Trustees, Friend or Foe?

XL500

Well Mr Hellman
It seems that you want to find out information through the Forum as you are not brave enough to use your real identity and it is obvious that you may be scared of the legal comebacks from the person or persons involved with this pareticular aircraft.
I have been involved in the maintenance of XL500 from the time served on ARK Royal right through to present with obvious different postings in between. I would not get involved with restoring this aircraft if
1, there was an issue with ownership
2, I did not think it was worthwhile
3, The public did not want to see it fly and not just rot away on the ground.

I was working on the School of Aircraft handling and when an aircraft is sent to this department it becomes ‘Struck off charge’ and no longer becomes an aircraft but becomes a Training aid. It just seems strange but over the last few weeks there has been a question of ownership of this aircraft and it started with a small group of individuals that were ex aircrew of 849 that paid a small fee to keep this and a Mk 5 gannet at Culdrose to let them rot away as a gate guard. I have seen the invoice of the sale of the aircraft to Mr Manna and the signature is from someone well qualified to sell the aircraft. All i can say to you Mr Hellman is, if you would like to re-emburse all the money and time that has been spent up to now on XL500 i would gladly let you have the aircraft and i will retire to somewhere warmer and not have to worry about finances anymore and you can also explain to everybody that has helped in providing spares and tooling to assist in the restoration of the aircraft why the aircraft will just get scrapped.

Politics within the historic aviation is the biggest cause of confrontation within companies and owners of these aircraft and it seems that you want to look for any excuse to have a private confrontation with someone on a popular Forum.

Apologies to all the genuine forum members that have been a great supporter of returning a fine aircraft to the air. (eventually).

Here Here to that Baz
Cheers

Jon

I see that Mr Hellman has not replied. Mr Manna believes that the case is closed. Hopefully others would agree.

Thank you again Bruce.

Good…I never respond to ‘Trolling’ on forums,you just do not know who they are or what their intentions are,if a new poster starts asking strange questions…why bother to reply ?? I do not mean Mr Manna in this case,but the other ordinary forum users.

rgds baz

Thanks for what you’ve done Tim if you get this passed on
Keep up the good work

Jon:

No Reply

I see that Mr Hellman has not replied. Mr Manna believes that the case is closed. Hopefully others would agree.

Thank you again Bruce.

There was no reason to close the thread earlier than it in fact was. I was asked to re-open it by one of the respondents to allow the courtesy of a reply, which I did.

Often, there is more to things than meets the eye!

Bruce

I still stand by what I said in my first response – and am genuinely surprised that Key themselves haven’t pulled this thread given the potential libel nature of the comments made by Mr Hellman.
When you have the likes of Tim Manna having to respond to the implications, you know that those that really matter are sitting up and taking notice of the potential damage this could cause.

I have my doubts about the integrity of Mr Hellman (alias of someone with a lot more info than they’re letting on) – and I wholeheartedly back Tim’s comments in the latest reply sent.

Instead of blathering on and on about it on a public forum – why don’t you try contacting the officials themselves to get the official reply you are so keen on hearing?

Sorry to sound so harsh, but you register and start posting on here and rub fellow forum members up the wrong way from the word go???? Not the best way to get answers on here I’m afraid…. :mad::mad:

Well said Tim Manna, your post should be required reading for those who arrive on forums.

Questions?

I have been asked to forward this by Tim Manna:

“Dear Mr. Hellman,

As a member of the public you are entitled to ask any question you want. What you may not expect or be legally entitled to is an answer. In wholly private an legal transactions, that do not involve a government or publicly sponsored entity (read between the lines here), there is no legal requirement to provide any information to an outside party.

As for “answers to the actual aviation questions,” if you asked an actual aviation question like, “How many Spitfires were manufactured?”, I assume you would have received an actual aviation answer. If someone asked you, “To whom did you sell your house, and for how much?”, I would not expect that person to get an answer, nor expect you to give one. Should that person then make inferences and accusations of impropriety simply because that person did not get the answer to his or her questions, I believe you would be right to feel impugned.

Whether the aircraft has been sold or not, is none of your business, politely said. You don’t have a right to that information. Certainly not on a public internet forum. When and if a sale gets put onto the public record you will have your answer.

As for the rest of the subjects being off bounds, the previous paragraphs apply. If it is a legal and private transaction (I am not sure that legal has anything to do with it or this forum) then you don’t have a right to an answer, and expecting one or more, then making oblique accusations when you don’t get what you want is certainly not on.

The Forum is the place to get actual answers. But to real and relevant questions, not those that pry into the private lives of others.

I repeat from my earlier reply, it is just this type of thread that keeps me from being a more regular contributor to the Forum (which I think, by the way, is an excellent tool when used properly. I enjoy it and often learn a lot.) I think that I might have a lot to say, hopefully some if not most of it relevant and accurate. But I keep my head down and hope that no real inaccuracies or untruths appear.

My apologies to you, Mr Hellman, if you thought my reply rude, or you think this one rude.

My apologies to members of the Forum for having subjected you to this unnecessary monologue.

My thanks to Bruce for his “moderation”.

My thanks to all the aviation enthusiasts in this and other countries without whom this passion would be less fun.

Respectfully,
Tim Manna”

Thank you for your replies,
Especially SeaDog.
Reading between the lines on the reply, I guess as a member of the public I cannot ask certain questions allegedly relating to our historic aircraft without having a rude reply which is then directed personaly at me. (thank you Bruce for moderating all replies!)

