Admirals Barge Shar for sale

Harrogate’s changed a lot since those days! 😉

Ah, for the days of Mr. Kenworthy………

Roger Smith

DSA do give serious thought to providing airframes to museums, but I’m unclear at what level the museum has to be (ie national, RAF, well known etc).

:rolleyes: Interesting – I believe one of the airframes I referred to in option 3, of post #35 above is on the Everett website!

Look at it from DSA viewpoint.

Option 1. Sell it all off as a job lot to a single purchaser with a proven track record of payment, collection, expertise and knowledge of handling the exotic types of materials that many modern aircraft have.

Option 2. Try to sell them off to individuals or museums who often may lack the resources, skill, knowledge and funds to undertake such a task. This could possibly leave DSA/MoD with uncollected hunks of metal if transport falls through for example. Or they may then have to go through the re-bidding process again because someone cannot stump up the funds. Or the buyer cannot prove to have the ability to handle dangerous materials.

All of the above scenarios (and more) have occurred in the past. As far as DSA is concerned, why should they bother going to the trouble when, to them, it is just some surplus equipment? Far easier to go with Option 1, as it is likely to be the easiest method of getting funds back with the minimum aggravation.

And I expect Everett etc will make them available to the general public in due course, as they are running a business and it is in their interest to do so.

It has been inferred (officially) to me that Everett has somehow circumvented this system.

The normal system is fair and airframes and most associated equipment are generally offered via Edisposals, or Liquidbiz.
DSA do give serious thought to providing airframes to museums, but I’m unclear at what level the museum has to be (ie national, RAF, well known etc).
Anyone really interested in purchasing equipment on a regular basis (very few people realisticaly) can register to DSA direct to be notified of any sales, and be added to a list of preffered bidders.
Anything the DSA see as scrap (can include valuables to us) usually gets offered to Metal & Waste, you can however contact DSA and try and put in a higher price – but this does rely on knowing if stuff is available.
These days the MoD likes to obtain best price, I’m sure plenty of money is wasted in the system though.

I’ve just been discussing this subject off-line with another volunteer at Newark and would venture two further options to be debated.

Option 3: Before airframes are offered via the tender process give serious consideration to reasoned and well funded applications for airframes or groups of airframes. I understand that such an approach was recently made for a group of training airframes, which was not successful. This could have eliminated the cost of the whole tendering process and given MOD a return on their investment.

The fourth option is perhaps a little too radical and as a UK tax payer I’ll agree that it might not be an ideal option, but why not give it an airing anyway.

Option 4: Offer airframes on a loan basis to properly constituted museums / groups. This would follow a similar approach to several of the Scandinavian Governments who for example have placed the Safir, Draken and Viggen on long-term ‘cultural’ loan to Newark.

Look at it from DSA viewpoint.

Option 1. Sell it all off as a job lot to a single purchaser with a proven track record of payment, collection, expertise and knowledge of handling the exotic types of materials that many modern aircraft have.

Option 2. Try to sell them off to individuals or museums who often may lack the resources, skill, knowledge and funds to undertake such a task. This could possibly leave DSA/MoD with uncollected hunks of metal if transport falls through for example. Or they may then have to go through the re-bidding process again because someone cannot stump up the funds. Or the buyer cannot prove to have the ability to handle dangerous materials.

All of the above scenarios (and more) have occurred in the past. As far as DSA is concerned, why should they bother going to the trouble when, to them, it is just some surplus equipment? Far easier to go with Option 1, as it is likely to be the easiest method of getting funds back with the minimum aggravation.

And I expect Everett etc will make them available to the general public in due course, as they are running a business and it is in their interest to do so.

I agree with you…. It is easier for the MOD to deal with a single point of contact within one company. The point I’m making, and what confuses me is that ‘selected’ airframes are made available on an individual basis… Which goes against option 1. And as you rightly point out… Option 1 is the easiest option to go with. But even still, items disposed of under option 1 should be advertised, even if the parameters are such that you have to have the correct infrastructure in place to deal with it.

Why did the MOD decide to place adverts advertising the disposal of the last 3 Canberra airframes, yet the Jags went without a trace. Then, last week a Lynx and Harrier are again made available through EDisposals. I just dont think it’s very consistent

As for Everett making them available to the general public… They are already available… It’s just at what cost?!!!

