Vulcan XH 558 Threads (merged)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unbelievable!!
No correct that - entirely believable from this bunch.
From the announcements made at Waddington (3?) over the course of the saturday it was categorically not TVOC's fault and they were not to blame for the oversight.
Apart from the oversight of MANAGING the project effectively of course.
Or the oversight to perhaps let the punters who were planning to travel to Waddington to make up their own minds whether it was worth taking the risk that XH558 might not fly by publicising this on the Friday. No doubt the crowd numbers would have been down but they would have earned some respect form the public (particularly me) if they had been honest, rather than the disdain felt now.
I still have yet to see XH558 in the air. I have now given up chasing her around the country only to be disappointed. If I ever see her flying it will be because she happens to be somewhere that I am visiting rather than me making any efforts to go and see her.
No correct that - entirely believable from this bunch.
From the announcements made at Waddington (3?) over the course of the saturday it was categorically not TVOC's fault and they were not to blame for the oversight.
Apart from the oversight of MANAGING the project effectively of course.
Or the oversight to perhaps let the punters who were planning to travel to Waddington to make up their own minds whether it was worth taking the risk that XH558 might not fly by publicising this on the Friday. No doubt the crowd numbers would have been down but they would have earned some respect form the public (particularly me) if they had been honest, rather than the disdain felt now.
I still have yet to see XH558 in the air. I have now given up chasing her around the country only to be disappointed. If I ever see her flying it will be because she happens to be somewhere that I am visiting rather than me making any efforts to go and see her.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bemusing.
According to Vulcan to the sky news
ie the CAA are not yet satisfied that the MA explanation of why the checks can be got round before a Permit To Fly can be issued.
Since, as yet, the CAA is not satisfied with MA's explanation, there clearly is a question, at least for now, in the CAA's mind.
According to Vulcan to the sky news
This report does not need to contain the results of the inspections, only the reasons for them, how they would be carried out or alternatively mitigated.
There is no question that XH558 is in any way structurally unsafe.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by airsound
In simple terms, Marshall Aerospace is , effectively, the operator of XH558. VTST can only do anything to the aircraft, including fly it, on direct authorisation from Marshall Aerospace.
Nutloose - you just don't get it, do you.
VTST cannot tell Marshalls what to do. What they did do was to remind them on several documented occasions what was required before the Permit to Fly could be reissued. As Dr Pleming's message suggests, during the week running up to the show, they were assured more than once that there would not be a problem with the reissue. In fact, VTST specifically asked if it was practical to let the aircraft launch from Brize. Once again they were reassured.
And as far as not letting people know is concerned, this didn't all finally crystallise until late Friday evening. And even then, at that stage, it wasn't seen as definitely fatal to XH558's flying appearance. A senior member of VTST staff even went down to Gatwick on Saturday, hoping to be able to pick up the Permit. When he got there, he found that the CAA were still unable to issue the Permit.
And, as I have said before - no one in VTST is blaming the CAA for doing their job.
airsound
who is as you've noted, merely
PS jindabyne - happy to receive a pm. Or an email, if you want. It's not hard to find my email. I'm not anonymous here.
VTST cannot tell Marshalls what to do. What they did do was to remind them on several documented occasions what was required before the Permit to Fly could be reissued. As Dr Pleming's message suggests, during the week running up to the show, they were assured more than once that there would not be a problem with the reissue. In fact, VTST specifically asked if it was practical to let the aircraft launch from Brize. Once again they were reassured.
And as far as not letting people know is concerned, this didn't all finally crystallise until late Friday evening. And even then, at that stage, it wasn't seen as definitely fatal to XH558's flying appearance. A senior member of VTST staff even went down to Gatwick on Saturday, hoping to be able to pick up the Permit. When he got there, he found that the CAA were still unable to issue the Permit.
And, as I have said before - no one in VTST is blaming the CAA for doing their job.
airsound
who is as you've noted, merely
some person that stands on a dias (sic) with a mike (sic) in his hand
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because the link VTS link was so small I have copied it as is and adjusted the font to a size we can all read.
