Vulcan XH 558 Threads (merged) [Archive] - Page 3

flipflopman RB199

20th Oct 2007, 11:01

Thank you to all for the kind words and support, but I can assure you that I was just as excited and keen to get XH558 in the air as you were. This has been FAR more than 'just a job' to myself and the rest of the team.

forget,

Don't quote me on this, as the aerials are not really my domain!:p

However, I believe that the large white blade aerial that now lives where the Rad Alt di-electric panels used to be, is the new UHF/VHF aerial. The fork shaped aerial that now adorns the Bomb Blister, is the new VOR aerial. There are several new aerials dotted across the airframe as part of her new avionics suite.

Interestingly, this new VOR aerial has forced a reduction of the Vne from its service limits, down to 330KIAS, with a normal operating speed of 300KIAS

As goes the future display format, well, I believe that it will be broadly similar to the previous display, but flown with a little more mechanical sympathy for the old girl's age! :p Theoretically, there is no physical reason why it could not be identical to the previous displays, however, a desire to preserve the engine cyclic usage and airframe fatigue life, will probably lead to a slightly gentler display.

However, this is of course just the way that I understand it, and ultimately, it will be entirely down to the Display Crew as to how 558 is displayed :ok:

Flipflopman

forget

20th Oct 2007, 12:37

Thanks Flip flop, I’m as pleased as anyone to see 558 airborne but I’m surprised at just how irritated I am by those add-on antennas. If they were your domain they wouldn’t have ended up there! Hard to believe that the people involved had so little sympathy for the appearance of the aircraft. The whole front end is spoilt.

I’ll offer to come over and fix it for free. Hang the VOR antenna from the old scanner mounts in the NBS radome. It’ll work fine and the VNE restriction is removed - if ever needed.

Stick a Vulcan standard VHF (+UHF?) antenna on the bomb-aimers blister – where it belongs. Job done.

Nit picking? No. It’s supposed to be an RAF Vulcan, not a Vulcan that’s been messed around with by hanging antennas wherever they happened to fit.

Apart from that, have another one. :D

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/antennas.jpg

XA909

20th Oct 2007, 15:10

Only an exceptionall lage donation to the XH558 flying fund will excuse Tombstone's completion of said naked perambulation.:=

And by large I mean at least 6 months salary:)

JR

The Helpful Stacker

20th Oct 2007, 15:13

Does anyone know if the in-flight refuelling system is still serviceable?

It'd be nice to see the Vulcan and VC10 together again.

flipflopman RB199

20th Oct 2007, 15:23

Does anyone know if the in-flight refuelling system is still serviceable?

Yes, I do

and

No, it's not :p

The IFR system on the XH558 has been disabled for many years, prior to her delivery at Bruntingthorpe. As XH558 will never again need to be filled to max, she will also never again need the In Flight Refuelling capability, so this system was never considered for repair.

That is not to say that 558 couldn't partake in a spot of 'Dry Prodding Action' :E However, whether the crew would deem that to be worth the risk to the newly restored, sole flying example of an Avro Vulcan, is another matter!!! :p

Flipflopman

Tim McLelland

20th Oct 2007, 15:49

Can't say I'm too disturbed by the addition of a few aerials, but it would have been nice to see the ECM intake replaced. Still, it's a Vulcan and that's what matters! Anyway, can we start a fund now to repaint her in proper colours? The Dark Green is fine, just needs some Medium Sea Grey and some gloss white for underneath - and a black radome of course! Send your cans of Dulux to...

I keep looking at the Youtube vid of the first flight - that's a pretty impressive take-off run even by Vulcan standards!:)

GeeRam

20th Oct 2007, 19:49

Anyway, can we start a fund now to repaint her in proper colours?

Yup......o/a anti-flash white with pastel insignia:ok:

Green Flash

20th Oct 2007, 20:36

.... with a subtle rose coloured tint, eh, Tombstone?

flipflopman RB199

20th Oct 2007, 23:50

Yup......o/a anti-flash white with pastel insignia

GeeRam,

I completely and utterly agree. Of all the colour schemes the Vulcan wore, in my eyes this was the finest.

Unfortunately, to get XH558 stripped and repainted, you would be looking at a six figure sum. This has been discussed many times, and sadly the end result is the same. Presently, there are neither the funds, nor the manhours required to repaint the aircraft.

Hopefully, from a purely selfish viewpoint, I too hope that the money can be found to refinish XH558 in the Anti Flash/Pastel scheme :ok:

Flipflopman

Navaleye

21st Oct 2007, 01:05

I agree completely. How about this? (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yRqrgvxkZPM)

Biggin 64, if I remember. It gets my vote I thought they looked great in white. I think the Valiant looks impressive too, although not much ground clearance compared to the Vulcan?

I have the originals if anyone wants them. What is the kit under the Vulcan's bomb bay?

forget

21st Oct 2007, 12:06

What is the kit under the Vulcan's bomb bay?

Blurred - but looks familiar. I think it's nothing more than a pair of folding steps lying on their side. The Crew Chief will have taken them along in the bomb bay.

ArthurR

21st Oct 2007, 13:09

In reply to your earlier post, sadly the hat trick can not now happen, as for more sugestions, how about Tombstone coming out of hiding.

BEagle

21st Oct 2007, 13:31

He has promised to supply the video evidence - but time is running out!

I offered to let him off if he paid a substantial donation, but some on here took rather a Merchant of Venice inspired approach - and demanded their pound of flesh.

So a rose 'twixt cheeks it has to be, I'm afraid. Although I'll agree to just the one verse of the song I told him - as long as it's sung on camera somewhere on a taxiway with the rose held as promised.

Tombstone

21st Oct 2007, 14:41

Well done guys!

As for my performance...

Wednesday.

Squirrel 41

21st Oct 2007, 14:59

Tombstone:

Stout fellow! :p

Enjoy, I think.....

S41

Gweedo

21st Oct 2007, 15:04

Ah, a man with honesty and integrity! Will you post the result on You tube? I'm almost looking forward to this as much as the Vulcan flight.

BEagle

21st Oct 2007, 15:34

Well, a chap with the honesty and integrity to stand by his promises.

A fine example - one that others would do well to emulate. The honesty and integrity bit, that is, not the rose-and-bottom thing!

As for the performance, nowhere was it ever agreed that it would be made public on yoof-tube or anywhere else. In the spirit of Vulcan-to-the-sky fundrasing, if Tombstone sends the original to yours truly, then I will forward it to Primetime who might, if they consider it acceptable, consider adding it to the next Restoration DVD. As a 'tailpiece', perhaps?

So, unless Tombstone wishes to air his rosy cheeks on yoof-tube, you probably won't get to see the event unless you pay for one of Primetime Joanna's splendid DVDs!

Over to you, mate!

saracenman

21st Oct 2007, 16:56

Tombstone,

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff37/saracenman/tombstone.gif
...for wednesday!:E :ok:

sm

flipflopman RB199

21st Oct 2007, 17:07

Sorry BEags, but the man himself did categorically state that after first flight, several things would happen, and I quote.....

He does indeed have the minerals, the banter from the F3 girls for a no show would be unbearable.

Two things will happen the day after the vulcan flies:

1. I will post the video on here, via youtube.

2. 'Tombstone' will die & I will have to come up with another name for Pprune. It's never a clever thing allowing your boss to know who you are on here & I think he might just work out who I am the day after (V+1) XH558 rotates!

Dear Santa,

please may I have a multiple engine surge on XH558 (prior to V panic) as an early Xmas. Pretty please. If it helps swing the decision, you can marry my sister.

No offence intended to the aircrew of 558 however, big boys rules, you know how it is!

So, best of British, old chap. I hope for the sake of your credibility, that it's not too cold out, on Wednesday! :ok:

Flipflopman

ArthurR

21st Oct 2007, 18:01

Good on you Tombstone, hope the weather is good, looking forward to the video...:ok:

Green Flash

21st Oct 2007, 19:42

Bravo Tombstone!

Best go for an early morning/late evening departure. High pressure dominating but a chilly easterly setting in. Also, less chance of meeting those of a delicate and nervous disposition.

cornish-stormrider

22nd Oct 2007, 11:44

Am waiting with much amusement to see if Tombstone is a man of his word. Good work from all the lads at TVOC etc. I'll have two tickets to any westcountry display and am in negotitions with SWMBO as to being allowed to help keep the old girl flying

PTR 175

22nd Oct 2007, 13:31

Forget:

Like you say, put the VOR antennae inside the Radome. That is where it is fitted in the Nimrod. It works most of the time, even with the Dishwater blasting out Jigga Watts of RF immediatly below.

iank

22nd Oct 2007, 13:45

Nice one Tombstone - never doubted your promise - good luck and I hope the weather holds for you! :ok:

ShyTorque

22nd Oct 2007, 17:40

I would prefer Tombstone be paid money NOT to post a video. :uhoh:

saracenman

22nd Oct 2007, 17:40

when Tombstone performs his 'deed' and sticks the evidence on youtube - anyone who watches it, PLEASE lob a tenner (or more:D) in TVOC's e-donate box, it's quite painless really! :}

no excuses now - http://www.tvoc.co.uk

watch the deed twice? that'll be twenty notes! get the idea?
:E

thanks all :)

sm
edit - and tombstone old bean, could you stick TVOC's link in your youtube post as well please?:D :ok:

Pontius Navigator

24th Oct 2007, 07:23

And the appointed day dawned. A near perfect morn. The air still, a hint of the previous night's frost still around. Small things shrivelled and curled. The roses with their last glorious hint of summer beckoning on a dark and mysterious future :}

Flying Signman

24th Oct 2007, 08:32

News just in......
A Flower Wholesaler in Norfolk reported exceptionally high demand for Red Roses at 5am this morning.
558 alone were ordered by a Military chappie wishing to show his love and devotion to a certain lady.
This quantity was totally unexpected and more than rivals the demand shown in this rural area of England around Valentines day.
When asked about his purchase, the gentleman (who wished to remain anonymous) said he had a "special presentation" to do later in the day.
Florists in the area have also reported huge demand for Roses, so some sort of local ritual is thought to be involved in the upsurge.
TV crews and reporters have been sent to the area to investigate the high demand at this unusual time of year.
A spokesman for the wholesaler said "I could not believe it when this guy turned up at the crack of day. He wiped me out of my entire stock. He must have got into a bit of a thorny issue with his loved one and wants to make ammends".
"I have never run out like this before - it is most embarassing, so guess I will just have to put it all behind me and make sure I have sufficient stock for the next time".

Will have to look out for updates!
:;): :D :D

BEagle

24th Oct 2007, 09:02

"...crack of day"

Indeed!

illuminate

24th Oct 2007, 12:32

did the man stick to his word?

Wader2

24th Oct 2007, 13:26

did the man stick to his word?

That is the point surely.

LS8-18

24th Oct 2007, 13:46

Hi,

I am waiting with bated breath for the youtube link.

Can't wait to go and post it on the TVOC forums!!!

Go Tombstone Go....:D:D:D

Flying Signman

24th Oct 2007, 17:08

Has the deed been done we wonder?

Tombstone - can you confirm?

(or maybe he is still recovering from frost bite or even Rose blight?)

clicker

24th Oct 2007, 17:24

hope he's not caught a dose of black flies. :E

spekesoftly

25th Oct 2007, 00:17

Any sign of Tombstone ? Or has he been quiet as a graveyard. Perhaps the rose was too much of a thorn in his (back)side! ;)

Green Flash

25th Oct 2007, 00:34

I understand Tombstone to be a man of the highest honour and integrety, but just in case an incentive is required a have in my grubby hand a crisp tenner which I will plunge deeply in to the nearest RBL Poppy Appeal collecting tin on the deed being carried out! What say you chaps?

Blacksheep

25th Oct 2007, 00:52

You do mean in addition to the usual tenner?

Green Flash

25th Oct 2007, 01:28

I mean in addition to the damn sight more than a tenner that I will give.

The Poppy is usually the only one I give to (exception is sometimes made for RAFBF/RAFA).

LS8-18

25th Oct 2007, 12:15

I would never suggest depriving the poppy appeal as its far too important but if you can spare it and given Tombstones demise is due to his now proven incorrect remarks about the vulcan never liftig off again hows about a donation to TVOC at http://www.tvoc.co.uk as well?

:):):)

BEagle

25th Oct 2007, 15:51

Tombstone.....

Oh, Toooombstoooooooone!!!

I was expecting to have seen evidence of a rosy glow to your cheeks by now, what's keeping you?

A promise is a promise!

The AvgasDinosaur

25th Oct 2007, 17:44

Perhaps he's got greenfly :\ :eek:
Be lucky
David

clicker

25th Oct 2007, 20:44

maybe his "you tube" has failed. :E

aviate1138

26th Oct 2007, 08:02

Lots of activity around XH 558. Hangar doors ajar.
http://vbc01.verifiedalarms.co.uk/index.php?sect=2
09:47 Hangar empty

BEagle

26th Oct 2007, 09:55

'Vulcan outside hangar'.... Well that's a relief - you mean it wasn't beamed up by aliens?

I've sent Tombstone a PM - but no response yet......