Option 2. Try to sell them off to individuals or museums who often may lack the resources, skill, knowledge and funds to undertake such a task. This could possibly leave DSA/MoD with uncollected hunks of metal if transport falls through for example. Or they may then have to go through the re-bidding process again because someone cannot stump up the funds. Or the buyer cannot prove to have the ability to handle dangerous materials.

IMHO – A few misconceptions there.

The UK preservation movement has an excellent record of moving airframes purchased from MOD going back decades; and I don’t believe that there have been many airframes that have needed to be re-tendered due to lack of payment.

I would also respectfully suggest that if any airframe was likely to be moved on to a third party, that under H & S guidelines the MOD would have a duty to remove any ‘questionable materials’ before they left their care.

This latter point might be one reason why it is possible that very few late version Harriers will ever end up in museums other than the nationals.

I must say, I dont understand the current set up… some stuff goes through the web site… Then people like Everett get huge quantities of stuff that is never made available to the general public.

Look at it from DSA viewpoint.

Option 1. Sell it all off as a job lot to a single purchaser with a proven track record of payment, collection, expertise and knowledge of handling the exotic types of materials that many modern aircraft have.

Option 2. Try to sell them off to individuals or museums who often may lack the resources, skill, knowledge and funds to undertake such a task. This could possibly leave DSA/MoD with uncollected hunks of metal if transport falls through for example. Or they may then have to go through the re-bidding process again because someone cannot stump up the funds. Or the buyer cannot prove to have the ability to handle dangerous materials.

All of the above scenarios (and more) have occurred in the past. As far as DSA is concerned, why should they bother going to the trouble when, to them, it is just some surplus equipment? Far easier to go with Option 1, as it is likely to be the easiest method of getting funds back with the minimum aggravation.

And I expect Everett etc will make them available to the general public in due course, as they are running a business and it is in their interest to do so.

As I’m trying to intimate, I don’t think that will happen again, so the next wave of GR.3s, 7s, SHars, and Jags etc should go through DSA/E Disposals.

I understand that, and it’s great news. But in the e-mail I received from them about 3 weeks ago, it was down to them to decide what was ‘attractive’ to the general public and what wasn’t. Those that were went onto edisposals. I’m delighted the the latest round of disposals will go on there. I just wish everything went though there as I think they’d be surprised at what a buch of crazy enthusiasts can do with a lump of ‘scrap’ metal!

Anyway, thank you for the update. It’s great news all round.

I never have unerstood the idea of fighting 2 wars and withdrawing top notch a/c with no sign of immediate replacements for them.

Not enough engine power for hot and high operations, and too expensive/small to re-fit a new one.

Limited to two weapons stations as well

I must say, I dont understand the current set up… some stuff goes through the web site… Then people like Everett get huge quantities of stuff that is never made available to the general public.

:diablo: Who does? What do they say about a moving target…….? 🙁

I dont understand the current set up… some stuff goes through the web site… Then people like Everett get huge quantities of stuff that is never made available to the general public.

As I’m trying to intimate, I don’t think that will happen again, so the next wave of GR.3s, 7s, SHars, and Jags etc should go through DSA/E Disposals.

Lindy – In a few months there very probably won’t be any GR.7 – the majority have been converted to ‘9’. I should also add a few years to your estimation of availability due to the £574 million HPAC deal that has been signed.

There’ll be some GR7 / 9’s coming up soon apparently (2-3 years) – none of your naval rubbish…..:D

edisposals advertised a GR7 only a couple of weeks ago… Anyone have any idea who got it?

I must say, I dont understand the current set up… some stuff goes through the web site… Then people like Everett get huge quantities of stuff that is never made available to the general public.

There’ll be some GR7 / 9’s coming up soon apparently (2-3 years) – none of your naval rubbish…..:D

That makes Newark’s ZA176 seem a bargain; as I understand it they paid a four figure sum [including transport] back in 2004. 😀

http://www.newarkairmuseum.org/aircraftlist.htm

What’s more it’s the “Alraigo” freighter airframe that became famous in 1983! 😎

If you want one then wait….

There are plenty enough SHAR and JAG airframes that the price wont stay that high.

Bruce

Indeed, and they will come through the proper DSA channels this time

ill get savin’ moi pennies then 😉

If you want one then wait….

There are plenty enough SHAR and JAG airframes that the price wont stay that high.

Bruce

His Jags seem to have gone up in price… I think they’re now looking at £10k for a gutted example. A good static SHAR was £30k when I last asked!

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

JESUS!!!