Vulcan Permit renewal Update
Monday, July 06, 2009 -
Following the announcement on Saturday that Vulcan XH558 would be unable to display at the RAF Waddington Airshow last weekend due to issues with the renewal of the aircraft’s annual Permit to Fly, the Vulcan to the Sky Trust (VTST) is doing all it can to ensure that XH558 returns to flight as soon as possible.
Robert Pleming, VTST Chief Executive: “On behalf of the Vulcan to the Sky Trust, I would like to apologise unreservedly for the huge disappointment felt by very many people, some of whom had traveled great distances, at the absence of the Vulcan from the flying display. The events leading to the cancellation of the Vulcan’s displays are deeply regrettable, and we will do everything we can to prevent this happening again at Waddington.”
Vulcan XH558 flies as a civilian aircraft, registration G-VLCN, under Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) regulations governing the operation of ex-military aircraft. The approved Engineering Authority for XH558 is Marshall of Cambridge Aerospace, which is responsible for all aspects of its airworthiness, including the application for the renewal of the Permit to Fly, due on 3rd July.
Following the success of the Pledge campaign in March, VTST contracted with Marshall Aerospace (MA) for the work needed to renew the aircraft’s Permit, including the annual service, and the test flight. However, during the original Major Service, a number of structural inspections were deferred and it was agreed to carry these out on BAE Systems-owned Vulcan XM603 at Woodford. The CAA required these inspections to be completed by the time of renewal of the Permit.
It has not proved possible to carry out these inspections and following a meeting with CAA, MA agreed to prepare a justification for a further extension to the inspections. In the week prior to the expiry of the existing permit, MA remained confident that the Permit revalidation would be obtained in time, to the extent that a joint decision was made to launch XH558 from RAF Brize Norton on Thursday 2nd July to fly to RAF Waddington for the Airshow Press Preview.
Unfortunately, on Friday 3rd July, MA were informed by the CAA that the justification for deferring the inspections was inadequate and that the CAA would require a much more detailed explanation before the Permit would be renewed. This report would also need to be underwritten by BAE Systems. (This report does not need to contain the results of the inspections, only the reasons for them, how they would be carried out or alternatively mitigated. There is no question that XH558 is in any way structurally unsafe.)
The level of detail required by CAA and the need for endorsement by BAE Systems meant that this could not be provided without significant additional work. Despite discussions between MA, the CAA and BAE Systems that ran on late into Friday evening and the following morning, there was no mechanism found that could have allowed the Vulcan to display legally over the weekend. Since then, MA have had a team working to generate and gain approval of the required report, ready for review by BAE Systems and submission to the CAA.
VTST does not yet have a firm date from CAA on when the Vulcan will be allowed to fly again, but it has been led to believe that the delay will be days rather than any longer.
XH558 remains fully serviceable at RAF Waddington.
A further update will be issued when more is known.
For more information on this Press Release, please contact:
VTST - Richard Clarke:
07714 898548 / [email protected]
Monday, July 06, 2009 -
Following the announcement on Saturday that Vulcan XH558 would be unable to display at the RAF Waddington Airshow last weekend due to issues with the renewal of the aircraft’s annual Permit to Fly, the Vulcan to the Sky Trust (VTST) is doing all it can to ensure that XH558 returns to flight as soon as possible.
Robert Pleming, VTST Chief Executive: “On behalf of the Vulcan to the Sky Trust, I would like to apologise unreservedly for the huge disappointment felt by very many people, some of whom had traveled great distances, at the absence of the Vulcan from the flying display. The events leading to the cancellation of the Vulcan’s displays are deeply regrettable, and we will do everything we can to prevent this happening again at Waddington.”
Vulcan XH558 flies as a civilian aircraft, registration G-VLCN, under Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) regulations governing the operation of ex-military aircraft. The approved Engineering Authority for XH558 is Marshall of Cambridge Aerospace, which is responsible for all aspects of its airworthiness, including the application for the renewal of the Permit to Fly, due on 3rd July.
Following the success of the Pledge campaign in March, VTST contracted with Marshall Aerospace (MA) for the work needed to renew the aircraft’s Permit, including the annual service, and the test flight. However, during the original Major Service, a number of structural inspections were deferred and it was agreed to carry these out on BAE Systems-owned Vulcan XM603 at Woodford. The CAA required these inspections to be completed by the time of renewal of the Permit.