ComJam

26th Oct 2007, 10:14

It's been a week now and still nothing......i suspect Mr Tombstone has gone into hiding. On the plus side he'll never be able to pull on an England rugby shirt without being reminded of his broken promise :}

aviate1138

26th Oct 2007, 10:41

Vulcan?
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k35/beejaviate/spockfrown.jpg

Flying Signman

26th Oct 2007, 10:45

'558 was being towed out this morning and backed up against the hangar purely for a photo shoot with a Poppy drop by the overflying BBMF Dakota.

Bit claggy weather wise, so not too sure if the plans have gone ahead.

As for Tombstone, he certainly has gone to ground!:hmm:

cornish-stormrider

26th Oct 2007, 11:40

The phrase "Gutless gob****e waste of breathing air and food" springs to mind when referencing Mr Tombstone. If one can't put up, one should shut up.

Maybe his sign in handle should be changed to gutless welching b4st4rd who is too afraid of his boss to carry out his promise.

I wait with baited breath for his reply and will issue a profuse and humble retraction when the deed is posted for posteriority:E

MostlyHarmless

26th Oct 2007, 12:17

Don't you just hate it when people sit on the fence...

brickhistory

26th Oct 2007, 12:23

Question from afar:

If Tombstone 'performed,' would/could somebody at the base complain and he get into trouble for it? I can imagine a similiar act's consequence if performed here and a no-sense of humo(u)r-type filing a complaint............

If so, might a few days grace period allow for the probably increased viewing audience to lessen and reduce his career risk?

Total speculation, but a thought?

forget

26th Oct 2007, 12:47

I'm with brick on this. It ain't the Air Force it once was and Tombstone's probably best advised to renege. When's he coming out .................. of the RAF?:hmm:

Flying Signman

26th Oct 2007, 12:47

Just a few "edited" errr....."rear shots" would suffice - just to show he actually did it! You know - 15 seconds should be more than enough.;)

That way - with no front/facial shots the real identity could be a safely guarded secret.

Unless of course the CO, demands a strip search to see who has that nasty rash!!!:)

brickhistory

26th Oct 2007, 12:59

Not my place to voice an opinion, but I'm not encouraging him to renege, just choose the best time for the op with regards to threat assessement planning.......

k3k3

26th Oct 2007, 20:37

At 2200 BST tonight there is a programme on the History Channel (Sky 529) about the return of 558 to the skies.

LS8-18

26th Oct 2007, 23:24

For someone who shouted the odds about how XH558 would never fly again he is very quiet all of a sudden.

If the deed is not done yet I hope he has sent a massive cheque to TVOC with a profuse appology engraved on the back

:bored::bored::bored:

Pontius Navigator

27th Oct 2007, 14:12

Question from afar:
If Tombstone 'performed,' would/could somebody at the base complain and he get into trouble for it? I can imagine a similiar act's consequence if performed here and a no-sense of humo(u)r-type filing a complaint

There was a spate of nude calendars in UK a few years ago, still vogue amongst farmers. Any way one such was done by our aeronautical docs people. Their OC went ballistic and a recall order was put out. I still have my copy.:}

Anyway 23 Sqn did an issue too with OC23 in just a pair or flying boots. The fun police then stepped in and said "Last Time."

Anyway the senior officer posters had the last laugh. Promoted the OV and made him head of PR as he obviously had a flair for it, or was in a bent?

BEagle

27th Oct 2007, 14:35

The scope dope lying on top of the E-3D consoles looked quite a babe!

I mentioned it to my old ex-F4 course nav - he'd been a Plt Off at that time. But later the very OC23 in question. Super chum!

Tombstone has yet to reply to my PM, incidentally.

Flying Signman

29th Oct 2007, 17:05

Not a word from Tombstone then?

I thought he was good for his word, but are beginning to think otherwise.......

Tombstone, please do not let a lot of us down:sad:

BEagle

29th Oct 2007, 18:41

Tombstone, being a chap who keeps his promises, has given me an update.

Firstly, he has been off the forum recently as he was on compassionate leave. I'm sure everyone will wish him well.

Now, you will all be interested to learn that the deed has been done and I will have the DVD in a few days' time.

However, a tip-off to Tombstone revealed that the RAF fun-detectors were not very happy about the idea of a 'public' performance, so quite understandably the DVD was shot not in a crewroom, but next to a jet.

The DVD will NOT be going to yoof-tube, that rather nasty happy slappers' website, but if the identity of the star can be suitably protected, it might be offered to the Primetime Video team, for inclusion on the next Vulcan Restoration DVD.

Which will mean that you will have to pay to see it - each DVD includes a contribution to the Vulcan To The Sky trust.

Pontius Navigator

29th Oct 2007, 18:46

However, a tip-off to Tombstone revealed that the RAF fun-detectors were not very happy about the idea of a 'public' performance.

Hypocrits.

As soon as the Armadillo video was out, bare bums and all, the media types wanted an RAF one.

Then the Royals do one with more bare bums!

phoenix leader

29th Oct 2007, 21:29

I'm rather curious that after watching the various video's of Vulcan 558 such as on Utube etc she seems to have had a modification of sorts just forward of the intakes, which to me look like a square window, which is on both sides of the aircraft, could some one shed any light on this (no pun intended).

The Helpful Stacker

29th Oct 2007, 21:33

Are you sure its not the new squarish shaped aerials you spotted?

flipflopman RB199

29th Oct 2007, 22:29

I can confirm that there have been no "Window shaped Mods" on XH558's forward fuselage.

With respect, are you sure that it's not something that has been there all along, that has only recently become apparent to you?

Flipflopman

Blacksheep

30th Oct 2007, 04:55

There was a spate of nude calendars in UK a few years ago, still vogue amongst farmers.I recall seeing a calendar picturing a rather tasty looking young lady in a WRAF Officer's uniform, astride a bicycle and displaying a rather nice pair of charms in the fresh air. I don't know if she was truly a serving ossifer, but the photograph was definitely taken outside our old crew room at Northolt. :ooh:

I'm pleased to see that Tombstone has had the last laugh to the financial advantage of the VTTS Trust. I have a copy of the video showing the end of 558's RAF career and I'd be pleased to pay for a video of what is hopefully the start of a new one.

Pray that she is able to remain on view in UK, rather than joining the last Shackleton on the other side of the Atlantic, where there's enough money to keep such large, complex old bangers airborne. :oh:

clicker

30th Oct 2007, 06:17

the deed has been done

Beagle, Thanks for the update.

Tombstone, Well done for having the guts to do it. :D

Can't say I would be so brave and I hope the cold didn't have any effects on the exposed equipment. :E

phoenix leader

30th Oct 2007, 08:21

Hi, what ever the window, ariel or panel of sorts that I asked about, has come about because my friend and colleague an ex Vulcan pilot, whom in fact has flown 558 phoned me up because he too was of the opinion that the panel in question has been added, it was myself that suggested that I place it on PPrune to see what if any light could be shed on this matter. If you look at the film on Utube of 558 taxiing you will see why the panel just forward of the intake and aft of the roundel does indeed look very much like a "widow" of sorts.

GeeRam

30th Oct 2007, 08:31

rather than joining the last Shackleton on the other side of the Atlantic, where there's enough money to keep such large, complex old bangers airborne.

Money isn't the reason the Shack is in the USA, as any time it does fly the money to do it comes from the UK, as it's still owned by Air Atlantique IIRC, and a team from Coventry does go out periodically to tend to her over there. The reason it's over there is that it can fly there, as it can't fly in the UK 'cos BAe have told CAA that it's fatigue-ex'd, so CAA say non....
In the USA however, under the experimental category, the FAA have a different view I believe.

airsound

30th Oct 2007, 08:39

Phoenix leader

If you go to Anthony Bartram's excellent piece for BBC East Midlands Today, you will see, right at the end, a very clear view of the panther head.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7050000/newsid_7051100/7051162.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm&news=1&ms3=4
On a more general note, it's a pity the main beeb was in such a state of chaos over its cuts that it couldn't manage to cover it nationally. Much credit is due to Anthony Bartram, who went to do the piece for the local beeb off his own bat, since the failure to get national coverage was something he had fought hard to avoid.

airsound

The Helpful Stacker

30th Oct 2007, 08:45

Blacksheep - The lovely Kathy West, although not a serving officer, looks rather fetching in her No.1s.

May not be work safe, obviously that depends on where you work (http://www.kathywest.com/pages/kathy_images/124.htm).

Flying Signman

30th Oct 2007, 10:23

Fair play to Tombstone in doing the deed and honouring the bet:D:D:D:ok:

cornish-stormrider

30th Oct 2007, 10:34

I humbly submit my profuse and gushing apology to Mr Tombstone for impugning (sp) his character. The RAF needs more like him, people with the moral courage to put up after losing a bet. Well Done. Oh and as I am still a civvy I can quite categorically say to the fun police

"Get a life you miserable pen pushing 4rselickers. You bring shame and loss of morale to a mighty force. You sicken me with your rulebook following attitude. May you suffer painful piles as pennance for your heinous deeds."

Oh and Tombstone, did every rose have its thorn?? :ok::ok::ok:

illuminate

30th Oct 2007, 11:00

well done tombstone :cool:

good to see a man of his word

A2QFI

30th Oct 2007, 11:14

"May your next poo be a hedgehog!"

CuNim1

30th Oct 2007, 22:10

Just a useless bit of information, but the largest rosebush is in Tombstone, Arizona, a Lady Banksia that came originally from Scotland in 1885

BEagle

30th Oct 2007, 23:04

phoenix leader, the window to which you refer is the AEO's 'porthole' window and was a feature of every Vulcan ever built.

An old copy of 'Royal Air Force Flying Review' which I have, dates July 1953 (price 1/-) has a 3 page article on the Vulcan - and VX770 clearly shows the window between the roundel and the port intake.

A similar window is located on the starboard side adjacent to the nav radar's seat.

Incidentally, the same magazine also describes the 600+ aircraft Royal Review at Odiham - and there were another 300 aircraft on static display. The flypast aircraft operated from 'more than 40 airfields all over Great Britain and Northern Ireland'.......:hmm:

LowNSlow

31st Oct 2007, 09:23

Well done to the team for getting the mighty Vulcan back in the air where she belongs. I can't wait to take my wee lass to see XH558 perform like I saw her back in Middle Wallop eons ago.

Well done to Tombstone for honouring his bet and placing the rose where it really doesn't belong.

forget

31st Oct 2007, 09:24

........... 'porthole' windows and were a feature of every Vulcan ever built.:ok:

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/window.jpg

Pontius Navigator

31st Oct 2007, 09:25

Well done to Tombstone for honouring his bet and placing the rose where it really doesn't belong.

Are we sure about that?

Stretch182

31st Oct 2007, 10:02

which to me look like a square window,

Don't think the ones in the picture are what he means.....

threeputt

31st Oct 2007, 10:06

That'll be me then, in the office, probably fast asleep. The only reson I wore that daft Mk2A ? helmet was to enable me to wedge my head in the most comfortable sleeping position.:zzz:

Happy day's

3P :ok:

LowNSlow

31st Oct 2007, 10:31

Pontious Navigator according to BEagle in his post #533 (last page) the dirty deed has indeed been done and video evidence will be provided :ok:

Flying Signman

1st Nov 2007, 09:06

In the meantime - is it not possible to put up a few still shots from the vid as evidence of such? :ok:

The AvgasDinosaur

1st Nov 2007, 09:19

My cheque for the fund awaits visual confirmation.
Be lucky
David

Ripline

1st Nov 2007, 12:12

The AvgasDinosaur My cheque for the fund awaits visual confirmation.

How appropriate! (Notice your message number?) :D

Ripline

The AvgasDinosaur

1st Nov 2007, 12:35

Quote from Ripline
(Notice your message number?)
Do I get a prize?
A free flight perhaps:O
Be lucky
David

EyesFront

1st Nov 2007, 12:40

I sometimes worry about the number of 'chaps' on this thread expressing an interest in seeing naked men's bottoms and flower arranging....

1859sqn

1st Nov 2007, 16:25

Ooh you BITCH !!!!.............................. :)

Pontius Navigator

1st Nov 2007, 16:29

Pontious Navigator according to BEagle in his post #533 (last page) the dirty deed has indeed been done and video evidence will be provided :ok:

Ah, but I was not doubting the facts. I was challenging your assertion

and placing the rose where it really doesn't belong:}

BEagle

18th Nov 2007, 07:48

Well, Tombstone claimed to have done the deed and promised to send me the video proof.

Nothing has yet arrived.

Any reason for the delay, Tombstone?

Tombstone

18th Nov 2007, 10:27

Sorry guys,

only came back into work last week.

I'll post the DVD today however, I don't think it would be at all appropriate for the footage at the moment.

It's been a hard week at Marham.

BEagle

18th Nov 2007, 11:00

Entirely understood.

RIP Mike.

BEagle

1st Dec 2007, 06:38

Well, came back fhome yesterday after 10 days away......

Still no DVD of the proof, Tombstone.

Tombstone

1st Dec 2007, 08:10

Like I think I said in my previous post, I'm not at all sure that any footage of me larking around in front of a GR4 parked at Marham is in any way appropriate at the moment. I'm not comfortable with the idea at all for now.

haltonapp

2nd Dec 2007, 10:08

Obviously Tombestone, when he retires from the RAF, should consider taking up a career as a politician, make promises and then have no intention of carrying them out! How do you know when a government minister is lying?

