RAF Cosford no longer getting a VC10?
 

It's being reported elsewhere that XR808, the VC10 earmarked for preservation at the RAF Museum, Cosford is instead heading to Bruntingthorpe next week. Anyone know what's the story on this?
https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Lit...ocation=stream
News

Believe its various factors, correct fire cover, headwind and trees on the approach.

If it could get into Brooklands surely it could make Cosworth?

There was a low approach and overshoot at Cosford a week or so ago - maybe that illuminated the Too Difficult caption.

Fascinating; BA managed to get a 707 into Cosford and the great selling point of the VC-10 always was that it could handle airports that the 707 couldn't ever handle.

I simply cannot believe that the RAF cannot get a VC-10 into Cosford.

The whole thing smells of LMF or have Elfin Safety taken over our Armed Forces and, if so, haven't our leaders got any balls any more?

In fact, having thought about this for a few minutes, BA managed to fly VC-10 G-ARVM into Cosford without any difficulty.

One of my old Argosy mates (the late Pete Moore) flew the last Vanguard G-APEP into just a few hundred metres of remaining runway at Brooklands. He told me that he and Garry practiced at EMA at light weights with FULL reverse and MAX braking on touch down before doing the deed.

After all, the aircraft is never going to fly again.

I have also accomplished "one way" arrivals in the past when I was in the RAF so I don't understand the problem.

Perhaps, with all the outsourcing that goes on nowadays in the military, we could ask BA to have another go?

"haven't our leaders got any balls any more?"

Hit the nail on the head there then!

JW we will get together and do it. We just need a flight engineer. I have many hundreds of hours on 808. Just at JNB on the way back home to Bots will look at my log books when I get back and see what adventures we had together.

Get Ryanair to fly it in - they thumped today's arrival into La Rochelle pretty hard!

Get the Daily Mail on the case. I can just see the headline now:

"Runway is long enough for British Airways, but too short for us, says RAF" :O

"One of my old Argosy mates (the late Pete Moore) flew the last Vanguard G-APEP into just a few hundred metres of remaining runway at Brooklands. He told me that he and Garry practiced at EMA at light weights with FULL reverse and MAX braking on touch down before doing the deed."

A superb piece of flying, captured on film and now on You Tube:

If the story is true, it's an utter disgrace. Clearly, Cosford can take a VC10 easily enough and many of the museum aircraft flew in directly without any difficulty (including the BA VC10 as has been mentioned). If there is now some issue, then it's some ghastly H&S problem or insurance, or some other modern-day regulation.

What have we come to? An aircraft designed for short runways can no longer land on a short runway. The RAF Museum can only collect aircraft providing that they're small enough, and the VC10 is not worthy of preservation because it's simply too big?

Where's my passport and where's the taxi...

I have flown several 747's into Cambridge when Marshall's were fitting the new IFE. I always managed to stop before taxiway D which goes to the Marshall's hangar. The landing distance to taxiway D is 1100m. The LDA at Cosford is 1141m.
I've flown both the VC10 and 747 (in fact, I've only flown the VC10 and 747) and I know that the VC10 can land on a shorter runway than the 747.

It's a very sad business. It was barely plausible that the Nimrod wasn't able to fly in to Cosford but the VC10 is just absurd, especially when it's already been done quite easily before.

But it raises a question over the RAF Museum's position. If this issue is going to affect the aircraft types that are preserved then where will it end? Will future exhibits be turned down in this fashion, just because Cosford's runway is perceived as being too short? What kind of logic is this for a nationally-important museum?

JW411



All well and good, sounds wonderful. I've also thought about this for a few minutes - didn't your late chum drop it in short and end up rolling through the rough at Brooklands?

Big holes in the ground, big holes in the approach briefing, big holes in its execution.

All's well that ends well could I suppose be used as a defence, but this particular crew were nevertheless very lucky. The arrival could easily have been something of an even greater embarrassment.

And before you ask (as in the past you have) : could I have done better?

Yes. I'd have landed on the runway. But I wouldn't have worn my cap for the post-op pictures. Pilots don't need a cap to be a pilot - but they do need to land on the runway and stay out of the rough. There are no excuses.

Have to say that I was surprised at the Youtube clip when I first saw it. Showing the landing at Brooklands was great but it did seem a little ill-advised to show how the pilot had under-shot, and then to have the crew proudly posing beside the tree holes was even more questionable. I guess it's symptomatic of all the Youtube, Facebook and Twitter stuff that people post... and then realise that they've just broadcast/published. I never understand how people don't seem to grasp this.

As for the VC10, I think it would be fascinating to hear the official reasons why it cannot be landed at Cosford. The runway is within the VC10's specs, one VC10 has already landed there easily, they can provide crash/rescue crew... so what, exactly, is their excuse? One assumes it's some awful H&S ruling but I'd love to know what.

Yes, I think it would have been better if the Vanguard clip on You Tube had not included the bit about the holes-detracts from an otherwise super piece of film of the final landing of the very last of one of my favourite aircraft of all time.

In the video version I saw a few years back, the crew could be heard saying was it such a good idea them being filmed near the holes and the cameraman (?) saying 'don't worry you're amongst friends'. As to who 'could' have landed on the runway or not, we will never know, you're only as good as you are on the day.

It's a sad day that the VC10 is coming to the end of it's working life, that's one thing that we can all agree on.



SHJ

Did not the vandals at Hendon scrap a Beverley ?

From what I can gather the RAF did not relinquish ownership of the Beverley. As they did not own it Hendon were unable to take any action to prevent it corroding away. It eventually became structurally dangerous and the was when it was scrapped.

It was a pity; I knew the bloke who flew it in to what was effectively a building site.