I take your point Flipflop and you're obviously in a better position to judge just how hopeless the TVOC situation may or may not be. Likewise, I would agree that a completely fresh start would be the ideal solution. My problem with this viewpoint though, is that a fresh start just isn't going to happen. How would it? Who would handle it? With what money? Worse still, even if it represented a fresh start, I would imagine that any prospective sponsor would be discouraged from supporting a project that has yet again ended in recriminations. It would hardly look like a good project to pour money into.
My point about the HLF is that they have huge amounts of money to spend and they could easily finance the aircraft at least for this year, on the grounds that they've already enabled the aircraft to get this far, therefore it would be complete folly to abandon the aircraft at this late stage. I agree it could look like a case of proverbially prolonging the agony, but there is no "agony" if HLF's input enabled the aircraft to fly. Surely, that's all we want? If TVOC is in a state of near-collapse then fine, I don't see how that is a factor if HLF stepped-in and either got TVOC into shape, or replaced them with people who can handle the job. They and they alone have the financial, legal and moral right to do it, so why not?
I just don't see how there's any alternative. Sending more contributions is certainly a case of throwing good money after bad and if TVOC is in danger of imminent collapse then okay, what will be will be. Maybe that is the opportunity for HLF to step in and rescure the project into which they've poured so much money? If HLF isn't the answer then what is the answer? If TVOC winds itself up and does no more, then surely that's the end of the whole project? I can't see anyone else stepping in either with management skills or (just as importantly) the money to do anything and once the aircraft starts to languish in the hangar it will obviously be more and more expensive to get it out again. So, I ask the question, if HLF isn't the answer then what is?
bubblesuk, I don't really know what you're proposing. How am I supposed to implement any plan? I have no influence with anyone otherwise I would obviously have used it by now! I've said it enough times - it needs someone with "clout" that either HLF or TVOC will take notice of. All I've been asking for is a little less of the talking and more discussion of what can actually be done. I get the impression that you resent my comments and that's fine, you're obviously entitled to your view, but the way I see things, you seem to think it unfair that I supposedly "dismiss" achievements "no matter how small"; my point was/is that these "achievements" aren't achievements at all - they achieve absolutely nothing. I've said all along that petitions, letters to MP's, radio and newspaper stuff, questions in Parliament and so on, are all well and good, and they reflect people's passion for the project to succeed, but they're fatally ill-conceived. They're not going to get a result, therefore it seems more practical to look at the ways in which we might all be able to make something happen. You can be sure that if we continue simply expressing our disappointment and frustration while people go off in all directions on their own self-declared campaigns, there will be nothing but fuss, and no results. I don't need to justify myself to you, I'm just saying what I think.
It's fine to say that if the project fails, you can sit back and say you did all you can to save it, but that would be a rather subjective conclusion. It depends what you perceive to be "doing all you can" doesn't it? Wasting time by shooting-off in all directions making pointless demands to people who cannot or will not influence the project is just activity for activity's sake, isn't it? Surely it's far wiser to first identify what precisely should be done - then we might stand some chance of finding a way to do it?!