G-KEST

2nd Dec 2007, 10:19

The cruel finger of fate can change any arrangements.

What was an honest undertaking on Tombstone's part should '558 fly can always be postponed. The response to a real tragedy in the form of inquiries, funerals and grieving cannot.

Let it be.

Cheers,

Reaper 69

Blacksheep

2nd Dec 2007, 13:19

God that hat tasted awful and never mind the roses, anyone who hasn't the balls to do a flaming arsehole in public isn't fit to wear the light blue. :rolleyes

I suppose I should have realised that if a shower of sh*t like us could keep them flying back then, a bunch of dedicated nutters would have no problem.

So, when is XH558 going to fly again?

621andy

3rd Dec 2007, 09:37

Give Tombstone a break...They're having a rough time at Marham.

I'm sure he's a man of honour and will post(god help us:\) evidence when the time is right....

cornish-stormrider

3rd Dec 2007, 11:18

I have insulted Mr Tombstone before, Now is not the time - and when it is I am 100% confident he will perform the dirty deed. Because if he doesn't he will never be able to walk into a bar again, the shame would be unbearable.

To all the lads and lasses at Marham and those that knew Mike. Keep your chins up and think on the good times, it sounds like there were quite a few and that he was a real gent.

Tombstone

3rd Dec 2007, 15:55

Absolutely true Cornish,

Mike was a top bloke & will be missed by all.

Prank WILL be released in good time however, more pressing issues remain at the forefront of our thoughts.

Lyneham Lad

20th Dec 2007, 21:05

Indeed - as I posted on the 'other' Vulcan thread on the 14th Dec (post #1273):-

Got a shilling to spare, Guv?

Vulcan XH558 needs £100,000 to complete flight-test programme (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/12/14/220313/vulcan-xh558-needs-100000-to-complete-flight-test.html)

Flight International today:-
Quote:
The Vulcan To The Sky Trust is in desperate need for £100,000 ($200,000) to fund the completion of the flight-test programme for Avro Vulcan XH558, which would enable the V-Bomber to participate in the 2008 air show season.

Click on the link for full story.

Never Alert

20th Dec 2007, 21:36

Jindabyne, good advice.

Should any of you feel the urge to contribute, stop for a moment and then redirect your money into the Help the Heroes campaign.

The whole Vulcan story has been a complete load of tosh & a waste of money. 6 million quid for one flight. Stinks of a badly run management plan.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

BEagle

20th Dec 2007, 23:08

Apart from blitzing everyone with further requests for donations, there has been a stunning lack of any real news since the return to flight. After that happy day......nothing.

People have been asking for progress reports and project updates on the website for weeks, but nothing 'official' has been forthcoming.

Why the deafening silence?

Blacksheep

21st Dec 2007, 05:24

As per the Flight article that works out at 50,000 per flight, which doesn't sound too far off for operating a Vulcan.

In the long term, there'll also be a few calendar time 'C' Checks to be budgetted for, on top of the regular defect rectification and post/pre flight maintenance and hangarage charges. Seventeen air shows won't cover the cost, so who are the sponsors mentioned in the article? A Vulcan in a Virgin paint scheme wouldn't do at all. :yuk:

nacluv

21st Dec 2007, 08:59

Bad though it sounds, I'd much rather see an orange Vulcan in the sky than no Vulcan in the sky.

However, the deafening silence post-flight and the poor timing of this latest 'pull your finger out' message is very off-putting, to say the least.:(

I really do hope they still do it, but I know a lot of people who have taken this latest 'development' (and the manner in which it has been handled) very badly.

speeddial

21st Dec 2007, 12:30

My uninformed but gut feeling is that they blew all their cash on getting that first flight made on the hope that a sponsor would come forward once they saw it in the air. Sadly, so far no one has stepped forward and they now have no cash for any more flying. Of course, that's not based on any fact.

GeeRam

21st Dec 2007, 12:36

goudie

21st Dec 2007, 13:09

Is Sir Michael Knight still involved with this project?

Haven't seen any of his reports, on the website, for some time.

speeddial

21st Dec 2007, 13:20

Now isn't the time for 80s action heros.

BEagle

22nd Dec 2007, 10:22

But certainly time for Cold War masterpieces of British aeronautical engineering!

Despite much of the doom and gloom pervading the project at the moment, one very bright spot indeed is the release of the 'First Flight' DVD from Primetime Video. In 16:9 with excellent camera work, it is a DVD worth acquiring. Dubya dubya dubya dot primetimevideo dot co dot UK will get you to their website - and buying the DVD will help support the continuing efforts of the 558 team.

Blacksheep

24th Dec 2007, 00:22

...Cold War masterpieces of British aeronautical engineeringFrom an aircrew perspective perhaps, an opinion not necessarily shared by those who had to keep them airworthy. :hmm:

They were certainly ingenious contraptions, but hardly qualify as 'masterpieces'. Harry Tripp would have given Vickers 4 out of 10 for the Valiant, Avro would have got 6 out of 10 for the Vulcan and Handley Page a massive 7 out of 10 for the Victor. But you needed 8 out of 10 from Harry for your work to qualify as a Masterpiece.

jindabyne

24th Dec 2007, 10:44

Is there any other kind of perspective ??

forget

24th Dec 2007, 10:51

Is there any other kind of perspective ??

Er ........ yes. If they ain't fixed and flyable then .............. :confused:

'Chuffer' Dandridge

24th Dec 2007, 11:03

The second 'first flight' of the Vulcan couldn't have come at a worse time. As good as it is to see it fly again, I wonder how many would-be large corporate sponsors are afraid to lay their cash on the table for fear of intimidation from the huggy fluffy, Guardian reading, carbon offset monkeys??

Lets face it, despite being an icon of bombing things and making a lot of noise, the Vulcan is definitely not an example of a carbon neutral masterpiece by any means.. :{

BEagle

24th Dec 2007, 12:49

Screw the flawed science of these weenie-greeny envirofundamentalists! 'Carbon footprint' is just political propaganda to allow governments to invent new taxes.

I'm just off to play with my 354bhp car - to burn lots of fossil fuel and make lots of CO2! Because I can!!

More seriously, why don't the lentilista Grauniad-reading tree-huggers try putting in the data for, say, 1920 into their 'we're all doomed' computer program and see what it comes up with for 2000?

The UK was a major wine exporter during the Roman era!

4 x Olympussies - the sound of freedom!

Krystal n chips

24th Dec 2007, 14:56

For Messrs Beagle and Dandridge, and from a fully paid up member of the Grudiad fraternity, I would venture to suggest the objections may well come from those who constitute the NIMBY element of our society.....as in "we've just moved to this super des res in the country, but the noise from those nasty aeroplanes at the local airfield is simply appalling....they have to be stopped!".......either that, and I know sod all about the finances of the venture, but a lack of £££'s may also play a part.

I did speak to somebody recently who said she was due a compass swing however.....true or not I cannot say.....and that the location for the swing was proving difficult to find. This was just a passing conversation by the way.

As for the corporate world, well times is about to get a "wee bit hard" I suggest...so not much spare cash available for ventures such as this....sadly.

4x Olympussies...the sound of freedom.....Amen to that Beagle :ok:

forget

24th Dec 2007, 15:33

...and that the location for the swing was proving difficult to find. This was just a passing conversation by the way.

I've seen this mentioned elsewhere. Could be an excuse for other delays, not that I'm cynical ;). An airfield can make its own compass base in an afternoon.

http://www.caa.govt.nz/aircraft/compass_leaflet.htm

G-KEST

24th Dec 2007, 15:39

During a recent presentation Dr. Pleming said that there was a possibility that Brize Norton might be available for that compass swing.

Cheers,

Reaper 69
:cool:

Pontius Navigator

24th Dec 2007, 15:58

It depends on the standard of swing required.

When operational the Vulcan needed a Class 1 compass base for an accurate swing. As it no longer has a bomb nav requirement an simple swing should suffice.

The problem of a compass swing base is not simply whether the base is a Class 1 or Class 2 base but whether it can accommodate a Vulcan. While Brize should certainly have a suitable base I would have thought that Waddo could also handle in.

Dysonsphere

24th Dec 2007, 17:09

Silly question but where do BA do there compass swings if you can swing a 747 im sure a Vulcan will fit.

goudie

24th Dec 2007, 17:09

have no cash for any more flying. Of course, that's not based on any fact.

Then why post it? Lots of speculation, some of it quite negative.
The update on the 10th by the Chief Exec. seems quite upbeat. Lets wait and see what he says in the New Year, shall we?

flipflopman RB199

24th Dec 2007, 19:03

The rumour currently being discussed, is sadly no more than that. A rumour.

There are no issues, nor have there ever been any issues surrounding suitable sites for a compass swing for 558, as has been mentioned previously by forget, pretty much anywhere free of magnetic interference can be used. This is certainly not the reason that XH558 is still awaiting the remainder of her test schedule to be carried out.

There appear to be many issues dogging TVOC Management at present, and one of the major issues is sadly the financial aspect, and how that has been handled. This is unfortunately the main reason XH558 has not flown since the 18th Oct, and not any technical issues with the aircraft. XH558 has been handed over to TVOC as a fully serviceable airframe, and any issues now are with funding and management.

Flipflopman

BEagle

24th Dec 2007, 19:58

"......any issues now are with funding and management."

In which order...:confused:

TopBunk

24th Dec 2007, 20:10

Silly question but where do BA do there compass swings if you can swing a 747 im sure a Vulcan will fit.

I don't believe that BA routinely do compass swings at all. The compass base at LHR disappeared about 10 years ago.

Furthermore, if you look at the compass cards on the B747-400 fleet, they are the originals dating back to 1989 for the oldest.

goudie

24th Dec 2007, 21:41

From the CH.Ex.
So what are we doing? On the fund-raising side, at the start of the New Year you'll see some initiatives to find new supporters, and to stimulate additional donations and merchandise sales. We hope that our existing list of 25,000 donors will be keen to safeguard their investments in XH558 by making further donations; we remain totally reliant on this donation flow to keep us going until the sponsorship revenue stream commences.

In the light of what Flipflop has said I trust this isn't just spin!

GeeRam

24th Dec 2007, 22:13

and any issues now are with funding and management.

So, no change there then........:E

A2QFI

25th Dec 2007, 07:32

A statement on the official website, issued this month, says:-

We have taken sensible decisions in paring our costs back to the core whilst retaining our operational capabilities, but that still leaves us with the need to raise £60,000 per month just to remain viable. Any additional activity, such as actually flying the aircraft, requires us to raise substantially more cash.

Where on Earth is that sort of money going to come from, by way of voluntary contributions?

Blacksheep

25th Dec 2007, 07:51

Silly question but where do BA do there compass swings if you can swing a 747 im sure a Vulcan will fit.Compass swings? You are behind the times old chap. :rolleyes:

Older "Classic" B747s that do still have compass systems commonly receive "Electrical Swings" performed using a generic test set.

In modern airliners the compass system has disappeared, superseded by IRS coupled Flight Mangement Sytems. The only compass in these aircraft is the standby. As this needs to be accurate only to +/-5 degrees we no longer bother with ground swings; the pilots will snag it if it differs from the Inertial Reference System by more than the permitted limit. If the standby compass is changed for any reason - bubble in the fluid, sticking or hysteresis - we do an Air Swing against the IRS. A modern FMS is far more accurate than the old V Bombers' navigational capability; that's why specialist navigators have vanished from the crew lists.

ArthurR

27th Dec 2007, 09:39

Agree with you Blacksheep, and normally the standby compass differing from the Inertial Nav system can be cured by removing the manuals the crew place underneath it. :E

green granite

27th Dec 2007, 14:24

normally the standby compass differing from the Inertial Nav system can be cured by removing the manuals the crew place underneath it.

To say nothing of the lucky horseshoe. :hmm:

SirToppamHat

27th Dec 2007, 14:45

I did speak to somebody recently who said she was due a compass swing however.....true or not I cannot say.....and that the location for the swing was proving difficult to find. This was just a passing conversation by the way.

Have they tried Scampton? or Waddington? - The former less likely to be busy but the latter more likely to have the appropriate Crash Cat perhaps?

STH

forget

27th Dec 2007, 15:29

An airfield can make its own compass base in an afternoon.

Bruntingthorpe? Now there's an idea. :ok:

goudie

27th Dec 2007, 15:47

The G4B compass was a reliable bit of kit and the need for a swing is probably to satisfy certification for further flights which, I thought, were to be VFR conditions anyway. Maybe the cost of fuel to carry it out is of more concern. I'm puzzled too why B'thorpe isn't suitable. Thought there would have been a pan there.

BEagle

27th Dec 2007, 16:12

G4B??!!!!!!

goudie

28th Dec 2007, 09:30

Memory gets confused these days BEAgle, now realise it's the Smiths MFS on the Mk 2

BEagle

28th Dec 2007, 10:14

Military Fright System is no longer used in '558 - it has a 'conventional' gyrocompass system and conventional attitude indicators.

