PDA

View Full Version : TVOC/VTST Q&A session 12 Jan. Unofficial report.


Coastergirl
13th Jan 2008, 22:38
Hi,

I was present at the Vulcan to the Sky Club Members Day on Saturday, and had a very enjoyable day; I came away with renewed excitement about the project despite my previous concerns. I wanted to post on the TVOC forum but it has been offline since early yesterday evening. Is it ever coming back? I wish I'd have had chance to tell people on there what happened at the meeting, as the only other post about the day was from the administrator who felt the day was a complete waste and contained nothing worth reporting at all. On the contrary, I have had trouble keeping my report to just one page... So here goes:

The day started with an open hangar visit from 10 - 12; we arrived and our small group had the pleasure of chatting to a smart-suited Alan Rolfe, the deputy Crew Chief. Amongst other topics covered, was first flight. He explained how she took off using 100% power. Later in the meeting it was stated by Dave Thomas the co-pilot that she only used 90%, so I wonder if perhaps we misunderstood what he had said? Mr Rolfe also said 558 is 'ready to go', 'ready for her next flight', she is a perfectly serviceable aircraft and the only delay now is Marshalls Aerospace. In his opinion, she was going to fly in the next 3 - 4 weeks. He was quite vocal about the scaremongers and voices were raised just slightly that people should realise it is a private company and the questions and badgering are unwelcome. He feels that anyone who has questions should contact them directly and ask them or come down to the hangar and ask.

There were three engines visible on the hangar floor and Alan Rolfe explained that two of them are not fit for flight but are perfectly adequate for taxi-runs and are being donated to XL426 at Southend, on the basis that if TVOC ever have the facility to "overhaul" the engines they would be returned. The third one, which had suffered "sympathetic damage" when the number 4 engine let go, is going to be cut open and have Perspex sides put on so it can be used as an exhibit for the education programme.

At this point, myself and my husband went down to the newly roofed QRA hangar to see a few members of the LPG, where they were working on their Lightning F6, XS-904. It was a total pleasure to see these guys and their two girls again; we saw the shuttering that was being replaced as part of the continuing work to complete the Q-shed. Its all a lot of hard work and I remain, as ever, in total awe of everything they do down there.

We then made our way to the school in Lutterworth, the venue for the afternoon meeting. We had "an exclusive screening" of the PrimeTime First Flight DVD, which is excellent to watch (I don't see how it was exclusive though since we've had our copy for weeks now, but never mind.) After the video, Dr Pleming addressed us all for about 30 minutes or so. Its hard to remember everything he said, so from what we can remember:

General
* Their new strapline is: "Honouring the past, Inspiring the Future".
* Since first flight they have been keeping the pressure on with sponsors etc
* The media coverage etc that the project received following first flight, would have cost over £1 million to 'buy'.
* Interestingly, they will not be allowed to fly over London. Even if they had been ready for last year's Falklands 25th Anniversary they would not have been allowed to, as CAA Permit to fly aircraft are not allowed to overfly London. Even if a special one-off dispensation had been granted, the CAA would have required to underwrite the insurance, coverage required £5 BILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
* In talking about the future home of 558, Dr Rob explained that they were weighing up the pros and cons of each possibility - such as Bruntingthorpe's central location, against the cost of running on an airfield where for every flight they wish to undertake, they have to set up a huge amount of infrastructure to turn it from its primary role as a automobile proving ground in to a suitable airfield - for example they have to hire fire tenders, set up Air Traffic Control, do in-depth FOD sweeps, etc.
* They are concentrating on a Club Membership drive and see this as the way forward for supporters. They are hoping to have a standing order program where people can give regularly, even if it is just £1 a month or £5 a quarter.

Situation
* The remaining test flights are hoped to be completed by April, there will then be a 6 week period where she runs up to display (i.e. practices, I think) and works to get her CAA approval. Assuming this goes well:-
* Target for first display is June 1st, at RAF Cosford airshow AND a private display for supporters at Duxford. This is not confirmed yet.
* He listed her proposed airshow schedule for 2008, and although I can't remember all of them, it included Kemble, Cosford, RIAT Fairford, Waddo, Jersey, SBAC Farnborough and Duxford.
* Goodwood was also listed, although can't remember if it was Festival of Speed or Revival Festival - think it might have been the F o Speed though.
* Garry asked Dr Robert whether there were plans to overfly the British Grand Prix and he replied that yes, they'd love to and are "trying to work something out". The CAA specifies that on a permit to fly, she can't overfly large groups of people, so they are trying to find a way around it. Note - the Red Arrows are off on tour to Canada on 2nd June.
* They are insured to fly in Europe, and under new regs coming in soon when EASA takes over certain areas from CAA, particularly in the Permit to Fly category - this is a distinct possibility (they jokingly commented how they'd love to display at the Moscow Airshow, they still have the flight plan if required!)
* New Education Manager, Miriam Tong, has been on board for a couple of months and there is a new portacabin at Brunty which houses the Education Programme Display.

Financial
* By October, the money had dried up and since then they have been living a hand to mouth existence. They have cut their costs to complete minimum now.
* Two of the major costs that caused this were having to re-manufacture the elevons as the RAF had left them "a bit ropey" (£200K) and the significant corrosion found under the wing skin late on in the restoration (£100K). Neither of these were foreseen, as is the nature of projects on this scale.
* The project will cost £75K per month to run, including the education programme etc.
* EADS have made a one off donation of £150K (I think it was £150K, apologies if it turns out to be £100K)
* Rolls Royce have made a one off donation to a similar tune
* Air BP have agreed to pay for 50% of the project's fuel costs for 2008 and have given a favourable rate for the purchase of the other 50%.
* Marshall Aerospace recognise that TVOC are a charity and understand how they are funded, and as a gesture of goodwill, have effectively (not officially, as it is illegal!) but in reality have written off a 7 figure outstanding debt from TVOC. Dr Rob repeatedly emphasised how grateful they are for the ongoing support of MA.
* MA have, however, said that £100K will be needed in their bank account, before they will continue the test flight programme.
* In terms of sponsors - no names were mentioned and it didn't sound as if they were "just dotting the i's and crossing the t's" with anyone in particular. He did say that "they were going where the money is" and at the moment that seems to be the Middle East, particularly the Gulf. They are "having conversations at the moment" with people in that area who can easily afford TVOC's bills.
* The appearance fee they will be charging for an Airshow display is £8000 per day with possible extras if it is a long way to fly or incurs extra costs. This is a loss leader, as the Trust realise that if they try to charge the actual cost then the airshow would have virtually nothing else displaying! However, they have also asked the airshow organisers that from any increase in numbers or income that can be directly attributed to the Vulcan, they will receive a share of this cash. No numbers were given on this.

Overall, Dr Robert was very easy to listen to, very charming and made me feel everything was going in the right direction. He seemed very passionate about the Vulcan itself but possibly a bit laid back regarding funding for the project. This is possibly not the case at all, it is just how it seemed to me personally.

We then moved on to the final part of the day, the Q & A session. The panel comprised: Barry Masefield - AEO for first flight, Mike Pollitt - pilot, Dave Thomas - Co-Pilot for first flight, Andrew Edmonson - Engineering Manager TVOC, Robert Pleming - CEO TVOC, Kevin 'Taff' Stone - Crew Chief, Colin Marshall - Logistics Manager, and Martin Withers - pilot for Black Buck 1. The audience were invited to ask questions, to any member of the panel. Questions I remember are: (apologies for any incorrect wording, this is all from memory as I did not make any notes! I can't remember the complete answers well enough to report them, sorry)

