (not holding breath though on that one)"

    Well the Museum is not going anywhere as it is a Provincial Historic site, the question is if and how it can survive?

    As far as thinking that EIA would work...I'd like to know your business case because no one has pulled that off in Canada, the US or Europe with that distance from a Metro Centre with a catch basin of this size without heavy government subisdies.

    And don't bother pointing at Canadian Warplane Heritage...much closer to Metro Centre and a far larger catch basin as well as huge corporate support.

    Additional information on this discussion at:
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...+Museum+future

    Tom
    Reynold's Alberta Museum has 70 aircraft. I even went up in a vintage bi-plane out there.
    It seems to do okay a long way from a major population center no?

  77. #77

    Default

    ^ I think your about to have "massive gov't subsidies" thrown back at ya.

  78. #78
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    ^ I think your about to have "massive gov't subsidies" thrown back at ya.
    Could be, I don't know what their funding model is, just that they do have significant private donations at least in the form of what is on the museum floor.

  79. #79

  80. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    "I personally feel the museum could do very well at the international, especially when it gets bus service (not holding breath though on that one)"

    Well the Museum is not going anywhere as it is a Provincial Historic site, the question is if and how it can survive?

    As far as thinking that EIA would work...I'd like to know your business case because no one has pulled that off in Canada, the US or Europe with that distance from a Metro Centre with a catch basin of this size without heavy government subisdies.

    And don't bother pointing at Canadian Warplane Heritage...much closer to Metro Centre and a far larger catch basin as well as huge corporate support.

    Additional information on this discussion at:
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...+Museum+future

    Tom
    Reynold's Alberta Museum has 70 aircraft. I even went up in a vintage bi-plane out there.
    It seems to do okay a long way from a major population center no?
    Morning Dan C and EDP

    Reynold is a great museum, actual count on aircraft right now is 88 most in storage unfortunately. Did you get to try the flight simulator we built for them?

    The Spirit of the Machine portion is absolutely world class.

    It is also 100% Provincial government funded for both operations and capital costs.

    Stan Reynolds donated the majority of both vehicle and aircraft (largest donation of kind in Canadian History)you see which is one of the reasons the Museum is where it is.

    Tom

  81. #81

    Default

    so why doesn't the museum apply for government funding, move out to YEG, and be done with the city center airport? Instead, you would rather have the museum drag its feet, work against the city of edmonton and the wishes of the majority of its citizens. You could be finding solutions, all I hear is a bunch of whining currently.
    Time to start finding ways to move on. The decision has been made. This message is for the museum, the kba, and anyone that still has an interest in the city center airport as an airport. It's closing. Move on.

    Thanks,
    Majority of Edmonton, City Council of Edmonton, etc.

  82. #82
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    so why doesn't the museum apply for government funding, move out to YEG, and be done with the city center airport? Instead, you would rather have the museum drag its feet, work against the city of edmonton and the wishes of the majority of its citizens. You could be finding solutions, all I hear is a bunch of whining currently.
    Time to start finding ways to move on. The decision has been made. This message is for the museum, the kba, and anyone that still has an interest in the city center airport as an airport. It's closing. Move on.

    Thanks,
    Majority of Edmonton, City Council of Edmonton, etc.
    Tom,
    How about instead you ignore the above ignorant comments and work with City Council and the Province to expand at the current site and then work with EIA to hold events at the international/Villeneuve when a functioning airport is required.
    The aviation museum is exactly the type of showcase and diverse attraction that helps to reinforce the core as a place to visit for locals and tourists.
    That said, I still believe that to be the case without the need to have a runway at your doorstep.

  83. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    so why doesn't the museum apply for government funding, move out to YEG, and be done with the city center airport? Instead, you would rather have the museum drag its feet, work against the city of edmonton and the wishes of the majority of its citizens. You could be finding solutions, all I hear is a bunch of whining currently.
    Time to start finding ways to move on. The decision has been made. This message is for the museum, the kba, and anyone that still has an interest in the city center airport as an airport. It's closing. Move on.

    Thanks,
    Majority of Edmonton, City Council of Edmonton, etc.
    Starting with the obvious...we are getting off topic so I will respond to Medwards and DanC then this conversation should move to this thread
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ad.php?t=13590

    Which also has adressed some of these questions.

    Medwards:
    1) "so why doesn't the museum apply for government funding,"

    There is no government funding for operations, we do apply for everything that is available now and often don't get as there is only so much going around and Heritage is apparently not a priority.

    2) "move out to YEG"

    Covered in the thread I listed and not practical for the reasons I already listed to you on the other thread.

    3) "be done with the city center airport?"

