Vulcan XH 558 Threads (merged) [Archive] - Page 9

XH558 Press Office

8th Jan 2009, 08:46

NEW YEAR – NEW CHALLENGES – NEWS from VULCAN XH558
A public appeal:

We bring you the launch of “XH558 Press Office” and the first of what will be regular updates across various Internet forums with the intention of spreading the word on this ground breaking aviation project.

XH558, was the first complex aircraft in the world to be privately restored to full flying condition, making her debut Airshow Display at RAF Waddington in July 2008.

Since then, the economic conditions have seriously affected the sponsorship levels expected in order to make continued operation as an airworthy airframe – the only one of its type in the world. The reality is, that unless a shortfall in funding of £1 million is found before early spring, she will be grounded forever.

The project has clear Technical, Engineering and Educational values to the current generation - who have lost sight of the Cold War era, the technical advances made by British industry and the value of engineering research and development to economic prosperity.

These are all values the “Vulcan to The Sky” team aims to continue demonstrating to millions of people throughout the 2009 Display season, leading to a public appeal in order to secure the aircrafts immediate future.

Following a successful fund in 2006, The ’09 Pledge Campaign has already raised nearly £200,000 towards this target in a little over 4 weeks.

We are now widening our appeal outside of Aviation circles, in order to take our story to a wider cross section of the community. These posts will be appearing of forums not only associated with Aviation, but other key interests, like Motorsport, Railways and Photography, together with more Educational and Technical sites.
We have a presence at “Autosport International” this coming weekend at the NEC, together with many other publicity drives in progress across Newspapers, Magazines and Media.
We do however, suffer from the understandable priorities of editors to cover World Events and more humanitarian charities.

If you feel able to support our project in any way, you will find more details on Vulcan to the Sky Trust - Avro Vulcan Bomber XH558 - Vulcan To The Sky Trust (http://www.vulcantothesky.com) together with the Pledge link, where you will be able to make a monthly or one off “promise” to pay any level of donation, only called providing the full £1 million is committed to by others – hence ensuring the successful implementation of a full Display Season. The site also has a live feed to the Pledge database, so you can easily check progress of the campaign at any time. (Look under Home > Pledge Data)

PLEASE HELP US SAVE XH558 FOR THE NATION – IT IS THE PEOPLE’S AIRCRAFT – ONLY YOU CAN SAVE HER NOW!

We would like to thank-you in advance for any help you can give to us.

Any person or Editor requiring more information can contact 0116 247 8145 to receive
a more detailed report via email.
For commercial sponsorship opportunities:- Call 07803 141483

Note to Forum Admin: This post is placed in an area of your site thought best to gain maximum attention.
This is an important news item we are sure your readers will be interested in. We hope to count on your support.
No communication channels or replies will be possible by this service. It is the only "official" information outside of the VTST site.

Delta15

8th Jan 2009, 22:08

Gonzo (http://www.pprune.org/members/10776-gonzo)

I've been trying to find any public domain material on the HLF submission, specifically any details of the education aspects.
====================================================

WHAT education aspects? the education manager has been in post some 13-4 months and as yet I have seen NO evidence of an Education Aspect to this project.... whats she been doing for 13 months????
:confused::confused:

bubblesuk

8th Jan 2009, 23:06

This is the link to the education bit on the site, hope it helps but dont shout at me if it dosnt!

Vulcan to the Sky Trust - Avro Vulcan Bomber XH558 - Vulcan To The Sky Trust (http://www.vulcantothesky.org/educationandaccess.asp)

Tim McLelland

9th Jan 2009, 07:03

whats she been doing for 13 months?

er... let me guess...

srobarts

9th Jan 2009, 08:46

WHAT education aspects? the education manager has been in post some 13-4 months and as yet I have seen NO evidence of an Education Aspect to this project.... whats she been doing for 13 months????
Isn't this symptomatic of the whole current situation. Negative press releases and lack of information.
At this time of needing more funding they should be trumpeting last years achievements to show providers of funds what the money produces over and above the appearance at Airshows.
Saying if we don't pay up the Vulcan won't be able to fly again is not good enough. How many pupils from how many schools plan to make educational visits this year? How does that compare with last year? What Airshows are already booked for 2009? If departments are not performing then they should show they have an action plan to either get them to perform or reduce the cost associated with the department.

Pleming may well have been the right man to bring the project to its first year of displays, but I can't help thinking the leadership needs to change towards a much more positive thinking promotional style. It. can't be easy for the team to generate the enthusiasm when they work under the Pleming Sword of Damocles...

andrewmcharlton

9th Jan 2009, 08:49

Well if you look at the slideshow which is available to view under the educational section abut the history I think, it winds up begging for money too, the only thing it is short of is asking for their pocket money.

Surely in all the reference works available some good informative educational information should be online for people of all ages and interests to capture their imagination.

srobarts

9th Jan 2009, 09:03

Well if you look at the slideshow which is available to view under the educational section abut the history I think, it winds up begging for money too, the only thing it is short of is asking for their pocket money.
Look at the properties of the pdf file- the author is one R Pleming. Nuff said

Tim McLelland

9th Jan 2009, 09:42

Maybe that's part of his educational package - teaching kids that if they play their cards right, they might get an inexplicably well-paid job like his when they grow up? :p

andrewmcharlton

9th Jan 2009, 09:45

Tim,

Whilst I support the quest for truth etc you have to stop the constant personal zoning in in Dr P.

I agree that he is (or his company) paid a handsome sum but that point has been made to death and not really relevant to the educational aspect mate.

bubblesuk

9th Jan 2009, 09:55

One of my friends is involved in the education program at Brunty and i did speak to her this morning to post some information on what is done etc, but after reading a couple of the posts since mine last night i wont bother, i simpy have neither the time nor the wish to feed the troll anymore, if you want to know why T.V.O.C. have been reluctent to use this another fora then the answer is on this very page.

andrewmcharlton

9th Jan 2009, 10:02

I for one would love to see her / him / them post some information. If misconceptions can be set aside it's good for everyone and the project.

The issue about not posting on here due to perceptions and beliefs I think is misguided. If the doubters are won over what a difference it would make and not posting because you think you'll get slated or asked awkward questions is the opposite of what is needed.

I hope you could persuade them to talk to us, after all, is it not still the case that you can't post on the VTST forum unless you pay their membership fees (unless things have changed in which case apologies).

bubblesuk

9th Jan 2009, 10:36

I will ask again though i doubt i will have any success, i dont know enough personally about the education aspect to be able to say what it entails but i do know that it is something taken seriously, its less of a case of perceptions and beliefs but rather a case of individuals who for whatever reason have an issue with T.V.O.C. and use the various fora to pounce on anything posted, i know my friend has no wish to have her efforts torn to bits by disgruntled people. The T.V.O.C. forum is viewable in parts but im not sure if it is possible to post on there.

DeepestSouth

9th Jan 2009, 10:46

This is very sad and, I would suggest, misguided. Misunderstanding and misconceptions can never be challenged and resolved by simply withdrawing from communication. Far better to make your case, respond to comments and suggestions, and strive to get people on board rather than leaving them to speculate and assume that the 'gossip' is true.

In addition, marketig theory, practice, commonsense and my own experience all tell me that ANY feedback an organisation can get from its potential customers is very useful indeed in understanding your market. In trying to understand what the 'market' of potential donors thinks, I'd place an aviation website pretty high up the list, and PPrune higher up than many others!

BTW, I am a VTST Member and donor and I'm now off to chuck another tenner in the pot!

bubblesuk

9th Jan 2009, 11:02

I agree However the reluctence is due to various individuals constant use of this forum to have a go at whatever T.V.O.C. does, sometimes it seems that they could say that everything is great, they have loads of money and everyone involved is a sheer b****y genius and someone would still whinge about something! My friend is a normal person who gives their time to help out and in her own words she has " no wish to have my efforts used by spoilt children to have another i hate T.V.O.C. rant" her words not mine. Sorry if that upsets anyone but her view is based on reading this and other fora and to be honest i dont blame her.

Tim McLelland

9th Jan 2009, 16:46

Andrew, I suggest you read the contents of Post 1989 and 1990 before making a comment like that about my post! ;)

Likewise, you suggestion that I "stop zoning in" on poor Dr.P is probably the daftest thing I've heard in quite a while. For heaven's sake, if he's not the crux of the problem then who the hell is?!

bubblesuk

9th Jan 2009, 20:39

Prove it then Tim, you keep boring us all to death with this so you prove to us that he is the crux of all the problems and i will give £100 to the charity of your choice, i for one am sick to the back teeth of your petty hate campaign, so you show me the proof and il stump up the cash.

Tim McLelland

10th Jan 2009, 13:09

bubbles This thread is for discussion of the Vulcan project, simple as that. If you don't happen to agree with me (and the others who share my views) that's fine, but please confine your comments to the project and stop this constant sniping at me. I've tried (as have others) to hold a sensible discussion/argument with you, but you simply ignore what is said. It's very tedious to be constantly having to reply to you and the other readers of this thread obviously don't want to hear about it. I think we've all established that you think that TVOC/Dr Pleming is doing a great job. Okay, enough already, you'll just have to accept that quite a few others (myself included) happen to think otherwise. Now, can we please move on?

HZ123

10th Jan 2009, 13:19

Is there any chance of the Vulcan doing a photo shoot at the SEN airshow and steaming along the seafront? All please note my request.

bubblesuk

10th Jan 2009, 13:40

That was exactly the response i expected Tim, when challenged to prove your claims of Pleming being the crux of T.V.O.C.'s problems you do your usual and start the waffle, i think you will find that i have been discussing 558 and the project and it is you that have been having ago may i refer you to what Andrew said about "personal zoning"? I dont think that Pleming has done a good job, nor do i think he has done a bad job as i simply do not have sufficient solid and reliable information to make a decision, that however has'nt stopped you from constantly attacking the guy, and i guess from your post you wont be taking me up on my offer then? That in its self speaks volumes so i suggest you take your own advice.

All i have ever asked is why he is useless etc and at no point have i attacked you or made it personal in any shape or form.

Tim McLelland

10th Jan 2009, 15:29

don't you ever shut up?:rolleyes:

Tim McLelland

10th Jan 2009, 15:33

HZ123 What is the SEN airshow?

I suppose any venue is possible if the organisers shell-out enough cash, although I guess it all rather depends if 558 participates in this year's air show calendar. If the info from TVOC is correct then one assumes that the project will have been wrapped-up by then.

Incidentally, I doubt if 558 would be "steaming" along anywhere, given that there are fatigue convservation limits to be considered now, and CAA safety rules just to make sure you never get too close to anything and enjoy yourself too much! :)

andrewmcharlton

10th Jan 2009, 15:53

Tim,

I don't disagree with the criticism but the point has been made and doesn't need to be constantly remade.

The issue is that as a charity any job needs to be accounted for as does any expenditure. It's clear that Dr P's payments need to be justified, but so do all of them. I happen to agree that things need to change but I do not want to run a vendetta against him or anyone elsewithout them having the right of reply and having all of the facts.

Your last sniping post to bubbles is just not needed irresepective of the view points everyone holds. Getting overtly aggressive or personal to other posters or to VTST staff is just going to get the thread closed.

BEagle

10th Jan 2009, 16:06

I refer you all to post 1963:

OK! That is enough.

This witch hunt will stop forthwith.

There may be a shred of truth here and there but that is not cause to engage in sniping and backbiting - especially the winding up kind. One or two of you are pressing hard to gain home runs. Just cut it out and be constructive.

If I see one more example of this occuring again, no matter how trivial, I will ban you/he/she from participating in this thread. No warnings, no explanations - nothing - you will be gone. I trust that is fully understood.

I am sick that some good people have been driven out and are no longer contributing - I plan to get them back.

PPP
__________________
Cool Mod - Here, and was there.

Take heed!

Tim McLelland

10th Jan 2009, 16:15

Beagle hear hear!

Sorry folks, but if you read back through these posts, you'll note that I've made every effort to answer bubbles even though he simply ignores what I say and then repeats his personal remarks. It's tedious and it's annoying for other users of the thread.

Anyway, just to set the record straight (again - hopefully bubbles might read and take note this time?), I've explained my position as fully as I possibly can. I have no intention of divulging names of people who have told me much more to the story, and anyone with an ounce of intelligence will know why. It's easy for anyone to simply say "well prove this or that" but it's a pointless and stupid reaction, based on the ludicrous supposition that I'm simply making my comments for fun (or because of some bizarre personal vendetta, according to some of the idiots who make similar stupid comments about me on other sites). The only practical response I can give is the one I've given many times before - if Pleming and co. think my comments are in any way inaccurate then all they have to do is provide a shred of evidence to convince us otherwise.

Andrew might think it's pointless to continue making comments about Pleming but I entirely disagree. He's heading the project and he's responsible. Simple as that. He has a right of reply, indeed he owes it to us all (as donors and Lottery buyers) to explain where every penny has gone. That's not unresaonable, it's what he should have been doing all along! The way that the project has been (and is being) handled is bad - and that's putting it mildly. Like many other people, I think it's time that we stopped shrugging our proverbial shoulders and addressed the fundamental fact that the aircraft seems to be in imminent danger of being grounded for good, and yet a phenomenal amount of money has been poured into the project, and an awful lot of it seems to have been wasted. Inexplicably, nobody, not the aviation press, HLF or anyone else, has ventured to ask where all the money has gone, and why.

Think that's as clear as I can be isn't it?

bubblesuk

10th Jan 2009, 16:36

This is the (provisional) list of appearences for this year.

Vulcan to the Sky Trust - Avro Vulcan Bomber XH558 - Vulcan To The Sky Trust (http://www.vulcantothesky.org/FlightOperations.asp)

bubblesuk

10th Jan 2009, 17:36

... and still the gripes and accusations continue.

Is there any point to all this? I think we've established that everyone believes TVOC are not doing a good job or worse. But could we take that as understood now and move on?

Whatever they're doing, there's nothing we can do about it, so why keep harping-on about their alleged "crimes" and failings?

Only the HLF has sufficient legal and moral grounds to step-in and stop them, and if necessary replace them with other people. Likewise, only HLF has immediate access to huge sums of money. They're the only people that can sort-out this mess so instead of petitions, pointless emails, letters to MP's or anything else, why can't we make an orchestrated effort to campaigh for HLF to stop sitting on their hands and rescue the project, before all their (our) money is completely wasted?

... or do we just want to whine about TVOC until the Vulcan rusts away?

Your words Tim from post 819 in this thread, now any chance you want to follow your own suggestion and stop attacking anyone who fails to share your view or challenges your accusations?

HZ123

10th Jan 2009, 18:16

SEN = Southend Air Show to which it may appear according to the list link. We also have a rather nice taxing example of our at Sothend, taxiable I meant.

Tim McLelland

10th Jan 2009, 18:45

Bubbles, I refer you to post 2002

HZ, I'm with you now! I guess Southend is always a contender for significant display acts (if they can afford them), although I seem to recall that the organisers were planning to scale-down the Southend show this year onwards?

andrewmcharlton

10th Jan 2009, 18:47

Tim, just give it a rest. You have made your points well enough and no matter what you think repeating it here over and over is not achieving a thing. Let it go and move on.

bubblesuk

10th Jan 2009, 19:07

I guess eastbourne cant afford them as they made a loss of over £300,000 last year, and are making it free entry again this year.

P.S. Tim, you love me really.

HZ123

10th Jan 2009, 19:07

Tim. I think the SEN airshow needs to have more not less this year as the last two years have been washed out. Even had they not been there were few a/c attending. This may well be the problem for many shows with fewer airlines and greater RAF commitments. We can only but hope?

Tim McLelland

10th Jan 2009, 21:20

I quite agree, I was just repeating what I read about the show some time back. Given the way that show participation and organisation is going, I guess it's a minor miracle if a show of any sort takes place these days. As for whether the Vulcan will take part, I think that's anybody's guess at this stage. I have a feeling that if 558 flies again at all, then I guess it might be the earlier shows of the year that stand a chance of seeing her, so you never know...

Andrew, I also agree that repetition is pointless, but what am I supposed to do when I keep getting the same questions thrown my way?! Anyway, I think the argument has run its course as I haven't seen anyone else add so much as a ha'peth of input. The same situation seems to apply on similar threads on other sites too judging from what I can see. Page upon page of waffle but nobody seems to have any interest in addressing the fundamental problems of what to do. I've explained my two points as fully as I can (ie- either get to the bottom of precisely what is going-on at TVOC with all our money, or look at getting the aircraft out of the UK while it's still possible) and I haven't seen any other alternative ideas - anywhere! It's not very encouraging is it, bearing in mind that Pleming's latest "now or never" target was supposedly the end of this month.

Incidentally, what did you folks think of XH558 Press Office appearing on some forums (did the press release turn up here too?). I couldn't quite see what the aim of the press release was though. It was claimed that the intention was to "spread the word" but when the release has been sent to plane spotter sites, I would assume that the word is already well and truly spread to them? As one might expect, there's a statement that no communication channels or replies will be possible so it doesn't sound like we're going to get any further down this exciting new avenue, does it? Then again, on the basis of what has been said on the various sites, I don't imagine that direct communication with TVOC's "press office" would achieve anything in any case - can you imagine the dialogue?!:p

PPRuNe Pop

11th Jan 2009, 08:15

The repetition here is getting very boring!

Time after time the same questions and the same assertions about the running of the project, unless you live on another planet, is making people bored and are now no longer taking part in the debate and fast losing interest.

I suggest that it is time for those who wish to get answers from TVOC do it with specific complaints to the Charity Commissioners and the HLF. If they deem there has been a mis-use of funds or donations they will deal with it pretty snappily. TVOC is accountable to both.

Right now this thread has lost its way. And it has lost some important contributors. Judging by some comments I have received they are fed-up to the back teeth with the unending bickering.

So, it is time for those who wish to tackle the 'problem' to do so and leave the thread for news and interest in XH558 otherwise this thread will wither and die.

Tim McLelland

11th Jan 2009, 12:54

That's easy to say, but you're probably failing to appreciate that there are lots of people who send comments my way too, agreeing entirely with my view.

But enough already. If the purpose of a thread is to suite the tastes of specific individuals, then it's not worth contributing to it. That's not a debate, it's a waste of time.

andrewmcharlton

11th Jan 2009, 13:02

Tim,

You just don't know when to give up do you. Follow your own earlier advice. I don't actually disagree with your points, just the way they are made.

I for one as an early critic of this and former regimes as VTST offered to go to see them, put the questions, post them unedited and see what could be done. I also did an FOI request to HLF and when I asked for anyone to send me details of any questions they wanted answered I got precisely zero replies.

I did get to speak to HLF and to Dr P who was very forthcoming and it seemed like their might be a change of direction. I think there has, althought it is tiny in comparison to what is needed. So I will repeat the offer. I work in the legal game and well used to dealing with tricky questions, accounting and legal issues so I will gladly volunteer, IF that is what anyone particularly wants (i.e. more than just Tim). If not, that's fine, I have plenty to do otherwise.

To paraphrase what the mod says, "let's sh*t or get off the pot".

BEagle

11th Jan 2009, 16:20

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

I'm not a god-botherer of any size, shape or form. But this verse from the good book is highly relevant to some of the prolific posters on this thread......

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU

11th Jan 2009, 17:48

BEagle. I thought for a moment, there, you were going to adopt the Naval tradition of quoting Scripture chapter and verse for brevity. :ok:

Tim McLelland. You really have made your point very well; several times. The ones who still disagree will simply never agree. Know the limits of reasoned argument.

Delta15

17th Jan 2009, 18:06

Educational Hangar visits

I have been PMed by Dennis to request I remove this post.... therefore I have done as asked.... he says " He feels this is not doing the project any good..."

U.M

Evanelpus

19th Jan 2009, 09:02

Wow Delta, don't know what you put on that form but it obviously did the trick. Fancy a crack at the country's economy?

andrewmcharlton

19th Jan 2009, 15:09

after that you're welcome as Manager at Newcastle United...

bubblesuk

19th Jan 2009, 16:28

after that you're welcome as Manager at Newcastle United...

Oh now thats just being silly! :-)

Tim McLelland

19th Jan 2009, 16:39

No news from the great TVOC press machine I take it?

SFCC

20th Jan 2009, 21:06

andrewmcharlton

20th Jan 2009, 22:54

Not the most charming response ever seen. If you want the answer to your question you will probably need to do some trawling somewhere as it's the answer we're all searching for.

Tim McLelland

20th Jan 2009, 22:57

That is kinda funny though - just hijack a thread and demand that everybody shuts-up and answers your question. You're not Jeremy Paxman by any chance?:p

Evanelpus

21st Jan 2009, 08:08

Right.....
I'm not bothered enough by all of this to trawl throught the entire thread, but I have been watching from afar and have donated some money to this debacle.
I think it is high time you lot stopped your pissing contest.
All I am interested in is whether we will be seeing the aeroplane on the display circuit in 2009 or not.
No waffle from TM, or arguments from other quarters.

Will it fly again....yes or no?

Whilst not the most elequently put question I've seen on PPruNe, it does raise a good point.

There are thousands of people out here who have donated to the TVOC in some way because they want to see the Vulcan fly on a regular basis. I'm not sure if they would have donated so readily if they knew/felt that it was a one season wonder.