A compass swing shouldn't take as long as it did when we had to swing MFS. I was once unlucky enough to do one of those with a particularly finicky nav plotter. We were towed around the compass base at Scampton for about 3 hours - as was the Houchin. I was only there to work the brakes and pass the Watts Datum values (signalled from outside)to the plotter as we stopped on each heading. I seem to remember we did a 4 pointer first, then an 8. Each time we had to wait until the 'velodynes' (?) stopped spinning.

We normally sent the compass book off to someone else to do the analysis but, on this occasion, the plotter actually did his own Fourier analysis on an HP programmable calculator......:hmm:

Hopefully it'll be much simpler to swing '558!

goudie

28th Dec 2007, 10:54

it has a 'conventional' gyrocompass system and conventional attitude indicators

That's the one I'm familiar with from the MK 1. mind you it was almost 50 yrs ago so I'm not exactly an authority these days.
I think pilots regarded compass swings as a 'black art' and rather bothersome.
.

flipflopman RB199

28th Dec 2007, 11:19

With apologies for the poor quality of the photograph, this picture shows XH558's new cockpit layout, including the Garmin 430.

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/FlipflopmanRB199/072607140614.jpg

Flipflopman

BEagle

28th Dec 2007, 11:21

No, '558 has a modern all-electric HSI system, not the old G4B!

goudie

28th Dec 2007, 11:58

FF Thanks for pic. Looks very smart compared to the old conventional panel I was familiar with. Still recognise most of it. Re the HSI system BEAg's, the Zero Reader was probably the forerunner of this. Also I'm now off the G4B thing.

TheOddOne

28th Dec 2007, 12:09

There's also the need to maintain a certified Compass base, checked to be free of magnetic anomalies.

The CB at LGW was certified as Class II and used to get checked out by the Admiralty (from their experience with de-gaussing minesweepers I believe) but they gave up a while ago and the last check was done by Qinetiq, though as is the way with these things, it was the same guy who turned up! When it was re-certified following extensive taxiway reconstruction works, he found a wheelbarrow, shovels and all other manner of construction equipment buried in the soft.

Maybe B'thorpe doesn't have a certified CB?

As indicated by the posts above, it's a passing thing for big aeroplanes now, the LGW facility probably doesn't get used more than a couple of times a year. I stand to be corrected, but the old CB at LHR has actually gone?

TheOddOne

SFCC

5th Jan 2008, 18:23

Looks nice.....ish, but no Garmin 430 visible.:confused:

Old Speckled Aircrew

5th Jan 2008, 21:41

Not sure what the pilots gps instrumentation is like, but I believe the master control unit is at the AEOs station

StopStart

5th Jan 2008, 22:01

Not a Garmin 430 - looks like a Garmin 165. LHS, top of the panel.

I'll get my coat....

flipflopman RB199

6th Jan 2008, 00:41

Sorry, my bad.

Garmin 430 is indeed situated at the AEO station, with a Garmin 165 repeater at the top left hand corner of the First Pilots console.

Do you come with a 'Vice Like Grip' as well as the 'Eagle Eyes' StopStart? :p:ok:

Flipflopman

airsound

6th Jan 2008, 17:17

For all of Dr Robert Pleming’s many fans (and perhaps even a few detractors) there’s a chance to hear him on BBC Radio 4 this Wednesday, 9 January. He’ll be on ‘Midweek’, as one of Libby Purves’ guests. The programme starts at 09:00hrs, and it's repeated (slightly shorter) at 21:30
.
For anyone who doesn’t know who he is - he’s the CEO of The Vulcan Operating Company.
http://www.tvoc.co.uk/about_us.asp

airsound

SFCC

13th Jan 2008, 21:01

typhoid

13th Jan 2008, 21:15

Why not give BAE a bell and ask to pop back to Woodford??

GeeRam

13th Jan 2008, 21:30

So what's the news then?
Will it ever fly again or was that a one hit wonder?

Not going to paint myself into a corner, but I have to say I'm not wholly convinced by the viability of the ongoing operation.

I've just read on the Flypast forum a poster claiming that a Trustee recently claimed the VOC turned down a offer from the owners of Brunty of a purpose built hanger and office on the grounds of runway FOD and '558 would be leaving Brunty permanently for a base elsewhere.....:hmm:

Assuming that they ever get any money to fly it again of course, which at the moment does seem an unlikely prospect....and as a serious annual operation, I'm still unconvinced of that being financially viable..?

The Spruse Goose analogy does seem sadly apt at the moment....:(

Coastergirl

13th Jan 2008, 22:49

Hi,

I was present at the Vulcan to the Sky Club Members Day on Sat 12 January. Its important news, so for fear of it being overlooked in this thread, I have posted a full (unofficial) report of the talk by Dr Pleming and the Q & A session held.

There is good and bad in the report, I hope you find it interesting reading.

Regards
Coastergirl ;)

BEagle

14th Jan 2008, 06:47

Coastergirl, whereabouts is your report?

Unfortunately all I can find on the VTTS Forum is:

Sorry, the board is offline at the moment.

The forums are unavailable.

Dr Pleming hasn't provided any formal statement since 10 Dec 2007 - despite all the requests from hitherto loyal supporters. This is not helping the project in the slightest.....:ugh:

BEagle

14th Jan 2008, 07:03

Yes, sorry, found it now!

Thanks very much indeed, Coastergirl.

Oh - and Tombstone, Happy New Year. I'm still waiting.......:hmm:

mr fish

14th Jan 2008, 19:01

having been a motorsport fan for many many years, i have forgotten just how many times i have heard the terms " military grade this, aerospace grade that", would it not be time these HUGELY funded operations paid back by giving just a little bit of sponsorship money, after all , they seem to have benefited somewhat over the years!!!

spekesoftly

14th Jan 2008, 20:24

I believe Subaru provide transport for the project.

airborne_artist

14th Jan 2008, 20:48

would it not be time these HUGELY funded operations paid back by giving just a little bit of sponsorship money

Sponsorship is like advertising - you spend money in the hope of getting a lot more back when your new (or existing) customers buy your product. There's no point spending money once they've bought all they can. Defence spending as a proportion of GDP is falling, and is going into far fewer, far larger projects, where advertising and sponsorship are as much use at t!ts on a fish. Hence no chance that defence-based companies will fall over themselves to throw money at TVOC.

mr fish

14th Jan 2008, 21:06

er, tits on a fish?, f1 has been pimping off aerospace for many years now. even in the late 70s the monocques were fashioned from aerolam and now of course we have kevlar,grp,mil grade connectors etc, why not a small(ish) f1 logo or something similar to show the watching public where all this gear was first used. 10+ teams, 100 grand each(how much do they spend in hospitality alone)= 1 million. surely we get one season out of that!!

goudie

14th Jan 2008, 22:22

I'm surprised one of the major Oil Companies hasn't offered free fuel. Drop in the ocean for them.

Mike51

15th Jan 2008, 00:05

Errrr........F1 teams sponsoring the Vulcan?

It may have escaped your notice, but F1 teams raise the majority of their income from sponsorship. Why would they then give it away in the form of sponsoring another, non-related activity? :confused:

mr fish

15th Jan 2008, 17:01

er , yeh, since 1968-gold leaf lotus,jim clark- graham hill:8. look, i know this is just a personal rant but surely someone can get the jist of my angle(no?, oh fu:mad:k it then).

Coastergirl

15th Jan 2008, 17:42

Hi,

In post #630, Goudie said:

I'm surprised one of the major Oil Companies hasn't offered free fuel. Drop in the ocean for them.

At the Club Members Day in Lutterworth on Saturday 12th January, Dr Pleming told us that Air BP are giving the project 50% of the fuel required in 2008 gratis, and a favourable rate for the remaining 50%. Every little helps.

Regards
Coastergirl

MostlyHarmless

20th Feb 2008, 12:08

Not looking good. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/20/vulcan_bomber_update/) at the moment...

"We need to start the rest of the test flight programme with the return of good weather at the beginning of March, but we still have to have £150,000 in our hands before we can do that, plus confidence that we will go on raising at least £50,000 per month after that.

:eek:

harrogate

20th Feb 2008, 12:49

They've still got a long way to go to beat this government's 'how much can we spend on an aircraft that'll never fly?' record.

airsound

22nd Feb 2008, 06:38

Dr Rob Pleming (CEO of Vulcan to the Sky) has just (0650) been on Today on Radio 4, talking to Jim Naughtie.

I haven't yet got the 'listen back' details, but I'll post them when I can, unless anyone else can do so in the meantime. Rob and I are both in Belgium at the European Air Show Council meeting, so internet access is a bit spasmodic at the mo.

airsound

Low Ball

22nd Feb 2008, 06:47

I heard the interview this morning on Radio 4.

They are looking for sponsorship of an immediate £150K and £50K per month until the Airshow season starts. The presumption then is that once flying and on view to the public the money will come rolling in and the CEO sited 2 cases - £6M over the life of the project all from public donation and IIRC £1.5M over a 12 or was it 18 month period. It sounded to me as if he felt the public would come to the rescue.

Mr Naughtie did not ask if there was a Plan B and one was not volunteered. Judging by what I read on this thread the future looks more ugley that rosey.

LB

cornish-stormrider

22nd Feb 2008, 07:56

Talking of roses........

Mr Tombstone, do we have anything to tell us?? How about PM'ing everyone with a link to the dirty deed

Fake Sealion

22nd Feb 2008, 08:26

Commence Rant

Shell recently reported a trading profit of £13.9 billion for 2007. That is £1.5 million per Hour
The Vulcan project is seeking approx £350K to get the aircraft to the first Airshow. Shell would generate that sum in 14 minutes.

However, I'm clealry missing the point somewhere.

End Rant

flightlineuk

22nd Feb 2008, 08:35

Sean, Here's the link to the appropriate part of the show - you need to skip to about 20.00 mins :-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today1_20080222.ram

Tim McLelland

22nd Feb 2008, 13:17

The whole saga seems to be turning into a farce. I know that Pleming is a past master when it comes to issuing "scare tactics" announcements, so I hope his latest comments are little more than that. On the other hand, if TVOC really have failed to find any significant sponsorship by now, the project's clearly dead. The whole saga rested on the first flight and it was claimed that sponsors were waiting in the wings to come forward, once the aircraft flew. Well... where are they? Sounds like typical British bull**it... people full of vaguely good intentions, but they run a mile when they have to put their hands in their pockets.

There is only one sensible option. HLF threw a lot of money into the project. TVOC should go back to them and explain that if they don't give a little more (much less than the amount already given) then all the money they've given so far will be wasted. It's a perfectly logical argument. HLF will doubtless say that they cannot do more but of course they can do what they like. They can twist the rules to suit. How much money will be poured into this stupid two week sports event in London in 2012? It seems obvious to me that if TVOC's PR people did their job well, they could put HLF in a very tight spot. What they gonna do? Throw away millions (again!) just because they're too blinkered to spend a little bit more?

I fear TVOC's people won't even bother asking. They'll be too busy chasing unrealistic goals. I mean, after all that work, the first flight got no more than a ten-second snip of national coverage. Inviting the local news media was pointless. Who gives a toss what local news programmes broadcast? Much as I hate the bloke, they should have had Jeremy Clarkson there, and some other celebs. There is only one way you can get good national TV coverage and that's by having some celebs to provide some banal sound bites. You'd think TVOC would have grasped that fact, and not wasted such a unique event.

It's a sad business.

The Swinging Monkey

22nd Feb 2008, 13:43

Tim,

How absolutely correct you are, it is an utter farce. I can't see the lottery people giving any more money for one simple reason - the management of this project have been shown to be seriously lacking, and whilst they are in place, at the helm of a rudderless ship, no one in their right mind would give any more cash.

I have waiting for a responce from Airsound, but I note that he is at an airshow with his good friend Dr Pleming! (no wonder he supports him so much) May I suggest that Pleming would do better if he got his backside back here and started answering some questions about what is happening?

Here is the post I put on the other forum:

So,
Surprise surprise, the Vulcan is in trouble yet again. When will they ever learn down at Brunters? How can so few people, make so many errors in their calculations and get it so wrong, so often??

In a statement, Keith Mans states:

Under their Companies Act obligations, the Board of Trustees must have sufficient confidence that the levels of funding required will be forthcoming at the right time. The Trustees have decided, with the deepest regret, that unless such confidence is gained by the end of March, further activity by the Vulcan to the Sky Trust will for the time being be suspended. So once again, we are dependent on the goodwill of others to ensure that XH558, the people’s aircraft, continues to fly. In August 2006, the public responded magnificently to our plea for support, and as the result, XH558 took to the air last October. Would you please join the Club and/or make a donation now to ensure that we are able to keep our promise to give XH558 back to you this summer?

Tell us Keith, will they be the same people who you wouldn't let come to see 'their aircraft' take to the skies last year?? And I notice you to have reverted to the old 'pay up or it fails' thread again eh?