* To DT: Q: Did you know that the RAF had left her " a bit ropey"?
(Dave gave a hilarious shocked and offended look, everyone laughed as he began her answer)

* To Martin Withers: Q: What was going through your mind as you sat in the cockpit during Black Buck mission?
(answer was very similar to his description in book Vulcan 607, which is a great read by the way)

* To the aircrew: Q: What was going through your mind before and during the first test flight?
(answer was very similar to interviews on the First Flight DVD and in club magazine, Barry Masefield was particularly expressive though and brought a lump to my throat with his account. Both DT and BM described how they communicate with the aircraft before flight - both vocally and by touching her, making sure the affinity is there. BM described how the day before ff, he had seen a slight snag but in conversations with Taff they decided it was safe to go up the next day so on the morning of FF, he had a stern word with XH558 telling her to behave herself... and he said "and she did, she was as sweet as a nut")

* To the aircrew: Q: How did she handle compared to the last time she flew?
(answer was very similar to interviews on the First Flight DVD and in club magazine)

* To DT: Q: How will she be displayed in her new career?
(answer was something along the lines of "gently at first, we will build up. whilst it would be fun and easy to be adventurous with her, but our aim this time around is to be careful with the airframe, to preserve the fatigue life. this is not to say that it won't be great to watch, just that I will have to think a bit more about how i do things.

* To Smiler: Q: What happens to 558 the morning of an airshow?
(engineering answer, can't remember it!)

* To the panel: Q: What plans are in place to replace the "ageing, albeit gently" current aircrew?
(answer was hilarious... Dave Thomas stood up with a stern look on his face and his arm outstretched, and said "Outside!" "I'll see you outside in 15 minutes!" LOL! Everyone laughed. The questioner said "Ah, but I know your wife!" and DT replied "Reeeeeeeally? Right, outside in 3 minutes then!". Then he continued on to answer the question but I was still laughing so didn't really catch it properly. Oops. Essentially, it was that it will be very difficult to replace the crew because the OCU for it wrapped up in 1984. Any suitable pilots would today be at least 48.He mentioned that it is difficult, nigh impossible, to train crew on a Delta planform as it is handles so completely differently to conventional aircraft. So, yes, it is a big problem for them.)

* To Martin Withers Q: How does flying the Vulcan compare to flying 767s?
(answer was that he is currently flying a 767-300 and, empty, she is not that dis-similar and it feels quite like flying a Vulcan. He said that they rarely, however, get the chance to fly her empty and that passengers don't appreciate being thrown around the skies, lol. He is only allowed to pitch to 20 degrees nose up and 30 degrees at bank. He commented on the New Zealand Air Force 757 who flew at Waddington in 2006 (I think it was '06)... he still can't understand how he was able to manoevre the bird the way he did. Of note is that the pilot then went home to NZ and they disbanded the Air Force - there is no longer a RNZAF, lol! Footage of this is up on You Tube at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo7DjIxFnEw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo7DjIxFnEw)

* To the panel: Q: At 2 or 3 day airshows, will she be flying in and out or staying overnight?
(answer was basically that they hope to "park up" overnight and have her as a static display.)

* To Dr Rob: Q: What was your opinion of the Radio 4 interviewer Libby Purves especially after her comments about how her being a lumbering bomber...?
(answer was that she was actually very good, and she does it that way to get a reaction out of people. she was eyeballing us the whole time.) Note: if you missed it, hear it at the BBC's Listen Again section: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/midweek.shtml

* To DT: Q: Why did you only use 90% power to take off?
(answer was basically "Whilst 101% power was available to them, 90% power was selected to limit the chance of asymmetric thrust complications, in the event of a double engine failure. The final 10% power would give an increase in thrust somewhere around 30% which could have potentially been catastrophic if the double engine failure had occurred. Even at 90% she was still airborne in less than 2000ft of runway" He also alluded to the possibility that had they gone off at 101%, it would have been quite easy to accidentally have her going skywards vertically and doing a nice roll off the top [cue everyone laughing]. He rapidly brought us back down to earth though with his comments that "we are not in the business of doing this though, our aim is to fly this aircraft ????, precisely, and safely." (I can't remember what word he used there. It was a particularly profound statement though)