At what point this year will TVOC have to say Yes or No to a flying programme for 558?

Tim McLelland

21st Jan 2009, 13:55

The answers to both questions - and every other question - lay with TVOC, quite obviously. Needless to say, getting an answer about anything is (and always has been) virtually impossible.

PPRuNe Pop

21st Jan 2009, 15:00

I suggest that it is time for those who wish to get answers from TVOC do it with specific complaints to the Charity Commissioners and the HLF. If they deem there has been a mis-use of funds or donations they will deal with it pretty snappily. TVOC is accountable to both.

For the whingers and whiners and those who repeat the questions again and again - the answer is in the hands of those who complain to the governing bodies and other authorities. Funny that those who complain most are the ones who do nothing.

If all we are going to hear about XH588 is how TVOC won't do this or that etc.,.........the thread is not worth keeping open. Time to act.

PPP

Tim McLelland

21st Jan 2009, 16:26

Bit of a sweeping statement isn't it? Presupposes that all the "whiners" haven't already complained or tried to take some action... maybe they have? Likewise, it's a bit of a sweeping statement to make a judgement on whether one person thinks a thread is "worth keeping open" isn't it?

I'm tempted to say that if you think all of this talk is a waste of time (and I have to admit that I'm inclined to agree with you) then why not talk to the Pprune Administrators and see whether Pprune can make some effort to make more official enquiries to TVOC, HLF, Government, CAA or anyone else you care to think of? Pprune is (technically-speaking) a publisher, and represents the views of many people, so you'd certainly have enough "clout" to deserve some decent answers, if nothing else. The opportunity to actually do something is there...

Able Archer

23rd Jan 2009, 12:45

Whilst this long running and long suffering thread continues to follow the UK economy, you have to review what is fact.
Lots of hugs and kisses to supporters, workers, sponsors, aircrew and VOC in getting this aircraft to where it is.
VTTS decided a long time back to take the long road to success which has high risk.
It took a good ten years for the sea vixen to return to flight, so VOC should never announced that the aircraft in 1999 will be flying in 2000.

VOC have been taking our hard earned cash of us for 10 years now. The £40 name on the bomb bay door was the first of many fleeces. In fact they are in breach of the law and you can reclaim the £40 through the online small claims court in Northampton if anyone wants a refund.
I have personally decided VTTS will not get 1p from me until they become more transparent.
Unlike other charities in this expense zone, they have seemed to employ any one who passes the gates at the air field. They really have to stop doing this. They base a £2m annual fundraising budget on volunteers to dream up ideas. Most of the ideas bring in £500 - £1000 a time. Very nice income if you are a Morris Men group or a local dramatic company. But sadly flying a Vulcan is not in that category.

I see the latest cash generator is a days shooting with the VOC management of which £17 of the £39 ticket go's to keeping the Vulcan flying. Limited to 32 places = £ 544 profit BEFORE expenses of VOC staff travelling to the venue for the day and any out of pocket expenses.

As repeated elsewhere, non engineering salaries are a huge chunk of the budget, but all charities have this people in these positions. Terry Wogan get's paid for hosting Children In Need, it happens.
Then we have the trustees, a bunch of guys to oversee a continuing failing charity. As I have said before they give the impression of lacking any corporate backbone. With the charity on the brink, they really should be a little more active in the day to day running of it.
Suggest: Existing non engineering staff to work a 3 day week until fully funded - that includes the CEO. Once fully funded give notice to all non engineering staff and request they reapply for the jobs. Interview board should include people from other charity based organisations. Right skills for the right position.
Pay off creditors, and leave Bruntingthorpe for a more attractive airfield with all the facilities to handle the aircraft, and not get fleeced for a high hanger rental agreement which currently I believe is around £10K - £15k a month.
Start sucking up to your die hard supporters a bit, learning to say sorry be open and you might find some cash will come your way.

Tim McLelland

23rd Jan 2009, 12:58

In David Walton's defence, I believe the hangarage would still be free had it not been for one particular former member of the TVOC group. Just one example of how money has been wasted I'm afraid.

Lister Noble

23rd Jan 2009, 13:37

I'm sitting here wearing a Vulcan to the Sky bodywarmer that I bought at a local airshow ,Rougham, to which I flew last year.
The Vulcan flew low over my house ,probably on the way to Lowestoft airshow last year and I thought that it was a marvellous site.

Two things now suprise and concern me.

1-I went to my local flying club last week for a social visit,and was wearing my Vulcan body warmer,the CFI who taught me to fly,ex RAF,50 years professional flying from Lightnings to Harriers and still teaching people to fly said.

"Why are you wearing that rubbish,there are just as many people wanting it not to fly including the CAA as there are wanting it to fly,it would be better if they put their money into something that meant more in the history of the Britain,like building a Mosquito etc"

2-I did not realise that the Vulcan project is now so much at risk due to the various reasons explained in this thread.

I wonder how many of the general public who gave and have now probably forgotten about it would feel if they knew what was going on?

Sorry if this is repetition and I'm not sniping at anyone,but can't struggle through the entire thread.

It's all very sad.
Lister

Tim McLelland

23rd Jan 2009, 15:07

I don't think anyone wants it not to fly - although I accept that there are many people who simply don't care one way or the other. There are certainly lots of people who think the idea was a non-starter right from the beginning though. As for the CAA, I think it would be unfair to suggest that they don't want it to fly, as they've done a lot to expedite it's progress in fact, and ultimately it's not down to the CAA to express their view one way or the other. As a regulatory body, they are (or at least should be) concerned only with the aircraft's condition and safety standards. The problem is that the CAA have set themselves such ridiculously over-ambitious standards that it makes the operation of any complex aircraft almost impossible. This is my gripe with the CAA - they have taken the regulatory process to the extreme to the point at which it has gone beyond all reasonable issues of safety and into the realms of sheer stupidity - as witnessed by the B-17 insurance saga and so on. Unfortunately, they are in a position where everybody assumes that their word is law, and nobody is entitled to ask on what basis they reach such ludicrous decisions. Ultimately, it's down to the Government to dictate how the CAA operates, but I don't think anyone has the will to try and persuade anyone within the Government to start asking questions about how the CAA operates. Besides, nobody in the Government would have any interest in getting involved. As far as they're concerned, the CAA does a good job keeping us all safe from any risk of hair-brained warbird operators who run the risk of dropping their planes into our back gardens.

It's true that there would probably be more enthusiasm for the project if it was a Mosquito rather than a Vulcan, but then a Mosquito would be infinitely cheaper to restore and operate. Sadly, the majority of people in this country still have a mind-set which assumes that history ended in 1945 and they don't seem able to grasp that in its own way, the Vulcan was just as important as any WWII aircraft, indeed in one respect it is more important as without it we might well all be dead by now. But most people fall victim to the assumtion that if an aircraft didn't drop bombs over Germany, then it has never served any purpose of any significance. It's almost impossible to make some people understand that the whole point of the Vulcan was to ensure that it was never used for the job for which it was designed. If it had been used to deliver Yellow Suns to the USSR then it would have been a failure by definition. Sadly, Joe Public isn't bright enough to grasp that fact, so for most people, the Vulcan is simply a pretty aeroplane, and therefore of no great importance.

As I've said many times before, the 558 saga was a great idea full of potential but it's doomed, no matter how you look at it. Clearly, it is way too expensive to operate, given the regulatory processes that we're stuck with in this country. The only question is whether it can survive in flying condition for a while, and what happens to the aircraft once it is accepted that it cannot continue to fly - at least in this country. My disappointment is that far too many people have been involved with the project who have been ill-equipped to do the job, and who have evidently been more interested in making a few bob out of it, rather than ensuring the project's success. That's not to say that everyone involved has acted this way - the engineers deserve a medal for the job they did in restoring the aircraft.

There's still time for a miracle to happen but I don't think anyone is expecting a billionaire to suddenly open his cheque book. I imagine that the aircraft is more likely to re-appear at the beginning of this year's show season, and make a few appearances until whatever money is left, has gone. As I've said before, my real gripe with TVOC is that they've clearly not addressed the issue of what happens to the aircraft at that stage, and they seem to be only interested in pursuing their pleas for donations - rather like flogging the proverbial dead horse. The cynical part of my nature makes me inclined to think that this is because at least one person within TVOC is more concerned with milking the project's income for as long as he can, and when the project runs dry he won't be interested in it any longer. I'd like to think that my view is wrong but (as I've said before) I've not seen so much as a single word from him to convince me or anyone else, otherwise.

The thrilling new XH558 Press Office has appeared and, as expected, it hasn't produced so much as a line of useful information about the project so far. It doesn't fill me with confidence that TVOC have changed their approach. I've received so many communications from people who tell me of the ways in which they've offered help to TVOC and they've been met with either refusal or indifference (or no response at all). I've also been told of some of the ways in which money has simply been wasted, or transferred into people's pockets. It's not good, in fact it's a disgrace in my opinion. It's fine to congratulate TVOC on getting the aircraft back into the air but I think this fails to grasp the truth of the situation, that others could have done the job more successfully and much less expensively.

But referring back to my previous post, is there anything we can do, other than mourn the slow death of the project? I think there is some opportunity to do something, as I said before. Pprune represents a large body of people, many of whom are servicemen or former servicemen, who ought to have some "weight" when it comes to demanding answers. Clearly, the toothless aviation press is never going to look into the project and they'll continue to simply publish TVOC's press blurb and never stop to ask any difficult questions (they might not get their press passes to the next flight if they don't roll-over and say nice things). If there is any will amongst the people on Pprune to do anything other than moan, then why can't Pprune organise a project to approach HLF and seek some clear answers from them about where all their money went, and why, and whether they think it is acceptable to have allowed all this money to be spent on a project which now appears to have reached a dead end? TVOC can't simply sit-back and ignore HLF, even though they seem perfectly willing to ignore everybody else. Likewise, HLF seem to think that they can avoid discussing the project because their dealings with TVOC are confidential. Of course this is rubbish - HLF is spending our money, so we have a right to know where evey penny has gone, and why it seems like complete folly to allow it to be wasted, when shelling-out a little more would now produce some results. Make no mistake, HLF is the only hope of providing enough funds for 558 to fly, and yet nobody seems willing to address this fact, and everyone seems to think it's perfectly acceptable for HLF to pour money into the project and then refuse to give any more, just when the project has been completed and would produce a "return" on the hefty investmant. It's ridiculous.

Surely, somebody with a bit of "weight" should be demanding to know why HLF now seem happy to sit back and allow all the money they've spent (our money) to be wasted, just for the sake of spending a little bit (by HLF standards) more? If nobody has the enthusiasm or will to start asking serious questions, then what is the alternative? We simply sit and watch TVOC run the project into the ground?

bubblesuk

23rd Jan 2009, 15:13

Posted by Able Archer

I see the latest cash generator is a days shooting with the VOC management of which £17 of the £39 ticket go's to keeping the Vulcan flying. Limited to 32 places = £ 544 profit BEFORE expenses of VOC staff travelling to the venue for the day and any out of pocket expenses.

The shooting day has been arranged by Roger of the March Hare and is not organized or staffed by T.V.O.C./VTTS at all so there will be no expenses for the club etc to be deducted from the £544, the only way that the Brunty Bunch are involved is as competitors because i believe Doc Bob and co are attending. :)

DeKd

23rd Jan 2009, 16:52

there will be no expenses for the club etc to be deducted from the £544,

It's a Thursday.

Are you saying that anybody employed by the Charity will be taking a days leave and paying their own expenses to attend?

Similarly, are you saying that NOBODY will be charging the charity for their time and expenses in representing VTTS on the day?

That seems a bit "above and beyond" to me...

If, as I suspect, it's treated a normal working day, the point made remains valid - the charity needs ideas to raise real money. From the outside it would be very easy to interpret this as the management fiddling whilst Rome burns.

bubblesuk

23rd Jan 2009, 19:17

Roger is a club member and organises these days off his own back, this is organised by him and him alone, Doc Bob, Taff, Andrew edmundson and Martin withers are going to be there as competitors and no doubt be stumping up for the ticket price. There will be no need for the club or trust to pay to be represented as it is a club day. everything but Rogers costs will be donated. Im terribly sorry that theres no hidden agenda or scandal or any form of ripp off embezzelment involved. Instead of guessing and speculating about the day may i suggest you contact Roger yourself?

Blacksheep

23rd Jan 2009, 20:40

Should any disillusioned person wish to part with a bit of cash that will be well spent on preserving a worthy bit of our aviation history, there's a certain place just off the M25 bt London Colney that would make good use of it.

Aaah! DeHavilland as Straight & Level would say....

Tim McLelland

24th Jan 2009, 00:21

er... I hope you're not suggesting that the Mosquito and co. are somehow more worthy than a Vulcan are you?! :)

Cypherus

24th Jan 2009, 18:24

An avid supporter of the project from inception I have watched with growing concern as the 558 project has stumbled in a hapless fashion from crisis and disaster through triumph and once again to uncertainty all the while stoically associated with a body of silence from those responsible for the project other than meekly worded threats about imminent closure and final demise, and all of this has forced me too look hard at the projects original viability and organisation.

Reading through Tim’s latest post he makes good points that have niggled at people from the start.

As the originators of the projects major funding, the HLF, who time and again have had praise heaped upon them for the donation of the seed capital and provision of the credibility that such funding bestows seem to have avoided the real fall out of the projects financial problems by simply pointing too the confidentiality of their dealings with the TVOC senior board members regarding the original funding agreement, all well and good on the face of it, but looking harder at the HLF and it’s record of funding projects one finds that there is praise in abundance for those that have survived but little information on those that once seeded have gone on too close soon after the HLF capital was expended.

Which brings me too my major gripe with the HLF/TVOC involvement with the project, Too many times they provide large and small sums of money to start such projects with it would appear little or no regard for the longevity of same, seemingly to believe that once the money is handed over and accolades given their responsibility is over, in the case of 558 the money donated was always applauded as a one off donation and the project would be required too survive or fall on it’s own merits thereafter, the HLF would not give another penny too the funding, but do they not have a responsibility too the fund to ensure that the money they donate is used in the best interests of the project and as such failure should and would be seen clearly as lack of due care on their behalf to the aims of the fund, seems so as they quietly sit and watch numerous funded projects fail each year..

Yes the HLF provided enough money once the names were aboard to start the project, but in truth are the very organisation that was and is directly responsible for it’s demise by not correctly funding such a major project over the term of it’s tenure and for allowing the underperformance of the projects management to continue, but it would appear that their actual ability to control what goes on within the TVOC upper echelons is limited or non existent.

As for the TVOC fund raising efforts, farcical or what they should simply stop chasing the large sponsors, and concentrate on getting a regular flow of small donations from any and all sources, if the project had anything too offer the large corporations they would have invited themselves aboard long before now, obviously they do not see it as a well run beneficial source of advertising exposure so do not consider getting involved.

I for one will continue too support the project via the VTTS for the value I get from their efforts, but I have little expectations of seeing 558 over Eastbourne or any other venue for that matter again.

ibw123

24th Jan 2009, 21:10

TL this is a well thought out sit-rep of the present VTTS situation. I hardly ever agree with you but this time I think you have summed up the situation very well.:ok:

Have you mellowed ( towards the plight of XH558 ) or - have I become more critical? (of TVOC?).

Tim McLelland

25th Jan 2009, 03:07

Maybe it's a combination of both?! I haven't mellowed though - I've just resigned myself to the fact that the whole saga evidently isn't going anywhere and the best one can hope for is that 558 will make a few appearances this year before the inevitable occurs. I think the horrible truth of this matter is that despite the various actions which could be taken, they're not going to be taken, and the project is just going to plod-along in the same way that it always has done, until all the money is gone. Simple as that.

I don't see any sign of TVOC having any appetite to do things differently, nor do I see any signs of anyone with any influence wanting to get involved to try and salvage something from the mess. You can spend forever reading the endless comments on one enthusiast site or another but ultimately they amount to nothing. Like I said previously, the HLF is the only possible means of saving the project and nobody - absolutely nobody - has shown even a glimmer of interest in making an organised and serious effort to enter into any sort of dialogue with them. As I've said here and elsewhere repeatedly, anyone who still think sponsors are going to miraculously keep the aircraft flying or that donations will suffice, are simply deluding themselves. But the real crime is that HLF have effectively spent a huge amount of our money on a project which is ultimately going to end in failure. They have the ability to easily save the project and ensure that the money they put into it will result in a funded, flying exhibit. The amount of money required is peanuts as far as HLF is concerned, but it seems they're happy to simply write-off all the money that has been spent, rather than having the good sense to spend some more and thereby make the original expediture worthwhile. It's not as if there's even any question as to whether any further expenditure would yield results - we now know that the aircraft can fly.

But it seems that TVOC have no interest in pursuing this argument with HLF. Why? Well who knows - they steadfastly refuse to tell us anything. Maybe it's because they're already embarrassed by the way in which they appear to have failed to fulfil the terms of the first agreement with HLF? Or maybe they don't want HLF to ask too many questions as to precisely where all the money went? But whatever the reason, it seems that everybody is content to sit-back and ignore this obvious absurdity. It's quite amazing that so much talk and so much fuss has been made on so many forums, and yet nobody has addressed this matter, even though its the only practical way of saving the project. Seems that people are content to whine and moan about every aspect of the saga without dicussing the one point which could - just possibly - keep 558 flying.

I tried myself more than a year ago to get some useful dialogue with HLF and I had the support of a well-known former RAF officer who was willing to give his time and public support. But HLF will say very little without being forced to (because of this laughable confidentiality cop-out which is quite ludicrous, considering that it's public money that they're spending), and forcing HLF to address the matter would require some serious, organised effort - maybe even involving MP's if necessary. Unfortunately, what actually happens is that people would rather waste their time emailing silly petitions to 10 Downing Street - presumably because this provides a feeling of achievement without doing anything more than clicking on a website. Sadly, nobody seems to have the appetite to do anything more constructive, but then I think the vast majority of enthusiasts don't even know how to. So you have to conclude that, tragic though it may be, the project's going to go nowhere. It's a shame, but realistically, who can imagine the outcome is going to be any different?

Blacksheep

25th Jan 2009, 14:42

er... I hope you're not suggesting that the Mosquito and co. are somehow more worthy than a Vulcan are you?! I'm suggesting that we have several well preserved and safely housed examples of the Vulcan. All that money could have been well spent on Mosquitos, and many other flying machines that form part of our aviation heritage. Rather than a futile attempt to keep a large, complex, multi-engine bomber that costs an absolute fortune to maintain, flying for a few short years longer.

JEM60

25th Jan 2009, 17:14

Hi, Blacksheep. I couldn't agree more!!!!! Financing again would be the problem. I doubt that the HLF would want to be involved in a series of smaller projects though.

Tim McLelland

25th Jan 2009, 19:16

safely housed examples of the Vulcan

Three in the UK to be precise - not a great deal really.

I doubt if there would be the same enthusiasm to support a project to get a Mosquito flying (it's not as if WWII isn't already well represented at air shows, is it?!) besides, Kermit Weeks already has one. As for being a "futile" attempt to keep the Vulcan flying for a few years, I don't think it was futile. The idea was sound, it's just been mismanaged very badly.

oldlag53

26th Jan 2009, 09:04

Tim,

Firstly, I do applaud your brave and persistent efforts on behalf of the Vulcan to keep the discussion going on this forum. About a year or so ago I had the 'temerity' to question the viability of the project on this forum and was threatened with a ban (via pm) until I got the main pprune admins to intervene. So much for freedom of speech...

Regarding your comments about the HLF, the problem is surely that it would cost a huge amount of time and money to have inspectors(?) who followed each and every project through to completion. Although it is the taxpayers' money, it is in effect going back to the taxpayer to use for the benefit of communities/interest groups/charities etc.

Uncomfortable as it may be, I think you just have to trust the groups to complete their projects, and accept that human nature being what it is, some will fall by the wayside. Equally, you can't really expect the HLF to keep pouring money into a project until it is completed - this would clearly be unfair on the many projects who no doubt are refused funding in the first place.

I think the only exception to this might be in the case of a public building (a museum perhaps) where it was half-finished and thus stood derelict for lack of funds. An old aircraft (IMHO) does not qualify.

I must say I was amazed the Vulcan got HLF funding in the first place, considering the problems involved and the relatively small audience for it.

Tim McLelland

26th Jan 2009, 09:35

I accept that HFL obviouly couldn't devote resources to constant monitoring of projects they've funded, but at present they seem to have gone to the other extreme. Having given TVOC a substantial amount of money, they now seem to be completely disassociated with the project.

But the most important point (as I keep trying to hammer-home) is that the money HLF gave will be wasted if the aircraft doesn't fly even for just a few years. It seems like complete stupidity to sit-back and allow the project to fail when, for the sake of a bit more money (and a tiny amount by HLF standards) they could see the project through and make the initial expenditure worthwhile.

It really is that simple, and yet nobody seems to have had the good sense to pursue this matter with the HLF. People seem keen to create stupid petitions, pointless campaigns, futile fundraising pleas, endless silly hopes for sponsorship, and yet the key to solving the problem is staring them in the face. Why are people so scared of pressuring HLF? Just because HLF say they won't put any more money into the project? Why hasn't anyone got the enthusiasm to take-on this issue and raise public awareness of how ridiculous HLF's position is? It's our money and we have the right to demand that it's spent as we see fit, surely? Just because HLF says no, doesn't mean we should take that as being their final position - ultimately they don't have the right to simply dismiss things so easily.

