Vulcans XM655 and XL426 Question

at the moment XM655 is technically the only “trundler” as XL426 has been hibernating due to some maintenance that they wish to perform, which i believe they are currently fundrasing for 🙂

Correct. The work progesses as the finance becomes available, and the outcome should result in the best preserved Vulcan in the country, bar one!

There is some oil burn to varying degrees on our old engines, and in time we plan to replace the worst with two newer ones, which we received from TVOC in exchange for some vital items they required.

They’ll do for now. Not perfect, but fit for purpose.

at the moment XM655 is technically the only “trundler” as XL426 has been hibernating due to some maintenance that they wish to perform, which i believe they are currently fundrasing for 🙂 though i think there are other people on here directly affiliated with 426 who would be able to tell you.

sadly there is a colossal difference between trundling one up the runway and flying one, look how long it took them to do 558, she arrived at brunty in 1992/3 as david said a good ten years after the majority of the museum examples, then i think in 1997 she was put into her hangar and restoration work started (she may have been hangared before), and from then took a further 10 years until she was finally rolled out again and even then it was a further 4/5 months before she took to the skies again. then it took a month to check all the paperwork and has only just been awarded her permit to fly. its a wicked thought though 🙂

ok, just a thought, was thinking if they trundle one up a runway every now & again, it must be in good nick ?? personnally great credit to all involved in getting one flying, but still in financial trouble, how long will it be flying ??
in hindsight might have been better spending the money to get another Lancaster flying, or building a Halifax – more pipe dreams !!

well i would have said that realistically, IF the spares were around to support another vulcan, AND if the money could be found (considering that 588 still doesnt have a major sponsor) purely hypothetically, if you had the above two,i would say XM655 at wellesbourne shes the youngest surviving aircraft, and from what ive been told is in excellent condition for an aircraft that has sat outside for 24 years, they even did a retraction test a few years back. though someone did mention that the runway isnt long enough for her to takeoff again (if she could)

realistically, there will never be another one unless bill gates donates a sizeable sum, and even then i doubt it

Woodbridge – there is no chance of another flying. The current machine flying
was the last to fly – now imagine what damage another ten years on the ground did to the others in terms of corrosion . The cost itself is another matter – don’t think less – think more money.
With no major commercial sponsor as of yet -having attained a Permit to Fly – there is no money about to make the prospect of two Vulcan’s flying
anything other than a dream.

flyable vulcan’s

indirectly linked, re; Vulcans. now that one is flying, just wondering how easy to get another one flying, how much monies involved, a bit less once the standard’s been set, i hope, and just how many Vulcan’s could if pushed be made to fly ??

I think Peter is referring to the Blue smoke, this is more indicative of engine oil being burn’t. Have a look at videos of XM655 and XL426, then compare with XH558, completely different colour smoke.
The smoke is coming probably out of an oil breather, we get it on RR Trents. Probably not helped by periods of inactivity, through no fault of the various groups.

The engines of the Vulcan era, do produce more black smoke, due to inefficiencies in fuel being burn’t, compared to modern engines, which have a more efficient and cleaner burn.

DXB Driver

Thanks FFM, It still seems more oily similiar to when a car engine wears and burns oil to me. I dont have the links handy, but youtube has a couple of clips that shwos what I am referring to.

Peter,

As Ramshornvortex says, it really is typical of not only the Olympus, but also of the Gas Turbine engines of the period. The main cause of which can be attributed to the efficiency of the combusters and the fuel burners.

Early jets, in the main, used Simplex and Duplex burners, which basically gushed the fuel out into the combustion chamber. Simplex burners having one single orifice for all flows, and the duplex having two, a Primary orifice for starting and low RPM, and a Main orifice for everything else. When in use, the burners delivered the fuel directly into the combustion chamber, forming a “Tulip” effect on the head of the burner, much as you see on the end of an open hosepipe. This, as you’d imagine, is not a very effective way of igniting your fuel, so a fair proportion of it doesn’t ignite and burn fully or completely, thus giving the efflux a smoky appearance. As time and technology progressed, so did the burners, leading to Spray burners as found in the Adour, fitted to the Jag and Hawk, and further to Vapourisers and Atomisers, fitted to modern Gas Turbines, which pretty much do exactly what they say on the tin. As you’d imagine, these are highly efficient, so produce little smoke.

A further reason for the smokiness of older engines, is that they tend to be straight through Turbojets, as with the Olympus. This means that there is no clean, bypassed air to mix with the efflux and clean it up, so what you see coming out of the jetpipe is the pure, unadulterated filth of the engine! :D:D

Hope that helps a bit.

Flipflopman

Thanks RHV! Must be typical “Vulcan smoke” then.

I can only speak for XM655 as I am one of the volunteers that look after her…

The smoke is just typical of the Olympus engine – Concord and TSR2 were just as smoky, as is XH558! We have video at Wellesbourne of 655 being ferried in to the airfield in 1984 with four almost brand new engines and they were just as smoky!

The smoke is more brown than ‘oily’, and I can confirm that the oil consumption for the three or four engine runs per year is negligible (certainly compared to the Jet A1 consumption :)).

As far as maintenance is concerned – they are pampered and well looked after – believe me…

RHV