No more Vulcan from next year
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Torque of the devil
Disagree. While of course the Mosquito is a superb and impressive aircraft, it is just another twin piston from the 1940s, many of which were almost as successful; crucially, from a preservation point of view, it doesn't look distinctive. The Vulcan, by comparison, is very big, very noisy and instantly recognizable to a large proportion of the population, being one of very few large deltas flying anywhere in the world. I would suggest that in this day and age, the Vulcan deserves the 'iconic' sobriquet more than the Mosquito.
I will NEVER accept the Mosquito was 'just' another' twin piston
...... I think we mean twin engined but even then it was more than JUST a twin engined aircraft. Its accomplishments are legendary and to me it accomplished more in one day than all the Vulcans achieved in their whole service. The Vulcan was an aircraft that looked different but does that justify the expense of keeping it airborne?If volunteers can raise the money to keep the Vulcan in the air then that would be very nice, but as a taxpayer and ex military, I would much prefer to see something like HMS Plymouth preserved as a reminder to the whole World of just what we can do when the chips are down.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Whitby, North Yorkshire
Age: 38
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say, i was sad to see the news article, having seen it at many displays and done many power checks next to xm655 at Wellesbourne!
Theres alsorts of aircraft special to this country's past and should all be preserved, however in the argument over government money - nah, they are far too busy giving billions to other countries better off than we are!
Im a guy who believes in destiny and things happening for a reason. Maybe the engine accidents happened for a reason as to ground the thing and prevent an even bigger disaster, god forbid.
Im more of a Spitfire guy myself and would rather see that than a vulcan at display, but i firmly believe any aircraft should be preserved for aslong as viable.
sad loss
Dan
Theres alsorts of aircraft special to this country's past and should all be preserved, however in the argument over government money - nah, they are far too busy giving billions to other countries better off than we are!
Im a guy who believes in destiny and things happening for a reason. Maybe the engine accidents happened for a reason as to ground the thing and prevent an even bigger disaster, god forbid.
Im more of a Spitfire guy myself and would rather see that than a vulcan at display, but i firmly believe any aircraft should be preserved for aslong as viable.
sad loss
Dan
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will NEVER accept the Mosquito was 'just' another' twin piston 
...... I think we mean twin engined but even then it was more than JUST a twin engined aircraft. Its accomplishments are legendary and to me it accomplished more in one day than all the Vulcans achieved in their whole service.
...... I think we mean twin engined but even then it was more than JUST a twin engined aircraft. Its accomplishments are legendary and to me it accomplished more in one day than all the Vulcans achieved in their whole service.
We'll never truly know, but perhaps the best accomplishment of the Vulcan (and its contemporaries) is the fact that we're still here today and its presence and abilities helped keep the Cold War from turning very hot.
Had things turned out badly I have no doubt it could have stuck a severe blow to the Soviet Union; but then we probably wouldn't be around having this discussion.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We'll never truly know, but perhaps the best accomplishment of the Vulcan (and its contemporaries) is the fact that we're still here today and its presence and abilities helped keep the Cold War from turning very hot.
Had things turned out badly I have no doubt it could have stuck a severe blow to the Soviet Union; but then we probably wouldn't be around having this discussion.
Had things turned out badly I have no doubt it could have stuck a severe blow to the Soviet Union; but then we probably wouldn't be around having this discussion.
I am sure our Royal Navy and their submariners might disagree with that observation and was the Cold War a case of boys with toys all trying to out bluff each other? 
How big a contribution would we have made to any nuclear holocaust as my thoughts are that it would have been very little to none as we would have been playing catch the missile within minutes of the kick-off?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How big a contribution would we have made to any nuclear holocaust as my thoughts are that it would have been very little to none as we would have been playing catch the missile within minutes of the kick-off?
It took the Sovs a long time to get a sizeable and credible ICBM capability (early '60s ?) by which time the Great White Detergent (love it!) was fairly long in the tooth.
The old Semyorkas which were the mainstay for a decade or more were all but useless as they were cryo-liquid fuelled, took many hours to prepare and could not be left on the pad fuelled for very long as the O2 boil-off was so great. A quick response weapon they most certainly were not. Quite apart from the logistical nightmare of the O2 supply problem itself (by long distance rail for many years which was also too cumbersome to work properly). See Chertok's "Rockets and People" for the exhaustive detail.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots.
It took the Sovs a long time to get a sizeable and credible ICBM capability (early '60s ?) by which time the Great White Detergent (love it!) was fairly long in the tooth.
The old Semyorkas which were the mainstay for a decade or more were all but useless as they were cryo-liquid fuelled, took many hours to prepare and could not be left on the pad fuelled for very long as the O2 boil-off was so great. A quick response weapon they most certainly were not. Quite apart from the logistical nightmare of the O2 supply problem itself (by long distance rail for many years which was also too cumbersome to work properly). See Chertok's "Rockets and People" for the exhaustive detail.
It took the Sovs a long time to get a sizeable and credible ICBM capability (early '60s ?) by which time the Great White Detergent (love it!) was fairly long in the tooth.
The old Semyorkas which were the mainstay for a decade or more were all but useless as they were cryo-liquid fuelled, took many hours to prepare and could not be left on the pad fuelled for very long as the O2 boil-off was so great. A quick response weapon they most certainly were not. Quite apart from the logistical nightmare of the O2 supply problem itself (by long distance rail for many years which was also too cumbersome to work properly). See Chertok's "Rockets and People" for the exhaustive detail.
Okee dokee, just big boys and their big toys and in fairness to the light blue, the Royal navy only came into the game in the second half. 1969 rings a bell and before then no submarine was capable of launching these types of missile 
I cannot see anyone having any of these early boats\submarines as a museum piece just because of what it may or may not have deterred. The older aircraft talked the talk and played a significant role in the winning of a World War so MUCH respect to those that designed and of course flew them.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the real appeal of the ol' tin triangle is that it harks back to the days when Britain had a world class Air Force, not the shell it has now and the Vulcan is the most iconic symbol of that era. The fact that the Vulcan never did anything operationally (yes, I know, a minor and rather random diversion in its dotage) is by the by, it is hugely symbolic of the days when we "could".
Plus, they "could" get one flying again. It "could" have been a Victor but it wasn't. Merit has nothing to do with it - if someone asked you to front a project to get a Beverley flying again you'd leap at the chance, wouldn't you, just because that was what was on offer. Any arguments about the "merit" of the Beverley over Mossies or Twin Mustangs is irrelevant if there are none of them on offer or available but there is a Beverley.
Yes, the Vulcan was a gloriously pointless and bombastic nostalgia that wasted millions in mismanagement and ineptitude but the money wasn't raised by someone resurrecting a Mossie was it? Perhaps it should have been but that's for another argument or another fund raiser to tackle.
May someone take on that challenge...but please, not a Beverley!
Plus, they "could" get one flying again. It "could" have been a Victor but it wasn't. Merit has nothing to do with it - if someone asked you to front a project to get a Beverley flying again you'd leap at the chance, wouldn't you, just because that was what was on offer. Any arguments about the "merit" of the Beverley over Mossies or Twin Mustangs is irrelevant if there are none of them on offer or available but there is a Beverley.
Yes, the Vulcan was a gloriously pointless and bombastic nostalgia that wasted millions in mismanagement and ineptitude but the money wasn't raised by someone resurrecting a Mossie was it? Perhaps it should have been but that's for another argument or another fund raiser to tackle.
May someone take on that challenge...but please, not a Beverley!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northumberland
Age: 52
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess there are two feathers in the bow of the Vulcan. To one generation, it was one of a fleet of aircraft tasked with delivering our share of a nuclear exchange with the former USSR. As such it may now in hindsight be considered a white elephant, as thankfully it was never tasked with such. Then to another generation it was the aeroplane which achieved what was previously considered impossible, and woke up Stanley airfield and it's surroundings early on a number of occassions.
Obviously we all know that this was only possible because of a much larger number of Victors. But how many of the people who pledged cash for 558 knew that.....?
Obviously we all know that this was only possible because of a much larger number of Victors. But how many of the people who pledged cash for 558 knew that.....?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feathers in a bow? What on earth does that mean? 
Methinks someone also doesn't know what "white elephant" means...How is the totally successful mainstay of one's defense policy ever a white elephant? It became obsolete as all technological gizmos eventually do, no matter how successful in their time which is quite a different thing.
Methinks someone also doesn't know what "white elephant" means...How is the totally successful mainstay of one's defense policy ever a white elephant? It became obsolete as all technological gizmos eventually do, no matter how successful in their time which is quite a different thing.
Last edited by Agaricus bisporus; 30th Oct 2012 at 14:14.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Over the hill (and far away)
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AB
Come on now, it's obvious; feathers in a bow is the same as a second string to your cap.
si
The Vulcan never carried out its potential tasks/missions; that is a measure of its success as part of the deterrent, hardly a "white elephant" to any generation, either contemporaneously or with hindsight. And dont' forget that the nuclear deternet also included those Victors you mention, along with Valiants, Canberras et al.
Mister B
Come on now, it's obvious; feathers in a bow is the same as a second string to your cap.
si
The Vulcan never carried out its potential tasks/missions; that is a measure of its success as part of the deterrent, hardly a "white elephant" to any generation, either contemporaneously or with hindsight. And dont' forget that the nuclear deternet also included those Victors you mention, along with Valiants, Canberras et al.
Mister B
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northumberland
Age: 52
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The feather in the bow remark was simply a play on words. Used to demonstrate you don't have to have feathers in caps, or strings in bows. If you want a feather in your bow, that's up to you, it's your bow.
Just as people who don't believe we ever needed a nuclear deterent, may still believe the Vulcan to be worth their donations. Or people who didn't agree with the Falkland Islands conflict can still acknowledge what was achieved by the Vulcan.
Though it is true, I don't understand the meaning of the term 'White Elephant'. As an elephant being white would be very useful. It wouldn't need such large ears.....
Just as people who don't believe we ever needed a nuclear deterent, may still believe the Vulcan to be worth their donations. Or people who didn't agree with the Falkland Islands conflict can still acknowledge what was achieved by the Vulcan.
Though it is true, I don't understand the meaning of the term 'White Elephant'. As an elephant being white would be very useful. It wouldn't need such large ears.....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Over the hill (and far away)
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
si
If you really don't know what is meant by "white elephant", the general accepted wisdom is:
"A burdensome possession; creating more trouble than it is worth."
For once, Wikipedia gives a reasonable explanation for the origin of the phrase.
If you've ever been to a village fete and seen the article on offer on White Elephant stall, you would get the general picture.
I must confess that I don't quite follow your thinking on feathers and bows and word play; is it some sort of existentialist reference?
Mister B
If you really don't know what is meant by "white elephant", the general accepted wisdom is:
"A burdensome possession; creating more trouble than it is worth."
For once, Wikipedia gives a reasonable explanation for the origin of the phrase.
If you've ever been to a village fete and seen the article on offer on White Elephant stall, you would get the general picture.
I must confess that I don't quite follow your thinking on feathers and bows and word play; is it some sort of existentialist reference?
Mister B
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northumberland
Age: 52
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mister B
To a degree it is indeed a reference to the existentialist way of thinking, which is becoming more prevalent in society. In that people are now more likely to form none conformist opinions. I used the term 'white elephant' as an example, of a term which has been used for generations to describe items such as you described at the village fete. Whilst some may consider the UK's nuclear deterent to be no more than then an expensive burden, others may consider it to be as useful as being a reflectiive colour whilst walking the African plains. Just as someone may well purchase an item off the stall at the fete, in the belief that the item has a use.
My point on the thread was, regardless of anyone's opinion on the usefulness of the V-force during the Cold War, they may recognise the Vulcan's (and the Victor's) contribution to the coventional conflict fought in the South Atlantic, and as such may have chosen to donate towards 558's restoration. Which they may not have chosen to do, had the aircraft only operated in one role, which they either had little knowledge of, or didn't believe in.
To a degree it is indeed a reference to the existentialist way of thinking, which is becoming more prevalent in society. In that people are now more likely to form none conformist opinions. I used the term 'white elephant' as an example, of a term which has been used for generations to describe items such as you described at the village fete. Whilst some may consider the UK's nuclear deterent to be no more than then an expensive burden, others may consider it to be as useful as being a reflectiive colour whilst walking the African plains. Just as someone may well purchase an item off the stall at the fete, in the belief that the item has a use.
My point on the thread was, regardless of anyone's opinion on the usefulness of the V-force during the Cold War, they may recognise the Vulcan's (and the Victor's) contribution to the coventional conflict fought in the South Atlantic, and as such may have chosen to donate towards 558's restoration. Which they may not have chosen to do, had the aircraft only operated in one role, which they either had little knowledge of, or didn't believe in.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC News - Vulcan Bomber XH558: 'Grace and style' in the sky
XH558 is the final airworthy aircraft of its type and has been admired by thousands of people each year at air shows as a result. But soon it too could be grounded like all those before it.
The "tin triangle", which is more than 50 years old, needs "challenging modifications" to both wings which the trust that owns it has decided cannot be funded.
The Leicestershire-based Vulcan To The Sky trust, which bought the aircraft in 2005, says escalating costs and limited engine life mean soon it will be confined to the runway for limited displays.
XH558 is the final airworthy aircraft of its type and has been admired by thousands of people each year at air shows as a result. But soon it too could be grounded like all those before it.
The "tin triangle", which is more than 50 years old, needs "challenging modifications" to both wings which the trust that owns it has decided cannot be funded.
The Leicestershire-based Vulcan To The Sky trust, which bought the aircraft in 2005, says escalating costs and limited engine life mean soon it will be confined to the runway for limited displays.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Should you search for Plan Addington you will find a much earlier instance of an operational deployment which again had a deterrent effect far beyond its actual military capability.
the Mosquito accomplished more in one day than all the Vulcans achieved in their whole service.
I don't want to fall out with you over this, but which day in particular are you thinking of? I know you (probably) weren't being that literal, but that's quite a claim you're making.
The Vulcan was an aircraft that looked different but does that justify the expense of keeping it airborne?