The longer this saga plods on, the more convinced I am that TVOC simply don't want to have HLF involved any more, for reasons which they want to keep to themselves. Likewise, it seems equally clear that people are perfectly happy to whine and moan on forums, and to click a box to sign a petition, but nobody is prepared to do anything which actually stands a chance of getting a result. For some reason, people seem to be scared of taking-on HLF and their stupid attitude, even though HLF should be accountable to us - the people who give them the money in the first place.

As I've said before, HLF is the only option, it really is that simple. Everything else is a waste of time no matter how much people might argue otherwise.

Surrey Towers

26th Jan 2009, 11:45

Why hasn't anyone got the enthusiasm to take-on this issue and raise public awareness of how ridiculous HLF's position is? It's our money and we have the right to demand that it's spent as we see fit, surely?

You seem to be the one doing all the talking and constantly badgering other people to do what YOU think is right. So, what are you waiting for?

No good supplying just the bullets is it...?

andrewmcharlton

26th Jan 2009, 11:57

So last year I made a request to the HLF under the FOI for some bits of information after an appeal to anyone for suggestions, this is what I received back, unedited:

Dear Mr Charlton,
Thank you for your email.
We are in the process of consulting with the applicant to ascertain whether there is any commercial information contained in the application forms that it would not be proper for us to release.
In the interim we are aware it has been a little while, and therefore thought it was better to respond on these other questions as quickly as possible; and that if you are able to give us a steer on any particular information from the application form that you are interested in, we may be able to pull that out more quickly.

In relation to this specific query, to start with perhaps I could provide with the following information for each of the various applications:
HF-01-00951 - Vulcan to the Sky - Rejected
Vulcan to the Sky NHMF 2002 (9) 10
DECISION: REJECT
Vulcan to the Sky Limited sought a grant of £2,500,000 (57% of eligible costs) to purchase and restore the Avro Vulcan XH558, to fly at air shows in the UK. Expert advice and officers’ advice was not supportive. The aircraft was in good condition for static display and not at risk, and while possibly the only one that could be restored to flying condition there were 20 presently in preservation. Its maximum permitted flying life if the project was approved would be 5 to 8 years. The Board noted that the restoration of aircraft to flying condition was a low priority for HLF funding, primarily because of the flying risks, but agreed that exception to this could be made on the basis of the merits of individual applications. However, they agreed that, in view of the short flying life of the aircraft, the heritage and public benefits would be insufficient to provide value for money for the grant sought. The Board rejected the application, on the grounds of (1) low priority, and (2) poor value for money for HLF funding.

HG-03-00079/1 - Vulcan To the Sky - Approved
Vulcan to the Sky; HG-03-00079/1 HLF 2003 (11) 14
DECISION: STAGE ONE PASS (£2,497,000; 61%)
In November 2002, the Board had rejected an application by Vulcan to the Sky Trust for a grant of £2,500,000 to purchase a Vulcan ZH558, carry out a major maintenance programme, and return it to flight. The decision had been based on the low priority of restoring aircraft to flying condition and poor value for money. The project had since been revised, with the Trust now seeking a Stage One Pass of £2,497,000, the aircraft having now been valued at £125,000.
The revised project had addressed the risk involved in returning aircraft to flying condition. Undertakings had been obtained from BAE Systems and the Civil Aviation Authority on their involvement in managing risk and ensuring airworthiness. The risk was now believed to be no greater than for any commercially operated aircraft licensed to carry passengers. The Board agreed that, in view of the low risk and that fact that several other Vulcan aircraft existed, a grant might be awarded subject to conditions including suitable insurance and an evaluation programme. It was agreed that other grants to restore aircraft to flight would not be considered until the results of the evaluation were known.
The revised project had also addressed value for money concerns and developed public and educational benefits. The aircraft would now be displayed at various shows around the country over a longer period. Although some Trustees were concerned that the public benefits would still only last for a relatively short period of time, others were persuaded by the increased public enjoyment of the sight of this particular aircraft in flight.
Although the Royal Air Force was not providing a cash contribution towards the project, the Vulcan would be flown by RAF crew who would provide training for others. At the end of its flying life, it would be transferred to the Imperial War Museum’s collection at Duxford for display and taxi run demonstrations. Links with Duxford were already being forged.

The Board noted that the specific issues raised when the previous application was rejected had been addressed, and the support for the project from local people, volunteers, and the Committee for the East Midlands. The Board agreed the application was a high priority for funding. They approved a Stage One Pass of £2,497,000 (61% of eligible costs), subject to the following conditions:
- The Trust should submit with their Stage Two application for HLF approval a plan detailing all the access, interpretation and education programmes and materials for the first year of operation plus a strategy for the next four years; this should included details of staffing, measurable targets, and links with partner organisations.
- The Trust should also devise and implement an evaluation strategy for measuring the benefits delivered through this programme, and through the presence of the Vulcan at events where it would fly. The results from would need to be shared with HLF on a regular basis.
- The Trust should have in place adequate insurance to be able to repay HLF grants should any loss or damage be sustained by the aircraft during its flying life.
20 Vulcan to the Sky; HG-03-00079/2 HLF 2004 (6) 20
DECISION: AWARD GRANT OF £2,734,000 (63%)
(INCLUDING UPLIFT OF £238,000 ON STAGE ONE PASS)
In December 2003 the Board had approved a Stage One Pass with a view to a grant of £2,497,000 towards an application by the Vulcan to the Sky Trust to restore a Vulcan A-bomber to flight, to allow it to be displayed throughout the country over its remaining 10 to 15 years flying life, after which it would retire to Duxford to become the centre of their Cold War exhibition. The Trust had addressed the Stage One requirements by producing education, access and interpretation plans and a project evaluation strategy. An uplift of £238,000 was sought to cover an increased rental charge for the hangar. Expert advice was supportive. The Board agreed it was a high priority for funding, and awarded a grant of £2,734,000 (63% of revised eligible costs), subject to the special conditions as recommended.

3. HLF has had no requests, formal or informal, for further funding.
2 & 4. HLF monitors all large projects to ensure that the approved purposes are achieved and that Lottery money is properly spent. When projects are awarded a grant a monitor is appointed. A monitor was appointed to the Vulcan project and has been closely involved in overseeing the project on behalf of HLF since the grant was awarded. The monitor's role is to oversee the project on behalf of HLF, visit the project regularly, examine progress on the works involved, all expenditure and invoices and scrutinise project management. The monitor provides us with regular reports on the project's progress and any requests to drawdown money. Should the monitoring process highlight any problems or concerns, HLF's case officer will meet the grantees with the monitor and agree ways of resolving the issues.
Similarly, we have a great deal of monitoring paperwork, some of which we may not be able to release (most likely, given the financial reporting made, because of a commercial confidentiality) and in any case not without consulting with the grantee to ascertain this. Again, if you are able to be more specific in defining your interest in any way I can probably respond to that more promptly.
Then I received this additional information:

HLF appointed a monitor in January 2005 to monitor and oversee the Vulcan restoration project. The monitor has held and continues to hold monthly on-site meetings with the grantees. Monitoring concentrates on the grantees’ mobilisation on site and all works undertaken as part of the grantee’. This covers scrutiny of : 1. Acquisition of the aircraft
2. Taking a legal charge over the aircraft
3. Acquisition of the hangar lease
4. Completion of the main works supplier’s contracts and indemnities
5. Completion of contracts and indemnities with sub-contractors
6. Establishing Original Equipment Manufacturers contribution to the project
7. Completion of Aircraft hull insurance
8. Compliance with CAA rules for the major overhaul back to flight
9. Compliance with the CAA registration process
10. Fundraising programme development and progress
11. Education programme development and implementation
12. Drawing down HLF grant – monthly requests with full documentation
13. Initiation and regular review of Management Information System
14. Cost Plan and Risk Management Plan initiation and reviews
15. Staff recruitment and employment
16. Arrangements for post-flight housing and display
The monitor provides a full progress report to HLF each month. The report covers all of the above aspects of the project, highlights any problems or issues that need to be resolved and advises whether further funding should be released.

Tim McLelland

26th Jan 2009, 16:19

You seem to be the one doing all the talking and constantly badgering other people to do what YOU think is right. So, what are you waiting for?

Suggest you read previous posts before commenting. I already said that I tried, a long time ago, but nobody was interested in helping us. But thanks for the pointless snipe;)

Tim McLelland

26th Jan 2009, 16:24

Andrew, I'm inclined to think that HLF's monitor doesn't actually do much monitoring. A cynic would think that he merely ticks boxes and collects his wage from HLF...

However, the most interesting line is:-
3. HLF has had no requests, formal or informal, for further funding.

So, after all this wringing of hands and all the last-ditch pleas for money, TVOC haven't even bothered to ask for any more money? Oh dear...

andrewmcharlton

26th Jan 2009, 19:25

I was pretty surprised at that response too. I don't recallthe exact appeal message but I recall reading one and the implication, if indirect, was that traditional lines of finance had been exhausted hence the pass the hat appeal, i.e. asked and refused. It does seem that unless something has been done since this FOI reply was filled out, that they didn't even ask for further help.

Tim McLelland

26th Jan 2009, 21:24

It's quite absurd isn't it? If you read the endless threads on various sites, you ocassionally see HLF mentioned and everyone immediately dismisses the notion of seeking more money from HLF, usually with the throw-away comment that HLF are unwilling to provide any more funding - as if the idea had been explored. But when you read things like your response from HLF, it suggests that TVOC haven't even bothered to ask.

Madness, complete madness.

andrewmcharlton

27th Jan 2009, 17:13

This is a dire state of affairs and I am sure others on here, irrespective of views, would wish that your hard graft and commitment were not lost to the project.

It would be nice to think that someone at TVOC would read this and respond, not neccessarily to specific points you raise but in generality as it is symptomatic of a disconnected leadership not just from the donors but from their volunteers.

Very sad and thank you for your contribution, enjoy a lie in.

Tim McLelland

27th Jan 2009, 17:23

I agree with Andrew - good that someone within the team is willing to say what they think and I hope it encourages more to do the same before the people running this project grind it into the ground completely.

Tim McLelland

27th Jan 2009, 20:51

I sincerely hope the posts are not removed - it would be nice to think that Pprune, alone amongst the range of enthusiast sites and aviation magazines, could actually discuss the realities of this project, rather than wasting time on the usual pointless chat found elsewhere. It's refreshing to hear from someone who has actually been involved and I hope that others will come forward too and say what they think. It's pretty clear that the TVOC management have no intention of saying anything of any significance to anyone unless - or until - they're forced to.

andrewmcharlton

27th Jan 2009, 21:16

Not sure why the post should be remnoved, it's about the most valid and straight talking one we've had to date, keep it up.

Tim McLelland

27th Jan 2009, 21:59

Why doesn't that surprise me?!

I know from experience that TVOC only communicate with people when they want to, and as soon as they can't be bothered or when they think someone might be inclined to ask some difficult questions, the lines of communications go dead. It's a sorry business.

I'm glad that you've said what you think and I hope others do the same too. I don't know why everyone seems to be so reluctant to point the proverbial finger at TVOC's management - maybe it's some sort of fear that if too many questions are asked then the whole project might come tumbling down? But let's face it, I think we've reached a stage where it's starting to topple in any case so if there's anything we can do to prevent things becoming even more dire then let's do it, don't you think?

Surely, we have the opportunity here on Pprune to gather the "serious" people together and combine our talents in order that we can demand some sensible dialogue with TVOC and/or HLF? If we don't then who the hell will?

jindabyne

27th Jan 2009, 21:59

Strange this. I have also had a post removed from the TVOC site very recently: mild and inoffensive, it was intended to provoke a response to topical concerns. Hard to understand.

saracenman

27th Jan 2009, 22:48

I haven't posted on here for a while but thought it a real shame reading what's been posted on the last few posts.

as one who has been greatly despised (to some toe-curling degree I hasten to add!) by TVOC management for a considerable time, due to my voicing my own grave concerns about the management of the project since October 2007, it would be all too easy to simply say "I told you so!" Not quite though.

what brunty558 has said, several of us have known for quite a while, along with a lot of other stuff. However, it's a great pity that it's 'come to light' now, as this is the first time in quite a while that I personally have felt positive about 558's future. I know that seems daft, given the current financial situation and the Sword of Damocles hanging over 558, but my reasoning is actually very simple - the new management structure!

Various things that I have been working on for over a year are finally beginning to bear fruit, with respect to publicity and funding for 558. Putting it into plain English, Rusty's departure is the best thing to happen in a long long time; she was a completely disorganised and counterproductive control-freak, determined to have her fingers in every pie, whether it was the concern of the Commercial Manager or not.

I had many spats with her, usually resulting in her editing or deleting my posts on the forum and even various threats of legal action (to which i always replied "bring it on!") All to try and silence me and promote her own version of the truth. The more I learned about her 'management style' the more I realised just how much she (and a few others) were getting away with and the resulting mess that TVOC certainly was. Now her role has been re-ordered and filled by someone who actually seems to 'get it'!

Hallelujah!

my emails now get answered promptly, telephone calls happen as planned and finally it appears that there IS someone at the helm that GENUINELY thinks of 558 as OUR aeroplane, with many valuable supporters who have good ideas! That, believe me, is a completely new concept for TVOC!

my only caveat to all of that is that 'things' got too far down the slope for too long - so much so that the new structure and people will have a much harder task than they might have had six or twelve months ago; so much damage has been done. If things continue in the positive way that they have shown so far, there are certain people whose faces simply won't fit anymore - by default. Thus the transformation will be complete!

seeing things slide further and further down the slippery slope over the past few months, I really never thought I'd hear myself saying this but things ARE looking better, little bit by little bit. I'm a long way off shouting the sickening "Keep the Faith" battle-cry, but I now have far more confidence in the management than at any time in the past.

brunty558, thanks for the stalwart effort and support you've given over the months and years - I'm sorry that you've been driven to your decision, but I genuinely hope that I'm proved right in the medium term and you can possibly reconsider in the future.

sm

Tim McLelland

27th Jan 2009, 23:42

What are your thoughts on the new "Press office"? I haven't seen so much as a single word from them (him?) as yet.

What exactly is happening on the TVOC forum? Is anything of any relevance being said or is it just the usual pointless banter? More importantly, have TVOC actually said anything about how things really are progressing (or not)?

And, most importantly, has anything been said about HLF? I assume not?

saracenman

28th Jan 2009, 00:31

I can't answer you in any official capacity, but...

press office
I have been speaking with him for more than 18 months and I can't think of anyone better to be given the task to be honest. the fact that he is (not meaning to sound condescending!) 'only' a club member - a very conscientious one at that - is significant in itself. he has shared my own concerns for some time and approached TVOC directly at the start of 2007 to offer his not-inconsiderable services. we have discussed several things over the months and bounced ideas off each other - i know that he is keen, motivated and effective, but bear in mind that he will only ever be as good as the information that he is given!

it also brings the club activities closer to TVOC - another thing which was long overdue - it has appeared for too long that they were both on opposing sides!

don't forget that anything is better than the wall of silence that so many of us screamed and shouted about not so many months ago.

forum
I haven't looked myself for a wee while, but I am aware that there are a few squabbles going on at present.

I can't say much about the banter really as I've been an instigator of much of it myself!:}

what I think should be realised though is that there is nowhere near as much genuine 558 stuff as there was two years ago - for obvious reasons. what is good about it though is that it still represents a valuable 'place' for 558's core supporters to chat - without that the project would have died a long time ago. Rusty & Co never appreciated just how indispensible the forum is for continued core support.

progress
again, I think that there is very little to report. I know that there are some feverish goings-on in the background to get things organised - particularly with respect to finances/creditors etc. the 'new team' certainly did as promised before Christmas and published the figures that we have begged and begged and begged for. I know from my own conversations that this was considered long overdue, and the general 'sweep it under the carpet' routine has been reversed as a matter of urgency.

I personally don't expect to hear much in the short term, so I won't be disappointed if we don't!

HLF
what were you hoping for? as far as I'm aware, the HLF involvement is done and dusted. I think it foolhardy for anyone to assume that they have any control over 558; the HLF have given millions to countless causes that have fallen by the wayside. I'm no HLF expert by any means, but I think that those three letters have to be forgotten about - unless of course another application is made, but that's a different matter entirely!

overall, as long as we can all sit tight and see 558 through this current hiatus, she stands a much better chance of displaying this year that she did this time last year!

cracks appeared a long time ago - they went unchecked and steadily became gaping chasms, despite some very conserted efforts from the supporters to keep it going. now there is a very real chance of fixing these, but with a small pallette knife and a tiny tub of Polyfila, it won't happen overnight!

sm

Tim McLelland

28th Jan 2009, 01:08

Thanks for the very full reply - good to finally be getting down to some serious discussion at last!

Press office - well I would agree that he will only be as good as the information he's given, but I hope that doesn't mean that he's going to simply act as a "mouthpiece" for the rest of the team. Heaven-forbid that the management found yet another excuse to avoid actually communicating with anyone! Does this also mean that if/when he is approched with new ideas to help TVOC, the offers won't simply be ignored now? I very much hope so. However, my main worry is that I haven't seen the new "press office" translate into any press coverage anywhere. I hope that whoever the guy is, he understands that a press officer has to be proactive not merely reactive.

Forum - Oh wel 'nuff said. I agree that the forum serves a useful purpose in enabling supporters to talk to each other but in a wider sense, I doubt if it's had any effect on the amount of money going into the programme. In fact I worry slightly that reading endless squabbles over nothing actually deters people from making dontaions!

Progress - I'm not quite so convinced that everything's fine. I think Dr.Pleming has made it very clear that there's a serious shortfall of money still outstanding so unless this money looks like being found (and I assume that it doesn't look like being found?) then I don't see much to be enthusiastic about? Fundamentally, no matter what changes might or might not be made to TVOC, if ther money still isn't there, it's a waste of time.

HLF - Well, as I've said in previous posts, HLF is the only obvious way in which longer-term funding for the aircraft could be secured. As you say, the HLF involvement appears to be "done and dusted" which seems - to put it mildly - completely crazy! Surely, if TVOC are doing anything worthwhile to seriously find funding, then they should be putting a lot of effort into trying to persuade HLF to provide it. I've already explained why, and if they haven't done that, then surely it's time that someone was asking them why not?

Oh well, the saga continues...

Dis Gruntled

28th Jan 2009, 08:18

I have not posted for a while but have been keeping an eye on things and too tell you the truth am amazed it is this close too collapse and still people are backing the management (sorry SM). Yes Rusty was a complete control freak but was certainley not just her with an air of arrogance and a self centred approach too the project, and those people are still there. I feel really sorry for the volunteers I know many of them travelled miles a few times a week and were owned hundreds of pounds in petrol money while the management swanned about in the tri-becas at the weekend wasting precious money. As for Pleming this is a man who said that he never looks at forums as they are a waste of time maybe its time you changed your tune Bob and really quickly because you have f****d up big time. These are the people who with enough belief could save your sorry ass. If it does all go pear shaped then I hope the management could be held responsible, the mismangement, deciept and lies on all levels beggars belief. How you can sell things on ebay with a certificate of authenticity too say its from 558 when its not, how you can take a mans half million pounds he has given to save the vulcan and then the first thing you do is buy half a dozen brand new lap tops for the management, how you can lie to the seat fitting team that Martin Baker said the seats were safe too fit and put engineers and flight crews lives at risk, all of this and so much more makes me sick. I know this will probably be deleted in 30 seconds flat, but I feel so much better now. DG

andrewmcharlton

28th Jan 2009, 08:58

Well said DG.

It seems the truth will out eventually. I know Dr P probably isn't a reader of the forums as last year, whenever it was, I emailed him and he called me back and we chatted for an hour or so. I know he does care passionately about the project but I am not persuaded he is the right man to be a leader of the project. That's not a personal attack by the way simply a realistic observation based on many years in business.

HLF seem to be out of the frame, presumeably on the basis that money has been spent and they haven't a major ongoing role so it seems it is down to donors / supporters as the last stakeholders.

Splash Down

28th Jan 2009, 10:28

My rudimentary understanding of HLF funding:

Any group/charity/organisation that qualifies for HLF backing do so on the understanding that it’s a ONE OFF payment and not a source of regular funding/income.

Basically they will give you the money to get your project off the ground but will NOT provide the finances to keep operating on a weekly/monthly/yearly basis.

Why should HLF bail out 558.

As has been said they have funded other projects that have gone tits up why should 558 be any different she’ll fly again just you watch.

Brad

andrewmcharlton

28th Jan 2009, 10:50

I'm not sure anyone is actually suggesting an HLF bail out.

The question is do they have any continuing oversight and should TVOC make any second approach formally, even if as you say HLF decide not to oblige.

Tim McLelland

28th Jan 2009, 11:05

Why should HLF bail out 558

I've already explained previously. Surely, having donated a hefty amount of cash to the project, it will be recognised as having been spent for nothing if the aircraft doesn't fly again (or doesn't fly for more than a few weeks). The HLF donation will be seen (quite rightly) as a waste of Lottery buyer's money.