It has not proved possible to carry out these inspections and following a meeting with CAA, MA agreed to prepare a justification for a further extension to the inspections. In the week prior to the expiry of the existing permit, MA remained confident that the Permit revalidation would be obtained in time, to the extent that a joint decision was made to launch XH558 from RAF Brize Norton on Thursday 2nd July to fly to RAF Waddington for the Airshow Press Preview.
Unfortunately, on Friday 3rd July, MA were informed by the CAA that the justification for deferring the inspections was inadequate and that the CAA would require a much more detailed explanation before the Permit would be renewed. This report would also need to be underwritten by BAE Systems. (This report does not need to contain the results of the inspections, only the reasons for them, how they would be carried out or alternatively mitigated. There is no question that XH558 is in any way structurally unsafe.)
The level of detail required by CAA and the need for endorsement by BAE Systems meant that this could not be provided without significant additional work. Despite discussions between MA, the CAA and BAE Systems that ran on late into Friday evening and the following morning, there was no mechanism found that could have allowed the Vulcan to display legally over the weekend. Since then, MA have had a team working to generate and gain approval of the required report, ready for review by BAE Systems and submission to the CAA.
VTST does not yet have a firm date from CAA on when the Vulcan will be allowed to fly again, but it has been led to believe that the delay will be days rather than any longer.
XH558 remains fully serviceable at RAF Waddington.
A further update will be issued when more is known.
For more information on this Press Release, please contact:
VTST - Richard Clarke:
07714 898548 / [email protected]
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 53
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airsound,
I'm sorry you think that it's all MA and not VTST. The bootom line is they run this "business" and have simply failed miserably, again.
MA are clearly responsible for many things but the client, VTST have to carry the can and as CEO Dr P has to take responsibility. However, given that the a/c and the trust are already mortgaged to the hilt to MA forever they doubtless call the shots instead of the other way round.
I wanted to believe that they had "learned lessons" about many things but its patently untrue.
Their PR is yet again woeful and their disregard for the paying public is astonishing given the utter claptrap issued about the Vulcan factor and their success of delivering a flying Vulcan.
This issue hasn't simply arisen out of the blue and if I ran any of my businesses by failing to have the key ingredient fit for purpose (and including paperwork) I would be bust in a wet weekend.
For once the trustees should grow a spine, call this to account and act instead of the usual sycophantic ramblings. How much of a hole is this going to put in the finances for the next whipround?
Time for Dr P to take the rap and resign, now.
I'm sorry you think that it's all MA and not VTST. The bootom line is they run this "business" and have simply failed miserably, again.
MA are clearly responsible for many things but the client, VTST have to carry the can and as CEO Dr P has to take responsibility. However, given that the a/c and the trust are already mortgaged to the hilt to MA forever they doubtless call the shots instead of the other way round.
I wanted to believe that they had "learned lessons" about many things but its patently untrue.
Their PR is yet again woeful and their disregard for the paying public is astonishing given the utter claptrap issued about the Vulcan factor and their success of delivering a flying Vulcan.
This issue hasn't simply arisen out of the blue and if I ran any of my businesses by failing to have the key ingredient fit for purpose (and including paperwork) I would be bust in a wet weekend.
For once the trustees should grow a spine, call this to account and act instead of the usual sycophantic ramblings. How much of a hole is this going to put in the finances for the next whipround?
Time for Dr P to take the rap and resign, now.
andrewmcharlton
Perhaps you weren't at Farnborough last year. Or at several other shows. Including Cosford this year, where the show exceeded last year's "capacity" crowd of 54,000 by 4,000. Because of that they closed the gates at 1230, and had to turn people round on the motorway, and refund a lot of prepaid tickets. OK the wx was good, but it's been good before. That was the Vulcan effect. I know - I was there.
So what have they delivered, if not a flying Vulcan? That's exactly what they have delivered, despite the efforts of all the naysayers and doom mongers.
airsound
the utter claptrap issued about the Vulcan factor
the utter claptrap issued about .... their success of delivering a flying Vulcan.
airsound
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,830 Likes
on
1,208 Posts
Nutloose - you just don't get it, do you.
