Vulcan final flight live on you tube now

[camelspyyder]

they're just completing the preflight from the look of it.

https://youtu.be/DcKqkq27ffk

[camelspyyder]

...chocks away

[camelspyyder]

ready for Take-off.

[NutLoose]

Done and dusted and now for the CAA enquiries into the Barrel roll over Grantham

Did Vulcan do banned trick over Grantham? - Grantham Journal (http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/local/did-vulcan-do-banned-trick-over-grantham-1-7033833)


Vulcan Last Flight? - Page 16 (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?135282-Vulcan-Last-Flight/page16)

[Wander00]

Jet aeros are a long way back for me, but just what is defined as "high energy" - ISTR that slow roll is +1 to -1 to +1, and a barrel roll is +1 all the way round - so why is there a problem?

[phil9560]

TBH I thought the wingover I saw at MAN a few months ago was a bit gamey.

[Pontius Navigator]

Wander, indeed, and thinking on, low energy manoeuvres can be just as problematical. We used to do a high AOB circuit at about 200 feet and 155 kts IIRC.

[NutLoose]

Because it's defined as aerobatics, where as a wing over isn't Wanderer, and I think it's not allowed at the moment post Shoreham. I wonder if it is cleared for them as I cannot remember it ever doing one post RAF



.

[Wander00]

Just because it Wednesday evening, it is now dark and I am bored, was the prohibition "aerobatics" or "high energy manoeuvres", or did the CAA mix its terminology

[ACW418]

Wander,

Do you have a different calendar in France? Its Wednesday in the UK.

ACW

[NutLoose]

The CAA has announced the following:

• As a precaution, on Saturday 22 August we took steps to ensure no further flights were made by Hawker Hunter aircraft - this temporary restriction remains in place.

• Flying displays over land by vintage jet aircraft will be significantly restricted until further notice. They will be limited to flypasts, which means ‘high energy’ aerobatics will not be permitted. This only affects aircraft on the civil register, and not existing military types.

• The CAA will conduct additional risk assessments on all forthcoming civil air displays to establish if additional measures should be introduced.

• We commenced a full review of civil air display safety yesterday and held an initial meeting this morning.

The safety standards that must be met by all major civil air displays in the UK are among the very highest in the world and are regularly reviewed. All air display arrangements, including the pilots and aircraft, must meet rigorous safety requirements. Individual display pilots are only granted approval following a thorough test of their abilities.



............

[Dominator2]

Even if a barrel roll was performed, the CAA Restriction states:

Flying displays over land by vintage jet aircraft will be significantly restricted until further notice. They will be limited to flypasts, which means ‘high energy’ aerobatics will not be permitted. This only affects aircraft on the civil register, and not existing military types

Since the aircraft was NOT performing a Flying Display this restriction is not relevant.

[Pontius Navigator]

And define high energy.

[Dominator2]

If Tex Johnston could barrel roll a Boeing 707 at 1G it must be "low energy" and OK for a military bomber aircraft to perform?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaA7kPfC5Hk

[Cazalet33]

define high energy
Albert Einstein: 1859 - 1955

[Gsxr600]

I thought today's flight was disappointing and rather pointless. The crowd control issue seems to have ended up in a farce, with a supposedly special "final flight" on a rainy Wednesday with few people in attendance to witness it.


I really do hope XH558 does have the "exciting future" the Twitter message I got from VTTS claims, but I wish today's hop had been to Bruntingthorpe where she could have formed the flagship of a live cold war jet collection, rather than another sole Vulcan at a regional airport with a 10 minute taxi run once or twice a year if the fuel can be afforded.

[Tashengurt]

I think it was done quietly to avoid swarms of people descending on Finningley.

Shame she didn't go to Elvington or similar. I'm sure she'll make a great exhibit but it would have been great to see her in context with the other airframes there.

[Davef68]

There was apparently a video of the 'roll' posted the day after on youtube, but taken down equally quickly

[Mach Two]

I feel very privileged to have watched this historic occasion. Sad to see her go.

[GeeRam]

There was apparently a video of the 'roll' posted the day after on youtube, but taken down equally quickly

I saw it before it was taken down, and it wasn't a video....it was a animated sequence from a burst-shot of stills - taken from a distance, and therefore far from conclusive to what it was........given that it could easily have been a photoshop job?

[cessnapete]

What a sad reflection on the aviation world in UK.
For such an iconic event an insignificant provincial airport with less movements then Popham on a rainy day, is unable to organise itself, and actually tells intending visitors to stay away. As usual at many major UK aviation events, the local police are unable to handle access from the local road network.
Plenty of room for enthusiasts in visiting light aircraft. Ah sorry, not enough staff to manage the mandatory handling and PPR required, or security staff for the searching of visiting crew and passengers.
All for half a dozen at most, holiday 737s.
You couldn't make it up!!

[camelspyyder]

Peel Group must have been mad to try to redevelop Finningley in the first place. Leeds, East Midlands and Humberside were already established within an hours drive. There just wasn't a need for another airport in the region and passenger numbers and profits (losses) reflect that.

[BEagle]

What's the betting that they'll announce that the airport isn't a commercially viable proposition, then try to obtain planning permission for hundreds of new houses....

Although who on earth would want to live in Doncaster?

[wonderboysteve]

Some of us were born there and didn't have much of a choice!

The issues with the airport/council/Police became apparent very late in the day (as indeed, did the need to end flying). Doubtless more could have been done with more time to plan and a bit less risk aversion. The final flight though was always intended to be a short hop around the airport; very many people would have travelled to see the TO and landing, even had the display been held elsewhere. Given the lack of ability to cope with that, hands tied unfortunately.

Still, there was a very extensive flying programme this year and the two farewell tours a couple of weekends ago. As far as send offs go, I'd say the 2015 season wasn't bad.

[Nige321]

The Vulcan cost £100,877 per flight according to figures on another forum...:eek:

[ZeBedie]

Not sure what to make of this VIDEO: Did Vulcan do banned trick over Grantham? - Grantham Journal (http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/local/video-did-vulcan-do-banned-trick-over-grantham-1-7033833)

[814man]

Totally agree with comments of cessnapete.
Only in this country, or possibly only in this area, could we feel the need to have such an event held in secret just in case the public want to turn up. The “Robin Hood International Airport”, aka Finningley, had a total of 7 departures spread over the whole day yesterday. It’s surrounded by small villages and fields so it’s not as if any major roads would have been affected. The police statement highlighting Health & Safety issues was just a disgrace. Surely they could have got some security/car parkers in, even sold tickets and welcomed the public who have shown in huge numbers that they would love to have seen this event. Where’s the enterprising spirit that says someone could even have made some money out of this, let alone allow the public to enjoy seeing the final flight of this great aircraft.

[hunterboy]

Welcome to Britain.....

[Linedog]

I believe the emergency car park is still there by the main entrance. It used to do a good job during BoB weekends. They could've opened it up at a tenner per car and covered the costs of martialling it.

[camelspyyder]

Yes, according to Google Maps half of it survived the developers.

Mind you, the airport has parking for about 2500 cars and very few pax so I don't think it would be an issue.

[Monsun]

Peel are making just as good a job of running Durham Tees Valley....

[Mogwi]

Just for the record a Barell Roll is NOT a 1g manoeuvre; it can be a LOW g manoeuvre and does not involve any -ve g.

[NutLoose]

Film sequence of photos

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be..TICK&v=5kDPqElQGwo

More

Vulcan XH558: The Final Season - the Final Discussion (http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=67440&start=2350)

Btw I just used 1G as an example that it wouldn't need be a high energy manoeuvre

Zebedie, it is a sequence of still photos, my camera will take shots at 14 frames a second and produces the same effect.

[glad rag]

Hmm. Just imagine you have seen an exciting and wide open opportunity for photography along with tourism publicity along with survey work in the sparsely populated highlands with low or little overheads after initial equipment outlay.....ker shring £££££

Then the CAA rears it's head. :ooh::eek: :sad::(:{:ugh::ugh::mad:

[NutLoose]

Well stupidity and arrogance springs to mind, if wasn't cleared for aeros, even though it was / is capable of doing them and then to do them over the mainland where let's face it, you know someone's is going to capture it on film and upload it, and especially after Shoreham and even more with the CAA restrictions imposed by that, it is just asking for the CAA to hang you out to dry.
One just wonders how their employers will look upon it or whether they reported it happened.
I am surprised the mainstream gutter press are not jumping all over it as it appears to blatantly put two fingers up to the CAA restrictions post Shoreham.

