dark light

Any plans to fly XL426

Hi

Are the Vrt still hopeing to fly XL426 one day (cash permitting) or are they just planning to keep it taxing

Their website used to say the wanted to fly it one day but their is no menttion of it flying anymore

Still XM655 would be the better pick if we got another flying if XH558 flew again

655 has loads more hours left

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

448

Send private message

By: Vulcan903 - 30th July 2003 at 17:06

The list is endless and changes on a monthly basis.

It would be a long e mail worth a look at http://www.museum-explorer.org.uk/museum-explorer/site_details_return.php?museum=9

The original 747 was to be a Conference centre but never happened so it was blown up, a few weeks later the SAS went in and blew the doors off from the outsite as well for training. Same idea for the tristar as well. Then a few blokes bought it and wanted to move it to Derby and open a cafe in it. Thus it never happened and was scrapped!
Rumour and I am not one for rumours! The Victor cockpit will be leaving soon as well as one of the Canberras.

I think it was Loughborough council who stopped the planning. Waltons appealed and lost. The main issue at the time was noise, from either aircraft or cars on the proving ground. There we sound recording machines on site for a year or two to monitor the noise level.
Planning permmission for aircraft is only granted for Pans 1, 2 & 3 all other areas are not permitted. That why you see them on those pans only.
The Taxi Days I would say from experience are not big earners for the Waltons, as they have to move 100’s of cars the weeks before and after. Also insurance fuel, the list is endless. That why Rolling Thunder/Big Thunder events are no longer held.
But yes good profile for the site. Ideal for Concorde fast taxi’s!!!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

390

Send private message

By: DOUGHNUT - 30th July 2003 at 16:47

Ok Vulcan 903 thanks for answering my questions, here is one more for you exactly, who owns what at Bruntingthorpe. I only ask because it is to easy to assume that they all belong to the Waltons. (which I know they do not!!)
Was it the local authority which turned down the planning permission? did they give a reason why the did not want to allow the aircraft to taxi, surely an undertaking NOT to have a flying museum would have been good enough. The ‘taxi days’ must have been a good money earner and certainly gave Bruntingthorpe a high profile event.

DOUGHNUT

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,275

Send private message

By: Bluebird Mike - 30th July 2003 at 16:27

To clarify, I meant everyone associated with the Vulcan, not anyone else who happens to be based at Brunty.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

448

Send private message

By: Vulcan903 - 30th July 2003 at 16:25

Ownership of 558 will pass to VOC if the HLF grant comes good, as the aircraft becomes an asset to the nation operated by the Vulcan To The Sky Trust. At the end the aircrat would retire to Duxford.

BAH is still going, and it represents a small workforce of volunteers who look after the Walton owned aircraft. Planning for a hanger/vistors centre was proposed and I saw the plans for this. At that time planning permission would be granted if all aircraft on site would no longer perform taxi runs.

This was a few years ago and thinks might have changed since then.

Bruntingthorpes income is car storage and it is a secure site.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

390

Send private message

By: DOUGHNUT - 30th July 2003 at 16:18

I agree with Damien’s last post that because one group has made a mess of things that the location of Bruntingthorpe should not be dragged down, unfortunatly mud sticks. It must be remembered that many things go on at Bruntingthorpe, not all connected with aviation, aircraft have arrived at Bruntingthorpe for the sole purpose of being broken up for scrap (B747 and Tristar)
I think (?) I am right when I say that the airfield and hangars are owned by the Walton family. Thus the various aircraft owners and companies only pay rent. What, if any, aircraft do the Waltons own? did the Vulcan not pass to The Vulcan Operating Company (TVOC)
And a repeated question what ever happed to the British Aviation Heritage museum that was proposed by the Waltons several years ago.

DOUGHNUT

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

448

Send private message

By: Vulcan903 - 30th July 2003 at 15:59

Approx cost to put 558 back to original config would be £250K. Most parts have already been refurbished by the OEM’s and are still waiting dispatch back to Bruntingthorpe.
In 1993 C Waltons tender to aquire 558 was the most realistic out the short list of 7. Thus David and the family took delivery.
No one has ever gone this far to date with a complex aircraft in the UK, just need hard cash to make it happen.
I have seen some of the letters of support from Industry to the HLF about the grant bid, and feel positive that this project will go forward.
It will take £250K and the OK from the Walton family to put 558 back if the HLF fails, otherwise it will be dragged out of the hanger, and the hanger let for storage.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

792

Send private message

By: British Canuck - 30th July 2003 at 14:23

Just pop those Bristol-Siddeley Olympus back in and connect your batteries up and voila!!