VTST cannot tell Marshalls what to do. What they did do was to remind them on several documented occasions what was required before the Permit to Fly could be reissued. As Dr Pleming's message suggests, during the week running up to the show, they were assured more than once that there would not be a problem with the reissue. In fact, VTST specifically asked if it was practical to let the aircraft launch from Brize. Once again they were reassured.
And as far as not letting people know is concerned, this didn't all finally crystallise until late Friday evening. And even then, at that stage, it wasn't seen as definitely fatal to XH558's flying appearance. A senior member of VTST staff even went down to Gatwick on Saturday, hoping to be able to pick up the Permit. When he got there, he found that the CAA were still unable to issue the Permit.
And, as I have said before - no one in VTST is blaming the CAA for doing their job.
airsound
VTST cannot tell Marshalls what to do. What they did do was to remind them on several documented occasions what was required before the Permit to Fly could be reissued. As Dr Pleming's message suggests, during the week running up to the show, they were assured more than once that there would not be a problem with the reissue. In fact, VTST specifically asked if it was practical to let the aircraft launch from Brize. Once again they were reassured.
And as far as not letting people know is concerned, this didn't all finally crystallise until late Friday evening. And even then, at that stage, it wasn't seen as definitely fatal to XH558's flying appearance. A senior member of VTST staff even went down to Gatwick on Saturday, hoping to be able to pick up the Permit. When he got there, he found that the CAA were still unable to issue the Permit.
And, as I have said before - no one in VTST is blaming the CAA for doing their job.
airsound
You still do not get it do you, the VOC is responsible at the end of the day for both ensuring that the work has been carried out and then when the work has not been ensuring it is. the buck stops with the management of the Aircraft........ they have a duty to the public that are paying their wages and for the Aircraft, this they have AGAIN failed to do so should resign and a stronger management team appointed that will get things done.
The biggest failing was not announcing earlier that there may be a chance it would not be able to fly and giving those that are paying their wages the opportunity to decide whether to travel of not.....
And 4 days to draft a letter blaming everyone else for their short comings, as I said before, have the inspection issues been resolved? or are you still trying to defer them, in which case how can you say the aircraft is Servicable at Waddington with the CAA saying it still needs these things done, and hence no permit as of yet??
RESIGN
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 53
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was at Farnborough, I was also at 4 days when it went tech and I can live with that.
However, that is history and the fact is it's on the ground through failure to carry out required checks and testing and whichever way you splice it it is not currently able to fly.
They allowed people to travel, incur substantial costs when they knew it could not display. They have waited days to publish a statement which is no compensation to anyone who has paid good money in difficult times and they still look to blame someone else.
I echo Nutloose and everyone else's remarks, it's a bloody shambles and nobody is prepared to take responsibility. You talk about naysayers and doommongers and if you like you can count me in them, but not one of them has tried to stop her flying just continually questioned those in charge and their efforts, this is yet another clear demonstration of their total ineptitude at running a public attraction that the public pay for.
I note your commentary at Cosford I think at the same naysayers and doommongers which I think is uncalled for given that many of them, me included were there to support it and pay good money for the priviledge. I see you're now signing off as their commentator as opposed to a simple supporter and well wisher so I can't expect any objectivity or impartiality.
Imagine going to an F1 race and discovering they can't race for lack of a license or a concert without a singer? Stupid isn't it but it seems in the context of 558 everything and everyone is blameless and forgiven. When you look through the rose tinted spectacles be sure to notice the plane is still on the ground and thousands are upset, angry and disappointed at being let down, again.
However, that is history and the fact is it's on the ground through failure to carry out required checks and testing and whichever way you splice it it is not currently able to fly.
They allowed people to travel, incur substantial costs when they knew it could not display. They have waited days to publish a statement which is no compensation to anyone who has paid good money in difficult times and they still look to blame someone else.
I echo Nutloose and everyone else's remarks, it's a bloody shambles and nobody is prepared to take responsibility. You talk about naysayers and doommongers and if you like you can count me in them, but not one of them has tried to stop her flying just continually questioned those in charge and their efforts, this is yet another clear demonstration of their total ineptitude at running a public attraction that the public pay for.
