The Curator, sorry to learn of your rather shabby treatment
With which I can sympathise, having had much the same treatment myself some 11 years ago
If the TriStar had been updated with a glass cockpit and 2 x wing pods, things could have been very different. Particularly if an AAR planning and management system had been included.
Certainly the wing pod mod. would have been a challenge, but would have been fine for the F3 / Harrier etc. Prodding the centreline from the VC10 wasn't as simple as prodding another VC10, but entirely acceptable.
'Gone with a whimper'? Well, I don't know about that, because coverage in the local media was pretty good - when the local BBC news is down to a 13 min segment from Oxford, to have a 4 minute item was good going - and both the disbandment parade and final operational sortie were given good coverage in both the
Oxford Mail and
Witney Gazette.
When you look at the case originally presented for the FSTA and compare it with the current size of the RAF, it is perhaps not surprising that, notwithstanding its capability, an increasingly expensive-to-maintain 30 year old aeroplane with a single (OK, dual redundant) hose had a limited remaining lifetime, compared with a brand-new, 2 hose aircraft with less burn and up to 111 tonnes of fuel. Particularly since MoD beancounters didn't have to consider acquisition costs under A PFI....
...just the astonishing £1.2M
per day cost!
At least the TriStar was still permitted to carry passengers on its last operational trip - unlike the poor old VC10 which, having once carried HM The Queen, was no longer permitted to carry anything other than essential crew
PS - Happy Birthday,
vascodegama!