And the good Dr Pleming writes:

The next phase in the new life of XH558 takes the aircraft from today up to its first public display. In funding terms, we estimate that it will cost about £575,000 to meet our target of returning her to public display on 1st June, an amount which is consistent with our estimated gross annual running costs of about £1.6million. Following on from the enormous financial goodwill shown by many companies, and by Marshall Aerospace in particular, in enabling us to achieve the first test flight on 18th October, we have chosen to avoid the risk of future fiscal embarrassment by electing to pay for any major work before it starts. Whilst the largest proportion of the £575,000 pays for the monthly £70,000 baseline costs of salaries and other vital items, the steepest part of the new challenge is the upfront outlay of £85,000 required now to restart the test flight programme. The costs of the display work-up flights and aviation insurance are the other major elements making up the total.

Tell me Robert, did no one advise you about the Insurance costs? Did you not even have an inkling yourself? And what about these salaries? have they just been introduced or what? Why were neither of these costs factored into your budget plans? Just who is running this show?

Just as a matter of interest to all those thousands of people who, like myself, have given over their hard-earned cash to you for the past few years, who is in charge of finances at TVOC? Do you have a treasurer?

No doubt Dr Plemings friends will soon kick off here, telling us what a fine chap he is, and we are wrong to bad mouth the project, but the fact remains that, IMHO, and i suspect in the minds of many others, this project is rapidly turning into a joke. The sad thing is that the joke is on the thousands of people who have thrown good money at it.

OK, standing by for a barrage of abuse from you-know-who!

TSM

BEagle

22nd Feb 2008, 14:53

In early January, many concerned questions were being asked quite reasonably on the Vulcan to the Sky forum. Not once was a reply offered by the Trust - in fact the entire thread later disappeared.

Why?

No answers = no more donations. Well, that's what many people said.

The second flight was due to happen shortly after the first, but due to a cock-up, there wasn't sufficient fire cover. Or so I'm told.

Then they all went on holiday - and there was almost a total news blackout for the rest of the year. NOT a good way to win support and/or sponsorship!

Incidentally, Tombstone never did send me the DVD of his performance.....

Winco

22nd Feb 2008, 15:09

It is good to see that the likes of BEagle, for whom I have the utmost respect, seems to be agreeing with some of the more sceptical posters on this forum. It is indeed, and sad refelction on TVOC that even the hardest of the die-hards are getting a little fed up with the lack of responce and progress being made. The sheer arrogance of Pleming and the rest of the top brass at bruningthorpe not to reply or respond is shameful I feel, and saysd much about the people who are (supposedly) running this project.

For fear of being haranged by some, I fully agree with the previous posters regarding bad management and would suggest a little bit of incompetance even.

We have been assured on countless occasions that there were plenty of sponsors ready to come on board, and I remember hearing DT state publicly that 'money (sponsorship money) is not a problem' Well David, it certainly appears to be a problem now old man, dosn't it?

No doubt the next copy of Flypast or Air forces Monthly will have yet another interview with Pleming, threatening the projects end unless more money can be found.

Maybe it's time to let the old lady retire gracefully?

forget

22nd Feb 2008, 15:14

Maybe it's time to let the old lady retire gracefully?

More to the point - maybe it's time to ask those holding the purse strings where the hell the money has gone- Officially!

Winco

22nd Feb 2008, 15:40

forget,

well said Sir!

The Rocket

22nd Feb 2008, 21:48

As much as it surprises me to say it, for once I am in total agreement with TSM/Winco. This entire project really has become a lesson in mismanagement and incompetance, and I shall certainly not be putting a penny more into TVOC's squanderous pockets. As much as I would love to see the aircraft fly, I have no wish to keep incompetant managers in a job, for the sake of it.

TSM/Winco,

Why do you persist in continuing this charade of being seperate individuals, when it is clear that you are indeed one and the same person, popping up on every Vulcan thread, to add weight to each others posts? You are now not only over using the word "Sir" in the posts that you make, but are now both awaiting a 'Responce' (sic) from TVOC. This would perhaps not be quite so tiresome if it did not happen every single time a post on the Vulcan appeared. I quote.......

Winco..
It is indeed, and sad refelction on TVOC that even the hardest of the die-hards are getting a little fed up with the lack of responce and progress being made

The Swinging Monkey..
I have waiting for a responce from Airsound, but I note that he is at an airshow with his good friend Dr Pleming

A coincidence? Possibly, but within 90 minutes of each other, along with your previous form, I doubt it.

Winco

23rd Feb 2008, 05:36

Rocket,
You are not the first to suggest that, but I'm afraid you are wrong.
I don't know who TSM is, and just because we agree on this topic of the Vulcan is hardly cause to suggest otherwise. (I think that if you look at the Nimrod thread, you will see that on more than one occasion I actually argue against some of the more 'colourful' things he says)

I call many people 'Sir' infact I use it most days when I talk to ATC around the world. I use it a term of endearment more than anything else, and Air Traffickers like it! I would suggest that most commercial pilots do the same. Maybe TSM is also a commercial pilot, although his profile suggests otherwise.

So, I'm sorry, but you're wrong in your assumption, and I will try to make a point of not agreeing with him anymore!

MrSoft

23rd Feb 2008, 09:52

How totally depressing. Been away and I just caught up with this stuff.

Sitting in my inbox was the entreaty to Spam everyone from GMTV to the Beano with the lamest press release I ever saw. My mouth is agape at the amateurishness off it all. Where is the marketing oomphh, in return for all our donations? I see they do actually have a Commercial Director called Rusty, who seems more preoccupied with moaning about "copywrite" (sic) issues and unauthorised use of the word Vulcan.

It seems to me that they failed utterly to lever publicity around the first flight, perhaps the most moving aviation event I can remember, excepting Concorde's last flight.

It seems to me that they never thought beyond first flight and had no plan.

Make no mistake, it will go t*ts-up unless some professional input on marketing / sponsorship materialises. It's just a question of time. I am left feeling that I wish it had never flown at all, it's too poignant!

forget

23rd Feb 2008, 10:03

Commercial Director called Rusty, who seems more preoccupied with moaning about "copywrite" (sic) issues

:ugh::ugh: That says it all - in a dozen words. The 'management' were/are all amateurs. 'Rusty' will call 558 the 'plane'.

Tim McLelland

23rd Feb 2008, 12:24

As some of you know, I followed the saga quite closely last year while I was working on my Vulcan book. Now that it's published, I've lost interest as I got completly bored with the conflicting stories and half truths which continue even to this day as we can see.

It must say something about the project that when I first started the book, we approached TVOC to seek their co-operation so that we could benefit from their story and also publicse the project. All I got was a snotty response saying they wouldn't release anything that wasn't on their website, as everything else would form the basis of their own publication which would raise money for the project. All well and good (although I guess they didn't raise much!), but when we approached publication time, I thought it was only fair to try and help as best we could, so we approached TVOC again to see if we could at least run some information on the project's progress in the book, and promote the project through the promotion of our book etc. Despite a long series of emails (and calls from my publisher), all we ever got was a ticket to the first flight! So the biggest Vulcan book ever produced evidently is of no interest to them - think we can draw our own conclusions about the effectiveness of their PR people, from that very fact.

Clearly, they seem incapable of seizing a publicity opportunity when it's handed to them. So it rather begs the question - just how many people are getting paid, and to do what?

Even Pleming doesn't seem to be doing much, despite some astonishing expenses claims which I was shown (in confidence) some time ago. Claiming what would be almost a year's salary for me, to cover one business trip seems just a little excessive when the money was supposed to be going to the Vulcan, not the people surrounding it. His performance on Radio 4 was just plain rubbish - I could have done better myself. For starters, he allowed the interviewer to start-off the whole section with incorrect information, and then he just drifted into the same old waffle, and then allowed the interviewer to start talking about how magnificent Concorde is! It's just rubbish - complete and utter rubbish. The worst kind of amateurish babble that a kid could utter. If these people can't string a plausible sentence together and say what needs to be said, what are they getting paid for? For heaven's sake, if you can't say what needs to be said when you finally get the chance, clear-off and get somebody who can, and stop wasting our money.

I've followed the saga for a long time, I've tried to offer my help where I could and frankly I'm sick and tired of it. I've given these people the benefit of the doubt but I'm quite coinvinced now that we're dealing with a bunch of fools and opportunists who are making a fast buck for doing nothing, with other people's money. I feel truly sorry for all the guys who have done the real work on the aircraft - their efforts come to nothing when the fools who are supposedly managing the project just go from one self-induced crisis to another.

I'm convinced there is only one solution - a pressure group needs to be formed that goes to HLF and convinces them that as the major contributor of public money, they have the right to investigate the whole project, kick-out all the idiots and money-makers, and appoint people who can see this project through to a proper conclusion, so that all the HLF money spent so far isn't simply wasted. I don't think there's any point arguing with the muppets at Bruntingthorpe any longer - it's the HLF that has the authority to stop this nonsense before it drifts on any longer.

andrewmcharlton

23rd Feb 2008, 12:29

Perhaps the way to deal with their lack of accountability at Brunty is to make some well worded Freedom of Information requests to the HLF and the Charities Commission ?

Someone has already asked for copies of their application documents which were released...."In August 2007, a member of the public requested sight of the application forms submitted for the Vulcan Bomber project. After consulting the applicant, the forms were released."

forget

23rd Feb 2008, 12:50

Even Pleming doesn't seem to be doing much, despite some astonishing expenses claims which I was shown (in confidence) some time ago. Claiming what would be almost a year's salary for me, to cover one business trip seems just a little excessive when the money was supposed to be going to the Vulcan, not the people surrounding it.

WTF! What now needs to be done is a FORMAL insistence that the books be made public - and why not here on Prune? I'd guess that a fair amount of the dosh came from Pruners.

We need a single creditable Representative to wield the stick. Any takers? Any suggestions? This will go from bad to worse :mad:

andrewmcharlton

23rd Feb 2008, 13:08

I see from the Charities Commission website no accounts or annual returns have been received since 31st July 2005.

Also, on reading the newest set of accounts available even the Auditors couldn't sign off the books as being a true reflection due to lack of documentation and information available and couldn't verify the future of the project as a sgoing concern even then.

Somebody somewhere needs to be accountable for this.

forget

23rd Feb 2008, 13:49

Here's a start. Now all that's needed are the missing years and a detailed breakdown of what went where.

Financial History
Finan Y Start Finan Y End Gross Income Total Expenditure

01 Aug 2003 31 Jul 2004 £446,465 £200,158
01 Aug 2004 31 Jul 2005 £1,092,081 £839,575

Tim McLelland

23rd Feb 2008, 14:11

I'm no legal expert, so I don't know how one should proceed to make these people more accountable. I guess the problem is that it's unwise to start hurling direct accusations at them without some sort of legal back-up, otherwise it could get very messy indeed. But having said that, I would have thought there must be a PPruner out there somewhere who has the legal qualifications to do something? I've heard lots over the past year, some of it has been common knowledge and some of it has been said to me in confidence, but overall, I think the TVOC set-up is a joke and I'm convinced that some people are taking advantage of their positions in the group to do little but get money out of it - money that was supposed to go to the Vulcan.

I have no objections to people getting paid when they have to work on the project full time but as to how much they're paid and why? Well when it's public money being used, we have a right to know what is being spent and where. It wouldn't be so bad if we thought these people were doing a good job, but on the basis of everything that's happened (or not happened) since last October, I don't think they're doing a good job at all. That awful radio interview yesterday is a classic example. If that's the kind of thing that Pleming is getting paid (handsomely) for, then it's no wonder the project has been such a mess.

What exactly do all these people do? ; the Trustees, the Directors, the PR company etc.? It really is time that somebody with some good legal background took them to task and demanded that they stop using-up huge amounts of other people's money, without providing a very clear and current explanation of what is spent, where it goes, who gets paid what, and precisely what they're doing in exchange for the cash. That's not an unreasonable requirement. Simply expecting everyone to roll-over and let them do what they like, in secret, is just not acceptable when other people's money is being spent.

nacluv

23rd Feb 2008, 14:41

This has all happened before. Didn't the last Vulcan 558 trust implode amid financial irregularities and so on? We're here again, aren't we?

Having put more into this fund than I could really afford (i.e. letting my enthusiasm for the Vulcan get the better of me), the current situation is depressing and very hard to take.

I think the general consensus that the whole thing has been grossly mis-managed sounds about right from where I'm sitting. That is how it appears. I am a layman - not an 'insider', and that is exactly how he whole project now comes across.

I can't understand how last year's late corrosion problems could have come about - and at that late stage in particular. The whole airframe had been subject to countless ultrasonic and visual tests and inspections, so how could it have been discovered so late in the day?

Surely the latest calculations for running costs could and should have been anticipated well in advance. To have to admit that these matters were seemingly overlooked or ignored is a clear signal of incompetence if ever there was one.

As for the (alleged) expense claim issue, I would very much like to see where this goes - if true then we need someone like the SFO in on this as soon as possible.

The absolutely deafening silence since October is a PR cock-up of colossal magnitude. Where are all the sponsors who were just waiting to see the aircraft in the air? Has the Trust succeeded in scaring them ALL away? Or was this a complete lie from the outset? Either way, it's yet more evidence (as if more were needed) of managerial ineptitude.

I haven't even renewed my club subscription, let alone pledge more money, and that's not going to change unless something radically changes at VTST.

