RAF Cosford no longer getting a VC10?

[Skipness One Echo]

It's being reported elsewhere that XR808, the VC10 earmarked for preservation at the RAF Museum, Cosford is instead heading to Bruntingthorpe next week. Anyone know what's the story on this?
https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Little-VC10derness/205305179480938?hc_location=stream
News (http://www.vc10.net/news.html)

[scarecrow450]

Believe its various factors, correct fire cover, headwind and trees on the approach.

[aviate1138]

If it could get into Brooklands surely it could make Cosworth?

[teeteringhead]

There was a low approach and overshoot at Cosford a week or so ago - maybe that illuminated the Too Difficult caption.

[JW411]

Fascinating; BA managed to get a 707 into Cosford and the great selling point of the VC-10 always was that it could handle airports that the 707 couldn't ever handle.

I simply cannot believe that the RAF cannot get a VC-10 into Cosford.

The whole thing smells of LMF or have Elfin Safety taken over our Armed Forces and, if so, haven't our leaders got any balls any more?

[JW411]

In fact, having thought about this for a few minutes, BA managed to fly VC-10 G-ARVM into Cosford without any difficulty.

One of my old Argosy mates (the late Pete Moore) flew the last Vanguard G-APEP into just a few hundred metres of remaining runway at Brooklands. He told me that he and Garry practiced at EMA at light weights with FULL reverse and MAX braking on touch down before doing the deed.

After all, the aircraft is never going to fly again.

I have also accomplished "one way" arrivals in the past when I was in the RAF so I don't understand the problem.

Perhaps, with all the outsourcing that goes on nowadays in the military, we could ask BA to have another go?

[scorpion63]

"haven't our leaders got any balls any more?"

Hit the nail on the head there then!

[Exascot]

JW we will get together and do it. We just need a flight engineer. I have many hundreds of hours on 808. Just at JNB on the way back home to Bots will look at my log books when I get back and see what adventures we had together.

[Wander00]

Get Ryanair to fly it in - they thumped today's arrival into La Rochelle pretty hard!

[DaveReidUK]

Get the Daily Mail on the case. I can just see the headline now:

"Runway is long enough for British Airways, but too short for us, says RAF" :O

[Proplinerman]

"One of my old Argosy mates (the late Pete Moore) flew the last Vanguard G-APEP into just a few hundred metres of remaining runway at Brooklands. He told me that he and Garry practiced at EMA at light weights with FULL reverse and MAX braking on touch down before doing the deed."

A superb piece of flying, captured on film and now on You Tube: Vickers Vanguard lands at Brooklands -- The incredible story - YouTube

[WH904]

If the story is true, it's an utter disgrace. Clearly, Cosford can take a VC10 easily enough and many of the museum aircraft flew in directly without any difficulty (including the BA VC10 as has been mentioned). If there is now some issue, then it's some ghastly H&S problem or insurance, or some other modern-day regulation.

What have we come to? An aircraft designed for short runways can no longer land on a short runway. The RAF Museum can only collect aircraft providing that they're small enough, and the VC10 is not worthy of preservation because it's simply too big?

Where's my passport and where's the taxi...

[Airclues]

I have flown several 747's into Cambridge when Marshall's were fitting the new IFE. I always managed to stop before taxiway D which goes to the Marshall's hangar. The landing distance to taxiway D is 1100m. The LDA at Cosford is 1141m.
I've flown both the VC10 and 747 (in fact, I've only flown the VC10 and 747) and I know that the VC10 can land on a shorter runway than the 747.

[WH904]

It's a very sad business. It was barely plausible that the Nimrod wasn't able to fly in to Cosford but the VC10 is just absurd, especially when it's already been done quite easily before.

But it raises a question over the RAF Museum's position. If this issue is going to affect the aircraft types that are preserved then where will it end? Will future exhibits be turned down in this fashion, just because Cosford's runway is perceived as being too short? What kind of logic is this for a nationally-important museum?

