Rumour Control has it that the time team are planning a dig at the site of the old RAF Kenley. Could any of you knowledgable types either deny or confirm please?
__________________________
We really have dinosaurs today, without any question. You just need the right weather conditions, as I see it, to get huge creatures. And in the ocean, of course, we have huge creatures....this is where the plesiosauruses seem to be today, and perhaps also this fire breathing dragon is still down there -- very rare, but occasionally there.
--Rev. Walter Lang Founder, Bible-Science Association
The thing with time team is that they rush through in 3 days what would take proper archaeologists a year, so they are obviously spoiling things. As for digging up a WWII airfield, it better not be because a housing developer wants to build some lego style houses on it, such areas should be preserved in memory of those who were killed both on the airfield and flying from it.
Strange. Might be a browser problem? I saw it perfectly on another box earlier today, but here I can open the pdf but with all the images missing. Anyway, the document explains the importance of the site, how any development must be sympathetic, and how the important features are to be protected.
This is an emotive subject, rather like a developer wanting to build on a civil war battlefield in the UK, or on a WWI battlefield in France or Belgium.
A lot of the old BoB airfields cover quite large areas, and have become enveloped in the urban sprawl. Their importance is fading in the mists of time, with many of the younger generation knowing nothing about them anyway. It's not good enough to just bulldoze these old airfields, then naming a couple of roads after WWII pilots.
........................................................................ Support the PAS Go with the FLO
I think kids should be made to watch Battle Of Britain and taken to Biggin Hill or Duxford to put things in scale for them. I hear that WW2 has been removed from school history classes; it should be put right back if you ask me.
But how long do you leave something before it becomes available to meet public needs (such as housing or transport)? Britain has a very rich heritage and many places and areas are sites of historic significance. Should we never build on old battlegrounds or airfields? Or set, say, a one hundred year limit? We've discussed before the digging up and reburial of remains from previously consecrated ground which is surely a more relevant issue than a place from where people set off and might not have returned. When do the needs of remembrance outweigh the needs of those living today?
Yeah but if it wasn't for those airfields and the brave people who worked and flew from them, we would all be wearing leather pants and eating shed loads of funny sausages. The people who fought in the great battles asked one thing; to be remembered... I dont think that putting up some stupid looking house on their barracks is really very fitting. Especially as wars with Germany are no longer taught in schools.
My father was a para in WWII and his health is still affected following his experiences, both because of being shot in the chest, shoulder and elbow and being a PoW.
So please don't think I don't have the greatest respect for our veterans.
But I still ask when do we let the remembrances and respect for our history take second place to the needs of those actually living today?
I don't think there is any danger of WWII being underplayed in schools. Children I know cover it a number of times throughout their time at school.
As for building on airfield, it is a difficult issue. Once a barracks or airfield goes out of use it is hard to find another use. Any building or space unless it has a use becomes derelict very soon. And do we save all, some, or just one example? Saving examples is important, but it has to be weighed up against other important needs. How we include non-tangible considerations such as historic importance in the planning process is something many wrestle with. I know a number of people trying to save particular building, coming up with reasons why the historic nature should outweigh the developers desire to knock down. I suppose it can only come to each case considered on its merits.
Remembrance can come in various guises. One thing I've noticed in the past 25 years is that Remembrance Day is actually observed more now than it was when i was young, and often in addition to Remembrance Sunday. There are lots of other ways people can be remembered, such as the many war memorials. However many of these are passive, they sit is a corner of a building or in the side of a road, but how many know anything about the people listed?
I always think that the best way we can honour people and the memory of their deeds is in our hearts and minds, not simply by preservation of tangible property.