    ECCA is where the History happened, our building is going nowhere with or without us as it is a Provincial historic site. This is the place, its not replaceable or substitutable...its real.

    4) "have the museum drag its feet, work against the city of edmonton"

    Not true...the museum/society position as stated to council has been non involvement and living with the results...and we are. E-mail the Mayor to verify if you wish.

    My position as an Edmonton citizen is different and I have been very very clear in separating them. Publicly and to council and the mayor.

    5) "the wishes of the majority of its citizens."

    Really...shoe is now on the other foot...prove it! Statistically and verifiably not anecdotally from comments on this forum or others.

    My bet is the majority of Edmontonians don't care one way or another.

    6) "You could be finding solutions," + "Time to start finding ways to move on."

    We have been since before the decision was made and options being looked at are posted on this forum.

    7) "This message is for the museum, he kba, and anyone that still has an interest in the city center airport as an airport. It's closing. Move on."

    No...unlike typical businesses listed, we are not part of the airport, we are protected and lastly this is where the history happened that is fact and not a choice...for a change you adapt. Historic sites don't move you can't decide where things have happened in hind site.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society

  84. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    so why doesn't the museum apply for government funding, move out to YEG, and be done with the city center airport? Instead, you would rather have the museum drag its feet, work against the city of edmonton and the wishes of the majority of its citizens. You could be finding solutions, all I hear is a bunch of whining currently.
    Time to start finding ways to move on. The decision has been made. This message is for the museum, the kba, and anyone that still has an interest in the city center airport as an airport. It's closing. Move on.

    Thanks,
    Majority of Edmonton, City Council of Edmonton, etc.
    Tom,
    How about instead you ignore the above ignorant comments and work with City Council and the Province to expand at the current site and then work with EIA to hold events at the international/Villeneuve when a functioning airport is required.
    The aviation museum is exactly the type of showcase and diverse attraction that helps to reinforce the core as a place to visit for locals and tourists.
    That said, I still believe that to be the case without the need to have a runway at your doorstep.
    Morning Dan C

    If you check out the other thread http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ad.php?t=13590

    We are looking at various options right now and we have been actively trying to work to expand on site but the City doesn't want to commit to anything until the site plan is determined, problem is we need to be doing it now. The Province can't do anything till we have a commitment to site planning...so we are currently in a Catch 22 and its hurting.

    YEG is not a good option and the reasons are listed on the other thread, even for strictly flight ops it is a poor compromise for both the airport and our operations.

    Villeneuve is being looked at as are a couple of others as second flight operation sites, but it may not be economically viable and remain self sufficient which is part of our mandate and frankly a good thing all around.

    The runway issue is what it is, we will have 12/30 for some period of time and need to be working on finishing deals on large aircraft acquistions now as the transport costs later will may it impossible. But with no place on site to store them its another catch 22...we need to get them in now, but have no where to put them so we can't bring them in. Yes we are working with EIA and the City to try and do something interim.

    My gut feeling is the long term viability is going to end up being linked to the Mall of Museums/Edmonton Museums Complex http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...s+Complex+Mall but nothing can happen till site plans can happen.

    In short till decisions come from others we are caught and trying to survive through this period. When the site decisions and others come down we can start to make final plans.

    Thanks

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum/Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society

    Mods...can we move the last few posts to the other thread?

    Tom

  85. #85
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,388

    Default

    I think YEG is a great option for the museum. I also would support an increase in airport ticket tax to support its long term operations and construction. It would be a win for everyone. But I wanted it connected right to the Terminal Buildings so if arriving early or between flights - people could also visit. It should have full dining room service, possibly a direct connect to the hotel. Better yet, some of the planes could be positioned right IN the terminal buildings with a "walking museum signage" allowing people to progress through time etc. I will not support its existing operation in the centre of the city - and will not support any tax subsidy at that site. It must move.

  86. #86

    Default

    Well EdmTrekker

    Appreciate your point of view even if we do disagree.

    But bear in mind even if the Museum moved the site and building remains and cannot be developed or removed as it is both a Municipal and Provincial Historic site.

    Tom

  87. #87

    Default

    The topic of moving to YEG has come back up so I thought it best to address it again.

    I wish the folks at EIA the best in their plans but putting the museum there is simply not a top choice.

    Locations that far from a Metro centre simply do not do well and in our case it is magnified.

    a) We are home to more than just the Museum and moving would make all the other organizations homeless..about 1000-1500 members and volunteers.