[ratpackgreenslug]

JW411

In fact, having thought about this for a few minutes, BA managed to fly VC-10 G-ARVM into Cosford without any difficulty.

One of my old Argosy mates (the late Pete Moore) flew the last Vanguard G-APEP into just a few hundred metres of remaining runway at Brooklands. He told me that he and Garry practiced at EMA at light weights with FULL reverse and MAX braking on touch down before doing the deed.

After all, the aircraft is never going to fly again.

I have also accomplished "one way" arrivals in the past when I was in the RAF so I don't understand the problem.

Perhaps, with all the outsourcing that goes on nowadays in the military, we could ask BA to have another go?



All well and good, sounds wonderful. I've also thought about this for a few minutes - didn't your late chum drop it in short and end up rolling through the rough at Brooklands?

Big holes in the ground, big holes in the approach briefing, big holes in its execution.

All's well that ends well could I suppose be used as a defence, but this particular crew were nevertheless very lucky. The arrival could easily have been something of an even greater embarrassment.

And before you ask (as in the past you have) : could I have done better?

Yes. I'd have landed on the runway. But I wouldn't have worn my cap for the post-op pictures. Pilots don't need a cap to be a pilot - but they do need to land on the runway and stay out of the rough. There are no excuses.

[WH904]

Have to say that I was surprised at the Youtube clip when I first saw it. Showing the landing at Brooklands was great but it did seem a little ill-advised to show how the pilot had under-shot, and then to have the crew proudly posing beside the tree holes was even more questionable. I guess it's symptomatic of all the Youtube, Facebook and Twitter stuff that people post... and then realise that they've just broadcast/published. I never understand how people don't seem to grasp this.

As for the VC10, I think it would be fascinating to hear the official reasons why it cannot be landed at Cosford. The runway is within the VC10's specs, one VC10 has already landed there easily, they can provide crash/rescue crew... so what, exactly, is their excuse? One assumes it's some awful H&S ruling but I'd love to know what.

[Proplinerman]

Yes, I think it would have been better if the Vanguard clip on You Tube had not included the bit about the holes-detracts from an otherwise super piece of film of the final landing of the very last of one of my favourite aircraft of all time.

[SpringHeeledJack]

In the video version I saw a few years back, the crew could be heard saying was it such a good idea them being filmed near the holes and the cameraman (?) saying 'don't worry you're amongst friends'. As to who 'could' have landed on the runway or not, we will never know, you're only as good as you are on the day.

It's a sad day that the VC10 is coming to the end of it's working life, that's one thing that we can all agree on.



SHJ

[ancientaviator62]

Did not the vandals at Hendon scrap a Beverley ?

[Fareastdriver]

From what I can gather the RAF did not relinquish ownership of the Beverley. As they did not own it Hendon were unable to take any action to prevent it corroding away. It eventually became structurally dangerous and the was when it was scrapped.

It was a pity; I knew the bloke who flew it in to what was effectively a building site.

[Proplinerman]

"Did not the vandals at Hendon scrap a Beverley ?"

Yes-and right in front of the museum, where it stood; a fine first impression for visitors! Thank goodness I got there in the 1980's and was therefore able to record the Beverley for posterity-one of only two I've seen, the other one being the sole survivor of the type, now at Fort Paull, near Hull. It has been preserved because of the efforts of a private owner, not the RAF.

The above all said however, I was at Cosford a few weeks ago, my first visit since they got rid of some of the airliners (BA's fault, not the RAF) and built the Cold War Jets Hall; and I'm pleased to be able to say that it remains a really excellent museum, in my view. They had even, somehow, managed to get the Belslow (as I've seen it referred to here) indoors! But thank goodness I visited it before the airliners went.


I'll be going to Hendon on 10th August, for my first visit in many years (bar a short one in 2008, when unfortunately I wasn't very well on the day). I expect to be impressed.

Strange how these threads always end up drifting!