A 4 o'clock finish deadline was fast approaching so the day was wrapped up by Richard Clarke, who very eloquently thanked us all for coming, thanked the panel etc. We all helped put the chairs away, said our goodbyes and set off on our respective journeys homeward. I'm sure we all had other questions we would like to have asked if time or brainpower had allowed - I can think of several now, but then you always can after the event, lol. My overwhelming opinion is that it is not all doom and gloom, there is a future in the skies for our beloved Vulcan, but I still think TVOC and VTST could improve the way they communicate with the masses. Overall, really glad we went and feel proud to be member of the Vulcan to the Sky Club. :D

I'm pooped after typing all that, lol, but I feel it is important that I put it all down on paper now so I can remember it. This is in no way intended to replace any official report that will hopefully be published, and is purely my own recollections from the day that I am sharing. :ok:

Regards
Coastergirl

airsound
14th Jan 2008, 07:20
Totally brilliant, Coastergirl - thank you very much for all your effort.

Your report is probably a lot easier to read than any official diatribe might be - perhaps there's a challenge to official report-writers there.....

airsound

XA909
14th Jan 2008, 09:22
Forum stll closed. Is this censorship:confused::ugh:

XA909

forget
14th Jan 2008, 09:31
He was quite vocal about the scaremongers and voices were raised just slightly that people should realise it is a private company and the questions and badgering are unwelcome.

Interesting position. :confused: I thought this was a charity, with lottery (public) funding. Don't such companies have to publish their accounts?

BEagle
14th Jan 2008, 11:30
Not sure WTF is going on with the VTTS website - it's been up and down all morning.

I understand that the current software is too buggy and is being changed.

I note that there seems to have been a purge of the "We await answers to our questions" thread.........:oh:

Mike51
14th Jan 2008, 12:47
"Marshall Aerospace recognise that TVOC are a charity and understand how they are funded, and as a gesture of goodwill, have effectively (not officially, as it is illegal!) but in reality have written off a 7 figure outstanding debt from TVOC."

I wonder what the local press will make of this 'gesture of goodwill' the next time Marshall's announce lay-offs. I don't suppose this million quid will buy them much goodwill there.

pr00ne
14th Jan 2008, 14:14
HHMmm.................

"MA have, however, said that £100K will be needed in their bank account, before they will continue the test flight programme."


Er, isn't that a bit of a show stopper for an organisation that has been "living hand to mouth" since October on their own admission?

Is this on top of the 75k needed per month?

Winco
14th Jan 2008, 15:06
One wonders why, if MA want £100k, they didn't simply write off £900,000 instead of the £1,000,000 ?? How very odd (maybe it's an accounting thing!)

It is sad that after all the 'crowing' that took place several months ago, the project seems to be right back at square one, which is dissapointing to say the least, especially for those of us who have given quite generously over the years.

I note the comment about the aircraft overflying London, and the problems of it being a 'Permit aircraft' The thing is, this is very common knowledge indeed, and I am amazed that those involved at TVOC didn't forsee this well in advance. It demonstrates a lack of 'real world' aviation rules and regulations to say the least. Yes, there are always dispensations available, but they are always at a cost.

Perhaps the most concerning comment from the minutes was the fact that DT was 'quite vocal about the scaremongers' and that 'voices were raised just slightly that people should realise it is a private company and the questions and badgering are unwelcome'

I can understand him being critical of scaremongers, but he must realise that the VOC has not handled this well at all, and people have an absolute right to ask questions, irrespective of how difficult or embarrassing they may be.(after all, they have put a great deal of money into this project) There has been so much rubbish and nonesence spoken by people involved in this project, that the general public will understandably ask awkward questions, and to get upset by that is a little bit arrogant I would suggest.