I note your commentary at Cosford I think at the same naysayers and doommongers which I think is uncalled for given that many of them, me included were there to support it and pay good money for the priviledge. I see you're now signing off as their commentator as opposed to a simple supporter and well wisher so I can't expect any objectivity or impartiality.
Imagine going to an F1 race and discovering they can't race for lack of a license or a concert without a singer? Stupid isn't it but it seems in the context of 558 everything and everyone is blameless and forgiven. When you look through the rose tinted spectacles be sure to notice the plane is still on the ground and thousands are upset, angry and disappointed at being let down, again.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Land of the Bumbly Boo
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Airsound, you'd perhaps like to review
CAP733
Chapter 5
Section 1.2
First sentence tells you all you need to know, and, at who's feet any 'blame' lies. It shouldn't come as a great surprise. The second part of the para just sort of emphahsises a few elements too. I's crossed, T's dotted, that sort of thing.
CAP733
Chapter 5
Section 1.2
First sentence tells you all you need to know, and, at who's feet any 'blame' lies. It shouldn't come as a great surprise. The second part of the para just sort of emphahsises a few elements too. I's crossed, T's dotted, that sort of thing.
Originally Posted by airsound
In simple terms, Marshall Aerospace is , effectively, the operator of XH558
I thought MA were the contracted, appointed licensed engineering support to TVOC as decreed as suitable by the CAA/BAe?
The OC in TVOC standing for 'operating company' IIRC, therefore as everyone with some sense on here rightly points out, that's where the buck stops.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North Cornwall
Age: 73
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought MA were the contracted, appointed licensed engineering support to TVOC as decreed as suitable by the CAA/BAe?
The OC in TVOC standing for 'operating company' IIRC, therefore as everyone with some sense on here rightly points out, that's where the buck stops.
The OC in TVOC standing for 'operating company' IIRC, therefore as everyone with some sense on here rightly points out, that's where the buck stops.
As a born again cynic I can't help but wonder if Marshalls are still owed rather alot of money. We were told earlier this year when the fundraising was going on that Marshalls was one of those who hadn't been paid. The sum of £1.4m was quoted as being owed to Waltons(the landlords) and Marshalls.
I hope that Mr Pleming hasn't exhausted the goodwill of Marshalls in working for the promise of payment.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West Yorkshire Zone
Posts: 976
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
No retraction here, they allowed people to travel to the show and waste their money knowing full well that the Permit would have expired,
Reply
Spot On - Nutloose!!!
We drove the 74 miles on saturday to Waddo - what for??
Not much at all really, But we cannot complain as we ALLOWED for all this and elected to sit in a field for nowt!!
Even that was merely impossible as the MOD & civilian police were acting like they worked for the 'God Squad' blocking every country lane off upto 4 miles away with cones totally OTT policing.
But I didn't expect to be told that the reason was because of the CAA not permitting the display!!!
We didn't know anything until about 14.45 when the news was spread round to everyone's dissapointment, The FRA Falcons & Hawks had just finished their display.
2 Of my friends paid to go into the show, I have spoken to one and he says that may be the last time he goes to the show??
He came home dissapointed, And said that they were told on the coach at about 10.30 am that XH558 was not running.
If they had known earlier, He said that the coach may have turned round and gone back up the A15??
It was the quitest Airshow that I have ever been to, An average of 1 display every 45 minutes.
We only really went for the Vulc, The FRA display & the Typhoon, But expected to see a Herc a Seaking & the Sentry flying.
But nothing in that category.
The Typhoon was good to excellent I would say, But not a long display compared to the others.
ELVINGTON - sprung to my mind??
Waddington is turning into another Elvington which was once a good day out with a good and sometimes excellent static & flying display.
But over the last few years until Elvington finishing, It was not worth paying 14.00 to go thru the gate to see just a handful of training aircraft.
Obviously XH558 has to be run by the book cover, But surely the CAA could have either sent somebody or arranged for certification to be done on the saturday??
I don't know nor have had time to read the 'Exact' chain of events so I am only asking the questions??
I was told that XH558 group would lose 8,000 pound a day for the non display flying??