    Current member organizations of the Facility:
    - (5) Veteran/Veterans related organizations
    - (4) Experimental/Recreational aircraft groups
    - (2) Youth organizations (approx 400kids) Royal Canadian Cadet Orgs (free for kids 12-18 )
    - (1) Air Cadet Archives and Museum (only one in Canada)
    - (1) Organization devoted to restoring a Ventura (RCAF) Patrol bomber, combat vet
    - (1) Civil Air Search and Rescue Association
    (volunteer search and rescue first searchers for all kinds of searches inc Aircraft)

    b) As a private not for profit society (as opposed to a Government Museum) we have to be operationally self sufficent. Which means we rely on our volunteers and their efforts to keep costs in check. Discussions with our volunteers it has been made clear that if they have to make a major commute to volunteer most will not.

    As such we would no longer be economically viable

    c) We provide a venue for a series of not for profit that work with people with physical and mental challenges as a place for work experience and social interaction. A commute to YEG would end these programs.

    d) To a very large extent we act as a seniors drop in centre for many of the members and others. A commute to YEG would end these programs.

    e) We also act as a youth centre serving approx 400 youth through (2) Royal Canadian Cadet programs...that cost the parents zero

    f) Interviews with Educators using our programs have made it clear that the cost of transportation to the current site is the single biggest issue in coming to the Museum.
    Its expensive and a pain...a larger distance will result in fewer schools using the programs.

    Strangely enough out of town, out of region and out of province schools do not have as much concern about the cost and hassle of transport...go figure.

    g) A large portion of our operating income is derived from the rental of a section of our facility for functions as wide ranging as cultural to sales events. Again the distance involved would drastically reduce the income from these operations and make us economically unsustainable.

    h) The biggie...visitors, interviews with Museums in the USA that are on or adjacent to International airports have made one thing very clear. Travelers going to the airport do not impact admissions. Think of how you are when traveling, you get to the airport when you have to to catch your flight, when you get off you immediately head to you destination. The vast majority of people do.

    So from the interviews there is no gain in admissions with an International airport location.

    With the distance involved visitation form the Metro centre drops...making the facility unsustainable economically.

    This is without even getting issues of historic relevance or into the capital costs of such a move which would be massive. (many, many millions)

    From the Airports side there are two big points.
    We would detract from their retail operations and provide no income, in effect costing them money on space they generate no revenue from.

    Our flight ops, because of speed and other operational differences, would be counter productive to revenue traffic, again costing the airport money.

    If International Airports were great visitation drivers for attractions there would be tourism destinations clamoring to get a location at the International Airports.

    EIA does a great job of many things, but a museum location is not one of them.

    Most of these point apply to ANY location a similar distance from the metro area, not just EIA/YEG and researching museums around the world has lead to these conclusions.

    Hope this explains the issues, clears that this is not an anti EIA issue and answers some of the questions.

    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    AAMA/EAHS

    Edit...information added in bold
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 25-05-2010 at 09:01 AM. Reason: Splng, additional information added in bold

  88. #88
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    But bear in mind even if the Museum moved the site and building remains and cannot be developed or removed as it is both a Municipal and Provincial Historic site.
    Exactly. What the hell would you "move it to YEG" people want to do with an empty hangar?

    Airport closes. Museum stays. End of story.

  89. #89

    Default Options under review

    For information...Basically reposted from earlier in this thread with some minor edits (bolded)

    The options under review are:

    Our first plan is to find a way to maintain operations on the existing site
    Challenges:
    Will require a much much larger property footprint,don't know if that will be possible yet and would require cancellation of any flying operations and possibly ground running operations and loss of related events.

    Right now too many questions and not enough answers to know if this is the best route.

    Second is to go (2) sites, the current site as main display, education community programming, youth and senior programming as it is now-second operational aircraft and restoration.
    Challenges:
    No one has pulled this off as a self sustaining operation before. San Diego is a similar size to us and has similar operations split over (2) sites but could not exist without multiple levels of government support.

    Then there is the complication of multiple sites, duplicated services etc etc.

    Villeneuve would be the most likely second site for a lot of operational and cost effective reasons.

    And like above too many questions, not enough answers at this point.

    Third is a full move and this is not a choice we hope we have to make.
    Challenges:

    Loss of historic site
    Loss of relevance as a museum,
    (Our collections mandate is Edmonton first, then Alberta and the North, followed by Canada.)

    Loss of community involvement
    Access to Education programming
    Access for volunteers

    and a whole bunch more make this undesirable

    Last is closure or dissolution
    This of course is the most undesirable and would only be considered if all else is financially impossible.

    There are also contingency plans that are variations on these themes, but no direction can be taken till we know more.

    We are currently dealing with issues of immediate consolidation of operations, damage control and placing some things on hold awaiting more information and canceling some things till we have more information.

    We are following plans made months ago in the event a closure choice was made, these are not knee jerk or scare tactics. We always said we would live with the decision and are...now it is dealing with the decision, getting more information and then making choices.