Seriously are the costs so high just to reassembly the aircraft to taxing condition?..all the parts are servicable and on hand!! It should be a doable with the right suport.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,275

Send private message

By: Bluebird Mike - 30th July 2003 at 14:11

Iagree with Doughnut’s last paragraph there-one has to wonder why the poor thing went there in the first place. We’ve had a few good years of taxi runs, but now she’s most likely to just end up as spares and bean cans. What’s the point of that? At least they’d always have had a guaranteed crowd-puller if they kept her in ground running condition.

If they don’t at least return her to that state, and just her bits go here and there, I for one would be inclined to think ‘Sod them then’ and not take anyone at Bruntingthorpe seriously as an aircraft preservation establishment ever again. 😡

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

390

Send private message

By: DOUGHNUT - 30th July 2003 at 13:21

Moggy C you seem to be making a case that the Walton family only obtained the Vulcan and the other aircraft in order to make money from them ie for their own personnel gain? If this is so then why should the HLF be expected to provide the money to restore them.
I would like to think that a reasonable income could be made from the entrance fees from a good museum within which the Vulcan and other could be housed. Even better if the museum can offer the sight and sound of real live aircraft, Vulcan, Victor et al. I would be interested to know of any Uk museum or collection which that claims to make a profit.
I will repeat a point made some time ago, when XH558 was flown to Bruntingthorpe she was ‘donated’ with an agreement that she would be cared for as part of the nations heritage. I believe that the actions of the last few years have done the reverse and a once servicable and active aircraft has been reduced to little more than scrap.

DOUGHNUT

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

626

Send private message

By: Willow - 30th July 2003 at 12:47

Moggy, I understand what your saying and in any other case you would be quite correct. However…..

in this case the owner already has a collection of large post-war aircraft which are only taxiable, including a Victor and Comet. Keeping the Vulcan would therefore make sense as it would still fit extremely well into the existing collection even if it was only to be taxiable.

It was always the main attraction at Bruntingthorpe, and would continue to be so.

Well, except for the Lightnings maybe!!

Willow

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 30th July 2003 at 12:31

Willow,

I’ll turn the question round.

Why should the owners keep it?

We all agree that it should be kept, but thinking as if you were the owners for a minute, what possible justification is there for committing to a continuing expenditure in keeping the thing housed and maintained with no significant prospect of an income stream?

The alternative would be for them to tow it to a quiet patch of grass and watch it corrode like many of the others. Not a great spectator draw.

Rob P

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

626

Send private message

By: Willow - 30th July 2003 at 12:03

Originally posted by Bigglesworth
XH558… If HLF do not fund her then she WILL be ‘reduced to produce’ and lost forever, sad but true. Unsucessful bid for HLF money will not result in her being rebuilt to taxiable status.

Why? Surely as a potential flyer, 558 must be in better structural condition than any other Vulcan. Why scrap it?

Willow

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,734

Send private message

By: frankvw - 29th July 2003 at 17:35

In last ressort, why not, but then, paint it in the white anti-radiation scheme, and paint the tail, and some markings on the belly. Not the entire plane…

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,132

Send private message

By: ageorge - 29th July 2003 at 17:25

Originally posted by Shorty01
How about XH558 in Red Bull colours ?…..

I’m ducking now.

Hey , if it was flying I don’t mind what colour scheme she’s painted in !!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

662

Send private message

By: Shorty01 - 28th July 2003 at 16:35

How about XH558 in Red Bull colours ?…..

I’m ducking now.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

792

Send private message

By: British Canuck - 25th July 2003 at 13:56

Any progress been made at Bruntingthorpe with the QRA Hangars
for the LPG Lightnings? At least they might be saved abit longer if they get some of the smaller taxible jets under cover.

But the cost to build a hangar to house a Vulcan would not be cheap$$. Especially one that does not fly anymore

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,530

Send private message

By: Steve Bond - 25th July 2003 at 13:40

True, but they won’t be around for ever!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

331

Send private message

By: scott c - 25th July 2003 at 13:30

I dont think the experiance side of things makes a differance ive worked on the victor at elvington for a couple of years with guys who worked on them in the RAF and you learna hell of a lot from them.

Scott C

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,530

Send private message

By: Steve Bond - 25th July 2003 at 13:23

The Southend and Wellesbourne crews have done fantastic jobs on these two Vulcans, but how long is their present condition sustainable? Not just from the spares and experience points of view, but from the fact that they have to live outside.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

226

Send private message

By: Bigglesworth - 25th July 2003 at 13:22

Mr B has already been approached…. amongst others.

1 2
Sign in to post a reply