Vulcan to the Sky, The End? (Merged)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Coventry, UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Yellow Sun
OK, let's get this straight, the Waltons buy an old aircraft, they realise there's some risk involved, but they think it's worth a punt. The difficulties are too great so they decide to sell said old jet. Along come a group of enthusiasts who want to take on the project and agree to the Walton's terms.
Let's not forget either, that when the Waltons bought the Vulcan, they alos bought the RAF spares stockholding - some 800 tons and trawled the various Vulcan bases for test rigs and equipment that would help them return the Aircraft to flight. Whilst they saw it as a commerical venture initially (along with all the other historics then based at Bruntingthorpr - the Grace spitfire, Canberra WK163 et al), it wasn't with a view to selling it all off and making a profit!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: shrewsbury
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been following this thread with interest and up to last evening I would have agreed with the view that this latest requirement of emergency funding to keep the project going is almost the final drinking implement.
My thirteen year old son, who has been donating a percentage of his pocket money to the project for the last 14 months, discovered the latest glitch yesterday. When he looked me in the eye and asked me "will I see it fly" I realised again why this project is so important
Not many things left in this Country we can be proud of.
Lets give it one more chance.
My thirteen year old son, who has been donating a percentage of his pocket money to the project for the last 14 months, discovered the latest glitch yesterday. When he looked me in the eye and asked me "will I see it fly" I realised again why this project is so important
Not many things left in this Country we can be proud of.
Lets give it one more chance.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Yellow Sun
OK Tim, so it's the CAA's fault then? So you fully understand how this works from your extensive dealings with them? You are conversant with the regulatory regime? "Permit to Fly" does not mean it can be treated as a light aircraft. Because it is not going to carry passengers does not mean it is not a commercial undertaking and the aircraft is not going to be involved in "Aerial Work". The regulations applied by the CAA are in place to ensure the safety of the public and the operators, which ones do you propose to ignore Tim?
YS
YS
The CAA insists on everything being done to meet their rules. Fine. Problem is, they're the CAA's rules, imposed and designed by the CAA. Nobody ever investigates them. Nobody even questions them. Clearly, different rules apply in other countries, not least the US and South Africa. You can bet that the project would have been much, much easier without the CAA, but that's yet another argument and yet another tangent we can go-off to explore, instead of concentrating on the more important fact that there's now less than three weeks in which to keep the project running...
I know I'm repeating myself here but no matter how many postings people make, we have heard all (and I do mean all) of these comments before. Some people think it's a lost cause, some think it's worth one last push. Point is, no matter which way you look at it, the whole saga is going to be irrelevant if some more cash isn't found fast.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Tim McLelland
I really don't understand this kind of logic. I've just been looking at the posts on UKAR about this same subject and it's mind-numbing to see how some people on there (in typical fashion) can't even be bothered to cut and paste a simple message and email it (a task which takes about a minute and costs nothing) but they can take the time to write paragraphs whining and bitching about the project, presumably to supposedly impress us all with their views... even though we've heard the same moans and comments a hundred times or more.
Why the change in attitude? Are your own commercial interests tied up with a return to flight in any way?
Problem is, they're the CAA's rules, imposed and designed by the CAA. Nobody ever investigates them. Nobody even questions them. Clearly, different rules apply in other countries, not least the US and South Africa. You can bet that the project would have been much, much easier without the CAA
YS
Originally Posted by Tim McLelland
The CAA insists on everything being done to meet their rules. Fine. Problem is, they're the CAA's rules, imposed and designed by the CAA. Nobody ever investigates them. Nobody even questions them.
There are many that have been involved over the years dealing with the CAA in regards returning or proposals to return ex-mil jet to the air in civvie ownership.....Sea Vixen, Bucc, Lightning etc.,etc to know just how many hoops would have to be jumped through, only to end up going around in circles to jump through them again etc.....
Lots of been there done that.........and it's all these that are the sceptical ones that to a man would dearly love to see a Vulcan in the air again but from bitter experience know the realities of the task, and yet despite these hard bitten experiences gained over many years they are shot down in flames as being non-believers rather than just being plain realistic.
As soon as this project had to become a commercial one, because of the CAA/BAe/HLF it ceased to be a viable one.....simple as that.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Englandshire, mostly.
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on GeeRam.