    Thomas Hinderks
    Executive Director
    Alberta Aviation Museum
    Edmonton Aviation Heritage Society
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 24-05-2010 at 10:20 PM. Reason: Format

  90. #90

    Default

    ^if you are going to have to move it (option 3), then I think probably wisest to go straight to 4, I doubt any of the other airports in Edmonton are central and accessable enough for the museum to be sufficiently supported by the public. I think you would then get a slow painfull death, which would be worse. Perhaps better to pull the plug, the collection I guess, would need to then be dispersed across Canada.

    Whatever happens, good luck, I hope you can somehow keep it at the current site.

  91. #91
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    But bear in mind even if the Museum moved the site and building remains and cannot be developed or removed as it is both a Municipal and Provincial Historic site.
    Exactly. What the hell would you "move it to YEG" people want to do with an empty hangar?

    Airport closes. Museum stays. End of story.
    Move it to Fort Edmonton.....totally doable. Hell I will kick in for it...

  92. #92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bootlegga View Post
    How many visitors will drive all the way to the International to see the Aviation Museum?
    Why? Is it only accessible by plane or something? It won't be moved.

    What a dumb argument.

  93. #93
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    But bear in mind even if the Museum moved the site and building remains and cannot be developed or removed as it is both a Municipal and Provincial Historic site.
    Exactly. What the hell would you "move it to YEG" people want to do with an empty hangar?

    Airport closes. Museum stays. End of story.
    Move it to Fort Edmonton.....totally doable. Hell I will kick in for it...
    I know, but why? What am I missing here? Is the objective here to move any semblance of aviation history away from the former City Centre Airport?

  94. #94
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    853

    Default

    It would do fine at YEG, and the historical building can remain as it is as a static place.

  95. #95

    Default

    Which returns us to my original query to you...

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    As far as thinking that EIA would work...I'd like to know your business case because no one has pulled that off in Canada, the US or Europe with that distance from a Metro Centre with a catch basin of this size without heavy government subisdies.

    And don't bother pointing at Canadian Warplane Heritage...much closer to Metro Centre and a far larger catch basin as well as huge corporate support.

    Additional information on this discussion at:
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...+Museum+future

    Tom
    So whats your business case for the assumption?

    Edit...information added
    "YEG is not a good option and the reasons are listed on the other thread http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...488#post286488 , even for strictly flight ops it is a poor compromise for both the airport and our operations."

    Can we let this one get back on track


    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 25-05-2010 at 09:03 AM. Reason: additional information, link added

  96. #96
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NW Edmonton
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bootlegga View Post
    How many visitors will drive all the way to the International to see the Aviation Museum?
    Why? Is it only accessible by plane or something? It won't be moved.

    What a dumb argument.
    Obviously you have little idea of the business model of museums, otherwise it wouldn't sound dumb.

    Most tourists (and residents) won't drive 30-45 minutes to see a museum located in the YEG. However, one located a few minutes from downtown (by car, bus or LRT) is more accessible and will draw far more visitors than one located out in the sticks. That's why the new art museum was built downtown, not in Leduc.

  97. #97

    Default

    Alot of tourists pass by via QEII and many more pass by going to The Edmonton Airport...
    The aviation museum in Ottawa has no problem surviving away from the many other museum that are centreville Ottawa.

  98. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Alot of tourists pass by via QEII and many more pass by going to The Edmonton Airport...
    The aviation museum in Ottawa has no problem surviving away from the many other museum that are centreville Ottawa.
    Your tourism comment is addressed on the thread noted above.

    And the Canadian Aviation Museum in Ottawa...come on
    55 minute walk from the downtown Mariott, I did it last year at the Smithsonian Convention cause I was too cheap to pay for a cab.

    4km (approx) from the Prime Ministers residence which is on the way
    5km (approx) from the former City Hall

    Oh yes...and 100% Federal government funded

    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 25-05-2010 at 04:08 PM. Reason: underline, additional information

  99. #99

    Default

    Thanks for thoughts Moahunter...

    If option 3 ends up being the route we are forced to we have options.

    We have been contacted by other communities that would love to have the Museum.

    Problem being our members, volunteers and our mandate is here so it is a very undesirable option and would only be pursued as a last ditch to avoid dissolution.

    In my personal opinion
    Tom
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 25-05-2010 at 05:09 PM. Reason: wording added in bold

  100. #100
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    The museum is a gem that cannot be permitted to leave. The amount of effort and money is almost incalculable.This will be a great look see if the city actually cares about a genuine Edmonton Heritage venue. Something to throw at the Mayoral candidates this fall.!!!!
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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