There is also this never-ending on-going question of funding and I recall several years ago mneeting DT at an airshow where he stated publicy, that sponsorship was 'NOT A PROBLEM' He said that there were sponsors just waiting until the aircrafts first flight before they come on oboard. So where are they now Dave? And why has the monthly operating cost gone up by a whapping 25%? Is it another 'oversight' by those at Brunters?? Oh dear, it's all looking pretty sad again isn't it?

The Winco

Al R
14th Jan 2008, 15:56
Thanks Coastergirl, I enjoyed that.

deltapapa
14th Jan 2008, 16:28
Hi All this is my first posting & I can't seem to find a quote button so here goes.

Winco

Is was NOT DT that said about the scaremongering or the VOC being a public limited company - It was the deputy Crew Chief. So your comments about arrogance are aimed at the wrong person, I know I was there. Read it again.

As for quoting sponsership waiting in the wings it is what he was told by those in authority.

AND as an aside he has always stated that the there should be more info forthcoming.

Coastergirl
14th Jan 2008, 17:14
Hello again,

I disagree with the people who are voicing that we are back to square 1. At square 1 she wasn't even in an airworthy condition, let alone having undertaken her maiden test flight, so we are certainly not at square 1 in my opinion. We may not be at goal yet, but we are well on the way! :ok:

As the previous poster pointed out, it was most certainly NOT Dave Thomas who commented on the scaremongering. DT only ever voiced opinions about first flight, aircrew and future display details, never about the company or finances. A lot of care was taken when I wrote my report to make sure I did not get people mixed up or misquote anyone. Please ensure you read thoroughly before commenting; no-one needs more factually incorrect ranting. :ugh:

My personal opinion is that there have been some less than brilliant decisions made regarding communication and fundraising etc but I continue to be hopeful and confident that the project will win through and we will all be enjoying some Olympus howl this summer! :D

Regards
Coastergirl

airsound
14th Jan 2008, 19:13
Coastergirl - you might want to put Winco (sorry, ‘The Winco’) on your ‘ignore’ list. He - I’m assuming ‘he’, but it could be ‘she’ - is one of a small-ish group of people who have been unremittingly negative about the whole project since, in my experience at least, summer/autumn 2006. That was one of the times, you may remember, when the dream nearly died, only to be revived by huge efforts on the part of many people, in the face of constant nay-saying on PPRuNe by The Winco and a couple of others.

Then, in the run-up to the first flight, more negativity, never anything positive.

Since the first flight actually happened, nothing heard from Wincoland, no congratulations, no happiness to assuage the previous gloom. You might almost have imagined The Winco waiting with bated breath for something to go wrong.

Well, now he/she’s happy again, having found a few more things to whinge about.

Personally, I’m hoping that gloom from Wincoland is actually a good sign - it has been in the past.

airsound

Stratofreighter
14th Jan 2008, 19:19
Thanks very much for your effort Coastergirl! :ok:

Winco
14th Jan 2008, 21:39
deltapapa,

Thank you for the clarification, and in view of your comments, I offer my apologies to Dave, however, let me just quote to you what is written above:

'Later in the meeting it was stated by Dave Thomas the co-pilot that she only used 90%, so I wonder if perhaps we misunderstood what he had said? He also said 558 is 'ready to go', 'ready for her next flight', she is a perfectly serviceable aircraft and the only delay now is Marshalls Aerospace. In his opinion, she was going to fly in the next 3 - 4 weeks. He was quite vocal about the scaremongers and voices were raised just slightly that people should realise it is a private company and the questions and badgering are unwelcome. He feels that anyone who has questions should contact them directly and ask them or come down to the hangar and ask'

I'm sure that you would agree, that the implication is that DT said it!

airsound, thank you for yet another pointless post, you really are a complete arrogant fool!