[cyflyer]

Proplinerman, me, as someone who lives abroad now, but manages to visit the RAF Museum at least every year, and considers it my 'home' museum, yes you will be impressed. There have been many changes past few years and its always a pleasure to leisurely walk round the museum. Most notable change, the hall housing the Sunderland which is now glass fronted. I was not impressed a few years back when access to one gallery in the BoB hall, housing the Stuka etc, was of limits due to 'Lack of staff'. Oh, and expect to pay for the car park now. Predict how many hours you will be to pre-pay for the parking !!!!!! I also remember the Beverley there many years ago. At least you can have a cup of tea very near the aircraft as they have placed the cafeteria 'open plan' amongst the aircraft. Will be there next month also.

[ICM]

I trust I might be forgiven for drifting the thread back towards the final disposal of XR 808. I have to accept that I am nowadays retired and remote from the decision making in this case, but it is frustrating to have been aware of an understanding, if not a plan, that this original C Mk 1 airframe would go to Cosford for (I'm sure) the better part of 2 years now and to see that dissolve in such an unimpressive manner in these last days. Back then, of course, the expectation was that the fleet would have been run down by now, and I'm not sure if I want to know that a good headwind on a day earlier in the year might have tipped the balance!

Having flown both the Argosy and Belfast airframes at Cosford, and probably the Meteor NF14 too, I had hoped that a VC10 would be added to the list there, but it seems that's not to be. Much as I loved both of those transport types, 808 has more years of RAF service than both put together, and almost half as long again as I had. It seems such a shame that the RAF Museum will not have an example of this glorious British aircraft on longterm display - I really could wish this had been better set up in the first place.

[sisemen]

There are some soft cocks entrusted with the RAF heritage. Shame on them.

[Rev1.5]

Wouldn't it be funny if "BOB" had and emergency of some sort on the way to Bruntingthorpe and had to divert to....Cosford:8

[JW411]

Yozzer:

"The VC10 is not flying into Cosford because CAS will not sign off a landing that is marginal."

Are you really telling us that the RAF has shrunk so much that it takes the signature of the Chief of the Air Staff to authorise the delivery of XR808 to Cosford?

Has he got nothing else to do? What has happened to the layers of responsibility that existed when I served in the RAF. I find this quite mind-boggling. This should be done at Squadron or Group level.

Surely there must be dozens of volunteers in 10/101 Squadrons absolutely dying to fly the aircraft into Cosford?

If the CAS really is stopping this relatively simple exercise, then maybe his title should be changed to CYAS.

[WE992]

JW411

Unfortunately so. However it still has enough manpower to have an Air Commodore and 2 Gp Capts stationed at Brize Ntn to oversee a fleet of less than 50 aircraft.

Having flown many hours in the back of 808 I for one am saddened that it no longer seems to be bound for Cosford.

[WH904]

I think it's utterly ridiculous and CAS should be ashamed of himself. It's "Jobsworthism" at its very worst.

It's doubly annoying that Cosford disposed of a VC10 with the supposed knowledge than a RAF example would replace it in due course. One can only hope that the aircraft can be dismantled at Bruntingthorpe and transported to Cosford by road, but if it is going to Bruntingthorpe, one assumes it's going there to be scrapped like all the others, although perhaps it might be an opportunity to save a "proper" RAF VC10 rather than the one that the folks at Bruntingthorpe are planning to save?

But no matter how you look at it, the saga is shambolic and a disgrace. Another example of the RAF Museum being rather too selective in deciding what's worth preserving and what isn't, and a brilliant example of how even a CAS can be an utter prat! Shame it's too late to get the media on board to highlight this shameful saga. Not much point in even trying to get the aviation media on board as they've been toothless for years!

[sisemen]

Pulford's a Wessex and Chinook man. He's probably really scared of normal aeroplanes.

You'd probably look in vain for a pair of cojones.

[esscee]

Time for a new CAS maybe? An AC and 2 Gp Cpt all based at BZZ to look after < 50 aircraft, proves what many have thought for a few years, far too many high up with their snouts in the trough, how can anyone make a decision when constantly being watched over your shoulder. To prove my point, highest rank in the Israeli Air Force is a Brigadier General.