Clearly, HLF have a golden opportunity to preserve the value of their original donation by giving a bit more cash - peanuts as far as their budgets are concerned, but it would be enough to ensure that the money they have already spent has been worthwhile. Anyone can see the logic of this argument?

It's easy to say that HLF have rules about one-off donations, rules about this or that, but it doesn't matter. The rules are meaningless as they're self-imposed and can be changed as quickly as they were implemented in the first place. Ultimately, HLF money is our money and we have a perfect right to see it spent as we see fit. If HLF have any objections to spending a bit more on 558 then let's hear what their reasons are. If the reasons aren't plausible (particularly if they use their own self-imposed rules to wriggle-out) then it's up to us to go to the Government ministers responsible, as they obviously have the power to dictate what HLF does or doesn't do. Simply rolling-over and taking no for an answer is precisely the sort of attitude that public bodies love.

However, the important point to remember is that (according to HLF's letter to Andrew) they haven't even been asked! So, while Pleming keeps whining about last chances, and begging school kids to dig into their pocket money (presumably to finance another laptop or two), he has failed to pursue the most obvious means of securing finance for the aircraft. It's absolutely ludicrous! What is his reason for not approaching HLF? Presumably he must either think that they would say no (but why didn't he at least ask and fight the decision - that's his job isn't it?), or he simply couldn't be bothered to find out. They can be the only possible reasons, unless he specifically doesn't want to have HLF involved again - why would that be? Because TVOC haven't met the terms of the original donation?

Sorry, but this saga is just completely ridiculous. We've listened to the garbage about no sponsors appearing (even though Pleming intimated that they were figuratively queueing-up to come forward) and how we're expected to dig into our pockets, as if having a "whip-round" is ever going to solve the problem. And yet, the one obvious source of reliable money for the aircraft hasn't even been pursued... and people wonder why I think TVOC's management are a joke?!

saracenman

28th Jan 2009, 11:48

just to clarify what i meant by "done and dusted" - the HLF grant, in simple terms, was given for 558's restoration to flight As is obvious, that has been done. The fact that the grant was secured predominantly on the basis of TVOC's Education Programme, and whether that part of the deal has been fulfilled adequately seems to me to be something of a moot point. In my own opinion, the Education Programme has, to date, been a joke - little more than ticking HLF's box.

I have personally been banging on about it being the very core of TVOC's efforts, to significantly boost support across the board. I won't say that I've been a lone voice on this, but until very recently no-one at Brunty seemed to 'get it'

whether part of the HLF's remit is to smack TVOC's wrists for not dealing with the education, i really don't know - but i very much doubt it. I'm pretty certain though, that for HLF to come to the rescue now would require a new application, which would take far longer to achieve that we've realistically got! Even then, there's no guarantee of success anyway.

Not sure what you meant Tim about the forum's value; it could be read either way. Even so, we as a group (the forum members) have achieved incredible success, particularly saving the day back in February 2008 when the project was near collapse. Not that it seemed fully appreciated at the time by the management, but without us 558 would never have had a second test flight!

DG - no need to apologise! I completely agree, particularly with respect to Dr. Pleming - the buck stops with him and should never have allowed certain people to screw things up for so long. It was clear to me that whatever management structure was supposed to be in place back then was an absolute joke - a ship adrift in rough seas with no-one at the helm. Certainly Dr. P is still there, but my understanding of the new management structure is such that TVOC are now more than capable of running things in the way that they should have been long ago, irrespective of Dr. P The disorganisation was almost institutional, with many of TVOC believing their own hype - the main protagonist in this respect was Rusty, in my opinion. Now that she has gone, killing off the rest of the rot will be somewhat simpler i feel.

I'm not trying to say that all is fantastic at Brunty, as there is a lot more to be done yet, but the main difference now is that the shortcomings have finally been admitted (it used to be "we're wonderful - go away!") and that things are already being done to address the problems.

a long way to go, but all the right noises seem to be coming from all the right places - at long last!

sm

Tim McLelland

28th Jan 2009, 13:51

I hope you're right, but regardless of whatever "noises" TVOC now make, would we be correct in assuming that no new sources of money have been found? If so, I can only refer back to the contents of my previous post - TVOC's activities and attitude (be it good or bad) is of no significance if no money has been found. That's the key point that we need to be addressing, surely, and that's why I keep banging-on about HLF. Do you think TVOC have approached HLF since Andrew's letter, or do you think they ever will? If not, do you agree that they're missing the only plausible chance (and I accept it is a chance - but easily the best one) of finding the money that's needed?

saracenman

28th Jan 2009, 14:20

again, i can't answer definitively in an official capacity but i do know that the main efforts at present are one step 'before' any new source of money; as we all know, TVOC are in debt and i know that Michael Trotter has moved mountains to keep the creditors 'sweet' - aka keeping the wolf from the door.

to owe someone a lot of money and then be able to bang on their door and encourage them to become a supporter of the very cause that has cost them money is astonishing!

I'm sure many of you know that I've been banging on about cost cutting measures for months - what's the point in raising extra income if it's simply haemorrhaging from every pore. From what i know, this is in hand - just a shame that it wasn't dealt with long ago!

but that's the story of this whole project really isnt it!

sm

Tim McLelland

28th Jan 2009, 14:46

Indeed, if you go back over past threads, I've done my fair share of carping about that too! I know from the people who have told me in confidence that a huge amount of cash has been wasted over the years, and that doesn't even include more well-known sagas like the cost of hangarage (which might well have still been free of charge had it not been for one person), and so on.

The way that so many people have been figuratively kissing TVOC's proverbial butt has been almost sickening at times. Sure, they got the aircraft back into the air but so what? Anybody could have done the same management and PR job, and probably more effectively and less expensively. It's time that people accepted this and stopped treating TVOC (and by that I mean the management - not the engineers and the people who do the real work) as if they're somehow beyond reproach. They've spent our money, and lots of it.

Splash Down

28th Jan 2009, 15:08

Thought HLF said that they will not pay for an aircraft to fly, but can pay for its restoration to flight, if HLF pay more money out to 558 then they should have bailed out every other scheme they funded and then went tits up.

You cant have one rule for one and one rule for another.

Whats more important paying for one aircraft (of which a dozen of the same type are preserved on the ground) to fly or saving the last of the great tea clippers or preserving a great building that has much more significant heritage value to the nation?

Sorry but 558 would ot get my vote, I cant see her being ground after one poor season she will fly again mark my words.

Tim McLelland

28th Jan 2009, 21:13

Splashdown - I don't disagree with any of your comments but at the same time, you must be able to see that a contrary position is just as valid?

It's really about how you perceive the HLF payments. If you regard a further payment as "bailing out" that's one thing, whereas "making additional expenditure in order to ensure that the first payment wasn't entirely wasted", is another thing.

As for having one rule for one thing and another for another, simple answer is that you can have any rules you like! As I've said, it's our money, and HLF might think it's acceptable to hide behind self-imposed rules, but rules can be changed when necessary - that's what our MP's are for. But we're assuming we know what HLF's position is - seems they've never even been asked!

And as for judging whether 558 is more or less significant than any other artefact, well obviously it's subjective and it's irrelevant. Point is, the money needed is nothing as far as HLF is concerned so surely it's a simple case of asking whether they think it's acceptable to throw-away money, or simply pay a bit more to justify the first payment?

Cornerstone, I think "fraud" would be pushing it! It's not about fraud, it's about wasting huge sums of money and "milking" a project for money which could have gone on more important things. It's not illegal but in view of the nature of the project, I think it's just as objectionable.

saracenman

28th Jan 2009, 23:03

funnily enough, despite respecting and agreeing with everything that the likes of DG and brunty558 have said, i still find it difficult to believe that there has been any milking/wastage/diversion of funding undertaken intentionally

whilst I'm not Dr. P's greatest fan, you can't ignore that it was he that got the ball rolling in the first place with nothing in the bank and very little else. similarly, the whole team certainly have put in the hours etc - some more than others - i don't question any of TVOC's employees' dedication, intentions or motives at all, just their managerial acumen!

what i personally think happened is that (probably when the HLF money came in) the whole project out-grew the abilities of those managers in place at the time. in the bear-pit that is business and commerce, failing to realise one's own limitations is a fundamental mistake - simply giving a position to someone who'd previously been doing it for free is not the way to employ the most efficient workforce. TVOC's employment decisions have looked somewhat nepotistic to say the least!

i also see TVOC as having tried very hard to be the truly modern and professional streamlined outfit that they realised that they needed to be to get 558 back in the air again; the trouble was that it was a very flimsy veneer of professionalism stretched thinly over a very amateur core. again, by the nature of the limited funds etc, no-one could expect TVOC to have hired the likes of Gerry Robinson - you can't lead a champagne lifestyle on a beer budget; but again that is precisely where limitations have to realised from day one.

sadly sponsors are rather good at seeing through such thin veneers. sure, the 'credit crunch' wasn't exactly helpful, but have we seen a lack of adverts on TV? is there suddenly a swathe of corporate sponsors tearing up their agreements with football clubs and such like? again, a very convenient hook upon which TVOC could hang their shortcomings without appreciating the core problems

unfortunately TVOC very evidently ignored and wasted so many 'human assets' that were at their disposal - a massive mistake in my opinion as there were so many skilled people who offered their services and never even got a reply. it's little wonder that a general attitude existed among supporters that TVOC saw 558 as their aeroplane - that is until the coffers ran dry, at which point the "peoples' aeroplane" line was again trotted out!

lastly, due to the passion for 558 of a vast number of people (OEMS, contractors, creditors, supporters etc) TVOC management bathed in the glory of so many unsung people and organisations, without whom 558 would still be a box of bits on a hangar floor. in short, they believed their own hype and genuinely couldn't understand why anyone could have anything bad to say about them; "we made the Vulcan fly therefore we are better than sliced bread"

thankfully, that is in the past - largely. certainly some of the old team remain, but I'm sure that the recent changes will either force those to 'step up to the plate' or they will simply be left behind. there are two or three employees at Brunty that have been very much in the background for a long time; they were always kept firmly under the iron fist that was Rusty, but i know that they always 'got it' even if she didn't. I'd put money on them now coming forward and being allowed to shine for the first time.

in a recent conversation with one of the management team (since the re-org at Brunty) i heard a very encouraging comment - "the problem has been that everyone wanted to be the one single person that saved 558; it can't work like that, it's a team effort" - hit the nail on the head there me thinks - at last, someone is capable of looking in the proverbial mirror without ignoring the warts and boils!

as I've said before, all good and encouraging noises which would've been nice to hear some months ago, but that was then and this is now - better late than never. skin of teeth maybe, but this is encouraging - stormy seas still, but no longer is the pilot-less ship adrift.

sm

Delta15

28th Jan 2009, 23:31

SM
I have not been around for very long but I think you make some very good points ,

SM Quote...should never have allowed certain people to screw things up for so long.

Care to name names?

SM Quote... Even so, we as a group (the forum members) have achieved incredible success, particularly saving the day back in February 2008 when the project was near collapse. Not that it seemed fully appreciated at the time by the management, but without us 558 would never have had a second test flight!

As I say I haven't been around long, what happened in Feb 2008??

SM Quote... Certainly Dr. P is still there, but my understanding of the new management structure is such that TVOC are now more than capable of running things in the way that they should have been long ago, irrespective of Dr. P

Can you tell us what/who is the "New Management Structure" composed of ?

SM Quote...killing off the rest of the rot will be somewhat simpler i feel.

To whome do you refer here??

:confused:

Tim McLelland

29th Jan 2009, 01:50

find it difficult to believe that there has been any milking/wastage/diversion of funding undertaken intentionally

I don't find it difficult at all when people on the team have told me of specific cases where lots of money (and I mean thousands, not a few bob) has been wasted on "expenses" and on costs which could have been avoided if certain individuals hadn't acted irresponsibly.

As for the notion that Pleming deserves credit for "getting the ball rolling" I just don't see how. Big deal - there must be countless people (particularly former RAF Vulcan people) who could have done the job, and probably done it more successfully and much less expensively - probably for free in fact. Are we really buying into the notion that managing the restoration and operation of one aircraft requires a salaried full-time position? What rubbish! Likewise I don't see how getting an HLF grant, and a gratuitous donation from a well-wisher is a great achievement at all. It's hardly ground-breaking stuff, is it?

But it's pointless dwelling of the way the project has been handled. It's what happens now that worries me. Didn't Pleming say that unless the latest pile of dosh dropped on his desk by the end of this week, that would be the end of it? Or was this just another of his regular "last chance" announcements?

Will TVOC try and go back to HLF and seek their support? I suspect not. If they don't though, I fail to see what other options they have. Can anybody seriously think of one? Seriously? No, me neither.

One other thought - when you dig through the whole TVOC set-up, who, precisely, actually owns the aircraft now? I think that might be a fundamental point which ought to be established.

Tim McLelland

29th Jan 2009, 02:03

Incidentally Saracen, regarding the whole sponsorship saga, my view is that the whole notion of gaining major sponsorship was a non-starter right from the beginning. I know Pleming insisted it could (and would) happen but his pronouncements have been seen to be worthless. I don't buy the notion that sponsors were ever lining-up to finance the aircraft. The credit crunch is merely a convenient excuse.

I accept that donations (and major ones) were always a possibility but sponsorship? Nope. It's not about recognising TVOC's professionalism (or lack of it), it's about recognising a valuable sponsorship asset. The Vulcan never was one, simple as that. It's fine for plane spotters to get excited about seeing 558 at an air show but a major company couldn't possibly care less. Why would they have the slightest interest in promoting their company to an air show audience? More to the point, how would a company get any return on their investment at all? They can't (thank heavens) paint their company colours on the aircraft, so what can they expect in return for their money? A "sponsored by..." comment from Sean Maffet over an air show PA system? Big deal! The whole idea is ludicrous.

There was always the hope that some big players might finance the aircraft as a one-off goodwill donation - one person did of course. But it's pretty clear that there ain't any more on the horizon. This is why I keep banging-on about HLF. What other straw is there to cling to? Surely, nobody seriously believes that individual donations from enthusiasts is going to keep the aircraft flying?

Blacksheep

29th Jan 2009, 07:08

...is there suddenly a swathe of corporate sponsors tearing up their agreements with football clubs and such like? Well, since you ask, yes there is.

andrewmcharlton

29th Jan 2009, 08:14

Saracenman, I think you're very close to hitting the nail on the head.

Tim, I klnow you've got the bit between your teeth and fair enough, but I don't seriously think anyone has deliberately wasted money. You might very well have a fundemental disagreement over how it was spent etc and justifiably object to their spending on cetain people or items but thats very like the "F" word mentioned a few posts ago to suggest it was deliberately misspent.

Anyhoo, isn't the gist of the last few excellent posts that leadership has been lacking and it would be good to know how / if it has really changed and is it too late. On the basis Dr P was good enough to speak to me once before, maybe I should write to him again and see if the answers vary and hear it from the horses mouth rather than all this supposition unless someone else wishes to. Any better ideas?

saracenman

29th Jan 2009, 10:46

Naming names
where appropriate i have done so, where inappropriate i have omitted names - intentionally.

February 2008
a public announcement made by the VTST Chairman Keith Mans that if adequate funding was not found by the 31st March 2008, the project would be wound up. it was nothing more than a statement; no plea for we club/forum members to actually do anything other than donate. a few of us put some considerable time into a hugely successful publicity campaign regarding 558's plight (in particular an email campaign which was a forum incentive) in less than three weeks, the funds were found, club membership doubled (something which has not occurred since), fantastic press coverage and even a Parliamentary Early Day Motion. we unquestionably saved 558 at that time and enabled the test flight programme to proceed.

Structure
again, I'm not in any official capacity to give a full flow-diagram of the 'new-look' TVOC but i am aware that the whole project has been compartmentalised into three specific areas, with a clearly defined 'line of command' for each.

whereas before, the stock answer to a problem was usually "well if i had been aware then i would've done something about it" - no more! everyone knows what their defined role is, who reports to them etc etc - just like any other organisation

Other
Tim McLelland - i too have spoken to many people involved directly with 558 and i do agree that vast amounts have been wasted. this however does not equate to an institutionalised attitude of "wow, this Vulcan project is a fab opportunity to line my own pockets and deceive the public!"

i struggle to think of one single TVOC employee who had a thought like that! ineptitude, inefficiency and poor management are a far cry from criminal behaviour!

i agree about the sponsorship problems - the fact is that there was never really anything that they would get for their money. i think that sponsorship will come, once the whole project is given a proper focus, and that they can be seen to be a properly organised and managed organisation.

Tim McLelland - there's a gulf of difference between those that can do something and those that actually get down and do it! Dr. P did start the ball rolling and achieved something quite remarkable in that, in a sea of people who said that the CAA would never allow a complex ex-mil jet to fly in civvy hands, looked at the facts and said "well there's nowhere that says it can't be done!" Long before any restoration started, Dr P managed to gather the required support from OEMS etc - not an inconsiderable achievement when you realise the complexity of what was involved.

i have a huge respect for what he achieved in that respect but i seriously question his abilities as a manager and project-leader

Blacksheep - point taken! i don't follow football so it was probably not the best analogy, but I'm sure you take my point anyway! :p

sm

Tim McLelland

29th Jan 2009, 13:56

I struggle to think of one single TVOC employee who had a thought like that!

Well, for example, a one-day business trip (in the UK) equating to expenses of £7,000? Hmmm...

Anyway, Andrew, go for it! Would be fascinating to see what response you get (if any).

411A

29th Jan 2009, 15:56

Just a small question...
Will the Vulcan participate and fly at airshows in the UK?

If not, it would be a distinct disappointment...as, quite frankly, the USA has nothing like this bird on active display...:}

andrewmcharlton

29th Jan 2009, 20:23

411A, it already has for the last year, subject to weather and servicability. Welcome to such an esteemed and prolific poster !

Andrew

Flying Signman

29th Jan 2009, 21:02

411A

Search for "Vulcan To The Sky" and you will find their home page.

Meantime, word on the club forum is of some major awareness or fundraising campaign being launched tomorrow.

There seem to be quite a few events lined up in February and March also.
Be interesting to see if the Press Office have anything to say?

FS

Blacksheep

29th Jan 2009, 21:35

I don't believe that all that much money has been "wasted" as some claim here. So many "Enthusiasts" have little understanding of the processes and expenses involved in civil certification. Much of the money will have gone to Marshalls and they will have expended a huge amount of 'labour' in producing the required documentation. For example, it may seem to the uninitiated to be a simple matter to replace a Smiths Military Flight System with an ordinary artificial horizon and gyro compass but it is classified as a "Major Modification" and requires full and complete documentation, including proof of compliance and test results. I'd quote at least £15,000 for such an STC seeing as how I'm a sentimental old fool. A hard headed business manager would quote much more than that (for example, in US practice an FAA DER typically charges US$1,000 per day just to look at a modification.) The same applies to a major structural repair - especially when deviating from original design drawings. I think the costs incurred so far are entirely reasonable. The problem with this project is that those who set out on this project fall into two camps - those who naively believed that restoration to flight was a simple matter and those who, like me, appreciated what was involved but chose to wear blinkers and went ahead on the assumption that something was "bound to turn up".

saracenman

29th Jan 2009, 22:43

411A - go to www.vulcantothesky.com (http://www.vulcantothesky.com)

also just search for "XH558" on Yootoob - squillions of clips of her flights last year :ok:

sm

Tim McLelland

29th Jan 2009, 23:24

Well Blacksheep, some of us "enthusiasts" do think money has been wasted, in fact we know it has!;)

411A

30th Jan 2009, 01:09

also just search for "XH558" on Yootoob - squillions of clips of her flights last year

Have done so already, and passed these on to others at the time.
Just wondering if these flights will continue, as there seems to be a fair bit of dialogue ...future funding etc.?

Let us hope that the tin triangle has a bright future.

XH558 Press Office

30th Jan 2009, 17:01

URGENT PRESS RELEASE - LATEST NEWS FROM VULCAN XH558 – issued 30th January 2009

At the time of this press release, the ’09 Pledge Fund Scheme to raise £1million is coming to £250,000, which, in the harsh economic climate, is staggering in the 8 weeks it has been active.

Thankfully, due to the continued support of sponsors & supporters, it has been possible to extend the deadline of the Pledge scheme to the end of February, in the hope a wide spread publicity campaign will save her.

It is continued promotion, not only to the Aviation community, but to the wider public beyond, that will be key to our success in reaching the £1million goal in such a short period of time.

The Vulcan to the Sky Club is therefore pleased to announce: The
24 hour Vulcan Scramble! – a race against time to save XH558

Taking place on Sunday 22nd February, father and son club members, Robert & Steven Lowe, from Newark on Trent, who conceived this idea, will be joined by Crew Chief Taff Stone, in one of the Vulcan to The Sky Teams’ Subaru 4x4 vehicles. The club is providing 100% logistical and promotional support.

Starting in East Fortune with XM597 at 00.01 hours, the team will travel the length and breadth of the country, visiting all 15 existing Vulcan Airframes – hopefully within a 24 hour period.

They will be joined on different legs by surprise guests and staged events to encourage them on their way.