Tim, you're beating a drum that has had it's day. There is no real insentive, emotions aside, to resurect the Vulcan within the current financial constraints. It simply will not happen, certainly not in the UK.
Tim, you're beating a drum that has had it's day. There is no real insentive, emotions aside, to resurect the Vulcan within the current financial constraints. It simply will not happen, certainly not in the UK.
What a bunch of doom-ridden old women with singular lack of vision!
"My thirteen year old son, who has been donating a percentage of his pocket money to the project for the last 14 months, discovered the latest glitch yesterday. When he looked me in the eye and asked me "will I see it fly" I realised again why this project is so important
Not many things left in this Country we can be proud of.
Lets give it one more chance."
Damn good show, sir! Bloody right - and that's what this is all about. Now will the rest of you moaning minnies stop being so depressingly negative and at least write and tell the HLF that you also want to see 558 fly again!
"My thirteen year old son, who has been donating a percentage of his pocket money to the project for the last 14 months, discovered the latest glitch yesterday. When he looked me in the eye and asked me "will I see it fly" I realised again why this project is so important
Not many things left in this Country we can be proud of.
Lets give it one more chance."
Damn good show, sir! Bloody right - and that's what this is all about. Now will the rest of you moaning minnies stop being so depressingly negative and at least write and tell the HLF that you also want to see 558 fly again!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is it with you people? How many times do I have to say that I'm not interested in going over the same ground again and again. We've heard all these points many times before and we're all pretty-much agreed on them. My point was that this is not the time to be raising them.
If you think the project is a dead duck then fine. I was asking other people who have a bit of ambition, imagination and spirit, to stick with it a little longer and at least see the project through to the end. Just continually saying "it won't work" is the kind of silly attitude that stops this kind of project from ever starting in the first place. If you can't offer any help, constructive criticism or advice, then what is the point of even posting a message?
We've done all the whining and bitching. We know that TVOC needs to be brought to account. But can we please stop going over the same points over and over again, and those of us who want to try and save the project can look at trying to help, instead of simply crying "doom" at every opportunity.
As for your sparkling input dan, I think we'd all be grateful if you'd keep your nasty comments to yourself, or at least confine them to the equally childish UKAR site where they belong. Of course I have absolutely no commercial interest in the project whatsoever. Sorry to disappoint you. And yes, I have been very critical of the TVOC project, as I've said on here repeatedly... but then you'd know that if you'd bothered to read what I've already said. Oh I forgot - actually reading posts was never one of UKAR's strong points...
Now, is there even the vaguest chance that anyone might like to say something constructive about the project, or are we doomed to read endless pages of woe and misery? If that's all that's on offer, at least save it for next month when you can have your "I Told You So" party.
If you think the project is a dead duck then fine. I was asking other people who have a bit of ambition, imagination and spirit, to stick with it a little longer and at least see the project through to the end. Just continually saying "it won't work" is the kind of silly attitude that stops this kind of project from ever starting in the first place. If you can't offer any help, constructive criticism or advice, then what is the point of even posting a message?
We've done all the whining and bitching. We know that TVOC needs to be brought to account. But can we please stop going over the same points over and over again, and those of us who want to try and save the project can look at trying to help, instead of simply crying "doom" at every opportunity.
As for your sparkling input dan, I think we'd all be grateful if you'd keep your nasty comments to yourself, or at least confine them to the equally childish UKAR site where they belong. Of course I have absolutely no commercial interest in the project whatsoever. Sorry to disappoint you. And yes, I have been very critical of the TVOC project, as I've said on here repeatedly... but then you'd know that if you'd bothered to read what I've already said. Oh I forgot - actually reading posts was never one of UKAR's strong points...
Now, is there even the vaguest chance that anyone might like to say something constructive about the project, or are we doomed to read endless pages of woe and misery? If that's all that's on offer, at least save it for next month when you can have your "I Told You So" party.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GeeRam
Err........I think you'll find that's definately not the case.
There are many that have been involved over the years dealing with the CAA in regards returning or proposals to return ex-mil jet to the air in civvie ownership.....Sea Vixen, Bucc, Lightning etc.,etc to know just how many hoops would have to be jumped through, only to end up going around in circles to jump through them again etc.....
Lots of been there done that.........and it's all these that are the sceptical ones that to a man would dearly love to see a Vulcan in the air again but from bitter experience know the realities of the task, and yet despite these hard bitten experiences gained over many years they are shot down in flames as being non-believers rather than just being plain realistic.