"Vulcan to the Sky - the PR disaster to end all PR disasters"

Lancasterman

23rd Feb 2008, 14:41

I'me not a legal expert but wouldn't it be wise for HLF to have someone come in and legally make TVOC accountable for every last penny and find out where all the money went and why?
Not to be a doom and gloom merchant but I think this might be the end of the project unless as has been posted previously, the top end is cleared out and new people put in place.

Polikarpov

23rd Feb 2008, 15:09

Where are all the sponsors who were just waiting to see the aircraft in the air?According to Pleming during the Radio 4 interview (I agree with Tim, it was atrocious) they were simply falling over themselves to throw money at the Vulcan until the, erm, 'global credit crunch' happened, and now no-one can afford it.

Trying to pin a lack of sponsorship on the US sub-prime situation is a little tenuous, to say the least. I can't imagine many of the would-be sponsors were financial institutions; I don't think it was ever going to be the Northern Rock Vulcan (although that seems to be where it's now headed - without the subsequent bailout and nationalisation).

It's all so depressing, maybe 558 should be crated up and sent to the States where they know how to look after aviation icons (to rejoin the SHAR in a Falklands heritage flight).

Tim McLelland

23rd Feb 2008, 16:13

I have had mixed feelings about Pleming for a long time. On a private level he seems to be a very freindly and communicative guy, but I have to balance that with comments from other people (many in confidence) that suggest he isn't doing a good job and he's costing the project an awful lot of money in the process. I've seen a few of his interviews now and every time he gets a rare opportunity to talk to the media he makes a mess of it. He doesn't sell the project at all and he leaves people with the impression that it's some half-baked bunch of idiots trying to tart-up an old plane in their spare time. It's little wonder that major sponsors don't seem to take the project seriously if he approaches them in the same way. I was willing to accept TVOC's lack of communication and their somethimes-snotty attitude, on the basis that once the first flight came, the project would literally take-off. Now to hear him bleating about air show appearances, and how the project will suddenly flourish after a few air show appearances, is just nonsense. First of all, it pre-supposes that potential sponsors will even be aware of air shows, whereas they would surely have been made well-aware of last year's first flight? So why would turning-up at Waddington's show make the slightest bit of difference?

I fear that they lost their golden opportunity last October. In my opinion, the whole project rested on that one day and TVOC should have thrown their whole attention into that one event, moving heaven and earth to get national media, celebrities, potential sponsors and so on, over to Bruntingthorpe to showcase what was the culmination of a fantastic project that everyone claimed could never succeed. What did we get? A few plane spotters with cameras, and the local news who slipped a few minutes of coverage between the usual cats up trees and chavs fighting on council estates. It was a joke.

Now, months later, TVOC has been silent, going out of their way to avoid telling everyone what is going on, and relying on vague and slightly misleading statements about where they should go from here. Worse still, they're back to the same old story of "if only you could send us a few more quid, we could survive". For heaven's sake - every time the contrubition target is met, they simply open a new one. It's just ridiculous and I don't buy a word of it any longer - I just don't think TVOC have any intention of giving an honest account of how much money they've spent on what, and precisely how much money they need for the future. It's shameful.

My biggest gripe is with their PR company. Where the hell are they? For a PR company they seem to be spectacularly inept at generating publicity and yet I assume they're taking a hefty amount of money from the project.

More dark and gloomy statements about what they might or might not be forced to do are just no longer credible. I don't think anyone will believe a word of it any longer. I think the time has come where someone (or a group of people) needs to get some sort of legal backing and then go back to HLF directly to say that as the people who gave contributions or who offered them help, or who bought Lottery tickets, we demand that we get a clear and detailed account of precisely where every penny has gone and precisely what each person within TVOC actually does on a day-to-day basis. If they can't provide an answer then I think there should be some investigation into how these people can be removed and replaced by people who can get results and who aren't simply there for reasons of self-importance or profit.

It's not like they haven't had more than enough goodwill and last chances. Personally, I think the aircraft is far more important than these muppets that seem to have assumed control over it.

Tim McLelland

23rd Feb 2008, 16:29

I thought I'd put-up this separate post in the hope that the Pprune administrators might allow it to remain as a stand-alone message, and to draw people's attention back to the XH558 thread which can be found elsewhere on the forum. I suspect that many people might not bother even reading the XH558 thread now, as it's dragged-on for so long - just like the actual project!

In short, you may have read that TVOC are once again claiming that the project needs at least another 150K to survive and that their expected sponsorship hasn't appeared, supposedly because of the downturn in the world economic climate. In realty, one assumes that these sponsors were just full of good intentions and now that the Vulcan has flown, they never actually proposed to put their hands in their pockets in the first place.

Worse still TVOC seems completely unwilling to give a proper account of precisely how much money is needed, or where all the money has gone so far. They repeatedly avoid explaining which people in the team get paid what, or why, and it looks like everyone's goodwill and patience has finally run out - just when the Vulcan should be preparing for its first air show season.

I think everyone would agree that this saga has gone from one self-induced crisis to another for far too long and the time must be right for someone with proper legal knowledge to get involved. It needs someone to go back to HLF and ask them (as providers of millions, paid for by Lottery ticket buyers) to demand a proper explanation from TVOC which provides full details as to who does precisely what, who has been paid how much and why, and, most importantly, why the predicted sponsorship has suddenly disappeared. I think most of us agree that these people have been given the benefit of the doubt for a long time but now that the aircraft has flown, and the project seems to have come to a halt again, it's time that it was sorted-out once and for all so that the aircraft can either take to their air, or be flown-out to another country where more competent (and wealthy) people might be able to save the aircraft from an undeserved demise.

So, the question is, are there any Ppruners out there who have any "clout" either within political, media or legal circles? Surely, there must be someone out there who can stop all this nonsense once and for all? As Dr Pleming said only a day back, the Vulcan is our aircraft - we've paid for it, therefore it must be time to get some sort of control over its future?

Dysonsphere

23rd Feb 2008, 16:47

the whole thing is very sad its flown once and is now sitting in a hanger again. Now is proper maintanice been done or is she being left to rot with failed seals etc. Would like to hear the answer.

Lancasterman

23rd Feb 2008, 16:51

Museums make use of volunteers from those that push brooms to working on aircraft to office work, why should tvoc be any different? Do they utitlise the volunteers force is there enough in the area to be able to help? Why pay salaries if volunteers could do the same job?

forget

23rd Feb 2008, 17:07

From the Charity Commission Web Here (http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/publications/cc3.asp)

F5. Do trustees have to keep accounts?

There are legal requirements (in the 1993 Act and associated regulations) for charities, relating to:

(several, including) availability of accounts to the public.

Flying Signman

23rd Feb 2008, 17:09

Tim,

A bit of a grabbing headline.

Can I just ask if you have been on the site (and more importantly the forum) in the last few days at all?

I, like you perhaps have had great reservations over past performance and the viability of the "master-plan". However, things are moving on a-pace.

E-Donations are currently averaging £10,000 per week and some key initiatives should see the current shortfall raised/underwritten well before the end of March.

There are sufficient people who care so much about this project, that as much as you seek legal help - perhaps the right people in Sponsorship, Marketing and PR are getting on-board.

How current is your latest information, perhaps it is not so much of a crisis as you think?

Dysonsphere,
Anti-Dets are all to schedule as the Crew Chief has clearly stated and 558 is due out (weather permitting) next week.

Would it have been wise when it's been -5 degrees?

By the way, I am no official of TVOC - just someone who keeps upto speed with actual events and facts.

These sort of threads do no good to the general cause.

nwest

23rd Feb 2008, 17:11

[quote]I've seen a few of his interviews now and every time he gets a rare opportunity to talk to the media he makes a mess of it. He doesn't sell the project at all and he leaves people with the impression that it's some half-baked bunch of idiots trying to tart-up an old plane in their spare time.QUOTE]

I tend to agree.

I don't know Dr Pleming, nor have I ever met him, so I'm unqualified to make statements about his personality - but the impression he tends to provide on media interviews isn't a great one.

His performance on Radio 4's "Woman's Hour" a few weeks ago left a lot to be desired. He just came across on that occasion as dry, monotone and (frankly) dull. Dr Pleming speaks of wanting to get the Vulcan to fly to re-ignite interest and enthusiasm among young generations about engineering. The spokesman for the Vulcan project should therefore come across as energetic and enthusiastic which, with due respect, Dr Pleming does not.

Put it this way. If I was an "ordinary" person, not especially interested in aviation or aware of the Vulcan, and I heard Dr Pleming's interview on Woman's Hour - would I, after listening to Dr Pleming speak, be engaged and enthused about the subject enough to go and seek further info about it and maybe contribute to it? I'm not so sure I would be.

We live in a media age and people from all organisations who want public support for their cause (whatever it is) need to play the media game to get support. That means a certain type of spokesperson, with adequate media training.

Tim's suggestion of a well-known, 'appropriate' celebrity (like Clarkson) is a good one. Failing that, I see the airshow commentator Sean Maffet has posted on this thread. How about Sean being TVOC's media spokesperson? From his years of airshow commentating (and his BBC Oxfordshire days before that), as well as his other work with TV/video productions, Sean - to my mind at least - has a knack of choosing the right words, and able to inject a bit of warmth and humour to things.

And, in my opinion, he's a far more engaging listen than Dr Pleming.

x10ge

23rd Feb 2008, 17:16

Tim

Whilst I agree with your condemnation of an apparent misspend of HLF funding, you are now asking them to spend more money on finding out where the money has gone. As a regular buyer of lottery tickets I don't want anymore wasted - it would be better spent on air ambulances!

If you think there has been an insjustice then you should perhaps ask for a proper legal investigation. Funding grants are, I believe, issued after a proper case has been put forward and unless the money is spent outside of the proposal then no one has committed an offence.

Sad I know but like any other investment did you invest in the Vulcan? or its operating company?

Yes I have lost faith as well.

X10

Exrigger

23rd Feb 2008, 17:47

Flying Signman, while I agree to a point with your comments you asked if Tim has been in the forum and read what is going on. I think you will find that is the point that was being made, if you want donations and sponsorship then you cannot hide it behind two log ins on the TVOC forum, only accessable to those who are part of the membership.

It should of been pushed in the media and across the web from the first flight, not a wall of silence, which I think you will find the very supporters that you are part of also made these points on the same TVOC forum.

Like you I have nothing to do with the TVOC, only as an avid supporter who does not want the hard work by the guys and gals who achieved the impossible, including Marshalls and all of the OEMs who helped and not forgetting the support from the CAA, without which the effort would have been wasted and finally not forgetting the HLF for finally seeing sense and supporting a cold war icon that should never have been left to rot like 'we' have done with all the others.

kwh

23rd Feb 2008, 17:48

...as quickly as possible, then?

It's telling that the response of TVOC to people asking pertinent questions on their forum was to close it and make it 'members only'. So if you want to discuss the project with TVOC or ask 'difficult' questions, you first have to stump up to 'join the club'. I've donated more than once in the past (not huge sums, but more than I would want to waste), but never joined a 'club' - I'm not sure it existed when I donated last, and if it had, I wouldn't have thought they needed to be paying to send me 'newsletters' or whatever that I was just going to bin unread, so I didn't bother. Not another penny of mine is going to TVOC unless I develop confidence that they have a clue and aren't grossly incompetent and/or fraudsters and/or fantasists. At the moment I have no such confidence, and they don't seem to be interested in correcting any false impression I may have gained, so no more cash from me for the duration. I'll pay to go to an airshow to watch the Vulcan display tomorrow, though.

However, the Vulcan is now restored and sitting in a hangar at Bruntingthorpe. It can't be 'unrestored', although it might need somebody to keep it ticking over on a voluntary basis, if the CAA will allow that. If there is a viable way of operating it in the future, somebody will surely do so, even if the TVOC expires. If there never was a viable way of operating it, then the people who extracted money from hundreds or thousands of donors, and the HLF, have a lot more questions to answer than the already long list they will have if and when TVOC goes bust without delivering a flying Vulcan! Indeed, I would expect that the auditors from the Charity Commission, the HLF and if it appears necessary the SFO will be all over them as and when the organisation hits the buffers, so we will surely know sooner rather than later what has been going on!

If I'm right, donating is the last thing anybody should do. Let it die, and we might yet see a Vulcan in the air, if we were ever going to... and when the wheels of the various inevitable investigations finally grind to a conclusion, we might yet eventually all find out what happened to our money and who is to be held accountable...

kwh

23rd Feb 2008, 17:54

During the year ended 31 July 2005, Vulcan To The Sky Trust paid RW Pleming Consulting Limited an amount of £82,933 including expenses (2004 :£48,684) for consultancy services.

:eek:

What the F.... !

Is that widely known? What value has he added for that exactly? And how many of e.g. the ex-Vulcan crew who are now pensioners and have contributed what are to them very large sums of money on an ongoing basis knew that and would have been happy about it?

Tim McLelland

23rd Feb 2008, 18:35

Indeed, a "grabbing headline" was what I was trying to create, so the folks who have grown tired of reading the XH558 thread might take notice!

Short answer is no, I haven't been on their forum nor do I propose to - I'm really not interested in reading endless half truths, waffle, what if's and all the rest of it. It's gone on far too long. I'm only interested in trying to ensure that the aircraft isn't abandoned after having come so far.