And on a seperate note I was told that Paul Millikin didn't want to be involved with the new group since his last flight in the 1990's fearing the potential problems within the operation.
Everybody was looking forward to the 4th July it came and went - And we a 'few thousand' of us went home with Red faces!!!
Not just because of the weather but because we had failed to watch XH 558 do what she is made to do - Fly.
These things happen, But typically they happen on a warm sunny day the 1st day of flight op's!!!
And likewise if the weather had been rubbish then vice versa.
There are hardly enough Airshows in the North now, And to have dissapointments like saturday just makes everybody concerned upset, Dissapointed & Angry.
I look forward to seeing XH558 at the next AVAILABLE Airshow in the north of England hum!!!!
For every 8 airshows in the south there are 2 in the north.
So choice is limited.
And Elvington - I have no idea what's happening there??
Ask Mr Ken C.
No retraction here, they allowed people to travel to the show and waste their money knowing full well that the Permit would have expired,
Reply
Spot On - Nutloose!!!
We drove the 74 miles on saturday to Waddo - what for??
Not much at all really, But we cannot complain as we ALLOWED for all this and elected to sit in a field for nowt!!
Even that was merely impossible as the MOD & civilian police were acting like they worked for the 'God Squad' blocking every country lane off upto 4 miles away with cones totally OTT policing.
But I didn't expect to be told that the reason was because of the CAA not permitting the display!!!
We didn't know anything until about 14.45 when the news was spread round to everyone's dissapointment, The FRA Falcons & Hawks had just finished their display.
2 Of my friends paid to go into the show, I have spoken to one and he says that may be the last time he goes to the show??
He came home dissapointed, And said that they were told on the coach at about 10.30 am that XH558 was not running.
If they had known earlier, He said that the coach may have turned round and gone back up the A15??
It was the quitest Airshow that I have ever been to, An average of 1 display every 45 minutes.
We only really went for the Vulc, The FRA display & the Typhoon, But expected to see a Herc a Seaking & the Sentry flying.
But nothing in that category.
The Typhoon was good to excellent I would say, But not a long display compared to the others.
ELVINGTON - sprung to my mind??
Waddington is turning into another Elvington which was once a good day out with a good and sometimes excellent static & flying display.
But over the last few years until Elvington finishing, It was not worth paying 14.00 to go thru the gate to see just a handful of training aircraft.
Obviously XH558 has to be run by the book cover, But surely the CAA could have either sent somebody or arranged for certification to be done on the saturday??
I don't know nor have had time to read the 'Exact' chain of events so I am only asking the questions??
I was told that XH558 group would lose 8,000 pound a day for the non display flying??
And on a seperate note I was told that Paul Millikin didn't want to be involved with the new group since his last flight in the 1990's fearing the potential problems within the operation.
Everybody was looking forward to the 4th July it came and went - And we a 'few thousand' of us went home with Red faces!!!
Not just because of the weather but because we had failed to watch XH 558 do what she is made to do - Fly.
These things happen, But typically they happen on a warm sunny day the 1st day of flight op's!!!
And likewise if the weather had been rubbish then vice versa.
There are hardly enough Airshows in the North now, And to have dissapointments like saturday just makes everybody concerned upset, Dissapointed & Angry.
I look forward to seeing XH558 at the next AVAILABLE Airshow in the north of England hum!!!!
For every 8 airshows in the south there are 2 in the north.
So choice is limited.
And Elvington - I have no idea what's happening there??
Ask Mr Ken C.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airsound
As you can see, the only people around here who don't get it are yourself and that bunch of incompetant fools managing this project.
It's quite fitting that you should pick up the point
'during the week running up to the show, they were assured more than once that there would not be a problem with the reissue'
and that is the sort of point that YOU don't get.
Take a look at the CAA website. It clearly states that the CAA require at least 15 working days to process all this stuff. And Pleming spent the week running up to Waddo asking MA is all was OK ?? Don't you think he should have perhaps picked up the phone a asked the CAA if everything was OK or are you not able to understand that?
What about the edit from the CAA 12 months ago about the NDT checks on 603. Did you and Pleming think that the CAA might just forget about it and let it go??