THE Winco

Coastergirl
14th Jan 2008, 22:00
Winco,

I hadn't seen it from that point of view, I apologise. I have edited my original report to make it clearer who I was referring to at that point in the paragraph so that we may avoid anyone else coming to the same conclusion as you.

Kind regards
Coastergirl :O

deltapapa
15th Jan 2008, 07:20
Winco

Your apology is graciously accepted & I shall pass it on when I see him

Thank you

iggie99
15th Jan 2008, 08:47
Thanks for that CG, very nicely done:D

Onwards & upwards then:ok:

Cheers

iggie99

forget
15th Jan 2008, 08:54
'Onwards & upwards' :confused::confused: .... after reading that?

Are you a Newcastle supporter as well?

airsound
15th Jan 2008, 09:03
Winco, old bean, I apologise for even suggesting that anyone should ignore you - especially as I shall certainly not be doing that. I shall continue to peruse your posts with, erm, fascination.

As for my post being pointless - well, I guess that’s for others to decide. My point, in case I hadn’t made it clear to you, is that you have previous form in these matters, and I felt that it was time to remind ourselves of that.

I’ve looked back, and I can’t find a single post of yours that deals at all positively with XH558 affairs. Indeed, when things are not going too well, you are at your most vocal. On the, admittedly rarer, occasions when things are on an upswing, and are occasionally brilliant, you seem notable only for your deep silence. If you can demonstrate otherwise, I shall gladly withdraw.

You are, of course, fully entitled to your views, and there’s nothing to stop you airing them here. However, I do feel that, in view of PPRuNe’s wide and influential readership, your constant carping probably does the project harm.

Before you leap in to slag me off again, perhaps I should say that I have no problem with criticism in general of the XH558 project We all know it often deserves it - and indeed, the precarious, up-and-down nature of the whole thing often makes it extremely hard to cope with. But I believe that the regular drip of unremitting criticism can only do harm.

Over

airsound

Winco
15th Jan 2008, 09:17
airsound,

let me firstly begin by apologising for calling you an arogant fool last night. I'm afraid that I disliked your portrayal of me to others, but nevertheless, it didn't warrant name calling on my part.

That said, you must stop this bitching at people who raise valid points and comments, simply because it doesn't fall into your line of thinking. I have no idea if you are an ex Vulcan nav or what your background is, but I was a Vulcan captain, and I believe that I do know a little bit more about the aircraft than you do. With that, I also know a little bit about Civil Aviation also (my current job requires that!) and hereby lies my problem with the VOC organisation, I don't believe they have someone at the helm who is knows these things, or at least has the gumption to ask about them. The Falklands flypast is a point in question.

There was so much publicity pushed out about the aircraft leading the Falklands celebrations that it would have been reasonable for the general public to believe that it was a forgone conclusion - 558 would lead the flypast! Infact I was at a meeting early last year (I think) where a certain lady stood up and categorically announced that the aircraft would:
a) definately lead the flypast in London
b) definately be at Waddington Airshow
c) definately be at RIAT

We all know the reason why they didn't happen, but it now comes to light that the aircraft couldn't have flown over the city because it was on a permit! Did they not know that? Did no-one ask the question?

Anyone, even remotely in the Civil Aviation world knows the rules governing Permit aircraft and flying over built up areas. They should also know the regulations about flying over London especially. And yet it would appear that this came as a bit of a shock to TVOC? Why is that? Did no one ever consider asking the CAA what the rules were, when the proposal was being banded around? That is my point. It is not being run well, is it? I know they are all volunteers, but that should not matter.

This is just one instance of many which calls into the question the running of the VOC, the organaisation and leadership. I know you are a good friend of Dr Plemming, and I don't have an issue with that, but you are an ex staff officer so let me ask you this... 'friendship aside, do you think the VOC is being run well?'

I'm standing by for the incoming flak!
Regards
The Winco