XH558 hangar plans scrapped
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,073
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
XH558 hangar plans scrapped
Totally expected here, It just became another dead Vulcan languishing at an airfield at the end of its flying seasons. Wrong final destination too, somewhere like Elvington where she would have been accessible and able to run for the public was a sensible location, not a commercial airport.
Shame really and part of the Lottery funding was to have an end of game plan in place, one hopes it does not effect future aviation bids.
Perhaps they should have thought about funding when they bought that damned Canberra then lately the one for sale in the US to swop noses.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-60245294
Shame really and part of the Lottery funding was to have an end of game plan in place, one hopes it does not effect future aviation bids.
Perhaps they should have thought about funding when they bought that damned Canberra then lately the one for sale in the US to swop noses.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-60245294
Last edited by NutLoose; 5th Feb 2022 at 19:05.
Totally expected here, I just became another dead Vulcan languishing at an airfield at the end of its flying seasons. Wrong final destination too, somewhere like Elvington where she would have been accessible and able to run for the public was a sensible location, not a commercial airport.
So, no different to what they've ended up with at Doncaster then
Last accounts indicated VTS income was £2m......which is what they need to raise for the hangar..............but expenditure was £1.2m..........including £633,000 on advertising....astonishing.
At least had it gone to Elvington, there was a chance that once VTS got wound up (as it surely will eventually do sooner or later) there would have been a better chance of volunteer groups looking after it, than will be the case at Doncaster. The whole sorry situation was predicted by many, but VTS believed their own hype and BS. At least when they scrap it, it will provide decent parts for the other two live examples.
May as well cut the nose off and donate it to a museum to be preserved.
Then sell the rest to the scrappy. Might be able to sell the engines for conversion to power plants for generators.
Then sell the rest to the scrappy. Might be able to sell the engines for conversion to power plants for generators.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
I’d have thought because of its (presumably) good condition and individual history it might be better off being exchanged for one already in a museum.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,073
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
I don’t think you can pull a Vulcan apart to move it, I think the wing is all one bit and if you could I seriously doubt a wing would be road transportable as unlike a conventional wing that might fit length ways it’s triangular.
….
….
Last edited by NutLoose; 6th Feb 2022 at 03:41.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
If it was 'only' 6.5m to get it back to airworthy in the first place, and presuming most of that is still ok, how much for a bare minimum to 'hop' to someplace else more suitable?
I heard that a lot of original equipment was removed as part of the return to flight. Assuming that's correct, the ones already in museums may be more historically significant. It was, after all, built as a strategic bomber, not a display aircraft.
Indeed Pasta - it is now, sadly, neither fish nor fowl. The expensive mods needed for RtF make it a poor reference example, and the Vulcan has a disproportionately large surviving population (thanks to an enlightened disposal policy) including 3 ‘live’ airframes. Even when, inevitably, many become corroded hulks and are scrapped on H&S grounds, there are examples inside at Hendon, Duxford and Cosford. My opinion was always that Finni….er, Doncaster, was the wrong place for her once her flying days were done. Elvington is, probably, the most major UK collection without a Vulcan, but, perhaps, she would be a better fit at St Athan? Trouble is the cost of a road move would be prohibitive (unless VTTS used the remaining funds to pay for it) - I can’t realistically see a ferry permit being issued, even one flight only with gear locked down….
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh you're a depressing lot aren't you?
XH558 is in 'airworthy' condition (not that it's allowed to fly!) which is better than ALL other Vulcans. The engines are started and cycled to 'full...ish' power - which again is better than most other Vulcans.
The letter I received from the vulcan trustees was surprising - even as a supporter I wasn't aware of the deadline to raise the £2.4m needed (end of 2021) to continue with the lease and the initial hangar design etc. They raised half a million £ and there's the problem. There's an informative FAQ section on the vulcantothesky website explaining why Elvington & Bruntingthorpe weren't suitable.
I don't believe the Canberra was paid for by Vulcan funds...it's a separate project.
I am still hopeful the hangar project can be resurrected - even though it's unlikely...you never know!
In the letter they say there's a period of 'reflection' while they consider what to do next...I'm not hopeful but you never know...perhaps a wealthy benefactor will be found.