Your friend conned a great many people this past weekend, and many will never forgive him for that. It was shameful and disgraceful and yet you appear to condone it, continuing to blame everyone else.
I should start looking for a new job airsound, 'cos i can't see your services as the official Vulcan commentator bein g needed soon.
Winco
As you can see, the only people around here who don't get it are yourself and that bunch of incompetant fools managing this project.
It's quite fitting that you should pick up the point
'during the week running up to the show, they were assured more than once that there would not be a problem with the reissue'
and that is the sort of point that YOU don't get.
Take a look at the CAA website. It clearly states that the CAA require at least 15 working days to process all this stuff. And Pleming spent the week running up to Waddo asking MA is all was OK ?? Don't you think he should have perhaps picked up the phone a asked the CAA if everything was OK or are you not able to understand that?
What about the edit from the CAA 12 months ago about the NDT checks on 603. Did you and Pleming think that the CAA might just forget about it and let it go??
Your friend conned a great many people this past weekend, and many will never forgive him for that. It was shameful and disgraceful and yet you appear to condone it, continuing to blame everyone else.
I should start looking for a new job airsound, 'cos i can't see your services as the official Vulcan commentator bein g needed soon.
Winco
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winco
The CAA's web site clearly contains the following
"Following feedback from industry, the Applications and Approvals Department is delighted to announce the introduction of a new service designed to assist customers with urgent applications. To make an application under the service, please complete form Special Same Day Application Form."
It's on this page.
Permits to Fly | Airworthiness | Safety Regulation
I'm afraid that rather kills off your point about the dates of application, and your implication that the permit could never have been complated in time, as it apparently could have been completed on the day of application.
I really don't see what you are trying to achive, although, to be honest it is starting to look like a vendetta. You have made the same points numerous times, and I'm sure nothing will sway you from your opinion. But for what it's worth, apart from the possibility of poor communication with the public, VTTS/VOC seem to have done little wrong here.
There are questions that it would be good to have answered, (good becuase it's not a world ending event, as opposed to required, which is what you seem to think they should be) but shouting and screaming like you are is hardly going to make that happen quicker.
The CAA's web site clearly contains the following
"Following feedback from industry, the Applications and Approvals Department is delighted to announce the introduction of a new service designed to assist customers with urgent applications. To make an application under the service, please complete form Special Same Day Application Form."
It's on this page.
Permits to Fly | Airworthiness | Safety Regulation
I'm afraid that rather kills off your point about the dates of application, and your implication that the permit could never have been complated in time, as it apparently could have been completed on the day of application.
I really don't see what you are trying to achive, although, to be honest it is starting to look like a vendetta. You have made the same points numerous times, and I'm sure nothing will sway you from your opinion. But for what it's worth, apart from the possibility of poor communication with the public, VTTS/VOC seem to have done little wrong here.
There are questions that it would be good to have answered, (good becuase it's not a world ending event, as opposed to required, which is what you seem to think they should be) but shouting and screaming like you are is hardly going to make that happen quicker.
Airsound...you said
Don't VOC pay Marshalls? Doesn't that make VOC the customer?
I wonder if perhaps a change of leadership is needed at VOC to get a fresh approach to the running of this project. I doubt the National Lottery are too impressed either.
VTST cannot tell Marshalls what to do
I wonder if perhaps a change of leadership is needed at VOC to get a fresh approach to the running of this project. I doubt the National Lottery are too impressed either.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 53
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BJCC,
That's all well and dandy except they were not compliant with the requirements which were clearly set down. Try going for a same day passport and telling them your not holding all the documents, gues what, they just say no faster and charge you more money for the priviledge.
That is apart from being an aircraft operator in the airshow arean and haven't got a permit, can't fly to their only market, blew money they can't afford to blow and mislead and let down their financial suporters and fail to tell everyone honestly and openly why.
Possibility? Four days of silence then their statement; meanwhile, back on planet earth...
If the only purpose to your existence is to display aircraft at airshows it's pretty close for them at least.
That's all well and dandy except they were not compliant with the requirements which were clearly set down. Try going for a same day passport and telling them your not holding all the documents, gues what, they just say no faster and charge you more money for the priviledge.