Fellow club members will be acting as coordinators at each location, liaising with the museums involved, creating a presence on the day to welcome the team, as they stop by to change drivers, snap a picture and carry on with their challenge. Supporters will help explain the event and our plight to all the visitors, backed up with promotional posters and leaflets explaining the Pledge fund and the many ways people can help save the aircraft. With 850+ miles to cover, 18 hour 50 minutes journey time, it only leaves 15 minutes spare at each location – and that does not allow for traffic. At all times, speed limits will be observed. It is the challenge and raising of public interest in XH558 that most appeals to the team.

All locations have expressed fantastic support for this initiative and we would like to thank them for their encouragement and invaluable help, not only in the planning stage, but in the operation of this event.

A dedicated page explaining the challenge and giving full details will be available soon off the main website www.vulcantothesky.com (http://www.vulcantothesky.com/) Here, the time remaining, progress details and pledges or donations received, will be updated for all to see, together with links to partake in sponsoring of the event.

On the day, a central control room at Bruntingthorpe, “Scramble HQ” will track the team and give updated details as they progress along the route. Staff there will process Pledges collected en-route and enter onto the on-line system. You will be able to watch the progress of this event, add additional sponsorship or pledges and see the results as they happen. Official collecting tins and any donations received on the day will be added to the running total.

By the early hours of Monday 23rd February, the club aim to have not only raised a significant level of interest, but a not too insignificant level of further funding!(Message Ends)

Look out for more details of this event on the official VULCAN TO THE SKY WebPages soon:

XH558 is the only airworthy Vulcan in the world. Restored to flight after nearly 15 years at a cost of £7million. She now faces grounding forever, unless an additional £750,000 can be raised in February enabling funds for another full air show season. Last year, she appeared in front of over 1.5 million people.
She inspires immense pride in all who see her. A full education programme is built around her, not only telling the story of the cold war era, but the value of science and technology in inspiring future engineers. She was the “mother of concorde” - Can you help us save this ICONIC BRITISH AIRCRAFT?

Any Press or Media wishing more information should contact: Richard Clarke - 07714 898548
For Sponsorship Opportunities please contact: Michael Trotter – 07803 141483

No reply is possible by this office. Look out for another release next week. Many thanks for your interest and support.

Tim McLelland

30th Jan 2009, 23:42

major awareness or fundraising campaign being launched tomorrow

Oh well, I suppose it was only to be expected that it was a non event, which I note the "Press Office" hasn't even bothered to post on here - the one forum that might be worth publicising things on.

Why will driving round museums in "one of their Subarus" (how many do they have exactly?!) achieve anything other than wasting almost as much money as it will generate? Still, at least they've extended their deadline another month, and seen as they're er... a quarter of the way to the target, a bit more tin rattling around some museums is sure to do the trick.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. I give up.

saracenman

31st Jan 2009, 00:26

i know i might be seen as being uber pro-TVOC - i do not want to be thought of as one of the mere "keep the faith" bunch, as many of you know that I'm as far from that as it is possible to be!

however, i think that this "Scramble" deserves more praise than that Tim McLelland...

BUT...

only if it has been arranged to get maximum national publicity! i know that a huge amount of logistical organisation has gone into it - it' not just a few blokes swanning around in a car for the hell of it!

the locations of the preserved Vulcans stretch across the nation, which hopefully will garner some much needed publicity - without which we will surely see 558 grounded for good.

there are several more publicity 'stunts' in the pipeline, some of which I'm proud to have been involved with - these are tentatively planned for later in the year, so let's hope that we get that far!

instead of slating these guys for actually doing something constructive, perhaps we could wish them luck and hope that they achieve the newspaper column inches that 558 so desperately needs!

sm

Tim McLelland

31st Jan 2009, 01:40

Maximum national publicity? For God's sake, they couldn't even manage to post the press release on Pprune!

I've wished everyone involved with 558 luck from the day that David Walton bought it. But come on, this is just silly now. If they can't even be bothered to try and get some more money out of HLF then they might as well forget it. Going round the country with a collection can is just pointless.

danohagan

31st Jan 2009, 03:53

The problem with these fundraising ideas is that they, without fail, appear small-beer and a bit "village fete". A day for 30-odd people at a shooting range, the risible "Welcome Home Day" last autumn which featured apple-bobbing as one of the attractions on it's official poster, a stall at a Christmas market with not enough stock, and now a couple of chaps driving a car round to a few museums. A multi-million pound project HAS to think big, and BE big. The national media, and even the local press aren't going to drop everything to film a couple of enthusiasts in a Subaru driving to a few wet, cold aviation museums.

To get in the press, and especially to get on TV the story MUST be visual - ie have an element which lends itself well to either photography or film. Even in a regional newsroom the editor will have maybe 50 possible stories at the start of the day, without taking into account stories which break in the hours before the programme. To cover these stories they'll have perhaps six reporters and maybe only three or four cameras, so the editor has to be selective about where to deploy resources. I will tell you now, the prospect of filming a couple of spotters at an aviation museum driving a heavily-logoed Subaru (From experience, I can tell you that ITV News are VERY careful about showing anything which might be even loosely construed as product-placement) is highly unlikely to make the programme, and even if it did, it would be no more than a cursory ten second filler story.

Sorry to sound so negative, but the bottom line is that to have any hope of raising awareness, the team need to be a lot more savvy in HOW to appeal to the media.

JEM60

31st Jan 2009, 06:31

I get the feeling that the TV and Media companies feel that they may have had theirt fill of the Vulcan. Sure, it was covered on it's first flight, and some other shots from shows, but they are not going to continue with this sort of coverage. It has been done before, therefore it is not new or 'news'

Flying Signman

31st Jan 2009, 09:44

Tim and others,

I can assure you the Press Office statement was posted here yesterday evening. The same time the story was being populated around other sites. I believe it is in "moderation".

The first message took 2 days to appear here. As to the reason, I do not know.

Many thanks,

FS

hurn

31st Jan 2009, 09:46

Oh well, I suppose it was only to be expected that it was a non event, which I note the "Press Office" hasn't even bothered to post on here - the one forum that might be worth publicising things on.

Why will driving round museums in "one of their Subarus" (how many do they have exactly?!) achieve anything other than wasting almost as much money as it will generate? Still, at least they've extended their deadline another month, and seen as they're er... a quarter of the way to the target, a bit more tin rattling around some museums is sure to do the trick.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. I give up.
After reading through some of your repetitive 'axe to grind' posts it would be nice if you actually did. :ugh:

As far as the 'Scramble' goes, bear in mind its a supporters club initiative, so I doubt they have the resources for a 'massive' media campaign.

Its the people who really care the most getting up and doing something themselves to raise awareness, and I can only applaud them for that. :D

andrewmcharlton

31st Jan 2009, 09:50

Tim, I applaud your tenacity but it does look as though you are now just looking for anything to start a fight or criticism. God knows I am critical of them but having a go for not putting a story on PPrune immediately isn't cricket old man. I am sure their need, which we all accept is great, is to get more publicity than PPrune can afford them.

Go easy tiger its beggining to look like the MontyPython "Burn the Witch" scene.

I shall be sending off my aforementioned letter to the good Doctor later today and see if I can obtain a constructive response. Stand by your bunks.

Flying Signman

31st Jan 2009, 09:57

Tim,

As an after thought, if you have the time to write such well crafted words of negativity, your services and input in a positive manner, would always be welcome. It seems to me, you do have the time resources to help the cause.

Ideas..... Copy.... Up for it?

I can provide an email address if you wish to PM me?

Cheers,

FS

Flying Signman

31st Jan 2009, 10:58

Dan,

You make good points in your post.

Yes, some of these fundraisers seems small beer, but they are all Club orientated and helps bond friendships and a team spirit that has now resultred in the Scramble.

I hear a "presentation" cheque will be handed over next week, showing the £100,000 the Club donated to the Trust last year. That is no mean feat and accounts for nearly 15% of the annual projected running costs.

Now, as to the wider picture, Airshow aviation, and then Historical Aviation is such a small blip on the general publics radar, that to come up with the very promotional angle you mention, is hard work. That is the overiding factor in any interest from Press and Media.

It has been said before, Education is key, with actually getting the fact out there of why XH558 was built and the technological and engineering skills that Britain had at one time.

Perhaps now the world is realising you can't rely on financial services and part-time jobs in supermarkets to build a healthy economy, the project will stand a better chance of getting these values into the school curriculum, and the government will realise £2million a year to inspire future highly skilled, higer rate tax payers - might actually be a good investment.

Until that time, how do we change the publics' perception of a "boys toy"
and get them to stump up for their kids future?

All answers on the back of a postcard or here in this thread.:)

Flying Signman

31st Jan 2009, 13:00

It has indeed just appeared. Timed at 18.01.
Well before Tim's post on lack of communication.

Seems everyone is all too eager to jump on the projects back!

I hope this Scramble scheme does have wide publicity and gives a massive boost to the pledge fund.:D

As SM has mentioned in a few of his previous posts, those close to the project are seeing massive changes.

It will naturally take time to filter through to the sceptics and general public. Such is life.

FS

Tim McLelland

31st Jan 2009, 13:06

FS - fair point if an attempt was made to post the release. That's obviously something the Adminsitrator should be looking at then. I get the impression that at least one of the Moderators on here has some sort of "axe to grind" regarding the whole subject as someone mysteriously removed someone's posts on at least one other occasion and also tried to lock me out of the thread (without the knowledge of the Adminsitrator). As to what the motives are/were, we don't know.

As for the other sarcastic comments from various people, that's fine, I couldn't care less. I'm just being realistic, unlike heaven-knows how many other people on this thread and ones on other forums, who are living in cloud cuckoo land.

As for getting involved FS, well er... been there, done that. I tried my best to give TVOC what would have almost been their own book, and for no personal gain - it wouldn't have made me so much as an extra penny, but in return for my (and my publisher's efforts), all we got was complete disinterest, and endless sniping from the usual silly (jealous) plane spotters on other sites who wanted to imply that we were doing it for our own benefit - which certainly wasn't the case. I also gave-up photographs from my own personal collection which were printed into posters and sold at air shows, museums, etc. I didn't get a penny in return - not even a free poster (I had to buy my own), but as far as I know, none of the income went into the funding - it just disappeared. I also had the support and interest of a very well-known former RAF fighter pilot who offered to mount a major national campaign but again, TVOC couldn't even be bothered to discuss the idea. So in short, I've had enough of them, and I wouldn't waste any more of my time even trying to deal with them.

My negativity doesn't stem from all this though. I can write-off all that as just a shame and best forgotten. What really annoys me is that I know (from the information given to me by people who are or were on the TVOC team) that huge amounts of money have simply been wasted. As if that isn't bad enough, they avoid even trying to seek more money from HLF (which I admit is a long shot) even though it's the only possible way out of this mess. If they'd tried and failed then great, but to not even ask? That's just a complete disgrace. So what do they do? They issue occasional pleas for more dontaions and allow some well-meaning people to drive around the country, presumably in the hope of getting a few lines in a local paper and a few hundred quid. I mean, what is the point? It's just absurd.

Clearly, the project's coming to a grinding halt but on the basis of the way it's been handled, my view is that it may as well end, and then at least there's a vague chance that other people might try and resurrect the project, once the same old muppets have finally gone.

Winco

31st Jan 2009, 13:33

Flying Signman

Could you please tell us all what it is exactly that you would like people to do, other than throw money at the project of course?

I know several people and companies that have offered a great deal to the project, from suppliers of products right through to technical experts, but in each and every case their offers are declined without reason, and no one knows why. Why is that? Is it that they are not 'in the click' as far as Bruntingthorpe and TVOC are concerned? Or is it that they are 'better' than some of those in place or is it a simple case that those responsible will be made to look foolish when their limitations and failures are exposed by the 'new blood' ???

I don't have any faith left in the project at all. When I gave money to the project, I understood that it was going to get the aircraft back to airworthiness, not paying the likes of Pleming and Walton and others within the project. Maybe that was naaive on my part, but I'm not alone there I'm sure. The whole project has been run by people who I regard as incompetant and I have said so, often!

This latest begging ransom situation (which we have all heard numerous times) just makes the project look even more dead in the water than it was. However, if you would like to tell us what you want us to do Flying Signman, then I'd be interested to hear from you.

Winco

G4136

31st Jan 2009, 15:08

Don't you mean Key Stages 2/3/4? :confused:

Flying Signman

31st Jan 2009, 16:30

Winco,

I am not aware, as are most here I would guess, of an "instant" fix to this project and the situation it is in.

Yes, we all know the things that have been mentioned in the past and people's reservations over the management, but we are, were we are:

1. Costly to maintain Airworthy Vulcan
2. Worst Recession in 80 years
3. Perceived lack of enthusiasm from the Aviation community
4. Lack of awareness by the general public
5. Restriction on Sponsors and poor marketing conditions.

Now, all I ask is, rather than consistantly "slag" the project off, have a little thought for the dedicated and hard working people behind the scenes who are currently trying to save this project to the benefit of all, by trying to address those very issues.

Change is not going to happen overnight, yet change is happening.

Obviously, the easiest thing for the Trust to do would be to throw in the towel and shut-down. Add to that, the abuse and quite frankly - absurd things that are sometimes discussed here and on other fora - is it any wonder there is little dialogue?

It says something in my book, that they are however, still here and are showing willingness to communicate with the public.

As for knocking Club efforts to raise the profile and money, I can't see any better ideas coming off this forum, so perhaps my major point is this.

GIVE THE TEAM & SUPPORTERS A BREAK! - PUT UP or SHUT UP! (and that is not aimed at anyone)

I was merely trying to solicit members here to actually put themselves in "control" of the project..... then think about what you would do 1st 2nd and 3rd.

Would any of those companies you mention have got the project this far or have made a significant difference? No one knows, but it is sure damn easy to knock anything that is achieved, or perceived not to have been achieved - especially when you are outside looking in.

To me, that is what is doing most harm to this project now, not the "management" currently in place and fighting every possible angle to bring you a displaying aircraft. Someone is writing a private letter to Dr. Pleming. Well done, that is constructive and can only bring respect and I'm sure an answer.

Maybe, just maybe, if more people took that route, than the easier one of posting their gripes here, we would not be feeling so negative all the time.

I liken it to the TV and Newspapers reporting the recession all the time, worsening the situation and depressing everyone - making a bad situation far worse!

Thanks for listening......

FS.

PPRuNe Pop

31st Jan 2009, 16:45

Let me enlighten you Tim.

We moderators have a specific job to do which, I for one have been doing for the past 10 years.

Our function is to keep any thread on track and to control each and every poster and contents to ensure it stays within the bounds and rules of PPRuNe.

I can quite see why you think we have an axe to grind but we just don't have one. We try to remain impartial when we monitor posts to ensure their content, their veracity, their intention, signs of a thread hi-jack, when a poster is mis-leading others, or advertising, or making personal attacks, using inappropriate language, off topic posts or using PPRuNe for their own ends all stay within the rules. We can edit a post or delete a post if we deem it be offensive in any way. We can ban a person or persons for any period from one to 7 days or in extreme cases - permanently. This happens infrequently but it does happen and anywhere on PPRuNe, not just here.

Generally, we don't and do not have to give explanations for our actions - or why we take any action to keep a thread viable.

We also ensure that everyone has as much of a right to an opinion as anyone else.

All of PPRuNe is here to enjoy and we are the first to ensure that you can do so.

I hope that is clear.

AH&N Mods

Winco

31st Jan 2009, 17:22

Flying Signman

Thank you for your reply. Whilst I don't want to get to the stage that Tim has found himself in (and I do have sympathy for him) the facts remain that this project has NOT ground to a halt because of lack of money. It has found itself where it's at today because of (IMHO) poor management. Infact, management that has been beyond belief at times.

I have never slagged off the project. I have always wished them the best of luck, but luck is simply not enough, and my complaint has always been this managerial attitude of 'I know better than you, therefore I'm not going to listen to you' (or anyone else for that manner)

I myself have written to Pleming on more than one occasion. I know countless other ex Vulcan Pilots and aircrew who have also written to Plemming offering our services; do you think any of us have even so much as received an acknowledgement for our correspondance? Of course not. We haven't had a thing back, either from Pleming or TVOC as a group. That is not poor management, it's NO management!

The reason why there is little dialogue is NOT because of some of the things that are actually said, but it's because Pleming and his team refuse to enter into any discussions whatsoever with the public (he's even said that himself I think somewhere) and thus, when difficult questions get asked by the public, about THEIR money, no answer is offered and people do begin to 'slag them off' as you rightly say. But who is to blame for that do you think??

Now you claim that we should applaud them at Brunters because they are still here and still 'talking with the public' But what else do you expect? I have yet to see anything constructive posted on here or even on their own web site in responce to any form of cricism. Is that 'talking to the public' I think not. It displays an abundance of arrogance on their part that they continue NOT to talk to the public. I regret that, despite persistant requests on PPrune and elsewhere, you won't find any responce from TVOC answering any questions posed.

Indeed, if you go back a couple of pages on here, someone will tell you how posts are removed from TVOC site if they ask awkward questions or make disparaging comments. Do you consider that to be good management? I don't I'm afraid.

And so we come back to this never-ending saga of holding the British public to ransom with the old 'Cough up or she's grounded' statement yet again. It's really wearing thin now don't you think? Just get on and ground the thing if it's so dire - put us all out of our misery!

If Pleming and the rest of the team can't come up with something a little bit better than that, then they should go frankly. I shan't even bother to talk about this new female who's supposed to be running the education side of things - where do they get them from??

So, I regret that I must disagree with you on most counts and I fear it's now just a matter of time until the project folds for good. I only hope that when this sorry tale does end, that some form of inquiry is launched into some of the claims made on this forum and others. It will make for ineteresting reading for sure.

Winco

saracenman

31st Jan 2009, 18:06

thanks for the clarification on matters Mod PPP :ok:

interestingly, the matters you raised were, some months ago, indicative of just how poor TVOC's management abilities were; it took some very serious 'slagging-off' on here (and several other places) for TVOC to eventually pull their head out of the sand and realise that there were very valid concerns being voiced. for far too long, TVOC simply hoped that these comments would simply go away, rather than reading them as a genuinely constructive critique.

as i said before, failing to see one's own shortcomings is a fundamental failure of effective management.

Tim McLelland - contrary to what you may believe, i whole-heartedly agree with all that you have said with respect to offers of help being snubbed etc. i myself have encountered exactly the same since October 2007, to some astonishing extent; unanswered emails, non-returned 'phone calls, rudeness, threats of legal action etc etc - all because those 'guilty' few at Brunty had this holier-than-thou attitude. i am only too aware that my name was on a blacklist up there - third-parties would report back to me what reactions were received at the very mention of my name!

it was not that my ideas weren't any good, but that they weren't their ideas. they seemed to completely lack the ability to think laterally, and failed to see how their own projected figures for financial support and Club membership were totally unrealistic.

despite the difficulties i experienced, i persevered with things - especially after getting some advice directly from one of the Trustees - "if you can't work with them, either go over or around them!" :eek:

i did!

so, what has made my opinion of TVOC change so markedly? the change of management!!! the main blockage to progress has gone, those other few that were able to 'hide' before are now unprotected and can be held to account.

certainly Dr. P is still the big cheese, but the operational structure and those beneath him who actually do stuff have changed greatly; i now receive very prompt replies to emails, ideas are appreciated and discussed, and a couple of my own 'projects' which were previously impossible to even get TVOC to listen to are gradually becoming a reality. one publicity scheme i originally put to TVOC on December 14th 2007 but only within the last three weeks has anything actually been done about it - over a year!

so, in short, pre October last year (ish) all negative comments were 100% valid. it's only been a few weeks and i personally have seen a considerable change in attitude, as have many others. yes, it should have happened long ago, but it didn't - what is important is that it is happening now!

it was never realistic to sack the entire management and ship in a dream-team overnight, but with some key changes in personnel, attitude, focus and policy, TVOC is a very different beast than it was - thank god!

it just needs a little time - something which is preciously short, but it's not impossible.

sm

Tim McLelland

31st Jan 2009, 19:45

SM, I admire your optimism but I'm more inclined to wait and see what happens, as my own view (based on the past few years) is that things are unlikely to change, though I'll be delighted if I'm proved wrong. So far, I haven't seen anything to suggest even the slightest change though.

I'm prompted to ask that, if so much has supposedly changed and everyone is running-around below the great Dr.Pleming, then why exactly is he still the "Big Cheese"? What is he doing that everybody else isn't? As you say in your own words SM, there's him and then there's the people "who actually do stuff". Strange how the one who does and says the least is the one who is taking the most money isn't it? Is anyone doing anything about this or even asking why? No. I thought not.

Sorry, but the whole set-up has been a long-running saga of obscurity, silence, misinformation, and money wasting. I'd be prepared to put all that in the past (as would others I'm sure) but simply reading comments on a forum about "how things have changed" is no indication that they actually have. I suspect quite a few people will have got excited about the mutterings concering the "major national initiative" that came yesterday - and what was it? Some guys going round museums with a collecting can. Come on, is that the best that TVOC can do when their "boss" is sitting on a huge pay cheque that we're paying for?