[Proplinerman]

Re the IAF: and you should see their (magnificent) museum: Visit to the Israeli Air Force Museum at Hatzerim, 18th March 2008 - a set on Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48975048@N06/sets/72157632674307475/with/5653077097/)

As you'll see, amongst c140 aircraft, they have 8(!) Meteors, Spitfires, Mustangs, Migs, propliners-and even some flyers.

[ICM]

It has been claimed on a parallel thread that practice landings have been made with the aircraft stopping with some 300' to spare:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/520125-cojones-needed-cas-2.html#post7964306

If this is so, my dismay at the seeming lack of proper forward planning for an arrival at Cosford deepens. When it was first envisaged that 808 should go there, the runway length (3890') was known, together with the possibility of obstacle clearance issues on approach. A bit of work with the ODM would, I'm sure, have revealed that the aircraft at a stripped-down weight could be stopped, as appears to have been proved, but that there would never have been much of an additional margin. That would have been sufficient for most folk and it sufficed for delivery of the ex-Sultan of Oman's aircraft onto a similarly limited runway at Brooklands in 1987, with the crew having to add power to taxi off. XR 808 and its sister aircraft lived their service lives by the ODM and if the ODM calculations were considered insufficient in this final case, then it would have been better for any plan to go to Cosford to have been abandoned at the outset. I cannot claim to know what all of the surrounding circumstances might have been but, if there were real misgivings at the operational level, these were never likely to have been resolved by pushing the matter upwards - 'No' was always the likely answer.

But I repeat, this should all have been sorted out ages ago - long before there was any question of CAS' manhood being called into question. It's a very sorry end to a most creditable era in RAF history.

[Jetset 88]

Having myself taken the Omai VC10 into Brooklands back in 1987, I was saddened to read that Cosford cannot be achieved and an RAF VC10 will not be preserved there. I forget the exact LDA length at Brooklands but have measured it on Google Earth and compared it to Cosford. They seem, within about 5 mtres or so, to be about the same length:1065m or in old money about 3.550 ft. Yes, they did have to cut trees down on the approach and the whole event was carried out within Perf A requirements. We even had to put power on to taxi to the runway turn-off. One can only assume that the rules/regs have changed since "my day". Great shame. Apart from Tiger Moths, Dakotas and Canberras, has there been another aircraft that flew continuously for 47 years?

[Phileas Fogg]

Apart from Tiger Moths, Dakotas and Canberras, has there been another aircraft that flew continuously for 47 years

De Havilland Chipmunk ... God bless it ... Still in military service with BBMF.

[Flying Lawyer]

Interesting that the CAS is being criticised for the decision when:

it's not known with certainty whether he made it,
if he did, his reasons,
if he did, what information and advice he was given by those with VC10 expertise and experience,
nor
if it was a CAS decision, which CAS.

esscee Time for a new CAS maybe? When was the decision made?
The current CAS has only been in post since last Tuesday or Wednesday.

ICM It has been claimed on a parallel thread that practice landings have been made with the aircraft stopping with some 300' to spareA good example of broadly the same thing being said - but with a completely different implication. From the parallel thread:The guys on 101 squadron did quite a lot of practice landings at Brize for it, but it (apparently) only made it with 300 ft spare, so decided to chin it off!

sisemen Pulford's a Wessex and Chinook man. He's probably really scared of normal aeroplanes.
You'd probably look in vain for a pair of cojones.If the decision was made by the CAS, whether current (Wessex, Chinook and former AOC 2 Group, commanding Air Transport, AAR and ISTAR forces) or former (Jaguar and Tornado), is it likely that he would have made the decision without considering reports/recommendations by those with directly relevant experience?