Frankly, having heard all the fuss about their forum, I just don't think it matters one way or the other what is said on there, be it from members or TVOC people. We don't need to have some endless dialogue with TVOC - all that is required is a simple, regular statement of progress and activities. Simple as that. More statements of how they need just a little bit more money are unfair, unless they're prepared to explain (properly) why sponsorship hasn't come forward when they insisted it would after the first flight. Cheap lines about economic downturns are just insulting.

Frankly, instead of wasting time on forums, they should have someone (maybe Dr Pleming? He's supposed to be the guy in control isn't he?) make a detailed statement every week which includes a breakdown of what he and his team have actually done that week, and how much they were paid to do it. Think it would make fascinacting reading, and for a group which is happily spending the public's money, they seem incredibly reluctant to do something like this. One has to wonder why. I don't accept for a second that when Pleming in particular gets paid well to handle the project full time, he can't provide the public with that sort of information on a regular basis. Is he really that busy? All week? Every day?

It has simply gone on for far too long. I'm sick of hearing tales about what might or might not be happening and I'm tired of stories about various offers of help which have been ignored or mishandled. Having done my best to help them on two separate occasions, I'm also convinced that they're just not interested.

I accept that it's pointless to carry on carping, and I also accept that the real situation may not be as bad as it sounds. My point is, TVOC shouldn't be saying on the one hand that things are progressing smoothly, and then begging for cash as if they can't succeed without it, at the same time. Fundamentally, I just hope that there are some people out there who think, like me, that it's time to find-out what's really going on, before it's too late.

I don't have any influence but as I said previously, surely someone on Pprune must have a bit of potential "clout" in the right places? Or do we all just sit-back and listen to the endless wittering yet again, until next week's crisis comes along?

Tim McLelland

23rd Feb 2008, 18:59

Well this goes back to what I mentioned earlier. He gets paid handsomely. Nothing wrong with the guy in charge being paid of course, but you have to ask why it has to be that much? For heaven's sake, it's supposed to be a fund raising group and one would assume that the main man would be the one who would be putting his whole efforts into it, and trying to take as little out of it as possible. Frankly, when someone is getting what amounts to a huge salary, you really do have every right to know what we're getting for that in return. He (and TVOC) have no right to hide away behind paid-for forums, misleading statements or anything else. And for an annual expenses account like that, I really do think we should expect something rather better than Pleming's bumbling nonsense, on the rare occasions that he does manage to get any media coverage of the project.

I think we've all assumed the position of allowing these guys to get away with all sorts of liberties on the assumption that it was worth it, if it got XH558 back into the air. But it's flown now, and the way things are it doesn't sound like it will fly again, or if it does, not for very long. So I think we have every right to stop letting them do as they like, and start demanding some proper feedback. I don't care what Pleming has done so far (not much, from what he's bothered to tell us about) but if his expenses work-out at 200 quid a day, I think anyone would be wanting to ask precisely what we're getting for that. It's laughable - he claims he needs 150k - well maybe he could have handled the project in his spare time for free for a couple of years? That would have covered it! Heaven-knows he doesn't seem to have occupied every hour of the day on the project, or if he did, what's he been doing?

Doubtless he would claim that he's had to go here and there, do this or do that, but really, come on, I think we're being had for mugs here. I don't accept for a minute that half of the stuff he's been doing has been necessary. Floating around at air shows in a suit isn't exactly doing much to get sponsorship, and yet I'm quite sure he manages to claim every one of these junkets is an "expense" to claim for.

I feel terribly sorry for the people who have actually done the work on this project when there are people like Pleming and the long-gone Felicity Irwin sitting there at the top, doing very little and using-up funds in the process. I'd also love to know how much money is being diverted to the non-functional PR company that seems unable to even answer an email.

Sorry, but I've had enough of it. The Vulcan forum is just a needless distraction and it's time that the project was handled properly. As has been said above, there are too many people asking too many questions from all quarters. It needs one person or one small group with some media, financial or political clout, to go back to HLF, and together they should go to TVOC and stop all this nonsense once and for all before millions are poured down the drain forever and the Vulcan is just left there to rot.

SPIT

23rd Feb 2008, 19:42

Hi
After reading the answers given to this post I am of the firm belief that the gen aviation community are getting (UNFORTUNATELY) fed up with the whole
vulcam restoration saga now and they want to see it fly now at displays, after all that is what a lot of them originaly paid for [me amongst them).::bored: :eek:

kwh

23rd Feb 2008, 22:17

...and has 'Fly Virgin' emblazoned across its belly. The Red Bull Sea Vixen was a lot better flying than a historically correct replica paint job would have been in a dusty museum. What price the Virgin Vulcan?

The HLF might well have insisted that it flew in 'Authentic' cold war colours (but which ones exactly, eh?), but no doubt after the TVOC has gone bust for want of a sponsor, a business plan and the unquestioning financial support of an ever more sceptical public, etc, whoever takes over the project and the plane might be able to negotiate a variation of that condition. On the grounds that schoolkids can look at colour schemes in period photographs all day, but a triangular flying (howling) billboard is better than a faded static objet d'art in RAF colours, especially if the lottery fund is in for 'n' million already...

BEagle

24th Feb 2008, 06:51

Unless it's something he's personally involved in (such as balloonacy or flying in a spaceship), Sir Richard Branson does not allow the Virgin brand to be associated with any aviation project which isn't 100% reliable.

mustpost

24th Feb 2008, 08:42

Now would that be the project or the a/c? :E

speeddial

24th Feb 2008, 08:53

And considering the first partly bio-fuelled Virgin flight is in the news today I don't think a smokey Vulcan would go down well.

deltapapa

24th Feb 2008, 10:06

From Lancasterman

I'me not a legal expert but wouldn't it be wise for HLF to have someone come in and legally make TVOC accountable for every last penny and find out where all the money went and why?
Not to be a doom and gloom merchant but I think this might be the end of the project unless as has been posted previously, the top end is cleared out and new people put in place.

I agree everyone has a right to ask certain questions about the project & I think those questions are founded but in the interests of fair play may I point out it is my belief the HLF did not just hand over £2.73m & let TVOC just spend as they like. The HLF only pay out on the receipt of invoices which have been scrutanized, in addition TVOC will have had to produce a financial percentage of those invoices themselves which I think is 28%.

happy to be corrected if I have this wrong

forget

24th Feb 2008, 10:35

Yesterday I found some facts from the Vulcan to the Sky Trust Consolidated Report and Accounts; 31 July 2005, and posted them.

I made the remark that Dr Pleming had, during 2004, claimed almost £200 per working day on expenses. My post was deleted, although there’s still mention of it in post 670. Why would that be?

On the off-chance that the deletion wasn’t intended this is what the record says, available to anyone.

R Pleming, a director of Vulcan To The Sky Enterprises Limited, which is 100% owned by Vulcan To The Sky Trust, is also a director of RW Pleming Consulting Limited. During the year ended 31 July 2005, Vulcan To The Sky Trust paid RW Pleming Consulting Limited an amount of £82,933 including expenses (2004. £48,684) for consultancy services.

BEagle

24th Feb 2008, 10:47

The only way to put an end to these allegations and speculation is for VTST to publish fully audited figures immediately.

I can understand the reticence of anyone asked to make a further contribution if it was learned that, in one year alone, over £80K was not used for restoring the aircraft to flightworthy status.

I am still waiting to learn how much monthly rent is being charged to keep the aircraft hangared at Bruntingthorpe.....

However, it must be acknowledged by everyone that the engineers, groundcrew and aircrew have all done a fantastic job. Just watch any of Primetime Jo's excellent DVDs and you'll see what I mean!

forget

24th Feb 2008, 10:53

17. Commitments under operating leases. At 31 July 2005 the company had annual commitments under non-cancellable operating leases as set out below.

Land and buildings.

2005

Operating leases on Aircraft Hangar
which expire within two to five years. £180.000

BEagle

24th Feb 2008, 11:06

Could you confirm then, in terms for a simpleton like me, that this means the hangar rent is £15000 per month - so in the 31 months since 31 July 2005, some £465000 will have gone in rent alone?

Next question:

Who owns the hangar and receives these rental payments?

forget

24th Feb 2008, 11:12

As I read it, £180K per annum hangar rent. Also;

Whilst the contract for the purchase of Avro Vulcan XH558 and related assets from C. Walton Ltd was relatively simple, the conditions under which the hangar, office and storage facilities were to be rented from C. Walton Ltd . required significant concessions on both sides before agreement was reached . Contracts were finally signed on 28th February 2005, and Avro Vulcan XH558 finally passed into the ownership of the Trust on 3rd March 2005 for the benefit of the Nation.

BEagle

24th Feb 2008, 11:17

In other words then, the Waltons sold the aircraft to the Trust in Mar 2005 and must therefore, since then, have received some £180000 x (35/12) = £525000 in hangar and office rent alone?

All of which has come from public contributions and the HLF?

forget

24th Feb 2008, 11:28

Whilst the contract for the purchase of Avro Vulcan XH558 and related assets from C. Walton Ltd was relatively simple,

Not sure. Is that one seller, or two? I can only produce very indirect links to the pdf on the Charities Web Site. I'll see if I can improve on that - or could someone host a pdf.

BEagle

24th Feb 2008, 11:39

The 'Thunder and Lightnings' website has a good summary of the project, leading up to the first flight.

Last updated 27 Oct 2007.....:hmm:

Edit - PPRuNe software won't allow a direct link.....

forget

24th Feb 2008, 11:53

Try this for latest filed accounts-

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/registeredcharities/ScannedAccounts%5CEnds48%5C0001101948_AC_20050731_E_C.PDF

andrewmcharlton

24th Feb 2008, 12:30

Here's a sobering thought.....

If you look at TVOC's website you will see that last week's e-donations were a little over £7,000.

Let's call it an average of £30,000 a month.

Of that, £15,000 goes to Mr Walton's company (landlords and previous owners of the Vulcan). Assume the good Dr is making the same money as was being charged out previously (assumptions I know) then his company is taking around £7,000 a month.

That gives us around £22,000 a month outlays BEFORE any staff get paid.

No wonder there is little hope of them ever getting out of the cycle of doom based "bail us out" donations.

Of course we don't know this to be the case because they haven't filed any accounts or publicised any figures.

With the year end at 31 July, if the Trustees do not file their accounts and annual returns before 31 May, the Charity could be struck off the register.

BEagle

24th Feb 2008, 12:48

Those accounts are from July 2005....

However, I note the following:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/untitled3.jpg

Note the words 'for each financial year'.

Additionally, the figures for 'consultancy' do seem rather high......:hmm:

forget

24th Feb 2008, 13:21

On the positive side the Board of Trustees includes some very reputable people. The Accounts were 'Approved by the Board of Trustees on 7/7/06 and signed on its behalf by Air Chief Marshal Sir Michael Knight KCB AFC FRAeS. Chairman'. This 1960's ex Vulcan fairy believes that Air Chief Marshals don't get caught by any shonky business as a) they're too smart, and b) that's one reason they're Air Chief Marshals. Let's hope! :hmm:

deltapapa

24th Feb 2008, 13:27

Sir Michael Knight is no longer Chairman of the Board of Trustees & has not been since last August due to personal reasons

Lancasterman

24th Feb 2008, 13:43

Hmm makes one wonder if even if she was to go to another field to be based at then how much more in rent would it cost? Does she really need to be kept inside 24/7? Will be interesting to see where this story ends up as for me and this is my own opinion, that if she doesn't get a sponsor which seems highly unlikely then she will forever remain ground bound. Have they looked at gaining contracts for research flights or even to work alongside the RAF or MOD for testing or fighter interception flights with the typhoon?

forget

24th Feb 2008, 13:56

Whey hey! A thinking man! :ok: These guys rely on a 146, which rather limits their 'upper atmosphere'.

http://www.ncas.ac.uk/news/stories/trex_june06.htm

And it's been there before!

Wiki. Only five of the B.2(MRR)s were capable of the air sampling role, those that were included XH537, XH558 and XH560. These aircraft could be distinguished by the additional hard points outside of the Skybolt points. These additional points sometimes carried redundant Sea Vixen drop tanks that had the nose section replaced by a newer section of a larger diameter. Another external, but much smaller, piece of equipment was carried just outboard of the port undercarriage main door.

Andy Leitch.
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/558_scampton-1.jpg

forget

24th Feb 2008, 14:15

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/558_scamp.jpg

GeeRam

24th Feb 2008, 15:05

Hanger rental is the one expense along with actual restorations costs that are not an issue in my view, and is not something that the Walton family should have any critism aimed at....I've heard from Brunty sources that he's personally out of pocket to a six figure sum regarding '558.

As I understand it, '558 lived in that hanger along while it was being used for Walton business purposes that they got a good income from, so as it wasn't possible to move the a/c to another location, and the hanger was required to be upgraded for H&S etc reasons that meant sole occupancy for the hanger, and therefore a loss of earning from the hanger's use up to that time. I see it only fair that TVOC reimburse that loss of earning.

I can't see why the Waltons' should have been further out of pocket for an unknown length of time for something that they no longer had a responsiblity for and had already done financially more than there bit to help with already.