I'd be more inclined to think things had changed if someone (how about Pleming?) told us that they'd gone back to HLF along the lines I suggested and having being told no, they were embarking upon a national campaign (backed by MP's) to persuade HLF to change their stance. That would be a sign of TVOC doing something practical and worthwhile. Unfortunately, a group of blokes driving round with a collecting can while Pleming sits in his office admiring his bank balance, is no great sign of progress at all, in my view.

As I say, I'd like to be proved wrong but my view is the situation isn't going to change one jot until Pleming and his cronies kindly disappear and people with a better attitude get a chance to take-over. I sympathise with the people who are trying their best to raise money but until the folks at the top clear off, I think they're wasting their time.

Tim McLelland

31st Jan 2009, 19:49

Pprune Pop thanks for the information. Actually I was well aware of the role that a Moderator undertakes. I've edited enough magazines to know all about the problems of excluding potentially offensive or defamatory comments, thanks very much.

My point was that some posts on this thread have reportedly been removed without reason in the past, and I was locked out of the thread at one stage without any explanation. That isn't moderation - that's someone with an axe to grind in my opinion.

Anyway ' nuff said.

Splash Down

31st Jan 2009, 22:24

Vulcan time table.

REMOVED to due errors

hurn

31st Jan 2009, 23:05

My point was that some posts on this thread have reportedly been removed without reason in the past, and I was locked out of the thread at one stage without any explanation.
That isn't moderation - that's someone with an axe to grind in my opinion.
Oh the irony! :E

Anyway ' nuff said.
Yeah, you can always repeat yourself again later, and not only on this forum. :}

On the other hand, thanks to Saracenman for bringing a level headed an informative response to an otherwise very tedious thread. :D

ANW

1st Feb 2009, 04:56

Splash Down

As I understand the timetable you have copied in, the 4x4 will be driving around in a circle from 02:15 until 03:30, so as to arrive at Carlisle from Carlisle? :confused:

Solway Aviation Museum (http://www.solway-aviation-museum.co.uk/main.html) - nice museum situated at Carlisle Airport.

Exrigger

1st Feb 2009, 10:19

I have also experienced what SM has and concur with TM, Winco and others. I have and still do support them both financially and spreading the word locally, allthough what I do locally is of my own doing as I no longer bother with Bruntingthorpe for 'permission'. I will add that like SM I am also seeing a seed change happening but unfortunately I think it is, in all reality to little to late, more due to Dr Plemimg should not have made the rash statement he did.

But the biggest embarrasment is the raffle, this is supposed to be drawn on 7th Feb, but as the Dr Pleming's cry of give me money or it will not fly again decision was originally the end of January, now changed to the end of February, this means the draw cannot take place until the decision has been made as to wether 558 flys or not, so some people are going to have rather a lot of egg on there faces this next week with regards to the raffle and it is going to be very interesting as to how this is going to be approached.

Flying Signman

1st Feb 2009, 13:17

I think Spalshdown needs to amend his second line to Sunderland with
XL319 and then it will read right.:ok:

Tim McLelland

1st Feb 2009, 15:00

hurn, the reason threads like this become "tedious" is because people such as yourself think there's something amusing about trying to score points, or simply complaining about other people's posts. If you don't like my viewpoints that's fine, but if you haven't any alternative viewpoints, then why do you have to simply criticise those who do have something useful to say?

The only reason I continually repeat my view (which obviously annoys you) is because I care about the aircraft and I've made a very clear point about how the project could - just possibly - be saved. I keep banging-on about it because nobody (not least TVOC) has addressed the point, therefore it seems only reasonable to keep banging-on about it until somebody does. Or perhaps you'd rather I just forgot about it and sat-back to moan (like yourself)?

So, in short, if you have something constructive (or critical) to say about the project (rather than me) then by all means say it. Otherwise, why don't you go read another thread?

Splash Down

1st Feb 2009, 18:18

Re_ Timetable

Seeing as there were errors in the timetable that I posted up, on here and having had a request to remove/change part/s of it I have dicided to remove the whole thing.

I posted in good faith beleving it was correct at the time I posted it up,

If I have upset anyone I would like to apoligise.

Flying Signman

1st Feb 2009, 20:29

Splashdown,

That is fine.
From what I understand, the listing is subject to final confirmation.

There are one or two copies going around "pasted" off the members area on the main VTTS Club site by keen supporters, whilst it was still in the early stages of organisation.

It has been suggested we wait for a fresh Official Press Release nearer the time, which will have all the correct details on and route.

The one announcing this "Scramble" (a few posts back) also said more details will be available on a new dedicated webpage soon.;)

FS

Harrier1980

2nd Feb 2009, 12:17

I have found this forum from the talk on the TVOC website.

The CLUB seems to be very busy, but what is the TRUST doing?

I wish them well, and as the saying goes "it's a long shot, but it might just work"

however, unfortunately I dont think it will.

mark36

2nd Feb 2009, 13:21

Hi all.Just popped over from the official site.I'm afraid i'm with Harrier on this one.I was hoping that the wait for the big announcement (scramble) was gonna knock me of my feet,unfortunately i think its a bit of a damp squid.I too wish them well but i can't see the message getting out to the general public when much of the travelling and stops at sites is to be done when most will be tucked up in bed and more to the point the museums will not be open to the general public.Again the trust is saying nothing and it has been left to diehard forum members to come up with ideas.What the hell is going on at brunty?It has been mentioned on here and other fora that things are changing for the better but where's the proof of that?Why the silence??

chev1

2nd Feb 2009, 22:35

I have to agree withe Harrier and Mark36, just what is going on at the sharp end????? All that ever happens is they have another appeal and expect the club to bail them out again, seems they only ever want to get enough donations to pay their salaries each month, and what thanks do the club get.............. hardly a mention anywhere except on the site. You almost want the project to tumble just far enough to get the current management out and get some people in who can do the job right.

bubblesuk

2nd Feb 2009, 23:37

And just how far a tumble would that be? As i see it the project is in free fall at the minute.

I would also be interested to hear just exactly would/could take over and run the whole shabang, i keep hearing for the Brunty bunch to be sacked etc but not a single idea of who replaces them.

Tim McLelland

3rd Feb 2009, 00:01

Who knows? I can't imagine that anyone would show any interest in getting involved at present, but when the current bunch finally go, there must be a chance that some people might throw their proverbial hats into the ring. Let's face it, they wouldn't have to do much to improve on the achievements of the existing management.

Had to laugh at the news story today about some painting that's been "saved for the nation" at a cost of fifty million wasn't it? Seems that people were all-too willing to put their hands into their pockets for that, and yet the good Doctor claims that there's no money out there to be had because of the credit crunch. Bet there would be a much better response if we had Brian Sewell on TV wringing his hands with enthusiasm over 558 (like only he can), instead of Dr.Pleming's glittering TV appearances which, rather than inspiring me to throw money at the project, made me feel like wanting to bite my right arm off.

Tyres O'Flaherty

3rd Feb 2009, 00:09

''I have to agree withe Harrier and Mark36, just what is going on at the sharp end????? All that ever happens is they have another appeal and expect the club to bail them out again, seems they only ever want to get enough donations to pay their salaries each month, and what thanks do the club get.............. hardly a mention anywhere except on the site. You almost want the project to tumble just far enough to get the current management out and get some people in who can do the job right.''

How much more damning could this post by someone who obviously cares enough to be involved to whatever extent ?

This really sounds like the voice of people who matter in this project.

andrewmcharlton

3rd Feb 2009, 11:14

Just to be clear on the painting Tim, £7.4m out of £50m came from non-governmental donations, not the whole wad. By definition the arts lovers (being stereotypical) are more affluent than 558 supporters I would suggest.

Indeed also worth noting that said Titian has been on the wall in the UK for over 200 years and not much is going to change, in the context of a long term investment it's nowhere near as risky!

Harrier1980

3rd Feb 2009, 14:42

I will post this here, as I am sure it will get removed from the TVOC forum.

I had a look at the accountd filed with the Charity commission up to July 2007, and was amazed that they counted 15 employees, and the wages and salaries totalled £699,435.00 someone somewhere is well paid. :=

bubblesuk

3rd Feb 2009, 19:40

The problem with these fundraising ideas is that they, without fail, appear small-beer and a bit "village fete". A day for 30-odd people at a shooting range, the risible "Welcome Home Day" last autumn which featured apple-bobbing as one of the attractions on it's official poster, a stall at a Christmas market with not enough stock, and now a couple of chaps driving a car round to a few museums. A multi-million pound project HAS to think big, and BE big. The national media, and even the local press aren't going to drop everything to film a couple of enthusiasts in a Subaru driving to a few wet, cold aviation museums.

Dan

These "risable" events as you call them are the results of a lor of very hard work from a few individuals, i was involved with both the market and the welcome home day and i know that Jane who organised them has put a huge amount of effort into arranging thses events, and both were more succesfull than you give credit for. I also know that the constant knocking of people on these fora leave the ordinary members such as jane who give thier all and non more so than Jane come to think of it, are left wondering why they bother. It would be interesting to read what if any contributions many of the detracters on here and elswhere have made while pilloring the efforts of others.

Pontius Navigator

3rd Feb 2009, 19:53

Bubble I know what Dan was getting at.

I was involved in fundraising running a casino. It took 4-5 people, 5 hours or so, and we raised perhaps £4 per hour per person. We didn't raise much in a year.

Then we set up a concert. It took 30 people at about 10 hours each and we netted over £6000 or £20 per hour. The difference was the labour was delivered over a short time frame and was 5 times as effective.

Flying Signman

3rd Feb 2009, 21:20

Copying this off another forum, since I am told yet another posting has been delayed in moderation????????

Posted eleswhere from XH558 Press Office:

With many thanks to one of our dedicated supporters, an official
PLEDGE VIDEO has been posted to YouTube.

Please see: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JaBajcF9toE (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JaBajcF9toE)

It reminds us of what we are fighting for.
Any support you can give will be much appreciated.

Thank you.

Any Press or Media wishing more information should contact: Richard Clarke - 07714 898548
For Sponsorship Opportunities please contact: Michael Trotter – 07803 141483

taxydual

3rd Feb 2009, 22:03

I viewed the Pledge Video.

I saw it as a 'threat' video and not a 'pledge' video.

Has someone 'kidnapped' the aircraft and holding it to ransom?

I believe the word 'please' was used just 3 times.

Our, We, You, Your came across (to me) as a. To claim ownership, and b. To incite guilt feelings to non-owners.

As an outsider, I'm not convinced.

andrewmcharlton

3rd Feb 2009, 22:21

I have to say whilst the effort is worthy the message is very ill advised. Yet another them and us pitch in the mould of all things tvoc related and their merry band of loyal followers.

Instead of reaching out and selling the benefits of a shared resource it just alienates bystanders with an interest.

Shame.

andrewmcharlton

3rd Feb 2009, 23:01

The Trust does, until it is time to be handed on "to the nation".

mark36

3rd Feb 2009, 23:08

To be fair Andrew the video has been put together,yet again by a club member and had no involment from the the trust although i do believe it needed there seal of approval:confused:
As for the trust and there loyal band of supporters, don't you believe it.
Yes there are members who walk round with blindfolds on and see no wrong in the trust but there are many of us who feel as you do that we are alienated by the trust and they have no interest in there members other than to use them as a cash cow and i'm sure this opinion will not change unless they become more transparent which i wont hold my breath waiting for
However as enthusiast's we all have one thing in common and that is to keep her in the air and that is why inspite of the trust i and others will continue to support the project untill the fat lady sings although i must admit that won't be long the way things are going.:(

Tim McLelland

4th Feb 2009, 01:46

Well I know how you mean Andrew but surely, even if the aircraft is technically owned by the whole trust, surely somebody must be the sole legal owner, otherwise nobody has any ultimate authority? Perhaps it's still David Walton?

BEagle

4th Feb 2009, 06:52

According to G-INFO, Vulcan to the Sky Trust are the registered owners of G-VLCN aka XH558:

GINFO Search Results | Aircraft Register | Safety Regulation (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=60&pagetype=65&appid=1&mode=detailnosummary&fullregmark=VLCN)

andrewmcharlton

4th Feb 2009, 07:17

Tim, the Trust as a legal Entity are the owner, no individual.

Tim McLelland

4th Feb 2009, 13:01

Hmm... that's a bizarre set-up then if there is nobody with overall control. Do they have to arrange a committee meeting to discuss every tiny point then? if so, where are the minutes of these meetings one wonders?

If everything has to be a group decision, it's little wonder that bu**er-all happens!

iank

4th Feb 2009, 15:55

Tim,
Somewhere in the dusty recesses of my memory, from some research I did back just before Felicity left, there are two tiers in operation...

The Vulcan To The Sky Trust owns the airframe and the HLF grant was made to them - like many trusts, they appoint members who have an oversight of such funds as are raised in the Trusts name but 'day to day' running is usally left to an individual.

The Vulcan Operating Company is (in this case) the 'individual' - as a UK limited company it has a legal 'existence' and so can be employed by the Trust to perform the day to day operating i.e. kicking the tires and lighting the fires. As in all these situations - the duties of the Trust can only be discharged according to the information that flows between them and the chosen individual. If that information isn't timely or effective then complications may arise... As to the actual legal relationship as to who 'owns' TVOC and so has the ability to call them to account - then Andrew may be able to answer that but I suspect some legalese whereby the Trust owns a majority shareholding or some such.

In basic terms - the Trust raises the money (by whatever means) and gives it to TVOC to spend who then must account for that back to the Trust. One might be cynical and say that this provides a nice and handy legal separation in terms of responsibility for 'good housekeeping'.

Sat outside of this relationship is the Vulcan to the Sky Club (or the good old Vulcan Club as I joined back in 1994!) which raises money using the efforts of its own members (like most supporter clubs) and a few traders. Any funds raised by the club are then given as donations to the Trust above on the presumption they are spent on returning (and maintaining) the airframe to flight. When the green light was given - the club helped the redemption of the intial pledges (the Display Associate/Return to Flight scheme - I know, I was one - still waiting to see my first flight as promised, my badge and my name on the airframe but hey!).

I think confusion arose because Rusty from the Club became an employee of TVOC so some perceived the bodies to be the same - yet they are not as evidenced over the last couple of weeks as the Club tries its damnedest again to raise money.

I have sat and watched this sorry saga for the last few years (and corresponded with Andrew C about it) and with Subscriptions to the Club and pledges and so on - I've given about £500 so far but have decided now - no more until I see some 'thanks' for my efforts so far (and yes - I do know some have given far more). I know £500 isn't a lot in the greater scheme of things but it's the new TV I haven't got or the dishwasher I fancy...

The club is always grateful for what money I give, but VTST/TVOC - no 'Thank you' note for my £250 (and certainly no more mention of my contribution since - there used to be website (http://web.archive.org/web/20030418154123/www.tvoc.co.uk/pledges.htm) list) and no invite to first flight, I even offered to help put a crew on-site to stage the rollout on completion - didn't even get a return eMail (and to establish credentials - the crew I offered lit Coventry's Millennium Eve party).

"No one person takes a salary above £xk..." but we pay £x,000 to a consulting company, folk blacklisted for speaking up, engineers who worked hard on the project not welcome on-site after they finished because they looked at someone the wrong way etcetera etcetera. This isn't the way to run an organisation that depends so heavily on goodwill (and for goodwill - look at Marshalls and the write off they put on their books for their contribution to the project)

Now I watch from the sidelines, hoping something changes - that money does get raised (and spent on flight not on new computers or cars) and that I do get to see 558 in the air with my own eyes and not on a screen.

Edited to add a link

Marc1981

4th Feb 2009, 17:14

I know of a certain recruitment agency that had a very hard time getting paid for the contractors used by VTST which almost caused the whole situation to get into serious trouble. What do they spend the cash on?

The management side of things has always been a joke back when I was a memeber of their forum there was a lot of talking down to and negative comments towards club memebers. Then they turn round and ask for your money!

After watching the lastest pledge video not only did I find it laughable but the bully tactics are being used again as if its our fault that there is no money. Sorry but I didn't realise that we had to pay a sort of child maintenence towards the whole project.

Unless the quality of the approach to fund seeking isn't raised I can't see them hitting their target, especially in under a month, £1 million really is a lot to ask for. I hate my negative attitude towards the whole thing as I really do love the plane but with such amateurish PR and a management team with what seems to have no idea on what its doing (so far) I can't really see this going anywhere.

I hope I'm proved wrong, I hope she graces the skies again, even if it is for one more season but unfortunately I think this maybe could be it and it would be such a shame.

Marc

saracenman

4th Feb 2009, 18:38

what's with all the questions about 'who owns 558'?

the National Trust own countless properties in the UK - on behalf of us, the Nation. in principle, it is exactly the same with 558 - she has to be officially owned on paper by some entity or other, for the benefit of the Nation - aka us!

so, just like you and i both own 'a slice' of Chartwell, St.Michael's Mount, etc etc, we also own 'a slice' of 558

edit - i really hope that everyone can distinguish between "The Vulcan to the Sky Trust" and "The Vulcan to the Sky Club"

the youtube video has been put together by one of the dedicated, passionate and proactive CLUB members, which is NOT the same as it being something put out by the TRUST.

the Club has several thousand members/supporters, many of whom work tirelessly, and UNPAID, to promote 558 and the Club as much as possible. without such support, 558 would never have returned to flight at all.

every penny the Club makes (from membership fees, stall sales, etc) goes toward paying for 558. even if (God forbid) the whole project goes to the wall, there is no reason why the Club can't continue - it was there before the Trust was formed and is a totally separate entity.

among the Club ranks are some very passionate and capable people who CHOOSE to help promote their cause; that, in my book, should be applauded, rather than consistently slagged off!

any dispute about the Trust's effectiveness has no bearing whatsoever on the activities of the Club or its members - one of whom, I'm proud to say, is ME!

sm

sm

Tim McLelland

4th Feb 2009, 19:29

Saracenman, the short answer to your question is because I'm interested to know whether there is, ultimately, one person who effectively has the legal final say as to what does or doesn't happen. If there really is nobody in control then it's little wonder that they're doing such a rotten job.

I'm encouraged to read both here and on the Flypast forum that quite a few other people have taken the time to express their opinions which seem very similar to mine. Clearly, I'm not the only person that thinks TVOC are not the great team that people have claimed. I don't know how many times I have to say it but it really is this simple - how much money has Pleming been paid - for doing what? Does anyone seriously think this is acceptable? Personally I think it stinks. For heaven's sake what is he doing all this time? What does he do all day with all that money? Is issuing a plea for donations every few months really the best he can do? A chimpanzee could do better.

What kind of set-up is it where the management hide away, say nothing and appear to do nothing, while Club members race about the country with collecting cans and some guy has to make a home video on Youtube? It's just ridiculous.

The best thing that can happen would be for the project to fold, let these idiots disappear, let Pleming go make his salary somewhere else, and then hopefully some others might finally come along who propose to take the project seriously again.

andrewmcharlton

4th Feb 2009, 19:38

If the project fails the ownership issues and failed HLF project (as in the long term project not return to flight) might well preclude any rescue attempt.

If you wish it and it comes true it may be the worst outcome.

saracenman

4th Feb 2009, 19:51

TM - as I've tried to point out on several occasions, I'm probably the last person that many would expect to say anything good about TVOC (the generic name for VTST) - i have been one of their most ardent critics.

the fact that i appear to have 'changed my tune' is not a simple case of black and white - there is a swathe of grey in the middle!

i too still have questions about who does what, and how much they are paid for doing/not doing it. it is healthy that such discussions as you describe continue - as long as they are fair, well informed and constructive. i will stand by what i have already said - the new Management structure at Brunty might not be the dream-team that 558 could've done with, but what there is now is 100% better than at this time last year.

the general attitude used to stink to high-heaven, and they could appear amazing blinkered to all around them - but this HAS changed; late in the day maybe, not a clean-sweep either, but what IS currently in place has cheered me greatly in recent months.

as far as 558's ownership is concerned - well you didn't ask who it is that controls it, but who owns it!

the Trust are in control of 558 - a board of Trustees, comprised of some very eminent people committed to 558 from 'day one' quite how policy is decided i don't know, but these aren't 'Tom, Dick 'n' Harry from down the pub'

sm

srobarts

4th Feb 2009, 20:18

Surely the right route forward is not to let it fold but to have a change of leadership that inspires confidence so that support comes back.
Pleming has actually achieved a lot in getting the Vulcan back in the air, when so many said it couldn't be done - that is not to say that there weren't mistakes along the way in getting it into the air again.
In all my commercial life projects like this have had a change of leadership at each phase, because quite simply new skills are needed for each phase. We have had the rebuilding of XH558 we are now on to the development of the project and maintenance of income flow.
The Vulcan is back in the air, it needs now a leader who will keep it there.
Hopefully someone who is more marketing orientated and the call for support accentuates the positives of this project and what it will deliver in the future and not the perpetual "if we don't pay it will never fly again" message.

Tim McLelland

4th Feb 2009, 21:50

how policy is decided i don't know

Think that's part of the problem - nobody does!

Sorry if I didn't clarify what I was getting-at. It just seems to me that even if the aircraft is effectively under the control of a group of people, there still should be one person who has ultimate control and I wondered whether despite the TVOC arrangements, it might be David Walton who retained the actual ownership? But as you say, it's all very murky and it's hard to know precisely how they stand legally.

