h a l f b a k e r yContrary to popular belief
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
A United Nations resolution obliging all nations with an
indigenous defence industry to preserve - when any
system is withdrawn permanently from service - one fully
functioning exemplar, three working but mothballed
units,
and a stock of spares to keep one unit operating. This
would apply
to aviation, AFV's, small arms etc.
In the case of Naval vessels, one mothballed but
functioning unit would be mandated.
Such preserved examples would be of great value to
future
historians and academics, and would be the core of some
fascinating National collections and museums.
The process of preservation does take place already, but
on an ad-hoc basis, and sometimes all extant examples
are
damaged or lost before someone thinks to save just one
for posterity.
<later>
Nation-states which defeat other nation-states in war
are obliged to preserve examples of the defeated
nation's equipment.
Partway There
http://en.wikipedia..._Regeneration_Group
[MechE, Jul 23 2012]
Faith Hope and Charity
http://www.maltesec...emovement.com/?p=57
[Phrontistery, Jul 23 2012]
[link]
|
| |
[-] Even though it pisses me off personally that I can't find examples of the WW-II experimental aircraft I want to, you'd have to make a museum and that costs money. |
|
| |
If made in sufficient quantities there's usually many small arms kicking around long after their service life is done, eg: Enfield .303, AK-47, Garand M1, original M1911. |
|
| |
// many small arms kicking around long after their
service life is done // |
|
| |
Fair enough. But it's easier to write a "catch all"
clause. |
|
| |
There are vanishingly few specimens of WW2
Japanese aircraft still around, as opposed to the
dozens of Spitfires, P51-D's, C-47's.... there are B-
17's, B29's, and a couple of Lancasters. There are
only ten Mitsubishi Zeros, and only one JU-87. |
|
| |
I think there's only one Spitfire flying these days, ditto A or C type Mustangs... can't swing a dead cat without hitting a C-47 though... are any of those Zeros flying ? |
|
| |
So who's going to pay for all this ? and how ? |
|
| |
'couple of guys in Texas are building and flying new Me-262's (newer engine design though, the old one blew up too much) |
|
| |
I mean I like the idea, I just don't think it's particularly practical: might as well have old models of computers and adding machines as well (just as valid). |
|
| |
// there's only one Spitfire flying these days // |
|
| |
You're thinking of Hurricanes - only 3 left. There
are
dozens of Spits. |
|
| |
// who's going to pay for all this ? and how ? // |
|
| |
The taxpayer, of course. Who else ? |
|
| |
// old models of computers and adding machines
// |
|
| |
Also all brands and types of packaged food; all sizes and styles of clothing and shoes, etc. |
|
| |
It's hard to believe they made so many of those planes, and now there are so few. If only they had surplussed them, I could get an F4U Corsair instead of somethinng like a Cessna 152! |
|
| |
I give this a +, because I'm one of the historians who would love to visit a museum containing all this stuff. |
|
| |
Double post: as for the cost issue, it could all be kept somewhere where the air is dry and the land is cheap - like Sudan maybe? |
|
| |
//There are vanishingly few specimens of WW2 Japanese aircraft still around// Well, I think there was a big effort to get rid of them some time in the mid 1940s. I forget why. |
|
| |
Correct - in 1944/45, and, oddly, carried out largely by the Japanese themselves. |
|
| |
// I'm not sure we have space for one of everything // |
|
| |
You've not been to New Mexico, then ? |
|
| |
//Such preserved examples would be of great value to future historians and academics, and would be the core of some fascinating National collections and museums.// |
|
| |
Actually, there is an irony here to explore. What is of the highest economic value (not the 'greatest value' per se) of historians and academics is ironically the hiddenness of the subjects of their field when combined with a high level of public interest. What's the use in studying ancient warfare technology if the general public can view it all down at the local museum? Where is the discovery and exposition? If every bone of history were exposed for all to see and map out, what would the historian / archeologist do? It is these barriers to entry that preserve the economics of the tradecraft as an economic activity upon which one can build a career. |
|
| |
That's like banning printing, because it puts monks out of work in their scriptoriums .... |
|
| |
The hardware is only a small part of the whole story. |
|
| |
Fair enough.
[tongue_in_cheek] Ban the internet! It puts research librarians out of work! [/tic] |
|
| |
Makes me want to invent a trade so inscrupulous to future generations that it takes an army of otherwise unemployed Ph.D's to unsort what it was all for. And now I'm wondering as to how that doesn't resemble my current job... |
|
| |
I would like to improve upon the OP (but I'm too lazy to make a new topic) - instead of having everything physically in one place, we assume that it already exists somewhere and require that the various museums and organizations keeping these relics submit their data to an online log. This would include tech. specs, pictures, and most importantly where the item is. If they were to move it they would have to notify everybody. |
|
| |
Theye could be an incentive to do this - like financial aid - in exchange for having an item on the list. That, in turn, would have its own responsibilities like secure storage and public study. |
|
| |
as a fan of the history channel, i agree in principle |
|
| |
The UN is dedicated to the non-violent resolution of disputes through diplomacy, not catering to the fetishes of war geeks. [-] |
|
| |
// not catering to the fetishes of war geeks // |
|
| |
Precisely, and that deficiency is something this idea is designed to correct. |
|
| |
would the UN mandate that the UN supply examples of its own weaponry? |
|
| |
The UN doesn't have its own weaponry. |
|
| |
changed to [ ] leaning towards [+] |
|
| |
I'd go for this. I'd also like to see the last member
of any species safely pickled. In relation to this
latter point: |
|
| |
(a) It is clearly unwise to wait until said last
member has passed away, since decay processes
may set in before the pickling jar arrives. |
|
| |
(b) For those species whose conservation status is
unknown, but of which only one member has been
observed, that member should be considered the
last of its kind - better safe than sorry. And hello,
[8th]. |
|
| |
If that's vinegar in that oil drum you've got
tthere [MB], you'd better have a good
explanation. |
|
| |
//Correct - in 1944/45, and, oddly, carried out largely by the Japanese themselves. |
|
| |
Not so oddly, the population was always being told that one more battle and the allies would be defeated, then next it's surrender day. To say they were less than amused with the military would be an understatement. Returning soldiers despised, that kind of thing. A lot of them never made it home at all, rounded up by the soviets and sent to Siberia to die in workcamps. |
|
| |