Bruntingthorpe Shackleton news?

I for one found that very interesting. Thanks for taking the time to outline your approach. I wish you well with the return to flight. It will be great achievement when you get there.

You David think this a priority whilst others such as the shackleton group that Rich is involved with May have other ideas. Rich… His high on your priority list is finding a hangar for the shackleton and if it’s not your number one priority why is it not? I’d be fascinated to hear the other side on this if you have the time.

Its high on the list but not essential.

We need a hangar for certain work (its a CAA requirement), and will for the major service. However, unless our finances improve to the point we pull in the same kind of money as the Vulcan we will probably just look to hangar the aircraft for the essential works and expand it to cover all winter if possible – much like Sally B, or Air Atlantique’s DC3’s/DC6. This was also the kind of life the Shackleton was used to during its service life and it did 40 years or so this way. Admittedly we don’t fly so its more difficult to get moisture out of certain areas, but even so; the more active the aircraft the better and easier it gets. The closer you can get to the RAF servicing schedules, the better and easier it gets.

Its a delicate balancing act.

We’d love to be permanently indoors, but the costs for such a large aircraft would remove a large chunk of our budget each year. We’d rather keep going as we are and build the pot towards the return to flight, as we’re largely on top of what we’re doing and can keep most corrosion and weather related serviceablility issues at bay.

Kind regards,

Rich

Very much the Chicken and the Egg scenario. The obvious would be to aquire the aircraft first as without which the hangar would be useless.

Wings – I believe if I want to bang the drum for hangarage that is my perogative.

I have lost count of the numbers of preservation groups that have failed who’s sole preserve was to slap some paint and tinker with an aircraft in a field without any idea of a long term aim.

Of course it’s your right but it’s the right of those who taxi these aircraft and don’t find hangarage to do just that! Repeat yourself ad infinitum if you wish but it won’t do much good unless those with the aircraft have access to land, money and planning permission!

You David think this a priority whilst others such as the shackleton group that Rich is involved with May have other ideas. Rich… His high on your priority list is finding a hangar for the shackleton and if it’s not your number one priority why is it not? I’d be fascinated to hear the other side on this if you have the time.

Wings – I believe if I want to bang the drum for hangarage that is my perogative.

I have lost count of the numbers of preservation groups that have failed who’s sole preserve was to slap some paint and tinker with an aircraft in a field without any idea of a long term aim.

The Vulcan had serious corrosion that had to be delt with at Bruntingthorpe before it could fly. The effects of the elements are clear – a hangar will to a large degree slow the effects of sunlight and slow the temperature extremes that are damaging.

As to Mary Alice – she was from memory a early 80’s restoration. If areas of skin corrosion were appearing it’s a failure of the corrosion techniques used at the time as similarily restored machines havn’t suffered in the AAM .

I agree that preservation is vital and hangarage is the ideal but we’re talking about two Shackletons here that have no prospect of being indoors, so it just seems a little sad that the Bruntingthorpe example had yielded spares for the one at Gatwick, so the Gatwick example can run its engines. Would have been a great joy to see and hear a Shackleton (with Vipers) roaring along Bruntingthorpe’s runway.

I have a similar view on XH558. All very nice to keep her under cover at Finningley but I don’t believe the claim that it will be able to make runway ground runs there. When has the airport ever welcomed public spectators on the site? It ain’t gonna happen so surely it would be better off at Bruntingthorpe where it could at least move freely and where people can see it. As it is, XH558 is doomed to languish in a hangar and when the airport closes (as it well might) it will be stuck in the middle of a housing estate. I’d rather it braved the elements at Bruntingthorpe than suffer that fate! 🙂

The B-17 Mary Alice (or whatever anonymous scheme they’ve painted it in now) at Duxford is a prime example

I’m interested in whether any aircraft on static display in hangars have had to be re-restored?

With the state of some ex WW2 hangars and the impossibility of controlling the humidity, is there really much of a gain?

A hangar does to a massive degree! The current trend of keeping them ‘live’ is fine as long as it doesn’t distract from the real issues of getting roofs over airframes.

I think everyone gets it David. It’s your part piece to say this over and over. It’s true of course but maybe in the first instance fundraising/sorting planning permission/buying land for a hangar isn’t as enjoyable for some small groups as actually working on the aircraft.

A hangar does to a massive degree! The current trend of keeping them ‘live’ is fine as long as it doesn’t distract from the real issues of getting roofs over airframes.

Taxying a Shackleton up and down a runway doesn’t address the long term issue with all these machines that live outside -long term deterioration!

No one said it did. A hangar does to some degree.

The live ones seem to do a bit better for it though. It makes long term that bit longer!

Taxying a Shackleton up and down a runway doesn’t address the long term issue with all these machines that live outside -long term deterioration!

It’s a good collection even though it’s way smaller now, it’s just a pity that there’s no runway to play with:) The Sea Vixen target tug is a rare beauty. I hope and pray they don’t ever decide to respray it grey!

Not totally relevant – but I managed to snap off this photo as we took off from Gatwick on 24 May…..

… and zooming in….

Ken

That’s a shame if the Gatwick example runs and the one at Bruntingthorpe doesn’t. It’s a pity that it isn’t the other way around. How disappointing 🙁

No criticism of the folks at Gatwick of course, but it would be so much better to see the Shackleton move… and Bruntingthorpe’s the place for that.

There’s still a large section of wing at Gatwick, it’s going to look odd with half a wing missing!

PM

Well still a nice addition to the growing collection at Bruntingthorpe

I have a feeling I’d read somewhere it will be static only. I think it donated a lot of parts to the runner at Gatwick.

Could be wrong though!

Speaking to the Gatwick team last year (who are far better qualified to comment) it’s going as a static only with spares used for their remaining ground runner.