I think it's important to know, as if (or when) these muppets finally disappear, it raises questions as to what happens next. I think it fair to say that there are people out there who might be interested in taking-on the project but like so many of us, they just don't want to get involved at all while the current TVOC people are still there, going nowhere.

Saracenman, I hope your optimistic view is right and that we'll all be pleasantly surprised in due course. But, cynic that I am, I have to say that I haven't seen anything to suggest that anything has changed at all and I fear that even with the best will in the world, nothing significant will happen while the same people are running the project. But we'll see... fingers crossed?!

andrewmcharlton

4th Feb 2009, 21:54

Legally it is crystal clear, not murky at all.

The Trust, as a legal entity, own the aircraft.

Flying Signman

4th Feb 2009, 22:30

For all those not clear on the facts on funding, from the front page of the Vulcan to the Sky Website - Dated 2nd February:

"Added to this are various amounts raised through the current Raffle, sponsorship and other sources, and so I’m able to let you know that the running total of money identified in our current campaign stands at nearly £500,000"

So, it would appear the target is a further £ 500,000.

With the increased marketing and promotional activities I see being developed, it only needs a few good features or an editorial in a national paper to see the pledge scheme really take off.

OK, things can be better, but if the project fails at this point, I honestly can't see anything being salvaged that will give us a flying vulcan again.

With a full airshow season ahead, it will be the ideal time to prove what has been learnt from last season and hopefully management will be better able to meet everyones expectations.

It is your free choice to decide, but fail her now, (yes the aircraft) and there will be every chance you will never see the changes in management you consistantly ask for - put simply - there will be no project left to manage.

I for one, are adding to a pledge I have already made.
Hope a few more can join me too.

Cheers,
FS

Delta15

5th Feb 2009, 18:52

Saracen Man
I have asked this a number of times recently...

You say there is a wind of change blowing through the management structure of TVOC? and there is a lot of dead wood there.

Below, from their website, is the existing management structure, what has changed recently?

Dr Robert Pleming MBCS CITP ARAes
Chief Executive

We all ready know most peoples feelings about Dr R.

Michael Trotter
Business Development Manager

He has been there a couple of years?

Andrew Edmondson
Engineering Director

Mike Pollitt
Operations Manager

He has been there a couple of years?

Colin Marshall
Logistics Manager

Denis Parker
Visitors Manager

Miriam Tong
Education Manager

She has been there about 18-9months?

The rest have been in post a number of years…..what/who has changed recently?

Apart, that is, the departure of your arch enemy and who do you consider to be non-productive, of what is left?.

:confused:

saracenman

5th Feb 2009, 19:52

I never saw Rusty as 'my arch enemy'! :}

certainly i was constantly amazed at the way in which she dealt with things, and yes i did cross swords with her on a number of occasions. even so, i have always pointed out that i have the greatest respect for the commitment she showed to 558 over the years.

Rusty's retirement has enabled many changes to occur - not least of which is her day-to-day duties being undertaken by Michael Trotter who, as i understand it, had previously been employed on a consultancy basis only. he's now 'Mon-Fri 9-5'

i have spoken to Michael on several occasions now and, from the outset, i found him to be a very forthright and straight-talking person, aware for the problems and challenges. he was a little bemused not to have heard anything of my own endeavours and, after i had the opportunity to explain them, he promised to follow up on them as a matter of importance. this he has done - and within a few days! prior to Michael's new post, i had banged my head against the brick-wall for over 12 months, but now two particular concepts have been discussed further, to the point where they can finally become reality later in the year.

he was determined to publish detailed figures for all to see - something which we Club members have been screaming for for nearly 2 years now; true to his word, the figures appeared when he said they would!

ALL my emails are now answered within 24 hours - usually within 2 hours! just speaking with Michael Trotter, it is easy to detect the change in attitude at the top - the attitude to Club members and the public alike. Michael certainly means business and is not afraid to confront things rather than sweeping them under the carpet as it appeared was the general policy before.

also, since October last year, the actual structure of 'TVOC' has changed; it is now firmly separated into 3 specific 'departments' concerned with Engineering, Operations and Commercial. each has the rigidly defined structure and defined rôle that they lacked before. the one thing that was clearly missing in the past was organisation - i lost count of the number of times that i heard lines such as "well i wasn't aware, otherwise it would have been dealt with"

even those at the very top have admitted to me that "internal communication is woeful" some months ago, and i recall questioning just what defined structure there actually was up at Brunty - did any of the employees actually have job descriptions? it wasn't difficult to see just how shocking the so-called organisation was - it's no wonder that so many blunders were made, so many missed opportunities and just why we are in the mess we are in now.

in addition, the importance of the educational aspect of 558 has finally been realised; it has always been treated as an 'also-ran' with very little core focus on activities and interest for children. i have been banging on and on and on for months just how vital and pivotal the education programme is - get that right, and everything else will grow as a result. Michael Trotter certainly agreed with me on that one, saying that 2009 will see a huge 'push' in that direction.

TVOC's attitude toward the Club has also seen a major change. we appeared to be nothing more than a 'cash cow', constantly being relied upon to bail them out time and time again. even at the Farnborough Airshow, the Club's representatives suddenly found that their accommodation (paid for by the Club i hasten to add, not the Trust!) had been purloined for use by others, meaning that the Club had no presence at the airshow at all!

the vital importance of the Club, and the need to increase its membership (and therefore funding for 558) is now realised for what it is - VITAL! the newly appointed Press Officer, as i have mentioned previously, is not 'another TVOC cronie' but a Club member - if that isn't a indication of faith in and respect for the Club, i don't know what is!

isn't it interesting to note that, in his recent website update, Dr. Pleming says, "...if 15,000 supporters were to pledge just £4 per month then (with Gift Aid) the target would be met." - well I'm not sure what he defines as supporters, but the Club (aka the core of support!) can boast less than 10,000 :} doesn't this demonstrate just how important it is to swell the Club's numbers considerably?

so, in conclusion, there's definitely a new attitude, a new outlook, a new focus, and a new realism. TVOC and the Club seem more 'united' than ever before which is long overdue, especially as we are all fighting on the same side!

i hope that sheds a little light on why my own opinions seemed to have turned around in such spectacular fashion - it might not be the be-all-and-end-all that is so desperately needed for 558, but it is a bloody good start!

sm

Exrigger

5th Feb 2009, 20:39

SM: Whilst I normally support your views and concur with most of what you have said in the past, but so far all I have seen is words promising of changes, things happening in the background, things coming up later in the year. Yet none of this is visible 'now', there might not be a later in the year, and things need to be out front, not being worked on in the background as it will not do any good if these arrive to late to achieve the target by the new pledge deadline. The only work and initiatives that I visibly see are those by the Club members and some off those might end up being to little to late, though I continue to contribute and help in the background as it is my wish to see 558 back where she belongs as the video so eloquently puts it.
I still await with baited breath, as do the people I talked into buying tickets, what is going to happen on Saturday with the Raffle draw.

saracenman

5th Feb 2009, 21:08

you might be surprised to know Exrigger that i completely agree! :p

what i am at pains to point out, is that my change of opinion is merely to demonstrate just how different things are from this time last year. I'm not trying to fool everyone into thinking that all is well at Brunty,and that all problems have been fixed - far from it.

what cannot be ignored however, is that in February last year, we faced exactly the same situation - the statement from Keith Mans (Chairman of VTST) on February 18th warned, in no uncertain terms, that it looked like 'curtains' at the end of that March.

whilst i was one of the many determined not to fail, i was extremely sceptical that we could succeed, as 558 hadn't even had a second TF at that point, and i was also aware just how inept the management were at the time.

my 'new found optimism' seems to have been misunderstood - i am not automatically optimistic this time around, because of the financial situation. what i am trying get across is that i feel that 558 stands more chance this time around than last - not only because of what i have already said about the management changes, but also because 558 doesn't have the TF and PtoF hoops to jump through this time round!

as ever (and what i haven't changed my tune about) it is publicity and awareness that will be the only realistic saviour of 558, now and in the future - i was proved right 12 months ago, and this time around i have more confidence that publicity and offers of assistance will not be squandered in the way that they were before.

in short, I'm not saying IT'S GREAT - i am saying that IT'S BETTER :ok:

sm

Delta15

5th Feb 2009, 21:27

SM

I like most of your opinions but am a little disturbed/unsure, by the following..

Quote...in addition, the importance of the educational aspect of 558 has finally been realised; it has always been treated as an 'also-ran' with very little core focus on activities and interest for children. i have been banging on and on and on for months just how vital and pivotal the education programme is -

Why have you not got involved in the education aspects of the project?
I have seen requests from Mrs Tong on their web site for volunteers/Vulcan ambassadors, have you thought of doing something like this?

Quote...Even at the Farnborough Airshow, the Club's representatives suddenly found that their accommodation (paid for by the Club i hasten to add, not the Trust!) had been purloined for use by others, meaning that the Club had no presence at the airshow at all!

Are you saying that the Trust actually stole the accomodation that was paid for by the club? Isn't that Theft or Fraud or miss-appropriation of club funds?

This is a very serious accusation perhaps someone from the club committee or the Press Officer can confirm or deny this??

Quote....isn't it interesting to note that, in his recent website update, Dr. Pleming says, "...if 15,000 supporters were to pledge just £4 per month then (with Gift Aid) the target would be met." - well I'm not sure what he defines as supporters, but the Club (aka the core of support!) can boast less than 10,000 http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/badteeth.gif doesn't this demonstrate just how important it is to swell the Club's numbers considerably?

Didn't I read somewhere that there is something like 25,000 VTS Friends?, is it not possible Dr Bob is referring to these as his supporters as well as the club?

who do you consider to be non-productive, of what is left?.

You still seem to duck this one, you have oft repeated there was rot or dead wood in the management team so why won't you say who you are referring to?

:confused:

Tim McLelland

5th Feb 2009, 22:20

The thing that really astonishes me is that when you're reminded of the details of this set-up, you have to ask yourself why there are so many people supposedly working every hour they can on this project and yet very little progress ever seems to be made. How the hell does the operation of one aircraft require this whole entourage? It's quite absurd. Little wonder that so much money has been wasted. What the hell do all these people actually do all day?! Silly question I know, as they're incapable or unwilling to ever tell us!

saracenman

5th Feb 2009, 22:22

ok - let me try and deal with each question/comment in turn.

Why have you not got involved in the education aspects of the project?
I have seen requests from Mrs Tong on their web site for volunteers/Vulcan ambassadors, have you thought of doing something like this?

when i first spoke to Miriam Tong back in March/April last year, she told me of the Vulcan Ambassador scheme, suggesting that it 'might be right up my street'. i did express interest at the time but, at her suggestion given the insecurity of the whole project at the time, i deferred any further thought on this until much later.

i did look again at it and, contrary to what Ms Tong had described some moths before, the position was Brunty-based, and i live many hundreds of miles away! i did have some email contact with her after that, whereupon i suggested a meeting with her (and one of the most respected people within 558's realm had offered to accompany me to the meeting) - sadly this was rebuffed by Ms Tong in a somewhat curt and undiplomatic way! funnily enough, the main purpose of my proposed meeting was to offer TVOC a unique 'product', tailored to TVOC's requirements, aimed specifically at children. sadly i was unable to even talk with her about it at all - now however, Michael Trotter has discussed this with me and, as soon as the present crisis is averted, he wants to develop this further. i am being intentionally vague as to the nature of this, for obvious reasons!

Are you saying that the Trust actually stole the accommodation that was paid for by the club? Isn't that Theft or Fraud or miss-appropriation of club funds?

This is a very serious accusation perhaps someone from the club committee or the Press Officer can confirm or deny this??

NO I AM NOT SAYING THIS AT ALL!

:mad: please do not put words into my mouth! and as far as I'm concerned (as a Club member, supporter and donor) i do not think warrants further discussion! just put it down to all manner of factors at the time - the uncertain weather, pre-booking of accommodation without even knowing if 558 would be there, etc - things that none of us can possibly be aware of! i only made mention of it as an example of how, despite the co-existence of the two, the Club always seemed to come at the bottom of the list! :mad:

Didn't I read somewhere that there is something like 25,000 VTS Friends?, is it not possible Dr Bob is referring to these as his supporters as well as the club?
well i hope you are right, obviously! :} what i do know is that when i was involved in the mass email campaign this time last year, our administrator only had around 8,000 names on the database to contact. i know our numbers have grown since then, but i would be astonished if they grew by 17,000+ :eek:

as ever, i stand to be corrected! :ok:

You still seem to duck this one, you have oft repeated there was rot or dead wood in the management team so why won't you say who you are referring to?
yes i do don't i? :E

i don't know about you, but i think it wholly inappropriate to discuss people by name when i have not had much (if any) personal contact with them! i will gladly use Rusty's name, and that of Michael Trotter as i have had direct contact with them; in the same way, i would have no problem with them using my name appropriately!

i will not be drawn on names of others for the very simple reason that, however trustworthy my sources of information maybe, it's still third-hand information and therefore nothing more than 'hearsay'.

i have spoken with many of the 'key people', some over a considerable time-scale, and yes there are some names that crop up! as yet, there has never been any conflicting views either!

i hope that clears a few things up :)

sm

Delta15

5th Feb 2009, 23:07

Tim

I can see Saracen Mans three prongs.. Commercial, Engineering & Operations... with possibly logistics reporting to Engineering.... Visitors & Education reporting to Commercial..... Operations..well thats the aircrew innit.
1 CEO, 3 senior managers, & 3 junior managers = 7man management team 'bout right for a small engineering company with a very wide and unique interest base.. wouldn't you think?

SM
thank you for your thoughts ears are still ringing a bit and Mrs Tong.... well nuff said.:mad:......?

The only other person on that list that I have had contact with, was the visitor manager, whome I met in the hangar one sunday and I found him very interesting and extremely knowledgeable about the aircraft and the project histories.

:ok:

saracenman

6th Feb 2009, 17:52

i imagine that you're referring to Denis - he prides himself on being able to answer any 558 question you can think of!

very knowledgeable bloke :ok:

sm

The Rocket

6th Feb 2009, 23:37

Delta 15,

I note that you're incredibly supportive of Mr Parker in your posts, and also incredibly scathing toward Ms Tong and the education aspect of the Vulcan project. Cynics among us may suggest that the education aspect threatens the position of the "Access Manager" who as you quite rightly point out, has been there since the beginning of the project, due to his previous role with XH558 with the BAH.

I also note how you structure your replies in much the same manner as Mr Parker on the TVOC forum, answering questions individually with much use of bold case. Finally, I also note how in your previous replies, you appear to have 'behind the scenes knowledge' as it were, and also appear to be of the exact age and location of Mr Denis Parker.

Is there something you're not telling us perchance?

saracenman

6th Feb 2009, 23:41

is he allowed to 'phone a friend? :}

sm

andrewmcharlton

7th Feb 2009, 08:44

Think he's already had 50 /50 and the audience has spoken.....

G4136

9th Feb 2009, 16:51

Earlier, Saracenman said...".....what cannot be ignored however, is that in February last year, we faced exactly the same situation - the statement from Keith Mans (Chairman of VTST) on February 18th warned, in no uncertain terms, that it looked like 'curtains' at the end of that March."

Who is Chair of the Trustees now? :hmm:

Exrigger

9th Feb 2009, 17:10

I find it quite interesting reading the comments on this forum and UKAR re 558 and the trust, and comparing some of the VTSC forum comments about these two sites, they do seem somewhat diametrically opposed ;), IMHO of course.

andrewmcharlton

9th Feb 2009, 19:14

I hadn't ventured out on to UKAR before but had a look having read your post.

Now I am glad I hadn't as it simply seems an extension of the official forum.

I see one recent posting even says if you want to whine go away we don't want to hear it, good to see that all views are heard and respected. Mind you, only half of that last statement applies here on occassions :rolleyes: only joking....

Zero-1

10th Feb 2009, 12:05

SM
i imagine that you're referring to Denis - he prides himself on being able to answer any 558 question you can think of!

very knowledgeable bloke http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

sm

=================================================

Hi SM
I am amazed, considering the number of times we have crossed swords in the past, I never ever thought you would have expressed such sentiments about me.

Thank you kind sir..

now regarding the Farnborough Saga etc.... I don't know where you got the info from? but what follows is the true account...

Let me clear this up right now as I was involved with the Trust at Farnborough...

1] Club booked accomodation... Shirley Tull, club airshow rep, reserved three rooms at a local pub and when the club decided NOT to have a seperate appearance at the show, she was going to cancel the reservation, I as the Trust deputy organiser asked her to transfer the reservation to me for the Trust, this she did. What actually happened we, the Trust, decided we also would not require the accomodation and I cancelled it.

2] All the club volunteers that attended Farnborough were working for the Trust.

3] Accomodation for ALL the project team and it's club volunteers was provided either by Farnborough International or the Trust.

With regard to Friends numbers this stands at 25,051 and 7,467 club members.. but some people appear on both databases..

Denis Parker
VTST Friends Coord/VTSClub Membership Sect

saracenman

10th Feb 2009, 21:29

credit where credit's due Zero-1! :ok:

sm

Winco

10th Feb 2009, 21:57

Just had a text from a reliable friend saying that the Old Girl has been grounded and all 'staff' are to be sacked!

Wish I could say I'm surprised but I'm not.

RIP 558

Winco

andrewmcharlton

10th Feb 2009, 22:05

Blimey hardcore, I hope it isn't true, sympthy to anyone affected if it is true.

Cluster One

11th Feb 2009, 08:51

In todays Telegraph

SIR – The public has donated more than £5 million over three years for the restoration of the last delta-winged Avro Vulcan bomber. She is the only flying Vulcan in the world and the reaction last summer to her triumphant return to display flying was ecstatic.
The stirringly beautiful Vulcan in flight is an inspiration to the young and a reminder of the need to increase the country’s skills in design, engineering and manufacturing. The Vulcan is also a penetrating reminder of the lessons and sacrifices of the Cold War.
The efforts to keep Vulcan flying now face potentially insuperable funding challenges. We call upon the MoD to give a home to Vulcan in an expanded RAF Memorial Flight. The public paid for Vulcan’s return; now the Government needs to help keep her flying.

Letter and signatories may be viewed here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/4582560/It-is-not-only-the-bankers-who-need-to-apologise-for-the-state-of-the-economy.html). (Scroll down)

Gordon McGeachie

11th Feb 2009, 10:41

Winco............

All I can say is that you ignore things like that as the ONLY place you need to go to to get ANY information is the Official Vulcan website.:ok:

The Vulcan does not need any negativity at the moment, and it is stupid things like this that will doom the project as people will not see it as a worthwhile investment.:ugh:

Oh, and also ignor thet other sites that constantly put the project down....:=

andrewmcharlton

11th Feb 2009, 13:05

The VTTS website forum seems to have hit an all time low today in my eyes.

Apart from the usual "just give us the money" brigade, look at two of the less sensitive / sensible quotes that leap out:

even less chance of national coverage now with the 2 light aircraft crash in wales.Richard Branson think that HMG should step in, flipping heck, we only need 1.8 million to get 558 in the air this display season, why the chuffing heck does he not give it to us, he will make it back in interest by the end of the dayhttp://www.vulcantothesky.org/forums/icon_smile_angry.gif

He makes me sick at times...................I note one brave lad who is new to their forum has posted a dissenting voice, poor lad, he will probably be excommunicated for being a non-believer before the day is out.

On a serious note, it seems that again what is disseminated to the members (according to their posts last week) and to the press is vastly at odds. Such a shame.

Tim McLelland

11th Feb 2009, 14:06

Can't say I'm surprised Andrew. I rarely even look at the site as it's just another forum like all the others, full of pointless comments. It's amazing that people chime-in with things like "why doesn't Richard Branson step in" as if it's some innovative idea that hasn't been mentioned before. It's just the same old chatter that goes round and round in circles. Point is, the TVOC people probably never even look at it so what is the point? It's not as if TVOC are sat there taking note of everything (or anything) that people say. In one respect you can't blame them as you'd waste too much time reading nonsense from random idiots, but as we know, they like to maintain a very distinct distance from the public, and the people on the forum are probably deluding themselves if they think (as they probably do) that anything they say will ever be read by ayone that matters.

It's clear that TVOC are going to plod-along and do whatever they damned-well like and they're not going to bother discussing anything with anyone. I take it you never heard from Pleming?

My view is that it's probably better to just forget about the whole saga and see what happens. Maybe 558 will survive through this year's season - who knows. But if it doesn't, at least they'll all go away and maybe some others will come along and do better. Which ever way it goes, it's clear that TVOC aren't going to communicate with anyone, and it's clear from the efforts I've made that nobody has the appetite to force them to communicate - or to force HLF to do more. There's an awful lot of people who want to make comments, but very few people who want to do anything practical, so we might as well just forget about it I think - hope for the best but expect the worst!

ipso

11th Feb 2009, 14:33

Quote.
I rarely even look at the site as it's just another forum like all the others, full of pointless comments.

Like yours?

Oberon 1

11th Feb 2009, 14:36

Winco was nearly right. The aircraft hasn't been grounded (but it's a good emotive word to use on aviation forums) and the staff haven't been sacked. We have been given 4 weeks notice of termination of contract.

But then, as an accredited TVOC Vulcan Engineer, all of the above could be absolute nonsense from a random idiot.

bubblesuk

11th Feb 2009, 14:44

Oberon 1

You are clearly mistaken! you have been sacked cos PPrune said so! :}

And no im not being serious.

andrewmcharlton

11th Feb 2009, 14:47

IPSO, for a probationer it's quite a start to simly pile in, I think we've established that no more personal sniping is required or worth it. Welcome.

hurn

11th Feb 2009, 14:47

I rarely even look at the site as it's just another forum like all the others, full of pointless comments. It's just the same old chatter that goes round and round in circles.You should feel right at home there then Tim. :}

My view is that it's probably better to just forget about the whole saga and see what happens. Maybe 558 will survive through this year's season - who knows.
But if it doesn't, at least they'll all go away and maybe some others will come along and do better.Like who?
In this current financial climate I seriously doubt there's anyone who could come along and just pick up the reigns unless you know some aviation mad Sheik somewhere.

Once the engineers are laid off, the anti-dets and servicing wont be done, the OEM support will be lost, she'll lose that permit to fly and that will be that.

Lets face it, if it gets grounded that's it....end of...no more flying Vulcan , ever! :(

LookingNorth

11th Feb 2009, 15:38

Hardly. She was in need of far more work 3 years ago than she is in today, so if she was laid up for a year or two until better economic conditions are available, regaining her permit would just be a matter of carrying out some more work.Getting her somewhere that wouldn't charge hangarage for that storage period is the tricky bit. I know of one place that offered just that a while back, they operate vintage jets already so could presumably take on the anti-det schedule if enough money was forthcoming to keep her on tick-over like that.

The "even less chance of national coverage now with the 2 light aircraft crash in wales." comment is pretty despicable - I hope it wasn't from anybody actually involved with the project.

ipso

11th Feb 2009, 15:47

Not meant as a personal pop. Did you not see the question mark? Was simply pointing out that Mr McLelland regards forums as nothing more than pointless comments.

Taking this to a logical conclusion is he including himself?

Thanks for the welcome. Mr charlton.

Tim McLelland

11th Feb 2009, 16:18

Ipso, you're illustrating my point perfectly. People making smart-ass replies might seem amusing to the person who makes the comment but so what? It achieves absolutely nothing other than simply boring any people who have something useful to contribute. They read all the rubbish and conclude - quite rightly - that the various forums are indeed full of random idiots and they go away, never to be seen again. I know this is the case as people have told me that they've done precisely that.

Point is, the endless silly comments are fine but it doesn't get 558 so much as an inch from the hangar door. You could read through all the posts on the Vulcan forums and you'd probably find no more than a handful which were of any direct relevance or value. Little wonder that TVOC don't take the slightest bit of notice. Surely, the only possible use of a forum on this subject must be to gather like-minded people together who want to do something constructive about the project. But it never, ever happens. Look at my comments about HLF... all I got was silly sarcasm or dismissive arguments - pretty much anything other than a hint of actually doing something.

So as I said before, my view is that the only course of action seems to be letting TVOC get on with whatever they're doing behind their closed doors and hope that they achieve success, even though you get the impression that they're heading for failure. But if they do fail, then at least there's the opportunity for someone to pick-up the pieces and try again, perhaps with better results. It's easy to say "like who" and "how" - but who knows? There are certainly people out there who are interested and who might be able to achieve something so let's just hope that if TVOC fail, then someone else might fare better.

Failing that, we could just continue making sarcastic comments if we just want to pass the time?;)

VULCANCHASER

11th Feb 2009, 16:29

Failing that, we could just continue making sarcastic comments if we just want to pass the time?http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif

I don't think this element of the saga will ever actually stop!:)

hurn

11th Feb 2009, 16:30

There are certainly people out there who are interested
Such as....?

Coastergirl

11th Feb 2009, 17:36

Point is, the endless silly comments are fine but it doesn't get 558 so much as an inch from the hangar door. You could read through all the posts on the Vulcan forums and you'd probably find no more than a handful which were of any direct relevance or value. Little wonder that TVOC don't take the slightest bit of notice. Surely, the only possible use of a forum on this subject must be to gather like-minded people together who want to do something constructive about the project. But it never, ever happens. Look at my comments about HLF... all I got was silly sarcasm or dismissive arguments - pretty much anything other than a hint of actually doing something.

Hi Tim

I am a member of the VTSC forum but enjoy reading other forums too.

I take your points, and agree somewhat, but there is an element that I feel you have overlooked. You say that we could read through all the posts on VTSCF(orum) and only a handful are "of any direct relevance or value" - it is true that only a handful are about 558 itself but the count of threads regarding fundraising for 558 is much more than "a handful".

As for the remaining posts that aren't about 558 or fundraising for 558, they are predominantly chit-chat amongst the members. It may seem that a public aviation forum is no place to conduct day to day friendships but if it weren't for the friendships that have been formed on the forum then things like the forum fun days, the karting days, the photobook, the cookbook, the christmas party, the members enclosure at dunsfold last year etc would never have happened. People travel from around the country to meet up with friends they have met on that forum; and when the going got tough we kept each other going through the hard times (and still are). I personally can remember a few times when I could have quite happily stayed at home and watched TV instead of driving 2 hours to Brunty - but I didn't, because I wanted to see my friends and didn't want to let them down. All of these events and projects have raised a lot of cash for 558, so you see even the posts that aren't in the engineering section have still contributed overall to 558.

We don't always agree with each other, and we don't 'represent' TVOC/VTST/VTSC but we are mostly all there for the same reason - we love this Vulcan!

I'm sure you are right that some people go in to the forum, look at the "rubbish" and leave again; but I can't believe that a few threads of "rubbish" would change their support for the actual aircraft.

I am not a "keep the faith" person, but I do try to find reasons why something was done or said a certain way. The people at the helm of this project are a long way from perfect but it would be a tragedy for all of their hard work to be lost at this point, or the airframe that they have spent 14 years 'doing up' passed on to someone else to do the finishing touches and enjoy her remaining flying years.

I am not criticising you or your views, because that last post certainly did make some sense, but I just wanted to put across a side of the vulcan forum that perhaps you haven't encountered.

Regards
Rachel

Bye

11th Feb 2009, 18:01

Of course it could all be part of a plan.

For example.

Company is insolvent, arrange a pre-pack administration that basically shows the administrators that you are the only people who can take the business out of insolvency.

once in administration lots of debts can be re-arranged and modified lets say.

bring it out of administration with a lot of baggage removed.

Not a bad plan actually.

That is of course if its going into administration of course.

Geoff

andrewmcharlton

11th Feb 2009, 18:16

Neatly overlooking the fact that an administration only works if the creditors agree to it and failing which a liquidation is mandatory.

Also, the creditors are needed on an ongoing basis so that's a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas.

MA have already compromised the debt to be paid out of future revenues so there isnt too much room for maneouvre.

Also, the fact that title to the a/c probably reverts to HLF or their nominees if they go into a formal insolvency process so that would shaft that one too.

Matt Jones

11th Feb 2009, 18:30

I note one brave lad who is new to their forum has posted a dissenting voice, poor lad, he will probably be excommunicated for being a non-believer before the day is out.

Would that be me? :) It wouldn't be the first time I've said something that doesn't tow the 'party line'. I don't do it to deliberately inflame the situation. Sometimes I think they're a bit blinkered but it's only because they're so focussed and passionate. Luckily I'm think skinned enough that I'm not worried about it.

I hope they succeed because I's like to se it on the circuit again this year :ok:

andrewmcharlton

11th Feb 2009, 18:32

Matt, you are da man.

Welcome onboard to Dissenters Anonymous.

saracenman

11th Feb 2009, 19:05

amazing! :eek:

yet again, some on Prune remain convinced that TVOC forum members are an elitist bunch, all there to say how wonderful TVOC themselves are!

yeah - of course, I've always 'towed the party line' haven't i? :ok:

want to be part of our elite little clique? we've recently done away with the induction ceremony, the naked dancing around the sacred fire and even the human sacrifice! ;)

to keep the peasants out, we've recently upgraded and gone super-elite - you have to be one of those 'special' people capable of popping a cheque for £24 in an envelope and.........wait for it.........POSTING IT! :eek:

come and join our elite and secretive clique and be indoctrinated into the murky world of 'support' - it's almost as rewarding as the "World of Slagging Off" :ok:

oh, and as an introductory offer - you get slagged off completely free-of-charge! :D

sm

G4136

11th Feb 2009, 19:31

sm :D:D:D well said!

Exrigger

11th Feb 2009, 19:33

Coastergirl, eloquently put, well done:D SM as usual nice to see your still on side and despite appearing persona non grata (again) at the moment on the VTSC forum due to my frank approach, I still contirbute now and then. I am also an avid supporter with donations and other media support in the background but see no advantage to the cross forum arguing, or taking things out of context and the mis-quoting that occasionally happens.

If we put as much effort into constructively/actively supporting the superb engineers and support staff who have achieved what Tombstone et al thought could never happen that we do in shouting each other down and the endless cross forum arguments, I think the future of 558 would probably been secured a long time ago.

hurn

11th Feb 2009, 19:33

you have to be one of those 'special' people capable of popping a cheque for £24 in an envelope and.........wait for it.........POSTING IT! :eek:
How dare you expect people to fork out £24 for club membership. :eek:
Haven't you learnt from browsing this thread that all that money goes straight into Dr Plemings retirement fund! ;)

bubblesuk

11th Feb 2009, 19:47

amazing! http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif

yet again, some on Prune remain convinced that TVOC forum members are an elitist bunch, all there to say how wonderful TVOC themselves are!

yeah - of course, I've always 'towed the party line' haven't i? http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

want to be part of our elite little clique? we've recently done away with the induction ceremony, the naked dancing around the sacred fire and even the human sacrifice! http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif

to keep the peasants out, we've recently upgraded and gone super-elite - you have to be one of those 'special' people capable of popping a cheque for £24 in an envelope and.........wait for it.........POSTING IT! http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif

come and join our elite and secretive clique and be indoctrinated into the murky world of 'support' - it's almost as rewarding as the "World of Slagging Off" http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

oh, and as an introductory offer - you get slagged off completely free-of-charge! :D

sm

Saracenman.

You are a tubby Ginger Dwarf. ;)

And as your introductory offer has expired that insult will cost you £2.72!:}

saracenman

11th Feb 2009, 19:53

gone up in the world i see bubbs - you used to charge far less! :}

Bye

11th Feb 2009, 20:17

Neatly overlooking the fact that an administration only works if the creditors agree to it and failing which a liquidation is mandatory.

The way a pre-pack works is that the administrators have to consider all creditors equally and act in the their best interests.

The insolvency practitioner does not have to inform them of the pre-pack untill after the fact.

If the creditors are not happy they can then go to court where a judge will rule if the pre-pack was not fair.

If the pre-pack saves jobs he is unlikely to rule against the pre-pack or in favour of a winding up and dispersement.

the aircraft is probably owned by the trust company so the operating company could be pre-packed with no effect on the ownership.

It depends where the debts sit and with which company.

for example if the operating company owed a large amount of cash to the hangar owner it could be discharged / re-arranged with no effect of the trust ownership of the aircraft.

I notice that certain accounts are still overdue at companies house.

Yes the major creditors would be MA so the newco could convince an administrator that as they are the best hope for the company to keep going they are most likely to re-pay the debts. They can argue that without a pre-pack the company would be trading insolvently and the creditors would get nothing, which of course is less favourable than the company going forward and paying the creditors eventually.

With a pre-pack the administrator only has to be happy that the directors purcahsing the company through the pre-pack are the best hope for the creditors to recover the most money. and be able to convince a judge of the fact in case of a challenge.

of course all supposition and probably not the case at all.

and we won't know untill after the fact as is the way.

Geoff.

saracenman

11th Feb 2009, 20:21

How dare you expect people to fork out £24 for club membership. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif
Haven't you learnt from browsing this thread that all that money goes straight into Dr Plemings retirement fund! http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif

but Hurn - he is the chosen one - the Devine Leader of our elite and selective Cult - he who shall have his noble feet anointed with rare and precious oils!

we humbly worship at the sacred Altar of Pleming - he is all-knowing, all-powerful - he must be obeyed

oh, how i long for the day when The Triangular One rises again - all those unworthy mortals shall avert their eyes - we must smite the heathens' ears from their heads, lest they hear The Mighty Olympus

they are non-believers and must verily be struck down

sm

Exrigger

11th Feb 2009, 20:28

SM, don't tell me you have gone all religous on us ;) or have you partaken of the amber nectar:)

bubblesuk

11th Feb 2009, 20:33

saracenman

gone up in the world i see bubbs - you used to charge far less! http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/badteeth.gif

Tis the credit crunch Sm, times being hard and al that!

By the way are we doing the virgin sacrfices to ur leader again this year? :O

hurn

11th Feb 2009, 21:03

but Hurn - he is the chosen one - the Devine Leader of our elite and selective Cult - he who shall have his noble feet anointed with rare and precious oils!

we humbly worship at the sacred Altar of Pleming - he is all-knowing, all-powerful - he must be obeyed

oh, how i long for the day when The Triangular One rises again - all those unworthy mortals shall avert their eyes - we must smite the heathens' ears from their heads, lest they hear The Mighty Olympus

they are non-believers and must verily be struck down

smAnd lo, the disciples held aloft the sacred neck brace......and the mighty Pleming was pleased.

andrewmcharlton

11th Feb 2009, 23:07

Is it just me or did I see a post from a GMcG which has subsequently disappeared? We're not into mystery deletions on this forum too are we?

srobarts

11th Feb 2009, 23:18

Me too, just been emailed a post which is no longer here......

Flying Signman

12th Feb 2009, 12:21

......talking of missing posts, I have been informed another Press Office post giving the latest from yesterday's news conference has not appeared here.

It was posted around 8pm last night.:confused:

airsound

12th Feb 2009, 17:32

For anyone who feels that Vulcan To The Sky is a little uncommunicative sometimes, I have the text of a briefing that Dr Pleming gave to the press conference at the Royal Aeronautical Society on 11 Feb. I would post the text, but it's about 1500 words, and I'm dumb enough not to be able to find how to attach such a document.

But if you want to see it, PM me with your email, and I'll be happy to send it.

The presser wasn't very well attended, but the great Geoff Meade of Sky took the trouble to be there, and his report is at
Vulcan Bomber Grounded By Recession - Credit Crunch Means Delta Wing Aircraft May Be Sold | UK News | Sky News (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Vulcan-Bomber-Grounded-By-Recession---Credit-Crunch-Means-Delta-Wing-Aircraft-May-Be-Sold/Article/200902215221004?lid=ARTICLE_15221004_VulcanBomberGroundedByR ecession-CreditCrunchMeansDeltaWingAircraftMayBeSold&lpos=searchresul ts)

airsound

airsound

12th Feb 2009, 17:46

I can't believe there are many PPRuNers who don't have the Torygraph delivered, freshly ironed, to their breakfast table, but just in case you missed it, here's what the letter on 11 February (and the page 2 article about it) looked like

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/DTlet11Feb2009x2.jpg

airsound

Winco

12th Feb 2009, 21:46

Lets be frank and honest about this.....

The Vulcan has NOT been grounded by the recession. It has been grounded by greed. The recession might not have helped things I accept, but the countless tens or hundreds of thousands of people who have given their bloody-hard-earned money to this project will be thoroughly disgusted to find that a huge amount of it has gone to pay Pleming and another huge amount has gone to pay Walton.

That is the top and the bottom of it (IMHO of course!) GREED!!!

I for one am sick of hearing all the pleading from Pleming and all the threats from him. Airsound, why don't you ask your good friend Pleming to come onto this forum and answer some of the questions that have been posed? Why don't you ask him why he has refused, for years now, to come and answer any of the critisisms levelled against him? and then let us know what he says?

"a little uncommunicative sometimes" is that a joke? The man is always totally uncommunicative. He doesn't reply to letters, he won't reply to
e-mails, he won't talk on the phone, whats the matter with the man?

For heavens sake airsound, I know he's a friend and you have dealings with him, so please ask him to stand up, be a man and respond to some of the points raised. At least he may then be able to regain a bit of respect from some of us.

Winco

andrewmcharlton

12th Feb 2009, 21:54

In the interests of objectivity, whilst I am a massive critic of the "regime", I did an FOI request last year and started getting stroppy about it with HLF and the trust and he did pick up the phone and talk extensively and was very honest in his remarks.

However, being equally objective that may have been motivated equally by the worry the FOI would force disclosure of accounts and alike which hadn't til then been compiled or maybe I just hit lucky.

I don't think for one moment he is a dishonest man, in fact the opposite, although he, in my humble opinion, is not the man to lead such a major project nor can I imagine how the figures (and they are 2 years old) quoted in the accounts can in any way shape or form be justified no matter how good he is / was etc.

The project management and trustees have on the face of it made some shocking business decisions whilst doing a fantastic engineering job throught the fine services of the front line staff. I was going to say if you pay peanuts you get monkeys but I suspect enough has been paid to buy the peanut plantation so we expect and deserve much much more.

chris50

12th Feb 2009, 21:54

Any more gripes in 2009
or news cheers chris:D

bubblesuk

13th Feb 2009, 00:24

Any more gripes in 2009
or news cheers chris:D

Where to start Chris!

Well first the gripes,
My gas bill is astronically high, the wifes doing me head in, the kids are being little devils, i hurt my arm putting the seats up on my car, i cant find my glasses so imnot sure how this looks, the telly is crap, and i have heart burn.

And now the news.

Err..........see above basically. :}

andrewmcharlton

13th Feb 2009, 00:26

Hey Bubbles my missus is a headcase too, small world, where did you find yours?

I was going to try and blame it on the credit crunch or global warming but I think there must be someone connected with 558 I could blame somehow, maybe, somewhere, please?

Tim McLelland

13th Feb 2009, 03:03

I see the 558 Press office has granted us another release at last. Had to laugh at this line-

Whilst huge numbers of people saw the Vulcan display last summer, by contrast, hardly anyone appears to know of XH558’s plight now.

Guess you have to admire a press office that broadcasts its own deficiencies?

So it would appear that the saga really is in its death throes now, unless it's just another Pleming-esque attempt at screwing a little more money out of everyone. Interesting to see that Branson has supposedly spoken on the subject. If TVOC have any capability at all, now they'll pressure him into getting his cheque book out at last. Even if he doesn't want to sponsor the aircraft (and you can't blame him when he can't cover it in Virgin logos), he could make a one-off donation and milk the event for all the usual Virgin publicity he's so good at. But I don't suppose TVOC are even capable of convincing him that it's a good idea. They'd rather rattle collection cans.

Like I said before, this saga is going nowhere with a bunch of people who nobody trusts and who have failed to deliver on any of the much-promised sponsorship. It's nothing to do with the recesssion - it's because they've never really "sold" the idea to anyone. I've seen enough of Pleming and Co. on TV to make me squirm - they look and sound like a bunch of amateurs so you can't be surprised when they get ignored by people with money. The project needs some clued-up individuals who know how PR and media works, not some well-meaning enthusiasts who think that asking people for donations is ever (and I mean ever) going to bring-in enough money. What did they think this is? A jumble sale?

Let it run its course. Let them go away and then there's a slim chance that some other people might be inclined to take-over and do a much better job, hopefully with the same technical and engineering team who deserve better. Before the smart alecs chime-in with "like who?" well I don't know, but I know there are people out there who are interested in the project but who don't want to deal with TVOC. Likewise there are countless people who have already offered to help and they've been ignored. With another team maybe they'll come back? Hell, anything's got to be better than this long, painful death hasn't it?

I sympathise with the people who are doing their best to raise money from donations and I have no issues with people on the Vulcan forum sharing their thoughts and ideas or anything they like. My point is that it's all pointless in terms of getting 558 airborne. The fund-raising is well-meaning but it will achieve nothing as it can't hope to provide anything like the amounts needed. It requires big ideas from people who know how to get attention from the right people. Patently, the current bunch who are running the project haven't got a clue. I don't blame them for avoiding being answerable to every random enthusiasts who posts a question on a forum, but they should at least be direct, open and honest about where every penny has been spent, precisely how much money they need, who has been approached and who hasn't. Clearly, they're never going to tell us that so they deserve to go. It's not a private club, its a public concern paid-for by the public. As I've said before, the key to this is HLF as they can save the project and they can force TVOC to explain themselves. But HLF will not get involved unless they have to. But clearly, nobody has the inclination to try pressurising HLF as whenever I even mention the idea people just scoff. Presumably this is because it's easier than actually doing something. HLF is the only body that has enough "clout" to demand that TVOC deal openly and explain just what they have (or haven't) been doing for so long.

Our only other hope was the aviation press but as we've seen, they're just a bunch of toothless amateurs (indeed the term "press" hardly seems applicable to them any more) who churn-out pretty pictures, regurgitate press releases and vapid articles about nothing in particular, and never, ever want to ask any difficult questions or do something worthwhile. They're as big a joke as TVOC. But if nobody can be bothered to badger HLF then the only other practical option is to let TVOC run out of steam (and money) and let them go away. Then maybe - just maybe - some other people might be able to start again.

If Pleming achieved anything, at least he demonstrated that it can be done - so maybe that will be enough to convince others that it's worth a try?

Andrew - did you get a reply from Pleming then?;)