RAF Museum – VC10 preservation

Well maybe leaving one at Bruntingthorpe on RAFM charge wouldn’t be such a bad idea until the RAFM are in a position to house one indoors?

Sounds sensible way forward.

Well maybe leaving one at Bruntingthorpe on RAFM charge wouldn’t be such a bad idea until the RAFM are in a position to house one indoors?

RAFM proved itself not to be a safe and responsible place for a VC10 to be preserved. Best that the survivors go elsewhere until there is a regime change there.

The Viking for example at Brooklands is on loan from the RAFM.

That story has been around for a while, but the Viking was owned by BA who had loaned it to the RAFM. It was then loaned to Brooklands but in 2005 BA donated the aircraft so it is now fully Brooklands-owned.

At least in Base they were dry, I still have visions of us splashing around in tanks that had inches of fuel in the bottom as we changed various bits and bobs on the line 🙂

That sounds familiar!! 🙂 wasn’t too keen on the smell inside the tanks when all the little bugs started to decay though!!!!

At least in Base they were dry, I still have visions of us splashing around in tanks that had inches of fuel in the bottom as we changed various bits and bobs on the line 🙂

Richy -I should keep an eye on Aviation Job Search! Sounds like there are job prospects at Bruntinthorpe for you! As to why the RAFM don’t own XR808 -thats baffling!

Not a chance David,you seen how much PRC is on the inside of the tanks covering nuts,bolts and lock nuts etc? I have spent enough time in those fuel tanks to last a lifetime!!!!!
Richy.

Can a VC10 get out? G-ARVM’s fuselage was moved out of the site so it should be possible to get one in. Also G-ARVF was taken apart and reassembled 120km further on in Germany so there is indeed a precedent.

Ok, so taking a VC10 apart, transporting it across the planet and reassmbling it is possible… but at what cost ?
Was G-ARVF reasssembled inside a hangar ? The RAFM Nimrod was stored all over the site for ages, and put back together where the entrance to the Dornier exhibition now stands. That top carpark would have to be closed for months to assemble a VC10, if there was room.
The Nimrod was a tight fit up there…:eek:
And that ONLY had to be moved to the rear of the visitor centre…

Indeed. I well remember seeing VB,VE and VH stored at LHR (about Sept. 76, I think) just before they were scrapped. And as you say, VM continued to fly for BA for a few more years. I can only repeat what RAFM said many years later about VM, much to my surprise. Clearly if Boeing did still have a claim, they never followed it up!

Just to confuse matters it was realised late in the day that, bizarrely, Boeing may have had a claim on G-ARVM as it and three other Standard VC10s (scrapped at Heathrow in 1976, VB, VE, VH) were PEX with Boeing for new 747s.

As I understand it, only VB, VE and VH were involved in the exchange deal with Boeing. VM flew on until 1979 while the other three were taken out of service in 1974 and scrapped two years later. Surely if Boeing had a claim on VM it would have shown up on the registration somewhere, VM has always been registered to BOAC or BA until it was flown to Cosford.

Its somewhat vague the relationship! The Viking for example at Brooklands is on loan from the RAFM – it was certainly part of the BA collection and the Britania was purchased I believe by the RAFM and displayed in BOAC markings.

David B.
I was led to understand, by RAFM themselves, that the BA aircraft were owned by BA and never RAFM and it was when BA stopped any care and maintenance that RAFM asked BA to remove their planes. Also I recall that Cosford were a bit annoyed that BA never added a Concorde to their own collection. Just to confuse matters it was realised late in the day that, bizarrely, Boeing may have had a claim on G-ARVM as it and three other Standard VC10s (scrapped at Heathrow in 1976, VB, VE, VH) were PEX with Boeing for new 747s.
Anyway, the past is the past, let’s hope Bob gets there, somehow.

Richy -I should keep an eye on Aviation Job Search! Sounds like there are job prospects at Bruntinthorpe for you! As to why the RAFM don’t own XR808 -thats baffling!

I believe the one that Brooklands got at Dunsfold has corrosion issues. ZA150?

True, but hasn’t it been sold.. Sad sad days

You can unbolt the wings,there’s quite a few of them mind you!!! I worked on VC-10 majors for 8 years and one airframe (i forget which one) had corrosion issues in the wingroot,BAE basically took nearly all the bolts out so the wing was ‘detached’ from the fuselage for a few weeks,so it is feasible if not very,very,very time consuming!!

David -effectively the RAFM owned the VC-10 from the moment it touched down at Cosford. The problem seemed to arise when the RAFM were unhappy with the level of BA’s commitment to the airframes in terms of maintainance. Whether it was prudent to dispose of her without a replacement being in place is open to question ! What is certain is that the VC-10 that should be at Cosford is XR808.

G-ARVM what have they done to you! a real shame your magnificent tail got scrapped. And your wings. Seems like only yesterday I was watching you from the Queens Building at Heathrow doing a touch and go; crew training I was told; in your smart BA livery. 1977ish? Had it been known that the RAF couldn’t get a VC10 into Cosford now, then perhaps RAFM could have just purchased G-ARVM from BA and painted it in RAF markings. joe public would never have known the difference. There is a civil Britannia there, painted in RAF colours – and Nobody really knows! (Apart from those on this forum).

On G-ARVM the wings were cut just outboard of the fuselage, and just next to the production joint where the center section is bolted to the wings. On G-ARVF this joint has been used to remove the wings and bolt them back on. No cutting involved.

HP111’s photo of G-ARVM at Brooklands is from a few years ago. The photo below shows the current situation (actually this photo is from June 2012, the engine stub is also blanked off now).

Thanks for the update. It only seems like yesterday that I took that picture!

Will the problem not be the railway bridge? Seems odd to position it at Brunty to move though, one would have thought somewhere like Coventry would have been better, though to be honest, I suppose by the time that the decision was taken not to fly BOB in, those that may make the journey were already at Brunty.