As soon as this project had to become a commercial one, because of the CAA/BAe/HLF it ceased to be a viable one.....simple as that.
There are many that have been involved over the years dealing with the CAA in regards returning or proposals to return ex-mil jet to the air in civvie ownership.....Sea Vixen, Bucc, Lightning etc.,etc to know just how many hoops would have to be jumped through, only to end up going around in circles to jump through them again etc.....
Lots of been there done that.........and it's all these that are the sceptical ones that to a man would dearly love to see a Vulcan in the air again but from bitter experience know the realities of the task, and yet despite these hard bitten experiences gained over many years they are shot down in flames as being non-believers rather than just being plain realistic.
As soon as this project had to become a commercial one, because of the CAA/BAe/HLF it ceased to be a viable one.....simple as that.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Tim McLelland
As for your sparkling input dan, I think we'd all be grateful if you'd keep your nasty comments to yourself, or at least confine them to the equally childish UKAR site where they belong. Of course I have absolutely no commercial interest in the project whatsoever. Sorry to disappoint you. And yes, I have been very critical of the TVOC project, as I've said on here repeatedly... but then you'd know that if you'd bothered to read what I've already said. Oh I forgot - actually reading posts was never one of UKAR's strong points...
Really?
From your post in "Vulcan Aircrew?" thread, dated 24 Mar 06:
".....I think you'll find that my prophecy is correct, as I wrote "The Vulcan Story" years ago, and it's still recognised as the best (and certainly biggest) book on the subject, even though it's showing its age now (and the reprinted edition was ghastly!). The new book will be more than twice the size of that book, so I think the odds on anyone else producing anything better, are virtually zero, and this is why I want the new book to be as good as possible.
Okay, some small publishers will undoubtedly turn-out "monographs" or similar books, but large publishing companies just don't touch this kind of subject any more (wish they did!), so I think it's fair to say that the new book will be as good as it gets."
Modest as well, I see................
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle,
I am somewhat surprised at your attitude over this old boy. If you know something that the rest of us don't know, then pray tell, but don't condemn those amongst us who are being realistic over this utter fiasco.
I won't go over old ground, but there are still lots of questions and NO answers Sir. Even you must agree on that point surely?
We are not 'doom-ridden old women with singular lack of vision' we are sensible people who have reached the conclusion that the project is on its death bed, and without a cash injection it will die! I am willing to guarantee, that even with the £250K, unless there is a serious change in management, THE PROJECT WILL STILL DIE! There is NO plan of action is there? No one can or will say what will happen at the end of next month? And even if it gets rolled out, are you still 100% confident that a big-money sponsor will come forward? 'cos I'm not. I beleive that if anyone was going to come forward, then they would have done so by now. Imagine the publicity they would achieve.......'BEAGLE LTD SAVES VULCAN PROJECT'
What would you have us do BEagle, just keep throwing more and more money into the pot so Walton can get this months rent? Well not from me he 'aint! The same goes for Plemings 'consultancy' work - some consultant he has turned out to be eh?
Sorry all, I fear the end is nigh!
Kind regards
TSM
I am somewhat surprised at your attitude over this old boy. If you know something that the rest of us don't know, then pray tell, but don't condemn those amongst us who are being realistic over this utter fiasco.
I won't go over old ground, but there are still lots of questions and NO answers Sir. Even you must agree on that point surely?
We are not 'doom-ridden old women with singular lack of vision' we are sensible people who have reached the conclusion that the project is on its death bed, and without a cash injection it will die! I am willing to guarantee, that even with the £250K, unless there is a serious change in management, THE PROJECT WILL STILL DIE! There is NO plan of action is there? No one can or will say what will happen at the end of next month? And even if it gets rolled out, are you still 100% confident that a big-money sponsor will come forward? 'cos I'm not. I beleive that if anyone was going to come forward, then they would have done so by now. Imagine the publicity they would achieve.......'BEAGLE LTD SAVES VULCAN PROJECT'
What would you have us do BEagle, just keep throwing more and more money into the pot so Walton can get this months rent? Well not from me he 'aint! The same goes for Plemings 'consultancy' work - some consultant he has turned out to be eh?
Sorry all, I fear the end is nigh!
Kind regards
TSM
"....at least write and tell the HLF that you also want to see 558 fly again!"
Is that clear enough? Did you understand it that time?