XH558 is in 'airworthy' condition (not that it's allowed to fly!) which is better than ALL other Vulcans. The engines are started and cycled to 'full...ish' power - which again is better than most other Vulcans.
The letter I received from the vulcan trustees was surprising - even as a supporter I wasn't aware of the deadline to raise the £2.4m needed (end of 2021) to continue with the lease and the initial hangar design etc. They raised half a million £ and there's the problem. There's an informative FAQ section on the vulcantothesky website explaining why Elvington & Bruntingthorpe weren't suitable.
I don't believe the Canberra was paid for by Vulcan funds...it's a separate project.
I am still hopeful the hangar project can be resurrected - even though it's unlikely...you never know!
In the letter they say there's a period of 'reflection' while they consider what to do next...I'm not hopeful but you never know...perhaps a wealthy benefactor will be found.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,073
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Read page7
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/d...155e212b366c51
Totall revenues for the YEAR up until 31 Oct 20 was £2,348,262 they spent £1,416,590! With a assets of £1,791,617, the name under the wing brought in £1.5 mil, what are they spending it all on?
They own the Canberra and it’s in the accounts so they by ypthe looks of it bought it.
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/d...155e212b366c51
Totall revenues for the YEAR up until 31 Oct 20 was £2,348,262 they spent £1,416,590! With a assets of £1,791,617, the name under the wing brought in £1.5 mil, what are they spending it all on?
They own the Canberra and it’s in the accounts so they by ypthe looks of it bought it.
Oh you're a depressing lot aren't you?
XH558 is in 'airworthy' condition (not that it's allowed to fly!) which is better than ALL other Vulcans. The engines are started and cycled to 'full...ish' power - which again is better than most other Vulcans
snip
I don't believe the Canberra was paid for by Vulcan funds...it's a separate project.
.
XH558 is in 'airworthy' condition (not that it's allowed to fly!) which is better than ALL other Vulcans. The engines are started and cycled to 'full...ish' power - which again is better than most other Vulcans
snip
I don't believe the Canberra was paid for by Vulcan funds...it's a separate project.
.
Engine runs are done on 558 I’d estimate once per quarter. The aircraft is stored externally (since 2017) and it’s rare any maintenance is visibly taking place outside the periods it’s prepared for engine runs. Whilst it occasionally taxi’s under its own power (low speed on taxiways), on engine run days, it’s unrealistic to think it will ever fly again. On its penultimate flight (after Shoreham) it was rolled twice, outside its design restrictions and permit to fly permission, which was not reported. With that operational ‘legacy’, I can’t imagine any authorising body/design authority ever stepping back up to assist a return to flight, even if a one off.
The Canberra purchase came as a surprise to VTTS members as I recall, it certainly raised questions about what funds paid for it, which I don’t recall being clearly answered.
https://vulcantothesky.org/news/reco...-with-cockpit/
It is owned by VTTS, and since 2017 at least has been stored externally. See G-CTTS.
https://www.caa.co.uk/aircraft-regis...search-g-info/
As far as a benefactor stepping in to save it, it’s not happened yet after searching for many years, why would one appear now?
edit : spellin
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,073
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
I believe they also may have bought another Canberra at auction in the US for the nose
here you go, so much for using the raised funding to hangar the Vulcan.
https://vulcantothesky.org/news/reco...-with-cockpit/
here you go, so much for using the raised funding to hangar the Vulcan.
https://vulcantothesky.org/news/reco...-with-cockpit/
VTS are still ably demonstrating an excellent ability in being about to squander cash on everything except the very thing they are supposed to be spending it on.......so why on earth would any benefactor give them any money?
I'm still astonished that anyone is still giving them any money after all this time. People need their heads examining.
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Feet grounded, head in the clouds
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
Read page7
Totall revenues for the YEAR up until 31 Oct 20 was £2,348,262 they spent £1,416,590! With a assets of £1,791,617, the name under the wing brought in £1.5 mil, what are they spending it all on?
They own the Canberra and it’s in the accounts so they by ypthe looks of it bought it.
Totall revenues for the YEAR up until 31 Oct 20 was £2,348,262 they spent £1,416,590! With a assets of £1,791,617, the name under the wing brought in £1.5 mil, what are they spending it all on?
They own the Canberra and it’s in the accounts so they by ypthe looks of it bought it.
https://register-of-charities.charit...Number=4004310