Tyres O'Flaherty

thanks '903. I'll have a lie-in

Saab Dastard

Oooerrr - I hope that the parking charges aren't too bad!

SD

Vulcan 903

Let's hope TAG look kindly on the Vulcan during it's stay.

chevvron

Told him to use his brake 'chute.

SpringHeeledJack

Why does a brake change require a 2 week time frame ? Could that be down to a lack of spare parts and/or lack of engineers to do said repair ?


regards


SHJ

Delta15

Quote:
Sorry to report, but XH558 will be staying at Farnborough for a couple more weeks. They need to change a brake.
Why does a brake change require a 2 week time frame ? Could that be down to a lack of spare parts and/or lack of engineers to do said repair ?


regards


SHJ
==================================================

Grapevine has it that the manufacturer has to rebuild a new one ergo 2week lead time

Vulcan 903

It's a bit of both. The spares have been recently used for a change out, so the ones the OEM have need to be completed. Then you have to get our good friends MA down to sign the work off, then the crew together - some who are about to have a hard earned holiday. Then you also have to ensure there is room between the 20,000 cars at Bruntingthorpe to land.
So the aircraft will sit outside at FB for the time being.
The aircraft is still shaking down after it's rebuild, hopefully in 2009 it will get more action.

JEM60

Can anyone confirm that there is money for next year????

airsound

Sorry about a late reply, Vintage ATCO - and also JEM60
- but perhaps you didn't notice the link alongside the Beeb story, titled
Vulcan 'needs high flying backer', which explains it. (allowing for a little editing by the Beeb.)
BBC NEWS | UK | Vulcan 'needs high flying backer'

airsound

Blacksheep

I always wondered how they'd keep it flying on a commercial basis. That is to say, reliably appearing to order, wherever and whenever it is booked.

The answer seems to lie in the good old Vulcan reliability that I knew as ground crew. Without VOG support, regardless of how many bits you have in stock at main base, you simply can't.

JEM60

Thanks, Air sound. I see Dr. P describes it as a very successful sseason, but I think it missed around 50% of it's shows???.
Now I know that reliability is a very large factor in it's ability to attend, but it would be fair to say that it also disappointed quite a few Airshow customers by not showing. All us regular go-ers do, of course, realise the problems, but the general public may have felt that they were cheated somewhat and may not be so enthusiastic at turning up specifically to see it next year, assuming it still flies, which, with the best will in the world, would appear to be doubtful.
I have to say that I was very sceptical about 'the large sponsors coming on board as soon as it flies' statements, but I hope it keeps going, but I really think it is a vain hope these days.

Able Archer

I did hear there is a re org at the VOC office in a few weeks time. To be frank - when a company phones up offering £20,000 (because thats all they can afford) and gets told 'no it's £50,000 or we are not interested' then the rumoured re org is very long overdue.
I assume the Trustees don't get told this or maybe the Trustees lack backbone.
Lets hope for some fresh commerical direction, and with that might come (via very hard work) the money to keep on going? Lets hope they can do it eh?
What would the air crew do next year, if they did not have a Vulcan to fly!

Gulf4uk

hi

If you are in Farnborough you can see the Vulcan parked on A-SHED Tarmac
from The FAST Museum . Open Saturday and Sunday FREE .
There were loads of people all round it at lunchtime today with rumours
of a 1500 Departure Doing the rounds Sadly Never Happened .

Tony
Farnborough

robin

My problem is that I have walked round the Vulcan at Duxford and the one at Southend.

I want to see the Vulcan fly (and have donated to the Club). Yet each time this year I went to a display where it was billed, it failed due to technical problems.

I've said this before - I know how difficult the project has been and do appreciate the hard work and dedication of the staff, but this was possibly a project where management have let down the staff.

It was always going to be a challenge, but sponsors want a quick win, and that didn't happen. Now the 'crunch' has hit, and we'll have to see if anyone is going to step in at the last minute.

The Vulcan was a great sight, and I'm pleased she did fly, even if only briefly. My own preference would have been for Concorde to have been given the option and, I think, she might have had an easier time with sponsors,.

Here's hoping that 2009 season might see the Vulcan at more events, but.......

Tempsford

Could I ask how many LAE can certify the Vulcan by trade group? Is there an intention to increase this number and if this is not the case, what happens when any of the current LAE decide to call it a day?

It appears to be the case that in service, the Vulcan is labour intensive. It has just come off major maintenance and it was inevtiable that there would be teeething problems on flights following its return to service.

With this in mind, surely there should have been an idea as to how many LAE and spares that were required to support the aircraft based on the planned flying programme.

I have said it before on this site that getting the aircraft back in the air was a fantastic acheivement. Keeping it there will be just as difficult. The Vulcan needs its airshow revenue, without that the project will die.

Good luck to all concerned with the project, and I hope to see the Vulcan airworthy for many years to come.

Temps

kwh

I think that as long as it has to fly in a UK regulatory environment, without the kind of expensive engineering support that an airline can afford (and cost justify), it's a non-flier (literally, more often than not). Who is going to book the Vulcan next year on anything other than a 'Sale or Return' basis unless its airworthiness can be better guaranteed? What serviceability rate could it possibly achieve, even with MA techs on call and a dedicated engineering crew following it about in a chartered C130 full of spares? Would that optimal level of achievable serviceability be 'good enough' for an expensive-to-book airshow aircraft? If it wouldn't, why did nobody ask that question before they started the restoration project? If it would, how much would it cost and was that level of operational funding and sponsorship ever realistically achievable in anybody's wildest dreams? Again, if not, then why didn't anybody ask that question before they started the restoration project?

I don't just mean TVOC, by the way, although they should have done. If it was never a realistic proposition then the Heritage Lottery people have some questions that they need to answer.

Can the thing be mothballed until times are better or if it is parked back up in the hangar at Brunty is that it again without another multi-million-pound restoration project?

hurn

Lets not forget that the weather actually accounted for a number of no-shows this season as well.
A day at Duxford, Southport, and Leuchars were cancelled due to the weather en route or at the event, Fairford and Cosby being completely washed out altogether.

Besides, the main problem with the Vulcan isn't so much it going u/s, its the time it takes to get the parts and MA techs available to fix the problem. That unfortunately can take weeks.

I truly hope its able to fly next season, it would be a massive shame to have come this far only to be grounded after a handful of shows.

kwh

Yes, but that goes to the decision (did tey have a choice?) to have the aircraft certified as VFR capable only. We know that the plane used to be perfectly capable of operating independantly in zero visibility, over enemy territory because it used to do it as part of its operational role. It may not have its radar any more, but it didn't have GPS kit back when it was operational, either. Fairford was a bust because of the ground being waterlogged, but the other 'lost' weather shows were victims of weather at the take-off field or on transit routes weren't they? Clearly the Vulcan doesn't comply with some arcane regulation or other, or perhaps TVOC just didn't bother to fill in the form and apply for permission to do what the crew and the aircraft equipped for and capable of. So, why go for 'VFR only' on an aircraft that is going to have to fly a long way to a lot of its display venues at the mercy of the good old British weather?

hurn

I really don't know for sure why they're VFR only, and could only hazard a guess that it was maybe the quickest and most cost effective way of getting 558 back in the air.

There are ex TVOC engineers here who perhaps could shed more light on the subject.

That said, its not ideal, but perhaps will be addressed at some point if funding is forthcoming to continue flying.

bean

1. How many airshows are flown in IFR conditions?

2. The aircraft only has a permit to fly not a C of A. and would never be able
to aspire to one. To the best of my knowledge, aircraft with permits to
fly are all restricted to VMC coditions.: