Vulcan to the Sky Trust to return Canberra WK163 to display flight
A memory stirred - as a kid managed one year to persuade the parents to take me to Farnborough. WK163 was flying and turned away from the crowd and had the rockets going - deafened my Mother for a week.
Is the Canberra less complicated than the Hunter? I recall a Naval officer whose background was helicopters being offered appointment as last OC360. "But I am a chopper pilot" quoth he. "No problem - 70 hours on Hunters, like half a Canberra, and then convert to the Canberra." And he did just that.
MidAir was operating the PR.9 OK for a couple of seasons until recently when they went tits-up. Such a shame that a buyer for that can't be found. Don't understand why VTTS just didn't buy that, it's ready to go and fly now it was half the price of the what they say it's going to cost to return WK to the air......
XH134, being a Canberra PR9, has powered flying controls on the ailerons and rudder. These systems are irreversible with no mechanical reversion so, in the highly unlikely event of a total hydraulics failure, the PR9 is unflyable. Unfortunately that probably puts XH134 in a category the CAA label as 'Complex'.
Every other mark of Canberra will have manual flying controls throughout and is therefore categorised as 'Intermediate'.
Every other mark of Canberra will have manual flying controls throughout and is therefore categorised as 'Intermediate'.
Originally Posted by H Peacock
XH134, being a Canberra PR9, has powered flying controls on the ailerons and rudder. These systems are irreversible with no mechanical reversion so, in the highly unlikely event of a total hydraulics failure, the PR9 is unflyable. Unfortunately that probably puts XH134 in a category the CAA label as 'Complex'.
???
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For as much regard as I personally have for the Canberra, I'm afraid it just doesn't have the 'wow-factor' - no matter
how well credentialled that particular airframe might be.
Then, as Mr Peacock mentioned above, it's a PR.9 with no manual reversion.
Give WK163 a nice polish, a touch of paint and display it in a museum, where it properly belongs.
I really don't think the VVTS have properly done their homework.
Anyway, if you're going to go to all that trouble and expense, better to get a Lightning up and flying on the display circuit.
South Africa have done it.
More chance of getting the punters (sorry, enthusiasts) to part with their pounds, I think.
.
how well credentialled that particular airframe might be.
Then, as Mr Peacock mentioned above, it's a PR.9 with no manual reversion.
Give WK163 a nice polish, a touch of paint and display it in a museum, where it properly belongs.
I really don't think the VVTS have properly done their homework.
Anyway, if you're going to go to all that trouble and expense, better to get a Lightning up and flying on the display circuit.
South Africa have done it.
More chance of getting the punters (sorry, enthusiasts) to part with their pounds, I think.
.
Last edited by Stanwell; 20th May 2016 at 13:23. Reason: add
Originally Posted by Stanwell
For as much regard as I personally have for the Canberra, I'm afraid it just doesn't have the 'wow-factor' - no matter
how well credentialled that particular airframe might be.
Then, as Mr Peacock mentioned above, it's a PR.9 with no manual reversion.
I really don't think the VVTS have properly done their homework.
how well credentialled that particular airframe might be.
Then, as Mr Peacock mentioned above, it's a PR.9 with no manual reversion.
I really don't think the VVTS have properly done their homework.
No.....VTTS have acquired the non-airworthy ex-Classic Flight B.2 WK163, the PR.9 WH134 is the one owned by MidAir and currently up for sale.
Pontius
re:Anson, Wiki is definitely wrong.
BAE Systems owns a C.19, G-AHKX, which is maintained and flown out of Old Warden, while another Mk.19, G-VROE, is owned by Air Atlantique/Classic Air Force/insert name here and flies in post war RAF training colours.
And they both look absolutely splendid!
re:Anson, Wiki is definitely wrong.
BAE Systems owns a C.19, G-AHKX, which is maintained and flown out of Old Warden, while another Mk.19, G-VROE, is owned by Air Atlantique/Classic Air Force/insert name here and flies in post war RAF training colours.
And they both look absolutely splendid!
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't the Vulcan pilots and the 'charity' staff take a sizeable salary for themselves...?
When i heard that, it put me off donating. It's paying for an Old Boy's flying club.
When i heard that, it put me off donating. It's paying for an Old Boy's flying club.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: OXON
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VTTS need an un-airworthy airframe with all the associated costs and labour to fund a return to flight to support the team they have assembled. A ready to fly Canberra would not generate the work and funds to support their business model
Originally Posted by bluetail
I read on another thread that they actually claim to have 6 Engines (Avon 100s) all with the correct paperwork to allow them to be used for flight.
All the struggles Atlantic had getting a replacement engine with valid paperwork for it in 2006/7 seem to have been got round....really?.
All the struggles Atlantic had getting a replacement engine with valid paperwork for it in 2006/7 seem to have been got round....really?.
I'm afraid I take everything that VTTS claim with a pinch of salt.
I dare say they do indeed have 6 x Avons, as a package with WK163, but to claim they are flight capable is hardly true, given the fact that CF/AA trawled the globe for some after the FOD damage.
This is from a new snippet posted by them elsewhere on the net back in 2012.
"From Steve Bridgewater at CAT/Airbase.
'Currently on “ a slow boat from California ” is a Rolls Royce Avon 109 engine that we are hoping and praying will be serviceable and allow Canberra WK163 to take to the skies once again!
As you are probably well aware the team has been working long and hard to source a replacement engine after WK163 suffered FOD ingestion on take-off from Coventry a few years ago. We have literally scoured the globe and explored numerous leads of inquiry but, until now, have drawn a blank.
However, we now seem to have sourced an engine which, on first inspection, looks useable. The paperwork (normally the major stumbling block) looks OK and the engine is inhibited. It is now en route to us for a full inspection and testing and, if all is well, we will aim to purchase it and install it in WK163.
There are, in fact, a couple of engines from the same source and if funds can be secured we will try to acquire at least one spare as well. '
Sadly, when that Avon 109 arrived at Coventry it was found it had sustained damage beyond repair during transit, and so, that's why WK163 has remained on the ground ever since.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Back in '57 I was a ten-year-old, living in Oz. Already becoming an aviation nut, I missed hearing of the altitude record. Wiki isn't much help. Can anyone point me to more information on this please?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
It might be a wow; if they install the rocket motor again! 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tapping the Decca, wondering why it's not working.
Age: 75
Posts: 166
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, belay that. Archimedes has the better link.
'a
Last edited by aerobelly; 21st May 2016 at 17:46. Reason: Beaten by better information, faster too.