One time you could argue the toss that it was a wing over gone wrong, but twice?

[Wander00]

as someone once said, "Once is unfortunate, twice looks like carelessness"

[Rhino power]

I've read elsewhere that the PF is a 787 Binliner Captain, IF the 'roll' is proven to have taken place, and IF the CAA do react 'strongly', I wonder for how much longer?

-RP

[StopStart]

Well if and if and if then I suspect he'll carry on being a 787 skipper until he retires. He might lose his authority to display the Vulcan :rolleyes: but I suspect the CAA might have a hard time proving he was involved in a "Flying display".

[Wageslave]

Well if they did, and I sincerely hope they did, then what a wonderful, poignant, historic, unforgettable and utterly appropriate epitaph to the mighty Vulcan's career, bowing her out the same way Roly Falke bowed her in at Farnborough over half a century before. That, if it did actually happen, has an simply magical symmetry to it that will live in the annals of aviation for ever. How could any pilot with a soul miss such an opportunity?

If I had been flying her I'd have done it for certain and pleaded "guilty, Your Honour and with pride", and taken the penalty cheerfully.

Wouldn't you?

The worst they've done is exceed a flight manual limitation re aerobatics. The aeroplane is demonstrably able to do it and take it so reckless endangerment is a bit of a stretch, and as said above it wasn't at an airshow.

If they did, Bravo Zulu, and if not; reasons in writing please.

[ZeBedie]

CAA person - You didn't roll the Vulcan, did you?

Vulcan pilot - No, of course not, since that would not have been permitted.

CAA person, Well that's all I need to hear then, thank you.

That's how a pragmatic, confident and well respected aviation authority ought to behave.

[OvertHawk]

And if Shoreham had not happened and If someone had not taken photos then i'm sure that's what would have happened.

On the other hand - If this did happen (and I can see the temptation certainly) and there is photographic evidence that it happened in contravention of both the flight manual and a specific CAA restriction then the responsibility lies with the crew who did it rather than the CAA for responding - They can't turn a blind eye if theirs was not the only eye!

[NutLoose]

Must be a different CAA to the one I know Zebedie,

the problem is with Shoreham fresh in their minds and the CAA regulations laid down post that being blatantly ignored, you are always going to be in for a rough ride.

[NutLoose]

Bbc news has picked up on it and CAA confirms investigation

Footage of Vulcan performing barrel roll investigated - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-34712344)

[Cazalet33]

Remove that man's Vulcan DA immediately!

Subject to appeal, of course.

[Interested Passenger]

there should be an investigation into why there isn't better footage of it.

make a fantastic screen saver:ok:

[Pontius Navigator]

Control restriction? Pilot adopting extreme measures to avoid primary school, hospital, old folks home?

[NutLoose]

Do they carry a supply of childrens shoes in the bomb bay to drop, thus allowing the news crews to get the usual dramatic shot of a childs shoe next to the school, but miles away from the actual incident in question?

[NutLoose]

And now the Daily Telegraph, I wonder how long until its blazoned across the Stun and Daily Fail front pages


Vulcan bomber investigated over banned barrel roll (http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/vulcan-bomber-investigated-over-banned-barrel-roll/ar-BBmOQA9?li=AA9SkIr&ocid=iehp)

[EGNH_Flyboy]

Footage of Vulcan performing barrel roll investigated - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-34712344)

[rogcal]

For what it's worth, I was with many hundreds of people who were awaiting the arrival of the Vulcan in the vicinity of the Prince of Gloucester Barracks, Grantham (ex RAF Spitalgate) on the day in question and given the elevation of the location I was able to observe the Vulcan make it's approach from the north when it was a good five miles from Grantham and equally observed it's departure to the south until it went out of view some four miles distant.

At no time did it perform any maneuvers other than a slight change of course as it passed over the barracks.

I hope whoever compiled the video clip and published it is eventually named and shamed for being a cad and a bounder!

[OvertHawk]

It's not a video clip - In fact it's a series of stills (allegedly) taken in rapid succession. It's been montaged by the media and shown as if it's a video.