VTTS/VOC seem to have done little wrong here
possibility of poor communication with the public
it's not a world ending event
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Derby UK
Age: 59
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ironic really how quick the VTST management are to claim success and all the plaudits when she flies,
yet when she doesn't its someone elses fault.
so all the achievements to get 558 back in the air are clearly the achievements of MA and nobody else then.
So what do TVOC actually do then??????
Oh apart from keeping the hangar clean and emotionally blackmailing the public for money every year.
not a bad job that for the salary.
and this is really sticking my head above the parapet.
it seems that the aircraft often "goes Tech" so i have to wonder just how safe and sound this aircraft actually is to fly at all.
How long before one of these minor faults that seem to happen so often turns flight critical during a display.
now thats what i call doom and naresaying
Geoff ( aka Joe Public )
should of added, that with 2.6 million quid sitting in the bank, VTST could of bought 603 from Bae-systems, chopped err up themselves, kept all the bits they needed and had a nice cockpit for the "village", and done the checks they needed for the permit.
or is that too obvious ??
yet when she doesn't its someone elses fault.
so all the achievements to get 558 back in the air are clearly the achievements of MA and nobody else then.
So what do TVOC actually do then??????
Oh apart from keeping the hangar clean and emotionally blackmailing the public for money every year.
not a bad job that for the salary.
and this is really sticking my head above the parapet.
it seems that the aircraft often "goes Tech" so i have to wonder just how safe and sound this aircraft actually is to fly at all.
How long before one of these minor faults that seem to happen so often turns flight critical during a display.
now thats what i call doom and naresaying
Geoff ( aka Joe Public )
should of added, that with 2.6 million quid sitting in the bank, VTST could of bought 603 from Bae-systems, chopped err up themselves, kept all the bits they needed and had a nice cockpit for the "village", and done the checks they needed for the permit.
or is that too obvious ??
Last edited by Bye; 7th Jul 2009 at 07:39.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wales
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re Marshalls - Is this not like slagging off your surgeon before going in for open heart surgery.
With all the vitriol flying about, I would not be suprised to see Marshalls terminating the agreement with TVOC. Then what ??
With all the vitriol flying about, I would not be suprised to see Marshalls terminating the agreement with TVOC. Then what ??
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North of Watford (Gap)
Age: 58
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rights and wrongs of the MA/TVOC/CAA sign-off are well discussed here, and I am not going to add to that.
I didn't go to Waddo, and I'm bloody glad that I didn't, given the reports here and elsewhere. I probably won't go again unless there is concrete evidence of improvement in the coming years.
My beef is with the PR. OK - a monumental all-time cock-up has occurred, and yes, you have an airfield full of expectant paying customers. A bit (well, quite a lot) of quick thinking is clearly called for. What do you do?
The answer is 'SOMETHING'.
Not 'NOTHING'.
As had been alluded to already, there would seem to have been nothing to stop a ground run, or two, to give the punters SOMETHING. Why was this not considered/done? By the sound of it, the schedule was hardly bursting, so finding a slot could not have been difficult and the wx was hardly unsuitable. Did they decide that they could save a bob or two on the fuel?
The punters could have had the noise, the howl, the ground-shaking reverberation, the barn-door aero-braking. I.e. SOMETHING.
A piss-poor show. By any standard.
I didn't go to Waddo, and I'm bloody glad that I didn't, given the reports here and elsewhere. I probably won't go again unless there is concrete evidence of improvement in the coming years.
My beef is with the PR. OK - a monumental all-time cock-up has occurred, and yes, you have an airfield full of expectant paying customers. A bit (well, quite a lot) of quick thinking is clearly called for. What do you do?
The answer is 'SOMETHING'.
Not 'NOTHING'.
As had been alluded to already, there would seem to have been nothing to stop a ground run, or two, to give the punters SOMETHING. Why was this not considered/done? By the sound of it, the schedule was hardly bursting, so finding a slot could not have been difficult and the wx was hardly unsuitable. Did they decide that they could save a bob or two on the fuel?
The punters could have had the noise, the howl, the ground-shaking reverberation, the barn-door aero-braking. I.e. SOMETHING.
A piss-poor show. By any standard.