I think some folks need to be a little more realistic - you're starting to sound like the CAA!
Come on - do the math. How many private aircraft bumble around the UK on a daily basis? How many Lightnings stood a reasonable prospect of flying again and how often? So, what are the odds of a Lightning ploughing into your attic compared to a humble Cessna. It's a no-brainer.
As for your comment Krystal, thanks for the choice language but you obviously didn't grasp what I said. Anyone can tell you that a privately-owned and maintained aircraft is bound to receive more direct attention that an in-service machine. It's kinda obvious. When you have a team of engineers devoted to the operation of one aircraft, then they can obviously afford to spend all their time on it, rather than only the minimum time required in order to meet service standards. It's not like I just plucked this notion out of the air - any jet warbird operator will say the same.
I'm not saying for a second that operating a Lightning wouldn't be extremely difficult and costly, and with the benefit of hindsight I doubt if anyone would have been able to afford it in any case, but to simply rule-out the concept (as the CAA have effectively done) is just ludicrous. Their supposed concerns with safety bear absolutely no relation to the actual risks involved. But then I think we're all familiar with the modern world of over-obession with safety; this is why air show display lines are slowly drifting into adjacent counties!