The over reacting to this thread by some in the reply seems extreme at most and over defensive.
Why cant there be just answers to the actual aviation questions rather than attack with rude replies nobody is forced to read this thread.

Has the aircraft been allegedly sold, as some of us on threads hear it has! and others see that the CAA registration hasnt changed which is a 28 day requirement. What is the actual status SeaDog can we have it from the actual source?

So obviously the rest of the subjects discussed are off bounds, that is absolutely fine, no one would want a few blood vessels burst because of apparently which seem sensitive questions.
Thank you for your kind reply’s its obvious now the forum is not a place to get actual answers. However in most cases on the forum there seems to be a good amount of genuine people who do help the best they can.

SeaDog,
I do not think you´ll ever hear from Mr. Hellman (an obvious alias) again. He cr@pped in the cream and is not coming back for more.

It is sad to see trolls like that, with his (her?) first post on the forum add another weight on the scale to discourage operators to post on here. I totally understand your concerns.

All the best,
Sigurjon

XL500

I have been asked to forward this by Tim Manna:

“Mr Hellman, where are you?”

Rebuttal

Thank you Bruce.

re-opened in the hope of a reply!

XL500

I have been asked to forward this by Tim Manna:

“Mr. Hellman,

Your facts are incorrect at best, your assumptions equally so, and your implications libellous. Not only are you libelling me, but many very honest and hard working people who have put XL500’s interests before that of the government (most certainly) and any museum (they had many chances), and who have spent a great deal of time and money on a project that will never be rewarding financially.

You are typical of the uninformed self appointed expert that gives these forums a bad name and prevents those of us who may have something valuable to contribute decline to do so.

Should you wish to reimburse me for the time and the money that I have spent on this Albatross, I would be happy to talk. Please put your money where your mouth is.

Welcome to the Forum.

Should you wish to discuss this further with my solicitor, I would be most happy.”

Well said Hunter XF832.

Many deals in business are done in confidence for many reasons and provided the people involved follow the law there is no need to explain to the public how it was done.

In the historic aviation world small numbers of business people have managed to get military airframes released and restored after battling for an average of 8 years with red tape and this has happened in at least 4 countries.

You will never get details published on a forum like this but there are a few books around which give a sense of the time and effort involved. I have not noticed anyone getting rich with the deals and it appears that many subsidise historic aircraft from their other business interests.

Thank you for your input, but I have to say, I as a member of the public and a good supporter of historic aviation as well as a great many others should be able to ask simple questions that should not be sensitive with the aim to get an official reply from people in the position to answer directly.

Instead of blathering on and on about it on a public forum – why don’t you try contacting the officials themselves to get the official reply you are so keen on hearing?

Sorry to sound so harsh, but you register and start posting on here and rub fellow forum members up the wrong way from the word go???? Not the best way to get answers on here I’m afraid…. :mad::mad:

Can anyone tell me who governs trustee’s within a heritage trust subsidised by the public, which makes sure trustees are not developing the trust to their own benefit.

I’ll bite!

You obviously you missed post #2 …. http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ …. and several other well made points. :rolleyes:

Allegedly, you need two separate people to lodge complaints to trigger an investigation!!

Thank you for your input, but I have to say, I as a member of the public and a good supporter of historic aviation as well as a great many others should be able to ask simple questions that should not be sensitive with the aim to get an official reply from people in the position to answer directly.

Surly the official answers to questions should be available somewhere when members of the public want to know dealings that involve organisations which are supported by the public! or is the public and enthusiasts not important enough to get this information but good enough to donate their money!

No, when you donate money to any charity it’s entirely up to them how they spend it, or invest it (within reason). It’s no different if you give money to the RSPCA or guide dogs for the blind, and if you’re unsure of a charity and it’s policy, keep your hand in your pocket.

On the subject matter allegedly the aircraft was sold to a private collector of Naval aircraft for £1 which as per your reply’s seems to be a private collection at North Weald, but there doesnt seem to be any record of the aircraft being offered publicly for tender. Why? why did it go directly to one person almost like it was earmarked and not offered out. There must be a simple answer!
Allegedly this private collection is also owned by the same person who is also a trustee for the Naval heritage trust at Yeovilton.
And allegedly the trust was a source of a new Mk3 engine which was purchased from them for the Mk3 owner.
Can anyone provide evidence this is not the case as its recent history seems very secretive, does anyone know who has allegedly bought it now

Looking at the other threads what part does this private collection also play with the two seat Sea Fury recently purchased which arrived at North Weald and supposed to operate with the historic flight at Yeovilton as it reads they are also it seems overhauling the aircrafts engine at North Weald to. Did the trust actualy purchase this aircraft? as a supporter of the historic flight I didnt think they had that much spare money around! or is it on loan?

Can anyone tell me who governs trustee’s within a heritage trust subsidised by the public, which makes sure trustees are not developing the trust to their own benefit. At the end of the day its the general public which are relied on to keep the interest and funds in all these trusts, and it should be our right to know exactly what goes on within them when asked.

With great respect is my question to the entity at Chataham responsible for the sale, was the Mk3 Gannet XL500 sold on for approximately £1

You seem to have an individual in your sights. Why don’t you name him if you’re so sure he’s up to no good? I’m sure his lawyers could spend a constructive Monday morning looking into whether you’re libelling him or not.

Andy.

PS. I think this thread has potential, hopefully it’ll be as much fun as when old Flooded was about, or Douglas Bader spent the war in Liverpool.

Still trolling well !!