FL

[Airclues]

The fuselage of G-ARVM was moved from Cosford to Brooklands by road. Is it not possible to remove the wings, fin and engines, move XR808 to Cosford, then re-assemble?
Of the 70 mile journey, 90% is on motorways (M1, M6, M6Toll, M54).
If the RAF Museum needs to raise funds for this then I will be the first to contribute.

[Evalu8ter]

Flying Lawyer,
Exactly!

Sisemen,
'Pulford's a Wessex and Chinook man. He's probably really scared of normal aeroplanes.

You'd probably look in vain for a pair of cojones.'

I don't know what plank you drove when in the service, but I'd be real careful saying that around the SH force nowadays; more combat experience (not lobbing off SS or PW from ML miles away but seeing and being hit by SA, HMG, RPG and MANPADS) and more 'proper' decorations than any other part of the RAF. The recent conflicts have seen a shift in the risk taken by our crews; go to Odiham and ask to see the 'Chinook Room' in the O Mess and see for yourself...

[yorky66]

VC 10 XR808 was reported to have flown into Bruntingthorpe this morning and will eventually be roaded into Cosford.

[dolphinarium]

I saw this a/c do an approach on 15 at BHX earlier today-a lovely sight!
I understood that it was going to Brunty for keeps-is it really coming to Cosford or is this a rumour?

[Proplinerman]

"VC 10 XR808 was reported to have flown into Bruntingthorpe this morning and will eventually be roaded into Cosford."

If this is correct then I think it's fine-at least Cosford is going to get another VC-10 (a military one this time), one way or another. An absolute "must" for the RAF to preserve one of the longest serving type (I think) in its history.

[DaveReidUK]

Last Flight of a Standard/C.1 VC-10. XR808 arriving Bruntingthorpe 29/07/13 - YouTube

[joy ride]

Great video...what a sound! Is that the last ever flight by a 10? If so it's a sad day, but what a career!

[Vick Van Guard]

XR808 is staying at Bruntinghthorpe as a ground runner according to the people there this morning.

I can't see how one could be moved by road without hacking it to pieces.

[SpringHeeledJack]

I'm sure that it was mentioned somewhere on pprune that the last flight(s) will be in September, with some event at Brize Norton ? Does this mean that Cosford will now not get a VC10, or is there a new plan in place ?



SHJ

[Jhieminga]

Interesting that the CAS is being criticised for the decision when:

it's not known with certainty whether he made it,
if he did, his reasons,
if he did, what information and advice he was given by those with VC10 expertise and experience,
nor
if it was a CAS decision, which CAS.

Thank you for a refreshingly reasonable post FL! While I'm certainly not happy about the current VC10 retirement plans a lot of people are very quick to point fingers and we need to keep our heads cool here. Shouting and pointing won't resolve anything.


Whoever decided not to land XR808 at Cosford most likely had a good reason for it, and since neither of us was going to be at the pointy end of the aircraft in question, we don't get a say in this.


ICM made a good point:
But I repeat, this should all have been sorted out ages ago - long before there was any question of CAS' manhood being called into question. It's a very sorry end to a most creditable era in RAF history.
Talk of Bob going to Cosford has been around for quite some time, without checking I'll echo the two years that have been mentioned. It would have saved us all a lot of shouting and fussing if the plans had been finalised long before today. Right now we've got one party stating that XR808 will stay at Brunty and will be kept live, conditional on the paperwork and funding, and we've got claims of XR808 being roaded to Cosford. Also we've had the announcement a while ago that ZD241 would stay at Brunty to be kept live. What will happen now?


I really feel that the RAF Museum should have a VC10 to commemorate its 47 years of service. This VC10 would have a secure future and would be preserved in a museum condition. Not everyone agrees with keeping aircraft idle in a hangar or on an airfield which is why there is also room for a 'runner' at Bruntingthorpe. Whether this should be another C1K or a different version, I don't care but if we can achieve two preserved military VC10s then we've got the best of both worlds.


Let's hope that we can get to this point.