Is that clear enough? Did you understand it that time?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle,
Now I know you are losing it old boy. Sarcasm was never your strong point, and this latest outburst proves that.
I am sorry, but I will NOT write to the HLF and ask them to chuck another quarter of a million pounds at it, when a good percentage of that WILL NOT go to getting the aircraft back in the air.
ARE YOU NOW GETTING IT BEAGLE?
The money is NOT going to the aircraft, its going to the likes of David Walton for 'rent' and to Dr Pleming for 'consultancy' and God knows who else, NOT the aircraft.
For goodness sake man, thats why this project is a loser, because a 'few' are making lots of money out of it - even Tim admits that!
Time for a lie down and a large glass of grouse!!
Kind regards to all
TSM
Now I know you are losing it old boy. Sarcasm was never your strong point, and this latest outburst proves that.
I am sorry, but I will NOT write to the HLF and ask them to chuck another quarter of a million pounds at it, when a good percentage of that WILL NOT go to getting the aircraft back in the air.
ARE YOU NOW GETTING IT BEAGLE?
The money is NOT going to the aircraft, its going to the likes of David Walton for 'rent' and to Dr Pleming for 'consultancy' and God knows who else, NOT the aircraft.
For goodness sake man, thats why this project is a loser, because a 'few' are making lots of money out of it - even Tim admits that!
Time for a lie down and a large glass of grouse!!
Kind regards to all
TSM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle
Instead of cheap jibes, why don't you give us all the benefit of your experience and answer some of the questions on this forum?
In fact, why don't you just answer one.................
If they do get £250k to keep them going to the end of August, will you be of the same mindset when they come at the begining of September and say "we need just another £250k or else it folds"
And if you are, then at what stage will you say "hang on a minute chaps, what is happening here?" Because that's all people are saying NOW - "what on earth is going on here"?
They are not fools or old women, they are clearly passionate people who have given of their hard-earned cash, and want to know what is happening to it and why it is/has been wasted.
The Winco
Instead of cheap jibes, why don't you give us all the benefit of your experience and answer some of the questions on this forum?
In fact, why don't you just answer one.................
If they do get £250k to keep them going to the end of August, will you be of the same mindset when they come at the begining of September and say "we need just another £250k or else it folds"
And if you are, then at what stage will you say "hang on a minute chaps, what is happening here?" Because that's all people are saying NOW - "what on earth is going on here"?
They are not fools or old women, they are clearly passionate people who have given of their hard-earned cash, and want to know what is happening to it and why it is/has been wasted.
The Winco
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Coventry, UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Swinging Monkey
The money is NOT going to the aircraft, its going to the likes of David Walton for 'rent' and to Dr Pleming for 'consultancy' and God knows who else, NOT the aircraft.
If so, I think that you should proceed carefully unless you have proof to substantiate your claim - you could be construed as committing a libel here, in which case Messrs Walton & Pleming may decide to test that in court - you might end up contributing personally to their financial futures!! Whilst there is speculation aplenty about the Trust and it's finances, I would urge folk to tread carefully and perhaps take a leaf from Private Eye and preface such 'allegations' (if that's what they are) with "allegedly...".
I'm not connected with the Trust or anything, just an interested party having been a donor to the project since '93 and I can see tempers being raised in many forums - we just need to be careful, there are people reading who might decide we're 'easy meat' for a court case!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iank
Thank you for the advice.
The inverted commas were in no way intended to suggest any underhandedness or anything of the sort, and if I have implied that, then I apologise unreservidly.
Like yourself, I have been a donor for many years, and I am extremely frustrated at the goings on of late.
Maybe I should quietly retire from venting my anger, and return to my knitting!
Kind regards
TSM
Thank you for the advice.
The inverted commas were in no way intended to suggest any underhandedness or anything of the sort, and if I have implied that, then I apologise unreservidly.
Like yourself, I have been a donor for many years, and I am extremely frustrated at the goings on of late.
Maybe I should quietly retire from venting my anger, and return to my knitting!
Kind regards
TSM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 54
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's an interesting one for the trustees to mull over .....
http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk...cc3(a)text.pdf
Can anyone spot any issues that may be cause for concern to the trustees ? I wonder if they ever read this ?
http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk...cc3(a)text.pdf
Can anyone spot any issues that may be cause for concern to the trustees ? I wonder if they ever read this ?