Surely, if this was suich an issue, there was even more of a case for getting her moved and flight tested as soon as possible after that first flight last year..?

I think there are far more serious issues than the hanger rental costs....:=

Like the financial viability of ever operating a cash consumption machine such as a Vulcan in private hands in the first place......:ugh:

Tyres O'Flaherty

24th Feb 2008, 15:37

As has been mentioned before ( on this thread I believe ? ), 558 has only a few ( or even maybe only one ) pressurisation cycle available left on the cockpit seal, think the idea was to keep it below fl10

flipflopman RB199

24th Feb 2008, 15:53

Tyres,

That's quite correct. This is one of the major limiting factors of 558, as once those pressurisation cycles are used up (Around 8, I believe) the airframe is effectively scrap, as this area cannot be repaired/replaced without enormous cost. To this end, XH558 is now limited to FL150, with the pressurisation system permanently disabled.

Flipflopman

andrewmcharlton

24th Feb 2008, 17:49

Flipflopman,

Are there any other limiting factors (in laymans speak apologies) that would preclude any particular type of ops, e.g. G Limitations that would restrict display maneouvres or say major replacements / repairs that have been discovered since all the fine work you and your colleagues have done that weren't contemplated or originally planned for.

If a major sponsor was found / funding of one sort or another became available are there any mega expenses that weren't originally forseen that now need to be factored in ?

flipflopman RB199

24th Feb 2008, 18:24

Andrewmcharlton,

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm not entirely sure what you are asking me there. As goes physical limitation of the aircraft, as you are probably aware, there is an Altitude limitation of FL150 on the aircraft now, due to pressurisation issues, and there are new speed restrictions on the aircraft, with a Vne of 330kts, and a normal max operating speed of 300kts. This is due in no small part to the addition of aerials for the new avionics fit.

I believe, that the intention is to operate the aircraft to a gentler extent than previously, however, this is not strictly an airframe limitation, more a desire to ensure that the FI usage is kept to a minimum.

As far as I am aware, and I must stress that I no longer work for TVOC, there are no new major expenses that need to be factored in to any new appeal for cash. So far, the aircraft has been very well behaved, however, bear in mind that it has only flown once, so there may well yet be problems with serviceability, only time will tell.

Hope that clears a few questions up.

Cheers,

Flipflopman

andrewmcharlton

24th Feb 2008, 18:26

Thanks, spot on Flipflopman.

I wasn't aware you weren't at TVOC, apologies, no offence intended.

Andrew

vickyv

24th Feb 2008, 20:15

Hi Guys,

I have been watching the forums and listening to people i have met at the airfield and i have some questions.

1. As a regular donator over the last few years both at airshows and while visiting the airfield at unrelated events i was horrified to find out that recently a member of staff was fired for stealing a large amount of money from the project. This info was given to me by someone in the canteen at the airfield.
Has appropriate legal action been taken against the individual and has the money been returned?
What controls are in place within the company to stop this from happening again and how could it happen in the first place?

2. We were on the airfield recently for an open day and in the canteen a group of people were talking and they said that during that day the engineers had done things with the aircrfat they should not have done.
Does this explain the recent "lock-down" i have heard about where the engineers were prohibited from doing any work on the aircraft at all?
If it is the case then surely the vulcan deserves to be maintained to the highest standard and not be treated as a toy.

3.Why is it that when ever i have been to the airfield and have discussed the Vulcan, all i hear is that the management of the project are always alienating people and are not willing to admit their shortcomings and tend to try to blame people around them for any problems.
Why are they always struggling to raise money or even pay off current hangerage bills etc?
I applaud the fact that several millions of pounds have been raised over the last few years BUT we are now hopefully going in to the flying life of the aircraft and people cannot rest on their laurels for ever.

4.It also worries me that the general public are not allowed to ask probing questions about a project that is at the end of the day being financed by the public. I appreciate there are people who don't want it to succeed but when you hear that the official TVOC website's forum is apparently vetted by the management and any entries they do not like the sound of are taken off, it gets abit big brotherish.

I really want the Vulcan to fly as much as anyone but things i hear worry me.
Any body else know about these things?
If so why is nothing done to sort the project out?
It is OUR project so we should start asking awkward questions!

:confused::confused::confused::confused:

airsound

24th Feb 2008, 21:14

When I posted the details of Dr Pleming’s appearance on Today I knew I was, once again, poking my head into the lion’s den. I’m not sure why I do it. Except that I do believe that this is still a fantastically worthwhile project. And I would like to say that I listened, live , with a broadcaster’s ear, to Robert P on Today, and I thought he did fine. I have listened again since, and I still think the same. I’m not sure that the people who are criticising his interview have any idea how difficult it is - you only have to see what a pig’s ear many experienced and media-savvy politicians make of their time on Today. Robert didn’t do that - within the confines of the questions asked by Jim Naughtie, he did fine. And you may note that the VTTS website is still prominent on the Today site - not something Today does for everybody.

So, as far as post 666 is concerned, about possible alternative spokespeople, I can only say, nwest, that you might think that, but I couldn’t possibly comment. Thanks for the thought though.

But let’s get back to basics. What a lot of people don’t seem to realise is that this extraordinary, one-of-a-kind project, this amazing plan to get a Vulcan back into the sky, has always teetered on the knife-edge of success, with deep abysses of failure on either side. There have been many times when the whole thing was within an ace of disaster, only to be pulled back from the brink by courage and teamwork. But it’s still there, on that knife-edge, and still avoiding those falls - just. And also, never forget, XH558 has actually flown, and that is something a lot of people said would never happen.

But what’s really extraordinary is that nothing like this has ever been done before. VTTS, VOC, whatever, are writing the book as they go along, and stumbling frequently. There seems to be a consensus on this thread that something either dishonest or totally incompetent is going on. Well, for what it’s worth, I see absolutely no evidence of that. And I remind you that, as forget points out
On the positive side the Board of Trustees includes some very reputable people. The Accounts were 'Approved by the Board of Trustees on 7/7/06 and signed on its behalf by Air Chief Marshal Sir Michael Knight KCB AFC FRAeS. Chairman'. This 1960's ex Vulcan fairy believes that Air Chief Marshals don't get caught by any shonky business as a) they're too smart, and b) that's one reason they're Air Chief Marshals.
Sir Mike has since stepped down for personal reasons quite unconnected with the project. His place has been taken by Keith Mans, who is an equally distinguished aviation person, the CEO of the Royal Aeronautical Society, no less.

And although you might wish for much more openness about many things, the fact is that most of the unwillingness to talk in public is, and always has been, due to serious issues of commercial confidentiality. And that’s not confidentiality for the Vulcan people, but for the big companies that are supporting the project.

I can tell you, though, that the latest iteration of this not unfamiliar crisis came about largely because the major engineering contractor overspent its contracted price by significantly more than 100%, partly because it had badly underestimated the time required for the work. And before you say, why wasn’t there a fixed price contract, I can also tell you that such a thing was never available, nor ever likely to be. Same with any kind of insurance. There was nothing to be had.

It has always been the case that the aircraft would never cover its costs from fees, which is why a major commercial sponsor has always been an essential part of the financial framework. Incidentally, the price to an air show organiser for a Vulcan display will be something around the £7000 mark - not dissimilar to the cost of getting the Reds. But that major sponsor has so far proved elusive, despite much expert and tenacious searching. The timing has been unfortunate, because just at the time when the first flight had been expected to stimulate potential sponsors, the credit crunch and general financial downturn rendered big companies completely unwilling to contemplate significant sponsor schemes. But all is not lost, and several avenues are being voraciously searched as we speak.

Incidentally, it was mooted earlier that Robert Peming (and I) had been swanning around ‘at an air show’. The suggestion from the famous grunge band ‘Monkey and the Swinging Winco’ was that he, Pleming, should get
his backside back here and start answering some questions about what is happening.
But - an air show in mid-winter, in Belgium? I think not. No, as I said, we were at the annual convention of the European Air Show Council, and we were there at our own, not insignificant, expense. This is exactly the kind of forum where useful leads for the whole project can and do present themselves. And now that the convention is over, Dr P has indeed got his backside back to Blighty to continue with his punishing workload trying to make sure that XH558 continues to progress safely along that knife-edge until she finally emerges into the air show circuit this season.

airsound

Lancasterman

24th Feb 2008, 21:20

Flipflopman, Just want to say a big thank you for all your help and support with the vulcan and regular updates on the forums!!:ok:

Tim McLelland

24th Feb 2008, 21:44

Have to disgree airsound - I've done enough interviews myself to know it's not that difficult and Pleming's performance was rubbish, especially when he's getting paid handsomely to be the "figurehead" of the project. If he can't say what needs to be said then why is he there?

Re- the hangar fees, I believe the fees may have dropped or been waived again now? They were (as I understood it) only charged because of the long-gone Felicity Irwin who effectively forced Walton to make the charges. But I assume the situation may have improved since her useless presence was finally ended?

Anyway, I see the thread's drifting again. All the talk is fine but it would be nice if this going-round in circles stopped and the main issue of what to do about it was addressed. Sorry to see that the Pprune moderators ignored my plea to leave a separate thread about the latest developments - oh well, I did try!

off centre

24th Feb 2008, 21:54

"You there. Yes, you, old woman........"

andrewmcharlton

24th Feb 2008, 22:01

Airsound,

you make some good points which are generally accepted, however:

Incompetence - If you see no evidence of incompetence I fear that you have some very rose tinted specs. Aside from anything else, the trust is in breach of its statutory duties (not to mention any moral ones) in failing to submit either acocunts or annual returns. Apart from that the trust has an obligation to those funding it to be transparent and honest at all times, not when it suits them. Commerciality of certain contracts can be protected when needed but it is a right, not a priviledge, for the supporters, donors and indeed the tax paying public to know what is going on and they don't.

Sponsor - The credit crunch etc has zero to do with this. Since day one (and mentioned in the last available accounts) there has been no major corporate sponsor. The standard line of "lets ring Branson" gets rolled out and well meaning but inappropriate efforts in the old forum to "email Shell as they make pots of money" or similar. The lack of a sponsor has been ever present since inception. It's also a well know marketing fact that the most succesful companies spend more on sponsorship and advertising in a downturn than when the economy is bouyant.

Interview - at best average but criminal that the main man didn't make the points that needed to be made. If he wasn't used to doing these things (which I think he is) someone more suited should have done it.

You make the pint that the operators and their predecessors are making up the rules as they go. I can't agree. A huge number of projects have been undertaken worldwide to restore various engineering edifices of days gone by succesfully. If this one could not be adequetely costsed, project planned and managed with appropriate contingencies then it should never have been undertaken.

Everyone is 100% full of admiration for the work done and the achievements of those who were at the coal face throughout. Nobody seems full of admiration for the communication, management and running of the project as a whole.

In the words of Leo Amery (borrowed from Cromwell I believe), "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!"

Time to change at the top or call it a day.

The Swinging Monkey

25th Feb 2008, 07:33

airsound,

At a time when even the strongest supporters of this project are questioning the whole 'Vulcan Saga' you still continue with your undying support for Pleming and the others. Whilst that is admirable, might I ask at what point are you going wake up and see reality yourself ?

At a time when I am being accused of being The winco, I am no longer convinced that you are not infact.....Dr Robert Pleming!! You will not have a single bad thing said about him. Did you actaully hear the interview last week?? I have listened to it several times, and it was appalling, and if he can't do any better, then tell him to find someone who can. This project is, as you say, 'teetering on a knife edge' and his efforts last week did absolutely nothing to help the cause frankly.

Instead of you telling us all well things are going, why don't you start answering some of the difficult and tricky questions that are being asked of this project, such as those posed by BEagle, Vickyv, Tim McL and AndrewCharlton? and allay some of the concerns that many have? Why is it that no one from Brunters ever answers difficult questions? Why don't you do it for them?

I can't believe that you are still so positive about it all and have such faith in a management team that (IMHO of course) seem to be bordering on incompetance! Who is running the accounts?

I know the first few papragraphs of your reply will begin with you accusing me and the others of being the 'doom and gloom' squad. But please, spare us all that rubbish, and answer some of the questions, please!

Tim McLelland

25th Feb 2008, 08:08

We can go round in circles discussing the project but I think we can almost all agree theat, regardless of the history of the project, it is the present situation which matters?

Okay, well rather than simply moan and argue about it, can we not look at what could be done about it?

Fundamentally, the one action needed to stop all the fuss, is for TVOC to provide the public with a clear, concise and properly-detailed account of where all the money has been spent - and I mean all of it. They must have accounts so they have no reason to withold them. Additionally, we need to know which people work for free and which get paid, either a wage or expenses, and we need to know what they get paid, and what they did/do in exchange for the money.

If we had that information, there wouldn't be any argument, would there? At least, not unless the information revealed some less-than satisfactory facts?

So how can we demand that information from TVOC? That's the most relevant question I think. My own view is that it is only that can insist that the information be made available, so as I've already said, surely there must be someone on PPrune who has some legal experience, that can persuade HLF to make this information available, so that we can either rest assured that the project is being handled properly, or find-out once and for all what has really been going on, before it's too late?

Surely, this is the only practical step we can take instead of just batting questions and comments backwards and forwards forever, while the project goes nowhere?