[RileyDove]

Proplinerman -The scrapping of the airliners at Cosford was as much the fault of the RAFM as BA. BA provided a large amount of funding for years to sustain the collection -the RAFM benefited from admission fees and additions to its collection that it didn't have to pay for ! It should be pointed out that there wouldn't be a Britannia (308F) on display at Cosford if it wasn't for BA but its always easier to blame BA rather than see the RAFM wanting to clear room for it's 'exciting' new building project!

[Albert Driver]

I would gently remind everyone that no VC10 (or any other aeroplane) is "preserved" until it is permanently under cover.
The slow but deadly disintegration outdoors of the last surviving BOAC VC10s should serve as a reminder of this.

RAF Museum or not, Cosford seems unable to offer covered space for one in the forseeable future.
The last RAF VC10s might therefore be safer elsewhere in the long run.

[JW411]

Well, they could always sink one on the Goodwin Sands and go back for it in 70 years time.

[Vick Van Guard]

Did the BA VC 10's retain all four thrust reversers?

[Proplinerman]

Riley Dove: interested to see your comment, as I had always suspected that the building of the "Cold War jets hall" at Cosford, coinciding as it did with the removal or scrapping of several of the airliners, was no coincidence.

[Albert Driver]

Did the BA VC 10's retain all four thrust reversers?

No, they did not.

[WH904]

I agree that blaming CAS directly might be unwise, at it might not have been his decision. Point is, whoever made the decision ought to be ashamed of himself! I fail to see how anyone could argue that a VC10 could not land safely at Cosford when the aircraft's performance clearly indicates that it could, and as we know, one VC10 already did land there safely.

But I also agree that even if Cosford did acquire a VC10, it wouldn't necessarily be "preserved" there. Clearly, it would be doomed to stay outdoors as the Cold War Museum doesn't have room for anything new (possibly its greatest fault - it's never going to be any different no matter how many times you visit it). Maybe there is some hope of a new hall being built sometime in the distant future but somehow I doubt it, therefore any new acquisitions are likely to languish outdoors for a long time, if not forever. We know from experience that sooner or later, the powers-that-be at Cosford will decide that aircraft left outdoors should be dumped.

It seems likely that any VC10 (and I guess this applies to the Nimrod already?) would remain outdoors until Cosford either lose interest in it, or decide that it makes the site untidy, as happened with the airliner collection. They will doubtless claim that the aircraft is unsafe, or beyond economical restoration (as happened to the unique Vulcan B1). If Health & Safety zealots continue to infect our lives, it also seems likely that aircraft left outdoors will be declared a risk (little Johnny might climb through the barrier and stand underneath it and a wing might drop him at any moment).

So, I go back to one of my previous posts. The whole issue goes beyond the VC10 saga. We already seem to have a situation where Cosford decline aircraft if they are deemed too big to fly-in, or too expensive to transport by road. They have a demonstrable dislike for externally collections of any great size, so in all respects Cosford has become another Hendon.

Perhaps we've reached a stage where the preservation people need to start suggesting that the RAFM find another site to pursue longer-term preservation, or perhaps look at ways of working with IWM so that Duxford takes-on aircraft that RAFM cannot or will not save? Or maybe Duxford's also too small to accept a VC10-sized aircraft these days?!

But whatever happens, it seems pretty likely that only Bruntingthorpe will save an example of the RAF's mighty VC10. Well done RAFM... Well done IWM...

[Albert Driver]

The last BA Standard VC10 Victor Mike was flown into Cosford by Bill Outram in '79.
I remember him around that time frequently reminding us all of his earnest desire to collect his substantial and imminent pension! I doubt that any corners were cut going into Cosford. It wasn't his style. Also, after the infamous White Waltham fly-by a year or two earlier there was a little more caution among the remaining trainers on the fleet.

In addition wasn't this the one that lost an engine on the way and ended up landing on three? Bill must have felt he had something in hand to have committed to that.

Would be interesting to know what has changed.

[SpringHeeledJack]

Would be interesting to know what has changed.

The world. I'm not always convinced that it's for the better.



SHJ